The URL can be used to link to this page

06/18/1985 - City Council Regular-f �f '/ e - AGENDA REGULAR MEETING EAGAN CITY COUNCIL EAGAN, MINNESOTA CITY HALL JUNE 18, 1985 6:30 P.M. I. 6:30 — ROLL CALL & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE II. 6:35 — ADOPT AGENDA & APPROVAL OF MINUTES 10. / III. 6:40 — COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT — 1984 IV. 6:50 — DEPARTMENT HEAD BUSINESS (SEE ATTACHED LIST) VI. 7:00 — PUBLIC HEARINGS /,. id. A. Public Hearing for Multi—Family Revenue Bonds for Wescott Hills Fourth Addition in the Amount of $2,100,000 VII. OLD BUSINESS 417 A. Annual Review, Conditional Use Permit (Werner Lembke) �o.Se2 B. U.S. Home Corporation for a Revised Preliminary Plat of Lexington Place South Second Addition, 12.16 Acres Located in the W 1/2 of the SW 1/4 of Section 14, Duckwood Dr. & Lexington Ave. p./eS-C. Dean Fulmer for a Conditional Use Permit to Allow a Self Service Car Wash on Lot 3, Block 1, of Century Addition, Section 9. VIII. HRA P 7 -LA. Acceptance of Interest Rate Reduction Program, Cinnamon Ridge Project/Can—American IX. NEN BUSINESS A. Consider Recommendation of HRA and Set Public Hearing to Consider Interest Rate Reduction Program, Cinnamon Ridge Project/Can—American, At July 2, 1985, City Council Meeting. /a• qg B. Eagles Nest Village for a Preliminary Plat of Eagles Nest Village Consisting of 14 Townhouse Units on 1.4 Acres Located on Lots 101, 102, 103, & 104, Block 1 of Meadowland 1st Addition, p a A. Fire Department P•dC. Park & Recreation Department P, d B. Police Department�o.6D. Public Works Department V. 6:55 — CONSENT AGENDA (SEE ATTACHED LIST) VI. 7:00 — PUBLIC HEARINGS /,. id. A. Public Hearing for Multi—Family Revenue Bonds for Wescott Hills Fourth Addition in the Amount of $2,100,000 VII. OLD BUSINESS 417 A. Annual Review, Conditional Use Permit (Werner Lembke) �o.Se2 B. U.S. Home Corporation for a Revised Preliminary Plat of Lexington Place South Second Addition, 12.16 Acres Located in the W 1/2 of the SW 1/4 of Section 14, Duckwood Dr. & Lexington Ave. p./eS-C. Dean Fulmer for a Conditional Use Permit to Allow a Self Service Car Wash on Lot 3, Block 1, of Century Addition, Section 9. VIII. HRA P 7 -LA. Acceptance of Interest Rate Reduction Program, Cinnamon Ridge Project/Can—American IX. NEN BUSINESS A. Consider Recommendation of HRA and Set Public Hearing to Consider Interest Rate Reduction Program, Cinnamon Ridge Project/Can—American, At July 2, 1985, City Council Meeting. /a• qg B. Eagles Nest Village for a Preliminary Plat of Eagles Nest Village Consisting of 14 Townhouse Units on 1.4 Acres Located on Lots 101, 102, 103, & 104, Block 1 of Meadowland 1st Addition, NEW BUSINESS (continued) 7 �,C O'Neil Center (R.J. O'Neil) for a Rezoning from A (Agricultural) to PD (Planned Development) for Approximately 100 Acres Located in the S 1/2 of Section 10. /3,z D. Sunset 8th Addition (Tri—Land Properties) for a P Preliminary Plat of Sunset 8th Addition Consisting of 3 Single Family Lots on 2 Acres, Located on Lot 7, Block 1 of Sunset 3rd Addition, Section 25. SS E. Dave Gabbert, for a Waiver of Plat to Adjust a Side Lot Line Between Lots 5 & 6, Block 5 of Westbury 1st Addition & a 7' Setback Variance to Allow a 43' Setback to Lexington Ave., Located in Section 22. P.14,/ F. Nordquist Sign Company for Conditional Use Permit for a 271 High Pylon Sign to be Located on Part of the SW 1/4 of Section 2 & Lot 7, .Plainview Addition. p. /bPG. Doug Ruth for Special Permit to Move a House onto Lot 3, Block 1, Braun Sunrise Addition, SW 1/4 of Section 15. P / 7J H. Robert Lencowski for a Special Permit to Allow a House to be Moved to Lot 16, Block 5 of Country Home Heights Addition. 7,? 1. Q Petroleum for a Variance to Allow Construction of an Overhead Canopy in the Front Setback Area of Nicols Road. Part of Lot 19, Block 8, of Cedar Grove No.2, Section 30. /o./Be2J. Lundgren Bros. Construction for a Special Permit. to Allow a Tempory Sales Office to be Located on Lot 43, Block 4, of Blackhawk Glen. Along Ashbury Road, Section 16. P.1,?6 K. Coldwell Banker for a Special Permit for 2 Temporary Advertising Signs for Knob Hill. Along Thomas Lake Road, Section 28. �•/90L. Elliot Libman for a 10'Variance from the 30' Front Setback to Knoll Ridge Drive Located on Lot 10, Block 1 of Rose Hill Addition, Section 17. VIII. ADDITIONAL ITEMS P /95 A. Contract 85-12 , Receive Bids/Award Contract (Lexington Place South) P,/14, B. Contract 85-16, Receive Bids/Award Contract (Eagan Woods & Safari 2nd) P,/y 8 C. Reevaluation Regarding Ovehead Percentage Used to Determine Financial Guarantee Amounts for New Developments IR. VISITORS TO BE HEARD (for those persons not on the agenda) X. ADJOURNMENT J W, REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 18, 1985 CONSENT ITEMS P. 7 A. Personnel Items P.13 B. Contractor Licenses P.15 C. Change Order #1, Contract 84-13 (Lexington Avenue Booster Station) e.l& D. Change Order 111, Project 85-14 (Spring Parks Construction) 7 E. Project 84-21, Final Payment/Acceptance (Tennis Court Resurfacing) ,4.1-7 F. Project 84-22, Final Payment/Acceptance (Northview Athletic Field Lighting) P-/8 G. Receive Petition to Vacate Utility & Drainage Easement (Clearview Addition) P ,g H. Receive Petition to Vacate Utility & Drainage Easement (Sunset 4th Addition) P./7 I. Final Plat Approval, Eagandale Office Park 2nd Q•ji J. Final Plat Approval, Blackhawk Townhouse Apts. �.a 5 K. Excavation Permit 17-125, R. L. Johnson, Outlot A (Comserv) ?.ds -L. Excavation Permit 16-135, Blackhawk Glen P aC M. Contract 85-15, Approve Plans & Specifications/ Order Advertisement for Bids (Royal Oak Circle) P.a`N. Contract 85-18, Approve Plans & Specifications/ Order Advertisement for Bids (UPS) a7 0. Project 451, Receive Petition/Order Feasibility Report (Coachman Road — Trunk Watermain) � .iY P. Project 444, Receive Feasibility Report/Order Public Hearing (Holland Lake Trunk Storm) P.a Q. Project 449, Receive Feasibility Report/Order Public Hearing (Country Club Market) P•a9 R. Project 431, Receive Feasibility Report/Order Public Hearing (Johannes Addition) p 39 S. Project 447, Receive Feasibility Report/Order Public Hearing (Lone Oak Trunk Watermain) P,3o T. Project 448, Receive Feasibility Report/Order Public Hearing (Pond LP -55 Outlet) ?.31 U. Project 414, Receive Feasibility Report/Order Public Hearing (Pine Ridge Drive) P.3fV. Contract 83-17, Final Payment/Acceptance (Borchert—Ingersoll Pond, Hurley Lake, and Schwanz Lake Outlets) MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCILMEMBERS FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: JUNE 12, 1985 SUBJECT: AGENDA INFORMATION After approval of the June 4, 1985, regular City Council minutes, and the agenda for the June 18, 1985, City Council meeting, the following items are in order for consideration: COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT/1984 The auditing firm of Deloitte, Haskins & Sells have completed a comprehensive annual financial report for all combined financial • statements that were prepared and transacted during calendar year 1984. The audit consists of a 103 page document entitled "Comprehensive Annual Financial Report" that was distributed to each member of the City Council approximately two (2) weeks ago. Also distributed to the City Council was a letter that provides a detailed examination and a valuation of the City's system of internal accounting control and other related examinations. The Director of Finance and City Administrator have reviewed the documents along with a representative from Deloitte, Haskins & Sells. The audit report will be presented to the City Council for review and consideration. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or continue for any further consideration the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for 1984 as prepared by the firm Deloitte, Haskins & Sells. • Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Two A. FIRE DEPARTMENT There are no items this time. B. POLICE DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT HEAD BUSINESS to be considered under Fire Department at There are no items to be considered under Police Department at this time. C. PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT 1. Purchase of Used Gang Mower -- The City Council authorized the Director of Parks & Recreation to negotiate with Independent School District #191 for the purchase of a used nine reel gang mower. An amount equal to $14,000 was authorized for the purchase and recently the District did accept the City's offer of $12,500 for this unit. There is no action required on this item. 2.. Park Naming -- At a recent City Council meeting, there was a recommendation to rename Schwanz Lake Park to proposed Trapp Farm Park. There was a question raised at the City Council meeting concerning the naming of an Eagan park unless a family has been recognized for a certain duration of residency within the community. The old criteria for naming Eagan parks, which is attached on page ---3 , states that parks may be named for the deceased after 50 years have elapsed from the time of death. During July, 1980, there were some guidelines that were considered by both the Park Commission and City Council. P1 ase make reference to those guidelines which are found on page Also enclosed is a copy of a memorandum from the Director o P rks & Recreation regarding this item. This can be found on page, ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the renaming of Schwanz Lake Park to Trapp Farm Park. A CRITERIA FOR NAMING EAGAN PARKS I. Parks may be named for the living if they have contributed 75% of the property or 75% of the land cost for the park. 2. Parks may be named for the deceased after 50 years have elaped from the time of death. The deceased may include local or national heroes and national, state or local officials. 3. Parks may be named for streets, neighborhoods, historic events and characters, trees, flowers, places and feature names great ideas, and mythological and descriptive names. These names should be indigenous to Eagan. 4. Parks should not be named for civic organizations in order to avoid community conflicts. 5. Park or facility names should not be changed without good cause. They should be named carefully and with permanent intent. • 6. The criteria should be reviewed from time to time, and if necessary, periodically revised to offer the naming committee a practical, up- to-date and helpful tool through which practical decisions may be reached and by which difficult situations may be amicably reconciled. P11 JULY 1980 MEMO TO: ADVISORY PARK COMMITTEE FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION SUBJECT: NAMING OF PARKS; SUGGESTED GUIDELINES: PROCESS: 2ND DRAFT BACKGROUND: At the June meeting of the Committee, a draft for the naming of parks was submitted. This item was then referred to the Sub -Committee for further review. On Tuesday evening, July 1, two members of the Sub -Committee 10. A creative name based on some impressions of the site. 11. A name based on the vegetation present or the ecology of the area. 12. A name based on the dominant feature of the site. 13. The name by which most of the neighborhood children refer to the park. 14. A creative name which has identity for the particular use or people associated with the park. 15. The naming of a park after an individual. This should normally be done in memoriam. Careful evaluation is necessary before proceeding with the use of a person's name. ® Parks may be named for the living if they have been the major contributors or the property or of the land cost. (Previous criteria used by the Com- mittee have established a 75% factor.) and the Director again reviewed the criteria with some changes made. SUGGESTED GUIDELINES: • 1. The name of the subdivision associated with the park. 2. The neighborhood name in which the park is located. 3. The school name if adjacent to or closely identified with the park. 4. The street name adjacent to or closely identified with the park. 5. The name of a local interest point or local focal point near the park. 6. The name of a stream or creek adjacent to or near the park. 7. The name of a water body adjacent to or near the park. 8. The name of some topographic feature associated with the park. 9. The name of an historical occurrence associated with the area indigenous • to Eagan. 10. A creative name based on some impressions of the site. 11. A name based on the vegetation present or the ecology of the area. 12. A name based on the dominant feature of the site. 13. The name by which most of the neighborhood children refer to the park. 14. A creative name which has identity for the particular use or people associated with the park. 15. The naming of a park after an individual. This should normally be done in memoriam. Careful evaluation is necessary before proceeding with the use of a person's name. ® Parks may be named for the living if they have been the major contributors or the property or of the land cost. (Previous criteria used by the Com- mittee have established a 75% factor.) MEMO TO: THOMAS L. HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS 8 RECREATION DATE: MAY 29, 1985 SUBJECT: PARK NAMING Recently, the City Council reviewed a recommendation from the Advisory Parks and Recreation Commission relative to the naming of the now "Schwanz Lake Park." The question was raised by the Council as to the propriety of naming the park after an individual in light of the City's policy relative to the naming of parks after an individual. In July of 1980, the Advisory Commission and City Council adopted as a policy, "suggested" guidelines to the naming of parks. The first 14 guidelines listed suggest the naming of parks after a particular, significant item, i.e. a dominant feature, significant vegetation, historical occurrence, etc. • Guideline 15 is as follows: "The naming of a park after an individual. This should normally be done in memoriam. Careful evaluation is necessary before proceeding with the use of a person's name. Parks may be named for the living if they have been major contributors of the property or of the land cost. The naming or renaming of a park after an individual should not be done in an emotional or sentimental rush, but reviewed in a timely and proper manner." As you note, the naming of a park after an individual does not have a definitive policy. Rather, guidelines suggest "careful evaluation" and that it not be done in an emotional or sentimental rush. It is also suggested that the naming be done for the living if they have been major contributors. This is not the case with the naming of this particular park although there is some historical reference to the naming of the lake and the park land for individuals who have lived in the community for a number of years. If you would like additional information or clarification relative to the suggested guidelines and the naming of this particular park, please feel free • to contact me. Respectfully submitted, Director of Parks and Recreation KV/kf • • Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Three D. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT There are no items to be considered under Public Works Department at this time. 0 Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Four CONSENT`AGENDA There are ( 22) items on the agenda referred to as Consent Items requiring one (1) motion by the City Council. If the Council wishes to discuss any of the items in further detail, those items should be removed from the consent agenda and placed under Addi- tional Items unless the discussion required is brief. PERSONNEL ITEMS A. PERSONNEL ITEMS The following personnel items were to be considered: • 1. The Hiring of a Clerk/Typist -- With the promotion of Karen Finnegan to Administrative Secretary, a vacancy was created in the typing pool. The vacancy was posted, candidates were tested and interviewed by Administrative Assistant Duffy and Administrative' Secretary Finnegan. The recommendation of this office is to hire Deanna Kivi of 2053 Quartz Lane for the vacancy. Ms. Kivi has successfully completed the City's physical examination and her first day of work scheduled for Monday, June 17, 1985. 2. Bicycle Safety Patrol Cadet -- As a part of the recent bicycle safety project grant a bicycle safety patrol cadet was authorized to administer the program. After proper posting and advertising it is recommended that Kathleen LaClair be hired to fill the position. She has completed her Law Enforcement Associate of Arts Degree and has a backgroundlin police reserve work. A_ 3. Summer Playground Personnel -- Attached on page Yl is a list of people recommended for employment with the Eagan Play- grounds for the summer of 1985. • Ll MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR d, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS 6 RECREATION DATE: JUNE 3, 1985 BE: SUMMER PLAYGROUND PERSONNEL Following is a list of people recommended for employment with the Eagan playgrounds for the summer of 1985: RETURNING FROM LAST YEAR Lynn Booher Kristi Edlund Kathleen Fletcher James Gilbertson Lisa Gilsdorf Rachelle Jirik Lisa Lundquist Maureen Porter Dawn Rasmussen Tamara Sova Katharine Weeklund Kristin Weeklund NEW PERSONNEL Janelle Bonner Carol Connelly Tricia Gilbertson Susan Jorgenson Chris Kirschner Tamara Mathson Gus Nelson Gina Penn Lizabeth Sistowicz Renee Smith Wages shall be from $3.55 for program aides to $5.50 for leaders who are returning for a third year. All salaries are within departmental budget/salaries range. Respectfully suomitted, KV/js C Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Five 4. City of Eagan Mileage Reimbursement Rate -- At a special City Council meeting on March 12, 1985, the reimbursement rate for use of personnel autos was increased from $.20 to $.25 per mile. According to the Director of Finance the IRS currently allows a reimbursement of $.205 per mile without any declaration of the income or documentation of expenditures. An increase to $.25 per mile will require the City to record as income for each employee total mileage payments, either as an adjustment to the employee's W -21s or by issuing 1099 forms for miscellaneous income. As the Director of Finance stated in a recent memorandum records will have to be researched and documentation prepared for the 25-30 • employees who are involved. All employees will have to declare the income and show car expense deductions using $.205 per mile or actual costs as they desire or is available. Any employee not filling the long -form would have additional taxable income of $.25 per mile with no offsetting deductions. After reviewing this position with the City staff, with the exception of the City Planner, that the mileage reimbursement rate be changed to $.205 per mile to conform with the IRS regulations. In the case of the City Planner it is his request that the $.25 per mile rate remain due to his special circumstances in attending meetings and using his personnel vehicle at a higher frequency rate than most of the other employees that are affected by the reimbursement rate. Therefore with the exception of the City Planner it is recommended that mileage reimbursement rate be set at $.205 per mile as suggested and recommended by the Director of Finance. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve all personnel • items as stated. 5. Staff Accountant Position --Recently, the City Council gave approval to a staff accountant position as a part of some minor reorganization in the Finance Department. The Director of Finance is proposing. that the salary start at $1,600 per month with no scheduled adjustments. Since the position is new, a copy of a memorandum and job description is enclosed on pages d through /Y for your review. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To authorize the recruitment of a staff accountant at a salary of $1,600 per month. I II i r MEMO TO: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES FROM: FINANCE DIRECTOR/CITY CLERK VANOVERBEKE DATE: JUNE 10, 1985 SUBJECT: STAFF ACCOUNTANT POSITION Now that the accounting clerk for utility billing has been filled, I would like to proceed with the filling of the staff accountant position. This timing should allow for the various relocations being proposed while providing support for the budget process and expected special assessment conversion and fall certifications. The training of the new account clerk has gone well but has taken and will continue to take a lot of Ken's time as we attempt to replace Lorna's vast experience. Attached is a proposed job description for the staff accountant position. I have not included any supervisory activities in the position, however it does involve a coordination role. I pre- viously stated that I would require at least two years of formal accounting education and have changed that to a four year degree. Based on the number of two-year people who applied for the utility billing position, it seems appropriate and beneficial to make this adjustment. I would propose the salary start at $1,600 per month with no scheduled adjustments. The position would be evaluated and ad- justed through the comparable worth studies and annual adjustment process. I assume that an appropriate range would be developed through that process. Brooklyn Park is currently filling a staff accountant position and has had over 200 applications. They have advertised a starting salary of $1,600 per month. The placement director at St. John's informed them that recent accounting grad- uates were atarting in the area of $1,580 to $1,670 with CPA firms and in the area of $1,540 to $1,630 in government and industry. As of July 1, 1985, the union salary range for senior accounting • clerk is from $1,231 to $1,549 after five years. The proposed rate of $1,600 per month may be a little out of line on the low end in relationship to the engineering tech II, construction ana- lyst and administrative secretary. I would suggest the $1,600 per month with the unannounced possibility of adjustment through compar- able worth; your review and/or Holly's would be appreciated, how- ever. I would expect most applicants to be recent graduates and would not propose formal testing for the position. Since it is not a clerical position, I do not feel that union membership would be required. I will be happy to provide any additional information you desire or to discuss the matter in more detail. Upon your approval, we will begin the recruitment process. Finan"-Director/City Clerk EJV/kf /D BAND I GRADESUBGRAD Job Description ARTHUR YOUNG JOB TITLE DEPARTMENT/SECTION JOB NO. Staff Accountant Finance TITLE OF IMMEDIATE SUPERVISOR 'Assistant Finance Director JOBSUMMARY The Staff Accountant is responsible to assist in the development, coordina- tion and control of financial records and reports; to assure accuracy, com- pleteness and timeliness of resulting financial reports; to coordinate and assist in the functions of utility billing, payroll, payables, receivables, fixed assets and special assessments. TASK NO. DESCRIPTION FREQUENCY BAND/GRADE 1. Consult with Assistant Finance Director to develop controls necessary to assure accuracy and security of financial records. 2. Monitor monthly balances of various accounts to detect errors and ensure integrity of financial system. 3. Write reports as necessary using LOGIS terminals and HP 150 computer equipment. 4. Coordinate work schedules of utility billing, payroll, payables, receivables, fixed.assets and special assessments to insure that assignments are completed on a timely basis. 5. Prepare journal entires as necessary. 6. Assist in the preparation of annual budgets and • financial reports. 7. Assist other departments with finance related matters. APPROVED ON BEHALF OF J08 EVALUATION COMMITTEE DATE QUALIFICATIONS ;Specific training or job experience rewired before appointment A combination of training and experience substantially equivalent to college graduation with major course work in accounting, business and/or public administration, finance, economics or a related field. e Estimated length of time required for new entrant to achieve acceptable level of proficiency ORGANIZATIONAL RELATIONSHIPS DIRECTOR OF FINANCE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF FINANCE STAFF ACCOUNTANT STRUCTURAL AUTHORITY SAPIENTIAL AUTHORITY RESPONSIBILITY ACCOUNTABILITY ADVISABILITY INFORMABILITY SYMBOLS Nominal control y Actual contra 'Cl -Actual Q Actual 4 Full control 1 C— Nominal f Nominal WORKING CONDITIONS Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Six CONTRACTOR LICENSE B. CONTRACTOR LICENSE Attached on page � is a list of contractors who are renewing or have been selected and retained to build a building by a customer either living in, or planning to, reside in Eagan. They have references from other municipalities or their client and a permit application is awaiting City Council approval for a contractor license. • ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the list of contractor license which is enclosed for review. P /3 • • CONTRACTOR'S LICENSE JUNE 18, 1985 GENERAL CONTRACTORS: 1. DE ZURIK BUILDERS, INC. 2. M.A. MORTENSON CO. 3. T.J. CONTRACTING, INC. 4. TOP HAT CONSTRUCTION HCMBO NER: 1. WILLIAM H. ADAMS HEATING & VEN'T'ILATING: 1. ALEEN HEATING & AIR CONDITIONING 2. D & D ANDERSON HTG & PLBG, INC. 3. CARLSON REFRIGERATION 4. DEML HEATING & AIR CONDITIONING 5. MASTER HEATING & COOLING 6. NIECSON s=vo •, INC. 7. RICCAR HEATING 8. RICH'S HEATING & AIR CONDITIONING. PLUMBING: 1. LAREN BROAN PIDMBING 2. LAKESIDE PLUMING & HEATING, INC. 3. NIEMAN P & H, INC. 4. NYBO-PETERSON PLUMBING 5. TOWN & COUNTRY 14 4C -� r Myul7l�i •- 1. MUENCHCW CONCRETE & CONST. SVIMING POOL: 1. DOLPHIN POOL & PATIO • Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Seven CHANGE ORDER #1/WATER BOOSTER STATION C. Change Order #1, City Contract 84-13, Water Booster Station, Lexington Avenue --This change order resulted from the necessity of modifying the field piping to connect the booster station piping to the water main installed under City Contract 84-09. We anticipated the installation of the booster station piping would precede the installation of the trunk water main. Instead, installation of the trunk water main occurred prior to the con- struction of the booster station. This resulted in terminating the trunk water main short of the location anticipated by the booster station contract. This necessitated the requirement of an additional 11; bend and 24' of 20 -inch DIP water main to complete the water main connection to the booster station. A contractor, A 6 K Construction -Company, will perform this work for $1,302.41. In contrast, this same work would cost the City $1,455.00 if installed under City Contract 84-09 as originally proposed. By approving this change order, Council will meet all design objectives and save approximately $150. Therefore, staff recommends the approval of this change order. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve Change Order #1 to Contract 84-13 (water booster station -Lexington Avenue) in the amount of $1,302.41 and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. 15 Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Eight CHANGE ORDER/PROJECT 85-14/SPRING PARKS CONST. D. Change Order No. 1, Project 85-14 -- The Director of Parks & Recreation is requesting approval for Change Order #1 for the Spring Parks Construction project 85-14. The scope of this work is to modify the B618 concrete curb to a B612 curb. The shorter curb section will result in a savings on this contract of $1,898.10. The original contract amount is $476,837.05. The revised contract amount with this Change Order is $474,938.95. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve Change Order #1, which is a deduct in the amount of $1,898.10 for B612 concrete curbing. 0 E Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Nine PROJECT 84-21/FINAL PAYMENT/TENNIS CT. RESURFACING E. Project 84-21, Final Payment -- The Director of Parks & Recreation is recommending final payment for Project 84-21, the tennis court resurfacing. This final payment is in the amount of $9,892. The final recommendation is to accept final payment on the tennis court resurfacing project. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: Authorize final payment for tennis court resurfacing in the amount of $9,892 for Project 84-21. PROJECT 84-22/FINAL PAYMENT ATHLETIC FIELD LIGHTING F. Project 84-22, Final Payment -- The Director of Parks & Recreation is recommending final payment for Project 84-22 which includes supplying necessary equipment, poles and light fixtures for Northview Athletic Field lighting. The second portion of this contract included the installation of this equipment including all electrical installation and connections. The City staff have reviewed final payment requests and are recommending approval for supplying and installing athletic field lighting in the amounts of $5,347.22 and $6,644.16 for a total final payment of $11,991.38. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To accept Project 84-22, athletic field equipment and installations and authorize final payment in the amount of $11,991.38. /I Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Ten PETITION/VACATE UTILITY & DRAINAGE EASEMENT/CLEARVIEW ADDN. G. Receive Petition to Vacate Utility & Drainage Easement in Clearview Addition-- Staff received a petition from the owners of Lot 11 and a portion of Lot 12, Block 2, Clearview Addition, to vacate the existing drainage and utility easement on the southeasterly line of Lot 11 and the northwesterly line of Lot 12. The request that this line be moved to their southerly lot line that incorporates a portion of Lot 12. Staff will provide a detailed legal description and sketch for the public hearing for Council reference. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive this petition to vacate utility and drainage easement centered over the lot line between Lots 11 and 12 of Clearview Addition and order a public hearing for July 16, 1985. PETITION/VACATE UTILITY & DRAINAGE EASEMENT/SUNSET 4TH ADDN. H. Receive Petition to Vacate Utility & Draiange Easement in Sunset 4th Addition -- Staff received a petition from Mr. Brad Swenson for the vacation of right-of-way and utility and drainage easement for the "eyebrow" on Yorktown Place. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the petition • to vacate right-of-way and utility easement within Sunset 4th Addition and order a public hearing for July 16, 1985. • i Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Eleven FINAL PLAT/EAGANDALE OFFICE PARK 2ND ADDITION I. Final Plat Approval, Eagandale Office Park 2nd Addition (Opus) -- Staff is in receipt of a final plat application for the Eagandale Office Park 2nd Addition. Enclosed on page 'Za is a copy of the final plat. All submission materials required are in order for favorable consideration by Council. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the final plat for the Eagandale Office Park 2nd Addition and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. /9 m 0 0 EAGANDALE OFFICE PARK 2ND ADDITION 1 rY� aW:Ir Y \ 1 Yn r.•I.. \V .n1.\I renes Y Yu • II I WYYI I�I[I Iw LY YXIIIY, YI\ u: Ilr\ La Yl YI L/ IYY A{WIL: 1•\\ IY a1V(IIYI :Yry1L IIIL IYWYL LOIY,, I Xus111 LYIY•\IY, v W YIIrINw I W •r1Y Yu.:W Ygwa/nIWXY In Wfwyll puw, Lllur Nrull, \ .... " n r uY1 W .r unes. 1`h /IM. IIOIIw W W111 YI:w\Y YnW I::I, W WI\ IYr• Y.1: ul\ W 111. Ir Ifl w M ILI \n rIW Iv IV. IYIp4L QIIQ Ia, rrYY Y W rYw r14 WrW. MII[ u' YIVw{IWIY ^.:P YY W:MW\IIr YUY ur W u/r Y{ 11 Y .Iw IIL1 1• lluL ryY Ill 11 W II•\ N IYIGIII LINA IYIpAIY Ia, r[Y•1 Y W rYYY IIY {w W. •:r\•4 Y!1\VrllY Y. YII LtLI[ Q NYItliL w LWIN Q 11.1. IVn11 IAI. 1 r + 1111. I w Irll. IYe\I-Wr 1111. Iwll•lr 1111. Iw I�Ir . NII. Iw\,.u.Y QII n I.• I.M. Y• IYTIY I:wlr'1 Lil\WIY a YIw1YrY ww r YII_W •I IY�11111u .• 1.11. •Ir1111 NI\Vlllr \IwY:\ IUI 11 •lu Ilrh UI. LL QRp IY6UW wv11Y Y W rvW NN Yw11I. W Wres, r 11 IWIpYIY 111 �1= 11p all.i Y YrY1 •YIY W W 4 YI��" I4 FNY[rY Y [ [rl/ 1 W Ilu r111� -YIIy\ u 1..,Y, V Iuu1 u � Ilu IIUM w 1 IIV r.Yr w Nu • [YIV 1Y \11111 \s/ NII[. WYI. Nru\I Y IIW\I YW u11 W alVllly YI` Y1WYL1 Lies. I Iluo 1 Yrr111r. Yr Iar ly IrI1r r1Y1111 Y YIIY rl uw• W \V \Y/Y•Y W1 N IY Y Y Y O Lww:s WIIn Y Y IYYI II\III W\ r W_w Y IY�W Lu/ 4r\I N LYu. 11 ru11 YYwY YII /\II. �. v a1W,IW YIW un IYp1Y! Laa — nn rQ�u v ur11, umYu fun v Lh.n �- 1Y IIr.YIy In V �\ w uar1.1Y1 WI. r w Y =��_W uIIT,•II lTOIpRiY LIU4 T11i1�prlj I; Y q NI\q Lr1� ,y In • Ir1nW Wls �?T l `s X. :cAr•:nALE '::EE:TEi: E: lid'J IiSTR EA:;..Fli C4LE i.•.L PARK I .. � r Y I LOT 1 BLOC�f all ) LOT I I ` 1'15 hY':YJi :5 I 2. F.R K' LOT 2 I LOT BLOCK ya�jJ .• I I ..c 12. I •- Y I T.•.��.:IIJ J 1'I YIr Iles I.Ir1 Y Yyv m. 4r1 Of YrY. 1Y1. w W Y.0 Ir11 Wl1l .. n.\ hare. un Iln IIInr _W r Y — n: Yn1I�YV W'WI/Il.l [al.:ls AI. IIX N IIW0111 pllp IW YO `:a—ol w .�Yr I..IW 4 1: Wru 1\.1.1Y Yrin YS W I.r..W Y n Weu L..\I L.. w qn: s.br W r.rr Y rwbuY M W W I Iruur. r Wm Lry. nwYW .{ . rYrlr r.\IY Y uY Y: •mn: 1 r•:. �pr,APS.I-� 2 D I LOT 2 15 q HEIGHT-"' IL, QYYI(j WI) WIL" umoln ul[ YII)IIY 11V) W YYw4r Yr1L1 IW m .®IIIY w. W . • • . \�4 � .� � rs w nwI WIYX Y+Y Wnrlun Y. N��a w i41 w= s..• wl r nlr u W .rnY n i:.0 u.:11, YrYu ;�ANL,'AL-E :Er-ttF III DU TRIAL FARK `\j lui. 7 VICINITY MAP 3 e 1 _ h Y r:vnYvi. T4 ti R � 1. w•. I� I! ;�ANL,'AL-E :Er-ttF III DU TRIAL FARK `\j lui. 7 VICINITY MAP 3 e 1 _ Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Twelve FINAL PLAT APPROVAL/BLACKHAWK TOWNHOUSE APARTMENTS J. Final Plat Approval for Blackhawk Townhouse Apartments (Sharevest, Inc.) --Staff is in receipt of a final plat application for the Blackhawk Townhouse Apartment Addition. Location of this development is south of Diffley Road, east of Blackhawk Road and west of 35E. Enclosed on page y y is a copy of the final plat for Council's reference. All submittal materials are in order for favorable consideration by Council. . Enclosed- (page;!�2p) is a written request from Mr. Douglas Johnson representing Sharevest for issuance of the building permit for model units and rental office identified on the site as "D" building • and also the pool building. Enclosed on page7=44 is a copy of the site plan for Council's reference. It is staff's under- standing that Dakota County has about a six to eight week delay in recording the final plats. The issuing of a building permit requires that the final plat be recorded. Because this delay is of no fault of the developer or the City, staff feels it.appro- priate that Council could allow the issuance of a building permit in this instance. Instead of requiring proof of recording from Dakota County, staff would recommend some sort of proof that Dakota County is in receipt of the final plat. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the final plat for the Blackhawk Townhouse Apartments (Sharevest, Inc.) and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to "execute all related documents. Also to approve/deny the request for issuance of a building permit for the model units and rental office identified as cluster "D" • and also pool building based upon proof that Dakota County received the final plat. 'PXHIBIT "A" BLACKHAWK TOWNHOUSE APARTMENTS z t 4 'ry 6 1 1 rE• 1NE NORTH LIN! OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF OECTION 10. l.Et. A 1 HAS AN ASSUIIEO BEARING OR N BB SS AS E DENOTES RON MONUMENT BET MAOI(ED WITH REOIETRAIgN NUMBER I3600 DENOTEB NON MONUMENT FOUND. VICINITYMAP :.j. -_.. 16 F 1. .O 60J I �4:• ��<. IL �I rEnoe. NOINECIIINO COmPRN4, INC. MN MNII RiNN.H�Nu W. lure a nc R c.rc Tc 1:= x 1 �p YY}g ;N•i •_ � I Lj ' r ' 1 tS I fl � I I u I K 1 I 1 I ' I I �1• II z t 4 'ry 6 1 1 rE• 1NE NORTH LIN! OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF OECTION 10. l.Et. A 1 HAS AN ASSUIIEO BEARING OR N BB SS AS E DENOTES RON MONUMENT BET MAOI(ED WITH REOIETRAIgN NUMBER I3600 DENOTEB NON MONUMENT FOUND. VICINITYMAP :.j. -_.. 16 F 1. .O 60J I �4:• ��<. IL �I rEnoe. NOINECIIINO COmPRN4, INC. MN MNII RiNN.H�Nu W. lure a nc R c.rc Tc SHAREVEST, INC. NORTHWESTERN FINANCIAL CENTER. SUITE 1733 7600 %ER%ES AVENUE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55431 TELEPHONE 16121 6350622 June 12, 1985 Mr. Rich Hefti City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Rd. Eagan, MN 55121 RE: Walnut Trails (Blackhawk Townhouse Apartments) Building Permit for Models • Dear Mr. Hefti: Pursuant to Mr. Ed Kirsh and paragraph 16 of the Development Contract, request is hereby made for issuance of a building permit for the model units and rental office identified on the site plan as the Cluster "D" building and pool building. It is my understanding that final plat approval (but not recording of the plat) will be a condition for the issuance of a building permit if authorized by Council action. If you have questions or comments, please call. DMJ/ms V) Co?;dially, /�%'% • Dougla M. Johnso / LISTER yp - T ♦I ` . LUS C' ` S Ne i`IW \ 1 S' ^N1MN -- o {�! _•_ a. .•T iii. 13•aj�l W _ e 'h I „o \ +n LISTER yp - T ♦I ` . LUS C' ` S Ne i`IW \ 1 S' ^N1MN -- W _ e 'h \ a�KKORSUNSKV ARCKERICC ARCHITECTS. INQ --_ _ --- - -- . �"• "'••• • - ••• •••• - — -• �w� esu r •ow.m � - ... -. SITE PLAN; BLACKHAWK APARTMENT$ EAOAN. MINNESOTA ` NORTH SCALE: 1'•30' t=l` SHECT / OF 2 611EE7'S Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Thirteen EXCAVATION PERMIT/R.L. JOHNSON (OUTLOT A, COMSERV) K. Excavation Permit Application #17-125 for R. L. Johnson (Outlot A, Comserv)--Staff is in receipt of an application for excavation permit over Outlot A of the Comsery Addition. The applicant is R. L. Johnson Company who plan constructing an office -warehouse on Outlot A. The Planning Commission will review their proposed development at their next meeting, June 25, 1985. Meanwhile all submittal materials are in order for favorable consideration by Council. • ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve excavation permit #17-125 for R. L. Johnson Company for Outlot A, Comsery Addition. EXCAVATION PERMIT/SIENNA CORPORATION (BLACKHAWK GLEN L. Excavation Permit Application #16-135 for Blackhawk Glen (Sienna Corporation) --Staff is in receipt of an application for excavation permit for the proposed Blackhawk Glen development. Sienna Corporation will be the developer for this project which is located in the northeast quarter of the southwest quarter of Section 16. This is northeast of the Blackhawk Hills Addition and immediately south of the proposed Hampton Heights Addition. All submission materials are in order for favorable consideration by Council. • ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve excavation permit #16-135 for the Blackhawk Glen Addition (Sienna Corporation). a'15' Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Fourteen APPROVE PLANS & SPECS./ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS/ROYAL OAK CIRCLE M. Contract 85-15, Approve Plans & Specifications/Order Advertise- ment for Bids (Royal Oaks Circle Street & Utility Improvements) -- Council authorized the installation of streets and utilities under Project 432 (Royal Oaks Circle Addition) on April 16, 1985. In doing so, Council also authorized the preparation of plans and specifications for this project. The plans and specifications are complete. Upon Council's approval of these plans, staff recommends a bid opening on July 11, 1985. If Council desires, our. consulting engineer has the plans for this project for Council's review. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the plans and specifications for Contract 85-15, Project 432 (Royal Oaks Circle street and utility improvements) and authorize a bid opening for 10:30 a.m., July 11, 1985. APPROVE PLANS & SPECS./ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS/UPS N. Contract 85-18, Approve Plans & Specifications/Order Advertise- ment for Bids (UPS Street & Utility Improvements) -- Council authorized the installation of public utilities and streets under Project 442 for the UPS Addition on May 21, 1985. These plans and specifications are now complete for consideration by Council to order a bid opening for Friday, July 12, 1985. If Council so desires, our consulting engineer has these plans for this project for Council's review. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the plans and specifications for City Contract 85-18, Project 442 (UPS Utility and Street Improvements) and order a bid opening at 10:30 a.m., Friday, July 12, 1985. Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Fifteen PROJECT 451, RECEIVE PETITION/FEASIBILITY REPORT (COACHMAN ROAD) 0. Project 451, Receive Petition/Order Feasibility Report (Coachman Road Trunk Watermain) -- Staff is in receipt of a petition submitted by the developer's of the Hampton Heights Project. They are petitioning to have the City install the necessary trunk 30" watermain within the Coachman Road extension. The developer of the Hampton Heights Project will install all lateral public utilities and public streets under a private contract. • ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To redeive the petition for Project 451 and order a feasibility report for the trunk watermain extension within Coachman Road. • ;7-7 Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Sixteen FEASIBILITY REPORT/PUBLIC HEARING/HOLLAND LAKE TRUNK STORM SEWER P. Project 444, Receive Feasibility Reports/Order Public Hearing (Holland Lake Trunk Storm Sewer) -- Council received a petition from residents adjacent LP -36 for the necessary storm sewer improvements to prevent the flooding of their property every spring. Because of the dependence upon several other ponds in the vicinity, staff was directed to prepare a feasibility report addressing the storm sewer situation for ponds LP -61, LP -34, LP -35, LP-36,LP-45, LP -37, LP -51 and LP -38 (Holland Lake). Our consulting engineering firm determined this project is feasible from an engineering standpoint. Therefore, it would be appropriate to conduct a public hearing on August 6, 1985. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the feasibility report for Project444 (Holland Lake area trunk storm sewer) and order a public hearing for August 6, 1985. FEASIBILITY REPORT/PUBLIC HEARING/COUNTRY CLUB MARKET DRIVEWAY • Q. Project 449, Receive Feasibility Report/Order Public Hearing (Country Club Market Driveway Improvements) -- Council authorized a feasibility study for the extension of the driveway to Country Club Market, along with landscaping, on May 7, 1985. This feasi- bility report is now complete and the project is feasible. • Therefore, staff recommends that Council order a public hearing to consider this improvement on July 16, 1985. This date will allow adequate amount of time to publish and mail all legal notices. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To report for Project 449 (Country Club Market and order a public hearing for July 16, 1985. receive the feasibility driveway improvements) Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Seventeen FEASIBILITY REPORT/PUBLIC HEARING/JOHANNES ADDITION R. Project 431, Receive Feasibility Report/Order Public Hearing (Johannes Addition Trunk Storm Sewer) -- Acting on a petition by the developer of the Johannes Addition, Council authorized the preparation of a feasibility report for Project 431. This project includes the installation of trunk storm sewer between Ponds JP -33 and JP -12. The development of the Johannes Addition precipitated this project because staff felt it is more appropriate to install this segment of storm sewer now and not have to install it in the future when this parcel was not owned by one owner. This project is feasible from an engineering standpoint and, • therefore, it would be appropriate to schedule a public hearing for July 16, 1985. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the feasibility report for Project 431 (Johannes Addition trunk storm sewer) and order a public hearing for July 16, 1985. FEASIBILITY REPORT/PUBLIC HEARING/LONE OAK TRUNK WATERMAIN $. Project 447, Receive Feasibility Report/Order Public Hearing (Lone Oak Trunk Watermain) -- Acting on a petition submitted • by the developers of the Lone Oak Addition on May 7, 1985, Council authorized the preparation of a feasibility report to determine the feasibility of providing adequate water pressure and flows to this development. The feasibility report is now complete thereby making it appropriate for Council to authorize a public hearing for July 16, 1985, to consider the improvements as recom- mended by this report. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the feasibility report for Project 447, Lone Oak trunk watermain) and order a public hearing for July 16, 1985. z9 Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Eighteen FEASIBILITY REPORT/PUBLIC HEARING/POND LP -55 OUTLET T. Project 448, Receive Feasibility Report/Order Public Hearing (Pond LP -55 Trunk Storm Sewer Outlet) -- In responding to a complaint by Mr. Ney (Lot 5, Block 2, Oak Chase 2nd Addition) regarding the high water elevation in the pond located partially in Mr. Ney's backyard, staff reviewed the situation and determined the high water problem was probably due to a combination of leakage from the pond to the north (LP -55) and loss of permeability within Mr. Ney's pond itself over the years. To alleviate this problem, Council directed that a feasibility report be prepared to investigate possible alternatives. This report is now complete, thereby making it appropriate for Council to schedule a public • hearing for July 16, 1985, to consider the necessary improvements. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the feasibility report for Project 448 (Pond LP -55 trunk storm sewer outlet) and order a public hearing for July 16, 1985. 11 130 Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Nineteen PROJECT 414, PINE RIDGE DRIVE RECEIVE FEASIBILITY REPORT/ORDER PUBLIC HEARING U. Project 414, Receive Feasibility Report/Order Public Hearing (Pine Ridge Drive - Street Reconstruction) --Acting upon a petition submitted by the residents along Pine Ridge Drive, Council author- ized the preparation of a feasibility report on May 7, 1985. The feasibility report is now complete thereby making it appro- priate for Council to schedule a public hearing for August 6, 1985, to consider the street reconstruction and improvements necessary. • ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the feasibility report for Project 414 (Pine Ridge Drive street reconstruction) and order the public hearing for August 6, 1985. CONTRACT 83-17, FINAL PAYMENT/ACCEPTANCE BORCHERT-INGERSOLL POND, HURLEY LAKE.& SCHWANZ LAKE OUTLETS V. Contract 83-17, Final Payment/Acceptance (Borchert -Ingersoll Pond, Hurley Lake, and Schwanz Lake Outlets) --Contract 83-17 consisted of constructing the lift stations, force mains and necessary appurtenances to provide planned pond water level control facilities for the following ponds: • Borchert -Ingersoll (AP -1 and AP -2) Hurley Lake (JP -11) Schwanz Lake (LP -32) Our consulting engineering firm performed all tests and inspections required by the contract specifications and standard Eagan city policy. These tests indicate all materials and workmanship conform to the requirements of the plans and specifications. Therefore, staff recommends acceptance of this project by Council for perpetual maintenance and approval of the final payment to the contractor. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve final payment to the Austin Keller Construction in of $2,511.00 for City Contract 83-17 and accept for perpetual maintenance. 31 the 9th and the amount this project Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Twenty PUBLIC HEARINGS WESCOTT HILLS FOURTH ADDITION/MULTIFAMILY REVENUE BONDS A. Public Hearing for Multifamily Revenue Bonds for Wescott Hills Fourth Addition in the Amount of $2,100,000--A public hearing was scheduled for the June 4, 1985, City Council meeting and upon request by the developer, the hearing was continued until the June 18 meeting to consider multifamily housing revenue bonds for the Wescott Hills 4th Addition project. The application submitted by the developer is requesting a bond issue in the • amount of $2,100,000. In order to conform with the Council's policy of inducing not more than 808 of the market value appraisal, Miller and Schroeder Municipals Inc. is recommending a reduction in the project amount to $1,880,000. For a copy of the MAI appraisal review by both Miller and Schroeder Munici als Inc. and the actual appraisal, refer to pages _33 through p The project includes two (2) ten unit buildings, one (1) seven -unit building and two (2) four unit buildings containing a total of 35 townhouse units located on a site southwest of Yankee Doodle Road and Mike Collins Drive. All land use and planning requirements are satisfied. For additional information on the original applica- tion, refer to a letter drafted by Miller and Schroeder Municipals Inc. and referenced as pagesC through A copy of the program for the constru tion of a multifamily housing development can be found on page Also attached on pages 7, -through Ais a copy of the resolution and on pages through L is a copy of the application form. • ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: Approve or deny multifamily revenue bonds for Wescott Hills 4th Addiition in the amount of $1,880,000. &Y Toll Free Minnesota (8001 8626002 Toll Free Other States (800) 3286122 k�l Miller & Schroeder Municipals, Inc. Northwestern Financial Center, 7900 Xerxes Avenue South, Minneapolis. Minnesota 55431 • (612) 831-1500 June 12, 1985 Mr. Thomas Hedges City Administrator • City of Eagan 3930 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota 55122 RE: $1,880,000 City of Eagan, Minnesota Multifamily Housing Revenue Bonds (Wescott Hills Fourth Edition) Dear Mr. Hedges: You have asked that we summarize for you, the results of the appraisal on the above referenced proposed project and determine if the developer's request for bond financing is in conformance with the City's adopted guidelines for determining value. • We have reviewed the results of an appraisal prepared by MAI appraiser Alan Leirness of Shenehen & Associates. The appraisal considers the three recognized approaches to determining the value of the project: I. The Direct Sales Comparison Approach to Value II. The Income Approach to Value III. The Cost Approach to Value In looking at the direct sales comparison approach to value, the appraiser considered buildings of similar size which had sold in the area. The land was valued separately at $135,000 based on land sales with the appropriate zoning. As the appraiser continued his evaluation of the building, he considered the value of the subject improvements (buildings) and adjusted the improvements for items such as age, condition and quality of construction. The estimated value of the improvements was $1,925,000. With the value of the land added 33 Headquarters: Minneapolis, Minnesota Branch Offices: Downtown Minneapolis- Solana Beach. California -SantaMonica. California r Northbrook. Illinois- SL Paul. Minnesota, Naples. Flonda•Tallahassee. Flonda•Carson City. Nevada • .�. �... ..r ir.e Cn.... n...a I... e�r..r Itrv�ninn fnr m rTmn Mr. Thomas Hedges June 12, 1985 Page 2 back in, the value of the entire project was estimated at $2,100,000. The appraiser commented that this valuation approach leaves quite a bit to be desired since the age of the comparables are several years older than the subject. For the appraiser, the Income Approach to value is broken down into the following steps: A. Estimate potential gross income. B. Subtract allowances for vacancy and credit losses if • appropriate. C. Estimate and subtract all operating expenses that are typical for this type of real estate investment. D. Calculate the net operating income (NOI). E. Select an appropriate capitalization process and derive the capitalization rates based on a market analysis. F. Apply the selected capitalization process to the anticipated net operating income (NOI). With respect to the Income Approach to value the net operating income, a capitalization rate of 98 was used. This • resulted in.an estimated value of $2,150,000. Discounting is the process of converting forecast future income receipts to a present worth estimate. The mathematical foundation of this process is the basic formula for compound interest. Discounting is the mechanical basis for all income capitalization analysis in income property appraising. Value as of a given valuation date is the discounted present worth of the anticipated future income(s) reasonably expected to be generated by an income-producing property over a specified period of time. The appraiser is called upon to identify the value, as defined, of the future income receipts forecast to be receivable by the holder of a specific interest (rights) in the income-producing realty being appraised. The process by which future income receipts are converted to a present capital -value estimate is termed discounting. 3�- Mr. Thomas Hedges June 12, 1985 Page 3 Capitalization is the process of converting periodic income payments into an appropriate lump -sum capital value. It may be used to estimate either present worth or future worth. Discounting is that form of capitalization specifically concerned with the calculation of present worth of future receipts. Appraisals nearly always involve discounting because the final objective is usually a present -worth estimate. Using the discounted cash flow technique resulted in an • estimated value of $2,154,443. The appraiser commented that this was the best approach, as it considers accurate expenses and current investor yield rate requirements. In looking at the cost approach to value, the appraiser used the Marshall Valuation Cost Manual which conservatively estimates the hard costs of constructing the property. This preliminary study does not measure all "soft costs" nor the value of the subject property when it comes on line in the marketplace. The appraiser looked at some fees which would be necessary to consider in determining the value of constructing the improvements. Some of the fees which were not considered, for example, were the cost of construction financing and interest during that period, letter of credit fees and reserves. Based on the Marshall Valuation process, the value of the improvements was estimated to be $2,000,000. With the • value of the land added back in, the value of the entire project was estimated to be $2,135,000. As you can see, each approach to value is a "check" on the other two. Based on the Council's policy to consider all three approaches to value and based on this appraisal, Shenehen & Associates has given a market value to the Wescott Hills Project of: TWO MILLION THREE HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS 2,350,000 For the Concil's review we are attaching a copy of the letter to the developer from Shenehen & Associates, Inc. This letter is the cover of the appraisal. The appraisal in its entirety is available to the Council upon request. Mr. Thomas Hedges June 12, 1985 Page 4 The applicant is requesting that the City of Eagan give preliminary approval for a bond issue in the amount of $2,100,,000. In order to conform with the Council's policy of inducing not more than 80% of the market value appraisal, we recommend that the Council give preiliminary approval to this project in the amount of $1,880,000. If we can be of any further assistance, please contact me at 893-8920. Very truly yours, • MAC/dwh ,34 MILLER & SCHROEDER MUNICIPALS, INC. �pQ/ & �a5te_ / Marcia A. Cohodes Assistant Vice President • r1 f.J • Shenehon & Associates, Inc. Property valuation Et Market Analysis 903 imicNvest Plaza East, Minneapolis. Minnesota 55402 • (612) 333-6533 May 15, 1985 Mr. Darrel E. Gonyea/Mr. John Houston 1900 West Bloomington Freeway Minneapolis, Minnesota 55431 RE: MARKET VALUE APPRAISAL OF PROPOSED 35 UNIT RENTAL TOWNHOUSE PROJECT Dear Mr. Gonyea: In accordance with your request, we have completed an appraisal of the above referenced property for the purpose of estimating the market value of the fee simple interest. The following written report presents the findings, analyses and conclusions of this appraisal. We have made a complete inspection of the subject property and have fully identified the real estate in our written report. After careful consideration of the many factors influencing value, it is our opinion that the subject property will have a market value upon completion of the project according to specifications, as of April 1, 1986 of: TWO MILLION ONE HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS -------------($2,150,000.00) The value of the project on April 1, 1986 encuinbered with the proposed special financing is: TWO MILLION THREE HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS -----------($2,350,000.00) We have no personal interest or bias with respect to the subject matter of this appraisal report or the parties involved. The appraisal is made subject to certain assumptions and limiting conditions which are listed in this report. It conforms with accepted professional, ethical and performance standards of the real estate appraisal practice. If you have any questions or comments after reading this appraisal, please contact us. AJan P. Leimess • TirnottH E. Mardell • HaAard E. Shenehon • Robert J. Stradiota .` '51 Mr. Darrel E. Gonyea May 15, 1985 Page Two The undersigned appraiser certifies that he has personally inspected the property and has investigated information believed to be pertinent to the valuation of the property, and to the best of his knowledge and belief the statements and opinions expressed herein are correct and reasonable, subject to the limiting conditions set forth herein. S10MUN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Certified to this 15th day of May, 1985 Joseph R. Cook, Appraiser i, John G. Flaherty, Appraiser This appraisal has been reviewed and approved by the undersigned, who certifies that to the best of his knowledge and belief the statements and opinions expressed herein are correct and reasonable, subject to the limiting conditions set forth herein. The undersigned reviewer has inspected the subject property. S10EMN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Certified to this 15th day of May, 1985 � /; Alan P. Leirness, MAI, SRPA /kg • Toll Free Minnesota (800) 862-6002 Toll Free Other States (800) 328-6122 Miller & Schroeder Municipals, Inc. Northwestern Financial Center. 7900 Xerxes Avenue South, Minneapolis. Minnesota 55431 • (612) 831-1500 May 1, 1985 Mr. Thomas L. Hedges City Administrator City of Eagan • 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota 55122 Re: $2,100,000 City of Eagan Multifamily Housing Revenue Bonds (Wescott Hills Fourth Edition Project) Dear Mr. Hedges: Miller & Schroeder has been approached by a developer interested in utilizing Eagan's multifamiy housing bond program. The developers, Mr. John C. Houston and Mr. Darrel E. Gonyea currently are involved with projects in Lakeville and Apple Valley in addition to various other developments in Bloomington, Eden Prairie and Eagan. • Mr. Houston and Mr. Gonyea are proposing to develop a multifamily housing project southwest of Yankee Doodle Road and Mike Collins Drive. The proposed project will consist of two 10 unit buildings, one 7 unit building and two 4 unit buildings containing a total of 35 townhouse units. Each unit will have approximately 1252 square feet plus an attached 2 -car garage. It is anticipated that the size of the bond issue would not exceed $2,100,000. It is the request of Mr. Houston and Mr. Gonyea that the Wescott Hills Fourth Edition Project be on the agenda for May 7, 1985 City Council meeting,. to set a June 4, 1985 Public Hearing date. It is the desire of the developers to be considered for preliminary approval at the June 4th public hearing. At that time, or sooner, if you feel it appropriate, Mr. Houston and Mr. Gonyea will present its renderings of the proposed project, in addition to locational maps and individual unit floor plans. Enclosed with this letter you will find the developers' formal application for bond approval along with the application fee and the necessary resolutions and notices. Headquar2m inneapolis. Minnesota Branch Offices: Downtown Minneapolis- Solana Beach.California -Santa Monica. California -Northbrook, Illinois- St. Paul. Minnesota • Naples. Floncla•Tallahassee. Flonda•Carson City. Nevada ?1.mp•i of inry $emuues Imesmr Roteeion Carpormnn Mr. Thomas L. Hedges May 1, 1985 Page two If you should have any questions on this project please do not hesitate to call me at 893-8920. Very truly yours, MILLER & SCHROEDER MUNICIPALS, INC. `iumb,a �&ocf ee/ Marcia A. Cohodes Assistant Vice President MAC/pmh Enclosures M • • PROGRAM FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A MULTIFAMILY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C (the "Act"), the City of Eagan (the "City") has been authorized to develop and administer programs of multifamily housing developments under the circumstances and within the limitations set forth in the Act. Minnesota Statutes, Section 462C.07 provides that such programs for multifamily housing developments may be financed by revenue bonds issued by the City. The City has received a proposal from Mr. John Maiston and Mr. Darrel E. Gonyea that, pursuant to the authority found in the Act, the City approve a program providing for the construction of approximately thirty-five (35) units of rental housing ("Housing Units") located • southwest of Yankee Doodle Road and Mike Collins Drive in the City (the "Project"). The construction of the Project is to be funded through the issuance of up to $2,100,000 in revenue bonds issued by the City (the "Bonds"). It is proposed that the bonds be sold publicly through an underwriter and, that the Bonds will include some form of credit enhancement, such as additional collateral, insurance or a letter of credit, -in order to provide favorable interest rates. Following construction of the Project, the Developer, or a related entity, will own and operate the Project as a multifamily residential rental project. The thirty-five (35) townhouse units will consist of two bedroom apartments, of which twenty percent (20i) of the units will be specifically reserved for tenants whose incomes are not greater than eighty percent (80X) of the area median income. It is estimated that rents for the Housing Units will be between $595 and $635 per month. The City, in establishing this multifamily housing program (the "Program"), has considered the information contained in the City's 462C Housing Plan, adopted on April 17, 1984 (the "Housing Plan"), including particularly (i) the availability and affordability of other government housing programs; (ii) the availability and affordability of private mar- ket financing for the acquisition and rehabilitation of multifamily housing units; (iii) an analysis of population, unemployment trends and projections of future population trends and future employment needs; (iv) the recent housing trends and future housing needs of the City; and (v) an analysis of how the, Program will meet the needs of persons and families residing and expected to reside in the City. The City, in adopting the Program, has further considered (i) the amount, timing and sale of Bonds to finance the estimated costs of the housing units, to fund the appropriate reserves and to pay the cost of issuance; (ii) the method of monitoring and implementation of the Program to insure compliance with the City's housing plan and its objectives; (iii) the method of administering, servicing and supervising the Program; (iv) the costs to the City, including future administrative expenses; (v) the restrictions of the multifamily development to be financed under the Program; and (vi) certain other limitations. T� -1- CITY OF EAGAN RESOLUTION ADOPTING A HOUSING BOND PROGRAM FOR THE ISSUANCE OF MULTIFAMILY HOUSING REVENUE BONDS,FOR THE 14ESCOTT HILLS FOURTH ADDITION PROJECT AND AUTHORIZING SUB- MISSION OF SAME TO THE MINNESOTA HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY AND THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL. WHEREAS, pursuant to the Minnesota Municipal Housing Act, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C (the "Act"), the City of Eagan (the "City") is authorized to adopt a housing plan and carry out programs for the financing of multifamily housing which is affordable to persons of low and moderate income; and WHEREAS, the Act requires adoption of the housing plan after a public hearing held thereon after publication of notice in a newspaper • of general circulation in the City at least thirty days in advance of the hearing; and WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing on a proposed housing plan amendment was published on February 22, 1984; and WHEREAS, the City adopted the City's Housing Plan Amendment (the "Plan") on April 17, 1984, after a public hearing on March 22, 1984, continued to April 17, 1984; and WHEREAS, in accordance with its requirements, the Plan provides for programs for the issuance of bonds to finance multifamily housing development which are affordable to persons and families of low and moderate income and are consistent with the goals, conditions and requirements of'the Plan; and WHEREAS, the City has received from Mr. John C. Houston and Mr. 40 Darrel E. Gonyea (the "Developer") a proposal to construct a multi- family housing development of approximately 35 townhouse units on property located southwest of Yankee Doodle Road and Mike Collins Drive in the City (the "Project"), and a request for the City to issue housing revenue bonds in the amount of approximately $2,100,000 for the Project; and WHEREAS, the Act requires adoption of a program after a public hearing held thereon after publication of notice in a newspaper of general circulation in the City at least fifteen days in advance of the hearing before the issuance of bonds for the Project; and WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing on a proposed housing program for the Project (the "Program") was published on May 16, 1985; and �y WHEREAS, the City has on this date conducted a public hearing on the Program; and WHEREAS, the Act further requires submission of the Program to the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (the "MHFA") for its approval; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Eagan: 1. That the Program for the issuance of up to $2,100,000 of the City's multifamily housing revenue bonds is hereby in all respects adopted. 2. That the City Manager is hereby authorized to submit the Program to the MHFA, and to do all other things and take all other actions as may be necessary or appropriate to carry out the Program in accordance with the Act and any other applicable laws and regulations. • 3. The Developer has agreed to pay directly or through the City any and all costs incurred by the City in connection with the Project whether or not the Project is approved by the MHFA; whether or not the Project is carried to completion; and whether or not the bonds or operative instruments are executed. 4. Miller & Schroeder Municipals, Inc, is hereby designated as underwriter of the bonds to be used in connection with the Project, its fee to be paid out of the proceeds of the bonds when and if issued. 5. The adoption of this resolution does not constitute a guarantee or a firm commitment that the City will issue the bonds as requested by the Developer. The City retains the right in its sole discretion to withdraw from participation and accordingly not issue the bonds should the City at any time prior to the issuance thereof determine that it is in the best interest of the City not to issue the bond or should the parties to the transaction be unable to reach agreement as to the terms and conditions of any of the documents required for the transaction. ADOPTED: ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor �3 c CITY OF EAGAN, MINNESOTA Multifamily Housing Bond Program Request Date April 30, 1985 1. Name of Project WESCOTT HILLS FOURTH ADDITION Project Address Eagan, Minn (SW of Yankee Doodle Road & Mike Collins Drive) 2. Applicant Name John C. Houston and Darrel E. Gonyea Address % Gonyea Land, 9100 W Bloomington Freeway, Bloomington, Mn 55431 Contact Person John C. Houston Darrel E. Gonyea • Telephone Numbers (612)423-2995 (612)888-1112 3. Form of Business (check one) Sole Proprietorship Partnership % Corporation If parcnership, include names of partners and ownership interest. John C. Houston - 50% Darrel E. Gonyea - 50% 4. Partnership's Legal Counsel (firm name) Best & Flanagan Address 3500 IDS Tower Minneapolis, Mn 55402 Cort_ ,: Pgrso„ Jim Olson Telephone Number (612)339-7121 • 5. Experience in multifamily construction and/or rehabilitation. CITY PROJECT NAME Ik UNITS Lakeville Acorn Hts Replat 10 Apple Valley Farquar Hills 100 And various other developments in Bloomington, Eden Prairie and Eagan. 6. Project Description: 35 townhouse units in Wescott Hills Fourth Addirion in Eagan, Minnesota, consisting to two 10 unit buildings, one 7 unit building and two 4 unit buildings. Each unit will have about 1252 square feet plus an attached 2 -car garage. 7. The total cost of the project will be approximately $ 2,100,000 • 8. Source and Use of Funds: Source: Bonds 1,680,000 Developer Equity 420,000 Other Total Use: Construction Costs 1,680,000 Other 497,105 -2- 2,100,000 2,100,000 9. Has the applicant utilized bond financing elsewhere in Minnesota or in other States: No X Yes If yes, specify location and purpose: Appraisal is in progress by Alan Lierness of 10. Appraised value of project $ Shenehon & Associates Source of Appraisal (check one) MAI X Other • If other, identify some source and method of determining appraised value. Please remit your chp-'c in the amount of $500 payable to the City of Eagan, to the attentiu:: o: Ms. Marcia A Cohodes MILLER & SCHROEDER MUNICIPALS, INC. 7900 Xerxes Avenue South Suite 2300 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55431 Include two copies of this application with your check. 116 -3- Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Twenty -One CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/WERNER LEMBKE A. Annual Review, Conditional Use Permit, (Werner Lembke) -- The City received a complaint approximately two (2) months ago from West Publishing Company about the condition of the Werner Lembke property. As a result of the complaint, a direction was given by the City Council to have City staff review the property and ask that Mr. Lembke comply with all conditions set forth in the conditional use permit. To date, there is not compliance with the conditions as outlined in the April • 4, 1985, letter from the Chief Building Inspector. The City staff will make a final investigation prior to the City Council meeting and report on the conditional use permit at the meeting oesday. For additional information, refer to pages V through -!5'/ . ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the annual review of the Werner Lembke conditional use permit. • of eagan 3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD. P.O. BOX 21199 BEA BLOMQUIST EAGAN, MINNESOTA 55121 Mayor PHONE: (612) 454-8100 THOMAS EGAN JAMES A SMITH JERRY THOMAS THEODORE WACHTER corm Members June 4, 1985 THOMAS HEDGES CIN Admimftator ' EUGENE VAN OVERBEKE COV Crary MR. WERNER LEMBKE 545 WESCOTT RD EAGAN MN 55122 Dear Mr. Lembke: Two months have gone by since the attached letter by Dale Peterson was sent to you. The letter summarized the provisions of the Conditional Use Permit which allows you to do business at your location. We have seen no evidence of compliance with those conditions. As a result, we have scheduled a review of your Conditional Use Permit before the Eagan City Council at 7:00 p.m. on June 18, 1985. If you comply with these provisions prior to that date your Condi- tional Use Permit will be, renewed. If not, or if you fail to attend the June 18th meeting, your Conditional Use Permit will be revoked. If you have any questions, feel .free to call me at 454-8100. Sincerely, Gre H. Ingraham Assistant Planner GHI:jbd attachments CC: Thomas Hedges, City Administrator Pat Geagan, Administrative Captain, Eagan Police Dept. Paul Hauge, City Attorney THE LONE OAK TREE... THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY I of eagan 3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD. P.O. BOX 21199 BEA BLOMQUIST EAGAN. MINNESOTA 55121 Yam PHONE: (612) 454-8100 THOMAS EGAN JAMES A. SMITH April 4, 1985 JERRY THOMAS THEODORE WACHTER ' Council Ma ms THOMAS HEDGES Cry Aa m ftafq NR 11ERNER LE6IBKE EUGENE VAN OVERBEKE ON Cllk 545 WESCOTT RD ..EAGAN, NN 55123 Dear Nr Lembke: The Eagan City Council at the regular meeting of April 2, 1985 directed me to • enforce the provisions of your Conditional Use Permit. Failure to do so would indicate to us that you no longer desire to do business at that location in Eagan and are willing to have the permit revoked. Conditional Use Permits are designed to protect Eagan citizens property values and environment. Cn April 19,' 1983, You signed an agreement with the City 'to- meet the following conditions in return for the privilege of operating a business at,..Lot 1, Block 1, Lembke Addition: 1) Install green areas with 28 double needle Blue Spruce to screen the outside storage of trucks as shown. 2) Install concrete curbed driveways as shown. 3) Install bituminous drives and parking as shown. 4) Install clean, crushed rock in storage areas as shown. 5) Keep lawn areas weed free and mowed. 6) Keep stored tractors and trailers in an orderly manner. I feel quite confident that you will want to maintain a good image in the City and will take immediate steps to fulfill your obligations. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Sincerely, '1iCGF.L �� Dale Peterson Chief Building Official DP/js CC: Tom Hedges,.' city Administrator THE LONE OAK TREE... THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY V LEMBKE FIRST r EAG• 1 .... ••. exlsrlpG .. OFFI� fuSEO o4Sf ADDITION • EXISTING GRASS AREA TO REMAIN AS IS , u p P I i GR4 D:NG LIMITS 9� j W _ GRAVEL / - CRU 7dIHED 'a • y PsED 6uOPOSu DING p ]L d PROPOSED -!� d FLOOR ., ELEV.-9183 ROC iK SURFA CE� i I- u 1 w I.O ' 3 b B1T4M1a10US Sit E• a +- /I� �L 5c".Wlok SNR-IPPER `I`v f I 7D4 1 - lj . fo G AREA tyw< ua, Resour. CIYLe kwo RDLKE 1 - yIG1, 14 Mw<-Jdlq'oNe� dy llet✓t� WESCOTT f N �CACc: L Inch - 4'r C^et C� pe4DTEs UL5 EMPaoTee PAQ.'I. — Denotes proposed dre[nage elevations and contours shown are proposed except, those I shown on Wescott Road N Prepared By: Delmar H. Schwanz Land Surveyor, Re.. `Io. 86, Address: 2978 145th St..We: Rosemount, Mn. 7 55..68 z 'II Dated: May 1, 1980 IN SUPS gpIieecaaBRG 23J 1982 j Rzitseo JA NV.Aeof 19, On ro EXISTING CURB Cooc-SPTyNL. LOCATIOm 1'LALA r0L .. SCR.EELLIUC, %m ILud BFLY SEE co"er 1-i t t= T DELMAR H. SCHWANZ LAND SURVEYOR 5, iniG Registered Under Laws Of The State or Minnesota 2978 — 145TH STREET W. — BOX M ROSEMOUNT, MINNESOTA 55068 PHO E 612 423.1769 SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE _? m c1 to V, u cA Oil n ��'/ Q Z+e3 �oo"T7 17ou91g N��IDI.E , Ul..1H_ JF+Puc.fZ PSA 1.rTlV4 130 `O LD.TIOV I Sc�Eunw SNRu88�e� PRoPFerh LIAjF S C.0 TT ' Fsc(� _ �-eu 11.4 MINNESOTA REGISTRATION NO. 8625 • • Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Twenty -Two REVISED PRELIMINARY PLAT/LEXINGTON PLACE SOUTH B. U.S. Home Corporation for a Revised Preliminary Plat of Lexington Place South Second Addition -- At the June 4, 1985, City Council meeting, a revised preliminary plat of Lexington Place South 2nd Addition was presented for consideration. The direction given to U.S. Home Corporation after City Council review was to examine the possibility of increasing lot widths and essentially increase the size of lots in the Lexington Place South 2nd Addition. By changing the size of the lots, it might be possible to increase the subdivision by a few new lots and at the same time maintain the open space desired by the Advisory Parks & Recreation Commission. U.S. Home Corporation did review the possibility of changing lot lines, however, due to the inplace utility locations, it is not possible to change lot lines without moving utility locations. Therefore, the replat is not feasible. The U.S. Home Corporation has reviewed the Lexington Place South 2nd Addition and would like to present a change to their original request for a revised preliminary plat. The new preliminary plat provides a reduction of three (3) lots. For additional information on this item, refer to the Planning Department report 1 found on pages J 3 through t,3 For additional information and a review by the Advisory Parks & Recreation Commission, refer to/ �he Director of Parks & Recreation memorandum found on page i4_ ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED request by the U.S. Home liminary plat of Lexington ON THIS ITEM: Corporation to Place South 2nd 4� To approve or deny the consider a revised pre - Addition. MEMO TO: THOMAS L HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: DALE C RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER DATE: JUNE 13, 1985 SUBJECT: UPDATE ON LEXINGTON PLACE SOUTH 2ND ADDITION At the June 4, 1985 City Council meeting, the Council reviewed the Lexington Place South 2nd Addition and moved to deny the replatting of the outlots unless the applicant looks at the lots in the NE portion of the development and increases all lot sizes throughout the development in order to replat Outlot A & C of the 2nd Addition. • Staff has met with the applicants and reviewed the Lexington Place 2nd Addition to look at the development as it stands at the present time. The first exhibit attached denotes the utilities which are presently in place. Moving lot lines would change the location of water, sewer, electric, telephone and gas service stubs which have been provided to each lot. It appears to be almost impossible to replat the already created lots by expanding and making then larger without having to change all of the hookups and granting easements for the new design of lots. The Second suggestion is what would happen if lot lines were extended from the already created lots to take up the place of Outlot A & C. In review of this alternative, Staff has looked at the potential of extending lot lines to replace the outlots. It appears that the depth of the lots range in the neighborhood of 325' to 300' by a width of 65' which would make a very long, • narrow lot. These lots may not be maintained by the owner creating a no -man's zone which could be a potential problem for the City in requiring upkeep of a portion of the lot which is not maintained by the property owner. This issue was brought up to the applicant and they also have indicated they do not feel this solution would work in this particular subdivision. The last possibility would be replatting Outlots A & C into 16 lots rather than the 19 that were originally proposed. The applicant has reduced the number of lots by 3 and has made all of the newly created lots as large or larger than what is platted in the 1st Addition of Lexington Place South. In review of this revised site plan, the applicant has attempted to increase the size of the lots being platted but is still trying to keep continuity within the overall Lexington Place South Addition. !3 UPDATE - LEXINGTON PLACE SOUTH 2ND ADDITION PAGE 2 JUNE 13, 1985 There are numerous alternatives that could be, addressed, but the main issue is will the City allow the replat of the outlots or will they require the open space be -maintained. If the City will allow the outloE, how many lots will the City require in each of these outlots and how would the continuity be addressed in relationship to the overall plat. This has been a second attempt to take into consideration the concern of the City and also try to increase the lot sizes from what was originally approved. If anyone has questions or would like other addressed, please feel free to contact me at information can be provided at the June 18, 1985 Dale C. Runkle DCR:jbd 5 items specifically City Hall so this Council meeting. • 0 Revised Prelimincry Plat: LEXINGTON PLACE SOUTH CITY OF EAGAN (Pert of W( of SWief see eL,l tl.4i)) Wdh.m M. 3—Ph , 010 14 6 1II— rag ° �� a• 1.0 {1^..e. 1aa '1ea�. LO •� t �w° l N f ... n+ 1I is 1'o:S FX IR a .lip UIs p� a r o 3 o:... e r Wal/... I arrn.ra .". i'3 t P SM1r OJ3�C �Z: Stole+ 1'•100' . \10 / A e �_i.o� ]ep J f I- I ] g ° S z v v e I1— voo °O � 0 0': I• W° J �_—_.^ r—✓r —ram j .6 1° a •�- of • a • I b o � � • ti G • • —I ee • w Jo , 1 "B�•.,^l �— — __ I ae IL=' _ z — 0) _ S (c.unlr Reed n0 L]) • S a • b —J�_—' ---SY• F0.ANC11 ]V4�G I /ehgl Y. [G.IGr,alel. I � � SITE DATA: 50 1]4 Leh 2] leas Ov een GO .110' minnwmn LV size 10,°00 S. It eomle let m.e LL00 le 01 intmn\.n IN Gree LAND ALLOCATION: 1 L] ]e..$ Sb Gd{ 1.00 G.r.f Q,, Sb., us A..n Let% Ile , C.R. WINOEN III ASSOCIATES. INC. uw a11RYeWR, it emm ]rG[n aa. NLa. YIIeL{On area / IMTf p.00. Lal LINKS H0i FYi[r{ 4d.d ]� a 8 Kal 0rlo ]0' laYn]1.w \N fa' It 0 ', )w f . \10 / A e �_i.o� ]ep J f I- I ] g ° S z v v e I1— voo °O � 0 0': I• W° J �_—_.^ r—✓r —ram j .6 1° a •�- of • a • I b o � � • ti G • • —I ee • w Jo , 1 "B�•.,^l �— — __ I ae IL=' _ z — 0) _ S (c.unlr Reed n0 L]) • S a • b —J�_—' ---SY• F0.ANC11 ]V4�G I /ehgl Y. [G.IGr,alel. I � � SITE DATA: 50 1]4 Leh 2] leas Ov een GO .110' minnwmn LV size 10,°00 S. It eomle let m.e LL00 le 01 intmn\.n IN Gree LAND ALLOCATION: 1 L] ]e..$ Sb Gd{ 1.00 G.r.f Q,, Sb., us A..n Let% Ile , C.R. WINOEN III ASSOCIATES. INC. uw a11RYeWR, it emm ]rG[n aa. NLa. YIIeL{On area r / G p L Utilities shown are: Sanitary Sewer Storm Sewer Water Electrical Not shown: Telephone Gas o Denotes Manhole Denotes Fire Hydrant Denotes Catch Basin Denotes Sewer & !-:,-Iter Se.rvicu Stu o Denotes Electrical. Transformer v Denotes Underground F.lcctrical. pedestal 1 Denotes Electrical Service Stuh • • SITE DATA LEXINGTON PLACE SOUTH Total acres = 43.14 (excluding Outlots A & C) Total Lots = 134 Average Lot Area = 10,860 sq ft 9,474 sq ft excluding ponding easements Average Lot Width = 61.1 (63.3) 3.11 units/acre gross 4.01 units/acre net Proposed LEXINGTON PLACE SOUTH 2ND ADDITION • Total acres = 6.84 (Outlots A & C) Additional Lots = 19 Average Lot Area = 14,140 sq ft 10,200 sq ft excluding ponding easements Average Lot Width = 61.1 (64.2) 2.78 units\acre gross 3.08 units\acre net Proposed LEXINGTON PLACE SOUTH 2ND ADDITION - REVISED Total acres = 6.84 (Outlots A & C) Additional Lots = 16 Average Lot Area = 16,800 sq ft • 12,120 sq ft.excluding ponding easements Average Lot Width = 72.6 (76.3) 2.34 units\acre gross 2.59 units\acre net LEXINGTON PLACE SOUTH & proposed LEXINGTON PLACE SOUTH 2ND ADDITION Total Acres = 49.98 Total Lots = 153 Average Lot Area = 11,350 sq ft 9,560 sq ft excluding ponding easements Average Lot Width = 61.1 (63.8) 3.06 units\acre gross 3.87 units\acre net LEXINGTON PLACE SOUTH & proposed LEXINGTON PLACE SOUTH 2ND ADDITION - REVISED Total Acres = 49.98 Total Lots = 150 Average Lot Area = 11,570 sq ft 9,760 sq ft excluding ponding easements Average Lot Width = 62.3 (64.7) 3.00 units\acre gross 3.79 units\acre net • • L u LOTS GROUPED BY AREA LEXINGTON PLACE SOUTH No. Lots Area Sq Ft 14 6600 - 7000 16 7000 - 8000 22 8000 - 9000 17 9000 - 10,000 16 10,000 - 11,000 10 11,000 - 12,000 12 12,000 - 13,000 11 13,000 - 15,000 10 15,000 - 20,000 6 20,000 - 37,000 134 LOTS GROUPED BY AREA proposed LEXINGTON PLACE SOUTH 2ND ADDITION No. Lots Area Sq Ft 0 6600 - 7000 2 7000 - 8000 5 8000'- 9000 3 9000 - 10,000 2 10,000 - 11,000 2 11,000 - 12,000 1 12,000 - 13,000 0 13,000 - 15,000 0 15,000 - 20,000 4 20,000 - 37,000 LOTS GROUPED BY AREA proposed LEXINGTON PLACE SOUTH 2ND ADDITION - REVISED No. Lots Area Sq Ft 0 6600 - 7000 0 7000 - 8000 0 8000 - 9000 4 9000 - 10,000 2 10,000 - 11,000 2 11,000 - 12,000 2 12,000 - 13,000 2 13,000 - 15,000 0 15,000 - 20,000 4 20,000 - 44,400 i(0 LEXINGTON PLACE SOUTH 6-10-85 BLOCK LOT GROSS AREA NET AREA POND AREA LOT WIDTH 1 1 9,800 SQ FT 60' (70) 1 2 8,400 60' 1 3 9,800 70' 1 4 8,400 60' 1 5 9,800 70' 1 6 9,800 70' 1 7 9,800 70' 1 8 9,670 60' (70) 2 1 8,800 70' (80) 2 2 6,600 60' 2 3 8,800 70' (80) 2 4 61600 60' 2 5 6,600 60' 2 6 6,600 60' 2 7 6,600 60' 2 8 6,670 60' 2 9 6,810 60' 2 10 7,510 60' 2 11 11,620 60' 2 12 12,510 60' 2 13 8,690 61' 2 14 9,900 60' (80) 2 15 9,920 60' (80) 2 16 7,440 60' 2 17 7,440 60' 2 18 81740 60' 2 19 9,510 60' 2 20 9,480 60' 2 21 8,490 63' 2 22 6,940 60' 2 23 6,860 60' 2 24 6,830 60' 2 25 7,120 60' 2 26 6,680 60' 2 27 61610 60' 2 28 6,600 60' 2 29 61600 60' 3 1 91280 67' 3 2 9,550 60' 3 3 15,800 81820 6,980 60' 3 4 21,090 8,920 12,170 60' 3 5 16,900 60' 3 6 14,760 60' 3 7 12,160 60' 3 8 12,200 60' 3 9 16,330 60' (80) 4 1 10,510 8,170 2,340 72' 4 2 8,920 6,760 2,160 60' 4 3 11,230 6,550 4,680 60' 4 4 11,340 6,550 4,790 60' 4 5 11,230 6,480 4,750 60' m LJ • U 6 12,450 7,160 5,290 60' 7 10,190 7,020 3,170 60' 8 8,500 61340 2,160 60' 9 11,550 65' (75) 10 7,770 63' 11 8,590 6,320 2,270 63' 12 10,220 6,370 3,850 63' 13 10,600 6,100 4,500 63' 14 10,170 5,850 4,320 60' 15 10,710 6,750 3,960 63' 16 10,710 8,910 1,800 63' 17 10,110 63' 18 11,670 75' 1 10,040 60' (80) 2 7,570 60' 3 7,610 60' 4 7,650 60' 5 7,690 60' 6 7,720 60' 7 7,850 60' 8 8,470 60' 9 9,160 60' 10 10,500 60' 11 12,650 60' 12 15,860 60' 13 10,310 65' (75) 14 10,020 60' 15 12,540 60' 16 11,880 60' 17 9,820 60' 18 8,390 60' 19 7,490 60' 20 7,050 60' 1 7,470 60' 2 8,540 60' 3 10,330 60' 4 13,060 60' 5 17,140 60' 6 23,250 60' 7 31,390 16,990 14,400 60' 8 27,620 11,130 16,490 60' 9 21,870 10,100 11,770 60' 10 18,010 60' 11 15,450 60' 12 13,880 60' 13 17,740 54' (84) 1 11,810 60' (70) 2 12,000 60' 3 13,200 12,120 1,080 60' 4 13,200 11,040 2,160 60' 5 13,200 10,140 3,060 60' 6 13,200 9,240 3,960 60' 7 14,030 8,630 5,400 60' 8 15,900 8,340 7,560 60' 9 15,220 71480 7,740 60' 10 10,610 62' (72) 6/ 11 9,970 63' 12 12,130 10,550 1,580 63' 13 11,050 8,530 2,520 63' 14 9,130 62' (72) 15 7,950 60' 16 81970 7,350 1,620 60' 17 10,,550 71020 3,530 60' 18 11,350 6,670 4,680 60' 1 8,800 60' 2 8,860 60' 3 8,210 60' (70) 4 7,310 60' 5 13,940 60' 6 13,340 60' 7 12,980 9,450 31890 60' 8 12,130 6,730 5,400 60' 9 12,100 6,700 5,400 60' 10 12,070 6,670 5,400 60' 11 20,040 11,040 9,000 60' (100) • 1 10,690 63' 2 9,070 61' 3 8,890 61' 4 8,830 61' 5 8,400 60' 6 8,400 60' 7 8,400 60' 8 14,000 60' (100) 0 PRIGUMIMARY PLAT -REVISED------- OF, - - - - Wr IEEINCION PLAIT SOUTH SECOND ADDITION t L_ CARDIN A� 7mh ---------- U.S. _-_____0.5. Box Corporetlao 1712 Hopkins Crossroad Hine.taoka, Minnecuta 55363 / } 1 Z 1 IEN W m \ IS 6 2 t cn 70 i3 I r' ' 'y / `� gyp. / ; /0 "..�,.\o ^l .•y is TeO -'' \c ' T J1 I 9Cf� �lrs A / hOJ s, 4 ! 74 to 01__— I I OGT / ✓ "- I / /o-... _-�``. R! 12 (o..; H ' - ;1 1 ;v a 6��. L_____-___ T0• / a r v h c" H :I t \]f� .tea COURT q a , oat CANARY /' \: no ' 78 u e cs •ss I y �-- t Go 22 1 24 j 21 26 It so 160 s � P 26 / L SCALE IN FEET SETBACKS: N / SITE DATA Front 30' 20�\° °/ / Interior Lot Linea �P•P/ ;. b 27 ' r� SH Single Fen11y Into Nouea 10' 6rrb,f. • 7Y` - 7 V (60' a 110' Ninirnm) Garage 5' '0 Vie? V� QyQ` 3.1 U.Sts/Acre IncludingCourt Side -scree[ 20' m Gonory 2H 3.3 Ualte/Acre Excluding Canary Court ./ / Iherebs_'A}ythat:hIr wary. plan' -port \ , 0' _ / 11.51+ Acres Inc. car prep.nd Fy me m wbr my dirry y: --o V O / 0.65± Acres Canary Court ruin tad Sursgror wu-r ::e lax: ul ti:e S:er o: 5lir r / \ 12.16+ Acres Total / 4� / �O DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY ON s - �� lot 1. De:r 3 -2p -BS Q ( °4Oy Block 3; late 1 through 5, inclusive, Block 6; Lot. 14 18, 5�^-1 - Dnxa DD - A G__ 'Its, '9/l - �' �� / through incl uslve. Block 6; Lot. 1 through 4, Ourk.d_Approvrd Cd9 \ Nv0p AYEN4 / inclusive. Black 7; 18. Revised 6-R-b5-t•N...q NO 'J Block 76, f- 4J) // LLor ot. Block 9: C. R. Winden & Associates, lne. L Oudot A; .Jj'p-� -- outlet C; Land Su-gora 1381 Eustihone Sly. 55108 All in Lexlogtoa Place South, 36,16 - Dakota County, Minnesota. M NO TO: TOM HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS & RECREATION DATE: JUNE 12, 1985 RE: LEXINGTON SOUTH 2ND ADDITION ADVISORY PARKS & REC COHN ACTION The Advisory Parks & Recreation Commission was made aware of the City Council's actions concerning the proposed Lexington South 2nd Addition. Systems Planner Ingraham reviewed elements of the discussion by the City Council which the Advisory Parks & Recreation Commission was pleased to note. Commission asked staff to relate to the City Council its concurrence that the proposed platting of these two outlots not be approved in their proposed • configuration. Members supported continuation of this area to be used as open space as it is currently platted or through the extension of a lot line through these outlots. Because of questions and uncertainties, Commission asked that this proposed plat be returned to the Advisory Commission should the developer amend the proposed second addition. KV/js CC: Dale Runkle, City Planner Julie Dykstra, Planning Secretary 4r -• Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Twenty -Three USE PERMIT/SELF SERVICE CAR WASH C. Dean Fulmer for a Conditional Use Permit to Allow a Self - Service Car Wash (Century Addition) -- At the last regular meeting of the City Council, a motion for reconsideration was approved for the conditional use permit application in the name of Dean Fulmer to construct a self-service car wash and also a 20 foot variance to allow a 10 foot setback from the rear lot line • of Lot 3, Block 1, Century Addition. The Advisory Planning Commission had reviewed the application at the April 23, 1985 meeting and noted that car washes are conditional uses in all commercial zones except for neighborhood business zones and therefore recommended denial of the project. Action taken by the City Council at the May 21 meeting was consistent with the Advisory Planning Commission action. At the last City Council meeting, there was a brief discussion about the proposed self service car wash and a motion to reconsider. Therefore, this item is placed on the agenda for consideration by the City Council. For additional information, refer to the Planning Department report on pages (e& through For action taken by the APC, refer to those minutes on page _7Z_, ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny a conditional use permit to construct a self-service car wash in • the Century Addition. If approved, to approve or deny a 20 foot setback variance for that facility. '5 C CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCE APPLICANT: DEAN FULMER LOCATION: LOT 3, BLOCK 1, CENTURY ADDITION EXISTING ZONING: NB - NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: APRIL 23, 1985 DATE OF REPORT: APRIL 11, 1985 REPORTED BY: GREG H. INGRAHAM, ASSISTANT PLANNER • REVIEWED BY: DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER APPLICATION SUMMARY: The applicant wishes to construct a self-service car wash on the northwest corner of Century Point and Coachman Road. Car washes are permitted uses in the General Business zone and conditional uses in other commercial zones except for Neighborhood Business which makes no mention of the car wash use. The issue would be whether self-service car washes are acceptable (with conditions) in N.B. and whether they are appropriate in this specific location. CTwo site plans have been submitted, one of which ("A") would require a 20' variance from the 30' rear yard setback. The other ("B") meets all the setback requirements. The "A" plan would have less impact on the apartments to the north since the circulation would be oriented east -west instead of north -south in the "B" plan. The exterior would be architectural block. • If the Conditional Use Permit is approved it shall be subject to the following conditions: C 1) At least a 3' high berm and suitable landscape screening shall be installed along the north property line prior to operation.of the car wash. 2) Hours of operation shall be restricted to between 7 a.m. and 10 P.M. 3) If plan "A" is approved the exit drive shall be moved 100' to the west and a landscaped green area shall occur between the exit and entrance drives. 4) A detailed landscaping plan shll be submitted prior to construction showing the species, size and location. A NB L EC, rd lu-Ac DENS R: 2. Baf� H H TS PD .. ... . ...... - 81-3 A AR R-1 7A NK R -,A ADDITIM S - A IR -4 Z —C Lz I R-2 791, FF 9T Y BLACKHAYVK PARK GPD PK 77-2 A A F A PD %P2 I i L I R tpW HIL!-ANDAL BLACKHAYVK PARK GPD PK 77-2 A A F A PD %P2 7s rN N V1. V� �616 —� EQUI�'i31EilJT �C'CM VACuLM0(Au;A k ) VReUum S LAA10 Se APE A 2EA oQ t?ep P, opc,&'e x S .7/,-1 eK 1 7- .-1kca lz T7 ,e at'L y, jyNJ)ScAPe �J,eEA it n A ----------- VACuLM0(Au;A k ) VReUum S LAA10 Se APE A 2EA oQ t?ep P, opc,&'e x S .7/,-1 eK 1 7- .-1kca lz T7 ,e at'L y, jyNJ)ScAPe �J,eEA it n A ----------- /pL , , - 10 ti 60' LO I 64tarmEwr-Zoom � jlwj jo LAA)DSCAPE A (LEA o7151 /i,e tjb5 C A h: � jlwj jo LAA)DSCAPE A (LEA o7151 /i,e tjb5 C A h: APC Minutes April 23, 1985 FULMER CAR WASH - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT S VARIANCE Greg Ingraham introduced the application of Dean Fulmer for a conditional use permit for a self-service car wash and for a 20 foot variance to allow a 10 foot setback from the rear lot line on Lot 3, Block 1, Century Addition, Section 9, located at Coachman Road and Century Point. He noted that the car wash is not specifically allowed so that a conditional use permit is being requested. Harrison moved to recommend denial of the application on the basis that it is not appropriate because it is not allowed by ordinance. Dean Fulmer appeared and stated that the proposal goes hand in hand with the neighborhood business zoning, that it would draw from a 3 mile area, that noise would be pointed away from the apartments, that two plans are proposed, and that the best plan would require a 20 foot variance and would have less impact on the apartments, and better automobile stacking. Doraine Schram asked for a postponement for further review of the proposal. Don Klober of • Century 21 Realtors, appeared and stated that Century 21 is building immediately to the south and is selling the land to Fulmer. He stated that he considered the car wash to be a good neighbor to Century 21. A Mr. Bryant from the audience stated that he owns a car wash and that proposed car wash plan is a good one and is sensitive to the neighborhood. Fulmer stated that he is willing to do either plan, and that one plan would not require a variance. Hall seconded the motion of Harrison and all members voted in favor. Klober asked for clarification, since it was his understanding that the proposal could be allowed by the City. Ingraham stated that he had advised Mr. Klober that it was not listed as a permitted or conditional use, and that he could not say whether it would be accepted by the City or not. ADJOURNMENT Harrison moved, Wold seconded the motion to adjourn. All members voted in • favor. The meeting adjourned at 11:15 p.m. BS cretary Agenda Information June 18, 1985, City Page Twenty -Four Memo Council Meeting I:M1 A. Acceptance of Interest Rate Reduction Program, Cinnamon Ridge Project/Can-American -- Action is necessary to suspend the City Council meeting and to convene as the Housing and Redevelopment Authority for the purpose of considering an interest rate recuction program for the Cinnamon Ridge Project/Can-American. The tax increment financing district plan and interest rate reduction program project plan for the Cinnamon Ridge housing project has been completed. Action required by the HRA is to adopt the tax increment financing plan and submit the same to the City Council for review. Enclosed on pages�� through �4 is a copy of the Eagan Housing and Redevelopment Authority interest rate reduction program project plan for the Cinnamon Ridge housing project. The City Council has met on several occasions with representatives from Can -American and Miller & Schroeder Municipals, Inc., to discuss the interest rate reduction program proposed for the Cinnamon Ridge housing project. This plan was prepared by the City's program administrator and consultant, Miller & Schroeder Municipals, Inc., and includes the criteria that was desired by the City Council. Also enclosed is a resolution approving the tax increment financing plan for a tax increment financing district by the Eagan Housing and Redevelopment Authority. The resolution is enclosed on pages through. • ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: The HRA must act to approve or deny the resolution approving the tax increment financing plan for a tax increment financing district for the Cinnamon Ridge housing project. FURTHER ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To adjourn the HRA meeting and reconvene as a City Council. • RAGAN HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY INTEREST REDUCTION PROGRAM PROJECT PLAN Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.411 et TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT PLAN Minnesota Minnesota Statutes Sections 273.71-273.78 For THE CINNAMON RIDGE HOUSING PROJECT • EAGAN, MINNESOTA HOLMES & GRAVEN, Chartered 470 Pillsbury Center Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 (612) 338-1177 May 15, 1985 73 ffl TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. SECTION I. INTEREST REDUCTION PROGRAM PROJECT PLAN A. Public Purpose 1 B. Findings 1 C. Description of the Project 1 Map I: Project Area and Tax Increment District 5 D. Interest Reduction Program, Administrative Guidelines and Criteria 2 E. Interest Reduction Program Objectives F. Project Activities G. Land Use Plan H. Environmental Considerations L Developer's Obligations J. Relocation of Displaced Persons and Businesses K. Procedure for Change in Approved Plan SECTION IL TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN A. Statutory Authority B. Statement of Objectives C. Development Program (:Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.74, Subdivision 1) and Description of Project Proposals D. Description of Property E. Classification of Tax Increment Financing District F. Property in Acquisition G. Estimate of Costs H. Identification of the Use of Tax Increments -i- 6 6 7 7 7 8 8 10 10 10 10 10 10 11 it Ll • U Cl L Limitation on Administrative Expenses 11 J. Sources of Revenue to Finance Public Cost 12 K. Original Assessed Value 12 L. Estimated Captured Assessed Value 12 M. Duration of the District 12 N. Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions 13 O. Modifications 14 P. Limitation on Duration of Tax Increment Financing Districts 15 Q. Limitation on Qualification of Property in Tax Increment District Not Subject to Improvement 15 R. Annual Disclosure Requirements 16 S. Requirement for Agreements with Developer 17 T. Assessment Agreement 17 U. Notification of Prior Planned Improvements 17 V. Administration of the Tax Increment Housing Distric t 18 W. Tax Increment Financing Account for the Housing District 18 X. Estimate of Amount of Bonded Indebtedness 18 -ii- 75 EAGAN HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY INTEREST REDUCTION PROGRAM PROJECT PLAN Minnesota Statutes, Section 462AII et M. • 14 L INTEREST REDUCTION PROGRAM PROJECT PLAN A. PUBLIC PURPOSE Within the City of Eagan certain areas exist that require public financial involvement to promote the construction of adequate, safe, and sanitary dwelling accommodations due to a shortage of decent, safe and sanitary housing for persons of low and moderate income and their families. Private enterprise is unable to alleviate such shortage and to provide a supply of decent, safe and sanitary housing without government subsidy at prices or rents within the financial means of persons and families of such incomes. This shortage is inimical to the safety, health, morals and welfare of the residents of the city and state and to the sound growth and development of the City of Eagan. In order to alleviate this shortage, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Eagan (the "HRA') has been given certain powers pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.411, et seq. • B. FINDINGS 1. Project The City of Eagan has determined in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.415, Subdivision 5 that there is a shortage of decent, safe and sanitary housing for persons of low and moderate income and their families. 2. Program In establishing the Interest Reduction Program, the Eagan HRA has established the need for an Interest Reduction Program pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.421, Subdivision 14, Section 462.445, Subdivisions 10 and 11. In so is doing, the HRA has considered: The availability and affordability of other government programs, - The availability and affordability of private market financing, and The need for additional affordable mortgage credit to encourage the construction and enable the purchase of housing units within the jurisdiction of the authority. C. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT 1. Boundaries of Interest Reduction Program Project In recognition of conditions in certain areas of the City of Eagan, the HRA designates an Interest Reduction Program as a project pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.421, 77 Subdivision 14 and an accompanying tax increment financing district in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Sections 273.71-273.78. The facility to be assisted by the HRA Interest Reduction Program will be constructed upon the property described as follows: Outlot A, Cinnamon Ridge Addition, City of Eagan as shown on the Project Boundary Map, attached as page 5. 2. The facilities to be constructed within the project area shall consist of eleven rental apartment buidings containing a total of approximately 264 residential units, and facilities functionally subordinate thereto (the "Cinnamon Ridge Housing Project'), which shall meet the Program guidelines and criteria. D. INTEREST REDUCTION PROGRAM, ADMINISTRATIVE GUIDELINES AND CRITERIA The following guidelines for the Interest Reduction Program have been enacted by the City Council and are established as guildelines for the Program. 1. in determining whether to approve interest rate reduction assistance for a specific multifamily housing development, the Authority shall consider the following: a. Whether or not the development is to be financed with tax exempt revenue bonds; b. Whether the property surrounding the ' proposed development is zoned for multifamily residential housing (R-4); C. Whether unusual site conditions require excessive site preparation activities prior to construction; d. Whether the proposed rents for units in the development, without interest rate reduction assistance are affordable by present or future residents of the City; e. Any other information which the authority considers relevant. 2. Prior to receiving approval of interest rate reduction assistance, a developer shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Authority that either the proposed rents for units in the development will be lower than the rents for comparable units in the City in developments which do not receive interest rate reduction assistance or the cost of construction per unit is greater than that of units in a comparable development in the City. 2 79 • Interest Rate Reduction Assistance shall be provided only when it has been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Authority by the developer that, financing for a specific multifamily housing development is not available, either from private lenders or through other governmental programs upon terms and conditions such that the projected rental revenue of the development is sufficient to cover debt service, operating and other expenses and provide a reasonable return on the developer's investment, using reasonable assumptions related to the development. 4. Based upon all information which the Authority may receive about a proposed multifamily development, the Authority shall in its sole discretion determine whether to provide interest rate reduction assistance, and the amount of such assistance to be provided, if any. Interest rate reduction assistance, which is provided, shall be provided in accordance with the provisions of this resolution and of the Act. • 5. Tax increments may be contributed to an interest rate reduction program for a multifamily housing development for a period not to exceed ten years from the first collection of the tax increment from the development. 6. A sale of the multifamily housing development which received interest rate reduction assistance will require review of whether interest rate reduction assistance can, or will be continued. The terms and conditions for continuation of the assistance upon a sale of the property may be established at the time the interest rate reduction assistance is first provided. 7. At the time of sale of the multifamily housing development, or at the end of ten years after the receipt of the first tax increment, or upon the maturity of the bonds issued to finance the multifamily housing project at the option of the Authority the developer shall pay to the Authority repayment of the full amount of interest rate reduction assistance provided to the developer plus interest at a rate to be determined by the Authority. 8. After payment to the Authority of the amount provided for in paragraph 7 above, to the extent that the appreciated in value of the multifamily housing development is in excess of the amount described in paragraph 71 the developer shall be allowed to receive from the appreciation an amount equal to a specified rate of return on the developer's investment in the multifamily housing development. The rate of return to the developer shall be established prior to the first interest rate reduction payment to the developer. 77 9. To the extent that appreciation in value of the multifamily housing development exceeds the amounts specified in paragraphs 3 and 4 above, any excess appreciation shall be divided between the developer and the Authority based upon the amount of debt service paid on the financing for the project by the Authority, and the amount of debt service paid by the developer. 10. The amount of interest rate reduction assistance for a specific development shall not exceed fifty percent (50%) of the tax increment generated by the development. • a 4 So MAP I May 10 1885 TAX mcumEN'P DZMCP AND tMREBP REDIICfION RAM PROJECP La : u .i t.. MLI LI • �a I; R•• A Rq _ t� LI ' R of �� J+<$GB � -� Rr� R•1 �\•�R•1 —LL— •N R• 1 Kiyi PF - .:�.� LI � .. :•� i' _ � -_ PD ...- +•awn. po • X;7'77-2 LI L • _..(( /l y• r'� GIG i A A Ll IN 0-4 Ie d� �.• I �' • IS j A P Flo GO 4 79i G RO '.w __ �. ii /I�y_ NO - _ pP ♦ /'�',r I RO P X 8-2 / • Nr IR -4 .J(Jr a• 'XOR -!G 'I P 3�. R•• / "�/ • �5' _ rw Pfic� "— R•• R.• ^ I, -- • , PO -' 4J1� T* R•I N` "�; Site .. v fill 5 TW LB P - ^1 Y J claJ-i'Jia�i __ R•le /�' r p R•1A A I % e % APPLE SVAL-j A I R -IO ' PD E. INTEREST REDUCTION PROGRAM OBJECTIVES The City of Eagan and the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Eagan seek to achieve the following objectives through this Program: 1. Assist the financing of housing units which are primarily for occupancy by individuals of low or moderate income and related and subordinate facilities. 2. Provide maximum opportunity, consistent with the needs of the City, for development by private enterprise. 3. To accomplish the housing goals of the City including a mixture of housing type and income levels. 4. Improve the financial base of the City. 5. Achieve a high level of design and landscaping quality to • enhance the physical environment. 6. Combine elements of the City Comprehensive Plan with these project objectives. F. PROJECT ACTIVITIES 1. Property to be acquired No property is to be acquired under this Program. 2. Clearance No site clearance is proposed. 3. Relocation • No relocation of families or businesses is proposed: 4. Other Project Activities The HRA will provide assistance to the Cinnamon Ridge Housing Project in the form of Interest Rate Reduction payments in the form prescribed in and in accordance with the Interest Reduction Program, Administrative Guidelines and Criteria set forth in item D of this Interest Rate Reduction Program. , The primary funding source for Interest Rate Reduction payments under this Program will be the Project tax increment proceeds. C CL 5. Public Facilities to be Constructed No public facilities are to be constructed under this Project. G. LAND USE PLAN Proposed Land Use The proposed land use of the Cinnamon Ridge Housing Project is R4, zoned for multi -dwelling units. 2. Permitted Land Use a. The permitted land use is 14.5 units per acre for R4 zoning allowing 3004 square feet of land per unit. b. Additional regulations and controls. • (1) All new development shall conform to the applicable state and local codes and ordinances. (2) in consideration for the assistance to be provided under this Program, the Developer of the Cinnamon Ridge Housing Project will be required to develop approximately 264 units of housing. A minimum of 20% of such units will be available to and affordable to families or individuals with incomes below 80% of the median family income for the Minneapolis -St. Paul Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area, as defined by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development income limits for Section 8 housing assistance. • (3) The HRA shall also require that, in the event that the Cinnamon Ridge Housing Project is sold, the HRA will share in the appreciation of value of the Cinnamon Ridge Housing Project at the time of such sale, pursuant to the terms of the Developer's Agreement. H. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS The Eagan HRA does not expect any adverse environmental impacts as a result of the Interest Reduction Program, the Cinnamon Ridge Housing Project, or the tax increment financing district. I. DEVELOPERS OBLIGATIONS The requirements to be imposed upon the Developer and the City's participation in the Interest Reduction Program will be negotiated as part of the Developer's Agreement between the HRA and Developer. J. RELOCATION OF DISPLACED PERSONS AND BUSINESSES No relocation of persons or businesses is proposed for this Project. However, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Eagan accepts as binding its obligations under local provisions of state law (Minnesota Statutes, Sections 117.50-117.56) for relocation and will administer payment of relocation benefits to families, individuals, and businesses if displaced by public action. K. PROCEDURE FOR CHANGE IN PLAN The Program contained herein may be modified provided the modification shall be adopted by resolution of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Eagan; but only after a public hearing thereon after published notice in a newspaper of general circulation in the municipality at least once not less than ten days nor more than 30 days prior to the date of the hearing, unless such public notice and hearing is waived by the HRA. • • M 0 E TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN MINNESOTA 3TATDTB3, SECTIONS 273.71-273.78 mm IL TAS INCRENUINT FINANCE PLAN A. LP C. D. E. F. STATUTORY AUTHORITY The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Eagan (the "HRA") is authorized to create a tax increment financing district pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 273.71-273.78. STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES Section E. of Part 1 of this report is hereby incorporated as the statement of objectives for this tax increment financing plan (hereinafter the "Plan"). DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM (Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.74, Subdivision 1) AND DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT PROPOSALS 1. Construction of 264 units of housing including 53 units of low • and moderate income housing. 2. No contracts have been entered into at the time of preparation of this Plan. 3. No other development has been proposed within this tax increment district. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY 1. Tax Increment District Tax Parcel and Legal Description Parcel Number Legal Description 10-17400-010-00 Outlot A, Cinnamon Ridge Addition • CLASSIFICATION OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Eagan, Minnesota, In determining the need for a tax increment financing district in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Sections 273.71-273.78 inclusive, finds that the dd strT i -cam be established is a housing district pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 273.73, Subdivision 11 because the property included within the district shall be used for the construction of housing for persons or families of low and moderate income. PROPERTY IN ACQUISITION No properties have been identified for acquisition by the Eagan Housing and Redevelopment Authority at this time. 10 316 G. ESTIMATE OF COSTS 1. Financing Needs of the Proposed Cinnamon Ridge Housing Project The Developer's financing program requires the use of the Interest Rate Reduction Program. Current market -rate rents affordable to young and/or growing professional households in the Eagan market, as verified by mortgage underwriters and certified appraisers, would not alone support the rental project. Consequently, tax increment proceeds will be used to finance Interest Rate Reduction payments for this project to the extent necessary to meet the requirements of project financial feasibility. It is estimated that Interest Rate Reduction payments will average an amount not in excess of $118,800 per annum. • 2. District Budget Limits Interest Rate Reduction Payments for $1,188,000 Ten Year Duration Administrative and Sundry Cost for 118,800 Maximum District Duration Total Budget for Ten Year Duration $1,306,800 Interest Rate Reduction payments should not exceed an average of $118,800 per year although, in a given year, they may exceed that average. H. IDENTIFICATION OF THE USE OF TAX INCREMENTS Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.75, Subdivision 4, all • revenues derived roam the tax increment district shall be used in accordance with this Tax Increment Financing Plan. The revenues shall be used: 1. To pay the principal of and interest on bonds issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 462C or a loan made with proceeds of bonds issued pursuant to Chapter 462C; and 2. To pay for District costs as identified in the District budget described in Section G2 above. I. LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.75, Subdivision 3, administrative expenses are limited to ten percent (10%) of the total tax increment expenditures. "Administrative expenses" means all expenditures of an authority other than amounts paid for the purchase of land or amounts paid to contractors or others providing 11 V/ J. materials and services, including architectural and engineering services, directly connected with the physical development of the real property in the district, relocation benefits paid to or services provided for persons residing or businesses located in the district, or amounts used to pay interest on, fund a reserve for, or sell at a discount bonds issued pursuant to Section 273.77. "Administrative expenses" includes amounts paid for services provided by bond counsel, fiscal consultants, and planning or economic development consultants. SOURCES OF REVENUE TO FINANCE PUBLIC COST It is intended that the entire cost of interest reduction payments will be paid from the tax increment generated by the Cinnamon Ridge Housing Project. Estimated Revenue $292509639 Estimated Captured Assessed Value • x 105.570 Mills 237,600 Tax Increment -118,800 50 percent of Tax Increment Revenues 118,800 Available Revenue (Annual) Tax Increment Revenues will be available to the project for 10 years from the collection of the first full tax increment. Assuming that the project is substantially completed and leased -up in 1986 and fully assessed in 1987, the first full tax increment will be collected in 1988. K. ORIGINAL ASSESSED VALUE Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 273.74, Subdivision 1 and Section 273.76, Subdivision 1, the Original Assessed Value (OAV) of • the tax increment district is $84,480. L. ESTIMATED CAPTURED ASSESSED VALUE 1984 $ 84,480 Assessed Value 1987 $ 21335,119 Assessed Value Captured Assessed Value $ 2,2509639 (50% _ $1,125,319) It is proposed that 50% of the entire increase in assessed value be captured for ten years to pay project costs. Cinnamon Ridge Housing Project should be substantially completed and leased -up by the end of 1986 and fully assessed by January, 1987, payable in July and December of 1988. M. DURATION OF THE DISTRICT Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.75, Subdivision 1, the maximum duration of a tax increment housing district is 25 years 12 Sa • commencing with the date of receipt of the first increment by the authority. It is estimated that the HRA will collect tax increments on the district for .ten years from collection of the first full tax Increment, through the year 1997. N. IMPACT ON OTHER TAKING JURISDICTIONS The impact of the loss of tax dollars represented as tax increments is listed below for each taxing jurisdiction. The estimate is based on the existing housing proposal and does not include the possible tax increments derived from any other future development, mill changes, or inflation factors. . District Total Assessed Value Tax Increment Finance District $84,480 Latest Assessed Value of Each Government Body: Dakota County School District #196 City of Eagan Metro Council Transit District Mosquito Control % of District to Total $1,272,119,910 .006 $ 343,6199181 .025 $ 202,0329411 .042 $1,271,1979383 .007 $1,023,741,348 .008 $1,2719197,383 .007 Considering all the districts, it can be seen from the above that taxing jurisdictions will have over 99% of each respective district district available for normal growth of tax base or valuation. is Applying the percentage of the total mill rate in 1985 levied by each taxing jurisdiction to the projected mill rate and the estimated tax increment received reveals the annual loss of tax dollars by each taxing jurisdiction as listed in the table below assuming development would occur without public assistance. The finance plan indicates we anticipate a tax increment at build out as follows: Captured Tax Assessed Increment Valuation Received Tax Increment District $1,1259319 $118,800 Based on. the current mill rate, the estimated taxes received would be as follows for the taxing bodies: 13 91 The following table represents the additional mills that would have to be levied to compensate for the loss of tax dollars in estimated tax increments for each taxing jurisdiction. The tax increments derived from the Cinnamon Ridge Housing Project alluded to in the tax increment district would not be available to any of the taxing jurisdictions were it not for public intervention by the City. Although the increases in assessed value due to development will not be available for the application of the mill levy for the duration of the tax increment financing district, this new assessed value could eventually permit a mill levy decrease. If it could be assumed that the captured assessed value was available for each taxing jurisdiction, the non -receipt of tax dollars represented as tax increments may be determined. This determination is facilitated by estimating how much the mill levy for property outside of the tax increment financing district would have to be increased to raise the same amount of tax dollars in each taxing jurisdiction that would be available if the projects occurred without the assistance of the City. Impact on Taxing Jurisdictions if Development Occurred Without Public Assistance Annual Tax Increment Adjusted* Required Available Taxing Jurisdiction Assessed Value Mills to Project City of Fagan School District #196 Dakota County Metro Council Transit District Mosquito Control $ 201,947,931 $ 343,534,701 $1,272,0359430 $1,271,112,903 $1,023,656,868 $1,271,112,903 .1170 $23,676 .1970 Annual Tax .0190 Current Increment Available Taxing Jurisdiction Mills Percent to Project City of Fagan 21.039 20 $ 23,676 School District #196 60.228 57 67,776 Dakota County 21.043 20 23,680 Other (Metro Council, 3.260 3 3,668 Transit District, Mosquito Control) 105.570 100 $118,800 The following table represents the additional mills that would have to be levied to compensate for the loss of tax dollars in estimated tax increments for each taxing jurisdiction. The tax increments derived from the Cinnamon Ridge Housing Project alluded to in the tax increment district would not be available to any of the taxing jurisdictions were it not for public intervention by the City. Although the increases in assessed value due to development will not be available for the application of the mill levy for the duration of the tax increment financing district, this new assessed value could eventually permit a mill levy decrease. If it could be assumed that the captured assessed value was available for each taxing jurisdiction, the non -receipt of tax dollars represented as tax increments may be determined. This determination is facilitated by estimating how much the mill levy for property outside of the tax increment financing district would have to be increased to raise the same amount of tax dollars in each taxing jurisdiction that would be available if the projects occurred without the assistance of the City. Impact on Taxing Jurisdictions if Development Occurred Without Public Assistance Annual Tax Increment Adjusted* Required Available Taxing Jurisdiction Assessed Value Mills to Project City of Fagan School District #196 Dakota County Metro Council Transit District Mosquito Control $ 201,947,931 $ 343,534,701 $1,272,0359430 $1,271,112,903 $1,023,656,868 $1,271,112,903 .1170 $23,676 .1970 67,776 .0190 23,680 .0005 23,680 .0020 2,516 .0004 475 *District Assessed Value Subtracted O. MODIFICATIONS In accordance with Minnesota Statutes. Section 273.74, Subdivision 4, a tax increment financing plan may be modified by an authority, provided that any reduction or enlargement of geographic area of the 14 / D 0 0 project or tax increment financing district, increase in amount of bonded indebtedness to be incurred, including a determination to capitalize interest on the debt if that determination was not a part of the original plan, oe to increase or decrease the amount of interest on the debt to be capitalized, increase in the portion of the captured assessed value to be retained by the authority, increase in total estimated tax increment expenditures or designation of additional property to be acquired by the authority shall be approved upon the notice and after the discussion, public hearing and findings required for approval of the original plan; provided that if an authority changes the type of district from housing, redevelopment or economic development to another type of district, this change shall not be considered a modification but shall require the authority to follow the procedure set forth in Sections 273.71 to 273.78 for adoption of a new plan, including certification of the assessed valuation of the district by the county auditor. • The geographic area of a tax increment financing district may be reduced, but shall not be enlarged after five years following the date of certification of the original assessed value by the county auditor or five years from August 1, 1979, for tax increment financing districts authorized prior to August 1, 1979, except that development districts created pursuant to chapter 472A prior to August 1, 1979 may be reduced but shall not be enlarged after five years following the date of designation of such district. P. LIMITATION ON DURATION OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICTS Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.75, Subdivision 1, "no tax increment shall be paid to an authority for a tax increment financing district after three years from the date of certification of the original assessed value of the taxable real property in the district by the county auditor ... unless within the three year period (a) bonds • have been issued pursuant to section 273.77, or in aid of a project pursuant to any other law, except revenue bonds issued pursuant to chapter 474, prior to August 1, 1979, or (b) the authority has acquired property within the district, or (c) the authority has constructed or caused to be constructed public improvements within the district ..." It is intended that public improvements will be constructed in the project area which will satisfy this statutory requirement. Q. LIMITATION ON QUALIFICATION OF PROPERTY IN TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT NOT SUBJECT TO IMPROVEMENT Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 273.75, Subdivision 6, if, after four years from the date of certification of the original assessed value of the tax increment financing district pursuant to Section 273.76, no demolition, rehabilitation, construction or renovation of property or other site preparation, including improvement of a street adjacent to a parcel but not installation of 15 �/ utility service including sewer or water systems, has been commenced on a parcel located within a tax increment financing district by the authority or by the owner of the parcel in accordance with the tax increment financing plan, no additional tax increment may be taken from that parcel, and the original assessed value of that parcel shall be excluded from the original assessed value of the tax increment financing district. If the authority or the owner of the parcel subsequently commences demolition, rehabilitation or renovation or other site preparation on that parcel including improvement of a street adjacent to that parcel, in accordance with the tax increment financing plan, the authority shall certify to the county auditor that the activity has commenced, and the county auditor shall certify the assessed value thereof as most recently certified by the commissioner of revenue and add it to the original assessed value of the tax increment financing district. For purposes of this subdivision "parcel" means a tract or plat of land established prior to the certification of the district as a single unit for purposes of assessment. This statutory requirement will be fulfilled upon • commencement of construction of Cinnamon Ridge Housing Project. R. ANNUAL DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.74, Subdivision 5, the HRA must file an annual disclosure report for all tax increment financing districts. The report shall be filed with the city, school board, county board and the Minnesota Department of Energy, Planning and Development. The report to be filed by the HRA as district administrator shall include the following information: 1. The amount and source of revenue in the account; 2. The amount and purpose of expenditures from the account; 3. The amount of any pledge of revenues, including principal and interest on any outstanding bonded indebtedness; • 4. the original assessed value of the district; 5. The captured assessed value retained by the authority; 6. The captured assessed value shared with other taxing districts; 7. The tax increment received. The annual disclosure report is designed to be a two-way medium of information dissemination for both the Office of the County Auditor and the HRA. Should the auditor want additional information from the authority regarding its tax increment financing activities, such information should be requested prior to submission of the annual disclosure report by the authority. Similarly, the HRA may utilize the annual disclosure report as a means for requesting information from the Office of the County Auditor. 16 Additionally, the authority must annually publish a statement in a newspaper of general circulation in the municipality showing the tax increment received and expended in that year, the original assessed value, the captured assessed value, amount of outstanding bonded indebtedness and 'any additional information the authority deems necessary. S. REQUIREMENT FOR AGREEMENTS WITH DEVELOPER Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.75, Subdivision 5, no more than 25 percent, by acreage, of the property to be acquired within a project which contains a redevelopment district, or ten percent, by acreage, of the property to be acquired within a project which contains a housing or economic development district, as set forth in the tax increment financing plan, shall at any time be owned by an authority as a result of acquisition with the proceeds of bonds issued. pursuant to Section 273.77 without the authority having prior • to acquisition in excess of the percentages concluded an agreement for the development or redevelopment of the property acquired and which provides recourse for the authority should the development or redevelopment not be completed. The agreements are only required if property is to be acquired with bond proceeds. T. ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.76, Subdivision 8, the authority may, upon entering into a development agreement pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.75, Subdivision 5, enter into an agreement in recordable form with the developer of property within the tax increment financing district which establishes a minimum market value of the land and completed improvements for the duration of the tax increment district. The assessment agreement • shall be presented to the county assessor who shall review the plans and specifications for the improvements constructed, review the market value previously assigned to the land upon which the improvements are to be constructed and so long as the minimum market value contained in the assessment agreement appears in the judgment of the assessor, to be a reasonable estimate, the assessor may certify the minimum market value agreement. U. NOTIFICATION OF PRIOR PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 273.76, Subdivision 4, the authority shall, after due and diligent search, accompany its request for certification to the county auditor pursuant to Subdivision 1, or Its notice of district enlargement pursuant to Section 273.74, Subdivision 5, with a listing of all properties within the tax increment financing district or area of enlargement for which building permits have been issued during the 18 months immediately preceding approval of the tax increment financing plan by the municipality 93 17 V. W. X. pursuant to Section 273.74, Subdivision 4. The county auditor shall increase the original assessed value of the district by the assessed valuation of the improvements for which the building permit was issued, excluding the assessed valuation of improvements for which a building permit was issued during the three month period immediately preceding said approval of the tax increment financing plan, as certified by the assessor. ADMINISTRATION OF THE TAX INCREMENT HOUSING DISTRICT Administration of the tax increment housing district will be handled by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority through the Administrator of the City. TAX INCREMENT FINANCING ACCOUNT FOR THE HOUSING DISTRICT The tax increment received as a result of increases in the assessed value of the tax increment district parcels will be maintained in a tax increment account by the City Administrator as the designated administrator and manager of the tax increment district. The tax increment account will be separate from all other municipal accounts and grant accounts and expended only upon sanctioned redevelopment activities identified in this tax increment financing plan. ESTIMATE OF AMOUNT OF BONDED INDEBTEDNESS The Authority does not at this time expect to issue tax increment bonds. 18 �� • • RESOLUTION NO. BEING A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE TAX INCRMMT FINANCING PLAN FOR A TAX INCRE- MENT FINANCING DIS'T'RICT (CINNAMON RIDGE HOUSING PROJECT) BY THE HAGAN HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY. WHEREAS, the City of Eagan (the "City") has adopted a multifamily housing development program (the "Program") and proposes to issue housing revenue bonds (the "Bonds") pursuant to Minn. Stat. Section 462C.07 in order to finance the Program; and WHEREAS, the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (the "MHFA") has reviewed and approved the Program; and • WHEREAS, The Eagan Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "Authority') is authorized to undertake interest reduction programs to assist the financing of construction of rental housing units which are primarily for occupancy by individuals of low or moderate income in accordance with Minn. Stat. Section 462.445, Subds. 10, 11, lla and 12; and WHEREAS, the City has considered an Interest Reduction Program to assist the financing of the multifamily housing development to be financed with the Bonds (the "Interest Reduction Program') and has promulgated regulations for the Interest Reduction Program; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Minn. Stat. Sections 462.545 and 273.75, Subd. 4, the Authority is authorized to use tax increment to defray the costs of a project, including an interest reduction program; and WHEREAS, in connection with the establishment of the tax increment • district (the "District") by the Authority pursuant to the Minnesota Tax Increment Financing Act, Minn. Stat., Sections 271.71 to 273.78 inclusive (the "Act"), the approval by the Board of Commissioners (the "governing body") of the Authority of the tax increment plan is required by the local governing body before it will consider for approval said plan; and WHEREAS, there was presented to this meeting of the governing body of the Authority for its consideration and approval, a copy of an interest reduction program project plan and a tax increment plan for the district dated May 1, 1985, which plan is entitled Interest Reduction Program Project Plan and Tax Increment Financing District Plan for the Cinnamon Ridge Housing Project (the "Plan"); and WHEREAS, the Authority has prepared the Plan and submitted the Plan to the City Planning Commission of the City of Eagan (the "Planning Commission') for its review and opinion and to the Board of Commissioners of Dakota County for their review and comment; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY the Board of Commissioners of The Eagan Housing and Redevelopment Authority: 1. That the District is a housing district, as that term is described in Minn. Stat. Section 273.73, Subd. 11. 2. That the level of interest rates over the last several years have in some cases made it financially difficult or infeasible to finance the construction of multifamily rental housing without public assistance. The Developer has represented and the Board of Commissioners hereby finds that because of these market conditions the developer would not be able to successfully construct and market the proposed housing development without public assistance in the form of the Interest Reduction Program. 3. That the Plan, to provide funds to finance the Interest Reduction Program, will provide maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the City of Fagan for development of housing by private enterprise and for the rental of housing by low and moderate Income families. 4. That the Plan conforms to the general plan of the City of Eagan. 5. That the Interest Reduction Project Plan including Interest Rate • Reduction Regulations and the Tax Increment Financing Plan are hereby approved and adopted in the form presented to the Board of Commissioners. Adopted by the Board of Commissioners of The Eagan Housing and Redevelopment Authority this day of . 1985. Attest: Motion made by: Seconded by: _ Date: -2- gh 0 Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Twenty -Five INTEREST RATE REDUCTION PROGRAM/CINNAMON RIDGE PROJECT A. Consider Recommendation of HRA and Set Public Hearing to Consider Interest Rate Reduction Program for Cinnamon Ridge • Project/Can-American at July 2, 1985 City Council Meeting -- If the HRA action is affirmative, the City Council must review the tax increment financing financing plan and set a public hearing for the July 2, 1985 City Council meeting at which time public testimony will be received and considered regarding adoption of the tax increment financing plan together with the interest reduction program under the Minnesota Municipal Housing Redevelopment Act and Minnesota Tax Increment Financing Act. The purpose of considering this action to assist the financing of the contruction of multi -family rental housing which is primarily for occupancy by individuals of low and moderate income in a manner consistent with the needs of the City. If the HRA does not approve the tax increment financing planfor the Cinnamon Ridge housing project, the City Council can make a decision to either hold the public hearing to consider the tax increment financing plan or elect to not hold the public hearing • and the tax increment financing plan would then no longer be considered. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny setting a public hearing for the July 2, 1985 City Council meeting to consider a tax increment financing plan for a tax increment financing district in reference to the Cinnamon Ridge housing project. '77 Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Twenty -Six PRELIMINARY PLAT/EAGLES NEST VILLAGE B. Eagles Nest Village for a Preliminary Plat of Eagles Nest Village Consisting of 14 Townhouse Units on 1.4 Acres Located on Lots 101, 102, 103, & 104, Block 1, of Meadowland 1st Addition -- The public hearing was held before the Advisory Planning Commission at a regular meeting held on May 28, 1.985 to consider the preliminary plat entitled Eagles Nest Village which contains 14 townhouse units on 1.4 acres located east of Rahn Road, north • of Shale Lane and west of Bear Path Trail. The townhouse units are planned to be owner -occupied dwellings, half of which would be constructed as handicapped accessible. The Advisory Planning Commission is recommending approval of the Eagles Nest facility subject to several conditions in the staff report. For additional information on this item, refer to the Planning Department report found on pages through //L. At the regular meeting of the Advisory Pa -r & Commission on June 6, 1985, the Commission reviewed the proposed preliminary plat for Eagles Nest Village. The Commission is recommending a cash dedication requirement and a trail along Rahn Road. For a copy of action that was taken by the Advisory Planning Commission, refer to those minutes found on page(s),//7---//6 . ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny a preliminary plat for the Eagles Nest development as presented. is M ,- • CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY PLAT - EAGLES NEST VILLAGE APPLICANT: MC. R.S. INDUSTRIES INC LOCATION: LOTS 101-104, BLOCK 1, MEADOWLANDS 1ST ADD. EXISTING ZONING: MULTI -FAMILY, UNDER THE EAGAN HILLS WEST P.D. DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: MAY 28, 1985 DATE OF REPORT: MAY 22, 1985 REPORTED BY: GREG H.INGRAHAM, ASSISTANT PLANNER REVIEWED BY: DALE C.RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER APPLICATION SUMMARY: The applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat approval of Eagles Nest Village which contains 14 townhouse units on 1.4 acres located east of Rahn Road, north of Shale Lane and west of Bear Path Trail. The townhouse units are planned to be owner occupied dwellings, half of which would be constructed as handicapped accessible. ZONING AND LAND USE: The parcel is part of the Eagan Hills West Planned Development and is currently platted into four residential lots. At the February 1, 1983 City Council meeting the use of the parcel was established as an 18 unit multi -family building. In 1976 a 32 unit multi -family building was approved on this site. The size of the parcel has been reduced to 1.4 acres from the original 2.0 acres in 1976. The attached City Council minutes summarize the zoning history. The land consists of a knoll which slopes to the southwest and northeast. Grasses cover the site and several large oak trees are located on the knoll. All of the oak.trees would be removed to provide a level area for this proposal. Six duplex units are to the south of the site, single family homes lie to the north, west and east, and Rahn School and Rahn Park are to the SW of the site. CODE COMPLIANCE: The proposed 14 unit reduction from the 1983 plan. 30' setback to all right-of-ways. Rahn Road is 50', Shale Lane is 40' The dwelling units cover 218 of the 128 for a total building coverage of coverage maximum is 208 for R-4 zones. ment for the 14 units would be 1.7 provided for•each unit. townhouse units are a four The buildings maintain a The standard setback from and Bear Path Trail is 301. site and the garages cover 338. The standard building The normal lot size require - acres. A double garage is The main code compliance issue boils down to whether these one story units with detached garages (which do not meet all the standard requirements) are preferable to a two or three story Preliminary Plat - Eagles Nest Village May 28, 1985 Page 2 structure which could meet the code requirements. SITE PLANNING: Access to the project would be off of Rahn Road. Sidewalks connect the units to the garage areas. As shown, the garages are set back 15' from the north property line. They could be moved north 5' to allow more space at the interior of the development. The long line of garages should receive some architectural detailing or other treatment to break up the long mass along the north property line. The retaining wall along the north line could be incorporated into the garage walls and would provide berming to screen the garage mass. The dwellings are one story gable roofed with windows on one side of the units. The twelve 2 bedroom and two 3 bedroom units • would be split up into three separate buildings. Five of the fourteen units are oriented for proper solar access (south side of dwelling is within 150 of due south). Due to the common walls of these dwellings, energy costs should be 24% less than similar sized detached single family homes. GRADING/DRAINAGE: The major topographical features of this proposed development consist of a ridge at about a 901 elevation and a depression at an 884 elevation. The proposed grading plan indicates removing about 9' of material from the ridge. This material apparently is to be placed within the depresssion to raise the grade in that vicinity about 8'. This grading is feasible and in conformance with City policy and codes. However, the grading of the driveway and parking lot does not meet City requirements. The reason being that a high point in • the parking, between proposed lots 16 8 17, will direct runoff to the east and to the west of this high point. Because there is no storm sewer in Bear Path Tr., the runoff to the east of the parking lot high point must drain over land to reach Bear Path Tr. This is in direct conflict with City requirements that parking lot runoff be collected into storm sewer systems. This eliminates over -land flow that causes erosion and sedimentation problems. Staff recommends the grading of the parking lot/driveway be such that drainage is to the west, towards Rahn Rd. An existing 30" storm sewer line is in place along the east side of Rahn Rd. Catch basins installed near Rahn Rd can then collect the parking lot runoff and direct it into the existing storm sewer line. This is feasible and is in accordance with City requirements. UTILITIES: Sanitary sewer and watermain of sufficient size, capacity and depth are available to this site along Rahn Rd., Shale La. and Bear Path Tr. This development proposes to connect to the existing sanitary and water lines within Shale La. Staff can recommend servicing lots 2 - 11 from Shale La. Lots 12 - 15 can be serviced off of two existing services along Bear Path Tr. Using the existing services along Bear Path Tr will allow the developer to shift the proposed sanitary sewer and water -i Preliminary Plat - Eagles Nest Village May 28, 1985 Page 3 connection westerly to the vicinity of the existing sanitary sewer manhole. This will save the developer the cost of one additional manhole. The street restoration, along will all utility service construction, will be the responsibility of this development. STREETS: Streets and their functional classification, that border this proposed development, are listed in the following table: Existing Design Street Name Designation Width Width Rahn Rd Community Collector 36" 44" Shale La Neighborhood Collector 44" 44" Bear Path Tr Local Access 32" 32" • Rahn Rd is the only existing street not built to its ultimate design section. In addition to widening Rahn Rd, an 8' bituminous trailway is required along the east side of Rahn Rd to achieve its ultimate design section. This trailway, along with the widening costs, will be the responsibility of this development. Discussion on this subject will follow under the ASSESMENTS paragraph. RIGHT-OF-WAY/EASEMENTS: The platting of the Meadowlands 1st Addition fulfilled the dedication requirements for public right- of-way. Because this is a replat of existing platted lots, the vacating of drainage and utility easements over the internal lot lines must occur prior to final plat approval. The dedication of utility & drainage easements for this preliminary plat shall be in accord- ance with City code. • ASSESSMENTS: Trunk area assessments related to this development have previously been fulfilled. Staff recommends that this development prepay its future respon- sibility for the upgrading of Rahn Rd. City policy requires the prepayment of future assessments for street upgrading where multiple owned developments occur. The amount this development is responsible for is determined as follows 116 F.F.(1) x $28.47/F.F.(2) _ $3,303 il) Includes 75' corner lot credit (2) Difference between residential equiv. & multi. equiv. 1985 street rates The rate in effect at the time of final platting will determine the final amounts of this assessment. In addition, all costs for the installation of all onsite improvements, including trailway, is the sole responsibility of this development. f Preliminary Plat - Eagles Nest Village May 28, 1985 Page 4 If approved the Preliminary Plat shall be subject to the following conditions: 1) Five visitor parking spaces shall be provided on site with signage designating them as such. 2) A detailed landscape plan shall be prepared showing species size and location for all plant material. Special attention shall be paid to landscaping due to the "tightness" of this development. An adequate landscaping bond ($10,000) shall be held until one year after the landscaping is installed. 3) All trash containers shall be stored inside the garages or suitably screened. • 4) The garage layout shall be modified to break up the mass along the north property line. 5) All the standard Preliminary Plat conditions shall be adhered to. • Council Minutes February 1, 1983 EAGLE'S NEST ROME - BETTY BASSETT - QCG25 Application of Betty Bassett, Eagle's Nest Home for an amendment to the Eagan Hills West Planned Development to allow a change in the proposed Eagle's Nest Home and to allow R-2 as underlying zoning located on Lots 101 through 104, Block 1, Meadowlands 1st Addition, was next discussed. Mr. Hedges re- viewed the background of the application of Mrs. Bassett and stated a public hearing was held by the Advisory Planning Commission on January 11, 1983 to consider the application. The amendment would include a request to change the 32 person occupancy of Eagle's Nest Home for the handicapped to an 18 person facility and also to clarify the underlying zoning of the four lots. The Advisory Planning Commission recommended that the application be reviewed by • the City Council to clarify the intent of the City Council when it acted upon the application for the home in 1976. The City staff, including City Attorney Paul Hauge, prepared a memorandum dated January 26, 1983 reviewing the history, and Dale Runkle attached copies of Minutes and other documents to the packet distributed to the Council. Mrs. Bassett was present and stated that she wanted to remove the application for rezoning and requested that the City Council only consider clarification of the underlying use on the property within the planned development for Eagan Hills West. She distributed copies of a July 20, 1976 letter from Charles Slocum, together with survey attached, indicating that Parcel 3 on the Hedlund survey of 1976 did not conform with the current four lots, but indicated that the intention was that Parcel 3 on that survey was the parcel that was originally intended for Eagle's Nest Home, consisting of two acres. It was noted that the acreage has now been reduced and that the lots had been included in Meadowland 1st Addition. Councilman Egan stated that the use should conform with the intent of the Advisory Planning Commission and Council of 1976. Councilman Smith noted that Planning •Consultant Voss, in 1976, stated that the use was suitable and no rezoning was required; further, that a less dense use is being proposed at the present time. Councilman Wachter and Councilman Smith were on the Council in 1976 and Mayor Blomquist was on the Advisory Planning Commission, each of which spoke as to the recollection at that time when the application was submitted and approved. A number of neighboring property owners in Meadowlands Addition appeared, generally opposing the project. After extended discussion, Smith moved, Egan seconded the motion that the Council be on record acknowledging that the zoning of the property in 1976 at the time of the approval of the Eagle's Nest Home 32 unit facility, in 1976 or prior, was for a multiple residential use for reasons including the following: 1. He noted that Consultant Voss in 1976, stated that the property in his Memorandum was suitable for the proposed use and that no rezoning was required. 2. That the proposal of Mrs. Bassett at the present time is for less dense use than that proposed in 1976. 3. That in the event that there is a reversion to the underlying zoning, it could provide higher densities than the PUD concept if approved. 6 Council Minutes February 1, 1983 4. The developer had proposed in the original planned development, that the parcel be a proposed outlot, not a part of the single family district plat. 5. A building permit had been authorized in 1977 for 160 foot by 132 foot single -story structure. 6. That the land use to the south is R-2, that there is a large former farm home to the north and that there are streets on the east and west; further, that the four lots are larger than the standard lots in Meadowlands 1st Addition; further, that the planned development allowed for cluster home use for up to 4 units per acre, which would appear to conform; that a town- • house proposal was approved in 1976 which would appear to reflect approxi- mately an R-3 type zoning or use; that only one service stub was installed to service the property; now there are four lots so that it may, even under R-1 zoning, provide for up to six handicapped persons per lot. A number of the neighboring property owners had questions and comments, including objections to the proposal stating that the proposed use would be too dense and possibly the building would be too large for the site. Concerns were those of the impact on children, the claim that there would be a number of buses involved each day and the potential for converting the use to some other use. It was noted that the decision was unanimous in 1976 by the Council. Lowell Berg, a realtor, stated that the City staff had told him when he was selling homes in the area, that the lots were zoned R-1. Mary Olson, the owner of the farm home to the north, asked whether it's possible to build the same facility on the 1.37 remaining acres, and Ms. Bassett stated that the facility could be constructed and still conform with the ordinance requirements, noting that she has acquired a building permit for the project. There are a number of single • appears to be family homes that have been built since the approval, and this the only change in the circumstances. Councilman Egan stated that the central issue is whether a change from 32 to 18 persons or units should constitute a rezoning and it was his opinion that no rezoning would be required. Those in favor were Smith, Egan, Blomquist and Thomas, against was Wachter. The motion was adopted. 164 7 6 L L I ;FT, T u . . j Aigluawall go 48 i oQSH �TIMBER� .y �\. : oe Ir t i a ? •J" •pen dr+a\ I2 •,sem aan ' nm ra•e ee�w ] Y•a t .� N • rmm w,m � � 'kr 8�� m (; .rm� 1• 9 le .. le 1e A la O e • p R 0 \ a _ �Sf •' 4:•� raeo rae BE 20 al ME 1/ �L I t � �g •� •t so It9 m Q.� � lY� •' et a "e o-yhq/ OP�,��. '�6. I wa • et imm tl ea , .. . �M -'"bY i • 8 / ya le' room ••. • •em a ,_ " /ary 07 �� \•y ` 27 a O 1r/ • ♦' aap 8 (•�4j�� N as,._ a $a ea '•� s. e• .j g / ' ' f., �d� /, J-r+rl.`J •i�_ _ _�` ,. �.a e^• e7 �+ 0e ee •��. 8 �,/ t• Cq • BADGERsCDURT at e + a••` { ! ae ••,y�l n57 k..C' t0 } •%4 . u • - i s i • a4 .SI ---•—a p SI m m am nno 1 �d• pyt0 •o i �, g . �8 .lu a uam waa ,�a 4 . '',) 1.8 ry �,k/ 2 •�'` •>Lr• a a''3'• ' a caa` (('/ to ]° ± n t` •a 'Wb ar d6, yrt��,p y Y / ' a ro ••�• .E wh :\ ara � • tCO ]e ` • �,� '/' � a SROs, • •�' ^ •+• i N' '� $ ••^t �C' �y, 9 �� ]n I•t ''♦ as �..� X •ar•••ti �/ .0 g♦, 444'/'/'/ g ,; t r w �� .7� 1r,'� as +.•• ]• ♦ ea 'a /• '^•e.'bby wm , I a +. a e4 ;y. •1a � a ro rV r wam = usw• '�- !♦ '•+• 0 1 d+. �j• a A 17. a' e • !-�•, aT n'a ' S e ? faT I� to P ]Q s,P,+s Rr I aafn a � � e . - '•f � 8 9 ma• � �O1a . 1 • •• ala n M �Maatttt �,�' �. a`t � ) �T� � O (yQ �.': r / Al •"vm' ' nevi` i N re, 'aO • .Y 0 a 14 • 1t 21 Z u n c v � � � •. a • A 10 ¢, ! v �Y +o°° � ypY Q 9) .' • 1 `tii O yy- e n w ma �� QQQQQ•��tt • .tr. w.0 as as IZ pes �a'f°e ♦? II +• • e,O ^ /'t 'i1�.�/•1 8 !a A •'nay ., • ♦ ^ `L . °+e , : 2' oN ^• tl we .o; }}Ov..re:: 9� to k '1 "•. qq/ < ° :rs F•� a 1' ♦eS -i:..B I! . rasa 'P _ t r� '10 . P wm •rfm • Irs•a a4 tt 00 . J alta a. }8 F 1 • •ry y BEA r cc BEAR ufa F- b^ 'go� ° to 8 tl .. a t . v. a ] ••,ftn, U Is 14 C100 = / " t0 k aNnv • .ram Isco I ao p 1 I 6 It Bo It 1}e t r a rc w of Is a. MEADO LAND P 1crn 8 � It R:.o .e ounor I' •W $� /t $ —aaerom ew m 1 P / \ . = 9 SHALE —a' •'" LANE 4 a z / ` 8a ^ J - 9 ° ram aaa .nm nam nem pmm i!•• 2641A Ing I., I f— I I I 1 u 60.291 S9. Fr. 2 bK 2 :el 2 PSR 4... _2•na"nzx.o•�• N� Fla 1 I (sa Abr "'T I°ry 5 2 13K 2 PSR 2 BK iHIP� u�.N� 10q'-4" 60.291 S9. Fr. 2 bK 2 :el 2 PSR "'T I°ry 5 2 13K 2 ER 2 f5K iHIP� u�.N� 10q'-4" 60.291 S9. Fr. 2 bK 2 ELK 2 eR TW. L� 4 q rl.rs o" J 14 UNIT Gt;VE1APMENT M:.R fntlWtTGtq�k:� t4T6 iHIP� u�.N� 51TE AKFA 60.291 S9. Fr. 1.90 ACMIP NO. OF UJIT5 PROVIDED-.ZM 12 TOT&L 14 51T6 .6RPA FER UNIT 4306 5G. FT. UNITS PER ACRE 10.14 IAT OOYEKGbE'Pf MILVIK&e, 33% NO OF 6aRA ffA sFG:E-5 PROVIDED ?b G-AAK 5rAaE8 PCR U141T 2 L� 4 q rl.rs o" J 14 UNIT Gt;VE1APMENT M:.R fntlWtTGtq�k:� t4T6 I i I I I I I I i I I I �I I I I 1 I I � � I � 1 ».. •16•' M' f• 1 A ' r a it r 1 r •. iwl.w.ws 1 r � \ ' •f, •••1 's.. / r 4s 1YY,' i 0 _ Y e �..• . L�1 •In._LN I Ir w I s►f•n' la•a 1 4 n w �_•_ —1-40 u n ff _ •\4•m. ,. 1N JYn r S F4 u1. .P�•uT \Y IrT• I _ Y e �..• . L�1 •In._LN Ir w a 1 4 n w n u n ff ff •\4•m. ,. 1N JYn r 1 I I I ..i �'' �I Y e �..• . L�1 •In._LN •\4•m. ,. 1N JYn r S F4 u1. .P�•uT \Y IrT• n.r.w n•. r iN' yea un e4N If ,• 1 \ • ^04• ...r r........ S IT -A. IL e l i ire• _�— - - �• •+ ue\ W --.r P�. t 0.� I I 9 tP �� y eta J [f� I I I.* I�\ C L 1 I W.w•W,r., MY. Vi.V I;. � ;-Q:1 I sue.m�loeer CL I �i a �•rn.r as w, �Ya I / l.�STi.K 20L114G: �.l4 a� Dl s3QiPTln.1 Lora lou 10\.�Q\ WY W,4.ca 1, M!/.LuWL410 .,py( LLO.TwI, 1 1 1� 04VT/. GM/YfT, M��u\y,a Lao "-r •f\ •(.min, w) a. o wvf U^+ rr .run..J DE 491TY 0.6 .-If wuw(uT.wmwn T•�) I Owwl— I I I wYYYY[T w.r. idle. 1111e value 1 I 1 �.• r. [. varW .. f.wl Yu.l...ra I Yr w. :..1..'i ... 'r'�' Y�•I.r Yrh•'+ r�II/�410YY\/fYM.Yt{WLY4YW,YL. APC Minutes May 28, 1985 ulrooney moved, Trygg seconded the motion to recommend approv 1 of the preli%efamilyph ry lat application of Lexington Place South 2nd Addi on for 41 singlomes on 12.16 acres located in the above -des ibed area, subjeo the following conditions: 1. TheNplat and development shall be controlled and developed by one company or b 'lder as originally approved in 1984. 2. A revislpn shall be required to the Planned Development Agreement modifying it to i clude this plan. // 3. The plat sha`l`l be subject to the Park Commission's review and comment for the newly created ots. j 4. Detailed grading an and house plan shall be approved showing that • homes will fit on the lots eated. / 5. A grading and ponain plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Engineering Department in ord%1heo insure enough capacity for storm water ponding. 6. All other conditions of ginal approval shall apply. 7. The loss of ponding vplume result\fromding shall be compensated for, if necessary. 8. Vacation of any ding easementsproved by the City. 9. All costs for�blic improvementhe sole responsibility of this developer. 10. This d velopment shall be responsible for all nlevied trunk related • assessments a rates in effect at the time of final platt g. Harri cn stated his concern about the possibility AN basements being flooded by the ponds. Rich Hefti stated that prospective h ea would be 3 feet igher than the high water level and that this is an accepta le distance. All embers voted in favor of the motion except Harrison who voted ainst. EAGLES NEST VILLAGE - PRELIMINARY PLAT Chairman Hall convened the public hearing on the application of MCRS Industries, Inc. for preliminary plat approval of Eagles Nest Village consisting of 14 townhouse units on 1.4 acres located on Lots 101, 102, 103, and 104, Block 1 of Meadowlands lat Addition, Section 29, east of Rahn Road, north of Shale Lane, and west of Bear Path Trail. Dale Runkle introduced the application, reviewed the staff report of May 22, 1985, and mentioned that on February 1, 1983 the City Council had approved the use of the parcel for an 18 -unit multi -family building, and in 1976 a 32 -unit multi -family building had been approved on this site, with the understanding that the property would be used for handicapped housing. He stated that the proposal would provide for 2 SUBJECT TO APPROVAL MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE EAGAN ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION EAGAN, MINNESOTA MAY 28, 1985 A regular meeting of the Eagan Advisory Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, May 28, 1985 at 7:00 p.m. at the Eagan Municipal Center. Present were Chairman Hall and members Trygg, Mulrooney, McCrea, Bohne and Harrison. Absent were members Wilkins and Wold. Also present were City Planner Runkle, Acting City Engineer Hefti, and Assistant City Attorney Smith. AGENDA • Harrison stated that he would like to discuss the Opus development at Avalon and Burnside at the end of the meeting and requests that it be added to the Agenda. Harrison moved, McCrea seconded the motion to approve the agenda with the above noted change. All members voted in favor. MINUTES Mulrooney moved, McCrea seconded the motion to approve the minutes of the April 23, 1985 and April 25, 1985 meetings. All members voted in favor. LEXINGTON PLACE SOUTH 2ND ADDITION — REVISED PRELIMINARY PLAT Chairman Hall convened the public hearing concerning the application of U. S. Homes Corporation for preliminary plat approval of Lexington Place South 2nd Addition for 41 single family homes on 12.16 acres located in the west • half of the southwest quarter of Section 14 at Duckwood Drive and Lexington Avenue. Dale Runkle introduced the application, reviewed the memo from Park Director, Ken Vraa, dated May 13, 1985, and reviewed the staff report of April 15, 1985 regarding the application. He noted that while it was originally stated that 16 additional lots would be included, the actual amount is 19 additional lots. Robert Hoffman, attorney for Orrin Thompson, appeared and reviewed the history of Lexington Place South. He stated that the density had been reduced over the last few years and that the reason for the request for additional lots was that two outlots which had been set aside for amenities, including a private pool, were no longer required, as it was determined that. suc}i amenities would not be feasible with a single family development such as this. He stated that the developer will retain architectural control through covenants which require approval of design and location of all units by the developer. In response to a question from the Commission, Mr. Hoffman stated that the width of the lots would be equal to or larger than the existing lots and that they would be 60 feet in width or larger. 113 I APC Minutes May 28, 1985 33% lot coverage, including garages. Gene Bassett appeared on behalf of the owner and stated that the original proposed building would have covered 35% of the lot. Neighboring property owners appeared and objected to the proposal on the basis that it would reduce the salability of neighboring single family lots, that it was the understanding of property owners at the time they purchased in Meadowlands that these four lots were zoned single family, that garbage might be handled in an unsightly and sanitary manner, that access would affect the neighboring property owners, that the development would result in the loss of a number of large oak trees, that the zoning of the property as multiple was inappropriate immediately adjacent to single family lots, that construction noise would be disruptive to the neighborhood, and that the proposal was initially to be for handicapped persons only. Mrs. Bassett appeared on behalf of the owner and stated that the property was zoned multiple before Meadowlands was zoned or developed, and that the • development of Meadowlands had removed the top soil from their property. Mr. Bassett stated that the retaining wall behind the garages would be staggered so that there would be two small drops rather than one large drop. Dale Runkle stated that a condition of approval would include that garbage would be enclosed or screened, that garage access would only be from Rahn Road, and that the only access on Shale and Bear Path Trail would be for parking in front of the units on the street, and that all of the units were to be set up for handicapped access. James McMann of MCRS Industries appeared on behalf of the applicant and mentioned that an association will take care of snow, garbage and maintenance, and that all units will be accessible to wheelchairs and persons using crutches and canes. The developers stated that they want all the units to be purchased by handicapped persons but that they cannot discriminate by refusal to sell to non -handicapped persons, that the developer looked into the possibility of saving the trees and determined that it would be impossible to • do so, and that the excavators will be responsible for removing any debris from the area. Rich Hefti stated that City Ordinance only allows construction between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., and that if there is noise before or after those times, that City staff will correct the problem upon a report from neighbors. McCrea stated that she prefers this proposal to the higher elevation proposal and asked whether it would be possible to recruit handicapped persons. Ms. Bassett noted that handicapped organizations will be notified,. _ and'McMann stated that he has contacted a handicapped realtor who will work with the developer and who had access to special financing for the handicapped. McMann also stated that the garages will be broken up so that it will not be one long line of garages on the north end of the property, and that phasing will start at the Rahn Road side and move toward the east, with grading and the retaining wall to be done at the beginning. He stated that the units will range from 872 square feet for 2 -bedroom units, to 1,168 square feet for 3 -bedroom units, with full basements, at a cost from $57,000.00 to $65,000.00, with oak cabinets, forced air, gas heat, R-55 ceiling insulation, R-23 to 24 side insulation, 2 x 6 inch exterior walls and maintenance -free vinyl exteriors. 3 APE Minutes May 28, 1985 City Council member, Ted Wachter, was present and mentioned that the original zoning was approved with the understanding that it would be occupied with retarded persons only, and that was the reason for the underlying zoning. Mrs. Bassett stated that the original proposal was to be restricted to developmentally disabled persons which would include physically and mentally disabled persons. Harrison stated that the zoning map should show the underlying zoning for planned development districts to avoid misleading property owners. He asked whether this was feasible, and Brad Smith stated that an indication could be placed on the zoning map with PD zoned areas to indicate that the underlying zoning might not be fully reflected on the zoning. map. Mulrooney stated that the application is fraught with problems' concerning size, setbacks, drainage, that it does not conform with City requirements, that he is not satisfied that the history of the proposal has been fully explored, and that the proposal warrants further study, and on that • basis, moved that the matter be set aside for 30 days for further study. McCrea stated that the zoning could not be changed, but that this proposal would be better than a three-story building. Harrison seconded the motion of Mulrooney. In response to questions from member Harrison, the broker for the Bassetts, noted that there had been "For Sale" signs on the property, but not for sale as single family lots. Mulrooney and Trygg voted in favor of the motion; Harrison, Bohne and McCrea voted against the motion and the motion died. McCrea moved to recommend approval of the application of MSRS Industries, Inc. for preliminary plat approval of Eagles Nest Village, consisting of 14 townhouse units on 1.4 acres located on the property described above, subject to the following conditions: 1. Five visitor parking spaces shall be provided on the site with signage designating them as such. • 2. A detailed landscape plan shall be prepared showing species, size and location for all plant material. Special attention shall be paid to landscaping due to the tightness of this development, and an adequate landscaping bond ($10,000.00) shall be held until one year after the landscaping is installed. Drainage on the site shall be toward the west, pursuant to a drainage and grading plan, which shall be approved by City staff. 3. All trash containers shall be stored inside the garages or suitably screened. 4. The garage layout shall be modified to break up the mass along the north property line. 5. All standard preliminary plat conditions shall be adhered to. 6. Rahn Road shall be widend to 44 -foot design width and an 8 -foot bituminous trailway shall be placed along the east side of Rahn Road with the costs to be the responsibility of this development. 7. The developer shall complete the vacation of drainage and utility easements over the internal Lot lines, prior to final plat approval. 11-15 4 APC Minutes May 28, 1985 8. The developer shall prepay future assessment responsibility for the upgrading of Rahn Road at the rate in effect at final platting, and all costs for the installation of on-site improvements, including trailway, shall be the responsibility of this development. 9. A variance for lot coverage shall be obtained by the developer prior to final platting. 10. All units shall be constructed as to be accessible to handicapped persons. 11. The only ingress and egress to the garage area will be off Rahn Road. 12. All units shall be owned and occupied by handicapped persons, unless the City Attorney's office determines that such a requirement is not legal • under the State and Federal Housing Laws. Voting in favor were Harrison, Bohne, and McCrea; voting against were Trygg and Mulrooney. The chair abstained. The motion passed. O'NEIL CENTER - REZONING Chairman Hall convened the public hearing on the applicati of R. J. O'Neil for rezoning from A (Agricultural) to PD (Planned Dev opment) for approximately 100 acres, located in the south half of Section 10, north of Yankee Odle Road, weal of Lexington Avenue, and east of 5E. Dale Runkle introduce the application and summarized the staff r ort of May 21, 1985. He stated th the Comprehensive Land Use Guide design es this property as R - III, 6 to 12 u its per acre, that one of the access to Yankee Doodle Road might have to be ved, that areas D and L are d ignated for ponding use, and that while City statf--,has determined that t re is adequate commercial space • zoned in the City at this time, that the plication should still be reviewed on its own merits. Harold Sheff, attorney�\for a O'Neils appeared on behalf of the applicants and stated that Bill rice of Suburban Engineering and John Klein were present and would discusse•,�pplication. Bill Price stated that one of the driveways had been shifted and that the actual location would not be resolved until Dakota County eviewed 'the proposal, that O'Neil is making the proposal at this time be ause of other development in the area, that areas D and l would play an intricate role in the \city's storm water ponding and drainage plan, that be ause of the severe lopes the development would work around the ponds nd use them as ameniti and that one sanitary sewer connection to the outhwest has been eliminated be use of the extreme cost, but that the o er three proposed sanitary sewer c nections would not need revision. John Lein appeared and mentioned that the proposal is IV1�4ggered by the eat for cooperation concerning ponding, that the applicla cannot ine how to cooperate until he knows the ponding configuration, Chat tments would have more of an impact on utilities than a commerce 1 lopment, that if the 100 acres in question as well as the property 114 5 Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Twenty -Seven REZONING/O'NEILL CENTER C. O'Neill Center for Rezoning from A to PD for Approximately 100 Acres -- A public hearing was held before the Advisory Planning Commission at their regular meeting held on Tuesday, May 28, 1985, to consider an application for a commercial planned development consisting of approximately 120 acres. The planned development would have approximately 100 acres of commercial uses. The uses include limited business, roadside business and high tech office/warehouse, road right-of-way and ponding easements. The remaining 20 acres are proposed as R-4 in accordance with the existing zoning. The APC is recommending denial of the request for the PD due to its of compliance with the Comprehensive Guide Plan. For additional information on this • item, refer to the Cit Planner's repo t, a copy of which is enclosed on pages _ through /Z For a copy of the action which was taken by the Advisory Parks & Recreation Commission, refer to page For a copy of the action that was taken by the Advisory Pla ing Commission, refer to a copy of those minutes found on pages j, through /3/ . • ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the rezoing as submitted for O'Neill Center by Robert O'Neill. CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: REZONING TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT R J O'NEIL CENTER PLANNED DEVELOPMENT APPLICANT: R J O'NEIL LOCATION: PART OF THE S'h OF SECTION 10, NORTH OF YANKEE DOODLE RD, WEST OF LEXINGTON AV, EAST OF EXISTING ZONING: A (AGRICULTURAL) & I -35E R-4 (RESIDENTIAL/MULTIPLE DISTRICT) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: MAY 28, 1985 DATE OF REPORT: MAY 21, 1985 REPORTED BY: DALE C RUNKLE • APPLICATION SUBMITTED: An application has been submitted requesting a commercial planned development which would consist of approx. 120 acres. The planned development would have approx. 100 acres of commercial uses. These would include limited business, roadside business & high tech office/warehouse, road right-of-way and ponding easements. The remaining 20 acres are proposed to remain R-4 (residential multiple) in accordance with the existing zoning. ZONING & LAND USE: Presently the property is zoned A (agricultural) and in the past there have not been any development proposals to the City, therefore, the agricultural zoning is the original zoning of this property. The Comprehensive Guide designates this property as P. -III (mixed residential) with a density of 6 - 12 dwelling units per acre. The applicant is requesting that approx. 100 acres of the 120 be converted to limited business, roadside business, high tech office/warehouse, ponding & road right-of-way. Any change from the residential designation, on the Comp. Guide, will require an amendment to the Comp. Plan processed through the Metropolitan Council. COMMENTS: In review of this parcel, the property lies north of Yankee Doodle Rd, east of I -35E & west of Lexington Av. This parcel is the only undeveloped, high density residential area north of Yankee Doodle Rd. To the south is the 170 acres of commercial, known as Town Centre 100 & Town Centre 70, and to the east is presently undeveloped industrial land. To the north are some R-4 (residential multiples) and the bulk mail center and to the west is the I -35E alignment. Reviewing the Comprehensive Guide regarding this parcel, the main reason it was designated an R -III is because there was an existing plat recorded on the property north, however, this property has not been developed at this time. It has always been looked at as a questionable piece as to what the designation should be; a high density resident- ial or a commercial/industrial development, which would probably be more compatible to the uses to the south and east and also compatible with the I -35E right-of-way. It appears that this could be one of the parcels in the City that could be a commercial piece as well as a multiple. 111r R J O'NEIL CENTER PD MAY 28, 1985 PAGE 2 The land uses proposed, in the R J O'Neil Planned Development, consist of approx. 36 acres of limited business, or 507,400 S.F. of building area; 16.8 acres of roadside business, or approx. 220,300 S.F. of roadside business use; 17.7 acres of high tech office/warehouse, which is the new terminology for business/whse. consisting of approx. 50 - 60% office and 50 - 40% warehouse with brick veneer versus standard concrete block. The high tech square footage would be approx. 231,400 and lastly the ponding areas of approx. 14.2 - 15 acres. These would make up the uses within the commercial part of the P.D. In reviewing the areas and calculations, the limited business was figured at a floor area ratio of .2, the roadside business .3, and high tech approx. .2. These ratios are based in accordance with the square footage allowed in the Eagan Zoning Ordinance with the standard 20 - 30% building coverage. Besides the overall use, the applicants have provided a road plan as to how circulation would be developed on this property. They are showing two accesses onto Yankee Doodle Rd. & one east/west street which would connect with Lexington Av. The applicants have reasonably designed the street pattern in accordance with the severe topogaphy of this site and it appears to be one of the only feasible ways to develop this property and be able to provide proper access. The only issue is the most easterly of the two accesses onto Yankee Doodle Rd. As you can see, these accesses are offset and could be an issue as to where specifically the access will occur onto Yankee Doodle Rd. The second issue in regard to the commercial use and circulation is in review of the sewer flows that are available on this property. It appears that the City does not have the capacity to handle a multiple family development compared to being able to handle commercial development which has a lesser flow rate than multiple. Additional e trunk lines would have to be installed to obtain capacity to service multiple residential. Engineering can address this specific issue regarding sewer capacity and flows between multiple & commer- cial uses. The last issue is that the main reason to look at uses and as to how this area will develop, was because of the development south of Yankee Doodle Rd. With the development of Town Centre 70 & 100, there was not enough storm sewer capacity without obtain- ing additional ponding areas and easements on this property. Once the City informed Mr. O'Neil of the additional need of the City storm sewer system, the developer has been working with the City to determine what the ponding needs will be for the overall master storm sewer plan. Also, how he can develop the property in accordance with determining the ponding needs of the City. Therefore, the PD was initiated because of the City's need for ponding areas. The developer has reacted to put together a master plan as to how the 120 acre parcel can develop. At this time there is no specific user but parcels and circulation have been established which could be split off and developed individually in an orderly fashion.." R J O'NEIL CENTER PD MAY 28, 1985 PAGE 3 The engineering department would like to comment on two areas of concern regarding the O'Neil Planned Development. One area relates to sanitary sewer capacity and the other relates to access alignment onto Yankee Doodle Road. SANITARY SEWER The concern of the engineering department relates to the capacity of the 15 inch trunk sanitary sewer line within Mike Collins Drive. The installation of this line occurred in 1970. Apparently at that time, the intention was not to provide service to sub - districts N -W, N -Y, and N -X as indicated on figure one. Apparently, the original intent for servicing these areas was to extend a trunk line from the lift station on County Road 63-A. However, at some subsequent date the Comprehensive Sewer Plan changed to its present layout. The only way the 15 inch trunk sanitary • sewer will experience any capacity problems will be if one or several high users develop within the subdistricts tributary to the 15 inch trunk. If all the development within the tributary area designated for industrial use consists of low users, then the 15 inch line will probably not experience any capacity problems. The impact of the O'Neil Planned Development on the 15 inch trunk sanitary sewer consists of the type of use and some additional area from subdistrict C -H2 being added to the tributary area. The proposal to rezone from R-3 use to a commercial use would decrease the wastewater flows by approximately 268. The area being added to the tributary area for the 15 inch trunk from the O'Neil P.D. consists of a portion of the southwest quarter of Section 10 (40 acres). The reason for removing these 40 acres from subdistrict C -H2 was that it was not economically feasible to extend the 12 inch trunk sewer within Denmark Drive at a depth to serve these 40 acres. In summary, a potential capacity problem exists within the 15 inch trunk sanitary sewer in Mike Collins Drive. Also, the design flows from a commercial development are approximately 268 less then from a R-3 (multiple residential). Staff does not feel these issues merit a recommendation 'either for or against this proposed Planned Development. The Planning Commission must consider these factors with regard to the entire land use issue. STREETS At issue here is the offset between the proposed easterly access onto Yankee Doodle Road and the access to the 10 story high-rise. It is the staff's understanding from the Dakota County Highway Department that all accesses will be required to line up on Yankee Doodle Road. This is because of the anticipated high traffic volumes between Lexington Avenue and 35-E. This is feasible from an engineering standpoint. Staff will review this item upon the receipt of a Preliminary Plat. Z R J O'NEIL CENTER PD MAY 28, 1985 PAGE 4 CONDITIONS: 1. This Planned Development should be reviewed by the Eagan Park Commission to determine if parkland will be required with the change to commercial zoning. An overall pedestrian circulation plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Park Commission prior to the final approval of the PD. 2. The Planned Development shall be reviewed by the Park Commission for park dedication for this overall PD. 3. The Planned Development Agreement shall be entered into by the developer and the City of Eagan. This Agreement shall attach the exhibits that are in the May 21, 1985 Staff Report. This Agreement shall be for a period of 5 - 10 years as deter- mined by the City. •• 4. There is no platting being requested with this development plan, therefore, no development shall be allowed until the detailed first phase has been submitted for review and prelimi - nary plat. 5. The PD should be reviewed by MnDot and Dakota County for their review and comment as the property abuts county & state right-of-way. 6. An amendment shall be required of the City to change the Comprehensive Guide from R -III (mixed residential with a density of 6 - 12 dwelling units per acre) to commercial uses allowing limited business, roadside business & high tech office warehouse. 7. The developer shall cooperate with the ponding area easements that for the Eagan storm sewer system. the City of Eagan resolving are needed to be obtained 8. The environmental assessment worksheets & an environmental, review will be determined on a phase by phase basis once the detailed plans have been submitted. /a / �l .lA ZGB all .R AA V 1 LI R 7,11v A PD 3" 0 "4c s c p p CG B K i SC LB 82-2 R-4 O'LEA I RY PA I RKi ADqDITIO PILOT MCBR 714 CROSSROAD nF CENT1,R,., EIAG 4 N R Fw Fl K A , , 1. K 3 OC -C L A I L S R'= R-4 y /Wuuf H-15, R-2- LB- 1� &- CARRIAGE HILLS GOLF COURSE A PF i I v LI LI A�4 OXY r LI 1jIII n s 1. LI Pi,OPOSED ._ LI R.4 -t O'NkC CENTER I w MENDOTA .NITS. • _—�M.,0-- _—__ J Y \I ` Ind • i -- A '/ . \ — •�y nT� fG![ J - J Il •Yl.- 10. 1 ... _.J 1f • 4' -:. aryl — - � ""yy..4; � - .. ��++•.�� 1 — \wY.'rtl..:: :i:.M.^' -III, i' rte.•.. V COMMERCIAL • - � s, .., _ �'' .. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT JR (jn�,l LB R.�,n • ..... Indo,G6 I .. R -N r� Ra.. �1 © �.=_ • �� _ _ `�--�,. , /j r� • _ - - Ind. Inc. -✓ :'r. NB•—.-- LB R-114 ...R -III R -III -_ ``• P R41,1 -- JZ.N D: CSC. P ,.:.i --_ _ :;-Ind. _- ......:.:::\::/. R -II RI R -I - R -II . R•11 LB I R_ -I _ __ Rill .. R -I - - - Ind_ Y HALL 41 .._-..- RII . • . :ts.•i G•. - R -I - P 14 R-1 1 bl- -- \- .....p.:Tll., P P -' • R.�.: :. • 4. _ R -II ._ R-11- - t • N � ( L- r R-1 pRiR-III;�$...---R-III R -III �' i.:y„"`.'I - R -0I Csc/(B! R-1:_ - ✓ --R-III Rlt;.. R I:!,.:. R-U� • '-� . R'0 _ 1 '/ LAND USE GUIDE PLAN IN 001111113 Re J. O'NEIL CENTER I, .;' ',=.- '. ''ti' �1' i--4 •.,, ; _ - _ _1111 - R 4 ,MUL7NLE'HOUBIN6 - y ft _J MULTIPLE. HOl)SINB t 1 . s.0e u I 90 •0ev Irl , � � \.1,A i f11 - to I l \ c 1 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT R. J. O'Nell Properties AREA LAND USES AND BUILDING COVERAGE CITY OF EAGAK MN. .1 W� V w• wmw RJ (Aru A •••.m 1111•. l:owes Mea S u•au u1.•s• Aree C naue u.m Arse D mme Area E n•.o9 n•.m Aree F .u.r99 u.ue emrew 'mcmURAL xos Area O Area H u..ew u•.•se u,•« 1.r,•u Area 1 1.1,•09 Aree J 9new n1.•e• ' ASEMENT, Arsa ue.es9 n•..n L Aree L •.a..0• Re J. O'NEIL CENTER I, .;' ',=.- '. ''ti' �1' i--4 •.,, ; _ - _ _1111 - R 4 ,MUL7NLE'HOUBIN6 - y ft _J MULTIPLE. HOl)SINB t 1 . s.0e u I 90 •0ev Irl , � � \.1,A i f11 - to I l \ c 1 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT R. J. O'Nell Properties 2040 EdOecumbe Road ST. Paul Minn. 55116 CITY OF EAGAK MN. My. wee �9 fir• -': `(.` ECN�a � HIb11,7IF 11_11 I i . ' ASEMENT, (> o LIMITED BU6INESS" `ONIoe Parti'::., ... _ 1.. . -1:111. 1111 1 Re J. O'NEIL CENTER PLANNED DEVELOPMENT R. J. O'Nall Properties 2040 Edgecumbe Road ST. Paul Minn. 65116 CITY OF EAGAN, MK mv, less 114 GRADING, DRAINGE AND UTIUTIES PLAN r. P A. c 0 20 77. n' ...... . ... NU. .... .. . 5— POND L.... ....... . ygl�R-Kg QbObU RCFA 1P....,; ... . .......... '.MENDOTA HTS. ti iu.o B� - �� ,.------ - ,2-_ :�-��. - - '�� ,.r.•� CP -9 / 699.0 C" 702.0 / = z4• C \` 878.0 p JP -II 8157 8500 � -i JI 81 \ XP -3 EeCasiaLL� - r -v - r `-L0• w Cp_ 843.5 836.0 C F - C 1 1 .. 7150 715.0 7/9.7 827.7 _ �N- Li -4 H.... �• �e NP -4 D -I 899.0 �j I /D -L 859.3 / 866.0 ' so' .. DP ._ 6.0 _9 - ,(\ D a D-6 B7B.2 / \ _ D- I e 880" D -f eeoo DP -2 D -m BB l.9 874.0 � - � y �1 765,0 769.4 50 1 CP -6 \f x\8060 AP -27 - 796.3 Ste' �1 002.44 0-38' Qts 1 l gCpP-2 829.7 CP -12 826. 5 829.6 R.J. O'NEIL CENTER V 829.0 829.7 1000, CP- 11 795.0 808 J22--'<./ 944.0 IBS/.3 7903 I f BOLO /1--+-{/ -F9P-1144 FP -1 - 832.3 859.1 _ r F-• .r--F-e` i r,ZI d .; F a � �\ '-12 - 56.0 zo .r E-� E -r E -t •: DP -19 884 D . 890.0 DP_ ".-D P-27 174 8.0.6 ; DP -61 7 857! jj %i 1866.5L -7- I DP -23 9 88910 D•< b 8976 70 . DP -22 / J 760 _ 8922 880.0 Y�J-6 _ r - JP -67 p_1 871.0 0i CITY 887 772 CITY OF EAGAN . /2% STORM SEWER LAYOUT MAP DP -20 901.0 9042 E-4 -o DP -11 856 0 I c1TE 864• /EP -3e r ` / 877'a I ,_J/ 1 8448.8. D 0 DDP 0 E_ 860.0 858.3 z4• C \` 878.0 p JP -II 8157 8500 � -i JI 81 \ Cp_ CP•4 1 .. 7150 715.0 7/9.7 827.7 Li -4 842.6 i i s' CP -3 841.9 CP'S 6. 830.3 873/ - Corin 765,0 769.4 50 1 CP -6 \f x\8060 AP -27 - 796.3 Ste' �1 002.44 0-38' Qts 1 l gCpP-2 829.7 CP -12 826. 5 829.6 R.J. O'NEIL CENTER V 829.0 829.7 1000, CP- 11 795.0 808 J22--'<./ 944.0 IBS/.3 7903 I f BOLO /1--+-{/ -F9P-1144 FP -1 - 832.3 859.1 _ r F-• .r--F-e` i r,ZI d .; F a � �\ '-12 - 56.0 zo .r E-� E -r E -t •: DP -19 884 D . 890.0 DP_ ".-D P-27 174 8.0.6 ; DP -61 7 857! jj %i 1866.5L -7- I DP -23 9 88910 D•< b 8976 70 . DP -22 / J 760 _ 8922 880.0 Y�J-6 _ r - JP -67 p_1 871.0 0i CITY 887 772 CITY OF EAGAN . /2% STORM SEWER LAYOUT MAP DP -20 901.0 9042 E-4 -o DP -11 856 0 I c1TE 864• /EP -3e r ` / 877'a I ,_J/ 1 8448.8. D 0 DDP 0 E_ 860.0 858.3 Fizam MAP PRE-VARF-D 2r: 5.R A 1 Assoc. OGT 1989 JF 8• 9083 JP 62 Iz•0973 891.0 B93T _ / JP -46 19 2 3 88935 JP -II 8157 8500 � -_ 999, 007 JP -p44 � ^ 89J7 Y JI 81 Fizam MAP PRE-VARF-D 2r: 5.R A 1 Assoc. OGT 1989 JF 8• s n V I` �., 30 1'1-;--LIs 4. u el 83 - _J I - \ N -G / --- 81 — 15 21, I' / N -GG \ V02)18 N -II �\ 21° I \N-0 \\ \\ 112.. 1 Imo -'TEMPORARY fi N -P N -D. Fy�_- ---- — N -Q I N -S. fN- I` \ N -CC '� \ 15"I�-91 d'\\ 18 \ --J. -- N -T I 9' 94 N —JJ I� 12 C - H 2 31 _ 89 i .; o,t„N ` I :•ESCOtt \ \ \ — — FR.]GE _ _ \ N — Z \ -.r ¢zC3 i I : -. ,ice-° ;e -DEN ..]t. I I `\ IA 8 IZ” I N — X \95 � --N—W Oar NN L /�' N :I i.:i;•RYE. I I I _ IV -BB :. 62 64 l I i s.- 91 112rt q�{�s SUBJECT PARCEL city of eagan SANITARY SEWER PUBLIC ., WORKS MASTER PLAN DEPARTMENT FIG. *1 approved: standard plate #p: �0: TOM HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR M: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS & RECREATION DATE: JUNE 12, 1985 RE: O'NEIL CENTER — ADVISORY PARKS & REC COMM ACTION The Advisory Parks & Recreation Commission reviewed the proposed rezoning to P.U.D. of the O'Neil Center. There were numerous questions and discussion by the Advisory Commission relative to the overall P.U.D. and in particular, the implications on the need for parks space. Members noted there is additional R3 zoning of approximately 70 acres immediately to the north of the O'Neil Center and 20 acres of R4 zoning of O'Neil property could result in a • substantial number of residents which may require a small neighborhood park. Other factors were also considered including the possibility of replatting of the R3 property and previous discussions with Opus Corporation for park land dedication adjacent to I -35E immediately west of the post office bulk mail center facility. Because of the number of issues pertaining to parks and the uncertainty of a number of issues, Commission asked staff to prepare a report concerning these items. In summation, Commission asked for staff to prepare a report regarding park land needs in Park Service Section 10E and to look for a site which could provide basic neighborhood amenities based on the current R4 and R3 zoning. KV/js CC: Dale Runkle, City Planner Julie Dykstra, Planning Secretary /Z� APC Minutes May 28, 1985 8. The developer shall prepay future assessment responsibility for the upgrading of Rahn Road at the rate in effect at final'platting, and all costs for the installation of on-site improvements, including trailway, shall be the responsibility of this development. 9. A variance for lot coverage shall be obtained by the developer prior to final platting. 10. All units shall be constructed as to be accessible to handicapped persons. 11. The only ingress and egress to the garage area will be off Rahn Road. 12. All units shall be owned and occupied by handicapped persons, unless • the City Attorney's office determines that such a requirement is not legal under the State and Federal Housing Laws. Voting in favor were Harrison, Bohne, and McCrea; voting against were Trygg and Mulrooney. The chair abstained. The motion passed. O'NEIL CENTER - REZONING Chairman Hall convened the public hearing on the application of R. J. O'Neil for rezoning from A (Agricultural) to PD (Planned Development) for approximately 100 acres, located in the south half of Section 10, north of Yankee Doodle Road, west of Lexington Avenue, and east of I -35E. Dale Runkle introduced the application and summarized the staff report of May 21, 1985. He stated that the Comprehensive Land Use Guide designates this property as R - III, 6 to 12 units per acre, that one of the accesses to Yankee Doodle Road might have to be moved, that areas D and L are designated for ponding use, and • that while City staff has determined that there is adequate commercial space zoned in the City at this time, that the application should still be reviewed on its own merits. Harold Sheff, attorney for the O'Neils appeared on behalf of the applicants and stated that Bill Price of Suburban Engineering and John Klein were present and would discuss the application. Bill Price stated that one of the driveways had been shifted and that the actual location would not be resolved until Dakota County reviewed the proposal, that O'Neil is making the proposal at this time because of other development in the area, that areas D and l would play an intricate role in the city's storm water ponding and drainage plan, that because of the severe slopes the development would work around the ponds and use them as amenities, and that one sanitary sewer connection to the southwest has been eliminated because of the extreme cost, but that the other three proposed sanitary sewer connections would not need revision. John Klein appeared and mentioned that the proposal is triggered by the request for cooperation concerning ponding, that the applicant cannot determine how to cooperate until he knows the ponding configuration, that apartments would have more of an impact on utilities than a commercial development, that if the 100 acres in question as well as the property /30 5 APC Minutes May 28, 1985 immediately to the north all developed as multiple, 2,044 apartment units could conceivably be included in the area, that the high-tech office warehouse areas would be similar to what was approved for Opus Corporation, and that the buildings would have attractive exterior, not simply concrete block exteriors. Price noted that possible entrances near the southeast corner of the development on Yankee Doodle Road would be included only if Dakota County approved the access. Stan Ketchum, the owner of property on Lexington Avenue just north of Yankee Doodle Road and immediately adjacent to the proposed development's access to Lexington Avenue, appeared and opposed the application on the basis that it would substantially increase truck traffic in the area, that the use of all kinds of commercial and multiple uses is haphazard planning, and that the City is already over -built as to this type of development. John Klein stated that much of the traffic on Lexington Avenue exists because I -35W is not yet completed. Mr. Ketchum responded that the project to the south of • Yankee Doodle Road has no[ yet been built and would add substantially to the current traffic. Mulrooney noted that since the only request at this time is for rezoning, the question is whether this is the most appropriate zoning for the area. McCrea stated that she is opposed to more commercial property in Eagan, that if all freeway interchanges go commercial, there will be a lot of strip zoning, that some cities have not allowed commercial rezoning near freeways until other commercial areas in the cities develop, in order to determine whether the additional commercial space is necessary. Harrison stated that high-tech office warehouse is not appropriate for commercial property and should be on Industrial zoned property. In response to a question from Trygg, Hefti answered that if the property develops for commercial uses, the potential use of sanitary sewer would be reduced, but that he could not say for sure that the current sanitary sewer could handle the load without knowing how the property to the east of the proposal develops. Harrison asked why the City could not condemn the necessary ponding easements rather than discuss this proposal as a means of settling the storm sewer easement question. Hall stated that to some extent, the City had pushed the developer in coming up with the proposal as a result of the City's need for storm sewer. Harrison moved that the application of R. J. O'Neil for rezoning from A (Agricultural) to PD (Planned Development) for approximately 100 acres located in the property describe above, be recommended for denial for the following mentioned above and the following: 1. That the City of Eagan already has an excess of commercial property. zoned. 2. That the property is already designated for R -III use on the Land Use Guide. 3. That office/warehouse use should be located in Limited Industrial property, not commercial property. McCrea seconded the motion. All members voted in favor, except the Chair, who abstained. /3/ 6 • • Agenda Information June 18, 1985, City Page Twenty -Eight Memo Council Meeting PRELIMINARY PLAT SUNSET 8TH ADDITION D. Sunset 8th Addition for a Preliminary Plat of Sunset 8th Addition, Consisting of 3 Single Family Lots on 2 Acres --A public hearing was held by the Advisory Planning Commission held at their last regular meeting held on May 28, 1985 to consider an application to replat Lot 7, Block 1 of Sunset 3rd Addition into 3 single family lots to be renamed Sunset 8th Addition. The Advisory Planning Commission is recommending approval of this preliminary plat subject to conditions of the staff report with an added condition that staff be able to add a 10 foot front setback variance for Lot 1 if determined necessary to allow proper construction of the building. For additional information on this item, refer to a report prepared by the Planning and Engineering Departments enclosed on pages X33 through /. The Advisory Planning Commission is recommending a cash dedication per their regular meeting in June 1985. For additional information on this item, refer to the APC minutes. A copy is enclosed on pages /j' . ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: preliminary plat of Sunset 8th Addition. i3 7-- To approve or deny the CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY PLAT - SUNSET 8TH ADDITION APPLICANT: TRI -LAND, INC. - BRADLEY J SWENSON LOCATION: PART OF THE S'h OF THE NW'h, SECTION 25 EXISTING ZONING: R-1 (RESIDENTIAL SINGLE DISTRICT) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: MAY 28, 1985 DATE OF REPORT: MAY 22, 1985 REPORTED BY: PLANNING & ENGINEERING DEPTS. • APPLICATION SUBMITTED: An application has been submitted to. replat Lot 7, Sunset 3rd Addition into 3 single family lots and renamed Sunset 8th Addition. ZONING & LAND USE: Presently, the parcel is zoned R-1 and would allow single family residents.. The Comprehensive Guide also designates this parcel as R-1 (residential single district) and would allow a density of 0 - 3 dwelling units per acre. COMMENTS: In 1983, the applicant submitted an application and platted Sunset 3rd Addition consisting of 7 single family lots at which time the owner of the property lived on lot 7. It would be difficult to develop the remaining 3 acres because of the topography of the area as it is very low and a substantial amount of fill would have to be obtained in order to make the lots develop- able. • The owner has an existing house on what is lot 3 of the 8th Addition. The lots being created, lots 1 & 2, are on the westerly portion of the property and fill will have to be obtained and a grading plan submitted in order to have these be. buildable lots. Staff understands that the road elevation will be lowered approx. 5 - 6' in the general area of lots 1 & 2 increasing the feasibility of these 2 lots. Golden Meadow Rd is now being proposed to be upgraded and installed to provide circulation to Northview Meadows. With the construction and assessments of this road, the owner was forced to try to salvage 2 additional lots to help offset the cost of improvements to Golden Meadow Rd. GRADING/DRAINAGE: The existing topography generally consists of moderate to steeply sloping grassland. The moderate slopes (less than 10%) cover the vast majority of lots 2 & 3. The very steep slopes (greater than 208) occur within lot 1. The slopes on lot 1 will be softened somewhat by the lowering of Golden Meadow Rd. Under Project #418-R, Golden Meadow Rd will be lowered approx. 5' - 6' across the frontage of lot 1. Some of the excess material generated from the lowering of this road will be placed as fill material in lot 1. Staff is not aware•of the exact amount of fill, or what the finished contours will look like. A 10' setback Variance may be necessary for lot 1. A proposed grading 133 PRELIMINARY PLAT - SUNSET 8TH ADD MAY 28, 1985 PAGE 2 plan over this area would be beneficial in determining the necessity of this Variance. No grading plan was submitted to Staff for review with this application. Therefore, a condition for approval of this proposed Preliminary Plat must include that a detailed grading and erosion control plan be submitted to Staff. UTILITIES: Project #418-R is under construction and provides for the installation of sanitary sewer and watermain to service this proposed development. STREETS: Project #418-R also provides for the installation of Golden Meadow Rd along the entire frontage of this proposed develop- ment. Completion of this segment of Golden Meadow Rd under Project #418-R will complete the connection of the Northview Addition to Dodd Rd. RIGHT-OF-WAY/EASEMENTS: This development shall dedicate a 30' half right-of-way for Golden Meadow Rd. The City presently has a highway easement for this portion of right-of-way. The dedication of this right-of-way with this proposed development will be much neater because the right-of-way will be included with the plat rather than a separate document. Utility & drainage easements shall be dedicated adjacent public right-of-way and interior lot lines as required by City Code. ASSESSMENTS: All trunk area related assessments have been levied over this proposed development. No trunk related projects will be required as a result of this development. CONDITIONS: • 1. No Variances be allowed on lots 1 & 2 or the grading plan • and house pad elevations should be shown at this time to determine if a Variance will be required from the front setback. 2. All standard plat conditions shall apply. 3. A 30' half right-of-way be dedicated on the plat for Golden Meadow Rd. 4. All general engineering recommendations, which apply to this development, be adhered to. CITY OF EACAN SUBJECT: REZONING AND PRELIMINARY PLAT - SUNSET 3RD ADDITION APPLICANT: TRI -LAND INC., BRADLEY J. SWENSON LOCATION: PART OF THE S' OF THE NA OF SECTION 25 EXISTING ZONING: A (AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: JULY 26, 1983 DATE OF REPORT: JULY 20, 1983 REPORTED BY: DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER • APPLICATION SUBMITTED: The first application submitted is a request to rezone approximately 5 acres from A (Agricultural) to R-1 (Residen- tial Single District) located in part of the S' of the NW; of Section 25. The second application submitted is a request for preliminary plat approval, Sunset 3rd Addition, which would consist of approximately 5 acres and contain 7 single family lots. ZONING AND LAND USE Presently, the parcel is zoned Agricultural and would only allow one home per 5 acres. The Comprehensive Guide Plan designates this par- cel as R-1 (Residential Single District) and would allow a density of 0-3 dwelling units per acre'. • COMMENTS The proposed parcel is located directly east of Overview Estates Re - plat, a single family residential area. To the north is .Sunset 2nd Addition, which is a subdivision that was recently approved also con- taining single family lots. The property to the west is presently large lots or basically undeveloped, and the area to the south is comprised of large 5 -acre agriculturally -zoned tracts. Access to this parcel would be by Golden Meadow Road which has been improved to the westerly edge of Overview Estates. The applicant is proposing to construct a cul-de-sac, Golden Meadow Court, which would provide access to six single family lots. Lot 7 presently is the homestead of the original property owner and wishes to include his home in this particular plat. The reason Lot 7 is so large is that the only buildable portion of the lot is on the easterly side where the existing home is located. The area westerly will be a ponding area, or a low area, which will probably not be developed in the near future. Therefore, the applicant is requesting the six lots 135 CITY OF EAGAN REZONING AND PRELIMINARY PLAT - SUNSET 3RD ADDITION JULY 26, 1983 PAGE TWO and platting his own home as Lot 7 which would contain the rest of the acreage. In review of this preliminary plat, the first six lots contain 12,000 square feet and a minimum of 85' frontage at the 30' setback. There- fore, all lots in this preliminary plat meet the minimum R-1 zoning standards. If approved, the preliminary plat should be subject to the following conditions: 1) No variances be allowed for side setbacks except for topograph- ic or vegetation reasons. • 2) The plat shall be subject to the Park Commission's review for park dedication. 3) A development agreement shall be entered into and signed by the applicant prior to final plat application. DCR/jach ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS 4) If streets and utilities are to be installed privately, then the plans and specifications shall be prepared by a registered engi- neer in accordance with City standards. 5) In addition to typical utility and drainage easements, a 20' utility easement shall be required over the common lot line be- • tween Lots 3 and 4,and an easement of sufficient width over the westerly portion of Lot 7 will also be required for storm sewer. 6) A 30' half right-of-way shall be dedicated for Golden Meadow Road. 7) All costs associated with extending the existing Golden Meadow Road and the utilities within Golden Meadow Road and also the internal street and utilities shall be the sole responsibility of this development. RMH/jach MEMO TO: THE ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION, C/O DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER FROM: RICHARD M. HEFTI, ASSISTANT CITY ENGINEER DATE: JULY 21, 1963 SUBJECT: SUNSET 3RD ADDITION - PRELIMINARY PLAT The Engineering Division of the Department of Public Works has the following comments for consideration by the Planning Commission and City Council regarding this proposed development. I. DRAINAGE/TOPOGRAPHY This proposed development is located within the SW; of the NA of Section 25, just west of Overview Estates and north of Golden Mea- dow Road. The topography for this area consists of rolling terrain. The slopes associated with this terrain are approximately 7-8% over most of this parcel except the northwest corner where the slopes approach 20% to the natural existing depression located there. The existing drainage for Lots 1-6 around Golden Meadow Court is gen- erally to the south, towards Golden Meadow Road while the drainage over Lot 7 is towards the depression located near the northwest cor- ner of this lot. The proposed grading over this parcel will be limited to the grad- ing within Golden Meadow Court since the existing topography can be easily adapted to building upon. Subsequently, the drainage will remain the same as it is presently. Lot 7 contains the existing house on this parcel and would require no grading since the north- westerly portion of this lot is considered unbuildable due to the steep slopes and huge amounts of fill which would be required to try to make it buildable. The drainage from Golden Meadow Court is being proposed to be collected by storm sewer and deposited with- in the 24" storm sewer located within Golden Meadow Road. This, in turn, outlets into Schwanz Lake located to the southwest of this development. Figure 1 illustrates this development's location with- in the Schwanz Lake (Pond LP -32) area. Presently this pond does not have an outlet, however, a feasibility report for installing the trunk storm sewer outlet to this pond has been authorized by the Council with construction being anticipated to begin this fall. II. UTILITIES Utilities exist within Golden Meadow Road in the proximity of this proposed development of sufficient size, capacity and depth to pro- vide service to it. Figure 2 reveals the existing utilities within Golden Meadow Road and includes a 24" storm sewer, an 8" water main, and an 8" sanitary sewer. To service this parcel with utilities, it will be necessary to ex- tend both the water main and sanitary sewer within Golden Meadow Road to the west and terminate at a point at least 60' west of the 1,,37 ENGINEERING REPORT SUNSET 3RD ADDITION JULY 26, 1983 PAGE TWO east lot line of Lot 7. Golden Meadow Court is proposed to be ser- viced from the utilities within Golden Meadow Road. An 8" sewer will be required to be constructed within Golden Meadow Court along with a 6" water main which shall extend to the north property line of this parcel to connect with the proposed water main for Sunset 2nd Addition. Meanwhile, it is being proposed to extend a short lead from the existing storm sewer to the north to intercept the runoff from Golden Meadow Court. III. STREETS Access to this proposed development is currently from Golden Meadow Road. This is presently a paved City street, 34' wide with concret� curb and gutter to approximately the east property line of this pro posed development. From there it extends west as a gravel road and ends approximately 200' west of the east line of Lot 7. From there, it is just a dirt trail to the end of the parcel. The proposed access to the internal Lots 1-6, Block 1 is by way of Golden Meadow Court which is a 130' cul-de-sac off of Golden Meadow Road. This is well within the maximum length for cul-de-sacs as outlined in the City Code. It is recommended that Golden Meadow Road be constructed to its ultimate design of 34' wide bituminous surfacing with concrete curb and gutter to a point at least 60' west of the east line of Lot 7. Similarly, Golden Meadow Court should also be 34' wide with concrete curb and gutter and bituminous sur- facing. No trailways or sidewalks will be required since Golden Meadow Road is not a collector street. IV. RIGHT-OF-WAY/EASEMENTS • West of Overview Estates, Golden Meadow Road exists as a 60' ease- ment which was dedicated in 1971. Nevertheless, this proposed de- velopment should dedicate a 30' half right-of-way for Golden Mea- dow Road along with this proposed preliminary plat. In addition, Golden Meadow Court is proposed to be platted with a 50' right-of- way with the 'cul-de-sac radius being 60'. This right-of-way for Golden Meadow Court shall be dedicated with this plat. A typical 10' utility easement shall be dedicated along all public- ly dedicated right-of-way. In addition, a 10' drainage and utility easement shall be dedicated over all interior lot lines with a 5' drainage and utility easement being dedicated adjacent to all ex- terior lot lines. An exception to this would be that a 20' ease- ment should be dedicated over the common lot line between Lots 3 and 4 to incorporate the proposed water main. Finally, a utility easement of sufficient width will be required for storm sewer out- let construction resulting from the Sunset 1st and 2nd Additions. At this time, it is not possible to determine an exact location for this easement, however, it will probably be located within the wes- tern portion of Lot 7. The exact location will not be known until I% ENGINEERING REPORT SUNSET 3RD ADDITION JULY 26, 1983 PAGE THREE preparation of final plans have been completed. V. ASSESSMENTS A check on assessments has revealed that both trunk area water and trunk area sanitary sewer have been previously assessed, leaving only trunk area storm sewer to be assessed. However, this devel- opment's responsibility for this assessment has been fulfilled as it will be listed as a pending assessment under Project 383 (Schwanz Lake trunk storm sewer outlet). All costs associated with extending existing utilities and streets and also installing the internal utilities and streets shall be the • sole responsibility of this development. I will be available to discuss any aspect of this report in detail with the Advisory Planning Commission at their meeting on July 26, 1983. Respectfully submitted, Richard M. Hef , P.E. Assistant City Engineer RMH/jach Pi X39 r-/ v j 62_6 1 866.0 817.0 6-a+ , /..; oj8% 17 862.7 8670 8600 J J r 6P-4 8880- I ,J " 852,0 _ - 855.0 v� LS -170 y, / �:/• / II '; JP -9 _ ryRq JP -23 8170 '-----"J=, •'� 6522 III 8220=�. _ _ 'z� / \ ._ •_./�"' 855.3 _ ---: "3J -aa JP -34 i/ 840.0 4 684.0 J -s 8900 ri J-, 1''. f� \J-• JP -22 \ '=1 JP -24 8210 \\i'•. 1 ,_.8450-�-!l- 817.28'" 8360 JP -25' JP -29 - vI � \ L.9-IBI/\➢\`�`e�t' B/9!, ; '\ 6170 9400 I 0180 8040 --- J a4 r8••�)-6t�, 'P-43 - "I 9000 3540 9560 / ..':I J-EO.� . 966.0 LP-40 \�►� 9730 %-8,840-- `Pr41''i'"-.- 698.0 '-'aP.-50 ""LP -61 9770 'LP 9070 - ----- - 8920 - 864.4 ; 9170- - _ -'. 8940. ___. B@ 0 ,.9/BO �1• .'k.4h4'$1Lc C574rp 46 -V 900.0 _ 8 92�!P-39 B /Q"LP-33/'LP-31 `�•I `J 93 ] �`c=�ll8862_:•898.5 Y•-: ��- 'i 8880 ('9070 I ii'I LP -30 i �- 909.04: 906.3 ,51 /•�}s --"S, LP -34 1�\ I'...;AAI : iBO60 9/6.0 ,(668.0' lrP.;B l,iJ.-25 I-J•�,y�• 8790 \\ Vz• -" LP 29 9070 _'.'• - - .8780 .,LP -37 24 /, -8850 LP 49 ... _ -67g_ x`9160 '� 9/50 I LS:261 882.0--tP=33 - 9/BO-. ) _ Ff ?� 86206 B6a0 \�• ) S'_��)„ yG� - i^'LP-26 v/ L 6138 LP•45` - .��. 1`1/1✓\ 9/30 ' O 875.0 881.3 --- '1 '7 / •� .lrOTA J LP -25 1r- j �260 U'JH TY E Sox] 9170 P:. R 1 I �,� 9040 - -- .� /. LP -27 914.2 9/7! i' - -' LP -24 'I LP'26 922.0 - :.a YE BB60 920 .,gPAO `i /b 9260 9068++s1 9204 LP -19 1 :OD• ;.>a. 9002 - - \ - 900.0 2:K L Lp44 LP -IS F'1 GrURE 1 LP -230 926 . d6UU \O.;v Ea -9PP.0 -�/6. I 856.] _ =1 864,0 OP -IB -•/ /-rJP-l4 ' OP•7 887,0 870.0 / '� 877.0 1 y � ' 6330 X8460 ;. \Jl -_ 8720 8903 rz2 8922 8940 83 0� 8480 j�'• v 8970--� JP -41 • - 886.3 /�•T� / 1 "' / 887.0 "�/��L�] L5:! I 626O0=42 J'Y -. 88870\LSA4 2.JP-40 84/. (% PS JP -32 JP -11 8137 886.0. I - - 8900 _ I JP•44 JP -31 i JP -39.-. _ i 892.0:..'--? . BJ_00. ��J I 890] 8770 .- 8960 4D. J#� BBOO 1- i1 n Jl--d - } ^i JP -19 \ J -P m}a�4o } 4_Q 872.7 } 8820 /• r-/ v j 62_6 1 866.0 817.0 6-a+ , /..; oj8% 17 862.7 8670 8600 J J r 6P-4 8880- I ,J " 852,0 _ - 855.0 v� LS -170 y, / �:/• / II '; JP -9 _ ryRq JP -23 8170 '-----"J=, •'� 6522 III 8220=�. _ _ 'z� / \ ._ •_./�"' 855.3 _ ---: "3J -aa JP -34 i/ 840.0 4 684.0 J -s 8900 ri J-, 1''. f� \J-• JP -22 \ '=1 JP -24 8210 \\i'•. 1 ,_.8450-�-!l- 817.28'" 8360 JP -25' JP -29 - vI � \ L.9-IBI/\➢\`�`e�t' B/9!, ; '\ 6170 9400 I 0180 8040 --- J a4 r8••�)-6t�, 'P-43 - "I 9000 3540 9560 / ..':I J-EO.� . 966.0 LP-40 \�►� 9730 %-8,840-- `Pr41''i'"-.- 698.0 '-'aP.-50 ""LP -61 9770 'LP 9070 - ----- - 8920 - 864.4 ; 9170- - _ -'. 8940. ___. B@ 0 ,.9/BO �1• .'k.4h4'$1Lc C574rp 46 -V 900.0 _ 8 92�!P-39 B /Q"LP-33/'LP-31 `�•I `J 93 ] �`c=�ll8862_:•898.5 Y•-: ��- 'i 8880 ('9070 I ii'I LP -30 i �- 909.04: 906.3 ,51 /•�}s --"S, LP -34 1�\ I'...;AAI : iBO60 9/6.0 ,(668.0' lrP.;B l,iJ.-25 I-J•�,y�• 8790 \\ Vz• -" LP 29 9070 _'.'• - - .8780 .,LP -37 24 /, -8850 LP 49 ... _ -67g_ x`9160 '� 9/50 I LS:261 882.0--tP=33 - 9/BO-. ) _ Ff ?� 86206 B6a0 \�• ) S'_��)„ yG� - i^'LP-26 v/ L 6138 LP•45` - .��. 1`1/1✓\ 9/30 ' O 875.0 881.3 --- '1 '7 / •� .lrOTA J LP -25 1r- j �260 U'JH TY E Sox] 9170 P:. R 1 I �,� 9040 - -- .� /. LP -27 914.2 9/7! i' - -' LP -24 'I LP'26 922.0 - :.a YE BB60 920 .,gPAO `i /b 9260 9068++s1 9204 LP -19 1 :OD• ;.>a. 9002 - - \ - 900.0 2:K L Lp44 LP -IS F'1 GrURE 1 LP -230 926 . 0�20,r i -9PP.0 -�/6. w i • • N I O> -- a ll' 4e 133115 335 I m 1 Ul I Z 1 1 1 Ir v-a[T +t"M .1y >r �� 71i1 ✓4 M}�Y p4 'IeR n�f �ri�i r� t a r.----�+�-w•.-r.. .., .. n fI'.1� h�'�ia'S�+�.(��{jL %ai .��i� ] Ia+l '�+ �a r.. #) Pt d S [ t ir�,tlsS; L.i'ij �cr.i�?�t '.•`e N' [ � ---__. ' ii trf '��i �.}}I,�l �11f Y 1((e}� a al � ILY t R i4 6�! Jy�� ' 7 tY U' l � � '• � f ' ..:.. �'!` "l.'�INi-"'s!`�� d� �' LYnt�l•�Itho�+�W .71�1'9Y y.\I.�a�a,>. IA.Y T, � -+. .t_..r ='-i'1 . , �fi u.��?y 't 'Fh�' ah ,Fe;''t+t��-ilj/�• j1f �tt(,t`•f �'•1�� 1 .��1 � �.\t.L�! �"t -.."c. �T r„tF1 j^'�'TI �'ti- mo.a7 CKM0 020-2 020.29 �I 022-27 VD DRIVE ' _—!�— -oma-- — i rij 3^n \ 040-29 070.29 0400..29 I � I 021-26 W W V: a ADDL LASSO _= ."c 2 -� AgDI I� R H;CKMORE ... DR i O A Oi CO -29 10 .cr s cr 2 eu.Lo- � N � CO -29 .k PRELIMINARY PIAT: SUNSET 3RD ADDITION VICINITY MAP ti TRI -LAND CO. SHEET 1 OF 3 ITT I -T T IT" IMP a . TRI -LAND CO. SHEET 1 OF 3 PRELIMINARY PLAT. SUNSET 3RD ADDITION SCS ,1. . Ill,� , SCALE 0640' °.° .. w 116 COUNTY .°. No... VICINITY MAP ' d 4 N rH / F.• w m `LJ2 MaIle -i 0 I! / 0 M w 0 ....v ..0 .n....n w. .n •m n nm r EXISTING & PROPOSED CONTOURS TRI -LAND CO. SHEET 2 CF 3 NO 114 as 114 eo •. IT o° SITE DATA .. 1.. GO 114 COUNT, 00. 00. ,. VICINITY MAP 0 PRELIMINARY PLAT: SUNSET 3RD ADDITION N SCALE 1" 40' 4� ji 3 r• Ise Lu J O� - -. GOLDEN MEAD W RD, IT SITE DATA MrnW ..Y W� I.pnW YI. m1 n np. Y ' YN.W Is. YA•YY....W UTILITY PLAN YY.Ii YIOYI• � - __ _- TRI -LAND CO. SHEET 3 OF 3 - / MtNOWA SMT:':. /� '/.. _ _•'1� '6!17r GB RB '41iniit`—rik!?TT�% .. - .I ,p _:Lid. u,..o. cTi.�Y ..Ind.- �/ GOLF ,`i COMMERCIAL PLANNED CEVELOPMENT ' .. _ .. �R I•:. I�:;�`yl-�•'� .. -Intl.:, . ' �'�. % .il. -c•i:.;.•'� :IBJ;: . 1 - .Ind 7. ,i i E• 'i{ .�B ""RII •. - ,. /"�. .:�.�•f I: !' •III i — -- — _ — ----- --- •__ -- �R Ind �. H GB -:5 R-I, i i -.. p... RI Ind .` ,� �. — RBD, • iRdV I „�.. :.Ind.. .. Ind. .- __ J. NB' •` R-0I .-:; ..R-III R-III • _ -D -^CSD `rR_p� ,,^.•� �- R-III �«:: ^.l R_II CSC- is. PF• - _-4—find.• '3 Rdl CRL7! ' �— . _ — LB IrRd-III. aIMN .. I:;y :i R•� :.Y - -p- R-11 P- Ind- w R-III wl "a •J' RII '1�R(a' j E>,('). IEJ R-II ' �.-. R-1 ..� -III •-Rk': , : • ...P �..'�'!e •RR-11 'I' _,I .I '.� ALLY -'R-I R-11' R-11 lNr \ Com."_..'- .�:•�- - R.p�HS i11 \ik .�j E�j " R. Lr R-11 ' 7!!'R-II .� LLJ / `�, • ��:� .' I. I U \E P . _ - r �.It P Q" �•-'.R;li_°% It��w V�TCR R-II ....... .. _ R-11L R-olll J= Ngcg '• I�� NB RB R-III '. r.: • ..•. u s V. RE: R-lit. R'Ill RI_,11 -'°; i R-III CSC/GB/LB R_lll .. ' , a b �, .`.RID - - •.^— R I : �.: " R-II , 2• R-II.:P.. ,;:�:::'e±',�e?�,� ® \ R-II. /� �i.'� .e: ..t.� _ �' _R•I ::`�:;:•:'�� P .- t•.p.n-F-l._.J ";�: fi-I '_-R Rl I[�P . ,R r , !. CSC 5 • kr`i„dY . B , 7LB- - - FI�GOLF P 11_RII -. R-1R-II,• - �:' . P`"1 f ! •� R-II iuG,•:iP.1A WI J �. �.��.a P LE *' •:A� II.Er '.1 �• ' c- .ROSEWOIN , A GB 1-i ; FTC. S. A. H *t 30 AUDITOR'S SUM NO.42 DL Do PmcsL A PK .......... N- / A /-PK A A R-1 R V R R-1 OVER A APC Minutes July 26, 1983 SUNSET 3RD ADDITION - REZONING AND PRELIMINARY PLAT The hearing regarding the application of Tri -Land, Inc, and Bradley J. Swenson to rezone approximately 5 acres from A (Agricultural) to R-1 (Residen- tial Single District) and for preliminary plat approval of Sunset 3rd Addi- tion, containing 5 acres and 7 single family lots was convened by Chairman Charles Hall. After explanation of the application by Mr. Runkle, it was noted that Lot 7 is the homestead of the current property owner and would remain intact. The lots all conform with the minimum frontage and square footage requirements and noted that Lot 7 would not be easily subdividable. He stated that a neighborhood meeting had been held and there are no objec- tions from surrounding property owners. Wilkins moved, Krob seconded the motion to recommend approval of the application, for rezoning from A (Agri- cultural) to R-1 (Residential Single District). All voted yes. Then Wilkins moved, Mulroor.ey seconded the motion to recommend approval of the application for preliminary plat approval, subject to the following conditions: 1. No variances shall be allowed for side yard setbacks except for • topographic or vegetation reasons. 2. The plat shall be subject to the Park Commission's review for park dedication. 3. A development agreement shall be entered into and signed by the applicant prior to final plat application. 4. If streets and utilities are to be installed privately, then the plans and specifications shall be prepared by a registered engineer in accordance with City standards. 5. In addition to typical utility and drainage easements, a 20 foot utility easement shall be dedicated over the common lot line between Lots 3 and 4, and an easement of sufficient width over the westerly portion of Lot 7 will also be dedicated for storm sewer. 6. A 30 foot half right-of-way shall be dedicated for Golden Meadow Road. 7. All costs associated with extending the existing Golden Meadow Road and the utilities within Golden Meadow Road and also the internal street and utilities shall be the sole responsibility of this development. All voted in favor. I " 00238 Council Minutes August 16, 1983 SUNSET 3RD ADDITION - PREXOMNARY PLAT AND REZONING The application of Tri -Land Company for rezoning and preliminary plat approval of Sunset 3rd Addition was submitted to the Council. The Advisory Planning Commission recommended approval of the application to rezone from Agricultural to Single Family and for preliminary plat approval. Mr. Runkle presented the application to the Council and noted that Lot 7 which includes the existing homestead, consists of 3 acres and stated it would be very difficult to subdivide that parcel. Brad Swenson was present and further stated that Lot 7 cannot feasibly be subdivided, but it was suggested the plan for subdivision be submitted prior to final plat approval. Egan moved to approve the rezoning of the property as requested, Thomas seconded the motion. • All voted in favor. Smith then moved, Wachter seconded the motion to approve the application for preliminary plat approval with the rollowing conditions: I. That the developers submit a proposed overlay for Lot 7, consisting of the 3 acre lot. 2. .No variances shall be allowed for side yard setbacks except for topographic or vegetation reasons. 3. The plat shall be subject to the Park Commission's review for park dedication. 4. A development agreement shall be entered into and signed by the applicant prior to final plat application. 5. If streets and utilities are to be installed privately, then the plans and specifications shall be prepared by a registered engineer in accor- dance with City standards. 6. In addition to typical utility and drainage easements, a 20 foot utility easement shall be dedicated over the common lot line between Lots 3 and 4, and an easement of sufficient width over the westerly portion of Lot 7 will also be dedicated for storm sewer. Road. 7. A 30 foot half right-of-way shall be dedicated for Golden Meadow 8. All costs associated with extending the existing Golden Meadow Road and the utilities within Golden Meadow Road and also the internal street and utilities shall be the sole responsibility of this development. All voted yes. Alf SEE PLAT FI R R1_Sd I VFS OTT RC)AG'• i LEXINGTON - =�— SOUARE P &10RTHVIEW P A / I `\ PF . : I I ~p _ R - I r. AUC cENSINGT VI a I �r^r ^T T'..'__. PLACE I ~" N(E1SW j�; DDLE Ist ADD. PDr 75-1 ✓;� IEw rr_�r Gy'_ G 1lILL I �pw��.� I/ •`a::7 I I I L ii i PARK WALNUT wit " ' I i SCHWANZ LAKE) �KWOOD ?ARK.^— /C/itE13HTC dlrA�uv l:t J�Ii.. OAK POND 4HiLl PA 16' a C� SO.OAKS PARK OVERHILII SW. 1/4 SEC. 24, T. 27, R.23 .��•-•^COUNTY `�"•TATE -Al n,i. HIGHWAY; $ NO. *� '-V o� 3 � i y _ v _ • n m 9 __. n. em.. - • yy rr vYORNTOWNr••"PLACEm T ..y ,, �. - .r• . ... .m .. .m .m is 1 • �• 1\ �• P W •m • 'as DL NO MN • \ • :: • i,'T a •+1 �• - • { • �� • • • i LASSO _ L_A NE �:•sn t Le • • � Rim ]:em'we• Fl 1144 Elf • yj�nli � •.�.��tdj5t` •, :r .Iw.0 nr.... n. � i � � • � • 2 r !•'.�. - � _ .L so- „gid - - - n n ,•�� • 3 _� •• 1 ^II�" A D I r 10 N 6 I'•Mrnr, mnm !°"" - amus • •,:! l '7�� •, '. ORIV- ^� r .,�HACO^ORE ��' p �:n a: W P. -.-•...._�•w.:.•..•.-...no. rar. • ` `. ,.�cwJ-.,<L .. NS '� •. ¢ ARLar A Db1�1_ON ayn AtPnAn - '••,••.?.oac.xn\ese•o p A • 4s' \ f SUNSET EIGHTH ADDITION 3 \ 04 "V N SCALE' I 0' y° COUNTY P NW W4 NN 1/4 .y % N SCALE 1'= $p y4 y 11 1/♦ 1W 1/• COUNTY AD. NO. 79 J M '� aso r " t ' N F- / / / tts Ove W I r r ' 4r + W d . i MOIL ms gn1R„ tNI MT OF TN 1WLXIl U. MNJ 21 DLNl1YD .l n U"m or M sWID is W MID N.0 1M0; 1f O, OWn MAIM � Lt. mcu'sN OMOY I 51 BRIMS use sa LS 101x1 L, MOON uIIO n DI,Gues a mm DISUM Ism.Os n" MIT OF ul mm of MDmm; T m 91 Kculs AI OMTYI an. T1sT u OF M Dli O LIm ma. c0101N alO' llv r M 1<D1111 1I Oslts u DUTOWl11lIS1 N L waQ1LL mL 1 ; THIO OOO O." RR, m.m I YDO.W. APC Minutes May 28, 1985 SUNSET 8TH ADDITION - PRELIMINARY PLAT Chairman Hall convened the public hearing concerning the application of Tri -Land Properties for preliminary plat approval of Sunset 8th Addition, consisting of three single family lots on 2 acres, located on Lot 7, Block 1 of Sunset 3rd Addition, Section 25, located north of Golden Meadow Road, and west of Golden Meadow Court. Runkle reviewed the application and stated that Lot 3 would need a substantial amount of fill. Tom Rice, the owner of the property, appeared and explained that proposed Lot 2 is proposed to be pie - shaped because of existing buildings on Lot 3, because Lot 1 needs more room to build because of the terrain, and because Lot 2 has a crown and would be easier'to build on. He stated that the variance would be necessary for Lot 1 because of the steep hill and that he hopes that the Lots would be buildable with fill. Runkle stated that each lot is over 12,000 square feet, and that the frontage on Lot 2 is 150 feet. Mulrooney raised the question of whether the variance is premature, and Mr. Rice stated that they were requesting it now in order to avoid going through the whole process again, in order to give them a chance to design the use of the lot from the start. Bohne moved, McCrea seconded the motion to recommend approval of the application of Tri - Land Properties for preliminary plat approval of Sunset 8th Addition, consisting of 3 single family lots on 2 acres, located on Lot 7, Block 1, Sunset 3rd Addition, on the property described above, subject to the following conditions: 1. No variance shall be allowed for Lot 2. 2. A front -yard variance for Lot 1 shall be allowed only if necessary and only if approved by City staff and not to exceed 10 feet. 3. All standard plat conditions shall apply. 4. Thirty-foot half right-of-way shall be dedicated on the plat for • Golden Meadow Road. 5. All general engineering development shall be adhered to. All members voted in favor. recommendations which apply to this WESTBURY 1ST ADDITION - WAIVER OF PLAT 6 Chairmana onvened the public he:Side ring on a application of Dave Gabbert for waiver o at to adjust a line between Lots 5 and 6, Block 5 of Westbury 1st Additio or foot setback variance to allow a 43 foot setback to Lexington Avenue, red in Section 22 at Lexington Avenue and Westbury Drive. Dale Runkle " troduced the lication and summarized the staff report of May 21, 198 Wally Gabbert appp a- on behalf of the applicant and stated th without the variance or lot spli ly a 29 foot house would be a wed, but with the variance and lot split, a 4 t home could be built, ich is standard for the development. He stated that the develo and city staff missed the fact that a 50 foot setback would be 7 • E Agenda Information June 18, 1985, City Page Twenty -Nine Memo Council Meeting WAIVER OF PLAT & VARIANCE/WESTBDRY IST ADDITION E. Dave Gabbert for a Waiver of Plat to Adjust a Side Lot Line Beween Lots 5 and 6, Block 5 of Westbury 1st Addition and Setback Variance -- A public hearing was held by the Advisory Planning Commission at the May 28, 1985 APC meeting to consider a lot line shift between Lots 5 and 6 and a 7 foot variance from the 50 foot setback to Lexington Avenue for Lot 6. The Advisory Planning Commission is recommending approval of the variance and waiver of plat subject to conditions outlined in the staff report. For additional information on this item, refer to the Planning Department report found on pages 1,o5'6 through ZI�r_. For a copy of action that was taken by the APC, refer to pages /j'rj through T . ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the waiver of plat to adjust a sidelot line between Lots 5 and 6, Block 5, and secondly to approve or deny a 7 foot setback variance to allow a 43 foot setback to Lexington Avenue. •, f CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: WAIVER OF PLAT AND VARIANCE APPLICANT: DAVE GABBERT LOCATION: LOTS 5 & 6, BLOCK 5, WESTBURY 1ST ADDITION EXISTING ZONING: R-1 UNDER THE LEXINGTON SOUTH P.D. DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: MAY 28, 1985 DATE OF REPORT: MAY 21, 1985 REPORTED BY: GREG H. INGRAHAM, ASSISTANT PLANNER • REVIEWED BY: DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER APPLICATION SUMMARY: At the March 19, 1985 City Council meeting, a 15 foot side yard setback variance request for Lot 6 was denied. The applicant is now asking to shift the lot line between Lots 5 & 6 nine (9') feet to the west. In conjunction with the Waiver, the applicant is asking for a seven (71) foot Variance from the 50' setback to Lexington Avenue for Lot 6. The reason for the Waiver and Variance is due to the 84 foot width of Lot 6 which is located at the intersection of Westbury Drive and Lexington Avenue. Without a Waiver or a Variance the building pad for Lot 6 would be limited to 29 feet wide. The Waiver would reduce Lot 5 from 75' to 66' wide and from 9,750 square feet to 8,580 square feet. Lot 6 would increase in width • from 84' to 93' and in size from 11,019 square feet to 12,189 square feet. ' Existing Lots 3 & 4 have lot widths of 69' and 701. With the Waiver the building pad would be 38 feet wide. With the seven (71) foot Variance the building pad width would be 45'. If approved, the Waiver shall be subject to the following condi- tions: 1) Houses shall be designed and located to meet all the setback requirements. No Variance shall be granted for Lot 5. 2) All City ordinances & requirements shall be adhered to. 146 dNK R-2 GSLBGco�=4 (rCSC 18 -2 R-4 -- �� LVESCOTT LB a;UITIGiL\ O'LPEA RY PARK, CARRIAGE 41LLS QK A �` GOLF GARDEN _ 1 4 `r • - j — n: r 3 rOPF Oc ROAD` CROSrI.tTSS ti ;�QaAILS (' F R :. SAG A N --- . R-4 R 7-J71 A T C" r.t :-11 - L / i i LEXINGTON _ r fir^ ^+. jRiY A ADD. -- T "l SuP'i7w SQUARE F NO 2 .LE NORTNVIE`N �. PIt FK t I BERRY FATC -I PARK - `\° ^Arq '� AGA h - o 'If , L, PlC i _ \\NNNN PF int i PbRK fr 157 R' A 1 /LI .+ DELMAR H. SCHWANZ LANDSURVEVOR3t lV(.. Registered UndW Laws of The State of Minnewts 2978 — 149TH STREET W. — BOX M ROSEMOUNT. MINNESOTA 98989 PHONE 812 423-1789 SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE ' M O O C1 W�- 37-e , l e V 10,010E a 7570 F 1Z s �1WeI s Existing configuration o.^ Lots 5 and 6, Block 5 I I WESTBURY FIRST ADDITION, O �I 995v Sq.G% ;,,,s O //,o 0 / � �50,r-r, i Q a uri�7y �FASrI /p 0 75,0 9.09 93.5-2 t I _ Q r I Imo- S O //,o 0 / � �50,r-r, i Q a uri�7y �FASrI /p 0 75,0 9.09 93.5-2 D7;:f „146 E / d f/6/ 7y E1%5r71, i -7- PKoPcL� /✓�� /-o Scale: I inch of 50 feet M 7 V ARI N'1�5 lV I r I Imo- S Proposed rearrangement 4I O f oLots 5 °•lo::k 5, and 6, WESTBURY FIRST`S M cp ADLITIUN. D7;:f „146 E / d f/6/ 7y E1%5r71, i -7- PKoPcL� /✓�� /-o Scale: I inch of 50 feet M 7 V ARI N'1�5 lV APC Minutes May 28, 1985 SUNSET 8TH ADDITION - PRELIMINARY PLAT Chairman Hall convened the public hearing concerning the application of Tri nd Properties for preliminary plat approval of Sunset 8th Addition, consi ing of three single family lots on 2 acres, located on Lot 7/taoted Block 1 of Sun t 3rd Addition, Section 25, located north of Golden Meaad, and west o Golden Meadow Court. Runkle reviewed the application anthat Lot 3 wo ld need a substantial amount of fill. Tom Rice, the oof the property, ppeared and explained that proposed Lot 2 is pro deed to be pie - shaped bed use of existing buildings on Lot 3, because Lo needs more room to build bec use of the terrain, and because Lot 2 has a crown and would be easier to bui on. He stated that the variance would,be necessary for Lot 1 because of th steep hill and that he hopes that the/lots would be buildable with fill. Runk stated that each lot is over 12,000 square feet, and that • the frontage on Lo 2 is 150 feet. Mulrooney raised the question of whether the variance is p emature, and Mr. Rice stated that they were requesting it now in order to avoid oing through the whol5, pprocess again, in order to give them a chance to design the use of the /lot from the start. Bohne moved, McCrea seconded the mo ion to recommend approval of the application of Tri - Land Properties for or '%minary plat approval of Sunset 8th Addition, consisting of 3 single famitson/2 acres, located on Lot 7, Block 1, Sunset 3rd Addition, on theer described above, subject to the following conditions: 1. No variance shall or Lot 2. 2. A front -yard variance for Lot 1 hall be allowed only if necessary and only if approved by City staff and not to exceed 10 feet. /All and plat conditions shall\1y.ot half right-of-way sted on the plat for •Goldd. neral engineering recich apply to this deve be adhered to. All members voted in favor. WESTBURY 1ST ADDITION - WAIVER OF PLAT 6 VARIANCE Chairman Hall convened the public hearing on the application of Dave Gabbert for waiver of plat to adjust a side lot line between Lots 5 and 6, Block 5 of Westbury lat Addition, and for a 7 foot setback variance to allow a 43 foot setback to Lexington Avenue, located in Section 22 at Lexington Avenue and Westbury Drive. Dale Runkle introduced the application and summarized the staff report of May 21, 1985. Wally Gabbert appeared on behalf of the applicant and stated that without the variance or lot split, only a 29 foot house would be allowed, but with the variance and lot split, a 45 foot home could be built, which is standard for the development. He stated that both the developer and city staff missed the fact that a 50 foot setback would be X59 7 APC Minutes May 28, 1985 . " X. required from Lexington Avenue because it is a major street. Mulrooney moved, Harrison seconded the motion to recommend approval of the waiver of plat to adjust the side lot line between Lots 5 and 6, Block 5 of Westbury 1st Addition, 9 feet to the west, and to approve a 7 foot setback variance to allow a 43 foot setback to Lexington Avenue at the property described above, subject to the following conditions: 1. Houses shall be designed and located to meet all the setback requirements. No variance shall be granted for Lot 5. 2. All city Ordinances and requirements shall be adhered to. 3. All drainage and utility easements shall be vacated and relocated to conform with the new lot line. • All members voted in favor. NORDQUIST SIGN COMPANY - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT b VARIANCE Chairman Hall convenes the public hearing on the application of Nordqu'st Sign Company for a conditional use permit for a 27 foot high pylon si and r a variance to allow a 190 square foot sign instead of a stand d 125 sq re foot sign to be located on part of the southwest quarter o Section 2 andof 7, Plainview Addition. Dale Runkle reviewed the application and the staff eport of May 21, 1985. Charles Nolan, the owneXf8rommilHighways he property, appeared and states that the request for the variancne because of visibility problems and the need to provide for visibili #494 and I -35E, t t construction of the parking lot is o�rring at this time, that there wil be a manager of the park liv�tig on the premises, that neighborhood me tinge had been held and the inpue'�of neighbors had been taken into account in pl ning the development, that development will charge • $4.00 per day for pa ing rather than $8.00, a day as charged by the airport, that they would sti put up a sign if/tlie size is restricted to 125 equate feet, that the larger siz is requested'n order to allow the sign to be readable from 1,000 to 1,20 feet away, that advertising at the airport is now allowed by the airport commies' n,�but that the airport will cooperate with a shuttle system. Runkle stated at,Eagan has never allowed a larger business sign. Harrison moved, McCrea,secon ea the motion to recommend denial of the variance to allow a 190 sq "a foot sign and to recommend approval of the conditional use permit subject to the f lowing conditions: '1. The sign shaI not exceed 27 feet i height. 2. The sign shall be located at least 10 fe from any property line. 3. All other City ordinances and requirements sh%be adhered to. 4. a sign shall be oriented perpendicular to35E right-of-way in order to maximize exposure to the freeway and minimize the impact on the adj ent residences. 5. The sign shall not exceed 125 square feet per side. All members voted in favor. /4� Q 8 Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Thirty USE PERMIT/PYLON SIGN FOR NORDQUIST SIGN CO. F. Nordquist Sign Company for Conditional Use Permit for a 27 Foot High Pylon Sign to be Located on Part of the Plainview Addition --A public hearing was held before the Advisory Planning Commission at the May 28, 1985 meeting to consider a conditional use permit for a 27 foot high pylon sign to be located on Lexington Avenue north of Kenneth Drive. The Advisory Planning Commission reviewed past approvals and recommended approval for a pylon sign not to exceed 27 feet in height. For additional information on this item, refer to the City Planning Department report found on pages 16,7- through For a copy of the APC minutes and action on this item, refer to page /WI,( ,tbreuglr� •� For a copy of a letter from Charles Nolan, E -Z Air Park, re to page • ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny a conditional use permit for a 27 foot high pylon sign application. /6/ CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT & VARIANCE APPLICANT: NORDQUIST SIGN COMPANY LOCATION: PART OF THE SW; OF SECTION 2 and LOT 7, PLAINVIEW ADDITION EXISTING ZONING: P.D. - PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PLAINVIEW) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: MAY 28, 1985 DATE OF REPORT: MAY 21, 1985 REPORTED BY: GREG H INGRAHAM, ASSISTANT PLANNER • REVIEWED BY: DALE C RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER APPLICATION SUMMARY: The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit for a 27' high pylon sign to be located along Lexington Avenue, north of Kenneth Drive. The sign would be for the future EZ AIR PARK remote airport parking facility. The Variance request is to allow a 190 square foot sign instead of the standard 125 square foot limitation. The reason behind the Variance request is an attempt to gain more exposure to the nearby 35-E highway corridor. The sign would be located a minimum of 10' from any property line and it is more than 300' from any existing pylon sign. A residential district is located 175' south of the proposed sign location. The sign face would be illuminated from the interior of the sign. • If approved, the Conditional Use shall be subject to the following conditions: 1) The sign shall not exceed 27 feet in height. 2) The sign shall be located at least 10' from any property line. 3) All other City ordinances and requirements shall be adhered to. 4) The sign should be oriented perpendicular to the i -35E right-of- way in order to maximize exposure to the freeway and minimize the impact on the adjacent residents. If approved the Variance shall be subject to the following conditions: 1) The sign shall not exceed 190 square feet per side. If the Variance is not approved then this condition shall be added: 5) The sign shall not exceed 125 square feet per'side. 47,— Lo R EAGANDALE. FIC -11 PARK PD, 74-2KIC /ARK Mt. KEE; I FA�GANDAL OPP iNB I;�IIOM E$rr R 7, R -t4 IR -3 f J.S. POSTAL SERVICE LI - - P --A - --A .PKI L I ROA 6 ' ed�s �jh, NgfS O i � . S o Sf e.r .BBB V"`; :'•� >:.iK 3 si n o 5 % . 3 � e� ion \x�g� ms 'o t \ 91.16 I / W 91.0 \ I I 2 zi 891.5 J 2 ` � N - 40'sethack—� 8'13.4 I 5' CEDAR FENCr 1 '• R 'flj N � P � 1 I 0 ID 9'X18' typical parking pace `II ypical pede+un shelter \ N, I =o° YYLou QayeTol.1 4'-c." -P6- U Et 1 . 1 WI E IEZL66Toul 0 5coo It APC Minutes May 28, 1985 requir from Lexington Avenue because it is a major street. Mulrooney moved, Harrison econded the motion to recommend approval of the waiver of plat adjust the side lot line between Lots 5 and 6, Block 5 of Westb st Addition, 9 fe t to the west, and to approve a 7 foot setback )variance to allow a 43 fodt tback to Lexington Avenue at the propert�desscribed above, subject to the Poll 'ng conditions: 1. Houses shall be designed and located to meet all the setback requirements. No variance sh 1 be granted for Lot 5. 2. All city Ordinances an a rements shall be adhered to. 3. All draina nd utility easemen shall be vacated and relocated to conform with a new lot line. • All m6mbers voted in favor. NORDQUIST SIGN COMPANY - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT b VARIANCE Chairman Hall convened the public hearing on the application of Nordquist Sign Company for a conditional use permit for a 27 foot high pylon sign and for a variance to allow a 190 square foot sign instead of a standard 125 square foot sign to be located on part of the southwest quarter of Section 2 and Lot 7, Plainview Addition. Dale Runkle reviewed the application and the staff report of May 21, 1985. Charles Nolan, the owner of the property, appeared and stated that the request for the variance is made because of visibility problems and the need to provide for visibility from Highways /1494 and I -35E, that construction of the parking lot is occurring at this time, that there will be a manager of the park living on the premises, that neighborhood meetings had been held and the input of neighbors had been taken into account in planning the development, that the development will charge • $4.00 per day for parking rather than $8.00 a day as charged by the airport, that they would still put up a sign if the size is restricted to 125 square feet, that the larger size is requested in order to allow the sign to be readable from 1,000 to 1,200 feet away, that advertising at the airport is now allowed by the airport commission, but that the airport will cooperate with a shuttle system. Runkle stated that Eagan has never allowed a larger business sign. Harrison moved, McCrea seconded the motion to recommend denial of the variance to allow a 190 square foot sign and to recommend approval of the conditional use permit subject to the following conditions: '1. The sign shall not exceed 27 feet in height. 2. The sign shall be located at least 10 feet from any property line. 3. All other City ordinances and requirements shall be adhered to. .4. The sign shall be oriented perpendicular to the I -35E right-of-way in order to maximize exposure to the freeway and minimize the impact on the adjacent residences. i 5. The sign shall not exceed 125 square feet per side. All members voted in favor. 144, 8 11 E -Z AIR PARK P.O. BOX 26520 ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA 55426 14ay 5. 1985 City Council City of Eagan P.O. Foy. 21199 Eagan., ':innesota 55121 Dear Council 14embers: This letter is written with reference to our sign request • that is to be heard at the Council meeting on June 18th. We had previously requested the Planning Commission to recommend we be allowed a 190 sf. sign. This request was denied. We therefore request the Council to consider only 'a 125 sf. sign.. which is allowable under the ordinance. Pecause of a scheduling conflict I will not be in attendence the night of the meeting., but hope this will not hurt our chances of receiving the necessary approval on the 18th of June. 167 Very truly yours., E -Z Air Pa�rkk% Company BY ��/%n'W&7e f7 � • Charles Nolan Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Thirty -One SPECIAL PERMIT/DOUG RUTH TO MOVE A HOUSE G. Doug Ruth for a Special Permit to Move a House Onto Lot 3, Block 1, Braun Sunrise Addition -- An application was submitted to the Planning Department requesting a special permit to move a home to Lot 3, Block 1, Brauns Sunrise Addition. For additional information on this item, refer to a memorandum prepared by the City Planning Department found on pages 16-f through ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the special permit requested by Doug Ruth to move a house onto Lot • 3, Block 1, Brauns Sunrise Addition. • /4/0 D CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: SPECIAL PERMIT TO MOVE A HOUSE INTO EAGAN APPLICANT: DOUG RUTH LOCATION: LOT 3, BLOCK 1, BRAUNS SUNRISE ADDITION EXISTING ZONING: R-1 (RESIDENTIAL SINGLE DISTRICT) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: JUNE 18, 1985 DATE OF REPORT: JUNE 11, 1985 REPORTED BY: DALE C RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER • APPLICATION SUBMITTED: An application has been submitted requesting a Special Permit to move a home to Lot 3, Block 1, Brauns Sunrise Addition. COMMENTS: This is the first permit that Staff has processed under the codification of the City Code which now requires a Public Hearing before the City Council to review the compatibility of homes being moved into an area. Staff has processed this Public Hearing and have ,notified the property owners within 350' regarding a hearing to move the home onto Lot 3, Block 1, Brauns Sunrise Addition. The home that is proposed to be moved, has a dimension of 35 x 70 or approximately 2,500 sq. ft. of living area on one level. The home appears to be a fairly large size and architecturally would fit into the area proposed. The Staff has reviewed this • permit application and suggests that prior to occupancy the elec- trical system and insulation factors be reviewed in order to comply with Eagan City Codes. Enclosed with this application are pictures and elevations of the home proposed to be moved to the above mentioned site. At this time Staff has no more comments regarding this structure being moved to this area and if the Council elects to approve the Special Permit it should be subject to the following conditions: 1) No variances be allowed for side setbacks on Lot 3, Block 1, Brauns Sunrise Addition. 2) The structure shall be reviewed and brought into compliance with all building related codes for the City of Eagan. 3) A site grading plan shall be submitted to determine how the house will fit on Lot 3, Block 1, Brauns Sunrise Addition. /�f OACH R— �Yp FOX P K -7 �1 RIDGE i �, n SURREY rd 1`GARibEN i, blc-v 15r ,, =137A 'A :ITY -,ALL N BLACKHAYVK "', PARK OPD P PK 77-2 A I �:f Ki.- 5K DA I E /—h -c''i4 .i i' �... ��FN iw�ERRY L...- ' `PARK EuMaNN r . t. 176 (/ < , 090-31 j 000.91 j .. 17 9 Im v 1060-81 070-51 s•^aWL •°v'i er.."wm arL sio • j \�` I=_r � 1 I. ' Clty. Of u.V, Eagan ` aK'��•`• 1 t. ql 7 �` y a ; 012-00 i P-- ! `/ D I R'� M' •V L n . S' :� '' non �` a_ �sds �II-�� • Luna j— •r• _ 0 �I`sy -. a� •` � � ,� city ar Lam.• Eagan 4 olo-ss City Of Eagan p�+0 y� O ihy f 010-0o E a to �° IAGA"r/ON b a. _ NR ' «h of Eopon , x 4iv+ �. r r •� • Lra•r4 .ir.\ ° 3 + t y-.� Cr •� �1 +r'�t. •• j oao si d °;�' oe • ;\ nR fS0 ac In � �� s -`k i. d 040-�� L R a •rfy - � � 1.�Iy � �3 ''r4S; �� S1�y a�. am•@Lr.r ; r��a':- N*t ` �+YY>• �� "v��S .: _�` �a'tft :lR �.+, ' `� rS=id•Y K".. \ Wri W ~ r 6/Y '• '�L.=I �� r': L '•rf• :T�. riC`; (.-�.• 1 _ R 1, - �t r i 3n: �P�T.2�,ir f}`��.3•T� i vTrJ 1n n j 11� 'r wfl s .. -' - •JaY .i� t''' � },�Da , X r v l � rA�'� � �I'.' .(d+' �`?i;>�?'�LlR'}I�iJi.�� f]..tArt� vi,2� 7 r". V• Y.r J{a JJy�.. rte''`T ti�°rY t •{fix i.r� �1� LA . f {At'"'1 G >J eS .L1 Ltr✓c `? 7.-4�'Y^.li.' `' G,2Z T P t1A lip Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Thirty -Two SPECIAL PERMIT TO MOVE A HOUSE/ROBERT LENCOWSKI H. Robert Lancowski for a Special Permit to Allow a House to be Moved to Lot 16, Block 5, Country Home Heights Addition -- An application was submitted by Robert Lencowski to move a house from one lot on Pilot Knob Road to Lot 16, Block 5, Country Home Heights. For additional information on the special permit, refeF to the City Planning Department report found on pages through 177 -7--T- ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED special permit requested • to Lot 16, Block 5, Country U ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the by Robert Lencowski to move a house Home Heights Addition. 173 3 CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: SPECIAL PERMIT TO MOVE A HOME WITHIN EAGAN APPLICANT: ROBERT LENCOWSKI LOCATION: LOT 16, BLOCK 5, COUNTRY HOME HEIGHTS EXISTING ZONING: R-1 (RESIDENTIAL SINGLE DISTRICT) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: JUNE 18, 1985 DATE OF REPORT: JUNE 11, 1985 REPORTED BY: DALE C RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER • APPLICATION SUBMITTED: An application has been submitted requesting a Special Permit to move a house from one lot on Pilot Knob Rd., to Lot 16, Block 5, Country Home Heights. COMMENTS: Staff has received an application in order to move a home which is presently located next to Norwest Bank on Pilot Knob Rd to Lot 16, Block 5, Country Home Heights. Staff has reviewed the permit request and noted that the house could be brought into compliance with all the City Codes at the new location. Staff has also processed the notification of the Public Hearing in order that comments from the neighborhood can be received on June 18. The applicant has submitted a site plan showing how the house could sit on the lot. However, there is not a diagram as to •how the garage would be located on the lot and still meet setback requirements. It appears that the home could fit in the general area, however, the Council will receive input from the surrounding neighborhood as to their attitude and concerns regarding this structure. If approved, the permit should be subject to the following conditions: 1) The home be brought into compliance with all City Codes. this includes electrical installation and all other building related items. 2) No variances be allowed for this lot where the home is proposed to be located unless it is for vegetation reasons. 3) This application should be subject to all other City Code requirements for moving a house to this location. / 7e/ u') IMENDOTA MM- FRO EAGANC�ALET' T 74-7 GB' *LSPUR OST T- 7_ COUNTRY Or FICA CLUB. \% T R PF LB A Cc, T v 0 .3 A R D VALL H i G H! V 1, --'IV r7l 19 E S PARK I C�o L1.7 TRY1, . . ......... . Q — p /._A[PLAT�4 LA X -J j4___ .1 --JkF TREFFLE ACRES7 SUBD. p CHNDER A.C� I t 74-L 41,441 T'S - 'VV SFFOOL IR4N -I 'OPP G �A A I IOME TT I -T K .1 1. R PARK' R COA__j PF 'PF Y�l �,AKS R-3 L A _j RD -,d ADDITI MQ I P,A 175 ' V 6 CITY Q a 0 OF oAj o 080-08,; �,,, • �� ' .. =e 00-080 V D_ l EGAN i locatl n e 120-08 z DWwfo County )20 06 3 021-05 2 t aa, w 9�� = S \ ,••A z _ _ q� • 'P� 1 10 9� ql' • ROAD ESWL Q �' I DOC. MO. T$705 ao ozz•oa�aJF' 10 6. .91+. in f� 1tFR;., OPpD Z LAN L �NtERM• .,. tl E .. .'IV -•v � �f .. , a r,��P � .;,'��, =J j - ! �' - L .:ra m• ROAD EMT Oft No 33, e 010-50 Olt . ........ .. . 0 • Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Thirty -Three VARIANCE/Q PETROLEUM I. Q Petroleum for a Variance to Allow Construction of an Overhead Canopy in the Front Setback Area of Nicols Road -- A 44 ft. variance from the 50 ft. setback to Nicols Road is being requested by Q Petroleum for an overhead canopy. For additional information on this matter, refer to the City Planning Department report. A copy is enclosed on pages � through /9l. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: Approve or deny the variance to allow construction of the overhead canopy as requested by Q Petroleum. 17t CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: VARIANCE APPLICANT: Q PETROLEUM LOCATION: PART OF LOT 19, BLOCK 8 OF CEDAR GROVE #2 EXISTING ZONING: N.B. (NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: JUNE 18, 1985 DATE OF REPORT: JUNE 10, 1985 REPORTED BY: GREG H INGRAHAM, ASST PLANNER • REVIEWED BY: DALE C RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER APPLICATION SUBMITTED: The applicant is requesting a 44' variance from the 50' setback to Nicols Road for an overhead canopy. COMMENTS: Eagan City Code has the same setback requirements for service station buildings, gasoline pumps & overhead canopies. The existing gas pumps are within the 50' setback to Nicols Rd. The applicant wishes to construct a canopy over the existing pumps. The edge of the canopy would be approx. 6' from the right- of-way and 57' from the curb line of Nicols Rd. The addition of the canopy would bring the lot coverage to 17%. City Code allows up to a 20% coverage in a N.B. zone. In conjunction with the canopy construction, the company plans to move some gas pumps and alter some of the curb cuts onto the • service road. If approved the variance shall be subject to the following conditions: 1) All other applicable ordinances shall be adhered to. 2) The service road curb cuts shall be reviewed and approved by the County Highway Dept. prior to construction. 3) A landscaping plan shall be submitted for City Staff approval prior to construction of the canopy. 179 i. ! •a a• ti t As Iy• •• efp I 10 —1-411 C Hq w z� 3 w � 24 z) tt��' L/ � z0 / !/ City • 1 I tJ •` Eogo • 3 2 ' 100- m wall S :y • 5 a t �, a �; ry.-.. � _ • r. ■ •• Cit 17 lie Is 17 •, ; M y /S R. $50 I h hit CC TAPIEVCO, INC to Is it el ,ny 60 SCOUNTY p� STATE AID In oee..3 wan ,• I m r i 4 m- RMCCL1• I. I alto Ivif• i• yy m • 11 d t i ■ e aidd Jy art o Y ! - � .oaa n• Ned• • _ Y I° ro in .a • i 5 tieo0 < 8Cx. s �I ..� • _^.bs �`l:wuti`vYwi .�/^']. ..A_..�. .t.T��VVV^^.....(1JJJJu+ .0n_o.6 .s � ,1w k �llljjiii"jI �6 "�1 -1 iiiw.r naa .•r •RA at —t Is • 30130 al en— nt °° '• M e I r u o' Q IO •T • 0 b •a a ; T al • S>• • s •• sO 14 a °OEC a.Vw.r[. 1 [Y.■ y2 M P3 - IY n 33..0 s s. .. .A •� • to .3 O1ITLYT I •to • / eO • "o"e •• tea\ v I \V S •• Y rr ;.P II [J• 1 d l n @ u u@ I to 4 k ';,(` I 8 Jn tl u R& 4e w N .r1 a .I = i • GLbRY RY DRIVE a ',, 1° !0 r _ `be n Qa. U O :. 4zo(o `,&o a. R 5iol I i F 1 l 4 ♦: � v:�� i.3 a _ O :. 4zo(o `,&o O N/cocs TA.. 5iol 46 O ♦: � v:�� i.3 a _ ir `+ J - - .. I•. 19a:c.oea�-- � ,.�-�.r NLG L/VdQ 014. •4p'. a ..r �' -o ' pr i a 9 I � 1,. 7b 8 tGmaE7 1S.! . Imo•. �✓ .'Y'1� l�• fi .. i p'ic'a, 11. _ r •IFS. './• .l � ' —_ Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Thirty -Four SPECIAL PERMIT/LUNDGREN BROS. CONSTRUCTION J. Lundgren Bros. Construction for a Special Permit to Allow a Temporary Sales Office to be Located on Lot 43, Block 4, Blackhawk Glen -- An application was submitted by Lundgren Bros. requesting a special permit for a temporary sales office for the Blackhawk Glen development. For additional information on this matter, refer to the City Planner's report found on pages /g3 through /QJr for your review. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny a special permit to allow a temporary sales office for the Lundgren • Bros. Construction on Lot 43, Block 4, Blackhawk Glen. • /67z CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: SPECIAL PERMIT - TEMPORAY SALES OFFICE APPLICANT: LUNDGREN BROTHERS (BILL ALLEN) LOCATION: LOT 43, BLOCK 4, BLACKHAWK GLEN PART OF THE NEh OF THE SW's, SECTION 16 EXISTING ZONING: R-1 DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: JUNE 18, 1985 DATE OF REPORT: JUNE 11, 1985 REPORTED BY: DALE C RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER • APPLICATION SUBMITTED: An application has been submitted requesting a Special Permit to allow a temporary sales office for the Blackhawk Glen development. COMMENTS: In review of this request, it has been explained to Staff that the applicants wish to have a temporary sales office on site prior to and while grading is being done on Blackhawk Glen. Once the grading has been completed and a model home con- structed, the temporary sales office will be removed. At the present time, the applicants have just submitted a request for the Special Permit and no diagram or site, plan has been submitted. Staff is suggesting that the trailer be set back from the road right-of-way approx. 30and off-street parking be provided for the people in the sales office and potential clients. Therefore, a temporary parking lot of approx. 4 off-street parking spaces should be required with this permit. The applicants have indicated • that they would like to put it adjacent to the right-of-way and have on -street parking until the grading has been done on the property. If approved, the Special Permit shall be subject to the following conditions: 1) A detailed site plan be submitted showing the location of the trailer. 2) The Council make a determination to allow on -street parking or require off-street parking of 4 vehicles and adequate setback from the right-of-way. 3) The temporary sales office shall be removed with the completion of the first home in the subdivision. 4.) All other City Codes shall be adhered to. l?3 34 8 1R 14 'I,`22 `^ 2\ = '8 I y 23 / 13 �I S`t 26 / -- 70 J 25 12 'I 24 �� o 3E 100 37 49 38' .^I �` /°j^ �a 48 \11 / �S �� r` • I .'e X10 �\ ��`.i' /I 73 39 47 yrl ��l/ I by is \�. 41 �0oJ_--� /r----Tas---� h 40 L__ 15 -�\-"-- 1639 y- 6 74 42 I I j ------44 -------- 43: > / \II i i I h 40 ---��7 -----J �-r38-----J 30' 30' -lro----' �----135--'" _ BLACKHAWK _ HILLS ROAD / LOCATION MAP ��cRoN /0 BLACKHAWK HILLS ROAD DENOTES PROPOSED SURFACE DRAINAGE O DENOTES ROM MONUMENT SET . -'rTor, III i SCALE: I INCH = 30 FEET DGARAGE FLOOR FEET D LOWEST FLOOR = FEET D TOP OF BLOCK = FEET. IS A TRUE AND CORRECT :cording to tHe recorded .EGAL.DESCRIPTION WILL GLEN -IST ADDITION.) PURPORT TO SHOW IMPROVEMENTS R UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION, ILL, INC. ETERSON, LAND SURVEYOR ICEIISE 110. 12294 PnOJECT No. BOOK If PAGE JAMES R. HILL, INC. FILE NO.Planners / Engineers / Surveyors 8200 Humboldt Avenue South FOLDER Bloomington, Mn. 55421 1312-1384-3029 SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE' Z LUNDGREN BROTHERS 10 ZA L 0 7- 30 I N 89 a 46'21" W /10.00 N I 30 �'ORA/NAGE -N89046'21"W IO 8 UTILITY CASEMENT 10 PER PROPOSED PLAT�� - LOT 20 PROPOSED PORTABLE OFFICE BUILDING Q: W1 .11 30 40.0 C� CL 0.0 BLACKHAWK HILLS ROAD DENOTES PROPOSED SURFACE DRAINAGE O DENOTES ROM MONUMENT SET . -'rTor, III i SCALE: I INCH = 30 FEET DGARAGE FLOOR FEET D LOWEST FLOOR = FEET D TOP OF BLOCK = FEET. IS A TRUE AND CORRECT :cording to tHe recorded .EGAL.DESCRIPTION WILL GLEN -IST ADDITION.) PURPORT TO SHOW IMPROVEMENTS R UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION, ILL, INC. ETERSON, LAND SURVEYOR ICEIISE 110. 12294 PnOJECT No. BOOK If PAGE JAMES R. HILL, INC. FILE NO.Planners / Engineers / Surveyors 8200 Humboldt Avenue South FOLDER Bloomington, Mn. 55421 1312-1384-3029 Z 10 ZA 30 I I -N89046'21"W BLACKHAWK HILLS ROAD DENOTES PROPOSED SURFACE DRAINAGE O DENOTES ROM MONUMENT SET . -'rTor, III i SCALE: I INCH = 30 FEET DGARAGE FLOOR FEET D LOWEST FLOOR = FEET D TOP OF BLOCK = FEET. IS A TRUE AND CORRECT :cording to tHe recorded .EGAL.DESCRIPTION WILL GLEN -IST ADDITION.) PURPORT TO SHOW IMPROVEMENTS R UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION, ILL, INC. ETERSON, LAND SURVEYOR ICEIISE 110. 12294 PnOJECT No. BOOK If PAGE JAMES R. HILL, INC. FILE NO.Planners / Engineers / Surveyors 8200 Humboldt Avenue South FOLDER Bloomington, Mn. 55421 1312-1384-3029 Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Thirty -Five SPECIAL PERMIT/TEMPORARY ADVERTISING SIGNS K. Coldwell Banker for a Temporary Permit for Two (2) Temporary Advertising Signs for Knob Hill -- A special permit application for two (2) temporary advertising signs is being requested 'by Coldwell Banker to advertise the Knob Hill residential development. For additional information on this item, refer to the City Planner's report which can be found on pages �/T through /QQ for your review. — ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the special permit for Coldwell Banker for two (2) advertising signs • for Knob Hill. • 976 T CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: SPECIAL PERMIT — TEMPORARY ADVERTISING SIGNS APPLICANT: COLDWELL BANKER LOCATION: (1) THOMAS LAKE RD & CLIFF RD (2) THOMAS LAKE RD & DIFFLEY RD EXISTING ZONING: (1) PD (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT) (2) A (AGRICULTURAL) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: JUNE 18, 1985 DATE OF REPORT: JUNE 12, 1985 • REPORTED BY: GREG H INGRAHAM, ASST PLANNER REVIEWED BY: DALE C RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER APPLICATION SUBMITTED: In July of 1984, a Special Permit to allow three (3) temporary advertising signs for the Thomas Lake Heights development was approved (see attached minutes). Coldwell Banker is asking to convert these three signs to advertise the Knob Hill residential .development. The sign sizes would remain the same as the previous approval. Since one of the old Thomas Lake Heights signs was located on the Knob Hill property, no Special Permit is necessary for that location. The requested signs are located at the NW corner of Thomas Lake Rd & Cliff Rd and at the north side of Diffley Rd at Thomas Lake Rd. If approved, the Special Permit shall be subject to the following conditions: 1) The signs shall be located at least 10' from any property line. 2) The face areas of the signs shall not exceed 64 & 32 sq. ft. respectively. 3) The Special Permit shall have a maximum duration of 2 years. 4) The signs shall be no higher than 12' & 8' respectively. 5) The signs shall not obstruct sight distances or traffic visibility. 6) The applicant shall obtain written permission of the property owners where the signs are to be located. IVA THOMAS LAgE HEIGHTS - TEMPORARY ADVERTISING SIGNS The application of Eagan Realty for special permit to allow a temporary advertising sign for Thomas Lake Heights housing project was then considered by the Council. The application would provide for four temporary advertising signs in various locations. Barton Dunn appeared for the applicant. Smith moved, Egan seconded the motion to grant a permit for two advertising signs in locations to be selected by the developer with the understanding that a small temporary sign could be located on County Road #30 because of the road con- struction and subject to the following conditions: 0 1. That the two signs may be moved at the discretion of the developer • on sites that were previously selected in the application. 2. The signs shall be located at least 10 feet from any property line. 3. The face areas of the signs shall not exceed 64 and 32 square feet respectively. 4. The special permit shall have a maximum duration of two years. 5. The signs shall be no higher than 12 feet and 8 feet respectively. 6. The signs shall not obstruct sight distances or traffic visibility. All voted in favor. 12 0 Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Thirty -Six VARIANCE FOR ELLIOT LIBMAN L. Elliot Libman for a 10' Variance from the to Knoll Ridge Drive Located on Lot 10, Block Addition -- A variance application was submitted for a 20' front setback to Knoll Ridge Drive. information on this item, refer to the Planning which can be found on pages 419L through z4w-- 30' Front' Setback 1, of Rose Hill by Elliot Libman For additional Department report ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the 20' front setback variance as requested by Elliot Libman. � -0 CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: VARIANCE - 20' FRONT SETBACK APPLICANT: ELLIOT LIBMAN LOCATION: LOT 10, BLOCK 1, ROSEHILL ADDITION EXISTING ZONING: R-1, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: JUNE 18, 1985 DATE OF REPORT: JUNE 10, 1985 REPORTED BY: GREG H INGRHAM, ASST PLANNER • _ REVIEWED BY: DALE C RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER • APPLICATION SUBMITTED: The applicant is requesting a 10' variance from the 30' front setback to Knoll Ridge Dr. The lot is located on a cul-de-sac with a steep slope in the rear yard. The variance request would keep the house away from the slope and would bring it in line with the existing home on Lot 11. The Knoll Ridge Dr. cul-de-sac's 150' right-of-way is larger than the standard 120' cul-de-sac. Due to the large right-of-way and the irregular location of the cul-de-sac within the right-of-way, other homes on the cul-de-sac will have larger than normal setbacks. If approved, the variance shall be subject to all other City ordinances and requirements. Q- 7 R-3 A C E 0 ��R N II A LL -14 "Fd j PF PD LB 81-3 I I I I I r A -A NK ADD710 R-4 A K H 'A R HIL i k N EFPGAN IMETIRp 10ENT�R/LZ o- R -F - ✓ '•2 #A3� c T Zt, I F aLACKHAvVK -A PARK UAl F PK �AL 0 0 VL 44 PK A, A < E= i 77-r-, Er T7717,e A I A 5115oz s , FPPZOL. �a OZ) O PD -1 �1� ' 77-2 A vl i C-) A C H _PKI RIDGE . ...... .. NB C E 0 ��R N II A LL -14 "Fd j PF PD LB 81-3 I I I I I r A -A NK ADD710 R-4 A K H 'A R HIL i k N EFPGAN IMETIRp 10ENT�R/LZ o- R -F - ✓ '•2 #A3� c T Zt, I F aLACKHAvVK -A PARK UAl F PK �AL 0 0 VL 44 PK A, A < E= i 77-r-, Er T7717,e A I A 5115oz s , FPPZOL. �a OZ) O PD -1 �1� ' 77-2 A Pwr 06 9� OtZ _jb -i � q. 0 N)l \,Rj T'.. CO 7,IL orn I � -- ��/-fir ''' ,k�`i� low 5Lwc I N�l 8 --� 8%4 v Jj 840 ��- ,.,1�1�I �hlA. LME \ a3n\ : ,3 lx FIR. �BOSfl�A�r10. 0 boi to i Bl cUc I.r4=)Sf. RILL btu. �d1cA�1 �M►J. ZO , \w ILf�OI,I, 'FID(�E b�lv� S f� R1 I;zo Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Thirty -Seven CONTRACT 85-12, RECEIVE BIDS/AWARD CONTRACT (LEXINGTON PLACE SOUTH A. Contract 85-12, Receive Bids/Award Contract (Lexington Place South - Street Improvements) --Council continued this item at the request of the developer, Orrin Thompson Homes, from the June 4, 1985, meeting. The developer requested the two-week delay because they are in the process of selling a portion of the lots within the.Lexington Place South Addition and the potential buyer apparently wanted to install the streets under a private contract. However, staff explained to the developer (Orrin Thompson Homes) that we could not reduce the scope of this contract enough • to facilitate the potential buyer. Subsequently, staff informed the developer that either Council award this contract or reject all bids. Knowing this, the developer is requesting the project proceed as planned. If Council approves the revised preliminary plat of Lexington Place South 2nd Addition, it will require that a change order be processed for the installation of seven additional sewer and water services and also water and sewer stubs to the proposed cul de sac. Our consulting engineering firm is pursuing this change order to an existing City contract now. This is the most expedient method to installing the necessary utility services prior to the street contractor beginning his work. If we cannot accomplish this, then we can certainly add the necessary utility service work to this contract. As a reminder, Valley Paving Company submitted a low bid of •$200,525.75. This is 6.2% less than the feasibility report estimate and 2.2 less than the engineer's estimate. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To award City Contract 85-12 (Lexington Place South - Street Improvements) to Valley Paving Company in the amount of $200,525.75 and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the contract documents. 1%5 Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Thirty -Eight CONTRACT 85-16, RECEIVE BIDS/AWARD CONTRACT (EAGAN WOODS & SAFARI 2ND ADDITION - STREET & UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS B. Contract 85-16, Receive Bids/Award Contract (Eagan Woods & Safari 2nd Addition - Street & Utility Improvements) --A bid opening for City Contract 85-16, Project 425 and Project 439, took place on Thursday, June 13, 1985, at 10:30 a.m. The apparent low bidder is M. Danner Trucking submitting a total base bid of $147,368.40. Enclosed on page Zq -/ is a copy of the bidder's list. T� The low bid is 5.5% less than the feasibility report estimate and 2.0% less than the engineer's estimate. Therefore, staff • recommends favorable consideration by Council and awarding this contract. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS 85-15 (Eagan Woods Office Park and street improvements, to M. of $147,368.40 and authorize the the contract documents. ITEM: To award City Contract and Safari 2nd Addition utility Danner Trucking in the amount Mayor and City Clerk to execute • go- M Our File No. 49351 CITY CONTRACT NO. 85-16 EAGAN WOODS OFFICE PARK — PROJECT NO. 425 SAFARI SECOND ADDITION — PROJECT NO. 439 UTILITY & STREET IMPROVEMENTS FOR EAGAN. MINNESOTA CONTRACTORS I. M. Danner Trucking 2. Orfei & Sons 3. Encon Utilities 4. Brown & Cris 5. Cartzke Construction 6. J.P. Norex, Inc. 7. S.M. Hentges & Sons 8. 0 & P Contracting 9. Lund Asphalt 10. S.J. Louis Construction 11. Arcon Construction 12. Spencer Construction 13. Lametti & Sons 14. Alexander Construction 15. Sarah, Inc. 16. Ro—So Contracting 17. Mur—Con, Inc:, BID TIME: 10:30 A.M., C.D.S.T. BID DATE: Thursday, June 13, 1985 TOTAL BASE BID 147,368.40 147,388.28 147,672.85 147,994.30 151,255.50 156.703.80 160.315.37 166.178.19 No Bid No Bid No Bid No Bid No Bid No Bid No Bid No Bid No Bid Feasibility Report Estimate $156,000.00 ENCINEER'S.ESTIMATE .150,000.00 %(+) or (—) Feasibility Report -5.5 %(+) or (—) Engineer's Estimate -2.0 Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Thirty -Nine FINANCIAL GUARANTEE AMOUNTS FOR NEW DEVELOPMENTS C. Reevaluation Regarding Overhead Percentage Used to Determine Financial Guarantee Amounts for New Developments --Two instances evolved this year whereby the developers are requesting a reduction in the overhead amount calculation used to determine the total amount of the financial guarantee the development is responsible for. 'Upon reviewing both requests, staff feels that it may not be appropriate to assess a straight 308 overhead for determining the total financial guarantee amount required by a developer. Staff recommends the overhead policy be modified as follows: • 1. Use a sliding scale to determine engineering fees. 2. Allow a credit to developers installing public improvements under private contract for design engineering fees. SLIDING SCALE ENGINEERING FEES: When construction costs for public improvement projects exceed $500,000, the engineering fees for design and construction administration and inspection are historically less than for projects under $500,000. For example, projects under $500,000 generally average about 158 for total engineering fees. Projects in excess of $500,000 histor- ically average about 108 for total engineering fees. Therefore, staff feels a reduction to 258 would be more appropriate for overhead calculations when construction projects exceed $500,000. For Council's information, Federal Land Company requests this consideration for their Town Centre 70-100 developments. The • estimated costs for these developments are about $1.6 million. PRIVATELY INSTALLED PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS: Two factors that are not found in public improvement costs when these improvements are installed by the developer are design engineering fees and construction interest. Design engineering fees are always the responsibility of the developer when public improvements are installed privately. Therefore, staff feels it would be appropriate to omit these fees from the 308 overhead. For example, the developers of the Lone Oak Addition, Laukka-Beck, are requesting a reduction in the amount of 78 for the design engineering fees based upon the estimated construction costs of their project. When public improvements are installed by the developer, there is no construction interest to the City. However, if the developer would default, the City would have to bond for 408 of the remaining work to be completed. In the worst case whereby the developer defaults prior to any construction, would require the City to finance 408 of the public utilities (the other 608 being covered by the financial guarantee and development contract). Staff Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Forty also feels it would be appropriate to consider omitting this portion of the overhead from the 308 factor. Likewise in the instance of the Lone Oak development, this would amount to a reduction of 408. of 128, or 4.88. Adding the two deductions would amount to a total reduction of 11.88 from the 308 factor, or 18.28. ' Staff would suggest that the 18.28 be rounded to an even 208. This would allow for a 1.88 contingency factor. Enclosed on page ;4,0 and 7i01 is a letter from the developer's • engineer, BRW, outlining their specific request based upon the discussion of reducing the overhead to omit the engineering design fee and a portion of the construction interest. In summary, staff would suggest Council consider revising the application of a street 308 overhead factor. Staff can recommend that a 258 overhead factor be used for public improvements installed under City Contract when construction costs exceed $500,000. Staff also reommends that when public improvements installed by the developer exceed $500,000, the overhead factor may be reduced to 208 and when the construction costs are less than $500,000, the 308 overhead factor could be reduced to 258. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve/deny revisions to the 308 overhead factor depending upon the scope of the project and private financing of the project. /s/ Thomas L. Hedges City Administrator DISIM, BENNETT. RINGROSE. WOLSFELD. JARVIS, GARDNER. INC. May 1, 1985 City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 SgaS VO 2 - PLANNING TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING ARCHITECTURE THRESHER SODARE • 700 THIRD STREET SOUTH • MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55415 • PHONE 6123700700 Attn: Tom Hedges - City Administrator RE: Lone Oak Development Contract Honorable Mayor and City Council: On behalf of the Laukka Beck partnership, we are requesting that the Eagan City Council approve an amendment to the Standard Form of Development Contract for the Lone Oak plat. The Standard Form of Development Agreement provides for an allocation equal to 30% of the estimated construction cost to provide for engi- neering, administration, legal and fiscal fees In the calculation of the security deposit or letter of -credit. It is requested that the allocation be reduced to 18% for the Lone Oak plat. The basis or justification for our request is as follows. The purpose of the security deposit is to protect the City from any costs that might arise as a result of a default by the developer. The normal allocation of 30% of construc- tion cost includes the full cost of engineering design (7%+), enginnering construction fees (6%+), legal, administration and fiscal fees (6%+), and interest on construction funds during the 'construction period'(12,+). The Lone Oak project will be developed without any City participation in the on site public street and utility systems; therefore, the potential exposure that the City has In the event of a default is reduced In two areas. The first item of reduction Is that of the engineering design which Is about 7%. The complete design will be provided by the developer at his cost subject to the approval of the City staff. Therefore, the City will not be required to expend funds for engineering and design even in the event of a default. The second Item A s that of Interest on construction funds during the construction period. As indicated, the normal allocation for that item is approximately 12%. In this case, a letter of credit will be provide that .ensures funds will be available from the bank Issuing the letter of credit in the event of a default. The guarantee Is equal to 60% of the construction cost; therefore, 60% of the potential exposure for Interest cost Is quaranteed by the letter of credit. That results in a duplication in the security equal to 60% multiplied by 12% equals 7.2%. The combined total of these two items, a 7% degsign fee plus 7.2% Interest equals 14.2%. Reducing the standard 30% standard allocation by 14.2% results in 16.8% as a more accurate statement of the potential exposure for such admi- nistrative cost. DAVID J. BENNETT DONALD W. RINGROSE RICHARD P. WOLSFELD PETER E. JARVIS LAWRENCEJ.GARDNER THOMAS F. CARROLL ARNOLD J. ULLEVIG CRAIG A AMUNDSEN DONALD E. HUNT MARK G. SWENSON JOHN B. MCNAMARA GARY J. ERICKSON DONALD L CRAIG MINNEAPOLIS DENVER BRECKENRIDGE PHOENIX 0{06 City of Eagan May 1, 1985 Page 2 At a recent meeting with the City Engineer and City Attorney, this issue was discussed and it was Indicated to us that an amount computed at 18% of construc- tion cost would be reasonable and acceptable. It was suggested that we offi- cially request such a decisslon by the City Council concurrent with council action on the development contract. Please consider this letter to be that request. Sincerely, BENNETT-RINGROSE-WOLSFELD-JARVIS-GARDNER, INC. Donald W. Ri ngrose------ Principal / i DWR/Ip cc: Dale Beckman Peter Jarvis Warren Beck Larry Laukka Rich Hefty Ed Kirsch Paul Hauge zo/ -f �f '/ e - AGENDA REGULAR MEETING EAGAN CITY COUNCIL EAGAN, MINNESOTA CITY HALL JUNE 18, 1985 6:30 P.M. I. 6:30 — ROLL CALL & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE II. 6:35 — ADOPT AGENDA & APPROVAL OF MINUTES 10. / III. 6:40 — COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT — 1984 IV. 6:50 — DEPARTMENT HEAD BUSINESS (SEE ATTACHED LIST) VI. 7:00 — PUBLIC HEARINGS /,. id. A. Public Hearing for Multi—Family Revenue Bonds for Wescott Hills Fourth Addition in the Amount of $2,100,000 VII. OLD BUSINESS 417 A. Annual Review, Conditional Use Permit (Werner Lembke) �o.Se2 B. U.S. Home Corporation for a Revised Preliminary Plat of Lexington Place South Second Addition, 12.16 Acres Located in the W 1/2 of the SW 1/4 of Section 14, Duckwood Dr. & Lexington Ave. p./eS-C. Dean Fulmer for a Conditional Use Permit to Allow a Self Service Car Wash on Lot 3, Block 1, of Century Addition, Section 9. VIII. HRA P 7 -LA. Acceptance of Interest Rate Reduction Program, Cinnamon Ridge Project/Can—American IX. NEN BUSINESS A. Consider Recommendation of HRA and Set Public Hearing to Consider Interest Rate Reduction Program, Cinnamon Ridge Project/Can—American, At July 2, 1985, City Council Meeting. /a• qg B. Eagles Nest Village for a Preliminary Plat of Eagles Nest Village Consisting of 14 Townhouse Units on 1.4 Acres Located on Lots 101, 102, 103, & 104, Block 1 of Meadowland 1st Addition, p a A. Fire Department P•dC. Park & Recreation Department P, d B. Police Department�o.6D. Public Works Department V. 6:55 — CONSENT AGENDA (SEE ATTACHED LIST) VI. 7:00 — PUBLIC HEARINGS /,. id. A. Public Hearing for Multi—Family Revenue Bonds for Wescott Hills Fourth Addition in the Amount of $2,100,000 VII. OLD BUSINESS 417 A. Annual Review, Conditional Use Permit (Werner Lembke) �o.Se2 B. U.S. Home Corporation for a Revised Preliminary Plat of Lexington Place South Second Addition, 12.16 Acres Located in the W 1/2 of the SW 1/4 of Section 14, Duckwood Dr. & Lexington Ave. p./eS-C. Dean Fulmer for a Conditional Use Permit to Allow a Self Service Car Wash on Lot 3, Block 1, of Century Addition, Section 9. VIII. HRA P 7 -LA. Acceptance of Interest Rate Reduction Program, Cinnamon Ridge Project/Can—American IX. NEN BUSINESS A. Consider Recommendation of HRA and Set Public Hearing to Consider Interest Rate Reduction Program, Cinnamon Ridge Project/Can—American, At July 2, 1985, City Council Meeting. /a• qg B. Eagles Nest Village for a Preliminary Plat of Eagles Nest Village Consisting of 14 Townhouse Units on 1.4 Acres Located on Lots 101, 102, 103, & 104, Block 1 of Meadowland 1st Addition, NEW BUSINESS (continued) 7 �,C O'Neil Center (R.J. O'Neil) for a Rezoning from A (Agricultural) to PD (Planned Development) for Approximately 100 Acres Located in the S 1/2 of Section 10. /3,z D. Sunset 8th Addition (Tri—Land Properties) for a P Preliminary Plat of Sunset 8th Addition Consisting of 3 Single Family Lots on 2 Acres, Located on Lot 7, Block 1 of Sunset 3rd Addition, Section 25. SS E. Dave Gabbert, for a Waiver of Plat to Adjust a Side Lot Line Between Lots 5 & 6, Block 5 of Westbury 1st Addition & a 7' Setback Variance to Allow a 43' Setback to Lexington Ave., Located in Section 22. P.14,/ F. Nordquist Sign Company for Conditional Use Permit for a 271 High Pylon Sign to be Located on Part of the SW 1/4 of Section 2 & Lot 7, .Plainview Addition. p. /bPG. Doug Ruth for Special Permit to Move a House onto Lot 3, Block 1, Braun Sunrise Addition, SW 1/4 of Section 15. P / 7J H. Robert Lencowski for a Special Permit to Allow a House to be Moved to Lot 16, Block 5 of Country Home Heights Addition. 7,? 1. Q Petroleum for a Variance to Allow Construction of an Overhead Canopy in the Front Setback Area of Nicols Road. Part of Lot 19, Block 8, of Cedar Grove No.2, Section 30. /o./Be2J. Lundgren Bros. Construction for a Special Permit. to Allow a Tempory Sales Office to be Located on Lot 43, Block 4, of Blackhawk Glen. Along Ashbury Road, Section 16. P.1,?6 K. Coldwell Banker for a Special Permit for 2 Temporary Advertising Signs for Knob Hill. Along Thomas Lake Road, Section 28. �•/90L. Elliot Libman for a 10'Variance from the 30' Front Setback to Knoll Ridge Drive Located on Lot 10, Block 1 of Rose Hill Addition, Section 17. VIII. ADDITIONAL ITEMS P /95 A. Contract 85-12 , Receive Bids/Award Contract (Lexington Place South) P,/14, B. Contract 85-16, Receive Bids/Award Contract (Eagan Woods & Safari 2nd) P,/y 8 C. Reevaluation Regarding Ovehead Percentage Used to Determine Financial Guarantee Amounts for New Developments IR. VISITORS TO BE HEARD (for those persons not on the agenda) X. ADJOURNMENT J W, REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUNE 18, 1985 CONSENT ITEMS P. 7 A. Personnel Items P.13 B. Contractor Licenses P.15 C. Change Order #1, Contract 84-13 (Lexington Avenue Booster Station) e.l& D. Change Order 111, Project 85-14 (Spring Parks Construction) 7 E. Project 84-21, Final Payment/Acceptance (Tennis Court Resurfacing) ,4.1-7 F. Project 84-22, Final Payment/Acceptance (Northview Athletic Field Lighting) P-/8 G. Receive Petition to Vacate Utility & Drainage Easement (Clearview Addition) P ,g H. Receive Petition to Vacate Utility & Drainage Easement (Sunset 4th Addition) P./7 I. Final Plat Approval, Eagandale Office Park 2nd Q•ji J. Final Plat Approval, Blackhawk Townhouse Apts. �.a 5 K. Excavation Permit 17-125, R. L. Johnson, Outlot A (Comserv) ?.ds -L. Excavation Permit 16-135, Blackhawk Glen P aC M. Contract 85-15, Approve Plans & Specifications/ Order Advertisement for Bids (Royal Oak Circle) P.a`N. Contract 85-18, Approve Plans & Specifications/ Order Advertisement for Bids (UPS) a7 0. Project 451, Receive Petition/Order Feasibility Report (Coachman Road — Trunk Watermain) � .iY P. Project 444, Receive Feasibility Report/Order Public Hearing (Holland Lake Trunk Storm) P.a Q. Project 449, Receive Feasibility Report/Order Public Hearing (Country Club Market) P•a9 R. Project 431, Receive Feasibility Report/Order Public Hearing (Johannes Addition) p 39 S. Project 447, Receive Feasibility Report/Order Public Hearing (Lone Oak Trunk Watermain) P,3o T. Project 448, Receive Feasibility Report/Order Public Hearing (Pond LP -55 Outlet) ?.31 U. Project 414, Receive Feasibility Report/Order Public Hearing (Pine Ridge Drive) P.3fV. Contract 83-17, Final Payment/Acceptance (Borchert—Ingersoll Pond, Hurley Lake, and Schwanz Lake Outlets) MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCILMEMBERS FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: JUNE 12, 1985 SUBJECT: AGENDA INFORMATION After approval of the June 4, 1985, regular City Council minutes, and the agenda for the June 18, 1985, City Council meeting, the following items are in order for consideration: COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT/1984 The auditing firm of Deloitte, Haskins & Sells have completed a comprehensive annual financial report for all combined financial • statements that were prepared and transacted during calendar year 1984. The audit consists of a 103 page document entitled "Comprehensive Annual Financial Report" that was distributed to each member of the City Council approximately two (2) weeks ago. Also distributed to the City Council was a letter that provides a detailed examination and a valuation of the City's system of internal accounting control and other related examinations. The Director of Finance and City Administrator have reviewed the documents along with a representative from Deloitte, Haskins & Sells. The audit report will be presented to the City Council for review and consideration. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or continue for any further consideration the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for 1984 as prepared by the firm Deloitte, Haskins & Sells. • Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Two A. FIRE DEPARTMENT There are no items this time. B. POLICE DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT HEAD BUSINESS to be considered under Fire Department at There are no items to be considered under Police Department at this time. C. PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT 1. Purchase of Used Gang Mower -- The City Council authorized the Director of Parks & Recreation to negotiate with Independent School District #191 for the purchase of a used nine reel gang mower. An amount equal to $14,000 was authorized for the purchase and recently the District did accept the City's offer of $12,500 for this unit. There is no action required on this item. 2.. Park Naming -- At a recent City Council meeting, there was a recommendation to rename Schwanz Lake Park to proposed Trapp Farm Park. There was a question raised at the City Council meeting concerning the naming of an Eagan park unless a family has been recognized for a certain duration of residency within the community. The old criteria for naming Eagan parks, which is attached on page ---3 , states that parks may be named for the deceased after 50 years have elapsed from the time of death. During July, 1980, there were some guidelines that were considered by both the Park Commission and City Council. P1 ase make reference to those guidelines which are found on page Also enclosed is a copy of a memorandum from the Director o P rks & Recreation regarding this item. This can be found on page, ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the renaming of Schwanz Lake Park to Trapp Farm Park. A CRITERIA FOR NAMING EAGAN PARKS I. Parks may be named for the living if they have contributed 75% of the property or 75% of the land cost for the park. 2. Parks may be named for the deceased after 50 years have elaped from the time of death. The deceased may include local or national heroes and national, state or local officials. 3. Parks may be named for streets, neighborhoods, historic events and characters, trees, flowers, places and feature names great ideas, and mythological and descriptive names. These names should be indigenous to Eagan. 4. Parks should not be named for civic organizations in order to avoid community conflicts. 5. Park or facility names should not be changed without good cause. They should be named carefully and with permanent intent. • 6. The criteria should be reviewed from time to time, and if necessary, periodically revised to offer the naming committee a practical, up- to-date and helpful tool through which practical decisions may be reached and by which difficult situations may be amicably reconciled. P11 JULY 1980 MEMO TO: ADVISORY PARK COMMITTEE FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION SUBJECT: NAMING OF PARKS; SUGGESTED GUIDELINES: PROCESS: 2ND DRAFT BACKGROUND: At the June meeting of the Committee, a draft for the naming of parks was submitted. This item was then referred to the Sub -Committee for further review. On Tuesday evening, July 1, two members of the Sub -Committee 10. A creative name based on some impressions of the site. 11. A name based on the vegetation present or the ecology of the area. 12. A name based on the dominant feature of the site. 13. The name by which most of the neighborhood children refer to the park. 14. A creative name which has identity for the particular use or people associated with the park. 15. The naming of a park after an individual. This should normally be done in memoriam. Careful evaluation is necessary before proceeding with the use of a person's name. ® Parks may be named for the living if they have been the major contributors or the property or of the land cost. (Previous criteria used by the Com- mittee have established a 75% factor.) and the Director again reviewed the criteria with some changes made. SUGGESTED GUIDELINES: • 1. The name of the subdivision associated with the park. 2. The neighborhood name in which the park is located. 3. The school name if adjacent to or closely identified with the park. 4. The street name adjacent to or closely identified with the park. 5. The name of a local interest point or local focal point near the park. 6. The name of a stream or creek adjacent to or near the park. 7. The name of a water body adjacent to or near the park. 8. The name of some topographic feature associated with the park. 9. The name of an historical occurrence associated with the area indigenous • to Eagan. 10. A creative name based on some impressions of the site. 11. A name based on the vegetation present or the ecology of the area. 12. A name based on the dominant feature of the site. 13. The name by which most of the neighborhood children refer to the park. 14. A creative name which has identity for the particular use or people associated with the park. 15. The naming of a park after an individual. This should normally be done in memoriam. Careful evaluation is necessary before proceeding with the use of a person's name. ® Parks may be named for the living if they have been the major contributors or the property or of the land cost. (Previous criteria used by the Com- mittee have established a 75% factor.) MEMO TO: THOMAS L. HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS 8 RECREATION DATE: MAY 29, 1985 SUBJECT: PARK NAMING Recently, the City Council reviewed a recommendation from the Advisory Parks and Recreation Commission relative to the naming of the now "Schwanz Lake Park." The question was raised by the Council as to the propriety of naming the park after an individual in light of the City's policy relative to the naming of parks after an individual. In July of 1980, the Advisory Commission and City Council adopted as a policy, "suggested" guidelines to the naming of parks. The first 14 guidelines listed suggest the naming of parks after a particular, significant item, i.e. a dominant feature, significant vegetation, historical occurrence, etc. • Guideline 15 is as follows: "The naming of a park after an individual. This should normally be done in memoriam. Careful evaluation is necessary before proceeding with the use of a person's name. Parks may be named for the living if they have been major contributors of the property or of the land cost. The naming or renaming of a park after an individual should not be done in an emotional or sentimental rush, but reviewed in a timely and proper manner." As you note, the naming of a park after an individual does not have a definitive policy. Rather, guidelines suggest "careful evaluation" and that it not be done in an emotional or sentimental rush. It is also suggested that the naming be done for the living if they have been major contributors. This is not the case with the naming of this particular park although there is some historical reference to the naming of the lake and the park land for individuals who have lived in the community for a number of years. If you would like additional information or clarification relative to the suggested guidelines and the naming of this particular park, please feel free • to contact me. Respectfully submitted, Director of Parks and Recreation KV/kf • • Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Three D. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT There are no items to be considered under Public Works Department at this time. 0 Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Four CONSENT`AGENDA There are ( 22) items on the agenda referred to as Consent Items requiring one (1) motion by the City Council. If the Council wishes to discuss any of the items in further detail, those items should be removed from the consent agenda and placed under Addi- tional Items unless the discussion required is brief. PERSONNEL ITEMS A. PERSONNEL ITEMS The following personnel items were to be considered: • 1. The Hiring of a Clerk/Typist -- With the promotion of Karen Finnegan to Administrative Secretary, a vacancy was created in the typing pool. The vacancy was posted, candidates were tested and interviewed by Administrative Assistant Duffy and Administrative' Secretary Finnegan. The recommendation of this office is to hire Deanna Kivi of 2053 Quartz Lane for the vacancy. Ms. Kivi has successfully completed the City's physical examination and her first day of work scheduled for Monday, June 17, 1985. 2. Bicycle Safety Patrol Cadet -- As a part of the recent bicycle safety project grant a bicycle safety patrol cadet was authorized to administer the program. After proper posting and advertising it is recommended that Kathleen LaClair be hired to fill the position. She has completed her Law Enforcement Associate of Arts Degree and has a backgroundlin police reserve work. A_ 3. Summer Playground Personnel -- Attached on page Yl is a list of people recommended for employment with the Eagan Play- grounds for the summer of 1985. • Ll MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR d, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS 6 RECREATION DATE: JUNE 3, 1985 BE: SUMMER PLAYGROUND PERSONNEL Following is a list of people recommended for employment with the Eagan playgrounds for the summer of 1985: RETURNING FROM LAST YEAR Lynn Booher Kristi Edlund Kathleen Fletcher James Gilbertson Lisa Gilsdorf Rachelle Jirik Lisa Lundquist Maureen Porter Dawn Rasmussen Tamara Sova Katharine Weeklund Kristin Weeklund NEW PERSONNEL Janelle Bonner Carol Connelly Tricia Gilbertson Susan Jorgenson Chris Kirschner Tamara Mathson Gus Nelson Gina Penn Lizabeth Sistowicz Renee Smith Wages shall be from $3.55 for program aides to $5.50 for leaders who are returning for a third year. All salaries are within departmental budget/salaries range. Respectfully suomitted, KV/js C Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Five 4. City of Eagan Mileage Reimbursement Rate -- At a special City Council meeting on March 12, 1985, the reimbursement rate for use of personnel autos was increased from $.20 to $.25 per mile. According to the Director of Finance the IRS currently allows a reimbursement of $.205 per mile without any declaration of the income or documentation of expenditures. An increase to $.25 per mile will require the City to record as income for each employee total mileage payments, either as an adjustment to the employee's W -21s or by issuing 1099 forms for miscellaneous income. As the Director of Finance stated in a recent memorandum records will have to be researched and documentation prepared for the 25-30 • employees who are involved. All employees will have to declare the income and show car expense deductions using $.205 per mile or actual costs as they desire or is available. Any employee not filling the long -form would have additional taxable income of $.25 per mile with no offsetting deductions. After reviewing this position with the City staff, with the exception of the City Planner, that the mileage reimbursement rate be changed to $.205 per mile to conform with the IRS regulations. In the case of the City Planner it is his request that the $.25 per mile rate remain due to his special circumstances in attending meetings and using his personnel vehicle at a higher frequency rate than most of the other employees that are affected by the reimbursement rate. Therefore with the exception of the City Planner it is recommended that mileage reimbursement rate be set at $.205 per mile as suggested and recommended by the Director of Finance. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve all personnel • items as stated. 5. Staff Accountant Position --Recently, the City Council gave approval to a staff accountant position as a part of some minor reorganization in the Finance Department. The Director of Finance is proposing. that the salary start at $1,600 per month with no scheduled adjustments. Since the position is new, a copy of a memorandum and job description is enclosed on pages d through /Y for your review. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To authorize the recruitment of a staff accountant at a salary of $1,600 per month. I II i r MEMO TO: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES FROM: FINANCE DIRECTOR/CITY CLERK VANOVERBEKE DATE: JUNE 10, 1985 SUBJECT: STAFF ACCOUNTANT POSITION Now that the accounting clerk for utility billing has been filled, I would like to proceed with the filling of the staff accountant position. This timing should allow for the various relocations being proposed while providing support for the budget process and expected special assessment conversion and fall certifications. The training of the new account clerk has gone well but has taken and will continue to take a lot of Ken's time as we attempt to replace Lorna's vast experience. Attached is a proposed job description for the staff accountant position. I have not included any supervisory activities in the position, however it does involve a coordination role. I pre- viously stated that I would require at least two years of formal accounting education and have changed that to a four year degree. Based on the number of two-year people who applied for the utility billing position, it seems appropriate and beneficial to make this adjustment. I would propose the salary start at $1,600 per month with no scheduled adjustments. The position would be evaluated and ad- justed through the comparable worth studies and annual adjustment process. I assume that an appropriate range would be developed through that process. Brooklyn Park is currently filling a staff accountant position and has had over 200 applications. They have advertised a starting salary of $1,600 per month. The placement director at St. John's informed them that recent accounting grad- uates were atarting in the area of $1,580 to $1,670 with CPA firms and in the area of $1,540 to $1,630 in government and industry. As of July 1, 1985, the union salary range for senior accounting • clerk is from $1,231 to $1,549 after five years. The proposed rate of $1,600 per month may be a little out of line on the low end in relationship to the engineering tech II, construction ana- lyst and administrative secretary. I would suggest the $1,600 per month with the unannounced possibility of adjustment through compar- able worth; your review and/or Holly's would be appreciated, how- ever. I would expect most applicants to be recent graduates and would not propose formal testing for the position. Since it is not a clerical position, I do not feel that union membership would be required. I will be happy to provide any additional information you desire or to discuss the matter in more detail. Upon your approval, we will begin the recruitment process. Finan"-Director/City Clerk EJV/kf /D BAND I GRADESUBGRAD Job Description ARTHUR YOUNG JOB TITLE DEPARTMENT/SECTION JOB NO. Staff Accountant Finance TITLE OF IMMEDIATE SUPERVISOR 'Assistant Finance Director JOBSUMMARY The Staff Accountant is responsible to assist in the development, coordina- tion and control of financial records and reports; to assure accuracy, com- pleteness and timeliness of resulting financial reports; to coordinate and assist in the functions of utility billing, payroll, payables, receivables, fixed assets and special assessments. TASK NO. DESCRIPTION FREQUENCY BAND/GRADE 1. Consult with Assistant Finance Director to develop controls necessary to assure accuracy and security of financial records. 2. Monitor monthly balances of various accounts to detect errors and ensure integrity of financial system. 3. Write reports as necessary using LOGIS terminals and HP 150 computer equipment. 4. Coordinate work schedules of utility billing, payroll, payables, receivables, fixed.assets and special assessments to insure that assignments are completed on a timely basis. 5. Prepare journal entires as necessary. 6. Assist in the preparation of annual budgets and • financial reports. 7. Assist other departments with finance related matters. APPROVED ON BEHALF OF J08 EVALUATION COMMITTEE DATE QUALIFICATIONS ;Specific training or job experience rewired before appointment A combination of training and experience substantially equivalent to college graduation with major course work in accounting, business and/or public administration, finance, economics or a related field. e Estimated length of time required for new entrant to achieve acceptable level of proficiency ORGANIZATIONAL RELATIONSHIPS DIRECTOR OF FINANCE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF FINANCE STAFF ACCOUNTANT STRUCTURAL AUTHORITY SAPIENTIAL AUTHORITY RESPONSIBILITY ACCOUNTABILITY ADVISABILITY INFORMABILITY SYMBOLS Nominal control y Actual contra 'Cl -Actual Q Actual 4 Full control 1 C— Nominal f Nominal WORKING CONDITIONS Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Six CONTRACTOR LICENSE B. CONTRACTOR LICENSE Attached on page � is a list of contractors who are renewing or have been selected and retained to build a building by a customer either living in, or planning to, reside in Eagan. They have references from other municipalities or their client and a permit application is awaiting City Council approval for a contractor license. • ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the list of contractor license which is enclosed for review. P /3 • • CONTRACTOR'S LICENSE JUNE 18, 1985 GENERAL CONTRACTORS: 1. DE ZURIK BUILDERS, INC. 2. M.A. MORTENSON CO. 3. T.J. CONTRACTING, INC. 4. TOP HAT CONSTRUCTION HCMBO NER: 1. WILLIAM H. ADAMS HEATING & VEN'T'ILATING: 1. ALEEN HEATING & AIR CONDITIONING 2. D & D ANDERSON HTG & PLBG, INC. 3. CARLSON REFRIGERATION 4. DEML HEATING & AIR CONDITIONING 5. MASTER HEATING & COOLING 6. NIECSON s=vo •, INC. 7. RICCAR HEATING 8. RICH'S HEATING & AIR CONDITIONING. PLUMBING: 1. LAREN BROAN PIDMBING 2. LAKESIDE PLUMING & HEATING, INC. 3. NIEMAN P & H, INC. 4. NYBO-PETERSON PLUMBING 5. TOWN & COUNTRY 14 4C -� r Myul7l�i •- 1. MUENCHCW CONCRETE & CONST. SVIMING POOL: 1. DOLPHIN POOL & PATIO • Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Seven CHANGE ORDER #1/WATER BOOSTER STATION C. Change Order #1, City Contract 84-13, Water Booster Station, Lexington Avenue --This change order resulted from the necessity of modifying the field piping to connect the booster station piping to the water main installed under City Contract 84-09. We anticipated the installation of the booster station piping would precede the installation of the trunk water main. Instead, installation of the trunk water main occurred prior to the con- struction of the booster station. This resulted in terminating the trunk water main short of the location anticipated by the booster station contract. This necessitated the requirement of an additional 11; bend and 24' of 20 -inch DIP water main to complete the water main connection to the booster station. A contractor, A 6 K Construction -Company, will perform this work for $1,302.41. In contrast, this same work would cost the City $1,455.00 if installed under City Contract 84-09 as originally proposed. By approving this change order, Council will meet all design objectives and save approximately $150. Therefore, staff recommends the approval of this change order. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve Change Order #1 to Contract 84-13 (water booster station -Lexington Avenue) in the amount of $1,302.41 and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. 15 Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Eight CHANGE ORDER/PROJECT 85-14/SPRING PARKS CONST. D. Change Order No. 1, Project 85-14 -- The Director of Parks & Recreation is requesting approval for Change Order #1 for the Spring Parks Construction project 85-14. The scope of this work is to modify the B618 concrete curb to a B612 curb. The shorter curb section will result in a savings on this contract of $1,898.10. The original contract amount is $476,837.05. The revised contract amount with this Change Order is $474,938.95. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve Change Order #1, which is a deduct in the amount of $1,898.10 for B612 concrete curbing. 0 E Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Nine PROJECT 84-21/FINAL PAYMENT/TENNIS CT. RESURFACING E. Project 84-21, Final Payment -- The Director of Parks & Recreation is recommending final payment for Project 84-21, the tennis court resurfacing. This final payment is in the amount of $9,892. The final recommendation is to accept final payment on the tennis court resurfacing project. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: Authorize final payment for tennis court resurfacing in the amount of $9,892 for Project 84-21. PROJECT 84-22/FINAL PAYMENT ATHLETIC FIELD LIGHTING F. Project 84-22, Final Payment -- The Director of Parks & Recreation is recommending final payment for Project 84-22 which includes supplying necessary equipment, poles and light fixtures for Northview Athletic Field lighting. The second portion of this contract included the installation of this equipment including all electrical installation and connections. The City staff have reviewed final payment requests and are recommending approval for supplying and installing athletic field lighting in the amounts of $5,347.22 and $6,644.16 for a total final payment of $11,991.38. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To accept Project 84-22, athletic field equipment and installations and authorize final payment in the amount of $11,991.38. /I Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Ten PETITION/VACATE UTILITY & DRAINAGE EASEMENT/CLEARVIEW ADDN. G. Receive Petition to Vacate Utility & Drainage Easement in Clearview Addition-- Staff received a petition from the owners of Lot 11 and a portion of Lot 12, Block 2, Clearview Addition, to vacate the existing drainage and utility easement on the southeasterly line of Lot 11 and the northwesterly line of Lot 12. The request that this line be moved to their southerly lot line that incorporates a portion of Lot 12. Staff will provide a detailed legal description and sketch for the public hearing for Council reference. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive this petition to vacate utility and drainage easement centered over the lot line between Lots 11 and 12 of Clearview Addition and order a public hearing for July 16, 1985. PETITION/VACATE UTILITY & DRAINAGE EASEMENT/SUNSET 4TH ADDN. H. Receive Petition to Vacate Utility & Draiange Easement in Sunset 4th Addition -- Staff received a petition from Mr. Brad Swenson for the vacation of right-of-way and utility and drainage easement for the "eyebrow" on Yorktown Place. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the petition • to vacate right-of-way and utility easement within Sunset 4th Addition and order a public hearing for July 16, 1985. • i Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Eleven FINAL PLAT/EAGANDALE OFFICE PARK 2ND ADDITION I. Final Plat Approval, Eagandale Office Park 2nd Addition (Opus) -- Staff is in receipt of a final plat application for the Eagandale Office Park 2nd Addition. Enclosed on page 'Za is a copy of the final plat. All submission materials required are in order for favorable consideration by Council. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the final plat for the Eagandale Office Park 2nd Addition and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. /9 m 0 0 EAGANDALE OFFICE PARK 2ND ADDITION 1 rY� aW:Ir Y \ 1 Yn r.•I.. \V .n1.\I renes Y Yu • II I WYYI I�I[I Iw LY YXIIIY, YI\ u: Ilr\ La Yl YI L/ IYY A{WIL: 1•\\ IY a1V(IIYI :Yry1L IIIL IYWYL LOIY,, I Xus111 LYIY•\IY, v W YIIrINw I W •r1Y Yu.:W Ygwa/nIWXY In Wfwyll puw, Lllur Nrull, \ .... " n r uY1 W .r unes. 1`h /IM. IIOIIw W W111 YI:w\Y YnW I::I, W WI\ IYr• Y.1: ul\ W 111. Ir Ifl w M ILI \n rIW Iv IV. IYIp4L QIIQ Ia, rrYY Y W rYw r14 WrW. MII[ u' YIVw{IWIY ^.:P YY W:MW\IIr YUY ur W u/r Y{ 11 Y .Iw IIL1 1• lluL ryY Ill 11 W II•\ N IYIGIII LINA IYIpAIY Ia, r[Y•1 Y W rYYY IIY {w W. •:r\•4 Y!1\VrllY Y. YII LtLI[ Q NYItliL w LWIN Q 11.1. IVn11 IAI. 1 r + 1111. I w Irll. IYe\I-Wr 1111. Iwll•lr 1111. Iw I�Ir . NII. Iw\,.u.Y QII n I.• I.M. Y• IYTIY I:wlr'1 Lil\WIY a YIw1YrY ww r YII_W •I IY�11111u .• 1.11. •Ir1111 NI\Vlllr \IwY:\ IUI 11 •lu Ilrh UI. LL QRp IY6UW wv11Y Y W rvW NN Yw11I. W Wres, r 11 IWIpYIY 111 �1= 11p all.i Y YrY1 •YIY W W 4 YI��" I4 FNY[rY Y [ [rl/ 1 W Ilu r111� -YIIy\ u 1..,Y, V Iuu1 u � Ilu IIUM w 1 IIV r.Yr w Nu • [YIV 1Y \11111 \s/ NII[. WYI. Nru\I Y IIW\I YW u11 W alVllly YI` Y1WYL1 Lies. I Iluo 1 Yrr111r. Yr Iar ly IrI1r r1Y1111 Y YIIY rl uw• W \V \Y/Y•Y W1 N IY Y Y Y O Lww:s WIIn Y Y IYYI II\III W\ r W_w Y IY�W Lu/ 4r\I N LYu. 11 ru11 YYwY YII /\II. �. v a1W,IW YIW un IYp1Y! Laa — nn rQ�u v ur11, umYu fun v Lh.n �- 1Y IIr.YIy In V �\ w uar1.1Y1 WI. r w Y =��_W uIIT,•II lTOIpRiY LIU4 T11i1�prlj I; Y q NI\q Lr1� ,y In • Ir1nW Wls �?T l `s X. :cAr•:nALE '::EE:TEi: E: lid'J IiSTR EA:;..Fli C4LE i.•.L PARK I .. � r Y I LOT 1 BLOC�f all ) LOT I I ` 1'15 hY':YJi :5 I 2. F.R K' LOT 2 I LOT BLOCK ya�jJ .• I I ..c 12. I •- Y I T.•.��.:IIJ J 1'I YIr Iles I.Ir1 Y Yyv m. 4r1 Of YrY. 1Y1. w W Y.0 Ir11 Wl1l .. n.\ hare. un Iln IIInr _W r Y — n: Yn1I�YV W'WI/Il.l [al.:ls AI. IIX N IIW0111 pllp IW YO `:a—ol w .�Yr I..IW 4 1: Wru 1\.1.1Y Yrin YS W I.r..W Y n Weu L..\I L.. w qn: s.br W r.rr Y rwbuY M W W I Iruur. r Wm Lry. nwYW .{ . rYrlr r.\IY Y uY Y: •mn: 1 r•:. �pr,APS.I-� 2 D I LOT 2 15 q HEIGHT-"' IL, QYYI(j WI) WIL" umoln ul[ YII)IIY 11V) W YYw4r Yr1L1 IW m .®IIIY w. W . • • . \�4 � .� � rs w nwI WIYX Y+Y Wnrlun Y. N��a w i41 w= s..• wl r nlr u W .rnY n i:.0 u.:11, YrYu ;�ANL,'AL-E :Er-ttF III DU TRIAL FARK `\j lui. 7 VICINITY MAP 3 e 1 _ h Y r:vnYvi. T4 ti R � 1. w•. I� I! ;�ANL,'AL-E :Er-ttF III DU TRIAL FARK `\j lui. 7 VICINITY MAP 3 e 1 _ Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Twelve FINAL PLAT APPROVAL/BLACKHAWK TOWNHOUSE APARTMENTS J. Final Plat Approval for Blackhawk Townhouse Apartments (Sharevest, Inc.) --Staff is in receipt of a final plat application for the Blackhawk Townhouse Apartment Addition. Location of this development is south of Diffley Road, east of Blackhawk Road and west of 35E. Enclosed on page y y is a copy of the final plat for Council's reference. All submittal materials are in order for favorable consideration by Council. . Enclosed- (page;!�2p) is a written request from Mr. Douglas Johnson representing Sharevest for issuance of the building permit for model units and rental office identified on the site as "D" building • and also the pool building. Enclosed on page7=44 is a copy of the site plan for Council's reference. It is staff's under- standing that Dakota County has about a six to eight week delay in recording the final plats. The issuing of a building permit requires that the final plat be recorded. Because this delay is of no fault of the developer or the City, staff feels it.appro- priate that Council could allow the issuance of a building permit in this instance. Instead of requiring proof of recording from Dakota County, staff would recommend some sort of proof that Dakota County is in receipt of the final plat. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the final plat for the Blackhawk Townhouse Apartments (Sharevest, Inc.) and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to "execute all related documents. Also to approve/deny the request for issuance of a building permit for the model units and rental office identified as cluster "D" • and also pool building based upon proof that Dakota County received the final plat. 'PXHIBIT "A" BLACKHAWK TOWNHOUSE APARTMENTS z t 4 'ry 6 1 1 rE• 1NE NORTH LIN! OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF OECTION 10. l.Et. A 1 HAS AN ASSUIIEO BEARING OR N BB SS AS E DENOTES RON MONUMENT BET MAOI(ED WITH REOIETRAIgN NUMBER I3600 DENOTEB NON MONUMENT FOUND. VICINITYMAP :.j. -_.. 16 F 1. .O 60J I �4:• ��<. IL �I rEnoe. NOINECIIINO COmPRN4, INC. MN MNII RiNN.H�Nu W. lure a nc R c.rc Tc 1:= x 1 �p YY}g ;N•i •_ � I Lj ' r ' 1 tS I fl � I I u I K 1 I 1 I ' I I �1• II z t 4 'ry 6 1 1 rE• 1NE NORTH LIN! OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF OECTION 10. l.Et. A 1 HAS AN ASSUIIEO BEARING OR N BB SS AS E DENOTES RON MONUMENT BET MAOI(ED WITH REOIETRAIgN NUMBER I3600 DENOTEB NON MONUMENT FOUND. VICINITYMAP :.j. -_.. 16 F 1. .O 60J I �4:• ��<. IL �I rEnoe. NOINECIIINO COmPRN4, INC. MN MNII RiNN.H�Nu W. lure a nc R c.rc Tc SHAREVEST, INC. NORTHWESTERN FINANCIAL CENTER. SUITE 1733 7600 %ER%ES AVENUE SOUTH MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55431 TELEPHONE 16121 6350622 June 12, 1985 Mr. Rich Hefti City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Rd. Eagan, MN 55121 RE: Walnut Trails (Blackhawk Townhouse Apartments) Building Permit for Models • Dear Mr. Hefti: Pursuant to Mr. Ed Kirsh and paragraph 16 of the Development Contract, request is hereby made for issuance of a building permit for the model units and rental office identified on the site plan as the Cluster "D" building and pool building. It is my understanding that final plat approval (but not recording of the plat) will be a condition for the issuance of a building permit if authorized by Council action. If you have questions or comments, please call. DMJ/ms V) Co?;dially, /�%'% • Dougla M. Johnso / LISTER yp — T ♦I ` . LUS C' ` 3 Ne i`IW \ 1 S' ^N1MN 111��Asere •, �•,�� ,—•T BLACKHAWK APARTMENT$ �• �—W- -- o {�! _•_ a. _•T iii. 13•aj�l W _ e I RR.M' � � 'h I „o \ +n LISTER yp — T ♦I ` . LUS C' ` 3 Ne i`IW \ 1 S' ^N1MN 111��Asere •, �•,�� ,—•T BLACKHAWK APARTMENT$ �• �—W- -- __ ._...---- —Lm...... •�"'•"� W _ e � � 'h \ SITE PLAN; NORTH SCALE: 1'•30' KORSUNSKT KRANK ERK;KSON INC. •, �•,�� ,—•T BLACKHAWK APARTMENT$ �• �—W- mARCHITECTS• .m...r __ ._...---- —Lm...... •�"'•"� EAOAN, MINNESOTA ` 0 w 5HECT / of 2 silegrs Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Thirteen EXCAVATION PERMIT/R.L. JOHNSON (OUTLOT A, COMSERV) K. Excavation Permit Application #17-125 for R. L. Johnson (Outlot A, Comserv)--Staff is in receipt of an application for excavation permit over Outlot A of the Comsery Addition. The applicant is R. L. Johnson Company who plan constructing an office -warehouse on Outlot A. The Planning Commission will review their proposed development at their next meeting, June 25, 1985. Meanwhile all submittal materials are in order for favorable consideration by Council. • ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve excavation permit #17-125 for R. L. Johnson Company for Outlot A, Comsery Addition. EXCAVATION PERMIT/SIENNA CORPORATION (BLACKHAWK GLEN L. Excavation Permit Application #16-135 for Blackhawk Glen (Sienna Corporation) --Staff is in receipt of an application for excavation permit for the proposed Blackhawk Glen development. Sienna Corporation will be the developer for this project which is located in the northeast quarter of the southwest quarter of Section 16. This is northeast of the Blackhawk Hills Addition and immediately south of the proposed Hampton Heights Addition. All submission materials are in order for favorable consideration by Council. • ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve excavation permit #16-135 for the Blackhawk Glen Addition (Sienna Corporation). a'15' Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Fourteen APPROVE PLANS & SPECS./ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS/ROYAL OAK CIRCLE M. Contract 85-15, Approve Plans & Specifications/Order Advertise- ment for Bids (Royal Oaks Circle Street & Utility Improvements) -- Council authorized the installation of streets and utilities under Project 432 (Royal Oaks Circle Addition) on April 16, 1985. In doing so, Council also authorized the preparation of plans and specifications for this project. The plans and specifications are complete. Upon Council's approval of these plans, staff recommends a bid opening on July 11, 1985. If Council desires, our. consulting engineer has the plans for this project for Council's review. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the plans and specifications for Contract 85-15, Project 432 (Royal Oaks Circle street and utility improvements) and authorize a bid opening for 10:30 a.m., July 11, 1985. APPROVE PLANS & SPECS./ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS/UPS N. Contract 85-18, Approve Plans & Specifications/Order Advertise- ment for Bids (UPS Street & Utility Improvements) -- Council authorized the installation of public utilities and streets under Project 442 for the UPS Addition on May 21, 1985. These plans and specifications are now complete for consideration by Council to order a bid opening for Friday, July 12, 1985. If Council so desires, our consulting engineer has these plans for this project for Council's review. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the plans and specifications for City Contract 85-18, Project 442 (UPS Utility and Street Improvements) and order a bid opening at 10:30 a.m., Friday, July 12, 1985. Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Fifteen PROJECT 451, RECEIVE PETITION/FEASIBILITY REPORT (COACHMAN ROAD) 0. Project 451, Receive Petition/Order Feasibility Report (Coachman Road Trunk Watermain) -- Staff is in receipt of a petition submitted by the developer's of the Hampton Heights Project. They are petitioning to have the City install the necessary trunk 30" watermain within the Coachman Road extension. The developer of the Hampton Heights Project will install all lateral public utilities and public streets under a private contract. • ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To redeive the petition for Project 451 and order a feasibility report for the trunk watermain extension within Coachman Road. • ;7-7 Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Sixteen FEASIBILITY REPORT/PUBLIC HEARING/HOLLAND LAKE TRUNK STORM SEWER P. Project 444, Receive Feasibility Reports/Order Public Hearing (Holland Lake Trunk Storm Sewer) -- Council received a petition from residents adjacent LP -36 for the necessary storm sewer improvements to prevent the flooding of their property every spring. Because of the dependence upon several other ponds in the vicinity, staff was directed to prepare a feasibility report addressing the storm sewer situation for ponds LP -61, LP -34, LP -35, LP-36,LP-45, LP -37, LP -51 and LP -38 (Holland Lake). Our consulting engineering firm determined this project is feasible from an engineering standpoint. Therefore, it would be appropriate to conduct a public hearing on August 6, 1985. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the feasibility report for Project444 (Holland Lake area trunk storm sewer) and order a public hearing for August 6, 1985. FEASIBILITY REPORT/PUBLIC HEARING/COUNTRY CLUB MARKET DRIVEWAY • Q. Project 449, Receive Feasibility Report/Order Public Hearing (Country Club Market Driveway Improvements) -- Council authorized a feasibility study for the extension of the driveway to Country Club Market, along with landscaping, on May 7, 1985. This feasi- bility report is now complete and the project is feasible. • Therefore, staff recommends that Council order a public hearing to consider this improvement on July 16, 1985. This date will allow adequate amount of time to publish and mail all legal notices. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To report for Project 449 (Country Club Market and order a public hearing for July 16, 1985. receive the feasibility driveway improvements) Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Seventeen FEASIBILITY REPORT/PUBLIC HEARING/JOHANNES ADDITION R. Project 431, Receive Feasibility Report/Order Public Hearing (Johannes Addition Trunk Storm Sewer) -- Acting on a petition by the developer of the Johannes Addition, Council authorized the preparation of a feasibility report for Project 431. This project includes the installation of trunk storm sewer between Ponds JP -33 and JP -12. The development of the Johannes Addition precipitated this project because staff felt it is more appropriate to install this segment of storm sewer now and not have to install it in the future when this parcel was not owned by one owner. This project is feasible from an engineering standpoint and, • therefore, it would be appropriate to schedule a public hearing for July 16, 1985. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the feasibility report for Project 431 (Johannes Addition trunk storm sewer) and order a public hearing for July 16, 1985. FEASIBILITY REPORT/PUBLIC HEARING/LONE OAK TRUNK WATERMAIN $. Project 447, Receive Feasibility Report/Order Public Hearing (Lone Oak Trunk Watermain) -- Acting on a petition submitted • by the developers of the Lone Oak Addition on May 7, 1985, Council authorized the preparation of a feasibility report to determine the feasibility of providing adequate water pressure and flows to this development. The feasibility report is now complete thereby making it appropriate for Council to authorize a public hearing for July 16, 1985, to consider the improvements as recom- mended by this report. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the feasibility report for Project 447, Lone Oak trunk watermain) and order a public hearing for July 16, 1985. z9 Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Eighteen FEASIBILITY REPORT/PUBLIC HEARING/POND LP -55 OUTLET T. Project 448, Receive Feasibility Report/Order Public Hearing (Pond LP -55 Trunk Storm Sewer Outlet) -- In responding to a complaint by Mr. Ney (Lot 5, Block 2, Oak Chase 2nd Addition) regarding the high water elevation in the pond located partially in Mr. Ney's backyard, staff reviewed the situation and determined the high water problem was probably due to a combination of leakage from the pond to the north (LP -55) and loss of permeability within Mr. Ney's pond itself over the years. To alleviate this problem, Council directed that a feasibility report be prepared to investigate possible alternatives. This report is now complete, thereby making it appropriate for Council to schedule a public • hearing for July 16, 1985, to consider the necessary improvements. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the feasibility report for Project 448 (Pond LP -55 trunk storm sewer outlet) and order a public hearing for July 16, 1985. 11 130 Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Nineteen PROJECT 414, PINE RIDGE DRIVE RECEIVE FEASIBILITY REPORT/ORDER PUBLIC HEARING U. Project 414, Receive Feasibility Report/Order Public Hearing (Pine Ridge Drive - Street Reconstruction) --Acting upon a petition submitted by the residents along Pine Ridge Drive, Council author- ized the preparation of a feasibility report on May 7, 1985. The feasibility report is now complete thereby making it appro- priate for Council to schedule a public hearing for August 6, 1985, to consider the street reconstruction and improvements necessary. • ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the feasibility report for Project 414 (Pine Ridge Drive street reconstruction) and order the public hearing for August 6, 1985. CONTRACT 83-17, FINAL PAYMENT/ACCEPTANCE BORCHERT-INGERSOLL POND, HURLEY LAKE.& SCHWANZ LAKE OUTLETS V. Contract 83-17, Final Payment/Acceptance (Borchert -Ingersoll Pond, Hurley Lake, and Schwanz Lake Outlets) --Contract 83-17 consisted of constructing the lift stations, force mains and necessary appurtenances to provide planned pond water level control facilities for the following ponds: • Borchert -Ingersoll (AP -1 and AP -2) Hurley Lake (JP -11) Schwanz Lake (LP -32) Our consulting engineering firm performed all tests and inspections required by the contract specifications and standard Eagan city policy. These tests indicate all materials and workmanship conform to the requirements of the plans and specifications. Therefore, staff recommends acceptance of this project by Council for perpetual maintenance and approval of the final payment to the contractor. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve final payment to the Austin Keller Construction in of $2,511.00 for City Contract 83-17 and accept for perpetual maintenance. 31 the 9th and the amount this project Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Twenty PUBLIC HEARINGS WESCOTT HILLS FOURTH ADDITION/MULTIFAMILY REVENUE BONDS A. Public Hearing for Multifamily Revenue Bonds for Wescott Hills Fourth Addition in the Amount of $2,100,000--A public hearing was scheduled for the June 4, 1985, City Council meeting and upon request by the developer, the hearing was continued until the June 18 meeting to consider multifamily housing revenue bonds for the Wescott Hills 4th Addition project. The application submitted by the developer is requesting a bond issue in the • amount of $2,100,000. In order to conform with the Council's policy of inducing not more than 808 of the market value appraisal, Miller and Schroeder Municipals Inc. is recommending a reduction in the project amount to $1,880,000. For a copy of the MAI appraisal review by both Miller and Schroeder Munici als Inc. and the actual appraisal, refer to pages _33 through p The project includes two (2) ten unit buildings, one (1) seven -unit building and two (2) four unit buildings containing a total of 35 townhouse units located on a site southwest of Yankee Doodle Road and Mike Collins Drive. All land use and planning requirements are satisfied. For additional information on the original applica- tion, refer to a letter drafted by Miller and Schroeder Municipals Inc. and referenced as pagesC through A copy of the program for the constru tion of a multifamily housing development can be found on page Also attached on pages 7, -through Ais a copy of the resolution and on pages through L is a copy of the application form. • ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: Approve or deny multifamily revenue bonds for Wescott Hills 4th Addiition in the amount of $1,880,000. &Y Toll Free Minnesota (8001 8626002 Toll Free Other States (800) 3286122 k�l Miller & Schroeder Municipals, Inc. Northwestern Financial Center, 7900 Xerxes Avenue South, Minneapolis. Minnesota 55431 • (612) 831-1500 June 12, 1985 Mr. Thomas Hedges City Administrator • City of Eagan 3930 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota 55122 RE: $1,880,000 City of Eagan, Minnesota Multifamily Housing Revenue Bonds (Wescott Hills Fourth Edition) Dear Mr. Hedges: You have asked that we summarize for you, the results of the appraisal on the above referenced proposed project and determine if the developer's request for bond financing is in conformance with the City's adopted guidelines for determining value. • We have reviewed the results of an appraisal prepared by MAI appraiser Alan Leirness of Shenehen & Associates. The appraisal considers the three recognized approaches to determining the value of the project: I. The Direct Sales Comparison Approach to Value II. The Income Approach to Value III. The Cost Approach to Value In looking at the direct sales comparison approach to value, the appraiser considered buildings of similar size which had sold in the area. The land was valued separately at $135,000 based on land sales with the appropriate zoning. As the appraiser continued his evaluation of the building, he considered the value of the subject improvements (buildings) and adjusted the improvements for items such as age, condition and quality of construction. The estimated value of the improvements was $1,925,000. With the value of the land added 33 Headquarters: Minneapolis, Minnesota Branch Offices: Downtown Minneapolis- Solana Beach. California -SantaMonica. California r Northbrook. Illinois- SL Paul. Minnesota, Naples. Flonda•Tallahassee. Flonda•Carson City. Nevada • .�. �... ..r ir.e Cn.... n...a I... e�r..r Itrv�ninn fnr m rTmn Mr. Thomas Hedges June 12, 1985 Page 2 back in, the value of the entire project was estimated at $2,100,000. The appraiser commented that this valuation approach leaves quite a bit to be desired since the age of the comparables are several years older than the subject. For the appraiser, the Income Approach to value is broken down into the following steps: A. Estimate potential gross income. B. Subtract allowances for vacancy and credit losses if • appropriate. C. Estimate and subtract all operating expenses that are typical for this type of real estate investment. D. Calculate the net operating income (NOI). E. Select an appropriate capitalization process and derive the capitalization rates based on a market analysis. F. Apply the selected capitalization process to the anticipated net operating income (NOI). With respect to the Income Approach to value the net operating income, a capitalization rate of 98 was used. This • resulted in.an estimated value of $2,150,000. Discounting is the process of converting forecast future income receipts to a present worth estimate. The mathematical foundation of this process is the basic formula for compound interest. Discounting is the mechanical basis for all income capitalization analysis in income property appraising. Value as of a given valuation date is the discounted present worth of the anticipated future income(s) reasonably expected to be generated by an income-producing property over a specified period of time. The appraiser is called upon to identify the value, as defined, of the future income receipts forecast to be receivable by the holder of a specific interest (rights) in the income-producing realty being appraised. The process by which future income receipts are converted to a present capital -value estimate is termed discounting. 3�- Mr. Thomas Hedges June 12, 1985 Page 3 Capitalization is the process of converting periodic income payments into an appropriate lump -sum capital value. It may be used to estimate either present worth or future worth. Discounting is that form of capitalization specifically concerned with the calculation of present worth of future receipts. Appraisals nearly always involve discounting because the final objective is usually a present -worth estimate. Using the discounted cash flow technique resulted in an • estimated value of $2,154,443. The appraiser commented that this was the best approach, as it considers accurate expenses and current investor yield rate requirements. In looking at the cost approach to value, the appraiser used the Marshall Valuation Cost Manual which conservatively estimates the hard costs of constructing the property. This preliminary study does not measure all "soft costs" nor the value of the subject property when it comes on line in the marketplace. The appraiser looked at some fees which would be necessary to consider in determining the value of constructing the improvements. Some of the fees which were not considered, for example, were the cost of construction financing and interest during that period, letter of credit fees and reserves. Based on the Marshall Valuation process, the value of the improvements was estimated to be $2,000,000. With the • value of the land added back in, the value of the entire project was estimated to be $2,135,000. As you can see, each approach to value is a "check" on the other two. Based on the Council's policy to consider all three approaches to value and based on this appraisal, Shenehen & Associates has given a market value to the Wescott Hills Project of: TWO MILLION THREE HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS 2,350,000 For the Concil's review we are attaching a copy of the letter to the developer from Shenehen & Associates, Inc. This letter is the cover of the appraisal. The appraisal in its entirety is available to the Council upon request. Mr. Thomas Hedges June 12, 1985 Page 4 The applicant is requesting that the City of Eagan give preliminary approval for a bond issue in the amount of $2,100,,000. In order to conform with the Council's policy of inducing not more than 80% of the market value appraisal, we recommend that the Council give preiliminary approval to this project in the amount of $1,880,000. If we can be of any further assistance, please contact me at 893-8920. Very truly yours, • MAC/dwh ,34 MILLER & SCHROEDER MUNICIPALS, INC. �pQ/ & �a5te_ / Marcia A. Cohodes Assistant Vice President • r1 f.J • Shenehon & Associates, Inc. Property valuation Et Market Analysis 903 imicNvest Plaza East, Minneapolis. Minnesota 55402 • (612) 333-6533 May 15, 1985 Mr. Darrel E. Gonyea/Mr. John Houston 1900 West Bloomington Freeway Minneapolis, Minnesota 55431 RE: MARKET VALUE APPRAISAL OF PROPOSED 35 UNIT RENTAL TOWNHOUSE PROJECT Dear Mr. Gonyea: In accordance with your request, we have completed an appraisal of the above referenced property for the purpose of estimating the market value of the fee simple interest. The following written report presents the findings, analyses and conclusions of this appraisal. We have made a complete inspection of the subject property and have fully identified the real estate in our written report. After careful consideration of the many factors influencing value, it is our opinion that the subject property will have a market value upon completion of the project according to specifications, as of April 1, 1986 of: TWO MILLION ONE HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS -------------($2,150,000.00) The value of the project on April 1, 1986 encuinbered with the proposed special financing is: TWO MILLION THREE HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS -----------($2,350,000.00) We have no personal interest or bias with respect to the subject matter of this appraisal report or the parties involved. The appraisal is made subject to certain assumptions and limiting conditions which are listed in this report. It conforms with accepted professional, ethical and performance standards of the real estate appraisal practice. If you have any questions or comments after reading this appraisal, please contact us. AJan P. Leimess • TirnottH E. Mardell • HaAard E. Shenehon • Robert J. Stradiota .` '51 Mr. Darrel E. Gonyea May 15, 1985 Page Two The undersigned appraiser certifies that he has personally inspected the property and has investigated information believed to be pertinent to the valuation of the property, and to the best of his knowledge and belief the statements and opinions expressed herein are correct and reasonable, subject to the limiting conditions set forth herein. S10MUN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Certified to this 15th day of May, 1985 Joseph R. Cook, Appraiser i, John G. Flaherty, Appraiser This appraisal has been reviewed and approved by the undersigned, who certifies that to the best of his knowledge and belief the statements and opinions expressed herein are correct and reasonable, subject to the limiting conditions set forth herein. The undersigned reviewer has inspected the subject property. S10EMN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Certified to this 15th day of May, 1985 � /; Alan P. Leirness, MAI, SRPA /kg • Toll Free Minnesota (800) 862-6002 Toll Free Other States (800) 328-6122 Miller & Schroeder Municipals, Inc. Northwestern Financial Center. 7900 Xerxes Avenue South, Minneapolis. Minnesota 55431 • (612) 831-1500 May 1, 1985 Mr. Thomas L. Hedges City Administrator City of Eagan • 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota 55122 Re: $2,100,000 City of Eagan Multifamily Housing Revenue Bonds (Wescott Hills Fourth Edition Project) Dear Mr. Hedges: Miller & Schroeder has been approached by a developer interested in utilizing Eagan's multifamiy housing bond program. The developers, Mr. John C. Houston and Mr. Darrel E. Gonyea currently are involved with projects in Lakeville and Apple Valley in addition to various other developments in Bloomington, Eden Prairie and Eagan. • Mr. Houston and Mr. Gonyea are proposing to develop a multifamily housing project southwest of Yankee Doodle Road and Mike Collins Drive. The proposed project will consist of two 10 unit buildings, one 7 unit building and two 4 unit buildings containing a total of 35 townhouse units. Each unit will have approximately 1252 square feet plus an attached 2 -car garage. It is anticipated that the size of the bond issue would not exceed $2,100,000. It is the request of Mr. Houston and Mr. Gonyea that the Wescott Hills Fourth Edition Project be on the agenda for May 7, 1985 City Council meeting,. to set a June 4, 1985 Public Hearing date. It is the desire of the developers to be considered for preliminary approval at the June 4th public hearing. At that time, or sooner, if you feel it appropriate, Mr. Houston and Mr. Gonyea will present its renderings of the proposed project, in addition to locational maps and individual unit floor plans. Enclosed with this letter you will find the developers' formal application for bond approval along with the application fee and the necessary resolutions and notices. Headquar2m inneapolis. Minnesota Branch Offices: Downtown Minneapolis- Solana Beach.California -Santa Monica. California -Northbrook, Illinois- St. Paul. Minnesota • Naples. Floncla•Tallahassee. Flonda•Carson City. Nevada ?1.mp•i of inry $emuues Imesmr Roteeion Carpormnn Mr. Thomas L. Hedges May 1, 1985 Page two If you should have any questions on this project please do not hesitate to call me at 893-8920. Very truly yours, MILLER & SCHROEDER MUNICIPALS, INC. `iumb,a �&ocf ee/ Marcia A. Cohodes Assistant Vice President MAC/pmh Enclosures M • • PROGRAM FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A MULTIFAMILY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C (the "Act"), the City of Eagan (the "City") has been authorized to develop and administer programs of multifamily housing developments under the circumstances and within the limitations set forth in the Act. Minnesota Statutes, Section 462C.07 provides that such programs for multifamily housing developments may be financed by revenue bonds issued by the City. The City has received a proposal from Mr. John Maiston and Mr. Darrel E. Gonyea that, pursuant to the authority found in the Act, the City approve a program providing for the construction of approximately thirty-five (35) units of rental housing ("Housing Units") located • southwest of Yankee Doodle Road and Mike Collins Drive in the City (the "Project"). The construction of the Project is to be funded through the issuance of up to $2,100,000 in revenue bonds issued by the City (the "Bonds"). It is proposed that the bonds be sold publicly through an underwriter and, that the Bonds will include some form of credit enhancement, such as additional collateral, insurance or a letter of credit, -in order to provide favorable interest rates. Following construction of the Project, the Developer, or a related entity, will own and operate the Project as a multifamily residential rental project. The thirty-five (35) townhouse units will consist of two bedroom apartments, of which twenty percent (20i) of the units will be specifically reserved for tenants whose incomes are not greater than eighty percent (80X) of the area median income. It is estimated that rents for the Housing Units will be between $595 and $635 per month. The City, in establishing this multifamily housing program (the "Program"), has considered the information contained in the City's 462C Housing Plan, adopted on April 17, 1984 (the "Housing Plan"), including particularly (i) the availability and affordability of other government housing programs; (ii) the availability and affordability of private mar- ket financing for the acquisition and rehabilitation of multifamily housing units; (iii) an analysis of population, unemployment trends and projections of future population trends and future employment needs; (iv) the recent housing trends and future housing needs of the City; and (v) an analysis of how the, Program will meet the needs of persons and families residing and expected to reside in the City. The City, in adopting the Program, has further considered (i) the amount, timing and sale of Bonds to finance the estimated costs of the housing units, to fund the appropriate reserves and to pay the cost of issuance; (ii) the method of monitoring and implementation of the Program to insure compliance with the City's housing plan and its objectives; (iii) the method of administering, servicing and supervising the Program; (iv) the costs to the City, including future administrative expenses; (v) the restrictions of the multifamily development to be financed under the Program; and (vi) certain other limitations. T� -1- CITY OF EAGAN RESOLUTION ADOPTING A HOUSING BOND PROGRAM FOR THE ISSUANCE OF MULTIFAMILY HOUSING REVENUE BONDS,FOR THE 14ESCOTT HILLS FOURTH ADDITION PROJECT AND AUTHORIZING SUB- MISSION OF SAME TO THE MINNESOTA HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY AND THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL. WHEREAS, pursuant to the Minnesota Municipal Housing Act, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C (the "Act"), the City of Eagan (the "City") is authorized to adopt a housing plan and carry out programs for the financing of multifamily housing which is affordable to persons of low and moderate income; and WHEREAS, the Act requires adoption of the housing plan after a public hearing held thereon after publication of notice in a newspaper • of general circulation in the City at least thirty days in advance of the hearing; and WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing on a proposed housing plan amendment was published on February 22, 1984; and WHEREAS, the City adopted the City's Housing Plan Amendment (the "Plan") on April 17, 1984, after a public hearing on March 22, 1984, continued to April 17, 1984; and WHEREAS, in accordance with its requirements, the Plan provides for programs for the issuance of bonds to finance multifamily housing development which are affordable to persons and families of low and moderate income and are consistent with the goals, conditions and requirements of'the Plan; and WHEREAS, the City has received from Mr. John C. Houston and Mr. 40 Darrel E. Gonyea (the "Developer") a proposal to construct a multi- family housing development of approximately 35 townhouse units on property located southwest of Yankee Doodle Road and Mike Collins Drive in the City (the "Project"), and a request for the City to issue housing revenue bonds in the amount of approximately $2,100,000 for the Project; and WHEREAS, the Act requires adoption of a program after a public hearing held thereon after publication of notice in a newspaper of general circulation in the City at least fifteen days in advance of the hearing before the issuance of bonds for the Project; and WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing on a proposed housing program for the Project (the "Program") was published on May 16, 1985; and �y WHEREAS, the City has on this date conducted a public hearing on the Program; and WHEREAS, the Act further requires submission of the Program to the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (the "MHFA") for its approval; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Eagan: 1. That the Program for the issuance of up to $2,100,000 of the City's multifamily housing revenue bonds is hereby in all respects adopted. 2. That the City Manager is hereby authorized to submit the Program to the MHFA, and to do all other things and take all other actions as may be necessary or appropriate to carry out the Program in accordance with the Act and any other applicable laws and regulations. • 3. The Developer has agreed to pay directly or through the City any and all costs incurred by the City in connection with the Project whether or not the Project is approved by the MHFA; whether or not the Project is carried to completion; and whether or not the bonds or operative instruments are executed. 4. Miller & Schroeder Municipals, Inc, is hereby designated as underwriter of the bonds to be used in connection with the Project, its fee to be paid out of the proceeds of the bonds when and if issued. 5. The adoption of this resolution does not constitute a guarantee or a firm commitment that the City will issue the bonds as requested by the Developer. The City retains the right in its sole discretion to withdraw from participation and accordingly not issue the bonds should the City at any time prior to the issuance thereof determine that it is in the best interest of the City not to issue the bond or should the parties to the transaction be unable to reach agreement as to the terms and conditions of any of the documents required for the transaction. ADOPTED: ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor �3 c CITY OF EAGAN, MINNESOTA Multifamily Housing Bond Program Request Date April 30, 1985 1. Name of Project WESCOTT HILLS FOURTH ADDITION Project Address Eagan, Minn (SW of Yankee Doodle Road & Mike Collins Drive) 2. Applicant Name John C. Houston and Darrel E. Gonyea Address % Gonyea Land, 9100 W Bloomington Freeway, Bloomington, Mn 55431 Contact Person John C. Houston Darrel E. Gonyea • Telephone Numbers (612)423-2995 (612)888-1112 3. Form of Business (check one) Sole Proprietorship Partnership % Corporation If parcnership, include names of partners and ownership interest. John C. Houston - 50% Darrel E. Gonyea - 50% 4. Partnership's Legal Counsel (firm name) Best & Flanagan Address 3500 IDS Tower Minneapolis, Mn 55402 Cort_ ,: Pgrso„ Jim Olson Telephone Number (612)339-7121 • 5. Experience in multifamily construction and/or rehabilitation. CITY PROJECT NAME Ik UNITS Lakeville Acorn Hts Replat 10 Apple Valley Farquar Hills 100 And various other developments in Bloomington, Eden Prairie and Eagan. 6. Project Description: 35 townhouse units in Wescott Hills Fourth Addirion in Eagan, Minnesota, consisting to two 10 unit buildings, one 7 unit building and two 4 unit buildings. Each unit will have about 1252 square feet plus an attached 2 -car garage. 7. The total cost of the project will be approximately $ 2,100,000 • 8. Source and Use of Funds: Source: Bonds 1,680,000 Developer Equity 420,000 Other Total Use: Construction Costs 1,680,000 Other 497,105 -2- 2,100,000 2,100,000 9. Has the applicant utilized bond financing elsewhere in Minnesota or in other States: No X Yes If yes, specify location and purpose: Appraisal is in progress by Alan Lierness of 10. Appraised value of project $ Shenehon & Associates Source of Appraisal (check one) MAI X Other • If other, identify some source and method of determining appraised value. Please remit your chp-'c in the amount of $500 payable to the City of Eagan, to the attentiu:: o: Ms. Marcia A Cohodes MILLER & SCHROEDER MUNICIPALS, INC. 7900 Xerxes Avenue South Suite 2300 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55431 Include two copies of this application with your check. 116 -3- Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Twenty -One CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/WERNER LEMBKE A. Annual Review, Conditional Use Permit, (Werner Lembke) -- The City received a complaint approximately two (2) months ago from West Publishing Company about the condition of the Werner Lembke property. As a result of the complaint, a direction was given by the City Council to have City staff review the property and ask that Mr. Lembke comply with all conditions set forth in the conditional use permit. To date, there is not compliance with the conditions as outlined in the April • 4, 1985, letter from the Chief Building Inspector. The City staff will make a final investigation prior to the City Council meeting and report on the conditional use permit at the meeting oesday. For additional information, refer to pages V through -!5'/ . ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the annual review of the Werner Lembke conditional use permit. • of eagan 3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD. P.O. BOX 21199 BEA BLOMQUIST EAGAN, MINNESOTA 55121 Mayor PHONE: (612) 454-8100 THOMAS EGAN JAMES A SMITH JERRY THOMAS THEODORE WACHTER corm Members June 4, 1985 THOMAS HEDGES CIN Admimftator ' EUGENE VAN OVERBEKE COV Crary MR. WERNER LEMBKE 545 WESCOTT RD EAGAN MN 55122 Dear Mr. Lembke: Two months have gone by since the attached letter by Dale Peterson was sent to you. The letter summarized the provisions of the Conditional Use Permit which allows you to do business at your location. We have seen no evidence of compliance with those conditions. As a result, we have scheduled a review of your Conditional Use Permit before the Eagan City Council at 7:00 p.m. on June 18, 1985. If you comply with these provisions prior to that date your Condi- tional Use Permit will be, renewed. If not, or if you fail to attend the June 18th meeting, your Conditional Use Permit will be revoked. If you have any questions, feel .free to call me at 454-8100. Sincerely, Gre H. Ingraham Assistant Planner GHI:jbd attachments CC: Thomas Hedges, City Administrator Pat Geagan, Administrative Captain, Eagan Police Dept. Paul Hauge, City Attorney THE LONE OAK TREE... THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY I of eagan 3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD. P.O. BOX 21199 BEA BLOMQUIST EAGAN. MINNESOTA 55121 Yam PHONE: (612) 454-8100 THOMAS EGAN JAMES A. SMITH April 4, 1985 JERRY THOMAS THEODORE WACHTER ' Council Ma ms THOMAS HEDGES Cry Aa m ftafq NR 11ERNER LE6IBKE EUGENE VAN OVERBEKE ON Cllk 545 WESCOTT RD ..EAGAN, NN 55123 Dear Nr Lembke: The Eagan City Council at the regular meeting of April 2, 1985 directed me to • enforce the provisions of your Conditional Use Permit. Failure to do so would indicate to us that you no longer desire to do business at that location in Eagan and are willing to have the permit revoked. Conditional Use Permits are designed to protect Eagan citizens property values and environment. Cn April 19,' 1983, You signed an agreement with the City 'to- meet the following conditions in return for the privilege of operating a business at,..Lot 1, Block 1, Lembke Addition: 1) Install green areas with 28 double needle Blue Spruce to screen the outside storage of trucks as shown. 2) Install concrete curbed driveways as shown. 3) Install bituminous drives and parking as shown. 4) Install clean, crushed rock in storage areas as shown. 5) Keep lawn areas weed free and mowed. 6) Keep stored tractors and trailers in an orderly manner. I feel quite confident that you will want to maintain a good image in the City and will take immediate steps to fulfill your obligations. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. Sincerely, '1iCGF.L �� Dale Peterson Chief Building Official DP/js CC: Tom Hedges,.' city Administrator THE LONE OAK TREE... THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY V LEMBKE FIRST r EAG• 1 .... ••. exlsrlpG .. OFFI� fuSEO o4Sf ADDITION • EXISTING GRASS AREA TO REMAIN AS IS , u p P I i GR4 D:NG LIMITS 9� j W _ GRAVEL / - CRU 7dIHED 'a • y PsED 6uOPOSu DING p ]L d PROPOSED -!� d FLOOR ., ELEV.-9183 ROC iK SURFA CE� i I- u 1 w I.O ' 3 b B1T4M1a10US Sit E• a +- /I� �L 5c".Wlok SNR-IPPER `I`v f I 7D4 1 - lj . fo G AREA tyw< ua, Resour. CIYLe kwo RDLKE 1 - yIG1, 14 Mw<-Jdlq'oNe� dy llet✓t� WESCOTT f N �CACc: L Inch - 4'r C^et C� pe4DTEs UL5 EMPaoTee PAQ.'I. — Denotes proposed dre[nage elevations and contours shown are proposed except, those I shown on Wescott Road N Prepared By: Delmar H. Schwanz Land Surveyor, Re.. `Io. 86, Address: 2978 145th St..We: Rosemount, Mn. 7 55..68 z 'II Dated: May 1, 1980 IN SUPS gpIieecaaBRG 23J 1982 j Rzitseo JA NV.Aeof 19, On ro EXISTING CURB Cooc-SPTyNL. LOCATIOm 1'LALA r0L .. SCR.EELLIUC, %m ILud BFLY SEE co"er 1-i t t= T DELMAR H. SCHWANZ LAND SURVEYOR 5, iniG Registered Under Laws Of The State or Minnesota 2978 — 145TH STREET W. — BOX M ROSEMOUNT, MINNESOTA 55068 PHO E 612 423.1769 SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE _? m c1 to V, u cA Oil n ��'/ Q Z+e3 �oo"T7 17ou91g N��IDI.E , Ul..1H_ JF+Puc.fZ PSA 1.rTlV4 130 `O LD.TIOV I Sc�Eunw SNRu88�e� PRoPFerh LIAjF S C.0 TT ' Fsc(� _ �-eu 11.4 MINNESOTA REGISTRATION NO. 8625 • • Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Twenty -Two REVISED PRELIMINARY PLAT/LEXINGTON PLACE SOUTH B. U.S. Home Corporation for a Revised Preliminary Plat of Lexington Place South Second Addition -- At the June 4, 1985, City Council meeting, a revised preliminary plat of Lexington Place South 2nd Addition was presented for consideration. The direction given to U.S. Home Corporation after City Council review was to examine the possibility of increasing lot widths and essentially increase the size of lots in the Lexington Place South 2nd Addition. By changing the size of the lots, it might be possible to increase the subdivision by a few new lots and at the same time maintain the open space desired by the Advisory Parks & Recreation Commission. U.S. Home Corporation did review the possibility of changing lot lines, however, due to the inplace utility locations, it is not possible to change lot lines without moving utility locations. Therefore, the replat is not feasible. The U.S. Home Corporation has reviewed the Lexington Place South 2nd Addition and would like to present a change to their original request for a revised preliminary plat. The new preliminary plat provides a reduction of three (3) lots. For additional information on this item, refer to the Planning Department report 1 found on pages J 3 through t,3 For additional information and a review by the Advisory Parks & Recreation Commission, refer to/ �he Director of Parks & Recreation memorandum found on page i4_ ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED request by the U.S. Home liminary plat of Lexington ON THIS ITEM: Corporation to Place South 2nd 4� To approve or deny the consider a revised pre - Addition. MEMO TO: THOMAS L HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: DALE C RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER DATE: JUNE 13, 1985 SUBJECT: UPDATE ON LEXINGTON PLACE SOUTH 2ND ADDITION At the June 4, 1985 City Council meeting, the Council reviewed the Lexington Place South 2nd Addition and moved to deny the replatting of the outlots unless the applicant looks at the lots in the NE portion of the development and increases all lot sizes throughout the development in order to replat Outlot A & C of the 2nd Addition. • Staff has met with the applicants and reviewed the Lexington Place 2nd Addition to look at the development as it stands at the present time. The first exhibit attached denotes the utilities which are presently in place. Moving lot lines would change the location of water, sewer, electric, telephone and gas service stubs which have been provided to each lot. It appears to be almost impossible to replat the already created lots by expanding and making then larger without having to change all of the hookups and granting easements for the new design of lots. The Second suggestion is what would happen if lot lines were extended from the already created lots to take up the place of Outlot A & C. In review of this alternative, Staff has looked at the potential of extending lot lines to replace the outlots. It appears that the depth of the lots range in the neighborhood of 325' to 300' by a width of 65' which would make a very long, • narrow lot. These lots may not be maintained by the owner creating a no -man's zone which could be a potential problem for the City in requiring upkeep of a portion of the lot which is not maintained by the property owner. This issue was brought up to the applicant and they also have indicated they do not feel this solution would work in this particular subdivision. The last possibility would be replatting Outlots A & C into 16 lots rather than the 19 that were originally proposed. The applicant has reduced the number of lots by 3 and has made all of the newly created lots as large or larger than what is platted in the 1st Addition of Lexington Place South. In review of this revised site plan, the applicant has attempted to increase the size of the lots being platted but is still trying to keep continuity within the overall Lexington Place South Addition. !3 UPDATE - LEXINGTON PLACE SOUTH 2ND ADDITION PAGE 2 JUNE 13, 1985 There are numerous alternatives that could be, addressed, but the main issue is will the City allow the replat of the outlots or will they require the open space be -maintained. If the City will allow the outloE, how many lots will the City require in each of these outlots and how would the continuity be addressed in relationship to the overall plat. This has been a second attempt to take into consideration the concern of the City and also try to increase the lot sizes from what was originally approved. If anyone has questions or would like other addressed, please feel free to contact me at information can be provided at the June 18, 1985 Dale C. Runkle DCR:jbd 5 items specifically City Hall so this Council meeting. • 0 Revised Prelimincry Plat: LEXINGTON PLACE SOUTH CITY OF EAGAN (Pert of W( of SWief see eL,l tl.4i)) Wdh.m M. 3—Ph , 010 14 6 1II— rag ° �� a• 1.0 {1^..e. 1aa '1ea�. LO •� t �w° l N f ... n+ 1I is 1'o:S FX IR a .lip UIs p� a r o 3 o:... e r Wal/... I arrn.ra .". i'3 t P SM1r OJ3�C �Z: Stole+ 1'•100' . \10 / A e �_i.o� ]ep J f I- I ] g ° S z v v e I1— voo °O � 0 0': I• W° J �_—_.^ r—✓r —ram j .6 1° a •�- of • a • I b o � � • ti G • • —I ee • w Jo , 1 "B�•.,^l �— — __ I ae IL=' _ z — 0) _ S (c.unlr Reed n0 L]) • S a • b —J�_—' ---SY• F0.ANC11 ]V4�G I /ehgl Y. [G.IGr,alel. I � � SITE DATA: 50 1]4 Leh 2] leas Ov een GO .110' minnwmn LV size 10,°00 S. It eomle let m.e LL00 le 01 intmn\.n IN Gree LAND ALLOCATION: 1 L] ]e..$ Sb Gd{ 1.00 G.r.f Q,, Sb., us A..n Let% Ile , C.R. WINOEN III ASSOCIATES. INC. uw a11RYeWR, it emm ]rG[n aa. NLa. YIIeL{On area / IMTf p.00. Lal LINKS H0i FYi[r{ 4d.d ]� a 8 Kal 0rlo ]0' laYn]1.w \N fa' It 0 ', )w f . \10 / A e �_i.o� ]ep J f I- I ] g ° S z v v e I1— voo °O � 0 0': I• W° J �_—_.^ r—✓r —ram j .6 1° a •�- of • a • I b o � � • ti G • • —I ee • w Jo , 1 "B�•.,^l �— — __ I ae IL=' _ z — 0) _ S (c.unlr Reed n0 L]) • S a • b —J�_—' ---SY• F0.ANC11 ]V4�G I /ehgl Y. [G.IGr,alel. I � � SITE DATA: 50 1]4 Leh 2] leas Ov een GO .110' minnwmn LV size 10,°00 S. It eomle let m.e LL00 le 01 intmn\.n IN Gree LAND ALLOCATION: 1 L] ]e..$ Sb Gd{ 1.00 G.r.f Q,, Sb., us A..n Let% Ile , C.R. WINOEN III ASSOCIATES. INC. uw a11RYeWR, it emm ]rG[n aa. NLa. YIIeL{On area r / G p L Utilities shown are: Sanitary Sewer Storm Sewer Water Electrical Not shown: Telephone Gas o Denotes Manhole Denotes Fire Hydrant Denotes Catch Basin Denotes Sewer & !-:,-Iter Se.rvicu Stu o Denotes Electrical. Transformer v Denotes Underground F.lcctrical. pedestal 1 Denotes Electrical Service Stuh • • SITE DATA LEXINGTON PLACE SOUTH Total acres = 43.14 (excluding Outlots A & C) Total Lots = 134 Average Lot Area = 10,860 sq ft 9,474 sq ft excluding ponding easements Average Lot Width = 61.1 (63.3) 3.11 units/acre gross 4.01 units/acre net Proposed LEXINGTON PLACE SOUTH 2ND ADDITION • Total acres = 6.84 (Outlots A & C) Additional Lots = 19 Average Lot Area = 14,140 sq ft 10,200 sq ft excluding ponding easements Average Lot Width = 61.1 (64.2) 2.78 units\acre gross 3.08 units\acre net Proposed LEXINGTON PLACE SOUTH 2ND ADDITION - REVISED Total acres = 6.84 (Outlots A & C) Additional Lots = 16 Average Lot Area = 16,800 sq ft • 12,120 sq ft.excluding ponding easements Average Lot Width = 72.6 (76.3) 2.34 units\acre gross 2.59 units\acre net LEXINGTON PLACE SOUTH & proposed LEXINGTON PLACE SOUTH 2ND ADDITION Total Acres = 49.98 Total Lots = 153 Average Lot Area = 11,350 sq ft 9,560 sq ft excluding ponding easements Average Lot Width = 61.1 (63.8) 3.06 units\acre gross 3.87 units\acre net LEXINGTON PLACE SOUTH & proposed LEXINGTON PLACE SOUTH 2ND ADDITION - REVISED Total Acres = 49.98 Total Lots = 150 Average Lot Area = 11,570 sq ft 9,760 sq ft excluding ponding easements Average Lot Width = 62.3 (64.7) 3.00 units\acre gross 3.79 units\acre net • • L u LOTS GROUPED BY AREA LEXINGTON PLACE SOUTH No. Lots Area Sq Ft 14 6600 - 7000 16 7000 - 8000 22 8000 - 9000 17 9000 - 10,000 16 10,000 - 11,000 10 11,000 - 12,000 12 12,000 - 13,000 11 13,000 - 15,000 10 15,000 - 20,000 6 20,000 - 37,000 134 LOTS GROUPED BY AREA proposed LEXINGTON PLACE SOUTH 2ND ADDITION No. Lots Area Sq Ft 0 6600 - 7000 2 7000 - 8000 5 8000'- 9000 3 9000 - 10,000 2 10,000 - 11,000 2 11,000 - 12,000 1 12,000 - 13,000 0 13,000 - 15,000 0 15,000 - 20,000 4 20,000 - 37,000 LOTS GROUPED BY AREA proposed LEXINGTON PLACE SOUTH 2ND ADDITION - REVISED No. Lots Area Sq Ft 0 6600 - 7000 0 7000 - 8000 0 8000 - 9000 4 9000 - 10,000 2 10,000 - 11,000 2 11,000 - 12,000 2 12,000 - 13,000 2 13,000 - 15,000 0 15,000 - 20,000 4 20,000 - 44,400 i(0 LEXINGTON PLACE SOUTH 6-10-85 BLOCK LOT GROSS AREA NET AREA POND AREA LOT WIDTH 1 1 9,800 SQ FT 60' (70) 1 2 8,400 60' 1 3 9,800 70' 1 4 8,400 60' 1 5 9,800 70' 1 6 9,800 70' 1 7 9,800 70' 1 8 9,670 60' (70) 2 1 8,800 70' (80) 2 2 6,600 60' 2 3 8,800 70' (80) 2 4 61600 60' 2 5 6,600 60' 2 6 6,600 60' 2 7 6,600 60' 2 8 6,670 60' 2 9 6,810 60' 2 10 7,510 60' 2 11 11,620 60' 2 12 12,510 60' 2 13 8,690 61' 2 14 9,900 60' (80) 2 15 9,920 60' (80) 2 16 7,440 60' 2 17 7,440 60' 2 18 81740 60' 2 19 9,510 60' 2 20 9,480 60' 2 21 8,490 63' 2 22 6,940 60' 2 23 6,860 60' 2 24 6,830 60' 2 25 7,120 60' 2 26 6,680 60' 2 27 61610 60' 2 28 6,600 60' 2 29 61600 60' 3 1 91280 67' 3 2 9,550 60' 3 3 15,800 81820 6,980 60' 3 4 21,090 8,920 12,170 60' 3 5 16,900 60' 3 6 14,760 60' 3 7 12,160 60' 3 8 12,200 60' 3 9 16,330 60' (80) 4 1 10,510 8,170 2,340 72' 4 2 8,920 6,760 2,160 60' 4 3 11,230 6,550 4,680 60' 4 4 11,340 6,550 4,790 60' 4 5 11,230 6,480 4,750 60' m LJ • U 6 12,450 7,160 5,290 60' 7 10,190 7,020 3,170 60' 8 8,500 61340 2,160 60' 9 11,550 65' (75) 10 7,770 63' 11 8,590 6,320 2,270 63' 12 10,220 6,370 3,850 63' 13 10,600 6,100 4,500 63' 14 10,170 5,850 4,320 60' 15 10,710 6,750 3,960 63' 16 10,710 8,910 1,800 63' 17 10,110 63' 18 11,670 75' 1 10,040 60' (80) 2 7,570 60' 3 7,610 60' 4 7,650 60' 5 7,690 60' 6 7,720 60' 7 7,850 60' 8 8,470 60' 9 9,160 60' 10 10,500 60' 11 12,650 60' 12 15,860 60' 13 10,310 65' (75) 14 10,020 60' 15 12,540 60' 16 11,880 60' 17 9,820 60' 18 8,390 60' 19 7,490 60' 20 7,050 60' 1 7,470 60' 2 8,540 60' 3 10,330 60' 4 13,060 60' 5 17,140 60' 6 23,250 60' 7 31,390 16,990 14,400 60' 8 27,620 11,130 16,490 60' 9 21,870 10,100 11,770 60' 10 18,010 60' 11 15,450 60' 12 13,880 60' 13 17,740 54' (84) 1 11,810 60' (70) 2 12,000 60' 3 13,200 12,120 1,080 60' 4 13,200 11,040 2,160 60' 5 13,200 10,140 3,060 60' 6 13,200 9,240 3,960 60' 7 14,030 8,630 5,400 60' 8 15,900 8,340 7,560 60' 9 15,220 71480 7,740 60' 10 10,610 62' (72) 6/ 11 9,970 63' 12 12,130 10,550 1,580 63' 13 11,050 8,530 2,520 63' 14 9,130 62' (72) 15 7,950 60' 16 81970 7,350 1,620 60' 17 10,,550 71020 3,530 60' 18 11,350 6,670 4,680 60' 1 8,800 60' 2 8,860 60' 3 8,210 60' (70) 4 7,310 60' 5 13,940 60' 6 13,340 60' 7 12,980 9,450 31890 60' 8 12,130 6,730 5,400 60' 9 12,100 6,700 5,400 60' 10 12,070 6,670 5,400 60' 11 20,040 11,040 9,000 60' (100) • 1 10,690 63' 2 9,070 61' 3 8,890 61' 4 8,830 61' 5 8,400 60' 6 8,400 60' 7 8,400 60' 8 14,000 60' (100) 0 PRIGUMIMARY PLAT -REVISED------- OF, - - - - Wr IEEINCION PLAIT SOUTH SECOND ADDITION t L_ CARDIN A� 7mh ---------- U.S. _-_____0.5. Box Corporetlao 1712 Hopkins Crossroad Hine.taoka, Minnecuta 55363 / } 1 Z 1 IEN W m \ IS 6 2 t cn 70 i3 I r' ' 'y / `� gyp. / ; /0 "..�,.\o ^l .•y is TeO -'' \c ' T J1 I 9Cf� �lrs A / hOJ s, 4 ! 74 to 01__— I I OGT / ✓ "- I / /o-... _-�``. R! 12 (o..; H ' - ;1 1 ;v a 6��. L_____-___ T0• / a r v h c" H :I t \]f� .tea COURT q a , oat CANARY /' \: no ' 78 u e cs •ss I y �-- t Go 22 1 24 j 21 26 It so 160 s � P 26 / L SCALE IN FEET SETBACKS: N / SITE DATA Front 30' 20�\° °/ / Interior Lot Linea �P•P/ ;. b 27 ' r� SH Single Fen11y Into Nouea 10' 6rrb,f. • 7Y` - 7 V (60' a 110' Ninirnm) Garage 5' '0 Vie? V� QyQ` 3.1 U.Sts/Acre IncludingCourt Side -scree[ 20' m Gonory 2H 3.3 Ualte/Acre Excluding Canary Court ./ / Iherebs_'A}ythat:hIr wary. plan' -port \ , 0' _ / 11.51+ Acres Inc. car prep.nd Fy me m wbr my dirry y: --o V O / 0.65± Acres Canary Court ruin tad Sursgror wu-r ::e lax: ul ti:e S:er o: 5lir r / \ 12.16+ Acres Total / 4� / �O DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY ON s - �� lot 1. De:r 3 -2p -BS Q ( °4Oy Block 3; late 1 through 5, inclusive, Block 6; Lot. 14 18, 5�^-1 - Dnxa DD - A G__ 'Its, '9/l - �' �� / through incl uslve. Block 6; Lot. 1 through 4, Ourk.d_Approvrd Cd9 \ Nv0p AYEN4 / inclusive. Black 7; 18. Revised 6-R-b5-t•N...q NO 'J Block 76, f- 4J) // LLor ot. Block 9: C. R. Winden & Associates, lne. L Oudot A; .Jj'p-� -- outlet C; Land Su-gora 1381 Eustihone Sly. 55108 All in Lexlogtoa Place South, 36,16 - Dakota County, Minnesota. M NO TO: TOM HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS & RECREATION DATE: JUNE 12, 1985 RE: LEXINGTON SOUTH 2ND ADDITION ADVISORY PARKS & REC COHN ACTION The Advisory Parks & Recreation Commission was made aware of the City Council's actions concerning the proposed Lexington South 2nd Addition. Systems Planner Ingraham reviewed elements of the discussion by the City Council which the Advisory Parks & Recreation Commission was pleased to note. Commission asked staff to relate to the City Council its concurrence that the proposed platting of these two outlots not be approved in their proposed • configuration. Members supported continuation of this area to be used as open space as it is currently platted or through the extension of a lot line through these outlots. Because of questions and uncertainties, Commission asked that this proposed plat be returned to the Advisory Commission should the developer amend the proposed second addition. KV/js CC: Dale Runkle, City Planner Julie Dykstra, Planning Secretary 4r -• Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Twenty -Three USE PERMIT/SELF SERVICE CAR WASH C. Dean Fulmer for a Conditional Use Permit to Allow a Self - Service Car Wash (Century Addition) -- At the last regular meeting of the City Council, a motion for reconsideration was approved for the conditional use permit application in the name of Dean Fulmer to construct a self-service car wash and also a 20 foot variance to allow a 10 foot setback from the rear lot line • of Lot 3, Block 1, Century Addition. The Advisory Planning Commission had reviewed the application at the April 23, 1985 meeting and noted that car washes are conditional uses in all commercial zones except for neighborhood business zones and therefore recommended denial of the project. Action taken by the City Council at the May 21 meeting was consistent with the Advisory Planning Commission action. At the last City Council meeting, there was a brief discussion about the proposed self service car wash and a motion to reconsider. Therefore, this item is placed on the agenda for consideration by the City Council. For additional information, refer to the Planning Department report on pages (e& through For action taken by the APC, refer to those minutes on page _7Z_, ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny a conditional use permit to construct a self-service car wash in • the Century Addition. If approved, to approve or deny a 20 foot setback variance for that facility. '5 C CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCE APPLICANT: DEAN FULMER LOCATION: LOT 3, BLOCK 1, CENTURY ADDITION EXISTING ZONING: NB - NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: APRIL 23, 1985 DATE OF REPORT: APRIL 11, 1985 REPORTED BY: GREG H. INGRAHAM, ASSISTANT PLANNER • REVIEWED BY: DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER APPLICATION SUMMARY: The applicant wishes to construct a self-service car wash on the northwest corner of Century Point and Coachman Road. Car washes are permitted uses in the General Business zone and conditional uses in other commercial zones except for Neighborhood Business which makes no mention of the car wash use. The issue would be whether self-service car washes are acceptable (with conditions) in N.B. and whether they are appropriate in this specific location. CTwo site plans have been submitted, one of which ("A") would require a 20' variance from the 30' rear yard setback. The other ("B") meets all the setback requirements. The "A" plan would have less impact on the apartments to the north since the circulation would be oriented east -west instead of north -south in the "B" plan. The exterior would be architectural block. • If the Conditional Use Permit is approved it shall be subject to the following conditions: C 1) At least a 3' high berm and suitable landscape screening shall be installed along the north property line prior to operation.of the car wash. 2) Hours of operation shall be restricted to between 7 a.m. and 10 P.M. 3) If plan "A" is approved the exit drive shall be moved 100' to the west and a landscaped green area shall occur between the exit and entrance drives. 4) A detailed landscaping plan shll be submitted prior to construction showing the species, size and location. A NB L EC, rd lu-Ac DENS R: 2. Baf� H H TS PD .. ... . ...... - 81-3 A AR R-1 7A NK R -,A ADDITIM S - A IR -4 Z —C Lz I R-2 791, FF 9T Y BLACKHAYVK PARK GPD PK 77-2 A A F A PD %P2 I i L I R tpW HIL!-ANDAL BLACKHAYVK PARK GPD PK 77-2 A A F A PD %P2 7s rN N V1. V� �616 —� EQUI�'i31EilJT �C'CM VACuLM0(Au;A k ) VReUum S LAA10 Se APE A 2EA oQ t?ep P, opc,&'e x S .7/,-1 eK 1 7- .-1kca lz T7 ,e at'L y, jyNJ)ScAPe �J,eEA it n A ----------- VACuLM0(Au;A k ) VReUum S LAA10 Se APE A 2EA oQ t?ep P, opc,&'e x S .7/,-1 eK 1 7- .-1kca lz T7 ,e at'L y, jyNJ)ScAPe �J,eEA it n A ----------- /pL , , - 10 ti 60' LO I 64tarmEwr-Zoom � jlwj jo LAA)DSCAPE A (LEA o7151 /i,e tjb5 C A h: � jlwj jo LAA)DSCAPE A (LEA o7151 /i,e tjb5 C A h: APC Minutes April 23, 1985 FULMER CAR WASH - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT S VARIANCE Greg Ingraham introduced the application of Dean Fulmer for a conditional use permit for a self-service car wash and for a 20 foot variance to allow a 10 foot setback from the rear lot line on Lot 3, Block 1, Century Addition, Section 9, located at Coachman Road and Century Point. He noted that the car wash is not specifically allowed so that a conditional use permit is being requested. Harrison moved to recommend denial of the application on the basis that it is not appropriate because it is not allowed by ordinance. Dean Fulmer appeared and stated that the proposal goes hand in hand with the neighborhood business zoning, that it would draw from a 3 mile area, that noise would be pointed away from the apartments, that two plans are proposed, and that the best plan would require a 20 foot variance and would have less impact on the apartments, and better automobile stacking. Doraine Schram asked for a postponement for further review of the proposal. Don Klober of • Century 21 Realtors, appeared and stated that Century 21 is building immediately to the south and is selling the land to Fulmer. He stated that he considered the car wash to be a good neighbor to Century 21. A Mr. Bryant from the audience stated that he owns a car wash and that proposed car wash plan is a good one and is sensitive to the neighborhood. Fulmer stated that he is willing to do either plan, and that one plan would not require a variance. Hall seconded the motion of Harrison and all members voted in favor. Klober asked for clarification, since it was his understanding that the proposal could be allowed by the City. Ingraham stated that he had advised Mr. Klober that it was not listed as a permitted or conditional use, and that he could not say whether it would be accepted by the City or not. ADJOURNMENT Harrison moved, Wold seconded the motion to adjourn. All members voted in • favor. The meeting adjourned at 11:15 p.m. BS cretary Agenda Information June 18, 1985, City Page Twenty -Four Memo Council Meeting I:M1 A. Acceptance of Interest Rate Reduction Program, Cinnamon Ridge Project/Can-American -- Action is necessary to suspend the City Council meeting and to convene as the Housing and Redevelopment Authority for the purpose of considering an interest rate recuction program for the Cinnamon Ridge Project/Can-American. The tax increment financing district plan and interest rate reduction program project plan for the Cinnamon Ridge housing project has been completed. Action required by the HRA is to adopt the tax increment financing plan and submit the same to the City Council for review. Enclosed on pages�� through �4 is a copy of the Eagan Housing and Redevelopment Authority interest rate reduction program project plan for the Cinnamon Ridge housing project. The City Council has met on several occasions with representatives from Can -American and Miller & Schroeder Municipals, Inc., to discuss the interest rate reduction program proposed for the Cinnamon Ridge housing project. This plan was prepared by the City's program administrator and consultant, Miller & Schroeder Municipals, Inc., and includes the criteria that was desired by the City Council. Also enclosed is a resolution approving the tax increment financing plan for a tax increment financing district by the Eagan Housing and Redevelopment Authority. The resolution is enclosed on pages through. • ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: The HRA must act to approve or deny the resolution approving the tax increment financing plan for a tax increment financing district for the Cinnamon Ridge housing project. FURTHER ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To adjourn the HRA meeting and reconvene as a City Council. • RAGAN HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY INTEREST REDUCTION PROGRAM PROJECT PLAN Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.411 et TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT PLAN Minnesota Minnesota Statutes Sections 273.71-273.78 For THE CINNAMON RIDGE HOUSING PROJECT • EAGAN, MINNESOTA HOLMES & GRAVEN, Chartered 470 Pillsbury Center Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 (612) 338-1177 May 15, 1985 73 ffl TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. SECTION I. INTEREST REDUCTION PROGRAM PROJECT PLAN A. Public Purpose 1 B. Findings 1 C. Description of the Project 1 Map I: Project Area and Tax Increment District 5 D. Interest Reduction Program, Administrative Guidelines and Criteria 2 E. Interest Reduction Program Objectives F. Project Activities G. Land Use Plan H. Environmental Considerations L Developer's Obligations J. Relocation of Displaced Persons and Businesses K. Procedure for Change in Approved Plan SECTION IL TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN A. Statutory Authority B. Statement of Objectives C. Development Program (:Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.74, Subdivision 1) and Description of Project Proposals D. Description of Property E. Classification of Tax Increment Financing District F. Property in Acquisition G. Estimate of Costs H. Identification of the Use of Tax Increments -i- 6 6 7 7 7 8 8 10 10 10 10 10 10 11 it Ll • U Cl L Limitation on Administrative Expenses 11 J. Sources of Revenue to Finance Public Cost 12 K. Original Assessed Value 12 L. Estimated Captured Assessed Value 12 M. Duration of the District 12 N. Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions 13 O. Modifications 14 P. Limitation on Duration of Tax Increment Financing Districts 15 Q. Limitation on Qualification of Property in Tax Increment District Not Subject to Improvement 15 R. Annual Disclosure Requirements 16 S. Requirement for Agreements with Developer 17 T. Assessment Agreement 17 U. Notification of Prior Planned Improvements 17 V. Administration of the Tax Increment Housing Distric t 18 W. Tax Increment Financing Account for the Housing District 18 X. Estimate of Amount of Bonded Indebtedness 18 -ii- 75 EAGAN HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY INTEREST REDUCTION PROGRAM PROJECT PLAN Minnesota Statutes, Section 462AII et M. • 14 L INTEREST REDUCTION PROGRAM PROJECT PLAN A. PUBLIC PURPOSE Within the City of Eagan certain areas exist that require public financial involvement to promote the construction of adequate, safe, and sanitary dwelling accommodations due to a shortage of decent, safe and sanitary housing for persons of low and moderate income and their families. Private enterprise is unable to alleviate such shortage and to provide a supply of decent, safe and sanitary housing without government subsidy at prices or rents within the financial means of persons and families of such incomes. This shortage is inimical to the safety, health, morals and welfare of the residents of the city and state and to the sound growth and development of the City of Eagan. In order to alleviate this shortage, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Eagan (the "HRA') has been given certain powers pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.411, et seq. • B. FINDINGS 1. Project The City of Eagan has determined in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.415, Subdivision 5 that there is a shortage of decent, safe and sanitary housing for persons of low and moderate income and their families. 2. Program In establishing the Interest Reduction Program, the Eagan HRA has established the need for an Interest Reduction Program pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.421, Subdivision 14, Section 462.445, Subdivisions 10 and 11. In so is doing, the HRA has considered: The availability and affordability of other government programs, - The availability and affordability of private market financing, and The need for additional affordable mortgage credit to encourage the construction and enable the purchase of housing units within the jurisdiction of the authority. C. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT 1. Boundaries of Interest Reduction Program Project In recognition of conditions in certain areas of the City of Eagan, the HRA designates an Interest Reduction Program as a project pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.421, 77 Subdivision 14 and an accompanying tax increment financing district in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Sections 273.71-273.78. The facility to be assisted by the HRA Interest Reduction Program will be constructed upon the property described as follows: Outlot A, Cinnamon Ridge Addition, City of Eagan as shown on the Project Boundary Map, attached as page 5. 2. The facilities to be constructed within the project area shall consist of eleven rental apartment buidings containing a total of approximately 264 residential units, and facilities functionally subordinate thereto (the "Cinnamon Ridge Housing Project'), which shall meet the Program guidelines and criteria. D. INTEREST REDUCTION PROGRAM, ADMINISTRATIVE GUIDELINES AND CRITERIA The following guidelines for the Interest Reduction Program have been enacted by the City Council and are established as guildelines for the Program. 1. in determining whether to approve interest rate reduction assistance for a specific multifamily housing development, the Authority shall consider the following: a. Whether or not the development is to be financed with tax exempt revenue bonds; b. Whether the property surrounding the ' proposed development is zoned for multifamily residential housing (R-4); C. Whether unusual site conditions require excessive site preparation activities prior to construction; d. Whether the proposed rents for units in the development, without interest rate reduction assistance are affordable by present or future residents of the City; e. Any other information which the authority considers relevant. 2. Prior to receiving approval of interest rate reduction assistance, a developer shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Authority that either the proposed rents for units in the development will be lower than the rents for comparable units in the City in developments which do not receive interest rate reduction assistance or the cost of construction per unit is greater than that of units in a comparable development in the City. 2 79 • Interest Rate Reduction Assistance shall be provided only when it has been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Authority by the developer that, financing for a specific multifamily housing development is not available, either from private lenders or through other governmental programs upon terms and conditions such that the projected rental revenue of the development is sufficient to cover debt service, operating and other expenses and provide a reasonable return on the developer's investment, using reasonable assumptions related to the development. 4. Based upon all information which the Authority may receive about a proposed multifamily development, the Authority shall in its sole discretion determine whether to provide interest rate reduction assistance, and the amount of such assistance to be provided, if any. Interest rate reduction assistance, which is provided, shall be provided in accordance with the provisions of this resolution and of the Act. • 5. Tax increments may be contributed to an interest rate reduction program for a multifamily housing development for a period not to exceed ten years from the first collection of the tax increment from the development. 6. A sale of the multifamily housing development which received interest rate reduction assistance will require review of whether interest rate reduction assistance can, or will be continued. The terms and conditions for continuation of the assistance upon a sale of the property may be established at the time the interest rate reduction assistance is first provided. 7. At the time of sale of the multifamily housing development, or at the end of ten years after the receipt of the first tax increment, or upon the maturity of the bonds issued to finance the multifamily housing project at the option of the Authority the developer shall pay to the Authority repayment of the full amount of interest rate reduction assistance provided to the developer plus interest at a rate to be determined by the Authority. 8. After payment to the Authority of the amount provided for in paragraph 7 above, to the extent that the appreciated in value of the multifamily housing development is in excess of the amount described in paragraph 71 the developer shall be allowed to receive from the appreciation an amount equal to a specified rate of return on the developer's investment in the multifamily housing development. The rate of return to the developer shall be established prior to the first interest rate reduction payment to the developer. 77 9. To the extent that appreciation in value of the multifamily housing development exceeds the amounts specified in paragraphs 3 and 4 above, any excess appreciation shall be divided between the developer and the Authority based upon the amount of debt service paid on the financing for the project by the Authority, and the amount of debt service paid by the developer. 10. The amount of interest rate reduction assistance for a specific development shall not exceed fifty percent (50%) of the tax increment generated by the development. • a 4 So MAP I May 10 1885 TAX mcumEN'P DZMCP AND tMREBP REDIICfION RAM PROJECP La : u .i t.. MLI LI • �a I; R•• A Rq _ t� LI ' R of �� J+<$GB � -� Rr� R•1 �\•�R•1 —LL— •N R• 1 Kiyi PF - .:�.� LI � .. :•� i' _ � -_ PD ...- +•awn. po • X;7'77-2 LI L • _..(( /l y• r'� GIG i A A Ll IN 0-4 Ie d� �.• I �' • IS j A P Flo GO 4 79i G RO '.w __ �. ii /I�y_ NO - _ pP ♦ /'�',r I RO P X 8-2 / • Nr IR -4 .J(Jr a• 'XOR -!G 'I P 3�. R•• / "�/ • �5' _ rw Pfic� "— R•• R.• ^ I, -- • , PO -' 4J1� T* R•I N` "�; Site .. v fill 5 TW LB P - ^1 Y J claJ-i'Jia�i __ R•le /�' r p R•1A A I % e % APPLE SVAL-j A I R -IO ' PD E. INTEREST REDUCTION PROGRAM OBJECTIVES The City of Eagan and the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Eagan seek to achieve the following objectives through this Program: 1. Assist the financing of housing units which are primarily for occupancy by individuals of low or moderate income and related and subordinate facilities. 2. Provide maximum opportunity, consistent with the needs of the City, for development by private enterprise. 3. To accomplish the housing goals of the City including a mixture of housing type and income levels. 4. Improve the financial base of the City. 5. Achieve a high level of design and landscaping quality to • enhance the physical environment. 6. Combine elements of the City Comprehensive Plan with these project objectives. F. PROJECT ACTIVITIES 1. Property to be acquired No property is to be acquired under this Program. 2. Clearance No site clearance is proposed. 3. Relocation • No relocation of families or businesses is proposed: 4. Other Project Activities The HRA will provide assistance to the Cinnamon Ridge Housing Project in the form of Interest Rate Reduction payments in the form prescribed in and in accordance with the Interest Reduction Program, Administrative Guidelines and Criteria set forth in item D of this Interest Rate Reduction Program. , The primary funding source for Interest Rate Reduction payments under this Program will be the Project tax increment proceeds. C CL 5. Public Facilities to be Constructed No public facilities are to be constructed under this Project. G. LAND USE PLAN Proposed Land Use The proposed land use of the Cinnamon Ridge Housing Project is R4, zoned for multi -dwelling units. 2. Permitted Land Use a. The permitted land use is 14.5 units per acre for R4 zoning allowing 3004 square feet of land per unit. b. Additional regulations and controls. • (1) All new development shall conform to the applicable state and local codes and ordinances. (2) in consideration for the assistance to be provided under this Program, the Developer of the Cinnamon Ridge Housing Project will be required to develop approximately 264 units of housing. A minimum of 20% of such units will be available to and affordable to families or individuals with incomes below 80% of the median family income for the Minneapolis -St. Paul Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area, as defined by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development income limits for Section 8 housing assistance. • (3) The HRA shall also require that, in the event that the Cinnamon Ridge Housing Project is sold, the HRA will share in the appreciation of value of the Cinnamon Ridge Housing Project at the time of such sale, pursuant to the terms of the Developer's Agreement. H. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS The Eagan HRA does not expect any adverse environmental impacts as a result of the Interest Reduction Program, the Cinnamon Ridge Housing Project, or the tax increment financing district. I. DEVELOPERS OBLIGATIONS The requirements to be imposed upon the Developer and the City's participation in the Interest Reduction Program will be negotiated as part of the Developer's Agreement between the HRA and Developer. J. RELOCATION OF DISPLACED PERSONS AND BUSINESSES No relocation of persons or businesses is proposed for this Project. However, the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Eagan accepts as binding its obligations under local provisions of state law (Minnesota Statutes, Sections 117.50-117.56) for relocation and will administer payment of relocation benefits to families, individuals, and businesses if displaced by public action. K. PROCEDURE FOR CHANGE IN PLAN The Program contained herein may be modified provided the modification shall be adopted by resolution of the Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Eagan; but only after a public hearing thereon after published notice in a newspaper of general circulation in the municipality at least once not less than ten days nor more than 30 days prior to the date of the hearing, unless such public notice and hearing is waived by the HRA. • • M 0 E TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN MINNESOTA 3TATDTB3, SECTIONS 273.71-273.78 mm IL TAS INCRENUINT FINANCE PLAN A. LP C. D. E. F. STATUTORY AUTHORITY The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Eagan (the "HRA") is authorized to create a tax increment financing district pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 273.71-273.78. STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES Section E. of Part 1 of this report is hereby incorporated as the statement of objectives for this tax increment financing plan (hereinafter the "Plan"). DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM (Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.74, Subdivision 1) AND DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT PROPOSALS 1. Construction of 264 units of housing including 53 units of low • and moderate income housing. 2. No contracts have been entered into at the time of preparation of this Plan. 3. No other development has been proposed within this tax increment district. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY 1. Tax Increment District Tax Parcel and Legal Description Parcel Number Legal Description 10-17400-010-00 Outlot A, Cinnamon Ridge Addition • CLASSIFICATION OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT The Housing and Redevelopment Authority in and for the City of Eagan, Minnesota, In determining the need for a tax increment financing district in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Sections 273.71-273.78 inclusive, finds that the dd strT i -cam be established is a housing district pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 273.73, Subdivision 11 because the property included within the district shall be used for the construction of housing for persons or families of low and moderate income. PROPERTY IN ACQUISITION No properties have been identified for acquisition by the Eagan Housing and Redevelopment Authority at this time. 10 316 G. ESTIMATE OF COSTS 1. Financing Needs of the Proposed Cinnamon Ridge Housing Project The Developer's financing program requires the use of the Interest Rate Reduction Program. Current market -rate rents affordable to young and/or growing professional households in the Eagan market, as verified by mortgage underwriters and certified appraisers, would not alone support the rental project. Consequently, tax increment proceeds will be used to finance Interest Rate Reduction payments for this project to the extent necessary to meet the requirements of project financial feasibility. It is estimated that Interest Rate Reduction payments will average an amount not in excess of $118,800 per annum. • 2. District Budget Limits Interest Rate Reduction Payments for $1,188,000 Ten Year Duration Administrative and Sundry Cost for 118,800 Maximum District Duration Total Budget for Ten Year Duration $1,306,800 Interest Rate Reduction payments should not exceed an average of $118,800 per year although, in a given year, they may exceed that average. H. IDENTIFICATION OF THE USE OF TAX INCREMENTS Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.75, Subdivision 4, all • revenues derived roam the tax increment district shall be used in accordance with this Tax Increment Financing Plan. The revenues shall be used: 1. To pay the principal of and interest on bonds issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 462C or a loan made with proceeds of bonds issued pursuant to Chapter 462C; and 2. To pay for District costs as identified in the District budget described in Section G2 above. I. LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.75, Subdivision 3, administrative expenses are limited to ten percent (10%) of the total tax increment expenditures. "Administrative expenses" means all expenditures of an authority other than amounts paid for the purchase of land or amounts paid to contractors or others providing 11 V/ J. materials and services, including architectural and engineering services, directly connected with the physical development of the real property in the district, relocation benefits paid to or services provided for persons residing or businesses located in the district, or amounts used to pay interest on, fund a reserve for, or sell at a discount bonds issued pursuant to Section 273.77. "Administrative expenses" includes amounts paid for services provided by bond counsel, fiscal consultants, and planning or economic development consultants. SOURCES OF REVENUE TO FINANCE PUBLIC COST It is intended that the entire cost of interest reduction payments will be paid from the tax increment generated by the Cinnamon Ridge Housing Project. Estimated Revenue $292509639 Estimated Captured Assessed Value • x 105.570 Mills 237,600 Tax Increment -118,800 50 percent of Tax Increment Revenues 118,800 Available Revenue (Annual) Tax Increment Revenues will be available to the project for 10 years from the collection of the first full tax increment. Assuming that the project is substantially completed and leased -up in 1986 and fully assessed in 1987, the first full tax increment will be collected in 1988. K. ORIGINAL ASSESSED VALUE Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 273.74, Subdivision 1 and Section 273.76, Subdivision 1, the Original Assessed Value (OAV) of • the tax increment district is $84,480. L. ESTIMATED CAPTURED ASSESSED VALUE 1984 $ 84,480 Assessed Value 1987 $ 21335,119 Assessed Value Captured Assessed Value $ 2,2509639 (50% _ $1,125,319) It is proposed that 50% of the entire increase in assessed value be captured for ten years to pay project costs. Cinnamon Ridge Housing Project should be substantially completed and leased -up by the end of 1986 and fully assessed by January, 1987, payable in July and December of 1988. M. DURATION OF THE DISTRICT Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.75, Subdivision 1, the maximum duration of a tax increment housing district is 25 years 12 Sa • commencing with the date of receipt of the first increment by the authority. It is estimated that the HRA will collect tax increments on the district for .ten years from collection of the first full tax Increment, through the year 1997. N. IMPACT ON OTHER TAKING JURISDICTIONS The impact of the loss of tax dollars represented as tax increments is listed below for each taxing jurisdiction. The estimate is based on the existing housing proposal and does not include the possible tax increments derived from any other future development, mill changes, or inflation factors. . District Total Assessed Value Tax Increment Finance District $84,480 Latest Assessed Value of Each Government Body: Dakota County School District #196 City of Eagan Metro Council Transit District Mosquito Control % of District to Total $1,272,119,910 .006 $ 343,6199181 .025 $ 202,0329411 .042 $1,271,1979383 .007 $1,023,741,348 .008 $1,2719197,383 .007 Considering all the districts, it can be seen from the above that taxing jurisdictions will have over 99% of each respective district district available for normal growth of tax base or valuation. is Applying the percentage of the total mill rate in 1985 levied by each taxing jurisdiction to the projected mill rate and the estimated tax increment received reveals the annual loss of tax dollars by each taxing jurisdiction as listed in the table below assuming development would occur without public assistance. The finance plan indicates we anticipate a tax increment at build out as follows: Captured Tax Assessed Increment Valuation Received Tax Increment District $1,1259319 $118,800 Based on. the current mill rate, the estimated taxes received would be as follows for the taxing bodies: 13 91 The following table represents the additional mills that would have to be levied to compensate for the loss of tax dollars in estimated tax increments for each taxing jurisdiction. The tax increments derived from the Cinnamon Ridge Housing Project alluded to in the tax increment district would not be available to any of the taxing jurisdictions were it not for public intervention by the City. Although the increases in assessed value due to development will not be available for the application of the mill levy for the duration of the tax increment financing district, this new assessed value could eventually permit a mill levy decrease. If it could be assumed that the captured assessed value was available for each taxing jurisdiction, the non -receipt of tax dollars represented as tax increments may be determined. This determination is facilitated by estimating how much the mill levy for property outside of the tax increment financing district would have to be increased to raise the same amount of tax dollars in each taxing jurisdiction that would be available if the projects occurred without the assistance of the City. Impact on Taxing Jurisdictions if Development Occurred Without Public Assistance Annual Tax Increment Adjusted* Required Available Taxing Jurisdiction Assessed Value Mills to Project City of Fagan School District #196 Dakota County Metro Council Transit District Mosquito Control $ 201,947,931 $ 343,534,701 $1,272,0359430 $1,271,112,903 $1,023,656,868 $1,271,112,903 .1170 $23,676 .1970 Annual Tax .0190 Current Increment Available Taxing Jurisdiction Mills Percent to Project City of Fagan 21.039 20 $ 23,676 School District #196 60.228 57 67,776 Dakota County 21.043 20 23,680 Other (Metro Council, 3.260 3 3,668 Transit District, Mosquito Control) 105.570 100 $118,800 The following table represents the additional mills that would have to be levied to compensate for the loss of tax dollars in estimated tax increments for each taxing jurisdiction. The tax increments derived from the Cinnamon Ridge Housing Project alluded to in the tax increment district would not be available to any of the taxing jurisdictions were it not for public intervention by the City. Although the increases in assessed value due to development will not be available for the application of the mill levy for the duration of the tax increment financing district, this new assessed value could eventually permit a mill levy decrease. If it could be assumed that the captured assessed value was available for each taxing jurisdiction, the non -receipt of tax dollars represented as tax increments may be determined. This determination is facilitated by estimating how much the mill levy for property outside of the tax increment financing district would have to be increased to raise the same amount of tax dollars in each taxing jurisdiction that would be available if the projects occurred without the assistance of the City. Impact on Taxing Jurisdictions if Development Occurred Without Public Assistance Annual Tax Increment Adjusted* Required Available Taxing Jurisdiction Assessed Value Mills to Project City of Fagan School District #196 Dakota County Metro Council Transit District Mosquito Control $ 201,947,931 $ 343,534,701 $1,272,0359430 $1,271,112,903 $1,023,656,868 $1,271,112,903 .1170 $23,676 .1970 67,776 .0190 23,680 .0005 23,680 .0020 2,516 .0004 475 *District Assessed Value Subtracted O. MODIFICATIONS In accordance with Minnesota Statutes. Section 273.74, Subdivision 4, a tax increment financing plan may be modified by an authority, provided that any reduction or enlargement of geographic area of the 14 / D 0 0 project or tax increment financing district, increase in amount of bonded indebtedness to be incurred, including a determination to capitalize interest on the debt if that determination was not a part of the original plan, oe to increase or decrease the amount of interest on the debt to be capitalized, increase in the portion of the captured assessed value to be retained by the authority, increase in total estimated tax increment expenditures or designation of additional property to be acquired by the authority shall be approved upon the notice and after the discussion, public hearing and findings required for approval of the original plan; provided that if an authority changes the type of district from housing, redevelopment or economic development to another type of district, this change shall not be considered a modification but shall require the authority to follow the procedure set forth in Sections 273.71 to 273.78 for adoption of a new plan, including certification of the assessed valuation of the district by the county auditor. • The geographic area of a tax increment financing district may be reduced, but shall not be enlarged after five years following the date of certification of the original assessed value by the county auditor or five years from August 1, 1979, for tax increment financing districts authorized prior to August 1, 1979, except that development districts created pursuant to chapter 472A prior to August 1, 1979 may be reduced but shall not be enlarged after five years following the date of designation of such district. P. LIMITATION ON DURATION OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICTS Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.75, Subdivision 1, "no tax increment shall be paid to an authority for a tax increment financing district after three years from the date of certification of the original assessed value of the taxable real property in the district by the county auditor ... unless within the three year period (a) bonds • have been issued pursuant to section 273.77, or in aid of a project pursuant to any other law, except revenue bonds issued pursuant to chapter 474, prior to August 1, 1979, or (b) the authority has acquired property within the district, or (c) the authority has constructed or caused to be constructed public improvements within the district ..." It is intended that public improvements will be constructed in the project area which will satisfy this statutory requirement. Q. LIMITATION ON QUALIFICATION OF PROPERTY IN TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT NOT SUBJECT TO IMPROVEMENT Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 273.75, Subdivision 6, if, after four years from the date of certification of the original assessed value of the tax increment financing district pursuant to Section 273.76, no demolition, rehabilitation, construction or renovation of property or other site preparation, including improvement of a street adjacent to a parcel but not installation of 15 �/ utility service including sewer or water systems, has been commenced on a parcel located within a tax increment financing district by the authority or by the owner of the parcel in accordance with the tax increment financing plan, no additional tax increment may be taken from that parcel, and the original assessed value of that parcel shall be excluded from the original assessed value of the tax increment financing district. If the authority or the owner of the parcel subsequently commences demolition, rehabilitation or renovation or other site preparation on that parcel including improvement of a street adjacent to that parcel, in accordance with the tax increment financing plan, the authority shall certify to the county auditor that the activity has commenced, and the county auditor shall certify the assessed value thereof as most recently certified by the commissioner of revenue and add it to the original assessed value of the tax increment financing district. For purposes of this subdivision "parcel" means a tract or plat of land established prior to the certification of the district as a single unit for purposes of assessment. This statutory requirement will be fulfilled upon • commencement of construction of Cinnamon Ridge Housing Project. R. ANNUAL DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.74, Subdivision 5, the HRA must file an annual disclosure report for all tax increment financing districts. The report shall be filed with the city, school board, county board and the Minnesota Department of Energy, Planning and Development. The report to be filed by the HRA as district administrator shall include the following information: 1. The amount and source of revenue in the account; 2. The amount and purpose of expenditures from the account; 3. The amount of any pledge of revenues, including principal and interest on any outstanding bonded indebtedness; • 4. the original assessed value of the district; 5. The captured assessed value retained by the authority; 6. The captured assessed value shared with other taxing districts; 7. The tax increment received. The annual disclosure report is designed to be a two-way medium of information dissemination for both the Office of the County Auditor and the HRA. Should the auditor want additional information from the authority regarding its tax increment financing activities, such information should be requested prior to submission of the annual disclosure report by the authority. Similarly, the HRA may utilize the annual disclosure report as a means for requesting information from the Office of the County Auditor. 16 Additionally, the authority must annually publish a statement in a newspaper of general circulation in the municipality showing the tax increment received and expended in that year, the original assessed value, the captured assessed value, amount of outstanding bonded indebtedness and 'any additional information the authority deems necessary. S. REQUIREMENT FOR AGREEMENTS WITH DEVELOPER Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.75, Subdivision 5, no more than 25 percent, by acreage, of the property to be acquired within a project which contains a redevelopment district, or ten percent, by acreage, of the property to be acquired within a project which contains a housing or economic development district, as set forth in the tax increment financing plan, shall at any time be owned by an authority as a result of acquisition with the proceeds of bonds issued. pursuant to Section 273.77 without the authority having prior • to acquisition in excess of the percentages concluded an agreement for the development or redevelopment of the property acquired and which provides recourse for the authority should the development or redevelopment not be completed. The agreements are only required if property is to be acquired with bond proceeds. T. ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.76, Subdivision 8, the authority may, upon entering into a development agreement pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.75, Subdivision 5, enter into an agreement in recordable form with the developer of property within the tax increment financing district which establishes a minimum market value of the land and completed improvements for the duration of the tax increment district. The assessment agreement • shall be presented to the county assessor who shall review the plans and specifications for the improvements constructed, review the market value previously assigned to the land upon which the improvements are to be constructed and so long as the minimum market value contained in the assessment agreement appears in the judgment of the assessor, to be a reasonable estimate, the assessor may certify the minimum market value agreement. U. NOTIFICATION OF PRIOR PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 273.76, Subdivision 4, the authority shall, after due and diligent search, accompany its request for certification to the county auditor pursuant to Subdivision 1, or Its notice of district enlargement pursuant to Section 273.74, Subdivision 5, with a listing of all properties within the tax increment financing district or area of enlargement for which building permits have been issued during the 18 months immediately preceding approval of the tax increment financing plan by the municipality 93 17 V. W. X. pursuant to Section 273.74, Subdivision 4. The county auditor shall increase the original assessed value of the district by the assessed valuation of the improvements for which the building permit was issued, excluding the assessed valuation of improvements for which a building permit was issued during the three month period immediately preceding said approval of the tax increment financing plan, as certified by the assessor. ADMINISTRATION OF THE TAX INCREMENT HOUSING DISTRICT Administration of the tax increment housing district will be handled by the Housing and Redevelopment Authority through the Administrator of the City. TAX INCREMENT FINANCING ACCOUNT FOR THE HOUSING DISTRICT The tax increment received as a result of increases in the assessed value of the tax increment district parcels will be maintained in a tax increment account by the City Administrator as the designated administrator and manager of the tax increment district. The tax increment account will be separate from all other municipal accounts and grant accounts and expended only upon sanctioned redevelopment activities identified in this tax increment financing plan. ESTIMATE OF AMOUNT OF BONDED INDEBTEDNESS The Authority does not at this time expect to issue tax increment bonds. 18 �� • • RESOLUTION NO. BEING A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE TAX INCRMMT FINANCING PLAN FOR A TAX INCRE- MENT FINANCING DIS'T'RICT (CINNAMON RIDGE HOUSING PROJECT) BY THE HAGAN HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY. WHEREAS, the City of Eagan (the "City") has adopted a multifamily housing development program (the "Program") and proposes to issue housing revenue bonds (the "Bonds") pursuant to Minn. Stat. Section 462C.07 in order to finance the Program; and WHEREAS, the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (the "MHFA") has reviewed and approved the Program; and • WHEREAS, The Eagan Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "Authority') is authorized to undertake interest reduction programs to assist the financing of construction of rental housing units which are primarily for occupancy by individuals of low or moderate income in accordance with Minn. Stat. Section 462.445, Subds. 10, 11, lla and 12; and WHEREAS, the City has considered an Interest Reduction Program to assist the financing of the multifamily housing development to be financed with the Bonds (the "Interest Reduction Program') and has promulgated regulations for the Interest Reduction Program; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Minn. Stat. Sections 462.545 and 273.75, Subd. 4, the Authority is authorized to use tax increment to defray the costs of a project, including an interest reduction program; and WHEREAS, in connection with the establishment of the tax increment • district (the "District") by the Authority pursuant to the Minnesota Tax Increment Financing Act, Minn. Stat., Sections 271.71 to 273.78 inclusive (the "Act"), the approval by the Board of Commissioners (the "governing body") of the Authority of the tax increment plan is required by the local governing body before it will consider for approval said plan; and WHEREAS, there was presented to this meeting of the governing body of the Authority for its consideration and approval, a copy of an interest reduction program project plan and a tax increment plan for the district dated May 1, 1985, which plan is entitled Interest Reduction Program Project Plan and Tax Increment Financing District Plan for the Cinnamon Ridge Housing Project (the "Plan"); and WHEREAS, the Authority has prepared the Plan and submitted the Plan to the City Planning Commission of the City of Eagan (the "Planning Commission') for its review and opinion and to the Board of Commissioners of Dakota County for their review and comment; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY the Board of Commissioners of The Eagan Housing and Redevelopment Authority: 1. That the District is a housing district, as that term is described in Minn. Stat. Section 273.73, Subd. 11. 2. That the level of interest rates over the last several years have in some cases made it financially difficult or infeasible to finance the construction of multifamily rental housing without public assistance. The Developer has represented and the Board of Commissioners hereby finds that because of these market conditions the developer would not be able to successfully construct and market the proposed housing development without public assistance in the form of the Interest Reduction Program. 3. That the Plan, to provide funds to finance the Interest Reduction Program, will provide maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the City of Fagan for development of housing by private enterprise and for the rental of housing by low and moderate Income families. 4. That the Plan conforms to the general plan of the City of Eagan. 5. That the Interest Reduction Project Plan including Interest Rate • Reduction Regulations and the Tax Increment Financing Plan are hereby approved and adopted in the form presented to the Board of Commissioners. Adopted by the Board of Commissioners of The Eagan Housing and Redevelopment Authority this day of . 1985. Attest: Motion made by: Seconded by: _ Date: -2- gh 0 Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Twenty -Five INTEREST RATE REDUCTION PROGRAM/CINNAMON RIDGE PROJECT A. Consider Recommendation of HRA and Set Public Hearing to Consider Interest Rate Reduction Program for Cinnamon Ridge • Project/Can-American at July 2, 1985 City Council Meeting -- If the HRA action is affirmative, the City Council must review the tax increment financing financing plan and set a public hearing for the July 2, 1985 City Council meeting at which time public testimony will be received and considered regarding adoption of the tax increment financing plan together with the interest reduction program under the Minnesota Municipal Housing Redevelopment Act and Minnesota Tax Increment Financing Act. The purpose of considering this action to assist the financing of the contruction of multi -family rental housing which is primarily for occupancy by individuals of low and moderate income in a manner consistent with the needs of the City. If the HRA does not approve the tax increment financing planfor the Cinnamon Ridge housing project, the City Council can make a decision to either hold the public hearing to consider the tax increment financing plan or elect to not hold the public hearing • and the tax increment financing plan would then no longer be considered. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny setting a public hearing for the July 2, 1985 City Council meeting to consider a tax increment financing plan for a tax increment financing district in reference to the Cinnamon Ridge housing project. '77 Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Twenty -Six PRELIMINARY PLAT/EAGLES NEST VILLAGE B. Eagles Nest Village for a Preliminary Plat of Eagles Nest Village Consisting of 14 Townhouse Units on 1.4 Acres Located on Lots 101, 102, 103, & 104, Block 1, of Meadowland 1st Addition -- The public hearing was held before the Advisory Planning Commission at a regular meeting held on May 28, 1.985 to consider the preliminary plat entitled Eagles Nest Village which contains 14 townhouse units on 1.4 acres located east of Rahn Road, north • of Shale Lane and west of Bear Path Trail. The townhouse units are planned to be owner -occupied dwellings, half of which would be constructed as handicapped accessible. The Advisory Planning Commission is recommending approval of the Eagles Nest facility subject to several conditions in the staff report. For additional information on this item, refer to the Planning Department report found on pages through //L. At the regular meeting of the Advisory Pa -r & Commission on June 6, 1985, the Commission reviewed the proposed preliminary plat for Eagles Nest Village. The Commission is recommending a cash dedication requirement and a trail along Rahn Road. For a copy of action that was taken by the Advisory Planning Commission, refer to those minutes found on page(s),//7---//6 . ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny a preliminary plat for the Eagles Nest development as presented. is M ,- • CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY PLAT - EAGLES NEST VILLAGE APPLICANT: MC. R.S. INDUSTRIES INC LOCATION: LOTS 101-104, BLOCK 1, MEADOWLANDS 1ST ADD. EXISTING ZONING: MULTI -FAMILY, UNDER THE EAGAN HILLS WEST P.D. DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: MAY 28, 1985 DATE OF REPORT: MAY 22, 1985 REPORTED BY: GREG H.INGRAHAM, ASSISTANT PLANNER REVIEWED BY: DALE C.RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER APPLICATION SUMMARY: The applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat approval of Eagles Nest Village which contains 14 townhouse units on 1.4 acres located east of Rahn Road, north of Shale Lane and west of Bear Path Trail. The townhouse units are planned to be owner occupied dwellings, half of which would be constructed as handicapped accessible. ZONING AND LAND USE: The parcel is part of the Eagan Hills West Planned Development and is currently platted into four residential lots. At the February 1, 1983 City Council meeting the use of the parcel was established as an 18 unit multi -family building. In 1976 a 32 unit multi -family building was approved on this site. The size of the parcel has been reduced to 1.4 acres from the original 2.0 acres in 1976. The attached City Council minutes summarize the zoning history. The land consists of a knoll which slopes to the southwest and northeast. Grasses cover the site and several large oak trees are located on the knoll. All of the oak.trees would be removed to provide a level area for this proposal. Six duplex units are to the south of the site, single family homes lie to the north, west and east, and Rahn School and Rahn Park are to the SW of the site. CODE COMPLIANCE: The proposed 14 unit reduction from the 1983 plan. 30' setback to all right-of-ways. Rahn Road is 50', Shale Lane is 40' The dwelling units cover 218 of the 128 for a total building coverage of coverage maximum is 208 for R-4 zones. ment for the 14 units would be 1.7 provided for•each unit. townhouse units are a four The buildings maintain a The standard setback from and Bear Path Trail is 301. site and the garages cover 338. The standard building The normal lot size require - acres. A double garage is The main code compliance issue boils down to whether these one story units with detached garages (which do not meet all the standard requirements) are preferable to a two or three story Preliminary Plat - Eagles Nest Village May 28, 1985 Page 2 structure which could meet the code requirements. SITE PLANNING: Access to the project would be off of Rahn Road. Sidewalks connect the units to the garage areas. As shown, the garages are set back 15' from the north property line. They could be moved north 5' to allow more space at the interior of the development. The long line of garages should receive some architectural detailing or other treatment to break up the long mass along the north property line. The retaining wall along the north line could be incorporated into the garage walls and would provide berming to screen the garage mass. The dwellings are one story gable roofed with windows on one side of the units. The twelve 2 bedroom and two 3 bedroom units • would be split up into three separate buildings. Five of the fourteen units are oriented for proper solar access (south side of dwelling is within 150 of due south). Due to the common walls of these dwellings, energy costs should be 24% less than similar sized detached single family homes. GRADING/DRAINAGE: The major topographical features of this proposed development consist of a ridge at about a 901 elevation and a depression at an 884 elevation. The proposed grading plan indicates removing about 9' of material from the ridge. This material apparently is to be placed within the depresssion to raise the grade in that vicinity about 8'. This grading is feasible and in conformance with City policy and codes. However, the grading of the driveway and parking lot does not meet City requirements. The reason being that a high point in • the parking, between proposed lots 16 8 17, will direct runoff to the east and to the west of this high point. Because there is no storm sewer in Bear Path Tr., the runoff to the east of the parking lot high point must drain over land to reach Bear Path Tr. This is in direct conflict with City requirements that parking lot runoff be collected into storm sewer systems. This eliminates over -land flow that causes erosion and sedimentation problems. Staff recommends the grading of the parking lot/driveway be such that drainage is to the west, towards Rahn Rd. An existing 30" storm sewer line is in place along the east side of Rahn Rd. Catch basins installed near Rahn Rd can then collect the parking lot runoff and direct it into the existing storm sewer line. This is feasible and is in accordance with City requirements. UTILITIES: Sanitary sewer and watermain of sufficient size, capacity and depth are available to this site along Rahn Rd., Shale La. and Bear Path Tr. This development proposes to connect to the existing sanitary and water lines within Shale La. Staff can recommend servicing lots 2 - 11 from Shale La. Lots 12 - 15 can be serviced off of two existing services along Bear Path Tr. Using the existing services along Bear Path Tr will allow the developer to shift the proposed sanitary sewer and water -i Preliminary Plat - Eagles Nest Village May 28, 1985 Page 3 connection westerly to the vicinity of the existing sanitary sewer manhole. This will save the developer the cost of one additional manhole. The street restoration, along will all utility service construction, will be the responsibility of this development. STREETS: Streets and their functional classification, that border this proposed development, are listed in the following table: Existing Design Street Name Designation Width Width Rahn Rd Community Collector 36" 44" Shale La Neighborhood Collector 44" 44" Bear Path Tr Local Access 32" 32" • Rahn Rd is the only existing street not built to its ultimate design section. In addition to widening Rahn Rd, an 8' bituminous trailway is required along the east side of Rahn Rd to achieve its ultimate design section. This trailway, along with the widening costs, will be the responsibility of this development. Discussion on this subject will follow under the ASSESMENTS paragraph. RIGHT-OF-WAY/EASEMENTS: The platting of the Meadowlands 1st Addition fulfilled the dedication requirements for public right- of-way. Because this is a replat of existing platted lots, the vacating of drainage and utility easements over the internal lot lines must occur prior to final plat approval. The dedication of utility & drainage easements for this preliminary plat shall be in accord- ance with City code. • ASSESSMENTS: Trunk area assessments related to this development have previously been fulfilled. Staff recommends that this development prepay its future respon- sibility for the upgrading of Rahn Rd. City policy requires the prepayment of future assessments for street upgrading where multiple owned developments occur. The amount this development is responsible for is determined as follows 116 F.F.(1) x $28.47/F.F.(2) _ $3,303 il) Includes 75' corner lot credit (2) Difference between residential equiv. & multi. equiv. 1985 street rates The rate in effect at the time of final platting will determine the final amounts of this assessment. In addition, all costs for the installation of all onsite improvements, including trailway, is the sole responsibility of this development. f Preliminary Plat - Eagles Nest Village May 28, 1985 Page 4 If approved the Preliminary Plat shall be subject to the following conditions: 1) Five visitor parking spaces shall be provided on site with signage designating them as such. 2) A detailed landscape plan shall be prepared showing species size and location for all plant material. Special attention shall be paid to landscaping due to the "tightness" of this development. An adequate landscaping bond ($10,000) shall be held until one year after the landscaping is installed. 3) All trash containers shall be stored inside the garages or suitably screened. • 4) The garage layout shall be modified to break up the mass along the north property line. 5) All the standard Preliminary Plat conditions shall be adhered to. • Council Minutes February 1, 1983 EAGLE'S NEST ROME - BETTY BASSETT - QCG25 Application of Betty Bassett, Eagle's Nest Home for an amendment to the Eagan Hills West Planned Development to allow a change in the proposed Eagle's Nest Home and to allow R-2 as underlying zoning located on Lots 101 through 104, Block 1, Meadowlands 1st Addition, was next discussed. Mr. Hedges re- viewed the background of the application of Mrs. Bassett and stated a public hearing was held by the Advisory Planning Commission on January 11, 1983 to consider the application. The amendment would include a request to change the 32 person occupancy of Eagle's Nest Home for the handicapped to an 18 person facility and also to clarify the underlying zoning of the four lots. The Advisory Planning Commission recommended that the application be reviewed by • the City Council to clarify the intent of the City Council when it acted upon the application for the home in 1976. The City staff, including City Attorney Paul Hauge, prepared a memorandum dated January 26, 1983 reviewing the history, and Dale Runkle attached copies of Minutes and other documents to the packet distributed to the Council. Mrs. Bassett was present and stated that she wanted to remove the application for rezoning and requested that the City Council only consider clarification of the underlying use on the property within the planned development for Eagan Hills West. She distributed copies of a July 20, 1976 letter from Charles Slocum, together with survey attached, indicating that Parcel 3 on the Hedlund survey of 1976 did not conform with the current four lots, but indicated that the intention was that Parcel 3 on that survey was the parcel that was originally intended for Eagle's Nest Home, consisting of two acres. It was noted that the acreage has now been reduced and that the lots had been included in Meadowland 1st Addition. Councilman Egan stated that the use should conform with the intent of the Advisory Planning Commission and Council of 1976. Councilman Smith noted that Planning •Consultant Voss, in 1976, stated that the use was suitable and no rezoning was required; further, that a less dense use is being proposed at the present time. Councilman Wachter and Councilman Smith were on the Council in 1976 and Mayor Blomquist was on the Advisory Planning Commission, each of which spoke as to the recollection at that time when the application was submitted and approved. A number of neighboring property owners in Meadowlands Addition appeared, generally opposing the project. After extended discussion, Smith moved, Egan seconded the motion that the Council be on record acknowledging that the zoning of the property in 1976 at the time of the approval of the Eagle's Nest Home 32 unit facility, in 1976 or prior, was for a multiple residential use for reasons including the following: 1. He noted that Consultant Voss in 1976, stated that the property in his Memorandum was suitable for the proposed use and that no rezoning was required. 2. That the proposal of Mrs. Bassett at the present time is for less dense use than that proposed in 1976. 3. That in the event that there is a reversion to the underlying zoning, it could provide higher densities than the PUD concept if approved. 6 Council Minutes February 1, 1983 4. The developer had proposed in the original planned development, that the parcel be a proposed outlot, not a part of the single family district plat. 5. A building permit had been authorized in 1977 for 160 foot by 132 foot single -story structure. 6. That the land use to the south is R-2, that there is a large former farm home to the north and that there are streets on the east and west; further, that the four lots are larger than the standard lots in Meadowlands 1st Addition; further, that the planned development allowed for cluster home use for up to 4 units per acre, which would appear to conform; that a town- • house proposal was approved in 1976 which would appear to reflect approxi- mately an R-3 type zoning or use; that only one service stub was installed to service the property; now there are four lots so that it may, even under R-1 zoning, provide for up to six handicapped persons per lot. A number of the neighboring property owners had questions and comments, including objections to the proposal stating that the proposed use would be too dense and possibly the building would be too large for the site. Concerns were those of the impact on children, the claim that there would be a number of buses involved each day and the potential for converting the use to some other use. It was noted that the decision was unanimous in 1976 by the Council. Lowell Berg, a realtor, stated that the City staff had told him when he was selling homes in the area, that the lots were zoned R-1. Mary Olson, the owner of the farm home to the north, asked whether it's possible to build the same facility on the 1.37 remaining acres, and Ms. Bassett stated that the facility could be constructed and still conform with the ordinance requirements, noting that she has acquired a building permit for the project. There are a number of single • appears to be family homes that have been built since the approval, and this the only change in the circumstances. Councilman Egan stated that the central issue is whether a change from 32 to 18 persons or units should constitute a rezoning and it was his opinion that no rezoning would be required. Those in favor were Smith, Egan, Blomquist and Thomas, against was Wachter. The motion was adopted. 164 7 6 L L I ;FT, T u . . j Aigluawall go 48 i oQSH �TIMBER� .y �\. : oe Ir t i a ? •J" •pen dr+a\ I2 •,sem aan ' nm ra•e ee�w ] Y•a t .� N • rmm w,m � � 'kr 8�� m (; .rm� 1• 9 le .. le 1e A la O e • p R 0 \ a _ �Sf •' 4:•� raeo rae BE 20 al ME 1/ �L I t � �g •� •t so It9 m Q.� � lY� •' et a "e o-yhq/ OP�,��. '�6. I wa • et imm tl ea , .. . �M -'"bY i • 8 / ya le' room ••. • •em a ,_ " /ary 07 �� \•y ` 27 a O 1r/ • ♦' aap 8 (•�4j�� N as,._ a $a ea '•� s. e• .j g / ' ' f., �d� /, J-r+rl.`J •i�_ _ _�` ,. �.a e^• e7 �+ 0e ee •��. 8 �,/ t• Cq • BADGERsCDURT at e + a••` { ! ae ••,y�l n57 k..C' t0 } •%4 . u • - i s i • a4 .SI ---•—a p SI m m am nno 1 �d• pyt0 •o i �, g . �8 .lu a uam waa ,�a 4 . '',) 1.8 ry �,k/ 2 •�'` •>Lr• a a''3'• ' a caa` (('/ to ]° ± n t` •a 'Wb ar d6, yrt��,p y Y / ' a ro ••�• .E wh :\ ara � • tCO ]e ` • �,� '/' � a SROs, • •�' ^ •+• i N' '� $ ••^t �C' �y, 9 �� ]n I•t ''♦ as �..� X •ar•••ti �/ .0 g♦, 444'/'/'/ g ,; t r w �� .7� 1r,'� as +.•• ]• ♦ ea 'a /• '^•e.'bby wm , I a +. a e4 ;y. •1a � a ro rV r wam = usw• '�- !♦ '•+• 0 1 d+. �j• a A 17. a' e • !-�•, aT n'a ' S e ? faT I� to P ]Q s,P,+s Rr I aafn a � � e . - '•f � 8 9 ma• � �O1a . 1 • •• ala n M �Maatttt �,�' �. a`t � ) �T� � O (yQ �.': r / Al •"vm' ' nevi` i N re, 'aO • .Y 0 a 14 • 1t 21 Z u n c v � � � •. a • A 10 ¢, ! v �Y +o°° � ypY Q 9) .' • 1 `tii O yy- e n w ma �� QQQQQ•��tt • .tr. w.0 as as IZ pes �a'f°e ♦? II +• • e,O ^ /'t 'i1�.�/•1 8 !a A •'nay ., • ♦ ^ `L . °+e , : 2' oN ^• tl we .o; }}Ov..re:: 9� to k '1 "•. qq/ < ° :rs F•� a 1' ♦eS -i:..B I! . rasa 'P _ t r� '10 . P wm •rfm • Irs•a a4 tt 00 . J alta a. }8 F 1 • •ry y BEA r cc BEAR ufa F- b^ 'go� ° to 8 tl .. a t . v. a ] ••,ftn, U Is 14 C100 = / " t0 k aNnv • .ram Isco I ao p 1 I 6 It Bo It 1}e t r a rc w of Is a. MEADO LAND P 1crn 8 � It R:.o .e ounor I' •W $� /t $ —aaerom ew m 1 P / \ . = 9 SHALE —a' •'" LANE 4 a z / ` 8a ^ J - 9 ° ram aaa .nm nam nem pmm i!•• 2641A Ing I., I f— I I I 1 u 60.291 S9. Fr. 2 bK 2 :el 2 PSR 4... _2•na"nzx.o•�• N� Fla 1 I (sa Abr "'T I°ry 5 2 13K 2 PSR 2 BK iHIP� u�.N� 10q'-4" 60.291 S9. Fr. 2 bK 2 :el 2 PSR "'T I°ry 5 2 13K 2 ER 2 f5K iHIP� u�.N� 10q'-4" 60.291 S9. Fr. 2 bK 2 ELK 2 eR TW. L� 4 q rl.rs o" J 14 UNIT Gt;VE1APMENT M:.R fntlWtTGtq�k:� t4T6 iHIP� u�.N� 51TE AKFA 60.291 S9. Fr. 1.90 ACMIP NO. OF UJIT5 PROVIDED-.ZM 12 TOT&L 14 51T6 .6RPA FER UNIT 4306 5G. FT. UNITS PER ACRE 10.14 IAT OOYEKGbE'Pf MILVIK&e, 33% NO OF 6aRA ffA sFG:E-5 PROVIDED ?b G-AAK 5rAaE8 PCR U141T 2 L� 4 q rl.rs o" J 14 UNIT Gt;VE1APMENT M:.R fntlWtTGtq�k:� t4T6 I i I I I I I I i I I I �I I I I 1 I I � � I � 1 ».. •16•' M' f• 1 A ' r a it r 1 r •. iwl.w.ws 1 r � \ ' •f, •••1 's.. / r 4s 1YY,' i 0 _ Y e �..• . L�1 •In._LN I Ir w I s►f•n' la•a 1 4 n w �_•_ —1-40 u n ff _ •\4•m. ,. 1N JYn r S F4 u1. .P�•uT \Y IrT• I _ Y e �..• . L�1 •In._LN Ir w a 1 4 n w n u n ff ff •\4•m. ,. 1N JYn r 1 I I I ..i �'' �I Y e �..• . L�1 •In._LN •\4•m. ,. 1N JYn r S F4 u1. .P�•uT \Y IrT• n.r.w n•. r iN' yea un e4N If ,• 1 \ • ^04• ...r r........ S IT -A. IL e l i ire• _�— - - �• •+ ue\ W --.r P�. t 0.� I I 9 tP �� y eta J [f� I I I.* I�\ C L 1 I W.w•W,r., MY. Vi.V I;. � ;-Q:1 I sue.m�loeer CL I �i a �•rn.r as w, �Ya I / l.�STi.K 20L114G: �.l4 a� Dl s3QiPTln.1 Lora lou 10\.�Q\ WY W,4.ca 1, M!/.LuWL410 .,py( LLO.TwI, 1 1 1� 04VT/. GM/YfT, M��u\y,a Lao "-r •f\ •(.min, w) a. o wvf U^+ rr .run..J DE 491TY 0.6 .-If wuw(uT.wmwn T•�) I Owwl— I I I wYYYY[T w.r. idle. 1111e value 1 I 1 �.• r. [. varW .. f.wl Yu.l...ra I Yr w. :..1..'i ... 'r'�' Y�•I.r Yrh•'+ r�II/�410YY\/fYM.Yt{WLY4YW,YL. APC Minutes May 28, 1985 ulrooney moved, Trygg seconded the motion to recommend approv 1 of the preli%efamilyph ry lat application of Lexington Place South 2nd Addi on for 41 singlomes on 12.16 acres located in the above -des ibed area, subjeo the following conditions: 1. TheNplat and development shall be controlled and developed by one company or b 'lder as originally approved in 1984. 2. A revislpn shall be required to the Planned Development Agreement modifying it to i clude this plan. // 3. The plat sha`l`l be subject to the Park Commission's review and comment for the newly created ots. j 4. Detailed grading an and house plan shall be approved showing that • homes will fit on the lots eated. / 5. A grading and ponain plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Engineering Department in ord%1heo insure enough capacity for storm water ponding. 6. All other conditions of ginal approval shall apply. 7. The loss of ponding vplume result\fromding shall be compensated for, if necessary. 8. Vacation of any ding easementsproved by the City. 9. All costs for�blic improvementhe sole responsibility of this developer. 10. This d velopment shall be responsible for all nlevied trunk related • assessments a rates in effect at the time of final platt g. Harri cn stated his concern about the possibility AN basements being flooded by the ponds. Rich Hefti stated that prospective h ea would be 3 feet igher than the high water level and that this is an accepta le distance. All embers voted in favor of the motion except Harrison who voted ainst. EAGLES NEST VILLAGE - PRELIMINARY PLAT Chairman Hall convened the public hearing on the application of MCRS Industries, Inc. for preliminary plat approval of Eagles Nest Village consisting of 14 townhouse units on 1.4 acres located on Lots 101, 102, 103, and 104, Block 1 of Meadowlands lat Addition, Section 29, east of Rahn Road, north of Shale Lane, and west of Bear Path Trail. Dale Runkle introduced the application, reviewed the staff report of May 22, 1985, and mentioned that on February 1, 1983 the City Council had approved the use of the parcel for an 18 -unit multi -family building, and in 1976 a 32 -unit multi -family building had been approved on this site, with the understanding that the property would be used for handicapped housing. He stated that the proposal would provide for 2 SUBJECT TO APPROVAL MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE EAGAN ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION EAGAN, MINNESOTA MAY 28, 1985 A regular meeting of the Eagan Advisory Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, May 28, 1985 at 7:00 p.m. at the Eagan Municipal Center. Present were Chairman Hall and members Trygg, Mulrooney, McCrea, Bohne and Harrison. Absent were members Wilkins and Wold. Also present were City Planner Runkle, Acting City Engineer Hefti, and Assistant City Attorney Smith. AGENDA • Harrison stated that he would like to discuss the Opus development at Avalon and Burnside at the end of the meeting and requests that it be added to the Agenda. Harrison moved, McCrea seconded the motion to approve the agenda with the above noted change. All members voted in favor. MINUTES Mulrooney moved, McCrea seconded the motion to approve the minutes of the April 23, 1985 and April 25, 1985 meetings. All members voted in favor. LEXINGTON PLACE SOUTH 2ND ADDITION — REVISED PRELIMINARY PLAT Chairman Hall convened the public hearing concerning the application of U. S. Homes Corporation for preliminary plat approval of Lexington Place South 2nd Addition for 41 single family homes on 12.16 acres located in the west • half of the southwest quarter of Section 14 at Duckwood Drive and Lexington Avenue. Dale Runkle introduced the application, reviewed the memo from Park Director, Ken Vraa, dated May 13, 1985, and reviewed the staff report of April 15, 1985 regarding the application. He noted that while it was originally stated that 16 additional lots would be included, the actual amount is 19 additional lots. Robert Hoffman, attorney for Orrin Thompson, appeared and reviewed the history of Lexington Place South. He stated that the density had been reduced over the last few years and that the reason for the request for additional lots was that two outlots which had been set aside for amenities, including a private pool, were no longer required, as it was determined that. suc}i amenities would not be feasible with a single family development such as this. He stated that the developer will retain architectural control through covenants which require approval of design and location of all units by the developer. In response to a question from the Commission, Mr. Hoffman stated that the width of the lots would be equal to or larger than the existing lots and that they would be 60 feet in width or larger. 113 I APC Minutes May 28, 1985 33% lot coverage, including garages. Gene Bassett appeared on behalf of the owner and stated that the original proposed building would have covered 35% of the lot. Neighboring property owners appeared and objected to the proposal on the basis that it would reduce the salability of neighboring single family lots, that it was the understanding of property owners at the time they purchased in Meadowlands that these four lots were zoned single family, that garbage might be handled in an unsightly and sanitary manner, that access would affect the neighboring property owners, that the development would result in the loss of a number of large oak trees, that the zoning of the property as multiple was inappropriate immediately adjacent to single family lots, that construction noise would be disruptive to the neighborhood, and that the proposal was initially to be for handicapped persons only. Mrs. Bassett appeared on behalf of the owner and stated that the property was zoned multiple before Meadowlands was zoned or developed, and that the • development of Meadowlands had removed the top soil from their property. Mr. Bassett stated that the retaining wall behind the garages would be staggered so that there would be two small drops rather than one large drop. Dale Runkle stated that a condition of approval would include that garbage would be enclosed or screened, that garage access would only be from Rahn Road, and that the only access on Shale and Bear Path Trail would be for parking in front of the units on the street, and that all of the units were to be set up for handicapped access. James McMann of MCRS Industries appeared on behalf of the applicant and mentioned that an association will take care of snow, garbage and maintenance, and that all units will be accessible to wheelchairs and persons using crutches and canes. The developers stated that they want all the units to be purchased by handicapped persons but that they cannot discriminate by refusal to sell to non -handicapped persons, that the developer looked into the possibility of saving the trees and determined that it would be impossible to • do so, and that the excavators will be responsible for removing any debris from the area. Rich Hefti stated that City Ordinance only allows construction between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., and that if there is noise before or after those times, that City staff will correct the problem upon a report from neighbors. McCrea stated that she prefers this proposal to the higher elevation proposal and asked whether it would be possible to recruit handicapped persons. Ms. Bassett noted that handicapped organizations will be notified,. _ and'McMann stated that he has contacted a handicapped realtor who will work with the developer and who had access to special financing for the handicapped. McMann also stated that the garages will be broken up so that it will not be one long line of garages on the north end of the property, and that phasing will start at the Rahn Road side and move toward the east, with grading and the retaining wall to be done at the beginning. He stated that the units will range from 872 square feet for 2 -bedroom units, to 1,168 square feet for 3 -bedroom units, with full basements, at a cost from $57,000.00 to $65,000.00, with oak cabinets, forced air, gas heat, R-55 ceiling insulation, R-23 to 24 side insulation, 2 x 6 inch exterior walls and maintenance -free vinyl exteriors. 3 APE Minutes May 28, 1985 City Council member, Ted Wachter, was present and mentioned that the original zoning was approved with the understanding that it would be occupied with retarded persons only, and that was the reason for the underlying zoning. Mrs. Bassett stated that the original proposal was to be restricted to developmentally disabled persons which would include physically and mentally disabled persons. Harrison stated that the zoning map should show the underlying zoning for planned development districts to avoid misleading property owners. He asked whether this was feasible, and Brad Smith stated that an indication could be placed on the zoning map with PD zoned areas to indicate that the underlying zoning might not be fully reflected on the zoning. map. Mulrooney stated that the application is fraught with problems' concerning size, setbacks, drainage, that it does not conform with City requirements, that he is not satisfied that the history of the proposal has been fully explored, and that the proposal warrants further study, and on that • basis, moved that the matter be set aside for 30 days for further study. McCrea stated that the zoning could not be changed, but that this proposal would be better than a three-story building. Harrison seconded the motion of Mulrooney. In response to questions from member Harrison, the broker for the Bassetts, noted that there had been "For Sale" signs on the property, but not for sale as single family lots. Mulrooney and Trygg voted in favor of the motion; Harrison, Bohne and McCrea voted against the motion and the motion died. McCrea moved to recommend approval of the application of MSRS Industries, Inc. for preliminary plat approval of Eagles Nest Village, consisting of 14 townhouse units on 1.4 acres located on the property described above, subject to the following conditions: 1. Five visitor parking spaces shall be provided on the site with signage designating them as such. • 2. A detailed landscape plan shall be prepared showing species, size and location for all plant material. Special attention shall be paid to landscaping due to the tightness of this development, and an adequate landscaping bond ($10,000.00) shall be held until one year after the landscaping is installed. Drainage on the site shall be toward the west, pursuant to a drainage and grading plan, which shall be approved by City staff. 3. All trash containers shall be stored inside the garages or suitably screened. 4. The garage layout shall be modified to break up the mass along the north property line. 5. All standard preliminary plat conditions shall be adhered to. 6. Rahn Road shall be widend to 44 -foot design width and an 8 -foot bituminous trailway shall be placed along the east side of Rahn Road with the costs to be the responsibility of this development. 7. The developer shall complete the vacation of drainage and utility easements over the internal Lot lines, prior to final plat approval. 11-15 4 APC Minutes May 28, 1985 8. The developer shall prepay future assessment responsibility for the upgrading of Rahn Road at the rate in effect at final platting, and all costs for the installation of on-site improvements, including trailway, shall be the responsibility of this development. 9. A variance for lot coverage shall be obtained by the developer prior to final platting. 10. All units shall be constructed as to be accessible to handicapped persons. 11. The only ingress and egress to the garage area will be off Rahn Road. 12. All units shall be owned and occupied by handicapped persons, unless the City Attorney's office determines that such a requirement is not legal • under the State and Federal Housing Laws. Voting in favor were Harrison, Bohne, and McCrea; voting against were Trygg and Mulrooney. The chair abstained. The motion passed. O'NEIL CENTER - REZONING Chairman Hall convened the public hearing on the applicati of R. J. O'Neil for rezoning from A (Agricultural) to PD (Planned Dev opment) for approximately 100 acres, located in the south half of Section 10, north of Yankee Odle Road, weal of Lexington Avenue, and east of 5E. Dale Runkle introduce the application and summarized the staff r ort of May 21, 1985. He stated th the Comprehensive Land Use Guide design es this property as R - III, 6 to 12 u its per acre, that one of the access to Yankee Doodle Road might have to be ved, that areas D and L are d ignated for ponding use, and that while City statf--,has determined that t re is adequate commercial space • zoned in the City at this time, that the plication should still be reviewed on its own merits. Harold Sheff, attorney�\for a O'Neils appeared on behalf of the applicants and stated that Bill rice of Suburban Engineering and John Klein were present and would discusse•,�pplication. Bill Price stated that one of the driveways had been shifted and that the actual location would not be resolved until Dakota County eviewed 'the proposal, that O'Neil is making the proposal at this time be ause of other development in the area, that areas D and l would play an intricate role in the \city's storm water ponding and drainage plan, that be ause of the severe lopes the development would work around the ponds nd use them as ameniti and that one sanitary sewer connection to the outhwest has been eliminated be use of the extreme cost, but that the o er three proposed sanitary sewer c nections would not need revision. John Lein appeared and mentioned that the proposal is IV1�4ggered by the eat for cooperation concerning ponding, that the applicla cannot ine how to cooperate until he knows the ponding configuration, Chat tments would have more of an impact on utilities than a commerce 1 lopment, that if the 100 acres in question as well as the property 114 5 Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Twenty -Seven REZONING/O'NEILL CENTER C. O'Neill Center for Rezoning from A to PD for Approximately 100 Acres -- A public hearing was held before the Advisory Planning Commission at their regular meeting held on Tuesday, May 28, 1985, to consider an application for a commercial planned development consisting of approximately 120 acres. The planned development would have approximately 100 acres of commercial uses. The uses include limited business, roadside business and high tech office/warehouse, road right-of-way and ponding easements. The remaining 20 acres are proposed as R-4 in accordance with the existing zoning. The APC is recommending denial of the request for the PD due to its of compliance with the Comprehensive Guide Plan. For additional information on this • item, refer to the Cit Planner's repo t, a copy of which is enclosed on pages _ through /Z For a copy of the action which was taken by the Advisory Parks & Recreation Commission, refer to page For a copy of the action that was taken by the Advisory Pla ing Commission, refer to a copy of those minutes found on pages j, through /3/ . • ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the rezoing as submitted for O'Neill Center by Robert O'Neill. CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: REZONING TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT R J O'NEIL CENTER PLANNED DEVELOPMENT APPLICANT: R J O'NEIL LOCATION: PART OF THE S'h OF SECTION 10, NORTH OF YANKEE DOODLE RD, WEST OF LEXINGTON AV, EAST OF EXISTING ZONING: A (AGRICULTURAL) & I -35E R-4 (RESIDENTIAL/MULTIPLE DISTRICT) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: MAY 28, 1985 DATE OF REPORT: MAY 21, 1985 REPORTED BY: DALE C RUNKLE • APPLICATION SUBMITTED: An application has been submitted requesting a commercial planned development which would consist of approx. 120 acres. The planned development would have approx. 100 acres of commercial uses. These would include limited business, roadside business & high tech office/warehouse, road right-of-way and ponding easements. The remaining 20 acres are proposed to remain R-4 (residential multiple) in accordance with the existing zoning. ZONING & LAND USE: Presently the property is zoned A (agricultural) and in the past there have not been any development proposals to the City, therefore, the agricultural zoning is the original zoning of this property. The Comprehensive Guide designates this property as P. -III (mixed residential) with a density of 6 - 12 dwelling units per acre. The applicant is requesting that approx. 100 acres of the 120 be converted to limited business, roadside business, high tech office/warehouse, ponding & road right-of-way. Any change from the residential designation, on the Comp. Guide, will require an amendment to the Comp. Plan processed through the Metropolitan Council. COMMENTS: In review of this parcel, the property lies north of Yankee Doodle Rd, east of I -35E & west of Lexington Av. This parcel is the only undeveloped, high density residential area north of Yankee Doodle Rd. To the south is the 170 acres of commercial, known as Town Centre 100 & Town Centre 70, and to the east is presently undeveloped industrial land. To the north are some R-4 (residential multiples) and the bulk mail center and to the west is the I -35E alignment. Reviewing the Comprehensive Guide regarding this parcel, the main reason it was designated an R -III is because there was an existing plat recorded on the property north, however, this property has not been developed at this time. It has always been looked at as a questionable piece as to what the designation should be; a high density resident- ial or a commercial/industrial development, which would probably be more compatible to the uses to the south and east and also compatible with the I -35E right-of-way. It appears that this could be one of the parcels in the City that could be a commercial piece as well as a multiple. 111r R J O'NEIL CENTER PD MAY 28, 1985 PAGE 2 The land uses proposed, in the R J O'Neil Planned Development, consist of approx. 36 acres of limited business, or 507,400 S.F. of building area; 16.8 acres of roadside business, or approx. 220,300 S.F. of roadside business use; 17.7 acres of high tech office/warehouse, which is the new terminology for business/whse. consisting of approx. 50 - 60% office and 50 - 40% warehouse with brick veneer versus standard concrete block. The high tech square footage would be approx. 231,400 and lastly the ponding areas of approx. 14.2 - 15 acres. These would make up the uses within the commercial part of the P.D. In reviewing the areas and calculations, the limited business was figured at a floor area ratio of .2, the roadside business .3, and high tech approx. .2. These ratios are based in accordance with the square footage allowed in the Eagan Zoning Ordinance with the standard 20 - 30% building coverage. Besides the overall use, the applicants have provided a road plan as to how circulation would be developed on this property. They are showing two accesses onto Yankee Doodle Rd. & one east/west street which would connect with Lexington Av. The applicants have reasonably designed the street pattern in accordance with the severe topogaphy of this site and it appears to be one of the only feasible ways to develop this property and be able to provide proper access. The only issue is the most easterly of the two accesses onto Yankee Doodle Rd. As you can see, these accesses are offset and could be an issue as to where specifically the access will occur onto Yankee Doodle Rd. The second issue in regard to the commercial use and circulation is in review of the sewer flows that are available on this property. It appears that the City does not have the capacity to handle a multiple family development compared to being able to handle commercial development which has a lesser flow rate than multiple. Additional e trunk lines would have to be installed to obtain capacity to service multiple residential. Engineering can address this specific issue regarding sewer capacity and flows between multiple & commer- cial uses. The last issue is that the main reason to look at uses and as to how this area will develop, was because of the development south of Yankee Doodle Rd. With the development of Town Centre 70 & 100, there was not enough storm sewer capacity without obtain- ing additional ponding areas and easements on this property. Once the City informed Mr. O'Neil of the additional need of the City storm sewer system, the developer has been working with the City to determine what the ponding needs will be for the overall master storm sewer plan. Also, how he can develop the property in accordance with determining the ponding needs of the City. Therefore, the PD was initiated because of the City's need for ponding areas. The developer has reacted to put together a master plan as to how the 120 acre parcel can develop. At this time there is no specific user but parcels and circulation have been established which could be split off and developed individually in an orderly fashion.." R J O'NEIL CENTER PD MAY 28, 1985 PAGE 3 The engineering department would like to comment on two areas of concern regarding the O'Neil Planned Development. One area relates to sanitary sewer capacity and the other relates to access alignment onto Yankee Doodle Road. SANITARY SEWER The concern of the engineering department relates to the capacity of the 15 inch trunk sanitary sewer line within Mike Collins Drive. The installation of this line occurred in 1970. Apparently at that time, the intention was not to provide service to sub - districts N -W, N -Y, and N -X as indicated on figure one. Apparently, the original intent for servicing these areas was to extend a trunk line from the lift station on County Road 63-A. However, at some subsequent date the Comprehensive Sewer Plan changed to its present layout. The only way the 15 inch trunk sanitary • sewer will experience any capacity problems will be if one or several high users develop within the subdistricts tributary to the 15 inch trunk. If all the development within the tributary area designated for industrial use consists of low users, then the 15 inch line will probably not experience any capacity problems. The impact of the O'Neil Planned Development on the 15 inch trunk sanitary sewer consists of the type of use and some additional area from subdistrict C -H2 being added to the tributary area. The proposal to rezone from R-3 use to a commercial use would decrease the wastewater flows by approximately 268. The area being added to the tributary area for the 15 inch trunk from the O'Neil P.D. consists of a portion of the southwest quarter of Section 10 (40 acres). The reason for removing these 40 acres from subdistrict C -H2 was that it was not economically feasible to extend the 12 inch trunk sewer within Denmark Drive at a depth to serve these 40 acres. In summary, a potential capacity problem exists within the 15 inch trunk sanitary sewer in Mike Collins Drive. Also, the design flows from a commercial development are approximately 268 less then from a R-3 (multiple residential). Staff does not feel these issues merit a recommendation 'either for or against this proposed Planned Development. The Planning Commission must consider these factors with regard to the entire land use issue. STREETS At issue here is the offset between the proposed easterly access onto Yankee Doodle Road and the access to the 10 story high-rise. It is the staff's understanding from the Dakota County Highway Department that all accesses will be required to line up on Yankee Doodle Road. This is because of the anticipated high traffic volumes between Lexington Avenue and 35-E. This is feasible from an engineering standpoint. Staff will review this item upon the receipt of a Preliminary Plat. Z R J O'NEIL CENTER PD MAY 28, 1985 PAGE 4 CONDITIONS: 1. This Planned Development should be reviewed by the Eagan Park Commission to determine if parkland will be required with the change to commercial zoning. An overall pedestrian circulation plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Park Commission prior to the final approval of the PD. 2. The Planned Development shall be reviewed by the Park Commission for park dedication for this overall PD. 3. The Planned Development Agreement shall be entered into by the developer and the City of Eagan. This Agreement shall attach the exhibits that are in the May 21, 1985 Staff Report. This Agreement shall be for a period of 5 - 10 years as deter- mined by the City. •• 4. There is no platting being requested with this development plan, therefore, no development shall be allowed until the detailed first phase has been submitted for review and prelimi - nary plat. 5. The PD should be reviewed by MnDot and Dakota County for their review and comment as the property abuts county & state right-of-way. 6. An amendment shall be required of the City to change the Comprehensive Guide from R -III (mixed residential with a density of 6 - 12 dwelling units per acre) to commercial uses allowing limited business, roadside business & high tech office warehouse. 7. The developer shall cooperate with the ponding area easements that for the Eagan storm sewer system. the City of Eagan resolving are needed to be obtained 8. The environmental assessment worksheets & an environmental, review will be determined on a phase by phase basis once the detailed plans have been submitted. /a / �l .lA ZGB all .R AA V 1 LI R 7,11v A PD 3" 0 "4c s c p p CG B K i SC LB 82-2 R-4 O'LEA I RY PA I RKi ADqDITIO PILOT MCBR 714 CROSSROAD nF CENT1,R,., EIAG 4 N R Fw Fl K A , , 1. K 3 OC -C L A I L S R'= R-4 y /Wuuf H-15, R-2- LB- 1� &- CARRIAGE HILLS GOLF COURSE A PF i I v LI LI A�4 OXY r LI 1jIII n s 1. LI Pi,OPOSED ._ LI R.4 -t O'NkC CENTER I w MENDOTA .NITS. • _—�M.,0-- _—__ J Y \I ` Ind • i -- A '/ . \ — •�y nT� fG![ J - J Il •Yl.- 10. 1 ... _.J 1f • 4' -:. aryl — - � ""yy..4; � - .. ��++•.�� 1 — \wY.'rtl..:: :i:.M.^' -III, i' rte.•.. V COMMERCIAL • - � s, .., _ �'' .. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT JR (jn�,l LB R.�,n • ..... Indo,G6 I .. R -N r� Ra.. �1 © �.=_ • �� _ _ `�--�,. , /j r� • _ - - Ind. Inc. -✓ :'r. NB•—.-- LB R-114 ...R -III R -III -_ ``• P R41,1 -- JZ.N D: CSC. P ,.:.i --_ _ :;-Ind. _- ......:.:::\::/. R -II RI R -I - R -II . R•11 LB I R_ -I _ __ Rill .. R -I - - - Ind_ Y HALL 41 .._-..- RII . • . :ts.•i G•. - R -I - P 14 R-1 1 bl- -- \- .....p.:Tll., P P -' • R.�.: :. • 4. _ R -II ._ R-11- - t • N � ( L- r R-1 pRiR-III;�$...---R-III R -III �' i.:y„"`.'I - R -0I Csc/(B! R-1:_ - ✓ --R-III Rlt;.. R I:!,.:. R-U� • '-� . R'0 _ 1 '/ LAND USE GUIDE PLAN IN 001111113 Re J. O'NEIL CENTER I, .;' ',=.- '. ''ti' �1' i--4 •.,, ; _ - _ _1111 - R 4 ,MUL7NLE'HOUBIN6 - y ft _J MULTIPLE. HOl)SINB t 1 . s.0e u I 90 •0ev Irl , � � \.1,A i f11 - to I l \ c 1 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT R. J. O'Nell Properties AREA LAND USES AND BUILDING COVERAGE CITY OF EAGAK MN. .1 W� V w• wmw RJ (Aru A •••.m 1111•. l:owes Mea S u•au u1.•s• Aree C naue u.m Arse D mme Area E n•.o9 n•.m Aree F .u.r99 u.ue emrew 'mcmURAL xos Area O Area H u..ew u•.•se u,•« 1.r,•u Area 1 1.1,•09 Aree J 9new n1.•e• ' ASEMENT, Arsa ue.es9 n•..n L Aree L •.a..0• Re J. O'NEIL CENTER I, .;' ',=.- '. ''ti' �1' i--4 •.,, ; _ - _ _1111 - R 4 ,MUL7NLE'HOUBIN6 - y ft _J MULTIPLE. HOl)SINB t 1 . s.0e u I 90 •0ev Irl , � � \.1,A i f11 - to I l \ c 1 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT R. J. O'Nell Properties 2040 EdOecumbe Road ST. Paul Minn. 55116 CITY OF EAGAK MN. My. wee �9 fir• -': `(.` ECN�a � HIb11,7IF 11_11 I i . ' ASEMENT, (> o LIMITED BU6INESS" `ONIoe Parti'::., ... _ 1.. . -1:111. 1111 1 Re J. O'NEIL CENTER PLANNED DEVELOPMENT R. J. O'Nall Properties 2040 Edgecumbe Road ST. Paul Minn. 65116 CITY OF EAGAN, MK mv, less 114 GRADING, DRAINGE AND UTIUTIES PLAN r. P A. c 0 20 77. n' ...... . ... NU. .... .. . 5— POND L.... ....... . ygl�R-Kg QbObU RCFA 1P....,; ... . .......... '.MENDOTA HTS. ti iu.o B� - �� ,.------ - ,2-_ :�-��. - - '�� ,.r.•� CP -9 / 699.0 C" 702.0 / = z4• C \` 878.0 p JP -II 8157 8500 � -i JI 81 \ XP -3 EeCasiaLL� - r -v - r `-L0• w Cp_ 843.5 836.0 C F - C 1 1 .. 7150 715.0 7/9.7 827.7 _ �N- Li -4 H.... �• �e NP -4 D -I 899.0 �j I /D -L 859.3 / 866.0 ' so' .. DP ._ 6.0 _9 - ,(\ D a D-6 B7B.2 / \ _ D- I e 880" D -f eeoo DP -2 D -m BB l.9 874.0 � - � y �1 765,0 769.4 50 1 CP -6 \f x\8060 AP -27 - 796.3 Ste' �1 002.44 0-38' Qts 1 l gCpP-2 829.7 CP -12 826. 5 829.6 R.J. O'NEIL CENTER V 829.0 829.7 1000, CP- 11 795.0 808 J22--'<./ 944.0 IBS/.3 7903 I f BOLO /1--+-{/ -F9P-1144 FP -1 - 832.3 859.1 _ r F-• .r--F-e` i r,ZI d .; F a � �\ '-12 - 56.0 zo .r E-� E -r E -t •: DP -19 884 D . 890.0 DP_ ".-D P-27 174 8.0.6 ; DP -61 7 857! jj %i 1866.5L -7- I DP -23 9 88910 D•< b 8976 70 . DP -22 / J 760 _ 8922 880.0 Y�J-6 _ r - JP -67 p_1 871.0 0i CITY 887 772 CITY OF EAGAN . /2% STORM SEWER LAYOUT MAP DP -20 901.0 9042 E-4 -o DP -11 856 0 I c1TE 864• /EP -3e r ` / 877'a I ,_J/ 1 8448.8. D 0 DDP 0 E_ 860.0 858.3 z4• C \` 878.0 p JP -II 8157 8500 � -i JI 81 \ Cp_ CP•4 1 .. 7150 715.0 7/9.7 827.7 Li -4 842.6 i i s' CP -3 841.9 CP'S 6. 830.3 873/ - Corin 765,0 769.4 50 1 CP -6 \f x\8060 AP -27 - 796.3 Ste' �1 002.44 0-38' Qts 1 l gCpP-2 829.7 CP -12 826. 5 829.6 R.J. O'NEIL CENTER V 829.0 829.7 1000, CP- 11 795.0 808 J22--'<./ 944.0 IBS/.3 7903 I f BOLO /1--+-{/ -F9P-1144 FP -1 - 832.3 859.1 _ r F-• .r--F-e` i r,ZI d .; F a � �\ '-12 - 56.0 zo .r E-� E -r E -t •: DP -19 884 D . 890.0 DP_ ".-D P-27 174 8.0.6 ; DP -61 7 857! jj %i 1866.5L -7- I DP -23 9 88910 D•< b 8976 70 . DP -22 / J 760 _ 8922 880.0 Y�J-6 _ r - JP -67 p_1 871.0 0i CITY 887 772 CITY OF EAGAN . /2% STORM SEWER LAYOUT MAP DP -20 901.0 9042 E-4 -o DP -11 856 0 I c1TE 864• /EP -3e r ` / 877'a I ,_J/ 1 8448.8. D 0 DDP 0 E_ 860.0 858.3 Fizam MAP PRE-VARF-D 2r: 5.R A 1 Assoc. OGT 1989 JF 8• 9083 JP 62 Iz•0973 891.0 B93T _ / JP -46 19 2 3 88935 JP -II 8157 8500 � -_ 999, 007 JP -p44 � ^ 89J7 Y JI 81 Fizam MAP PRE-VARF-D 2r: 5.R A 1 Assoc. OGT 1989 JF 8• s n V I` �., 30 1'1-;--LIs 4. u el 83 - _J I - \ N -G / --- 81 — 15 21, I' / N -GG \ V02)18 N -II �\ 21° I \N-0 \\ \\ 112.. 1 Imo -'TEMPORARY fi N -P N -D. Fy�_- ---- — N -Q I N -S. fN- I` \ N -CC '� \ 15"I�-91 d'\\ 18 \ --J. -- N -T I 9' 94 N —JJ I� 12 C - H 2 31 _ 89 i .; o,t„N ` I :•ESCOtt \ \ \ — — FR.]GE _ _ \ N — Z \ -.r ¢zC3 i I : -. ,ice-° ;e -DEN ..]t. I I `\ IA 8 IZ” I N — X \95 � --N—W Oar NN L /�' N :I i.:i;•RYE. I I I _ IV -BB :. 62 64 l I i s.- 91 112rt q�{�s SUBJECT PARCEL city of eagan SANITARY SEWER PUBLIC ., WORKS MASTER PLAN DEPARTMENT FIG. *1 approved: standard plate #p: �0: TOM HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR M: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS & RECREATION DATE: JUNE 12, 1985 RE: O'NEIL CENTER — ADVISORY PARKS & REC COMM ACTION The Advisory Parks & Recreation Commission reviewed the proposed rezoning to P.U.D. of the O'Neil Center. There were numerous questions and discussion by the Advisory Commission relative to the overall P.U.D. and in particular, the implications on the need for parks space. Members noted there is additional R3 zoning of approximately 70 acres immediately to the north of the O'Neil Center and 20 acres of R4 zoning of O'Neil property could result in a • substantial number of residents which may require a small neighborhood park. Other factors were also considered including the possibility of replatting of the R3 property and previous discussions with Opus Corporation for park land dedication adjacent to I -35E immediately west of the post office bulk mail center facility. Because of the number of issues pertaining to parks and the uncertainty of a number of issues, Commission asked staff to prepare a report concerning these items. In summation, Commission asked for staff to prepare a report regarding park land needs in Park Service Section 10E and to look for a site which could provide basic neighborhood amenities based on the current R4 and R3 zoning. KV/js CC: Dale Runkle, City Planner Julie Dykstra, Planning Secretary /Z� APC Minutes May 28, 1985 8. The developer shall prepay future assessment responsibility for the upgrading of Rahn Road at the rate in effect at final'platting, and all costs for the installation of on-site improvements, including trailway, shall be the responsibility of this development. 9. A variance for lot coverage shall be obtained by the developer prior to final platting. 10. All units shall be constructed as to be accessible to handicapped persons. 11. The only ingress and egress to the garage area will be off Rahn Road. 12. All units shall be owned and occupied by handicapped persons, unless • the City Attorney's office determines that such a requirement is not legal under the State and Federal Housing Laws. Voting in favor were Harrison, Bohne, and McCrea; voting against were Trygg and Mulrooney. The chair abstained. The motion passed. O'NEIL CENTER - REZONING Chairman Hall convened the public hearing on the application of R. J. O'Neil for rezoning from A (Agricultural) to PD (Planned Development) for approximately 100 acres, located in the south half of Section 10, north of Yankee Doodle Road, west of Lexington Avenue, and east of I -35E. Dale Runkle introduced the application and summarized the staff report of May 21, 1985. He stated that the Comprehensive Land Use Guide designates this property as R - III, 6 to 12 units per acre, that one of the accesses to Yankee Doodle Road might have to be moved, that areas D and L are designated for ponding use, and • that while City staff has determined that there is adequate commercial space zoned in the City at this time, that the application should still be reviewed on its own merits. Harold Sheff, attorney for the O'Neils appeared on behalf of the applicants and stated that Bill Price of Suburban Engineering and John Klein were present and would discuss the application. Bill Price stated that one of the driveways had been shifted and that the actual location would not be resolved until Dakota County reviewed the proposal, that O'Neil is making the proposal at this time because of other development in the area, that areas D and l would play an intricate role in the city's storm water ponding and drainage plan, that because of the severe slopes the development would work around the ponds and use them as amenities, and that one sanitary sewer connection to the southwest has been eliminated because of the extreme cost, but that the other three proposed sanitary sewer connections would not need revision. John Klein appeared and mentioned that the proposal is triggered by the request for cooperation concerning ponding, that the applicant cannot determine how to cooperate until he knows the ponding configuration, that apartments would have more of an impact on utilities than a commercial development, that if the 100 acres in question as well as the property /30 5 APC Minutes May 28, 1985 immediately to the north all developed as multiple, 2,044 apartment units could conceivably be included in the area, that the high-tech office warehouse areas would be similar to what was approved for Opus Corporation, and that the buildings would have attractive exterior, not simply concrete block exteriors. Price noted that possible entrances near the southeast corner of the development on Yankee Doodle Road would be included only if Dakota County approved the access. Stan Ketchum, the owner of property on Lexington Avenue just north of Yankee Doodle Road and immediately adjacent to the proposed development's access to Lexington Avenue, appeared and opposed the application on the basis that it would substantially increase truck traffic in the area, that the use of all kinds of commercial and multiple uses is haphazard planning, and that the City is already over -built as to this type of development. John Klein stated that much of the traffic on Lexington Avenue exists because I -35W is not yet completed. Mr. Ketchum responded that the project to the south of • Yankee Doodle Road has no[ yet been built and would add substantially to the current traffic. Mulrooney noted that since the only request at this time is for rezoning, the question is whether this is the most appropriate zoning for the area. McCrea stated that she is opposed to more commercial property in Eagan, that if all freeway interchanges go commercial, there will be a lot of strip zoning, that some cities have not allowed commercial rezoning near freeways until other commercial areas in the cities develop, in order to determine whether the additional commercial space is necessary. Harrison stated that high-tech office warehouse is not appropriate for commercial property and should be on Industrial zoned property. In response to a question from Trygg, Hefti answered that if the property develops for commercial uses, the potential use of sanitary sewer would be reduced, but that he could not say for sure that the current sanitary sewer could handle the load without knowing how the property to the east of the proposal develops. Harrison asked why the City could not condemn the necessary ponding easements rather than discuss this proposal as a means of settling the storm sewer easement question. Hall stated that to some extent, the City had pushed the developer in coming up with the proposal as a result of the City's need for storm sewer. Harrison moved that the application of R. J. O'Neil for rezoning from A (Agricultural) to PD (Planned Development) for approximately 100 acres located in the property describe above, be recommended for denial for the following mentioned above and the following: 1. That the City of Eagan already has an excess of commercial property. zoned. 2. That the property is already designated for R -III use on the Land Use Guide. 3. That office/warehouse use should be located in Limited Industrial property, not commercial property. McCrea seconded the motion. All members voted in favor, except the Chair, who abstained. /3/ 6 • • Agenda Information June 18, 1985, City Page Twenty -Eight Memo Council Meeting PRELIMINARY PLAT SUNSET 8TH ADDITION D. Sunset 8th Addition for a Preliminary Plat of Sunset 8th Addition, Consisting of 3 Single Family Lots on 2 Acres --A public hearing was held by the Advisory Planning Commission held at their last regular meeting held on May 28, 1985 to consider an application to replat Lot 7, Block 1 of Sunset 3rd Addition into 3 single family lots to be renamed Sunset 8th Addition. The Advisory Planning Commission is recommending approval of this preliminary plat subject to conditions of the staff report with an added condition that staff be able to add a 10 foot front setback variance for Lot 1 if determined necessary to allow proper construction of the building. For additional information on this item, refer to a report prepared by the Planning and Engineering Departments enclosed on pages X33 through /. The Advisory Planning Commission is recommending a cash dedication per their regular meeting in June 1985. For additional information on this item, refer to the APC minutes. A copy is enclosed on pages /j' . ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: preliminary plat of Sunset 8th Addition. i3 7-- To approve or deny the CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY PLAT - SUNSET 8TH ADDITION APPLICANT: TRI -LAND, INC. - BRADLEY J SWENSON LOCATION: PART OF THE S'h OF THE NW'h, SECTION 25 EXISTING ZONING: R-1 (RESIDENTIAL SINGLE DISTRICT) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: MAY 28, 1985 DATE OF REPORT: MAY 22, 1985 REPORTED BY: PLANNING & ENGINEERING DEPTS. • APPLICATION SUBMITTED: An application has been submitted to. replat Lot 7, Sunset 3rd Addition into 3 single family lots and renamed Sunset 8th Addition. ZONING & LAND USE: Presently, the parcel is zoned R-1 and would allow single family residents.. The Comprehensive Guide also designates this parcel as R-1 (residential single district) and would allow a density of 0 - 3 dwelling units per acre. COMMENTS: In 1983, the applicant submitted an application and platted Sunset 3rd Addition consisting of 7 single family lots at which time the owner of the property lived on lot 7. It would be difficult to develop the remaining 3 acres because of the topography of the area as it is very low and a substantial amount of fill would have to be obtained in order to make the lots develop- able. • The owner has an existing house on what is lot 3 of the 8th Addition. The lots being created, lots 1 & 2, are on the westerly portion of the property and fill will have to be obtained and a grading plan submitted in order to have these be. buildable lots. Staff understands that the road elevation will be lowered approx. 5 - 6' in the general area of lots 1 & 2 increasing the feasibility of these 2 lots. Golden Meadow Rd is now being proposed to be upgraded and installed to provide circulation to Northview Meadows. With the construction and assessments of this road, the owner was forced to try to salvage 2 additional lots to help offset the cost of improvements to Golden Meadow Rd. GRADING/DRAINAGE: The existing topography generally consists of moderate to steeply sloping grassland. The moderate slopes (less than 10%) cover the vast majority of lots 2 & 3. The very steep slopes (greater than 208) occur within lot 1. The slopes on lot 1 will be softened somewhat by the lowering of Golden Meadow Rd. Under Project #418-R, Golden Meadow Rd will be lowered approx. 5' - 6' across the frontage of lot 1. Some of the excess material generated from the lowering of this road will be placed as fill material in lot 1. Staff is not aware•of the exact amount of fill, or what the finished contours will look like. A 10' setback Variance may be necessary for lot 1. A proposed grading 133 PRELIMINARY PLAT - SUNSET 8TH ADD MAY 28, 1985 PAGE 2 plan over this area would be beneficial in determining the necessity of this Variance. No grading plan was submitted to Staff for review with this application. Therefore, a condition for approval of this proposed Preliminary Plat must include that a detailed grading and erosion control plan be submitted to Staff. UTILITIES: Project #418-R is under construction and provides for the installation of sanitary sewer and watermain to service this proposed development. STREETS: Project #418-R also provides for the installation of Golden Meadow Rd along the entire frontage of this proposed develop- ment. Completion of this segment of Golden Meadow Rd under Project #418-R will complete the connection of the Northview Addition to Dodd Rd. RIGHT-OF-WAY/EASEMENTS: This development shall dedicate a 30' half right-of-way for Golden Meadow Rd. The City presently has a highway easement for this portion of right-of-way. The dedication of this right-of-way with this proposed development will be much neater because the right-of-way will be included with the plat rather than a separate document. Utility & drainage easements shall be dedicated adjacent public right-of-way and interior lot lines as required by City Code. ASSESSMENTS: All trunk area related assessments have been levied over this proposed development. No trunk related projects will be required as a result of this development. CONDITIONS: • 1. No Variances be allowed on lots 1 & 2 or the grading plan • and house pad elevations should be shown at this time to determine if a Variance will be required from the front setback. 2. All standard plat conditions shall apply. 3. A 30' half right-of-way be dedicated on the plat for Golden Meadow Rd. 4. All general engineering recommendations, which apply to this development, be adhered to. CITY OF EACAN SUBJECT: REZONING AND PRELIMINARY PLAT - SUNSET 3RD ADDITION APPLICANT: TRI -LAND INC., BRADLEY J. SWENSON LOCATION: PART OF THE S' OF THE NA OF SECTION 25 EXISTING ZONING: A (AGRICULTURAL DISTRICT) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: JULY 26, 1983 DATE OF REPORT: JULY 20, 1983 REPORTED BY: DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER • APPLICATION SUBMITTED: The first application submitted is a request to rezone approximately 5 acres from A (Agricultural) to R-1 (Residen- tial Single District) located in part of the S' of the NW; of Section 25. The second application submitted is a request for preliminary plat approval, Sunset 3rd Addition, which would consist of approximately 5 acres and contain 7 single family lots. ZONING AND LAND USE Presently, the parcel is zoned Agricultural and would only allow one home per 5 acres. The Comprehensive Guide Plan designates this par- cel as R-1 (Residential Single District) and would allow a density of 0-3 dwelling units per acre'. • COMMENTS The proposed parcel is located directly east of Overview Estates Re - plat, a single family residential area. To the north is .Sunset 2nd Addition, which is a subdivision that was recently approved also con- taining single family lots. The property to the west is presently large lots or basically undeveloped, and the area to the south is comprised of large 5 -acre agriculturally -zoned tracts. Access to this parcel would be by Golden Meadow Road which has been improved to the westerly edge of Overview Estates. The applicant is proposing to construct a cul-de-sac, Golden Meadow Court, which would provide access to six single family lots. Lot 7 presently is the homestead of the original property owner and wishes to include his home in this particular plat. The reason Lot 7 is so large is that the only buildable portion of the lot is on the easterly side where the existing home is located. The area westerly will be a ponding area, or a low area, which will probably not be developed in the near future. Therefore, the applicant is requesting the six lots 135 CITY OF EAGAN REZONING AND PRELIMINARY PLAT - SUNSET 3RD ADDITION JULY 26, 1983 PAGE TWO and platting his own home as Lot 7 which would contain the rest of the acreage. In review of this preliminary plat, the first six lots contain 12,000 square feet and a minimum of 85' frontage at the 30' setback. There- fore, all lots in this preliminary plat meet the minimum R-1 zoning standards. If approved, the preliminary plat should be subject to the following conditions: 1) No variances be allowed for side setbacks except for topograph- ic or vegetation reasons. • 2) The plat shall be subject to the Park Commission's review for park dedication. 3) A development agreement shall be entered into and signed by the applicant prior to final plat application. DCR/jach ENGINEERING RECOMMENDATIONS 4) If streets and utilities are to be installed privately, then the plans and specifications shall be prepared by a registered engi- neer in accordance with City standards. 5) In addition to typical utility and drainage easements, a 20' utility easement shall be required over the common lot line be- • tween Lots 3 and 4,and an easement of sufficient width over the westerly portion of Lot 7 will also be required for storm sewer. 6) A 30' half right-of-way shall be dedicated for Golden Meadow Road. 7) All costs associated with extending the existing Golden Meadow Road and the utilities within Golden Meadow Road and also the internal street and utilities shall be the sole responsibility of this development. RMH/jach MEMO TO: THE ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION, C/O DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER FROM: RICHARD M. HEFTI, ASSISTANT CITY ENGINEER DATE: JULY 21, 1963 SUBJECT: SUNSET 3RD ADDITION - PRELIMINARY PLAT The Engineering Division of the Department of Public Works has the following comments for consideration by the Planning Commission and City Council regarding this proposed development. I. DRAINAGE/TOPOGRAPHY This proposed development is located within the SW; of the NA of Section 25, just west of Overview Estates and north of Golden Mea- dow Road. The topography for this area consists of rolling terrain. The slopes associated with this terrain are approximately 7-8% over most of this parcel except the northwest corner where the slopes approach 20% to the natural existing depression located there. The existing drainage for Lots 1-6 around Golden Meadow Court is gen- erally to the south, towards Golden Meadow Road while the drainage over Lot 7 is towards the depression located near the northwest cor- ner of this lot. The proposed grading over this parcel will be limited to the grad- ing within Golden Meadow Court since the existing topography can be easily adapted to building upon. Subsequently, the drainage will remain the same as it is presently. Lot 7 contains the existing house on this parcel and would require no grading since the north- westerly portion of this lot is considered unbuildable due to the steep slopes and huge amounts of fill which would be required to try to make it buildable. The drainage from Golden Meadow Court is being proposed to be collected by storm sewer and deposited with- in the 24" storm sewer located within Golden Meadow Road. This, in turn, outlets into Schwanz Lake located to the southwest of this development. Figure 1 illustrates this development's location with- in the Schwanz Lake (Pond LP -32) area. Presently this pond does not have an outlet, however, a feasibility report for installing the trunk storm sewer outlet to this pond has been authorized by the Council with construction being anticipated to begin this fall. II. UTILITIES Utilities exist within Golden Meadow Road in the proximity of this proposed development of sufficient size, capacity and depth to pro- vide service to it. Figure 2 reveals the existing utilities within Golden Meadow Road and includes a 24" storm sewer, an 8" water main, and an 8" sanitary sewer. To service this parcel with utilities, it will be necessary to ex- tend both the water main and sanitary sewer within Golden Meadow Road to the west and terminate at a point at least 60' west of the 1,,37 ENGINEERING REPORT SUNSET 3RD ADDITION JULY 26, 1983 PAGE TWO east lot line of Lot 7. Golden Meadow Court is proposed to be ser- viced from the utilities within Golden Meadow Road. An 8" sewer will be required to be constructed within Golden Meadow Court along with a 6" water main which shall extend to the north property line of this parcel to connect with the proposed water main for Sunset 2nd Addition. Meanwhile, it is being proposed to extend a short lead from the existing storm sewer to the north to intercept the runoff from Golden Meadow Court. III. STREETS Access to this proposed development is currently from Golden Meadow Road. This is presently a paved City street, 34' wide with concret� curb and gutter to approximately the east property line of this pro posed development. From there it extends west as a gravel road and ends approximately 200' west of the east line of Lot 7. From there, it is just a dirt trail to the end of the parcel. The proposed access to the internal Lots 1-6, Block 1 is by way of Golden Meadow Court which is a 130' cul-de-sac off of Golden Meadow Road. This is well within the maximum length for cul-de-sacs as outlined in the City Code. It is recommended that Golden Meadow Road be constructed to its ultimate design of 34' wide bituminous surfacing with concrete curb and gutter to a point at least 60' west of the east line of Lot 7. Similarly, Golden Meadow Court should also be 34' wide with concrete curb and gutter and bituminous sur- facing. No trailways or sidewalks will be required since Golden Meadow Road is not a collector street. IV. RIGHT-OF-WAY/EASEMENTS • West of Overview Estates, Golden Meadow Road exists as a 60' ease- ment which was dedicated in 1971. Nevertheless, this proposed de- velopment should dedicate a 30' half right-of-way for Golden Mea- dow Road along with this proposed preliminary plat. In addition, Golden Meadow Court is proposed to be platted with a 50' right-of- way with the 'cul-de-sac radius being 60'. This right-of-way for Golden Meadow Court shall be dedicated with this plat. A typical 10' utility easement shall be dedicated along all public- ly dedicated right-of-way. In addition, a 10' drainage and utility easement shall be dedicated over all interior lot lines with a 5' drainage and utility easement being dedicated adjacent to all ex- terior lot lines. An exception to this would be that a 20' ease- ment should be dedicated over the common lot line between Lots 3 and 4 to incorporate the proposed water main. Finally, a utility easement of sufficient width will be required for storm sewer out- let construction resulting from the Sunset 1st and 2nd Additions. At this time, it is not possible to determine an exact location for this easement, however, it will probably be located within the wes- tern portion of Lot 7. The exact location will not be known until I% ENGINEERING REPORT SUNSET 3RD ADDITION JULY 26, 1983 PAGE THREE preparation of final plans have been completed. V. ASSESSMENTS A check on assessments has revealed that both trunk area water and trunk area sanitary sewer have been previously assessed, leaving only trunk area storm sewer to be assessed. However, this devel- opment's responsibility for this assessment has been fulfilled as it will be listed as a pending assessment under Project 383 (Schwanz Lake trunk storm sewer outlet). All costs associated with extending existing utilities and streets and also installing the internal utilities and streets shall be the • sole responsibility of this development. I will be available to discuss any aspect of this report in detail with the Advisory Planning Commission at their meeting on July 26, 1983. Respectfully submitted, Richard M. Hef , P.E. Assistant City Engineer RMH/jach Pi X39 r-/ v j 62_6 1 866.0 817.0 6-a+ , /..; oj8% 17 862.7 8670 8600 J J r 6P-4 8880- I ,J " 852,0 _ - 855.0 v� LS -170 y, / �:/• / II '; JP -9 _ ryRq JP -23 8170 '-----"J=, •'� 6522 III 8220=�. _ _ 'z� / \ ._ •_./�"' 855.3 _ ---: "3J -aa JP -34 i/ 840.0 4 684.0 J -s 8900 ri J-, 1''. f� \J-• JP -22 \ '=1 JP -24 8210 \\i'•. 1 ,_.8450-�-!l- 817.28'" 8360 JP -25' JP -29 - vI � \ L.9-IBI/\➢\`�`e�t' B/9!, ; '\ 6170 9400 I 0180 8040 --- J a4 r8••�)-6t�, 'P-43 - "I 9000 3540 9560 / ..':I J-EO.� . 966.0 LP-40 \�►� 9730 %-8,840-- `Pr41''i'"-.- 698.0 '-'aP.-50 ""LP -61 9770 'LP 9070 - ----- - 8920 - 864.4 ; 9170- - _ -'. 8940. ___. B@ 0 ,.9/BO �1• .'k.4h4'$1Lc C574rp 46 -V 900.0 _ 8 92�!P-39 B /Q"LP-33/'LP-31 `�•I `J 93 ] �`c=�ll8862_:•898.5 Y•-: ��- 'i 8880 ('9070 I ii'I LP -30 i �- 909.04: 906.3 ,51 /•�}s --"S, LP -34 1�\ I'...;AAI : iBO60 9/6.0 ,(668.0' lrP.;B l,iJ.-25 I-J•�,y�• 8790 \\ Vz• -" LP 29 9070 _'.'• - - .8780 .,LP -37 24 /, -8850 LP 49 ... _ -67g_ x`9160 '� 9/50 I LS:261 882.0--tP=33 - 9/BO-. ) _ Ff ?� 86206 B6a0 \�• ) S'_��)„ yG� - i^'LP-26 v/ L 6138 LP•45` - .��. 1`1/1✓\ 9/30 ' O 875.0 881.3 --- '1 '7 / •� .lrOTA J LP -25 1r- j �260 U'JH TY E Sox] 9170 P:. R 1 I �,� 9040 - -- .� /. LP -27 914.2 9/7! i' - -' LP -24 'I LP'26 922.0 - :.a YE BB60 920 .,gPAO `i /b 9260 9068++s1 9204 LP -19 1 :OD• ;.>a. 9002 - - \ - 900.0 2:K L Lp44 LP -IS F'1 GrURE 1 LP -230 926 . d6UU \O.;v Ea -9PP.0 -�/6. I 856.] _ =1 864,0 OP -IB -•/ /-rJP-l4 ' OP•7 887,0 870.0 / '� 877.0 1 y � ' 6330 X8460 ;. \Jl -_ 8720 8903 rz2 8922 8940 83 0� 8480 j�'• v 8970--� JP -41 • - 886.3 /�•T� / 1 "' / 887.0 "�/��L�] L5:! I 626O0=42 J'Y -. 88870\LSA4 2.JP-40 84/. (% PS JP -32 JP -11 8137 886.0. I - - 8900 _ I JP•44 JP -31 i JP -39.-. _ i 892.0:..'--? . BJ_00. ��J I 890] 8770 .- 8960 4D. J#� BBOO 1- i1 n Jl--d - } ^i JP -19 \ J -P m}a�4o } 4_Q 872.7 } 8820 /• r-/ v j 62_6 1 866.0 817.0 6-a+ , /..; oj8% 17 862.7 8670 8600 J J r 6P-4 8880- I ,J " 852,0 _ - 855.0 v� LS -170 y, / �:/• / II '; JP -9 _ ryRq JP -23 8170 '-----"J=, •'� 6522 III 8220=�. _ _ 'z� / \ ._ •_./�"' 855.3 _ ---: "3J -aa JP -34 i/ 840.0 4 684.0 J -s 8900 ri J-, 1''. f� \J-• JP -22 \ '=1 JP -24 8210 \\i'•. 1 ,_.8450-�-!l- 817.28'" 8360 JP -25' JP -29 - vI � \ L.9-IBI/\➢\`�`e�t' B/9!, ; '\ 6170 9400 I 0180 8040 --- J a4 r8••�)-6t�, 'P-43 - "I 9000 3540 9560 / ..':I J-EO.� . 966.0 LP-40 \�►� 9730 %-8,840-- `Pr41''i'"-.- 698.0 '-'aP.-50 ""LP -61 9770 'LP 9070 - ----- - 8920 - 864.4 ; 9170- - _ -'. 8940. ___. B@ 0 ,.9/BO �1• .'k.4h4'$1Lc C574rp 46 -V 900.0 _ 8 92�!P-39 B /Q"LP-33/'LP-31 `�•I `J 93 ] �`c=�ll8862_:•898.5 Y•-: ��- 'i 8880 ('9070 I ii'I LP -30 i �- 909.04: 906.3 ,51 /•�}s --"S, LP -34 1�\ I'...;AAI : iBO60 9/6.0 ,(668.0' lrP.;B l,iJ.-25 I-J•�,y�• 8790 \\ Vz• -" LP 29 9070 _'.'• - - .8780 .,LP -37 24 /, -8850 LP 49 ... _ -67g_ x`9160 '� 9/50 I LS:261 882.0--tP=33 - 9/BO-. ) _ Ff ?� 86206 B6a0 \�• ) S'_��)„ yG� - i^'LP-26 v/ L 6138 LP•45` - .��. 1`1/1✓\ 9/30 ' O 875.0 881.3 --- '1 '7 / •� .lrOTA J LP -25 1r- j �260 U'JH TY E Sox] 9170 P:. R 1 I �,� 9040 - -- .� /. LP -27 914.2 9/7! i' - -' LP -24 'I LP'26 922.0 - :.a YE BB60 920 .,gPAO `i /b 9260 9068++s1 9204 LP -19 1 :OD• ;.>a. 9002 - - \ - 900.0 2:K L Lp44 LP -IS F'1 GrURE 1 LP -230 926 . 0�20,r i -9PP.0 -�/6. w i • • N I O> -- a ll' 4e 133115 335 I m 1 Ul I Z 1 1 1 Ir v-a[T +t"M .1y >r �� 71i1 ✓4 M}�Y p4 'IeR n�f �ri�i r� t a r.----�+�-w•.-r.. .., .. n fI'.1� h�'�ia'S�+�.(��{jL %ai .��i� ] Ia+l '�+ �a r.. #) Pt d S [ t ir�,tlsS; L.i'ij �cr.i�?�t '.•`e N' [ � ---__. ' ii trf '��i �.}}I,�l �11f Y 1((e}� a al � ILY t R i4 6�! Jy�� ' 7 tY U' l � � '• � f ' ..:.. �'!` "l.'�INi-"'s!`�� d� �' LYnt�l•�Itho�+�W .71�1'9Y y.\I.�a�a,>. IA.Y T, � -+. .t_..r ='-i'1 . , �fi u.��?y 't 'Fh�' ah ,Fe;''t+t��-ilj/�• j1f �tt(,t`•f �'•1�� 1 .��1 � �.\t.L�! �"t -.."c. �T r„tF1 j^'�'TI �'ti- mo.a7 CKM0 020-2 020.29 �I 022-27 VD DRIVE ' _—!�— -oma-- — i rij 3^n \ 040-29 070.29 0400..29 I � I 021-26 W W V: a ADDL LASSO _= ."c 2 -� AgDI I� R H;CKMORE ... DR i O A Oi CO -29 10 .cr s cr 2 eu.Lo- � N � CO -29 .k PRELIMINARY PIAT: SUNSET 3RD ADDITION VICINITY MAP ti TRI -LAND CO. SHEET 1 OF 3 ITT I -T T IT" IMP a . TRI -LAND CO. SHEET 1 OF 3 PRELIMINARY PLAT. SUNSET 3RD ADDITION SCS ,1. . Ill,� , SCALE 0640' °.° .. w 116 COUNTY .°. No... VICINITY MAP ' d 4 N rH / F.• w m `LJ2 MaIle -i 0 I! / 0 M w 0 ....v ..0 .n....n w. .n •m n nm r EXISTING & PROPOSED CONTOURS TRI -LAND CO. SHEET 2 CF 3 NO 114 as 114 eo •. IT o° SITE DATA .. 1.. GO 114 COUNT, 00. 00. ,. VICINITY MAP 0 PRELIMINARY PLAT: SUNSET 3RD ADDITION N SCALE 1" 40' 4� ji 3 r• Ise Lu J O� - -. GOLDEN MEAD W RD, IT SITE DATA MrnW ..Y W� I.pnW YI. m1 n np. Y ' YN.W Is. YA•YY....W UTILITY PLAN YY.Ii YIOYI• � - __ _- TRI -LAND CO. SHEET 3 OF 3 - / MtNOWA SMT:':. /� '/.. _ _•'1� '6!17r GB RB '41iniit`—rik!?TT�% .. - .I ,p _:Lid. u,..o. cTi.�Y ..Ind.- �/ GOLF ,`i COMMERCIAL PLANNED CEVELOPMENT ' .. _ .. �R I•:. I�:;�`yl-�•'� .. -Intl.:, . ' �'�. % .il. -c•i:.;.•'� :IBJ;: . 1 - .Ind 7. ,i i E• 'i{ .�B ""RII •. - ,. /"�. .:�.�•f I: !' •III i — -- — _ — ----- --- •__ -- �R Ind �. H GB -:5 R-I, i i -.. p... RI Ind .` ,� �. — RBD, • iRdV I „�.. :.Ind.. .. Ind. .- __ J. NB' •` R-0I .-:; ..R-III R-III • _ -D -^CSD `rR_p� ,,^.•� �- R-III �«:: ^.l R_II CSC- is. PF• - _-4—find.• '3 Rdl CRL7! ' �— . _ — LB IrRd-III. aIMN .. I:;y :i R•� :.Y - -p- R-11 P- Ind- w R-III wl "a •J' RII '1�R(a' j E>,('). IEJ R-II ' �.-. R-1 ..� -III •-Rk': , : • ...P �..'�'!e •RR-11 'I' _,I .I '.� ALLY -'R-I R-11' R-11 lNr \ Com."_..'- .�:•�- - R.p�HS i11 \ik .�j E�j " R. Lr R-11 ' 7!!'R-II .� LLJ / `�, • ��:� .' I. I U \E P . _ - r �.It P Q" �•-'.R;li_°% It��w V�TCR R-II ....... .. _ R-11L R-olll J= Ngcg '• I�� NB RB R-III '. r.: • ..•. u s V. RE: R-lit. R'Ill RI_,11 -'°; i R-III CSC/GB/LB R_lll .. ' , a b �, .`.RID - - •.^— R I : �.: " R-II , 2• R-II.:P.. ,;:�:::'e±',�e?�,� ® \ R-II. /� �i.'� .e: ..t.� _ �' _R•I ::`�:;:•:'�� P .- t•.p.n-F-l._.J ";�: fi-I '_-R Rl I[�P . ,R r , !. CSC 5 • kr`i„dY . B , 7LB- - - FI�GOLF P 11_RII -. R-1R-II,• - �:' . P`"1 f ! •� R-II iuG,•:iP.1A WI J �. �.��.a P LE *' •:A� II.Er '.1 �• ' c- .ROSEWOIN , A GB 1-i ; FTC. S. A. H *t 30 AUDITOR'S SUM NO.42 DL Do PmcsL A PK .......... N- / A /-PK A A R-1 R V R R-1 OVER A APC Minutes July 26, 1983 SUNSET 3RD ADDITION - REZONING AND PRELIMINARY PLAT The hearing regarding the application of Tri -Land, Inc, and Bradley J. Swenson to rezone approximately 5 acres from A (Agricultural) to R-1 (Residen- tial Single District) and for preliminary plat approval of Sunset 3rd Addi- tion, containing 5 acres and 7 single family lots was convened by Chairman Charles Hall. After explanation of the application by Mr. Runkle, it was noted that Lot 7 is the homestead of the current property owner and would remain intact. The lots all conform with the minimum frontage and square footage requirements and noted that Lot 7 would not be easily subdividable. He stated that a neighborhood meeting had been held and there are no objec- tions from surrounding property owners. Wilkins moved, Krob seconded the motion to recommend approval of the application, for rezoning from A (Agri- cultural) to R-1 (Residential Single District). All voted yes. Then Wilkins moved, Mulroor.ey seconded the motion to recommend approval of the application for preliminary plat approval, subject to the following conditions: 1. No variances shall be allowed for side yard setbacks except for • topographic or vegetation reasons. 2. The plat shall be subject to the Park Commission's review for park dedication. 3. A development agreement shall be entered into and signed by the applicant prior to final plat application. 4. If streets and utilities are to be installed privately, then the plans and specifications shall be prepared by a registered engineer in accordance with City standards. 5. In addition to typical utility and drainage easements, a 20 foot utility easement shall be dedicated over the common lot line between Lots 3 and 4, and an easement of sufficient width over the westerly portion of Lot 7 will also be dedicated for storm sewer. 6. A 30 foot half right-of-way shall be dedicated for Golden Meadow Road. 7. All costs associated with extending the existing Golden Meadow Road and the utilities within Golden Meadow Road and also the internal street and utilities shall be the sole responsibility of this development. All voted in favor. I " 00238 Council Minutes August 16, 1983 SUNSET 3RD ADDITION - PREXOMNARY PLAT AND REZONING The application of Tri -Land Company for rezoning and preliminary plat approval of Sunset 3rd Addition was submitted to the Council. The Advisory Planning Commission recommended approval of the application to rezone from Agricultural to Single Family and for preliminary plat approval. Mr. Runkle presented the application to the Council and noted that Lot 7 which includes the existing homestead, consists of 3 acres and stated it would be very difficult to subdivide that parcel. Brad Swenson was present and further stated that Lot 7 cannot feasibly be subdivided, but it was suggested the plan for subdivision be submitted prior to final plat approval. Egan moved to approve the rezoning of the property as requested, Thomas seconded the motion. • All voted in favor. Smith then moved, Wachter seconded the motion to approve the application for preliminary plat approval with the rollowing conditions: I. That the developers submit a proposed overlay for Lot 7, consisting of the 3 acre lot. 2. .No variances shall be allowed for side yard setbacks except for topographic or vegetation reasons. 3. The plat shall be subject to the Park Commission's review for park dedication. 4. A development agreement shall be entered into and signed by the applicant prior to final plat application. 5. If streets and utilities are to be installed privately, then the plans and specifications shall be prepared by a registered engineer in accor- dance with City standards. 6. In addition to typical utility and drainage easements, a 20 foot utility easement shall be dedicated over the common lot line between Lots 3 and 4, and an easement of sufficient width over the westerly portion of Lot 7 will also be dedicated for storm sewer. Road. 7. A 30 foot half right-of-way shall be dedicated for Golden Meadow 8. All costs associated with extending the existing Golden Meadow Road and the utilities within Golden Meadow Road and also the internal street and utilities shall be the sole responsibility of this development. All voted yes. Alf SEE PLAT FI R R1_Sd I VFS OTT RC)AG'• i LEXINGTON - =�— SOUARE P &10RTHVIEW P A / I `\ PF . : I I ~p _ R - I r. AUC cENSINGT VI a I �r^r ^T T'..'__. PLACE I ~" N(E1SW j�; DDLE Ist ADD. PDr 75-1 ✓;� IEw rr_�r Gy'_ G 1lILL I �pw��.� I/ •`a::7 I I I L ii i PARK WALNUT wit " ' I i SCHWANZ LAKE) �KWOOD ?ARK.^— /C/itE13HTC dlrA�uv l:t J�Ii.. OAK POND 4HiLl PA 16' a C� SO.OAKS PARK OVERHILII SW. 1/4 SEC. 24, T. 27, R.23 .��•-•^COUNTY `�"•TATE -Al n,i. HIGHWAY; $ NO. *� '-V o� 3 � i y _ v _ • n m 9 __. n. em.. - • yy rr vYORNTOWNr••"PLACEm T ..y ,, �. - .r• . ... .m .. .m .m is 1 • �• 1\ �• P W •m • 'as DL NO MN • \ • :: • i,'T a •+1 �• - • { • �� • • • i LASSO _ L_A NE �:•sn t Le • • � Rim ]:em'we• Fl 1144 Elf • yj�nli � •.�.��tdj5t` •, :r .Iw.0 nr.... n. � i � � • � • 2 r !•'.�. - � _ .L so- „gid - - - n n ,•�� • 3 _� •• 1 ^II�" A D I r 10 N 6 I'•Mrnr, mnm !°"" - amus • •,:! l '7�� •, '. ORIV- ^� r .,�HACO^ORE ��' p �:n a: W P. -.-•...._�•w.:.•..•.-...no. rar. • ` `. ,.�cwJ-.,<L .. NS '� •. ¢ ARLar A Db1�1_ON ayn AtPnAn - '••,••.?.oac.xn\ese•o p A • 4s' \ f SUNSET EIGHTH ADDITION 3 \ 04 "V N SCALE' I 0' y° COUNTY P NW W4 NN 1/4 .y % N SCALE 1'= $p y4 y 11 1/♦ 1W 1/• COUNTY AD. NO. 79 J M '� aso r " t ' N F- / / / tts Ove W I r r ' 4r + W d . i MOIL ms gn1R„ tNI MT OF TN 1WLXIl U. MNJ 21 DLNl1YD .l n U"m or M sWID is W MID N.0 1M0; 1f O, OWn MAIM � Lt. mcu'sN OMOY I 51 BRIMS use sa LS 101x1 L, MOON uIIO n DI,Gues a mm DISUM Ism.Os n" MIT OF ul mm of MDmm; T m 91 Kculs AI OMTYI an. T1sT u OF M Dli O LIm ma. c0101N alO' llv r M 1<D1111 1I Oslts u DUTOWl11lIS1 N L waQ1LL mL 1 ; THIO OOO O." RR, m.m I YDO.W. APC Minutes May 28, 1985 SUNSET 8TH ADDITION - PRELIMINARY PLAT Chairman Hall convened the public hearing concerning the application of Tri -Land Properties for preliminary plat approval of Sunset 8th Addition, consisting of three single family lots on 2 acres, located on Lot 7, Block 1 of Sunset 3rd Addition, Section 25, located north of Golden Meadow Road, and west of Golden Meadow Court. Runkle reviewed the application and stated that Lot 3 would need a substantial amount of fill. Tom Rice, the owner of the property, appeared and explained that proposed Lot 2 is proposed to be pie - shaped because of existing buildings on Lot 3, because Lot 1 needs more room to build because of the terrain, and because Lot 2 has a crown and would be easier'to build on. He stated that the variance would be necessary for Lot 1 because of the steep hill and that he hopes that the Lots would be buildable with fill. Runkle stated that each lot is over 12,000 square feet, and that the frontage on Lot 2 is 150 feet. Mulrooney raised the question of whether the variance is premature, and Mr. Rice stated that they were requesting it now in order to avoid going through the whole process again, in order to give them a chance to design the use of the lot from the start. Bohne moved, McCrea seconded the motion to recommend approval of the application of Tri - Land Properties for preliminary plat approval of Sunset 8th Addition, consisting of 3 single family lots on 2 acres, located on Lot 7, Block 1, Sunset 3rd Addition, on the property described above, subject to the following conditions: 1. No variance shall be allowed for Lot 2. 2. A front -yard variance for Lot 1 shall be allowed only if necessary and only if approved by City staff and not to exceed 10 feet. 3. All standard plat conditions shall apply. 4. Thirty-foot half right-of-way shall be dedicated on the plat for • Golden Meadow Road. 5. All general engineering development shall be adhered to. All members voted in favor. recommendations which apply to this WESTBURY 1ST ADDITION - WAIVER OF PLAT 6 Chairmana onvened the public he:Side ring on a application of Dave Gabbert for waiver o at to adjust a line between Lots 5 and 6, Block 5 of Westbury 1st Additio or foot setback variance to allow a 43 foot setback to Lexington Avenue, red in Section 22 at Lexington Avenue and Westbury Drive. Dale Runkle " troduced the lication and summarized the staff report of May 21, 198 Wally Gabbert appp a- on behalf of the applicant and stated th without the variance or lot spli ly a 29 foot house would be a wed, but with the variance and lot split, a 4 t home could be built, ich is standard for the development. He stated that the develo and city staff missed the fact that a 50 foot setback would be 7 • E Agenda Information June 18, 1985, City Page Twenty -Nine Memo Council Meeting WAIVER OF PLAT & VARIANCE/WESTBDRY IST ADDITION E. Dave Gabbert for a Waiver of Plat to Adjust a Side Lot Line Beween Lots 5 and 6, Block 5 of Westbury 1st Addition and Setback Variance -- A public hearing was held by the Advisory Planning Commission at the May 28, 1985 APC meeting to consider a lot line shift between Lots 5 and 6 and a 7 foot variance from the 50 foot setback to Lexington Avenue for Lot 6. The Advisory Planning Commission is recommending approval of the variance and waiver of plat subject to conditions outlined in the staff report. For additional information on this item, refer to the Planning Department report found on pages 1,o5'6 through ZI�r_. For a copy of action that was taken by the APC, refer to pages /j'rj through T . ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the waiver of plat to adjust a sidelot line between Lots 5 and 6, Block 5, and secondly to approve or deny a 7 foot setback variance to allow a 43 foot setback to Lexington Avenue. •, f CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: WAIVER OF PLAT AND VARIANCE APPLICANT: DAVE GABBERT LOCATION: LOTS 5 & 6, BLOCK 5, WESTBURY 1ST ADDITION EXISTING ZONING: R-1 UNDER THE LEXINGTON SOUTH P.D. DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: MAY 28, 1985 DATE OF REPORT: MAY 21, 1985 REPORTED BY: GREG H. INGRAHAM, ASSISTANT PLANNER • REVIEWED BY: DALE C. RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER APPLICATION SUMMARY: At the March 19, 1985 City Council meeting, a 15 foot side yard setback variance request for Lot 6 was denied. The applicant is now asking to shift the lot line between Lots 5 & 6 nine (9') feet to the west. In conjunction with the Waiver, the applicant is asking for a seven (71) foot Variance from the 50' setback to Lexington Avenue for Lot 6. The reason for the Waiver and Variance is due to the 84 foot width of Lot 6 which is located at the intersection of Westbury Drive and Lexington Avenue. Without a Waiver or a Variance the building pad for Lot 6 would be limited to 29 feet wide. The Waiver would reduce Lot 5 from 75' to 66' wide and from 9,750 square feet to 8,580 square feet. Lot 6 would increase in width • from 84' to 93' and in size from 11,019 square feet to 12,189 square feet. ' Existing Lots 3 & 4 have lot widths of 69' and 701. With the Waiver the building pad would be 38 feet wide. With the seven (71) foot Variance the building pad width would be 45'. If approved, the Waiver shall be subject to the following condi- tions: 1) Houses shall be designed and located to meet all the setback requirements. No Variance shall be granted for Lot 5. 2) All City ordinances & requirements shall be adhered to. 146 dNK R-2 GSLBGco�=4 (rCSC 18 -2 R-4 -- �� LVESCOTT LB a;UITIGiL\ O'LPEA RY PARK, CARRIAGE 41LLS QK A �` GOLF GARDEN _ 1 4 `r • - j — n: r 3 rOPF Oc ROAD` CROSrI.tTSS ti ;�QaAILS (' F R :. SAG A N --- . R-4 R 7-J71 A T C" r.t :-11 - L / i i LEXINGTON _ r fir^ ^+. jRiY A ADD. -- T "l SuP'i7w SQUARE F NO 2 .LE NORTNVIE`N �. PIt FK t I BERRY FATC -I PARK - `\° ^Arq '� AGA h - o 'If , L, PlC i _ \\NNNN PF int i PbRK fr 157 R' A 1 /LI .+ DELMAR H. SCHWANZ LANDSURVEVOR3t lV(.. Registered UndW Laws of The State of Minnewts 2978 — 149TH STREET W. — BOX M ROSEMOUNT. MINNESOTA 98989 PHONE 812 423-1789 SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE ' M O O C1 W�- 37-e , l e V 10,010E a 7570 F 1Z s �1WeI s Existing configuration o.^ Lots 5 and 6, Block 5 I I WESTBURY FIRST ADDITION, O �I 995v Sq.G% ;,,,s O //,o 0 / � �50,r-r, i Q a uri�7y �FASrI /p 0 75,0 9.09 93.5-2 t I _ Q r I Imo- S O //,o 0 / � �50,r-r, i Q a uri�7y �FASrI /p 0 75,0 9.09 93.5-2 D7;:f „146 E / d f/6/ 7y E1%5r71, i -7- PKoPcL� /✓�� /-o Scale: I inch of 50 feet M 7 V ARI N'1�5 lV I r I Imo- S Proposed rearrangement 4I O f oLots 5 °•lo::k 5, and 6, WESTBURY FIRST`S M cp ADLITIUN. D7;:f „146 E / d f/6/ 7y E1%5r71, i -7- PKoPcL� /✓�� /-o Scale: I inch of 50 feet M 7 V ARI N'1�5 lV APC Minutes May 28, 1985 SUNSET 8TH ADDITION - PRELIMINARY PLAT Chairman Hall convened the public hearing concerning the application of Tri nd Properties for preliminary plat approval of Sunset 8th Addition, consi ing of three single family lots on 2 acres, located on Lot 7/taoted Block 1 of Sun t 3rd Addition, Section 25, located north of Golden Meaad, and west o Golden Meadow Court. Runkle reviewed the application anthat Lot 3 wo ld need a substantial amount of fill. Tom Rice, the oof the property, ppeared and explained that proposed Lot 2 is pro deed to be pie - shaped bed use of existing buildings on Lot 3, because Lo needs more room to build bec use of the terrain, and because Lot 2 has a crown and would be easier to bui on. He stated that the variance would,be necessary for Lot 1 because of th steep hill and that he hopes that the/lots would be buildable with fill. Runk stated that each lot is over 12,000 square feet, and that • the frontage on Lo 2 is 150 feet. Mulrooney raised the question of whether the variance is p emature, and Mr. Rice stated that they were requesting it now in order to avoid oing through the whol5, pprocess again, in order to give them a chance to design the use of the /lot from the start. Bohne moved, McCrea seconded the mo ion to recommend approval of the application of Tri - Land Properties for or '%minary plat approval of Sunset 8th Addition, consisting of 3 single famitson/2 acres, located on Lot 7, Block 1, Sunset 3rd Addition, on theer described above, subject to the following conditions: 1. No variance shall or Lot 2. 2. A front -yard variance for Lot 1 hall be allowed only if necessary and only if approved by City staff and not to exceed 10 feet. /All and plat conditions shall\1y.ot half right-of-way sted on the plat for •Goldd. neral engineering recich apply to this deve be adhered to. All members voted in favor. WESTBURY 1ST ADDITION - WAIVER OF PLAT 6 VARIANCE Chairman Hall convened the public hearing on the application of Dave Gabbert for waiver of plat to adjust a side lot line between Lots 5 and 6, Block 5 of Westbury lat Addition, and for a 7 foot setback variance to allow a 43 foot setback to Lexington Avenue, located in Section 22 at Lexington Avenue and Westbury Drive. Dale Runkle introduced the application and summarized the staff report of May 21, 1985. Wally Gabbert appeared on behalf of the applicant and stated that without the variance or lot split, only a 29 foot house would be allowed, but with the variance and lot split, a 45 foot home could be built, which is standard for the development. He stated that both the developer and city staff missed the fact that a 50 foot setback would be X59 7 APC Minutes May 28, 1985 . " X. required from Lexington Avenue because it is a major street. Mulrooney moved, Harrison seconded the motion to recommend approval of the waiver of plat to adjust the side lot line between Lots 5 and 6, Block 5 of Westbury 1st Addition, 9 feet to the west, and to approve a 7 foot setback variance to allow a 43 foot setback to Lexington Avenue at the property described above, subject to the following conditions: 1. Houses shall be designed and located to meet all the setback requirements. No variance shall be granted for Lot 5. 2. All city Ordinances and requirements shall be adhered to. 3. All drainage and utility easements shall be vacated and relocated to conform with the new lot line. • All members voted in favor. NORDQUIST SIGN COMPANY - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT b VARIANCE Chairman Hall convenes the public hearing on the application of Nordqu'st Sign Company for a conditional use permit for a 27 foot high pylon si and r a variance to allow a 190 square foot sign instead of a stand d 125 sq re foot sign to be located on part of the southwest quarter o Section 2 andof 7, Plainview Addition. Dale Runkle reviewed the application and the staff eport of May 21, 1985. Charles Nolan, the owneXf8rommilHighways he property, appeared and states that the request for the variancne because of visibility problems and the need to provide for visibili #494 and I -35E, t t construction of the parking lot is o�rring at this time, that there wil be a manager of the park liv�tig on the premises, that neighborhood me tinge had been held and the inpue'�of neighbors had been taken into account in pl ning the development, that development will charge • $4.00 per day for pa ing rather than $8.00, a day as charged by the airport, that they would sti put up a sign if/tlie size is restricted to 125 equate feet, that the larger siz is requested'n order to allow the sign to be readable from 1,000 to 1,20 feet away, that advertising at the airport is now allowed by the airport commies' n,�but that the airport will cooperate with a shuttle system. Runkle stated at,Eagan has never allowed a larger business sign. Harrison moved, McCrea,secon ea the motion to recommend denial of the variance to allow a 190 sq "a foot sign and to recommend approval of the conditional use permit subject to the f lowing conditions: '1. The sign shaI not exceed 27 feet i height. 2. The sign shall be located at least 10 fe from any property line. 3. All other City ordinances and requirements sh%be adhered to. 4. a sign shall be oriented perpendicular to35E right-of-way in order to maximize exposure to the freeway and minimize the impact on the adj ent residences. 5. The sign shall not exceed 125 square feet per side. All members voted in favor. /4� Q 8 Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Thirty USE PERMIT/PYLON SIGN FOR NORDQUIST SIGN CO. F. Nordquist Sign Company for Conditional Use Permit for a 27 Foot High Pylon Sign to be Located on Part of the Plainview Addition --A public hearing was held before the Advisory Planning Commission at the May 28, 1985 meeting to consider a conditional use permit for a 27 foot high pylon sign to be located on Lexington Avenue north of Kenneth Drive. The Advisory Planning Commission reviewed past approvals and recommended approval for a pylon sign not to exceed 27 feet in height. For additional information on this item, refer to the City Planning Department report found on pages 16,7- through For a copy of the APC minutes and action on this item, refer to page /WI,( ,tbreuglr� •� For a copy of a letter from Charles Nolan, E -Z Air Park, re to page • ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny a conditional use permit for a 27 foot high pylon sign application. /6/ CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT & VARIANCE APPLICANT: NORDQUIST SIGN COMPANY LOCATION: PART OF THE SW; OF SECTION 2 and LOT 7, PLAINVIEW ADDITION EXISTING ZONING: P.D. - PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PLAINVIEW) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: MAY 28, 1985 DATE OF REPORT: MAY 21, 1985 REPORTED BY: GREG H INGRAHAM, ASSISTANT PLANNER • REVIEWED BY: DALE C RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER APPLICATION SUMMARY: The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit for a 27' high pylon sign to be located along Lexington Avenue, north of Kenneth Drive. The sign would be for the future EZ AIR PARK remote airport parking facility. The Variance request is to allow a 190 square foot sign instead of the standard 125 square foot limitation. The reason behind the Variance request is an attempt to gain more exposure to the nearby 35-E highway corridor. The sign would be located a minimum of 10' from any property line and it is more than 300' from any existing pylon sign. A residential district is located 175' south of the proposed sign location. The sign face would be illuminated from the interior of the sign. • If approved, the Conditional Use shall be subject to the following conditions: 1) The sign shall not exceed 27 feet in height. 2) The sign shall be located at least 10' from any property line. 3) All other City ordinances and requirements shall be adhered to. 4) The sign should be oriented perpendicular to the i -35E right-of- way in order to maximize exposure to the freeway and minimize the impact on the adjacent residents. If approved the Variance shall be subject to the following conditions: 1) The sign shall not exceed 190 square feet per side. If the Variance is not approved then this condition shall be added: 5) The sign shall not exceed 125 square feet per'side. 47,— Lo R EAGANDALE. FIC -11 PARK PD, 74-2KIC /ARK Mt. KEE; I FA�GANDAL OPP iNB I;�IIOM E$rr R 7, R -t4 IR -3 f J.S. POSTAL SERVICE LI - - P --A - --A .PKI L I ROA 6 ' ed�s �jh, NgfS O i � . S o Sf e.r .BBB V"`; :'•� >:.iK 3 si n o 5 % . 3 � e� ion \x�g� ms 'o t \ 91.16 I / W 91.0 \ I I 2 zi 891.5 J 2 ` � N - 40'sethack—� 8'13.4 I 5' CEDAR FENCr 1 '• R 'flj N � P � 1 I 0 ID 9'X18' typical parking pace `II ypical pede+un shelter \ N, I =o° YYLou QayeTol.1 4'-c." -P6- U Et 1 . 1 WI E IEZL66Toul 0 5coo It APC Minutes May 28, 1985 requir from Lexington Avenue because it is a major street. Mulrooney moved, Harrison econded the motion to recommend approval of the waiver of plat adjust the side lot line between Lots 5 and 6, Block 5 of Westb st Addition, 9 fe t to the west, and to approve a 7 foot setback )variance to allow a 43 fodt tback to Lexington Avenue at the propert�desscribed above, subject to the Poll 'ng conditions: 1. Houses shall be designed and located to meet all the setback requirements. No variance sh 1 be granted for Lot 5. 2. All city Ordinances an a rements shall be adhered to. 3. All draina nd utility easemen shall be vacated and relocated to conform with a new lot line. • All m6mbers voted in favor. NORDQUIST SIGN COMPANY - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT b VARIANCE Chairman Hall convened the public hearing on the application of Nordquist Sign Company for a conditional use permit for a 27 foot high pylon sign and for a variance to allow a 190 square foot sign instead of a standard 125 square foot sign to be located on part of the southwest quarter of Section 2 and Lot 7, Plainview Addition. Dale Runkle reviewed the application and the staff report of May 21, 1985. Charles Nolan, the owner of the property, appeared and stated that the request for the variance is made because of visibility problems and the need to provide for visibility from Highways /1494 and I -35E, that construction of the parking lot is occurring at this time, that there will be a manager of the park living on the premises, that neighborhood meetings had been held and the input of neighbors had been taken into account in planning the development, that the development will charge • $4.00 per day for parking rather than $8.00 a day as charged by the airport, that they would still put up a sign if the size is restricted to 125 square feet, that the larger size is requested in order to allow the sign to be readable from 1,000 to 1,200 feet away, that advertising at the airport is now allowed by the airport commission, but that the airport will cooperate with a shuttle system. Runkle stated that Eagan has never allowed a larger business sign. Harrison moved, McCrea seconded the motion to recommend denial of the variance to allow a 190 square foot sign and to recommend approval of the conditional use permit subject to the following conditions: '1. The sign shall not exceed 27 feet in height. 2. The sign shall be located at least 10 feet from any property line. 3. All other City ordinances and requirements shall be adhered to. .4. The sign shall be oriented perpendicular to the I -35E right-of-way in order to maximize exposure to the freeway and minimize the impact on the adjacent residences. i 5. The sign shall not exceed 125 square feet per side. All members voted in favor. 144, 8 11 E -Z AIR PARK P.O. BOX 26520 ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA 55426 14ay 5. 1985 City Council City of Eagan P.O. Foy. 21199 Eagan., ':innesota 55121 Dear Council 14embers: This letter is written with reference to our sign request • that is to be heard at the Council meeting on June 18th. We had previously requested the Planning Commission to recommend we be allowed a 190 sf. sign. This request was denied. We therefore request the Council to consider only 'a 125 sf. sign.. which is allowable under the ordinance. Pecause of a scheduling conflict I will not be in attendence the night of the meeting., but hope this will not hurt our chances of receiving the necessary approval on the 18th of June. 167 Very truly yours., E -Z Air Pa�rkk% Company BY ��/%n'W&7e f7 � • Charles Nolan Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Thirty -One SPECIAL PERMIT/DOUG RUTH TO MOVE A HOUSE G. Doug Ruth for a Special Permit to Move a House Onto Lot 3, Block 1, Braun Sunrise Addition -- An application was submitted to the Planning Department requesting a special permit to move a home to Lot 3, Block 1, Brauns Sunrise Addition. For additional information on this item, refer to a memorandum prepared by the City Planning Department found on pages 16-f through ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the special permit requested by Doug Ruth to move a house onto Lot • 3, Block 1, Brauns Sunrise Addition. • /4/0 D CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: SPECIAL PERMIT TO MOVE A HOUSE INTO EAGAN APPLICANT: DOUG RUTH LOCATION: LOT 3, BLOCK 1, BRAUNS SUNRISE ADDITION EXISTING ZONING: R-1 (RESIDENTIAL SINGLE DISTRICT) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: JUNE 18, 1985 DATE OF REPORT: JUNE 11, 1985 REPORTED BY: DALE C RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER • APPLICATION SUBMITTED: An application has been submitted requesting a Special Permit to move a home to Lot 3, Block 1, Brauns Sunrise Addition. COMMENTS: This is the first permit that Staff has processed under the codification of the City Code which now requires a Public Hearing before the City Council to review the compatibility of homes being moved into an area. Staff has processed this Public Hearing and have ,notified the property owners within 350' regarding a hearing to move the home onto Lot 3, Block 1, Brauns Sunrise Addition. The home that is proposed to be moved, has a dimension of 35 x 70 or approximately 2,500 sq. ft. of living area on one level. The home appears to be a fairly large size and architecturally would fit into the area proposed. The Staff has reviewed this • permit application and suggests that prior to occupancy the elec- trical system and insulation factors be reviewed in order to comply with Eagan City Codes. Enclosed with this application are pictures and elevations of the home proposed to be moved to the above mentioned site. At this time Staff has no more comments regarding this structure being moved to this area and if the Council elects to approve the Special Permit it should be subject to the following conditions: 1) No variances be allowed for side setbacks on Lot 3, Block 1, Brauns Sunrise Addition. 2) The structure shall be reviewed and brought into compliance with all building related codes for the City of Eagan. 3) A site grading plan shall be submitted to determine how the house will fit on Lot 3, Block 1, Brauns Sunrise Addition. /�f OACH R— �Yp FOX P K -7 �1 RIDGE i �, n SURREY rd 1`GARibEN i, blc-v 15r ,, =137A 'A :ITY -,ALL N BLACKHAYVK "', PARK OPD P PK 77-2 A I �:f Ki.- 5K DA I E /—h -c''i4 .i i' �... ��FN iw�ERRY L...- ' `PARK EuMaNN r . t. 176 (/ < , 090-31 j 000.91 j .. 17 9 Im v 1060-81 070-51 s•^aWL •°v'i er.."wm arL sio • j \�` I=_r � 1 I. ' Clty. Of u.V, Eagan ` aK'��•`• 1 t. ql 7 �` y a ; 012-00 i P-- ! `/ D I R'� M' •V L n . S' :� '' non �` a_ �sds �II-�� • Luna j— •r• _ 0 �I`sy -. a� •` � � ,� city ar Lam.• Eagan 4 olo-ss City Of Eagan p�+0 y� O ihy f 010-0o E a to �° IAGA"r/ON b a. _ NR ' «h of Eopon , x 4iv+ �. r r •� • Lra•r4 .ir.\ ° 3 + t y-.� Cr •� �1 +r'�t. •• j oao si d °;�' oe • ;\ nR fS0 ac In � �� s -`k i. d 040-�� L R a •rfy - � � 1.�Iy � �3 ''r4S; �� S1�y a�. am•@Lr.r ; r��a':- N*t ` �+YY>• �� "v��S .: _�` �a'tft :lR �.+, ' `� rS=id•Y K".. \ Wri W ~ r 6/Y '• '�L.=I �� r': L '•rf• :T�. riC`; (.-�.• 1 _ R 1, - �t r i 3n: �P�T.2�,ir f}`��.3•T� i vTrJ 1n n j 11� 'r wfl s .. -' - •JaY .i� t''' � },�Da , X r v l � rA�'� � �I'.' .(d+' �`?i;>�?'�LlR'}I�iJi.�� f]..tArt� vi,2� 7 r". V• Y.r J{a JJy�.. rte''`T ti�°rY t •{fix i.r� �1� LA . f {At'"'1 G >J eS .L1 Ltr✓c `? 7.-4�'Y^.li.' `' G,2Z T P t1A lip Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Thirty -Two SPECIAL PERMIT TO MOVE A HOUSE/ROBERT LENCOWSKI H. Robert Lancowski for a Special Permit to Allow a House to be Moved to Lot 16, Block 5, Country Home Heights Addition -- An application was submitted by Robert Lencowski to move a house from one lot on Pilot Knob Road to Lot 16, Block 5, Country Home Heights. For additional information on the special permit, refeF to the City Planning Department report found on pages through 177 -7--T- ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED special permit requested • to Lot 16, Block 5, Country U ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the by Robert Lencowski to move a house Home Heights Addition. 173 3 CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: SPECIAL PERMIT TO MOVE A HOME WITHIN EAGAN APPLICANT: ROBERT LENCOWSKI LOCATION: LOT 16, BLOCK 5, COUNTRY HOME HEIGHTS EXISTING ZONING: R-1 (RESIDENTIAL SINGLE DISTRICT) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: JUNE 18, 1985 DATE OF REPORT: JUNE 11, 1985 REPORTED BY: DALE C RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER • APPLICATION SUBMITTED: An application has been submitted requesting a Special Permit to move a house from one lot on Pilot Knob Rd., to Lot 16, Block 5, Country Home Heights. COMMENTS: Staff has received an application in order to move a home which is presently located next to Norwest Bank on Pilot Knob Rd to Lot 16, Block 5, Country Home Heights. Staff has reviewed the permit request and noted that the house could be brought into compliance with all the City Codes at the new location. Staff has also processed the notification of the Public Hearing in order that comments from the neighborhood can be received on June 18. The applicant has submitted a site plan showing how the house could sit on the lot. However, there is not a diagram as to •how the garage would be located on the lot and still meet setback requirements. It appears that the home could fit in the general area, however, the Council will receive input from the surrounding neighborhood as to their attitude and concerns regarding this structure. If approved, the permit should be subject to the following conditions: 1) The home be brought into compliance with all City Codes. this includes electrical installation and all other building related items. 2) No variances be allowed for this lot where the home is proposed to be located unless it is for vegetation reasons. 3) This application should be subject to all other City Code requirements for moving a house to this location. / 7e/ u') IMENDOTA MM- FRO EAGANC�ALET' T 74-7 GB' *LSPUR OST T- 7_ COUNTRY Or FICA CLUB. \% T R PF LB A Cc, T v 0 .3 A R D VALL H i G H! V 1, --'IV r7l 19 E S PARK I C�o L1.7 TRY1, . . ......... . Q — p /._A[PLAT�4 LA X -J j4___ .1 --JkF TREFFLE ACRES7 SUBD. p CHNDER A.C� I t 74-L 41,441 T'S - 'VV SFFOOL IR4N -I 'OPP G �A A I IOME TT I -T K .1 1. R PARK' R COA__j PF 'PF Y�l �,AKS R-3 L A _j RD -,d ADDITI MQ I P,A 175 ' V 6 CITY Q a 0 OF oAj o 080-08,; �,,, • �� ' .. =e 00-080 V D_ l EGAN i locatl n e 120-08 z DWwfo County )20 06 3 021-05 2 t aa, w 9�� = S \ ,••A z _ _ q� • 'P� 1 10 9� ql' • ROAD ESWL Q �' I DOC. MO. T$705 ao ozz•oa�aJF' 10 6. .91+. in f� 1tFR;., OPpD Z LAN L �NtERM• .,. tl E .. .'IV -•v � �f .. , a r,��P � .;,'��, =J j - ! �' - L .:ra m• ROAD EMT Oft No 33, e 010-50 Olt . ........ .. . 0 • Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Thirty -Three VARIANCE/Q PETROLEUM I. Q Petroleum for a Variance to Allow Construction of an Overhead Canopy in the Front Setback Area of Nicols Road -- A 44 ft. variance from the 50 ft. setback to Nicols Road is being requested by Q Petroleum for an overhead canopy. For additional information on this matter, refer to the City Planning Department report. A copy is enclosed on pages � through /9l. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: Approve or deny the variance to allow construction of the overhead canopy as requested by Q Petroleum. 17t CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: VARIANCE APPLICANT: Q PETROLEUM LOCATION: PART OF LOT 19, BLOCK 8 OF CEDAR GROVE #2 EXISTING ZONING: N.B. (NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: JUNE 18, 1985 DATE OF REPORT: JUNE 10, 1985 REPORTED BY: GREG H INGRAHAM, ASST PLANNER • REVIEWED BY: DALE C RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER APPLICATION SUBMITTED: The applicant is requesting a 44' variance from the 50' setback to Nicols Road for an overhead canopy. COMMENTS: Eagan City Code has the same setback requirements for service station buildings, gasoline pumps & overhead canopies. The existing gas pumps are within the 50' setback to Nicols Rd. The applicant wishes to construct a canopy over the existing pumps. The edge of the canopy would be approx. 6' from the right- of-way and 57' from the curb line of Nicols Rd. The addition of the canopy would bring the lot coverage to 17%. City Code allows up to a 20% coverage in a N.B. zone. In conjunction with the canopy construction, the company plans to move some gas pumps and alter some of the curb cuts onto the • service road. If approved the variance shall be subject to the following conditions: 1) All other applicable ordinances shall be adhered to. 2) The service road curb cuts shall be reviewed and approved by the County Highway Dept. prior to construction. 3) A landscaping plan shall be submitted for City Staff approval prior to construction of the canopy. 179 i. ! •a a• ti t As Iy• •• efp I 10 —1-411 C Hq w z� 3 w � 24 z) tt��' L/ � z0 / !/ City • 1 I tJ •` Eogo • 3 2 ' 100- m wall S :y • 5 a t �, a �; ry.-.. � _ • r. ■ •• Cit 17 lie Is 17 •, ; M y /S R. $50 I h hit CC TAPIEVCO, INC to Is it el ,ny 60 SCOUNTY p� STATE AID In oee..3 wan ,• I m r i 4 m- RMCCL1• I. I alto Ivif• i• yy m • 11 d t i ■ e aidd Jy art o Y ! - � .oaa n• Ned• • _ Y I° ro in .a • i 5 tieo0 < 8Cx. s �I ..� • _^.bs �`l:wuti`vYwi .�/^']. ..A_..�. .t.T��VVV^^.....(1JJJJu+ .0n_o.6 .s � ,1w k �llljjiii"jI �6 "�1 -1 iiiw.r naa .•r •RA at —t Is • 30130 al en— nt °° '• M e I r u o' Q IO •T • 0 b •a a ; T al • S>• • s •• sO 14 a °OEC a.Vw.r[. 1 [Y.■ y2 M P3 - IY n 33..0 s s. .. .A •� • to .3 O1ITLYT I •to • / eO • "o"e •• tea\ v I \V S •• Y rr ;.P II [J• 1 d l n @ u u@ I to 4 k ';,(` I 8 Jn tl u R& 4e w N .r1 a .I = i • GLbRY RY DRIVE a ',, 1° !0 r _ `be n Qa. U O :. 4zo(o `,&o a. R 5iol I i F 1 l 4 ♦: � v:�� i.3 a _ O :. 4zo(o `,&o O N/cocs TA.. 5iol 46 O ♦: � v:�� i.3 a _ ir `+ J - - .. I•. 19a:c.oea�-- � ,.�-�.r NLG L/VdQ 014. •4p'. a ..r �' -o ' pr i a 9 I � 1,. 7b 8 tGmaE7 1S.! . Imo•. �✓ .'Y'1� l�• fi .. i p'ic'a, 11. _ r •IFS. './• .l � ' —_ Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Thirty -Four SPECIAL PERMIT/LUNDGREN BROS. CONSTRUCTION J. Lundgren Bros. Construction for a Special Permit to Allow a Temporary Sales Office to be Located on Lot 43, Block 4, Blackhawk Glen -- An application was submitted by Lundgren Bros. requesting a special permit for a temporary sales office for the Blackhawk Glen development. For additional information on this matter, refer to the City Planner's report found on pages /g3 through /QJr for your review. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny a special permit to allow a temporary sales office for the Lundgren • Bros. Construction on Lot 43, Block 4, Blackhawk Glen. • /67z CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: SPECIAL PERMIT - TEMPORAY SALES OFFICE APPLICANT: LUNDGREN BROTHERS (BILL ALLEN) LOCATION: LOT 43, BLOCK 4, BLACKHAWK GLEN PART OF THE NEh OF THE SW's, SECTION 16 EXISTING ZONING: R-1 DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: JUNE 18, 1985 DATE OF REPORT: JUNE 11, 1985 REPORTED BY: DALE C RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER • APPLICATION SUBMITTED: An application has been submitted requesting a Special Permit to allow a temporary sales office for the Blackhawk Glen development. COMMENTS: In review of this request, it has been explained to Staff that the applicants wish to have a temporary sales office on site prior to and while grading is being done on Blackhawk Glen. Once the grading has been completed and a model home con- structed, the temporary sales office will be removed. At the present time, the applicants have just submitted a request for the Special Permit and no diagram or site, plan has been submitted. Staff is suggesting that the trailer be set back from the road right-of-way approx. 30and off-street parking be provided for the people in the sales office and potential clients. Therefore, a temporary parking lot of approx. 4 off-street parking spaces should be required with this permit. The applicants have indicated • that they would like to put it adjacent to the right-of-way and have on -street parking until the grading has been done on the property. If approved, the Special Permit shall be subject to the following conditions: 1) A detailed site plan be submitted showing the location of the trailer. 2) The Council make a determination to allow on -street parking or require off-street parking of 4 vehicles and adequate setback from the right-of-way. 3) The temporary sales office shall be removed with the completion of the first home in the subdivision. 4.) All other City Codes shall be adhered to. l?3 34 8 1R 14 'I,`22 `^ 2\ = '8 I y 23 / 13 �I S`t 26 / -- 70 J 25 12 'I 24 �� o 3E 100 37 49 38' .^I �` /°j^ �a 48 \11 / �S �� r` • I .'e X10 �\ ��`.i' /I 73 39 47 yrl ��l/ I by is \�. 41 �0oJ_--� /r----Tas---� h 40 L__ 15 -�\-"-- 1639 y- 6 74 42 I I j ------44 -------- 43: > / \II i i I h 40 ---��7 -----J �-r38-----J 30' 30' -lro----' �----135--'" _ BLACKHAWK _ HILLS ROAD / LOCATION MAP ��cRoN /0 BLACKHAWK HILLS ROAD DENOTES PROPOSED SURFACE DRAINAGE O DENOTES ROM MONUMENT SET . -'rTor, III i SCALE: I INCH = 30 FEET DGARAGE FLOOR FEET D LOWEST FLOOR = FEET D TOP OF BLOCK = FEET. IS A TRUE AND CORRECT :cording to tHe recorded .EGAL.DESCRIPTION WILL GLEN -IST ADDITION.) PURPORT TO SHOW IMPROVEMENTS R UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION, ILL, INC. ETERSON, LAND SURVEYOR ICEIISE 110. 12294 PnOJECT No. BOOK If PAGE JAMES R. HILL, INC. FILE NO.Planners / Engineers / Surveyors 8200 Humboldt Avenue South FOLDER Bloomington, Mn. 55421 1312-1384-3029 SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE' Z LUNDGREN BROTHERS 10 ZA L 0 7- 30 I N 89 a 46'21" W /10.00 N I 30 �'ORA/NAGE -N89046'21"W IO 8 UTILITY CASEMENT 10 PER PROPOSED PLAT�� - LOT 20 PROPOSED PORTABLE OFFICE BUILDING Q: W1 .11 30 40.0 C� CL 0.0 BLACKHAWK HILLS ROAD DENOTES PROPOSED SURFACE DRAINAGE O DENOTES ROM MONUMENT SET . -'rTor, III i SCALE: I INCH = 30 FEET DGARAGE FLOOR FEET D LOWEST FLOOR = FEET D TOP OF BLOCK = FEET. IS A TRUE AND CORRECT :cording to tHe recorded .EGAL.DESCRIPTION WILL GLEN -IST ADDITION.) PURPORT TO SHOW IMPROVEMENTS R UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION, ILL, INC. ETERSON, LAND SURVEYOR ICEIISE 110. 12294 PnOJECT No. BOOK If PAGE JAMES R. HILL, INC. FILE NO.Planners / Engineers / Surveyors 8200 Humboldt Avenue South FOLDER Bloomington, Mn. 55421 1312-1384-3029 Z 10 ZA 30 I I -N89046'21"W BLACKHAWK HILLS ROAD DENOTES PROPOSED SURFACE DRAINAGE O DENOTES ROM MONUMENT SET . -'rTor, III i SCALE: I INCH = 30 FEET DGARAGE FLOOR FEET D LOWEST FLOOR = FEET D TOP OF BLOCK = FEET. IS A TRUE AND CORRECT :cording to tHe recorded .EGAL.DESCRIPTION WILL GLEN -IST ADDITION.) PURPORT TO SHOW IMPROVEMENTS R UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION, ILL, INC. ETERSON, LAND SURVEYOR ICEIISE 110. 12294 PnOJECT No. BOOK If PAGE JAMES R. HILL, INC. FILE NO.Planners / Engineers / Surveyors 8200 Humboldt Avenue South FOLDER Bloomington, Mn. 55421 1312-1384-3029 Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Thirty -Five SPECIAL PERMIT/TEMPORARY ADVERTISING SIGNS K. Coldwell Banker for a Temporary Permit for Two (2) Temporary Advertising Signs for Knob Hill -- A special permit application for two (2) temporary advertising signs is being requested 'by Coldwell Banker to advertise the Knob Hill residential development. For additional information on this item, refer to the City Planner's report which can be found on pages �/T through /QQ for your review. — ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the special permit for Coldwell Banker for two (2) advertising signs • for Knob Hill. • 976 T CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: SPECIAL PERMIT — TEMPORARY ADVERTISING SIGNS APPLICANT: COLDWELL BANKER LOCATION: (1) THOMAS LAKE RD & CLIFF RD (2) THOMAS LAKE RD & DIFFLEY RD EXISTING ZONING: (1) PD (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT) (2) A (AGRICULTURAL) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: JUNE 18, 1985 DATE OF REPORT: JUNE 12, 1985 • REPORTED BY: GREG H INGRAHAM, ASST PLANNER REVIEWED BY: DALE C RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER APPLICATION SUBMITTED: In July of 1984, a Special Permit to allow three (3) temporary advertising signs for the Thomas Lake Heights development was approved (see attached minutes). Coldwell Banker is asking to convert these three signs to advertise the Knob Hill residential .development. The sign sizes would remain the same as the previous approval. Since one of the old Thomas Lake Heights signs was located on the Knob Hill property, no Special Permit is necessary for that location. The requested signs are located at the NW corner of Thomas Lake Rd & Cliff Rd and at the north side of Diffley Rd at Thomas Lake Rd. If approved, the Special Permit shall be subject to the following conditions: 1) The signs shall be located at least 10' from any property line. 2) The face areas of the signs shall not exceed 64 & 32 sq. ft. respectively. 3) The Special Permit shall have a maximum duration of 2 years. 4) The signs shall be no higher than 12' & 8' respectively. 5) The signs shall not obstruct sight distances or traffic visibility. 6) The applicant shall obtain written permission of the property owners where the signs are to be located. IVA THOMAS LAgE HEIGHTS - TEMPORARY ADVERTISING SIGNS The application of Eagan Realty for special permit to allow a temporary advertising sign for Thomas Lake Heights housing project was then considered by the Council. The application would provide for four temporary advertising signs in various locations. Barton Dunn appeared for the applicant. Smith moved, Egan seconded the motion to grant a permit for two advertising signs in locations to be selected by the developer with the understanding that a small temporary sign could be located on County Road #30 because of the road con- struction and subject to the following conditions: 0 1. That the two signs may be moved at the discretion of the developer • on sites that were previously selected in the application. 2. The signs shall be located at least 10 feet from any property line. 3. The face areas of the signs shall not exceed 64 and 32 square feet respectively. 4. The special permit shall have a maximum duration of two years. 5. The signs shall be no higher than 12 feet and 8 feet respectively. 6. The signs shall not obstruct sight distances or traffic visibility. All voted in favor. 12 0 Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Thirty -Six VARIANCE FOR ELLIOT LIBMAN L. Elliot Libman for a 10' Variance from the to Knoll Ridge Drive Located on Lot 10, Block Addition -- A variance application was submitted for a 20' front setback to Knoll Ridge Drive. information on this item, refer to the Planning which can be found on pages 419L through z4w-- 30' Front' Setback 1, of Rose Hill by Elliot Libman For additional Department report ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the 20' front setback variance as requested by Elliot Libman. � -0 CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: VARIANCE - 20' FRONT SETBACK APPLICANT: ELLIOT LIBMAN LOCATION: LOT 10, BLOCK 1, ROSEHILL ADDITION EXISTING ZONING: R-1, RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: JUNE 18, 1985 DATE OF REPORT: JUNE 10, 1985 REPORTED BY: GREG H INGRHAM, ASST PLANNER • _ REVIEWED BY: DALE C RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER • APPLICATION SUBMITTED: The applicant is requesting a 10' variance from the 30' front setback to Knoll Ridge Dr. The lot is located on a cul-de-sac with a steep slope in the rear yard. The variance request would keep the house away from the slope and would bring it in line with the existing home on Lot 11. The Knoll Ridge Dr. cul-de-sac's 150' right-of-way is larger than the standard 120' cul-de-sac. Due to the large right-of-way and the irregular location of the cul-de-sac within the right-of-way, other homes on the cul-de-sac will have larger than normal setbacks. If approved, the variance shall be subject to all other City ordinances and requirements. Q- 7 R-3 A C E 0 ��R N II A LL -14 "Fd j PF PD LB 81-3 I I I I I r A -A NK ADD710 R-4 A K H 'A R HIL i k N EFPGAN IMETIRp 10ENT�R/LZ o- R -F - ✓ '•2 #A3� c T Zt, I F aLACKHAvVK -A PARK UAl F PK �AL 0 0 VL 44 PK A, A < E= i 77-r-, Er T7717,e A I A 5115oz s , FPPZOL. �a OZ) O PD -1 �1� ' 77-2 A vl i C-) A C H _PKI RIDGE . ...... .. NB C E 0 ��R N II A LL -14 "Fd j PF PD LB 81-3 I I I I I r A -A NK ADD710 R-4 A K H 'A R HIL i k N EFPGAN IMETIRp 10ENT�R/LZ o- R -F - ✓ '•2 #A3� c T Zt, I F aLACKHAvVK -A PARK UAl F PK �AL 0 0 VL 44 PK A, A < E= i 77-r-, Er T7717,e A I A 5115oz s , FPPZOL. �a OZ) O PD -1 �1� ' 77-2 A Pwr 06 9� OtZ _jb -i � q. 0 N)l \,Rj T'.. CO 7,IL orn I � -- ��/-fir ''' ,k�`i� low 5Lwc I N�l 8 --� 8%4 v Jj 840 ��- ,.,1�1�I �hlA. LME \ a3n\ : ,3 lx FIR. �BOSfl�A�r10. 0 boi to i Bl cUc I.r4=)Sf. RILL btu. �d1cA�1 �M►J. ZO , \w ILf�OI,I, 'FID(�E b�lv� S f� R1 I;zo Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Thirty -Seven CONTRACT 85-12, RECEIVE BIDS/AWARD CONTRACT (LEXINGTON PLACE SOUTH A. Contract 85-12, Receive Bids/Award Contract (Lexington Place South - Street Improvements) --Council continued this item at the request of the developer, Orrin Thompson Homes, from the June 4, 1985, meeting. The developer requested the two-week delay because they are in the process of selling a portion of the lots within the.Lexington Place South Addition and the potential buyer apparently wanted to install the streets under a private contract. However, staff explained to the developer (Orrin Thompson Homes) that we could not reduce the scope of this contract enough • to facilitate the potential buyer. Subsequently, staff informed the developer that either Council award this contract or reject all bids. Knowing this, the developer is requesting the project proceed as planned. If Council approves the revised preliminary plat of Lexington Place South 2nd Addition, it will require that a change order be processed for the installation of seven additional sewer and water services and also water and sewer stubs to the proposed cul de sac. Our consulting engineering firm is pursuing this change order to an existing City contract now. This is the most expedient method to installing the necessary utility services prior to the street contractor beginning his work. If we cannot accomplish this, then we can certainly add the necessary utility service work to this contract. As a reminder, Valley Paving Company submitted a low bid of •$200,525.75. This is 6.2% less than the feasibility report estimate and 2.2 less than the engineer's estimate. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To award City Contract 85-12 (Lexington Place South - Street Improvements) to Valley Paving Company in the amount of $200,525.75 and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the contract documents. 1%5 Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Thirty -Eight CONTRACT 85-16, RECEIVE BIDS/AWARD CONTRACT (EAGAN WOODS & SAFARI 2ND ADDITION - STREET & UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS B. Contract 85-16, Receive Bids/Award Contract (Eagan Woods & Safari 2nd Addition - Street & Utility Improvements) --A bid opening for City Contract 85-16, Project 425 and Project 439, took place on Thursday, June 13, 1985, at 10:30 a.m. The apparent low bidder is M. Danner Trucking submitting a total base bid of $147,368.40. Enclosed on page Zq -/ is a copy of the bidder's list. T� The low bid is 5.5% less than the feasibility report estimate and 2.0% less than the engineer's estimate. Therefore, staff • recommends favorable consideration by Council and awarding this contract. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS 85-15 (Eagan Woods Office Park and street improvements, to M. of $147,368.40 and authorize the the contract documents. ITEM: To award City Contract and Safari 2nd Addition utility Danner Trucking in the amount Mayor and City Clerk to execute • go- M Our File No. 49351 CITY CONTRACT NO. 85-16 EAGAN WOODS OFFICE PARK — PROJECT NO. 425 SAFARI SECOND ADDITION — PROJECT NO. 439 UTILITY & STREET IMPROVEMENTS FOR EAGAN. MINNESOTA CONTRACTORS I. M. Danner Trucking 2. Orfei & Sons 3. Encon Utilities 4. Brown & Cris 5. Cartzke Construction 6. J.P. Norex, Inc. 7. S.M. Hentges & Sons 8. 0 & P Contracting 9. Lund Asphalt 10. S.J. Louis Construction 11. Arcon Construction 12. Spencer Construction 13. Lametti & Sons 14. Alexander Construction 15. Sarah, Inc. 16. Ro—So Contracting 17. Mur—Con, Inc:, BID TIME: 10:30 A.M., C.D.S.T. BID DATE: Thursday, June 13, 1985 TOTAL BASE BID 147,368.40 147,388.28 147,672.85 147,994.30 151,255.50 156.703.80 160.315.37 166.178.19 No Bid No Bid No Bid No Bid No Bid No Bid No Bid No Bid No Bid Feasibility Report Estimate $156,000.00 ENCINEER'S.ESTIMATE .150,000.00 %(+) or (—) Feasibility Report -5.5 %(+) or (—) Engineer's Estimate -2.0 Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Thirty -Nine FINANCIAL GUARANTEE AMOUNTS FOR NEW DEVELOPMENTS C. Reevaluation Regarding Overhead Percentage Used to Determine Financial Guarantee Amounts for New Developments --Two instances evolved this year whereby the developers are requesting a reduction in the overhead amount calculation used to determine the total amount of the financial guarantee the development is responsible for. 'Upon reviewing both requests, staff feels that it may not be appropriate to assess a straight 308 overhead for determining the total financial guarantee amount required by a developer. Staff recommends the overhead policy be modified as follows: • 1. Use a sliding scale to determine engineering fees. 2. Allow a credit to developers installing public improvements under private contract for design engineering fees. SLIDING SCALE ENGINEERING FEES: When construction costs for public improvement projects exceed $500,000, the engineering fees for design and construction administration and inspection are historically less than for projects under $500,000. For example, projects under $500,000 generally average about 158 for total engineering fees. Projects in excess of $500,000 histor- ically average about 108 for total engineering fees. Therefore, staff feels a reduction to 258 would be more appropriate for overhead calculations when construction projects exceed $500,000. For Council's information, Federal Land Company requests this consideration for their Town Centre 70-100 developments. The • estimated costs for these developments are about $1.6 million. PRIVATELY INSTALLED PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS: Two factors that are not found in public improvement costs when these improvements are installed by the developer are design engineering fees and construction interest. Design engineering fees are always the responsibility of the developer when public improvements are installed privately. Therefore, staff feels it would be appropriate to omit these fees from the 308 overhead. For example, the developers of the Lone Oak Addition, Laukka-Beck, are requesting a reduction in the amount of 78 for the design engineering fees based upon the estimated construction costs of their project. When public improvements are installed by the developer, there is no construction interest to the City. However, if the developer would default, the City would have to bond for 408 of the remaining work to be completed. In the worst case whereby the developer defaults prior to any construction, would require the City to finance 408 of the public utilities (the other 608 being covered by the financial guarantee and development contract). Staff Agenda Information Memo June 18, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Forty also feels it would be appropriate to consider omitting this portion of the overhead from the 308 factor. Likewise in the instance of the Lone Oak development, this would amount to a reduction of 408. of 128, or 4.88. Adding the two deductions would amount to a total reduction of 11.88 from the 308 factor, or 18.28. ' Staff would suggest that the 18.28 be rounded to an even 208. This would allow for a 1.88 contingency factor. Enclosed on page ;4,0 and 7i01 is a letter from the developer's • engineer, BRW, outlining their specific request based upon the discussion of reducing the overhead to omit the engineering design fee and a portion of the construction interest. In summary, staff would suggest Council consider revising the application of a street 308 overhead factor. Staff can recommend that a 258 overhead factor be used for public improvements installed under City Contract when construction costs exceed $500,000. Staff also reommends that when public improvements installed by the developer exceed $500,000, the overhead factor may be reduced to 208 and when the construction costs are less than $500,000, the 308 overhead factor could be reduced to 258. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve/deny revisions to the 308 overhead factor depending upon the scope of the project and private financing of the project. /s/ Thomas L. Hedges City Administrator DISIM, BENNETT. RINGROSE. WOLSFELD. JARVIS, GARDNER. INC. May 1, 1985 City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 SgaS VO 2 - PLANNING TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING ARCHITECTURE THRESHER SODARE • 700 THIRD STREET SOUTH • MINNEAPOLIS. MN 55415 • PHONE 6123700700 Attn: Tom Hedges - City Administrator RE: Lone Oak Development Contract Honorable Mayor and City Council: On behalf of the Laukka Beck partnership, we are requesting that the Eagan City Council approve an amendment to the Standard Form of Development Contract for the Lone Oak plat. The Standard Form of Development Agreement provides for an allocation equal to 30% of the estimated construction cost to provide for engi- neering, administration, legal and fiscal fees In the calculation of the security deposit or letter of -credit. It is requested that the allocation be reduced to 18% for the Lone Oak plat. The basis or justification for our request is as follows. The purpose of the security deposit is to protect the City from any costs that might arise as a result of a default by the developer. The normal allocation of 30% of construc- tion cost includes the full cost of engineering design (7%+), enginnering construction fees (6%+), legal, administration and fiscal fees (6%+), and interest on construction funds during the 'construction period'(12,+). The Lone Oak project will be developed without any City participation in the on site public street and utility systems; therefore, the potential exposure that the City has In the event of a default is reduced In two areas. The first item of reduction Is that of the engineering design which Is about 7%. The complete design will be provided by the developer at his cost subject to the approval of the City staff. Therefore, the City will not be required to expend funds for engineering and design even in the event of a default. The second Item A s that of Interest on construction funds during the construction period. As indicated, the normal allocation for that item is approximately 12%. In this case, a letter of credit will be provide that .ensures funds will be available from the bank Issuing the letter of credit in the event of a default. The guarantee Is equal to 60% of the construction cost; therefore, 60% of the potential exposure for Interest cost Is quaranteed by the letter of credit. That results in a duplication in the security equal to 60% multiplied by 12% equals 7.2%. The combined total of these two items, a 7% degsign fee plus 7.2% Interest equals 14.2%. Reducing the standard 30% standard allocation by 14.2% results in 16.8% as a more accurate statement of the potential exposure for such admi- nistrative cost. DAVID J. BENNETT DONALD W. RINGROSE RICHARD P. WOLSFELD PETER E. JARVIS LAWRENCEJ.GARDNER THOMAS F. CARROLL ARNOLD J. ULLEVIG CRAIG A AMUNDSEN DONALD E. HUNT MARK G. SWENSON JOHN B. MCNAMARA GARY J. ERICKSON DONALD L CRAIG MINNEAPOLIS DENVER BRECKENRIDGE PHOENIX 0{06 City of Eagan May 1, 1985 Page 2 At a recent meeting with the City Engineer and City Attorney, this issue was discussed and it was Indicated to us that an amount computed at 18% of construc- tion cost would be reasonable and acceptable. It was suggested that we offi- cially request such a decisslon by the City Council concurrent with council action on the development contract. Please consider this letter to be that request. Sincerely, BENNETT-RINGROSE-WOLSFELD-JARVIS-GARDNER, INC. Donald W. Ri ngrose------ Principal / i DWR/Ip cc: Dale Beckman Peter Jarvis Warren Beck Larry Laukka Rich Hefty Ed Kirsch Paul Hauge zo/