Loading...
01/16/1985 - City Council SpecialMINUTES OF A SPECIAL ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE MEETING EAGAN, MINNESOTA JANUARY 16, 1985 A regular meeting of the Special Assessment Committee was held at the Eagan Municipal Center at 4:30 p.m. on January 16, 1986. Those present were Chairman Don Knight, Members Dale Vogt and Bill Rydrich, Mayor Bea Blomquist and Councilman Tom Egan. Absent was member Garrett Mulrooney. Also present were Public Works Director Tom Colbert and City Attorney Paul Hauge. /,[ ;17:I Vogt moved, Egan seconded the motion to approve the Agenda as presented. All voted yes. FRANCIS C. FRANZ 6 ANNA S. HEUER PROPERTY - PROJECT #372 Tom Colbert described the concerns of the property owners consisting of Francis C. Franz and Anna S. Heuer on the south side of Deerwooa Drive, objecting to proposed assessments associated with the recent completion of Deerwood Drive from Riverton Avenue to the east side of I -35E. The upgrading was performed under Project #372 by MnDOT through a Cost Participation Agreement with the City, with the majority of the costs paid by the Minnesota Department of Transportation, and a portion paid by the City. The Assessment Committee at its meeting in October 1985 received the objections and requested further information from the staff. The configuration, topography and setback restrictions were considered to be unique to the parcel, noting that the westerly parcel on the south Side of Deerwooa Drive and the easterly parcel on the north side of Deerw000 Drive, owned by Francis Franz should, according to Mr. Colbert's recommendation, receive credits toward the proposed assessments for lateral purposes and recommended a 300 foot reduction on the easterly parcel and 100 feet along the westerly parcel. In addition, there was discussion concerning proposed Sidewalk Trailway Policy #86-1 submitted by the staff. Member Ryarich questioned whether it would be permissible to assess a residential equivalent on Deerwood Drive if there is no direct access allowed. There was discussion concerning the 1978 Major Street Policy and also Mr. Colbert reviewed the Johnny Cake Ridge Road project commenced in 1976. It appeared that the Johnny Cake Ridge project was similar to the Deerwood Drive improvements and indicated that 50% of the Johnny Cake Ridge Road project was paid by the State and 50% from MSAS funds, with no assessments to adjacent property owners, with the understanding that all easements would be granted by the affected property owners. 1 Assessment Committee Minutes January 16, 1986 It was noted further that there was uncertainty as to development of the adjoining land on Deerwood and that it was assumed that access would be restricted with direct driveways prohibited. - Attorney Pat Farrell appeared on behalf of Mr. Franz and stated that because of the residual configuration of the various parcels of the Franz property, that it may be impractical to levy assessments, claiming there were no benefits against the property for sidewalk and street purposes. He argued there were no reasonable benefits to the property, and further, that the majority of the funds were federal funds used to install improvements with a small amount of City funding. It was also indicated that Mr. Franz has built a single family home on the property and therefore some benefit resulted. It was suggested that there would possibly be a benefit from the assessments for the single family home, and further, that sidewalks could be assessed depending upon the future use of the property. A representative of Mrs. Heuer was present and stated that the Heuer property is vacant and undeveloped. There was further discussion concerning proposed assessment for street and sidewalk purposes on all benefited properties on both the north and south side of Deerwood Drive. Egan then moved, Blomquist seconded the motion to recommend assessing the Francis Franz property for single family use only, with future assessments against the property based upon future uses including the sidewalk and trailway which would comply with the assessment policy at the time of future development; further, that the staff be directed to prepare a policy implementing the proposed recommendations of the Committee. All voted in favor. SIDEWALK AND TRAILWAY POLICY Rydrich moved, Egan seconded the motion to recommend adoption of the Trailway and Sidewalk Policy #86-1 submitted by the staff and recommend that the City Council approve it. All members voted yes. WILLARD BERFELZ - PROJECT #447 - LONE OAK ADDITION On August 6, 1985, a public hearing was held for the installation of trunk watermain along Highway #149 from Yankee Doodle Road to Trunk Highway #55. It was noted the Berfelz property is used as a single family residence but is zoned Light Industrial. Mr. Colbert recommended to the Committee that conditioned upon the owner executing an agreement for Special Assessment Policy #82-2, the staff recommended the rate be reduced to an Agricultural - Single Family rate and in addition, that the assessable footage be reduced to 135 feet for Lot 12, Auditor's Subdivision No. 38. Mr. and Mrs. Berfelz were present and stated that they also own Parcel 010-28 and Colbert stated that the same recommendation would apply to that parcel, with the understanding that both parcels are classified as homestead by the County Assessor. Mr. and Mrs. Berfelz had no objection to the proposed recommendation and upon motion by Egan, seconded Vogt, it was recommended to the City Council that the staff recommendation be adopted, including Parcel 010-28 and in the event that the property has been previously assessed for the same improvements, that no assessment be levied by the City Council. Staff was requested to investigate the statement of Mr. Berfelz that the property had been assessed for the same purpose at an earlier time. All voted yes. 2 Assessment Committee Minutes January 16, 1986 DON SANDBERG - PROJECT #427 - YANKEE DOODLE ROAD The next request for reconsideration of proposed assessments came from Don Sandberg, property owner on the south side of Yankee Doodle Road. The improvement provides for the upgrading of Yankee Doodle Road from a present rural ditch section to a four lane road with concrete curb and gutter and related storm sewer facilities. Mr. Sandberg's property contains 390 feet of frontage with a single family homestead. A 7.5 acre parcel is hampered by a protective wetland incorporated in the middle one-third of his property and Mr. Colbert recommended that the property be assessed for a comparable single family residential frontage according to City policy under the following conditions: 1. That the parcel be unplatted. 2. That the parcel shall have a net area of 3 acres, excluding all public and dedicated right-of-way ponaing easements. 3. That the parcel have a minimum 200 foot frontage on the public right- of-way where the connection is being made. Mr. Sandberg's property qualified, and therefore it was recommended that the assessment be reduced to a comparable single family frontage of 100 feet and that the additional assessments associated with the remaining frontage be assessed at the time of the rezoning of the development of any part or all of the balance of the property. Mr. Sandberg was present and had no objections to the recommendation. Egan moved, Vogt seconded the motion to recommend approval of the staff recommendation and forward it to the City Council. All members voted affirmatively. YD ASSOCIATES - PROJECT #427 - YANKEE DOODLE ROAD The Committee then considered a request of YD Associates under Project #427 regarding street and storm sewer improvements on Yankee Doodle Road to review the proposed assessments against the property. Mr.Colbert discussed the proposed assessments and Vance Grannie, Sr. appeared on behalf of the owners, objecting to the proposed assessments. He indicated that there was not adequate benefit, from the improvements, to justify the assessments. Mr. Colbert pointed out that there is a hazardous intersection at Coachman Road, there—is—lack-of-abi-lity-for-through-traffic-and-the-upgrading-of-the-street will improve the value of the adjacent property. No specific action was taken, noting that the assessments will not be levied until 1987 and Mr. Grannis indicated that an appraisal will be submitted within the next few months, to the City. 3 Assessment Committee Minutes January 16, 1986 PATRICK McCARTHY - PROJECT #404 - LEXINGTON AVENUE TRUNK WATER MAIN The objections of Patrick McCarthy were next brought to the assessment committee pertaining to the assessments associated with the trunk water main along Lexington Avenue. Mr. Colbert reviewed with the committee members the projected assessments and stated that a letter from Arnold Kempe, the attorney for the owner, requesting a continuance, had been submitted to his office. After discussion, Vogt moved, Egan seconded the motion to continue consideration of the objections, including Project #411, Birch Park Addition trunk storm sewer, until the next meeting of the assessment committee, noting that the applicant was not present. All members voted yea. DON VOGTMAN - PROJECT #411 - SKOVDALE The objections of Don Vogtman to the proposed trunk storm sewer assessments under Project #411 consisting of the Birch Park Addition/Patrick Eagan Park area were brought to the committee by Mr. Colbert. The Public Works Director detailed the City's position ana recommended that due to the recent building placed on the property eliminating the previous low drainage basin and redirecting the drainage flow that the storm sewer system serviced by Project #411, it's the staff's recommendation that the property be determined benefited by the improvement and that the assessment as proposed be reaffirmed. Don Vogtman was present and read a statement in opposition, including the fact that his land should be treated similar to the adjacent lots which receive about 56% credit, based, upon the large -lot allowance. He stated that his lana is serving as a temporary ponaing area and it is fairly heavily wooded, offering absorption qualities, ana further that the benefit is . not in proportion to the proposed assessments. Committee members noted that the 75 foot frontage at present will be reducea at the time of Pilot Knob Road widening, with the balance of about 60 feet for access from Deerwooa Drive to the northerly portion. Noting that Mr. Vogtman's property includes Lot 7 and the north half of Lot 6, Block 1, Skovaale, and that access to it for development would come from Deerwood Drive, Blomquist moved, Egan secondea the motion to recommend to the City Council that it allow a large -lot policy credit for the two lots, because of the fact that the parcels are platted, the fact that the other lots within Skovaale have received the large -lot credit, that all of Skovdale Addition was platted at one time and it would penalize the Vogtman property if it was not permitted; but in the event that the two parcels are divided into more than two single family lots, that the Council then may reconsider the assessments ana—increase—the—amount of -the -trunk -storm -sewer -assessments -at -that -time - A11 members votea yea. 4 Assessment Committee Minutes January 16, 1986 VICTOR STAFF - PROJECT #411 - SKOVDALE 2ND ADDITION The next objection brought before the Committee consisted of those from Mr. and Mrs. Victor Staff covering Lot 5, Block 1, Skovdale 2nd Addition, under Project #411, Birch Park Addition/Patrick Eagan Park trunk storm sewer. At the September 19, 1985 final assessment hearing before the City Council, Darrel Baska, the attorney for Mr. and Mrs. Staff, submitted a written Notice of Appeal and objected to the assessments. Mr. Baska was present and indicated that the level of the adjacent pond had increased and caused a portion of the Staff property to be lost and that an action has been commenced against the City for inverse condemnation. Negotiations have taken place for settlement of the action. Mr. Colbert noted that the staff had recommended a deduct for the area covered by water, and had adopted the large -lot formula with the balance of the lot assessed for storm sewer purposes. It was proposed the assessment be based on the area above the easement level of 830 feet. Egan moved, Blomquist seconded the motion to recommend to the City Council that it levy assessments for storm sewer purposes above the 830 foot level, including dedication of the easement from the Staffs and an acceptable settlement of the inverse condemnation action brought against the City. All voted yes. RONALD BOYLE - PROJECT #411 - BIRCH PARR ADDITION The objections from Mr. and Mrs. Ronald Boyle of Deerwood Drive to storm sewer assessments against their property were next considered by the Committee. Mr. Colbert reviewed the objections and noted that they were comparable to the Bergin, Caponi and Rooney objections, all of whose property drains into JP -8. He stated that JP -8 does.not have an outlet at the present time, but that the rise in the level of the pond will require interconnections within a very short period of time. Blomquist moved, Egan seconded the motion to recommend approval of the staff's recommendation that the assessment against the parcel be deferred until the property is directly benefited due to the installation of outlets in Pond JP -8. All voted yes. LILLIAN McCARTHY - PROJECT #411 BIRCH PARE ADDITION/PATRICK EAGAN PARR TRUNK STORM SEWER Mr. Colbert then brought before the Committee the objections of Lillian McCarthy, an owner on Lexington Avenue objecting to the trunk storm sewer assessments-under-Project-#41-1—The-parcel-incorporates-3.91-acres with --only 1.5 acres assessed at the Agricultural/Single Family rate, due to the large - lot credit proposed to be assessed against the property. There was no appearance on behalf of Ms. McCarthy. After discussion, Egan moved, Vogt seconded the motion to recommend that the proposed assessments with large -lot credit against the Lillian McCarthy property be approved by the City Council. All voted in favor. 5 Assessment Committee Minutes January 16, 1986 PARKLAND - SPECIAL ASSESSMENT POLICY - HOLLAND LAKE AREA A memorandum prepared by Tom Colbert was discussed by the members dated January 16, 1986 regarding proposed assessments for storm sewer improvements in the Holland Lake/Cliff Road area. He stated the estimated cost of the major storm sewer project is approximately $900,000.00, but that a large portion of the acreage, approximately 429 acres, consisting of County Park, would result in a proposed assessment of approximately $300,000.00 at the Agricultural/Single Family Residential rate. Preliminary discussion has been held with Dakota County representatives, indicating that they do not have the resources available to finance the estimated $300,000.00 and because of the need to negotiate the assessments, there was concern by Committee members that the City should continue to negotiate for contribution from the County. There were also questions about improvements that would undoubtedly be installed in the park, including park buildings, parking lots, etc. which would add to the storm sewer runoff. The Committee recommended an Ordinance be prepared to control the construction of improvements on public property without City approval. Egan moved, Vogt seconded the motion that the Committee be on record recommending to the City Council that it adopt a policy providing for one-half residential equivalent assessments against the County Park property for trunk storm sewer improvements, with the understanding that the City can impose restrictions on development, and in the event that future development of the park property takes place, that additional trunk storm sewer assessments could be levied against the benefited property. All members voted in favor. ADJOURNMENT Upon motion duly made and seconded, the meeting adjourned at 7:55 p.m. All voted yes. PHH 6 MINUTES OF A SPECIAL "SESSMEN--T-GGM-FT STING EAGAN, MINNESOTA JANUARY 16, 1985 A regular meeting of the Special Assessment Committee was held at the Eagan Municipal Center at 4:30 p.m. on -oJaua 1 , 1986. Those resent were Chairman Don Knight, Members Dale Vogt, Mayor lomquia Councilman Tom Egan r1c . Absent was member Garrett Mulrooney. Also present were Public Works Director Tom Colbert and City Attorney Paul Hauge. AGENDA Vogt moved, Egan seconded the motion to approve the Agenda as presented. All voted yes. FRANCIS C. FRANZ & ANNA S. HEUER PROPERTY - PROJECT #372 Tom Colbert described the concerns of the property owners consisting of Francis C. Franz and Anna S. Heuer on the south side of Deerwood Drive, objecting to proposed assessments associated with the recent completion of Deerwood Drive from Riverton Avenue to the east side of I -35E. The upgrading was performed under Project #372 by MnDOT through ost Participation Agreement with the City, with the majority of the costs paid by the S` ee .,.. r6.b « Minnesota Department of Transportation a portion paid by the City. The Assessment Committee at its meeting in October 1985 received the objections and requested further information from the staff. The configuration, topography and setback restrictions were considered to be unique to the parcel, noting that the westerly parcel on the south side of Deerwood Drive and the easterly parcel on the north side of Deerwood Drive, owned by Francis Franz should, according to Mr. Colbert's recommendation, receive credits toward the proposed assessments for lateral purposes and recommended a 300 foot reduction on the easterly parcel and 100 feet along the westerly parcel. In addition, there was discussion concerning t proposed Sidewalk Trailway Policy #86-1 submitted by the staff. Member Rydrich questioned k whether it would be permissible to assessCresidential equivalent on Deerwood A Drive if there is no direct access allowed. There was discussion concerning the 1978 Major Street Policy and also Mr. Colbert reviewed the Johnny Cake Ridge Road project commenced in 1976. It appeared that the Johnny Cake Ridge project was similar to the Deerwood Drive improvements and indicated that 50% of the Johnny Cake Ridge Road project was paid by the State and 50% from MSAS funds, with no assessments to adjacent property owners, with the understanding that all easements would be granted by the affected property owners. It was noted further that there was uncertainty Oir-1 lopment of the adjoining land on Deerwood and that it was assumed that t e access would be' restricted with direct driveways prohibited. Attorney Pat Farrell appeared on behalf of Mr. Franz and stated that because of the residual configuration of the various parcels of the Franz property, that it may be impractical to levy assessments, claiming there were no benefits against the '/property for sidewalk and street purposes. lAr ^� � �- •-• •, �e argued there were no reasonable benefits to the property, and further, that the J majority of the funds were federal funds ✓ used to install improvements,/with a vj(ry small amount of City funding. It was also indicated that Mr. Fran has built a single family home on the property and therefore some benefit resulted. It was suggested that there would possibly be a benefit from the assessments for the single family home, and further, that sidewalks could be assessed depending upon the future use of the pro ert n - g O R1\ydrich move, gan seconded the motion�to�adopt� the 'lrai`iway and Sidewalk ` Policy #86-1 submitted by the staff and recommend that the City Council approve it. All members voted yes. .TI -0 ---------- . C16 � A representative of Mrs. Heuer was present and stated that th fpe roperty is vacant and undeveloped. There was further discussion concerning proposed assessment for street and sidewalk purposes on all benefited properties on both the north and south sid of De rwood Drive. Egan then moved, Blomquist seconded the motion t asses4Vthe Francis Franz property for tfe single family use only, with future assessments against the property based upon future uses r including the sidewalk and trailway which would comply with thepolicy0 `s at the time of th,( future development; further, that the staff be directed to prepare a policy implementing the proposed recommendations of the Committee. All voted in favor. � I WILLARD BERFELZ - PROJECT $447 - LONE OAR ADDITION On August 6, 1985, a public hearing was held for the installation of trunk watermain along Highway 4149 from Yankee Doodle Road to Trunk Highway #55. It was noted the Berfelz property is used as a single family residence but is zoned Light Industrial. Mr. Colbert recommended to the Committee that conditioned upon the owner executing an agreement for Special Assessment Policy #82-2, the staff recommended the rate be reduced to an Agricultural - Single Family rate and in addition, that the assessable footage be reduced to 135 feet for Lot 12, Auditor's Subdivision No. 38. Mr. and Mrs. Berfelz were present and stated that they also own Parcel 010-28 and Colbert stated that the same recommendation would apply to that parcel, with the understanding that both parcels are classified as homestead by the County Assessor. Mr, and Mrs. Berfelz had no objection to the proposed recommendation and upon motion by Egan, seconded Vogt, it was recommended to the City Council that the staff recommendation be adopted, including Parcel 010-28 and in the event that the property has been previously assessed for the same improvements, that no assessment be levied by the City Council. Staff was requested to investigate F the statement of Mr. Berfelz that the property had been assessed for the same purpose at an earlier time. Ail voted yes. DON SANDBERG - PROJECT 4427 - YANKEE DOODLE ROAD The next request for reconsideration of proposed assessments came from Don Sandberg, property owner on the south side of Yankee Doodle Road. The improvement provides for the upgrading of Yankee Doodle Road from a present rural ditch section to a four lane road with concrete curb and gutter and related storm sewer facilities. Mr. Sandberg's property contains 390 feet of frontage with a single family homestead. A 7.5 acre parcel is hampered by a protective wetland incorporated in the middle one-third of his property and Mr. Colbert recommended that the property be assessed for a comparable single family residential frontage according to City policy under the following conditions: 1. That the parcel be unplatted. 2. That the parcel shall have a net area of 3 acres, excluding all public and dedicated right-of-way ponding easements. 3. That the parcel have a minimum 200 foot frontage on the public right- of-way where the connection is being made. Mr. Sandberg's property qualified, and therefore it was recommended that the assessment be reduced to a comparable single family frontage of 100 feet and that the additional assessments associated with the remaining frontage be assessed at the time of the rezoning of the development of any part or all of the balance of the property. Mr. Sandberg was present and had no objections to the recommendation. Egan moved, Vogt seconded the motion to recommend approval of the staff recommendation and forward it to the City Council. All members voted affirmatively. YD ASSOCIATES - PROJECT 4427 - YANKEE DOODLE ROAD 4 The Committee then considered a request of YD Associates under Project 46427 regarding street and storm sewer improvements on Yankee Doodle Road to review the proposed assessments against the property. Mr. Colbert discussed the proposed assessment and Vance Grannis, Sr. appeared on behalf of the owners, objecting to the proposed assessments. He indicated that there was not adequate benefit the improvements, to justify the assessments. Mr. Colbert pointed o that there is a hazardous intersection at Coachman Road, there is lack of ability for through -traffic and the upgrading of the street will improve the value of the adjacent property. No specific action was taken, noting that the assessments will not be levied until 1987 and Mr. Grannis indicated that an appraisal will be submitted within the next few months, to the City. PATRICK McCARTHY - PROJECT 46404 - LEXINGTON AVENUE TRUNK WATER MAIN The objections of Patrick McCarthy were next brought to the assessment committee pertaining to the assessments associated with the trunk water main along Lexington Avenue. Mr. Colbert reviewed with the committee members the projected assessments and stated that a letter from Arnold Kempe, the attorney for the owner, requesting a continuance, had been submitted to his office. After discussion, Vogt moved, Egan seconded the motion to continue ho - consideration of the objections, including Project 46411, Birch Park Addition trunk storm sewer, until the next meeting of the assessment committee, noting that the applicant was not present. All members voted yea. DON VOGTMAN - PROJECT #411 - SKOVDALE The objectioof Don Vogtman to the proposed trunk storm sewer assessments under Project All consisting of the Birch Park Adaition/Patrick Eagan Park area were brought to the committee by Mr. Colbert. The Qublicuibrks 9 -rector detailed the City's position and recommended that due to``JJthe recent building 5 placea on the property eliminating the previous low drainage basin and redirecting the drainage flow that the storm sewer system serviced by Project #411, it's the staff's recommendation that the property be deterrmmined benefited by the improvement and that the assessment O&s proposed _4 be reaffirmed. Don Vogtman was present and read a statement in opposition, including the fact that his land/should be treated similar to the adjacent lots which receive about 56% creoitd, based upon the large -lot allowance. He stated that his land is serving as !!! a temporary ponding area and it is fairly heavily wooded, offering absorption qualities, and further that the benefit is not in proportion to the proposed assessments. Committee members noted that the 75 foot frontage at present will be reduced at the time of Pilot Knob Road widening, with the balance of about 60 feet for access from Deerwood Drive to the northerly portion. Noting that Mr. Vogtman's property includes Lot 7 and the north half of Lot 6, Block 1, Skovdale, and that access to it for development would come from Deerwood Drive, Blomquist moved, Egan seconded the motion to recommend to the City Council that it allow a large -lot policy credit for the two lots, because of the fact that the parcels are platted, the fact that the other lots within Skovaale have received the large -lot credit, that all of Skovdale Addition was platted at one time and it would penalize the Vogtman property if it was not permitted; but in the event that the two parcels are divided into more than two single family lots, that the Council then may reconsider the assessments and increase the amount of the trunk storm sewer assessments at that time. Ail members voted yes. VICTOR STAFF - PROJECT #411 - SKOVDALE 2ND ADDITION The next objection brought before the Committee consisted of those from VYA't'victor Staff covering Lot 5, Block 1, Skovdale 2nd Addition, under Project N 6 #411, Birch Park Adaition/Patrick Eagan Park trunk storm sewer. At the September 19, 1985 final assessment hearing before the City Council, Darrel Baska, the attorney for Mr. and Mrs. Staff, submitted a written Notice of Appeal and objected to the assessments. Mr. Baska was present and indicated e� that the level of the adjacent pond had increased and caused a portion of the Staff property to be lost and that an action has been commenced against the City for inverse condemnation. Negotiations have taken place for settlement of the action. Colbert noted that the staff had recommended a deduct the area covered by water, and had adopted the large -lot formula with th balance of the lot assessed for storm sewer purposes. It was proposed the assessment be based on the area above the proposed areae h easement level of 830 feet. Egan moved, Blomquist seconded the motion to recommend to the City Council that it levy assessments for storm sewer sem" -�Q `{� purposes above pt�h)e 830 foot level, h@ asq�us �E�a�f the easement from the StafS. � acceptable settlement of the inverse condemnation action brought against the City. All voted yes. RONALD BOYLE - PROJECT #411 - BIRCH PARR ADDITION The objections from Mr. and Mrs. Ronald Boyle of Deerwood Drive to storm sewer assessments against their property were next considered by the Committee. Mr. Colbert reviewed the objections and noted that they were comparable to the Berg, Caponi and Rooney objections, all of whose property drains into JP -8. He stated that JP -8 does not have an outlet at the present time, but that the rise in the level of the pond will require interconnections within a very short period of time. Blomquist moved, Egan seconded the motion to recommend approval of the staff's recommendation that the assessment against the parcel be deferred until the property is directly benefited due to the installation of outlets in Pond JP -8. All voted yes. 7 LILLIAN HcCARTHY - PROJECT #411 BIRCH PARR ADDITION/PATRICK EAGAN PARR TRUNK STORK SEWER Mr. Colbert then brought before the Committee the objections of Lillian McCarthy, an owner on Lexington Avenue objecting to the trunk storm sewer assessments under Project #411. The parcel incorporates 3.91 acres with only 1.5 acres assessed at the Agricultural/Single Family rate, due to the large - lot credit proposed to be assessed against the property. There was no appearance on behalf of Ms. McCarthy. After discussion, Egan moved, Vogt seconded the motion to recommend that the proposed assessments with large -lot credit against the Lillian McCarthy property be approved by the City Council. All voted in favor. PARKLAND - SPECIAL ASSESSMENT POLICY - HOLLAND LAKE AREA A memorandum prepared by Tom Colbert was discussed by the members dated January 16, 1986 regarding proposed assessments for storm sewer improvements in the Holland Lake/Cliff Road area. He stated the estimated cost of the major storm sewer project is approximately $900,000.00, but that a large portion of the acreage, approximately 429 acres, consisting of County Park, (� resultfyin C —proposed assessment of approximately $300,000.00 O& T Agricultural/Single Family Residential rate. Preliminary discussion has been held with Dakota County representatives, indicating that they do not have the resources available to finance the estimated $300,000.00 and because of the need to negotiate the assessments, there was concern by Committee members that the City should continue to negotiate for contribution from the County. There wki also questions about improvements that would undoubtedly be installed in the park, including park buildings, parking lots, etc. which would add to the storm sewer runoff. e� J/p� The Committee recommended an Ordinance be (ed to control the construction of improvements on public property without City approval. 8 Egan moved, Vogt seconded the motion that the Committee be on record recommending to the City Council that it adopt a policy providing for one-half residential equivalent assessments against the County Park property for trunk storm sewer improvements, with the understanding that the City can impose restrictions on development, and in the event that future development of the park property takes place, that additional trunk storm sewer assessments could be levied against the benefited property. All members voted in favor. ADJOURNMENT Upon motion duly made and seconded, the meeting adjourned at 7:55 p.m. All voted yes. i PHH I 1 REPORT ON j TRUNK ASSESSMENT RATES i` �-,UTILITIE& AND STREETS EA.GAN, MINNESOTA P/ 1986. FILE N0. 49382 /S , %laseae, fq%iii s Ajoc&c&&, Am emvd"X,,q e st na"4 M I I i 1 I I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 2335 V. 7.....4 -41,A. St. P..d,, M—..& 55113 /)Aa...: 612 - 636-4600 December 15, 1985 City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55121 Re: Trunk Assessment Rate Report File No. 49382 Dear Mayor and Council: Glrnn R. C.M. P.E A'eirE A. Gmda n. P.E. Thom. E ?'n, a. P.F Rirhurd IP. Fmur. P.E, Fuben G. s1hu1111M. P Munir. L. Snr vol., P.F nonme C. B.rx.mr P.e levy A. Mork A. UdnSM RE Ted K. rleld. P E .5111h.e1 T. R.uunun n. P.E RoN, R. JAff de. P,F. noeid O. Lrnk.ru, P.E. Ch.d,s A. F..,,, Lro Al. Pv. eG1. ".., At Ou.n Transmitted herewith is our report for review and study of trunk assessment rates for utilities and streets for the City of Eagan. It is recommended the proposed rates for 1986 be retroactive beginning January 1, 1986. We would be happy to meet with the Council and other interested parties to re- view and discuss the contents of this report as may be required. Yours very truly, BONESTR00, ROSENE, ANDERLIK 5 ASSOCIATES, INC. Mark A. Hanson MAH: Ii I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of �� ark A. Hanson Date: December 15, 1985 Reg. No. 14260 Approved by: ./ ! n ��n A l� ' ''Thomas A. Colbert, P.E. Director of Public Works E -2481d Date: / Z. - Z- // - -i' Ono G, Ponesvem. P E. Reb," , kesene. P.E. J hsrPh C. And,,hk, P.E. Bradford.4. Le.rberR, P.E. R,rh..d F, 7.-^ P.E lama Coh.n, P E Glrnn R. C.M. P.E A'eirE A. Gmda n. P.E. Thom. E ?'n, a. P.F Rirhurd IP. Fmur. P.E, Fuben G. s1hu1111M. P Munir. L. Snr vol., P.F nonme C. B.rx.mr P.e levy A. Mork A. UdnSM RE Ted K. rleld. P E .5111h.e1 T. R.uunun n. P.E RoN, R. JAff de. P,F. noeid O. Lrnk.ru, P.E. Ch.d,s A. F..,,, Lro Al. Pv. eG1. ".., At Ou.n Transmitted herewith is our report for review and study of trunk assessment rates for utilities and streets for the City of Eagan. It is recommended the proposed rates for 1986 be retroactive beginning January 1, 1986. We would be happy to meet with the Council and other interested parties to re- view and discuss the contents of this report as may be required. Yours very truly, BONESTR00, ROSENE, ANDERLIK 5 ASSOCIATES, INC. Mark A. Hanson MAH: Ii I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of �� ark A. Hanson Date: December 15, 1985 Reg. No. 14260 Approved by: ./ ! n ��n A l� ' ''Thomas A. Colbert, P.E. Director of Public Works E -2481d Date: / Z. - Z- // - -i' 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 TRUNK ASSESSMENT RATE REPORT EAGAN, MINNESOTA LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL INDEX INTRODUCTION I. UTILITY ASSESSMENT - TRUNK AREA II. UTILITY ASSESSMENT - LATERAL BENEFIT FROM TRUNK III. MAJOR STREET ASSESSMENTS Table 1 - Major Street Costs Table 2 - Revenue for Major Street Table 3 - Road Unit Equivalency Table CALCULATION FOR EQUIVALENT ASSESSMENT RATES SUMMARY TRUNK ASSESSMENTS APPENDIX A - MAJOR STREET CONSTRUCTION 2487d - 1 - Page No. . 1. 2. 3. 7. 10. 11. 12. 13. 15. 18. 19. 1 r t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of a study undertaken annually to review trunk assessment rates for utilities and streets in the City of Eagan. As- sessment rates presented herein are used to finance oversizing costs associ- ated with constructing the trunk utility and major street system. This report is separated into three parts discussed as follows: I. UTILITY ASSESSMENT - TRUNK AREA II. UTILITY ASSESSMENT - LATERAL BENEFIT FROM TRUNK III. MAJOR STREET ASSESSMENT A. Road User Charge B. Equivalent - Zoning C. Lateral Storm Sewer E -2487d - 2 - I I 1 1 I. UTILITY ASSESSMENT _ TRUNK AREA Eagan assessment policy provides that pipe oversize costs be assessed against the service area causing the need for the oversize capacity. The costs associated with the pipe oversize is assessed on an area basis. By pol- icy, the trunk oversize is the difference in cost between the maximum lateral size and the installed trunk size. DEFINITION OF LATERAL UTILITIES Maximum Lateral Size Sanitary Sewer 8" Water Main - Residential 8" Water Main - Comm. -Ind. 12" Storm Sewer * Based on hydraulic calculation of need (See "Note", page 9) Because of inflation and the effects of the non-uniform rate of develop- ment, it is necessary to routinely re-evaluate the rates charged for pipe oversize. Standard procedure has been to annually evaluate the rate structure to adjust for inflation and other factors. Approximately every five years the entire trunk system is re-evaluated in a comprehensive study. From this study, the uncompleted portions of the system are identified and updated costs to complete the system are prepared. By this procedure, the comprehensive study is viewed as a detailed analysis of the costs to complete the system, from which assessment rates are prepared. This annual report is viewed as a fine tuning of the rate structure during the interim period between comprehen- sive studies. ' E -2487d - 3 - The latest comprehensive water distribution system and sanitary sewer sys- tem studies were completed in 1982. The comprehensive storm sewer system study was prepared in 1984. The annual rate studies essentially rely upon these comprehensive reports as benchmark data. However, the assessment ' portion of the Comprehensive Storm Sewer Plan was not prepared. As a result, ' rates presented herein for Trunk Storm Sewer Oversizing may need to be revised at the time the assessment portion of the Comprehensive Storm Sewer Plan is ' completed. Annual changes in the rate structure presented herein are evaluated by ap- plying construction cost trend factors to the previous years rate structure. ' Trend factors used to evaluate the rate structure for inflation are the EPA Index for sewers and a comparison of bid unit prices in the City of Eagan for commonly bid items in 1985 and past years. The most recent EPA Index available for purposes of this report indicate an annual inflation rate of ' 7.9% from the first quarter of 1984 to the first quarter of 1985. 11 ' - 4 - E -2487d 1 To determine the annual inflation rate in the City of Eagan based on bid unit prices for pipe construction associated with sanitary sewer, water main, ' and storm sewer each City Contract for 1984 and 1985 were reviewed. The aver- age bid unit price for 1983 and 1984 was determined by taking the average bid unit price for each contract as it relates to lineal footage of pipe bid and then averaging the total amount for each contract for that year. The average ' bid unit price for each contract was determined by taking an average of the five low bidders. A summary of the average bid unit price for 1983, 1984; and 1985 for lateral sanitary sewer, water main, and storm sewer pipe are ' listed as follows: 11 ' - 4 - E -2487d 1 AVERAGE BID UNIT PRICE FOR UTILITY CONSTRUCTION ' Annual Annual %,Decrease % Increase 1983 1984 1985 1984-1985 1983-1985 ' Sanitary Sewer $11.55/LF $13.25/LF $12.51/LF -5.6% + 4.1% (8" PVC 0'-12' dp.) ' Water Main $10.84/LF $11.91/LF $11.44/LF - 3.9% + 2.8% (6" DIP 714 dp.) Storm Sewer $18.82/LF $19.24/LF $18.30/LF - 4.9% - 1.4% (12" RCP 0'-10' dp.) The inflation rate based on the EPA Index (+7.9%) and the recent bid unit prices in the City of Eagan for 1983, 1984, and 1985, indicate the EPA Index is substantially higher. As indicated, the inflation rate for sanitary sewer and water main construction between 1983 and 1985 was minimal (+2.8% to 4.1%) ' while a decrease existed for storm sewer construction. It should be noted, ' however, that during the latter part of the 1985 construction season, a price war did exist among concrete pipe suppliers thus reducing the cost of concrete ' pipe utilized in storm sewer construction. Although the bid unit prices in Eagan for the construction of pipe indicate a minimal increase over recent ' years other items associated with pipe construction have increased dramatical- ly. These historically have included condemnation and contract litigation for it is a significant number of trunk sanitary and storm sewer systems. While virtually impossible to predict the future cost of these items, their poten- tial does exist and will significantly affect the estimated cost of completing ' the system. Therefore, it is recommended an increase of 4% to 5% be applied to the in City Eagan 1985 rates for trunk sanitary and storm sewer facilities the of - 5 - E-2487d I ' for 1986 and that the rates for financing the trunk water system remain at the 1985 level. The proposed rates for 1986 are as follows: 1 ' UTILITY ASSESSMENT - TRUNK AREA 1986 Percent Current 1985 Rate Proposed Rates Increase Trunk Sanitary Unplatted $1,190/Ac. $1,240/Ac. + 4.2% ' Sewer Oversize Platted Res. * $570/lot $595/lot + 4.4% (@ 2.1 lots/Ac.) Trunk Water Main Agricultural or $1,190/Ac. $1,190/Ac. No change Oversize Residential $570/lot $570/lot No change ' Water Supply & Single Family $500/lot $500/lot No change Storage Multi -Family** $400/unit $400/unit No change Water Supply & Storage & Main Oversizing Comm. & Ind. $3,020/Ac. $3,020/Ac. No change ' Trunk Storm Sewer Single Family $0.048/sq.ft. $0.050/s.f. + 4.2% Oversize Multi -Family $0.061/sq.ft. $0.064/s.f. + 4.9% Comm. & Ind. $0.072/sq.ft. $0.075/s.f + 4.2% ' ' * Lots which are platted at the time trunk facilities are ordered in. ** Multi -family is defined as R-3 and greater zoning and the unit cost is ' approximately 0.8 of the cost of a single family lot. *** For accounting purposes, Main Oversizing shall be $1,190/acre and Water Supply and Storage shall be $1,830/acre. [l 1 E -2487d 1 I II. UTILITY ASSESSMENT - LATERAL BENEFIT FROM TRUNK ' Eagan assessment policy provides that the lateral benefit received from trunk sanitary sewer and trunk water main be assessed against the property be- 1 ing serviced. It is proposed to assess the lateral benefit from trunk rate for sanitary sewer and water main on a footage basis. It is recommended the base rate presented in the 1985 report for sanitary sewer and water main re- main the same for 1986 due to the results of actual construction costs stabil- izing as discussed in the previous section. It is again recommended that all ' related appurtenances and overhead costs be added to the base rate in deter- mining the lateral benefit rate for trunk sanitary sewer and water main. Re- lated appurtenances would include such things as manholes, pipe and manhole overdepth (greater than 8' deep), rock stabilization, trench compaction, res- toration, etc. for sanitary sewer while water main would include such things ' as hydrants, valves, fittings, rock stabilization, trench compaction, restora- tion, etc. The necessary amount of related appurtenances would then be deter- mined by designing a lateral system to service the benefited parcel in lieu of ' the trunk facility being constructed. In the event it is not feasible to de- termine a related appurtenance ratio, a range of values from previous projects ' and a recommended value for both sanitary sewer and water main are listed herein. RELATED APPURTENANCE RATIOS I 1 ' E -2487d Sanitary Sewer Water Main Range of Values 1.45 to 2.55 1.3 to 1.63 - 7 - Recommended Value I 11 L 1 1 1 The range of values for sanitary sewer is much greater than for water main due to costs associated with sanitary sewer overdepth which may be significant for a given parcel dependent upon the terrain. The recommended value for san- itary sewer lateral benefit takes into account sanitary sewer construction up to 16 feet in depth. Overhead costs include legal, engineering, administration and bond inter- est. It is recommended the overhead rate for 1986 be 30% of the lateral bene- fit from trunk rate. The recommended 1986 lateral benefit from trunk sanitary sewer and trunk water main rate is summarized herein which reflects no increase in costs. BASE RATE 1986 LATERAL BENEFIT FROM TRUNK SANITARY SEWER AND TRUNK WATER MAIN 1985 1986 Percent Actual Rate Estimated Rate Increase Sanitary Sewer $12.98/Centerline ft. $12.98/Centerline ft. No change Water Main, Single Fam. $12.18/Centerline ft. $12.67/Centerline ft. No change Multi-Fam. $20.07/centerline ft. $20.87/centerline ft. No change Comm/Ind. RECOMMENDED VALUE 1 E -2487d 1 SANITARY SEWER WATER MAIN Rate/center- line ft. Rate/centerline ft. Multi -Family ._ Single Family Comm/Ind. Base Rate $12.98 $12.18 $20.07 Correlated Appurtenances Ratio 1.7 1.5 1.5 Total $22.07 $18.27 $30.11 Overhead (Legal, Engrng., Admin. 6 Bond Interest) +30% +30% 30% Total $28.69 $23.75 $39.14 1 E -2487d 1 ' The recommended value for the 1986 lateral benef=_t from trunk rate for sanitary sewer is $28.69/centerline ft. and for water main at the single-family ' and Multi -family, Comm/Ind. rate is $23.75 and $39.14/centerline foot, respec- ttively. ' Note: The Eagan assessment policy for recovering costs associated with lateral ' the trunk storm sewer amount will be determined as the amount of storm sewer required within a development to convey drainage from outside its boundaries. 1 [1 1 1 11 1 1 E -2487d benefit from trunk storm sewer is to assess the lateral storm sewer amount re- quired to convey drainage within each development. Storm sewer required to convey drainage from outside its boundaries is considered trunk storm sewer ' and will be the responsibility of the trunk storm sewer fund. Therefore, the ' the trunk storm sewer amount will be determined as the amount of storm sewer required within a development to convey drainage from outside its boundaries. 1 [1 1 1 11 1 1 E -2487d I ' III. MAJOR STREET ASSESSMENTS A. ROAD USER CHARGE Early in the development of Eagan Township, a Major Street Plan was adop- ted which provided major collector streets, principally county roads, designed as 9 ton/axle capacity with 52' wide paving and minor collector streets desig- nated as 7 to 9 ton/axle capacity from 36' to 44' wide paving. The oversize costs for these streets above the cost of a normal residential street at 5-7 ' ton/axle capacity 32' wide were paid for from county road turnback.funds and, ' in some cases, general obligation funds. A more detailed policy was developed in 1977 to provide more positive fi- nancing from new development due to the increased traffic requiring the con- struction of a major street system. Because of inequities which result from assessing lots or additions directly abutting major streets, the policy in- cluded a benefit charge to be levied with each building permit. Each new building places an additional burden on the Major Street System. Commercial ' and Industrial buildings were levied proportionately larger charges based on use and size of building. The user charge was to supplement other sources of ' funds available for the Major Street construction to provide a portion of the ' required cash flow to construct the needed major streets. In 1977, the Major Street construction financing plan was adopted which ' established the Road User charge of $75 per residential unit to be levied with the issuance of each building permit. However, due to inflation and improve- ments reflected in design considerations, the road unit charge has been in- creased to $280 in 1985 to maintain the necessary cash flow to assist in the ' continued construction of major streets. 'E -2487d - 10 - ' Table 1 shows the projected capital cost to complete the Major Street Sys- tem for the City of Eagan by the year 2005. These costs are separated into two types, County and City. City streets are further separated into Municipal ' State Aid and Non -State Aid Collectors reflecting eligibility for Municipal State Aid Funds. Capital costs shown for County Streets are 45% of the total cost which represents the City's responsibility. A more detailed breakdown of the cost per street is included in Appendix A located at the back of this re- port. 1A.1v i tMAJOR STREET COSTS Capital Cost Projection County Streets $ 8,315,800 ' City Streets - Municipal State Aid 9,234,120 Non -State Aid Collectors 7,144,280 Total Eagan's Cost $24,694,280 ' Revenue sources for the costs described in Table 1 will include: (1) Min- nesota Gas Tax (M.S.A.) funds, (2) commercial, industrial and residential ' equivalent assessments and (3) the major street benefit charge to be levied with the issuance of building permits. Each year the City receives an allotment of money acquired by the State of ' Minnesota through gasoline taxes to be used in the construction of Major Streets. Income from Municipal State Aid Funds was projected through the year ' 2005 by assuming the 1985 allotment represents an average amount based on future needs. 1 - E -2487d 11l ' A substantial income is also expected to be obtained from assessing resi- dential equivalents where unrestricted driveway access is to be allowed, such ' as on Minor Collector streets, and from assessing multifamily and commercial - industrial property on all Major Streets where access will be allowed. Due to the complexity of determining assessments, each segment of street was reviewed ' briefly to determine the estimated assessment amount based on similar projects previously assessed. In general, it is estimated approximately 40-45% of the ' project cost will be recovered through special assessments._ To determine a fair and equitable road unit charge for 1986, commonly bid items were reviewed between 1984 and 1985. Similar to utility construction, a ' very minimal increase in the unit prices was experienced during this time. However, because overall project costs continue to rise as previously indi- cated, it is recommended a 3.5% increase be applied to the 1985 Road Unit Charge. Table 2 shows projected revenues for Major Street Construction which ' recommends an increase to the road unit charge from $280 per residential unit for 1985 to $290 per residential unit for 1986. mens v n ' REVENUE FOR MAJOR STREET ' 1986-2005 (20 years) Revenue MSA Funds $11,800,000 Estimated Assessments 9,791,000 Road Unit Charge 3,770,000 ' ($290/unit x 20 yrs x 650 unit/yr) TOTAL REVENUE FOR EAGAN $25,361,000 ' in 1 2 revenues ex- The information presented Tables and shows anticipated ceed expenditures by 2.7%. Due to the difficulty in not only estimating the amount of revenues, but also the expenditures, it is felt a slight surplus to - 12 - 'E -2487d I 1 the revenue side is desirable. Therefore, it is recommended the road unit charge for 1986 be increased by $10/unit to $290/unit based on the Road Unit Equivalency Table presented in Table 3. ' TABLE 3 ROAD UNIT EQUIVALENCY TABLE Zoning ' R-1, R-2, R-3 R-4 ' Comm./Ind. New Comm./Ind. Bldg. Additions 1 1 11 1 1 Road Units 1.0/residential unit 0.8/residential unit 3.0/acre 3.0/acre with acreage as determined by building inspector. One remaining source of revenue received by the City of Eagan for streets is the Major Street Levy. The Major Street Levy is formerly known as County Turnback Funds. The amount of funds obtained from this tax levy in recent years is approximately $150,000 to $170,000 per year. As recommended in pre- vious sewer and water rate studies, the Major Street Levy Funds can be used to finance the City's responsibility for reconstruction/repair projects and the annual seal coating maintenance program. B. EQUIVALENT ZONING The Eagan assessment policy as it relates to construction of major streets is that the abutting property be assessed for the benefit received based on its zoning classification. Three zoning classifications are utilized in de- termining the equivalent assessment rate for a given street width and design section. Also included with the construction of most major streets is a con- crete or bituminous trailway. Eagan assessment policy as it relates to trail - ways is that certain zoning classifications are assessed for these improve- ' E -2487d 1 - 13 - I 1 1 11 1 1 ments. Summarized below is the 1985 assessment rates in conjunction with the proposed 1986 assessment rates. A review of bid unit prices from 1984 to 1985 in the City of Eagan show that costs associated with street construction have experienced only a slight increase through that period. However, similar to utility construction overall project costs associated with street construction have also increased dramatically which are not reflected in commonly bid items. Therefore, it is recommended an increase of 4% be added to the 1985 Equivalent Assessment Rates for street construction in the City of Eagan for 1986. Included on the following pages are the bid unit prices for each pay item used in determining the assessment rate for each zoning classification in 1986. A summary of each of the equivalent proposed assessment rates for 1986 are listed below: 1985 1984 Proposed Percent Rate/F.F. Rate/F.F. Increase STREET: Residential Equivalent (32' wide) $32.45 $33.75 +4.0% Multiple Equivalent (44' wide) $60.92 $63.36 +4.0% Commercial/Industrial Equivalent (52' wide) $75.43 $78.45 +4.0% TRAILWAY (Bituminous or Concrete) $11.36 $11.81 +4.0% 1 1 1 1 ' E -2487d - 14 - I 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 CALCULATION FOR EQUIVALENT ASSESSMENT RATES A) STREET Cu.yds. Excavation (50% of total) @ $1.20/cu.yd. $14.31 a) Residential Equivalent Rate (32' wide street) Aggregate Base Cl. 5 (10" Thick) @ $7.00/ton 10.85 0.41 Ton Rate F.F. 5.95 Cu.yds. Excavation (25% of total) $1.19/cu.yd. $ 7.08 0.73 Ton Aggregate base Cl. 5, (6" Thick) @ $7.00/ton 5.11 0.16 Ton Base course mixture, (1�" Thick) 2331 @ $11.50/tone 1.84 0.16 Ton Wear course mixture, (112" Thick) 2341 @ $12.50/ton 2.00 0.0176 Ton Bituminous mat'l. for mixture @ $210.00/ton 3.70 0.086 Gals. Bituminous mat'l. for tack coat @ $1.00/gal. 0.09 1 Lin.ft. Surmountable concrete curb & gutter @ $4.10/lin.ft. 4.10 0.00069 Acre Restoration @ $1,160.00/acre 0.80 $48.74 $24.72 14.62 +5% Contingencies 1.24 $63.36 $25.96 +30% Legal, Engrng., Admin. & Bond Interest 7.79 TOTAL........................................... $33.75 b) Multiple Equivalent Rate (44' wide street) 11.90 Cu.yds. Excavation (50% of total) @ $1.20/cu.yd. $14.31 1.55 Ton Aggregate Base Cl. 5 (10" Thick) @ $7.00/ton 10.85 0.41 Ton Base course mixture (3" Thick) 2331 @ $11.50/ton 4.72 0.21 Ton Wear course mixture (1'" Thick) 2341 @ $12.50/ton 2.63 0.0321 Ton Bituminous mat'l. for mixture @ $210.00/ton 6.74 0.114 Gals. Bituminous mat'l. for tack coat @ $1.00/gal. 0.11 1.0 Lin.ft. B618 concrete curb & gutter @ $6.00/lin.ft. 6.00 0.00091 Acre Restoration @ $1,160.00/acre 1.06 Total $46.42 +5% Contingencies 2.32 $48.74 +30% Legal, Engrng., Admin. & Bond Interest 14.62 TOTAL.......................................... $63.36 1 ' E -2487d 1 - 15 - c) Commercial/Industrial Equivalent Rate (52' wide street) B) TRAILWAY (Concrete or Bituminous) 1 Lin.ft. Granular base & surfacing @ $8.65/lin.ft. $ 8.65 Total $ 8.65 +5% Contingencies 0.43 $ 9.08 +30% Legal, Engrng., Admin. & Bond Interest 2.73 TOTAL ........................................... $11.81 - 16 - E -2487d Rate/F. F. 12.03 Cu.yds. Excavation (50% of total) @ $1.20/cu.yd. $14.43 2.18 Ton Aggregate Base Cl. 5 (12" thick) @ $7.00/ton 15.26 0.65 Ton Base course mixture (4" Thick), 2331 @ $11.50/ton 7.48 0.25 Ton Wear course mixture (1'2" Thick), 2341 @ $12.50/ton 3.13 0.0463 Ton Bituminous mat'l. for mixture @ $210.00/ton 9.72 0.132 Gals. Bituminous mat'l. for tack coat @ $1.00/gal. 0.13 1.0 Lin.ft. B618 concrete curb & gutter @ $6.00/lin.ft. 6.00 0.00115 Acre Restoration @ $1,160.00/acre 1.33 Total $57.48 +5% Contingencies 2.87 $60.35 +30% Legal, Engrng., Admin. & Bond Interest 18.10 TOTAL ........................................... $78.45 B) TRAILWAY (Concrete or Bituminous) 1 Lin.ft. Granular base & surfacing @ $8.65/lin.ft. $ 8.65 Total $ 8.65 +5% Contingencies 0.43 $ 9.08 +30% Legal, Engrng., Admin. & Bond Interest 2.73 TOTAL ........................................... $11.81 - 16 - E -2487d I 1 11 1 C. LATERAL STORM SEWER The Eagan assessment policy for lateral storm sewer within major streets is that the benefited property be assessed. However, included as part of all street construction is a certain amount of lateral storm sewer to convey drainage within that street. Therefore, included herein is a lateral storm sewer equivalent assessment rate per front foot which is based on a lateral storm sewer design within street right-of-way. Summarized herein is the method of determining the lateral storm sewer equivalent assessment rate which does not recommend an increase from the 1985 rate to the 1986 rate. LATERAL STORM SEWER EQUIVALENT ASSESSMENT RATE 0.2 Lin.ft RCP storm sewer pipe @ $25.00/Lin.ft. 0.001 Each Storm manhole @ $850.00/each 0.0015 Each Catch basin @ $750.00/each 0.2 Lin.ft. Mechanical trench compaction @ $1.00/lin.ft. 1 1 1 ' E -2487d +5% Contingencies +30% Legal, Engrng., Admin. 6 Bond Interest TOTAL........................................... - 17 - Rate/F.F. $ 5.00 0.85 1.13 0.20 $ 7.18 $ 0.36 $ 7.54 2.26 $ 9.80 SUMMARY TRUNK ASSESSMENTS I. UTILITY ASSESSMENT TRUNK AREA II. UTILITY ASSESSMENT LATERAL BENEFIT FROM TRUNK Proposed 1986 Rates Lateral Benefit from Trunk Sanitary Sewer $28.69/centerline ft. Lateral Benefit from Trunk Water Main, Single Family $23.75/centerline ft. Multi -Family Comm/Ind. $39.14/centerline ft. III. STREET Proposed 1986 Rates A. Road User Charge $290/residential unit B. Equivalent Zoning STREET - Residential Equivalent (32') $33.75/F.F. Multiple Equivalent (44') $63.36/F.F. Commercial/Industrial Equivalent (52') $78.45/F.F. TRAILWAY (Concrete or Bituminous) $11.81/F.F. C. Lateral Storm Sewer Equivalent Assessment Rate $ 9.80/F.F. (1) For accounting purposes Main Oversizing shall be $1,190/acre and Water Supply and Storage shall be $1,830/acre. - 18 - E -2487d Proposed 1986 Rates Trunk Sanitary Unplatted $1,240/Ac. Sewer Oversize Platted Res. $595/lot Trunk Water Main Agricultural or $1,190/Ac. Oversize Residential $570/lot Water Supply & Single Family $500/lot Storage Multi -Family $400/Unit Water Supply & Storage & Main Oversizing Comm. & Ind. $3,020/Ac. Trunk Storm Sewer Single Family $0.050/s.f. Oversize Multi -Family $0.064/s.f. Comm. & Ind. $0.075/s.f. II. UTILITY ASSESSMENT LATERAL BENEFIT FROM TRUNK Proposed 1986 Rates Lateral Benefit from Trunk Sanitary Sewer $28.69/centerline ft. Lateral Benefit from Trunk Water Main, Single Family $23.75/centerline ft. Multi -Family Comm/Ind. $39.14/centerline ft. III. STREET Proposed 1986 Rates A. Road User Charge $290/residential unit B. Equivalent Zoning STREET - Residential Equivalent (32') $33.75/F.F. Multiple Equivalent (44') $63.36/F.F. Commercial/Industrial Equivalent (52') $78.45/F.F. TRAILWAY (Concrete or Bituminous) $11.81/F.F. C. Lateral Storm Sewer Equivalent Assessment Rate $ 9.80/F.F. (1) For accounting purposes Main Oversizing shall be $1,190/acre and Water Supply and Storage shall be $1,830/acre. - 18 - E -2487d APPENDIX A MAJOR STREET CONSTRUCTION - 19 - 2487d Proj. Length Estimated Eagan Cost Miles Rate/Mile Proj. Cost (45% Proj.Cost) DAKOTA COUNTY Pilot Knob Rd. - Duckwood Dr. to Co. Rd. 30 1.83 $868,000 $1,588,440 $ 714,800 Pilot Knob Rd. - Co. Rd. 30 to Apple Valley 2.0 868,000 1,736,000 781,200 Co. Rd. 30 - Johnny Cake to T.H. #3 3.86 868,000 3,350,480 1,507,720 Cliff Rd. - Cedar to Pilot Knob (Except I -35E) 1.5 868,000 1,302,000 585,900 Cliff Rd. - Pilot Knob to T.H. #3 2.9 868,000 2,517,200 1,132,740 Lexington Ave. - '4 mi. N. Co. Rd. 30 to Yankee Doodle 1.8 868,000 1,562,400 703,080 Lone Oak Rd. - T.H. #13 to T.H. #55 (Except I -35E) 2.1 868,000 1,822,800 820,260 Lone Oak Rd. - T.H. #55 to Inver Grove Heights. 1.0 868,000 868,000 390,600 Yankee Doodle - T.H. #13 to T.H. #49 3.1 868,000 2,690,800 1,210,860 Dodd Rd. - Co. Rd. #30 to Wescott Rd. 1.2 868,000 1,041,600 468,720 $8,315,880 EAGAN MUNICIPAL STATE AID Wescott Rd. - T.H. 149 to Elrene Rd. 1.0 $500,760 $ 500,760 Deerwood - I -35E to Pilot Knob 0.5 868,000 434,000 Dodd Rd. - Co. Rd. 30 to Cliff 1.2 500,760 600,910 Blackhawk Rd. - Co. Rd. 30 to T.H. #13 1.9 500,760 951,440 Rahn Rd. - Beau D Rue to Shale Lane 1.3 500,760 650,990 Wilderness Run Rd. - Lexington to Dodd Rd. 1.3 500,760 650,990 Wescott Hills Dr. - Wescott Rd. to Wilderness Run 1.7 868,000 1,475,600 Johnny Cake - Woodgate to Co. Rd. 1130 0.3 500,760 150,230 - 19 - 2487d Proj. Length Estimated Eagan Cost Miles Rate/Mile Proj. Cost (45i Proj.Cost) EAGAN MUNICIPAL STATE AID - Continued Johnny Cake - Co. Rd. 30 to Deerwood 0.6 868,000 520,800 Deerwood - I -35E to Pilot Knob 0.5 868,000 434,000 Wescott Rd. - Lexington to Elrene 1.2 868,000 1,041,600 Covington Ln. - Beacon'Hills to Co. Rd. 32 0.5 868,000 q. 434,000 Nicols Rd. - Co. Rd. 32 to Cedarvale Blvd. 1.6 868,000 1,388,800 $9,234,120 EAGAN NON STATE AID COLLECTOR Elrene Rd. - Yankee Doodle to Wescott 1.1 $500,760 $ 550,840 Wilderness Run Rd. - W. of Lexington 0.2 500,760 100,150 Thomas Lk. Rd. - Co. Rd. 30 to Deerwood 0.6 868,000 520,800 Northview Park Rd. - Lexington to Dodd 1.6 868,000 1,388,800 Wescott Hills Dr. -'Wescott to Yankee Doodle 1.0 868,000 868,000 Center Section 16 - Blue Cross to Federal Drive 1.4 868,000 1,215,200 Section 1 - East and West 0.5 500,760 250,380 Denmark - In Section 10 0.5 500,760 250,380 Elrene Road - Wescott to Dodd Road 0.8 868,000 694,400 Section 29, SW 3t - Rahn Rd. to Blackhawk Rd. 0.7 500,760 350,530 Dodd Road - Cliff Rd. to Apple Valley 1.1 868,000 954,800 $7,144,280 2487d - 20 - PHONE 454.8100 VILLAGE OF EAGAN 3790 PILOT KNOB ROAD EAGAN. MINNESOTA 55122 May 10, 1973 Mr. E. E. Parranto Parranto Realty Inc. 1200 Commerce Building St. Paul, Minnesota 55102 RE: Lot 6 Block 3, Effress Addition Dear Mr. Parranto: Your request to have the Sherman Court Sewer and Water Lateral Assessments in the amount of $3320.00 removed from the above lot was given careful consideration. Due to the fact that this is an ex- tremely large lot which may be subdivided in the future, we feel there definitely is a benefit to this lot. Assessments are levied on a parcel of property according to the benefit derived and, therefore, we feel we cannot deviate from our assessment.policy and shift this assessment to the other lots on Sherman Court as their benefit wouldn't be that much greater. Any agreement you may hove had with the purchaser regarding the fact that this Lot was assessed both on Pilot Knob Road and Sherman Court is strictly private and the Village cannot become involved. We are enclosing a copy of a previous letter listing the assess- ments on this lot. Very truly yours Q�j 4R (Mrs.) Alyce Bolke Clerk-Teeasurer Encl. CC: Association of American Cereal Chemists AB:ck VI May 14, 1973 Mr. Paul Hauge 3908 Sibley Memorial St. Paul, Minnesota Dear PaulY received from Alice worth of assessments Highway 55122 realtors • appraisers • consultants commerce building aul, minnesota 55101 shone (612) 224-1341 ential sales/2767 hwy,55/454-1341 I enclose a copy of a letter that I Bolke regarding our request to remove 3,320. from Lot 6, Block 3, Effress Addition. If you will look at the plat,of Effress Addition, you will see that their total frontage on the culdusac is less than 10% of the total frontage available. Therefore, we feel that it should be removed entirely. In addition to this, if you will check the minutes of the meeting on the granting of a permit to American Cereal Chemists, one of the consideration was that Effress would provide a special sewer stub down County Road 31 to serve Lot 6. This was done for them and the assessments were assumed by Cereal Chemists. It seems to us unfair that they should be saddled with both assessments. If there is a legal problem invblved, I would like to meet with you together with Honnen Weiss, attorney for Effress to solve the matter. Very truly yours, Ada ;E. Parranto`'o EEP/nd encl. �, R neo NO C Q 49 II i tl _ia :ra uv nnne �ocn-nrc anmrr May 29, 1973 Mr. E. E. Parranto Parranto Brothers, Inc. 1220 Commerce Building St. Paul, MN 55101 RE: Eagan - Effress Addition Assessments Dear Pete: %'UD14QU vrgJ HOUAJH Z C1Y-AJ.IATF, aw,roT areQ ,ones urTTn2 sor-ca n'roa;rvniM ,auoseaxxrM uxe.r.rnra.M nuva.H .fl .mn9 rn Wl.a soao�p The Eagan Assessment Committee on May 23rd reviewed your request of May 14th concerning removing $3,320.00 worth of assessments on Lot 6, Block 3, Effress Addition and imposing the assessment on other lots not owned by American Cereal Chemists. It was the Assessment Committee recommendation to the Council that no shift in assewsments take place because it appeared to be an agreement between American Cereal Chumists and the developer on a private basis and such a shift would not be Permitted. If such an understanding was reached it would seem that the only way a change could take place would be to pay off the assessment on the American Cereal Chemists property in full. Very truly yours, Paul H. Hauge PHH:kw OctObor 199 1972 Edward Parranto 1202 Co®oroe Building St.Poul, MN V Dear Petoi Following is the breakdown of Lot 6 Bloch 30 Tffroso Addition which you requeatode PILOT KNOB ASSESSFI6 V Water Lateral, 200° at 04.60 par foot o 8920,00 Sower Lateral, 200° at 86,90 ger foot o 81380.00 Pair of Sorvico Stubo 8450.00 SIMM COM Water Lateral, 2000 at 06.00 par. 8mat3-. 81200.00 Sower Lateral, 2000 at 88.35 p= foot 81670.00 Pair of servico stubo 8450.00 Tho ontiro lot has storm donor of $1949.09 Tho orator axon in tho acount of 3 6 TOTAL ASSESSMM FOR LO, `' $9415.59 Call mo if you nood additional inforntion. J SPECIAL, ASSESSMENT DEPARTMENT Ann Oooro Assosomant Clerk a AGENDA Village of Fagan Assessment Committee October 23, 1973 6:30 p.m. 1. Consideration of method of assessment for water service to Carl Lange property in Section 22. 2. Consideration of assessment for James Lel-ov=?or sewer lateral, Section 8. L_; 3. Review Metro Sewer Board request for re�vction in assess- ment for Camanche Road and Kennebec Drive. 4. Consideration of easement requirements inn--Cedarvale area on Texaco property. io-a3-? -s i i0 WE AGF NDA Village of Fagan Assessment Committee October 23, 1973 6:30 p.m. 1. Consideration of method of assessment for water service to Carl Lange property in Section 22. 2. Consideration of assessment for James Lemke for sewer lateral, Section S. 3. Review Metro Sewer Board renuest for reduction in assess— ment for Camanche Road and Kennebec Drive. 4. Consideration of easement requirements ii, -tiarvale area on Texaco property. i MINUTES OF A SPECIAL ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE MEETING EAGAN, MINNESOTA JANUARY 16, 1985 A regular meeting of the Special Assessment Committee was held at the Eagan Municipal Center at 4:30 p.m. on January 16, 1986. Those present were Chairman Don Knight, Members Dale Vogt and Bill Rydrich, Mayor Bea Blomquist and Councilman Tom Egan. Absent was member Garrett Mulrooney. Also present were Public Works Director Tom Colbert and City Attorney Paul Hauge. /,[ ;17:I Vogt moved, Egan seconded the motion to approve the Agenda as presented. All voted yes. FRANCIS C. FRANZ 6 ANNA S. HEUER PROPERTY - PROJECT #372 Tom Colbert described the concerns of the property owners consisting of Francis C. Franz and Anna S. Heuer on the south side of Deerwooa Drive, objecting to proposed assessments associated with the recent completion of Deerwood Drive from Riverton Avenue to the east side of I -35E. The upgrading was performed under Project #372 by MnDOT through a Cost Participation Agreement with the City, with the majority of the costs paid by the Minnesota Department of Transportation, and a portion paid by the City. The Assessment Committee at its meeting in October 1985 received the objections and requested further information from the staff. The configuration, topography and setback restrictions were considered to be unique to the parcel, noting that the westerly parcel on the south Side of Deerwooa Drive and the easterly parcel on the north side of Deerw000 Drive, owned by Francis Franz should, according to Mr. Colbert's recommendation, receive credits toward the proposed assessments for lateral purposes and recommended a 300 foot reduction on the easterly parcel and 100 feet along the westerly parcel. In addition, there was discussion concerning proposed Sidewalk Trailway Policy #86-1 submitted by the staff. Member Ryarich questioned whether it would be permissible to assess a residential equivalent on Deerwood Drive if there is no direct access allowed. There was discussion concerning the 1978 Major Street Policy and also Mr. Colbert reviewed the Johnny Cake Ridge Road project commenced in 1976. It appeared that the Johnny Cake Ridge project was similar to the Deerwood Drive improvements and indicated that 50% of the Johnny Cake Ridge Road project was paid by the State and 50% from MSAS funds, with no assessments to adjacent property owners, with the understanding that all easements would be granted by the affected property owners. 1 Assessment Committee Minutes January 16, 1986 It was noted further that there was uncertainty as to development of the adjoining land on Deerwood and that it was assumed that access would be restricted with direct driveways prohibited. - Attorney Pat Farrell appeared on behalf of Mr. Franz and stated that because of the residual configuration of the various parcels of the Franz property, that it may be impractical to levy assessments, claiming there were no benefits against the property for sidewalk and street purposes. He argued there were no reasonable benefits to the property, and further, that the majority of the funds were federal funds used to install improvements with a small amount of City funding. It was also indicated that Mr. Franz has built a single family home on the property and therefore some benefit resulted. It was suggested that there would possibly be a benefit from the assessments for the single family home, and further, that sidewalks could be assessed depending upon the future use of the property. A representative of Mrs. Heuer was present and stated that the Heuer property is vacant and undeveloped. There was further discussion concerning proposed assessment for street and sidewalk purposes on all benefited properties on both the north and south side of Deerwood Drive. Egan then moved, Blomquist seconded the motion to recommend assessing the Francis Franz property for single family use only, with future assessments against the property based upon future uses including the sidewalk and trailway which would comply with the assessment policy at the time of future development; further, that the staff be directed to prepare a policy implementing the proposed recommendations of the Committee. All voted in favor. SIDEWALK AND TRAILWAY POLICY Rydrich moved, Egan seconded the motion to recommend adoption of the Trailway and Sidewalk Policy #86-1 submitted by the staff and recommend that the City Council approve it. All members voted yes. WILLARD BERFELZ - PROJECT #447 - LONE OAK ADDITION On August 6, 1985, a public hearing was held for the installation of trunk watermain along Highway #149 from Yankee Doodle Road to Trunk Highway #55. It was noted the Berfelz property is used as a single family residence but is zoned Light Industrial. Mr. Colbert recommended to the Committee that conditioned upon the owner executing an agreement for Special Assessment Policy #82-2, the staff recommended the rate be reduced to an Agricultural - Single Family rate and in addition, that the assessable footage be reduced to 135 feet for Lot 12, Auditor's Subdivision No. 38. Mr. and Mrs. Berfelz were present and stated that they also own Parcel 010-28 and Colbert stated that the same recommendation would apply to that parcel, with the understanding that both parcels are classified as homestead by the County Assessor. Mr. and Mrs. Berfelz had no objection to the proposed recommendation and upon motion by Egan, seconded Vogt, it was recommended to the City Council that the staff recommendation be adopted, including Parcel 010-28 and in the event that the property has been previously assessed for the same improvements, that no assessment be levied by the City Council. Staff was requested to investigate the statement of Mr. Berfelz that the property had been assessed for the same purpose at an earlier time. All voted yes. 2 Assessment Committee Minutes January 16, 1986 DON SANDBERG - PROJECT #427 - YANKEE DOODLE ROAD The next request for reconsideration of proposed assessments came from Don Sandberg, property owner on the south side of Yankee Doodle Road. The improvement provides for the upgrading of Yankee Doodle Road from a present rural ditch section to a four lane road with concrete curb and gutter and related storm sewer facilities. Mr. Sandberg's property contains 390 feet of frontage with a single family homestead. A 7.5 acre parcel is hampered by a protective wetland incorporated in the middle one-third of his property and Mr. Colbert recommended that the property be assessed for a comparable single family residential frontage according to City policy under the following conditions: 1. That the parcel be unplatted. 2. That the parcel shall have a net area of 3 acres, excluding all public and dedicated right-of-way ponaing easements. 3. That the parcel have a minimum 200 foot frontage on the public right- of-way where the connection is being made. Mr. Sandberg's property qualified, and therefore it was recommended that the assessment be reduced to a comparable single family frontage of 100 feet and that the additional assessments associated with the remaining frontage be assessed at the time of the rezoning of the development of any part or all of the balance of the property. Mr. Sandberg was present and had no objections to the recommendation. Egan moved, Vogt seconded the motion to recommend approval of the staff recommendation and forward it to the City Council. All members voted affirmatively. YD ASSOCIATES - PROJECT #427 - YANKEE DOODLE ROAD The Committee then considered a request of YD Associates under Project #427 regarding street and storm sewer improvements on Yankee Doodle Road to review the proposed assessments against the property. Mr.Colbert discussed the proposed assessments and Vance Grannie, Sr. appeared on behalf of the owners, objecting to the proposed assessments. He indicated that there was not adequate benefit, from the improvements, to justify the assessments. Mr. Colbert pointed out that there is a hazardous intersection at Coachman Road, there—is—lack-of-abi-lity-for-through-traffic-and-the-upgrading-of-the-street will improve the value of the adjacent property. No specific action was taken, noting that the assessments will not be levied until 1987 and Mr. Grannis indicated that an appraisal will be submitted within the next few months, to the City. 3 Assessment Committee Minutes January 16, 1986 PATRICK McCARTHY - PROJECT #404 - LEXINGTON AVENUE TRUNK WATER MAIN The objections of Patrick McCarthy were next brought to the assessment committee pertaining to the assessments associated with the trunk water main along Lexington Avenue. Mr. Colbert reviewed with the committee members the projected assessments and stated that a letter from Arnold Kempe, the attorney for the owner, requesting a continuance, had been submitted to his office. After discussion, Vogt moved, Egan seconded the motion to continue consideration of the objections, including Project #411, Birch Park Addition trunk storm sewer, until the next meeting of the assessment committee, noting that the applicant was not present. All members voted yea. DON VOGTMAN - PROJECT #411 - SKOVDALE The objections of Don Vogtman to the proposed trunk storm sewer assessments under Project #411 consisting of the Birch Park Addition/Patrick Eagan Park area were brought to the committee by Mr. Colbert. The Public Works Director detailed the City's position ana recommended that due to the recent building placed on the property eliminating the previous low drainage basin and redirecting the drainage flow that the storm sewer system serviced by Project #411, it's the staff's recommendation that the property be determined benefited by the improvement and that the assessment as proposed be reaffirmed. Don Vogtman was present and read a statement in opposition, including the fact that his land should be treated similar to the adjacent lots which receive about 56% credit, based, upon the large -lot allowance. He stated that his lana is serving as a temporary ponaing area and it is fairly heavily wooded, offering absorption qualities, ana further that the benefit is . not in proportion to the proposed assessments. Committee members noted that the 75 foot frontage at present will be reducea at the time of Pilot Knob Road widening, with the balance of about 60 feet for access from Deerwooa Drive to the northerly portion. Noting that Mr. Vogtman's property includes Lot 7 and the north half of Lot 6, Block 1, Skovaale, and that access to it for development would come from Deerwood Drive, Blomquist moved, Egan secondea the motion to recommend to the City Council that it allow a large -lot policy credit for the two lots, because of the fact that the parcels are platted, the fact that the other lots within Skovaale have received the large -lot credit, that all of Skovdale Addition was platted at one time and it would penalize the Vogtman property if it was not permitted; but in the event that the two parcels are divided into more than two single family lots, that the Council then may reconsider the assessments ana—increase—the—amount of -the -trunk -storm -sewer -assessments -at -that -time - A11 members votea yea. 4 Assessment Committee Minutes January 16, 1986 VICTOR STAFF - PROJECT #411 - SKOVDALE 2ND ADDITION The next objection brought before the Committee consisted of those from Mr. and Mrs. Victor Staff covering Lot 5, Block 1, Skovdale 2nd Addition, under Project #411, Birch Park Addition/Patrick Eagan Park trunk storm sewer. At the September 19, 1985 final assessment hearing before the City Council, Darrel Baska, the attorney for Mr. and Mrs. Staff, submitted a written Notice of Appeal and objected to the assessments. Mr. Baska was present and indicated that the level of the adjacent pond had increased and caused a portion of the Staff property to be lost and that an action has been commenced against the City for inverse condemnation. Negotiations have taken place for settlement of the action. Mr. Colbert noted that the staff had recommended a deduct for the area covered by water, and had adopted the large -lot formula with the balance of the lot assessed for storm sewer purposes. It was proposed the assessment be based on the area above the easement level of 830 feet. Egan moved, Blomquist seconded the motion to recommend to the City Council that it levy assessments for storm sewer purposes above the 830 foot level, including dedication of the easement from the Staffs and an acceptable settlement of the inverse condemnation action brought against the City. All voted yes. RONALD BOYLE - PROJECT #411 - BIRCH PARR ADDITION The objections from Mr. and Mrs. Ronald Boyle of Deerwood Drive to storm sewer assessments against their property were next considered by the Committee. Mr. Colbert reviewed the objections and noted that they were comparable to the Bergin, Caponi and Rooney objections, all of whose property drains into JP -8. He stated that JP -8 does.not have an outlet at the present time, but that the rise in the level of the pond will require interconnections within a very short period of time. Blomquist moved, Egan seconded the motion to recommend approval of the staff's recommendation that the assessment against the parcel be deferred until the property is directly benefited due to the installation of outlets in Pond JP -8. All voted yes. LILLIAN McCARTHY - PROJECT #411 BIRCH PARE ADDITION/PATRICK EAGAN PARR TRUNK STORM SEWER Mr. Colbert then brought before the Committee the objections of Lillian McCarthy, an owner on Lexington Avenue objecting to the trunk storm sewer assessments-under-Project-#41-1—The-parcel-incorporates-3.91-acres with --only 1.5 acres assessed at the Agricultural/Single Family rate, due to the large - lot credit proposed to be assessed against the property. There was no appearance on behalf of Ms. McCarthy. After discussion, Egan moved, Vogt seconded the motion to recommend that the proposed assessments with large -lot credit against the Lillian McCarthy property be approved by the City Council. All voted in favor. 5 Assessment Committee Minutes January 16, 1986 PARKLAND - SPECIAL ASSESSMENT POLICY - HOLLAND LAKE AREA A memorandum prepared by Tom Colbert was discussed by the members dated January 16, 1986 regarding proposed assessments for storm sewer improvements in the Holland Lake/Cliff Road area. He stated the estimated cost of the major storm sewer project is approximately $900,000.00, but that a large portion of the acreage, approximately 429 acres, consisting of County Park, would result in a proposed assessment of approximately $300,000.00 at the Agricultural/Single Family Residential rate. Preliminary discussion has been held with Dakota County representatives, indicating that they do not have the resources available to finance the estimated $300,000.00 and because of the need to negotiate the assessments, there was concern by Committee members that the City should continue to negotiate for contribution from the County. There were also questions about improvements that would undoubtedly be installed in the park, including park buildings, parking lots, etc. which would add to the storm sewer runoff. The Committee recommended an Ordinance be prepared to control the construction of improvements on public property without City approval. Egan moved, Vogt seconded the motion that the Committee be on record recommending to the City Council that it adopt a policy providing for one-half residential equivalent assessments against the County Park property for trunk storm sewer improvements, with the understanding that the City can impose restrictions on development, and in the event that future development of the park property takes place, that additional trunk storm sewer assessments could be levied against the benefited property. All members voted in favor. ADJOURNMENT Upon motion duly made and seconded, the meeting adjourned at 7:55 p.m. All voted yes. PHH 6 MINUTES OF A SPECIAL "SESSMEN--T-GGM-FT STING EAGAN, MINNESOTA JANUARY 16, 1985 A regular meeting of the Special Assessment Committee was held at the Eagan Municipal Center at 4:30 p.m. on -oJaua 1 , 1986. Those resent were Chairman Don Knight, Members Dale Vogt, Mayor lomquia Councilman Tom Egan r1c . Absent was member Garrett Mulrooney. Also present were Public Works Director Tom Colbert and City Attorney Paul Hauge. AGENDA Vogt moved, Egan seconded the motion to approve the Agenda as presented. All voted yes. FRANCIS C. FRANZ & ANNA S. HEUER PROPERTY - PROJECT #372 Tom Colbert described the concerns of the property owners consisting of Francis C. Franz and Anna S. Heuer on the south side of Deerwood Drive, objecting to proposed assessments associated with the recent completion of Deerwood Drive from Riverton Avenue to the east side of I -35E. The upgrading was performed under Project #372 by MnDOT through ost Participation Agreement with the City, with the majority of the costs paid by the S` ee .,.. r6.b « Minnesota Department of Transportation a portion paid by the City. The Assessment Committee at its meeting in October 1985 received the objections and requested further information from the staff. The configuration, topography and setback restrictions were considered to be unique to the parcel, noting that the westerly parcel on the south side of Deerwood Drive and the easterly parcel on the north side of Deerwood Drive, owned by Francis Franz should, according to Mr. Colbert's recommendation, receive credits toward the proposed assessments for lateral purposes and recommended a 300 foot reduction on the easterly parcel and 100 feet along the westerly parcel. In addition, there was discussion concerning t proposed Sidewalk Trailway Policy #86-1 submitted by the staff. Member Rydrich questioned k whether it would be permissible to assessCresidential equivalent on Deerwood A Drive if there is no direct access allowed. There was discussion concerning the 1978 Major Street Policy and also Mr. Colbert reviewed the Johnny Cake Ridge Road project commenced in 1976. It appeared that the Johnny Cake Ridge project was similar to the Deerwood Drive improvements and indicated that 50% of the Johnny Cake Ridge Road project was paid by the State and 50% from MSAS funds, with no assessments to adjacent property owners, with the understanding that all easements would be granted by the affected property owners. It was noted further that there was uncertainty Oir-1 lopment of the adjoining land on Deerwood and that it was assumed that t e access would be' restricted with direct driveways prohibited. Attorney Pat Farrell appeared on behalf of Mr. Franz and stated that because of the residual configuration of the various parcels of the Franz property, that it may be impractical to levy assessments, claiming there were no benefits against the '/property for sidewalk and street purposes. lAr ^� � �- •-• •, �e argued there were no reasonable benefits to the property, and further, that the J majority of the funds were federal funds ✓ used to install improvements,/with a vj(ry small amount of City funding. It was also indicated that Mr. Fran has built a single family home on the property and therefore some benefit resulted. It was suggested that there would possibly be a benefit from the assessments for the single family home, and further, that sidewalks could be assessed depending upon the future use of the pro ert n - g O R1\ydrich move, gan seconded the motion�to�adopt� the 'lrai`iway and Sidewalk ` Policy #86-1 submitted by the staff and recommend that the City Council approve it. All members voted yes. .TI -0 ---------- . C16 � A representative of Mrs. Heuer was present and stated that th fpe roperty is vacant and undeveloped. There was further discussion concerning proposed assessment for street and sidewalk purposes on all benefited properties on both the north and south sid of De rwood Drive. Egan then moved, Blomquist seconded the motion t asses4Vthe Francis Franz property for tfe single family use only, with future assessments against the property based upon future uses r including the sidewalk and trailway which would comply with thepolicy0 `s at the time of th,( future development; further, that the staff be directed to prepare a policy implementing the proposed recommendations of the Committee. All voted in favor. � I WILLARD BERFELZ - PROJECT $447 - LONE OAR ADDITION On August 6, 1985, a public hearing was held for the installation of trunk watermain along Highway 4149 from Yankee Doodle Road to Trunk Highway #55. It was noted the Berfelz property is used as a single family residence but is zoned Light Industrial. Mr. Colbert recommended to the Committee that conditioned upon the owner executing an agreement for Special Assessment Policy #82-2, the staff recommended the rate be reduced to an Agricultural - Single Family rate and in addition, that the assessable footage be reduced to 135 feet for Lot 12, Auditor's Subdivision No. 38. Mr. and Mrs. Berfelz were present and stated that they also own Parcel 010-28 and Colbert stated that the same recommendation would apply to that parcel, with the understanding that both parcels are classified as homestead by the County Assessor. Mr, and Mrs. Berfelz had no objection to the proposed recommendation and upon motion by Egan, seconded Vogt, it was recommended to the City Council that the staff recommendation be adopted, including Parcel 010-28 and in the event that the property has been previously assessed for the same improvements, that no assessment be levied by the City Council. Staff was requested to investigate F the statement of Mr. Berfelz that the property had been assessed for the same purpose at an earlier time. Ail voted yes. DON SANDBERG - PROJECT 4427 - YANKEE DOODLE ROAD The next request for reconsideration of proposed assessments came from Don Sandberg, property owner on the south side of Yankee Doodle Road. The improvement provides for the upgrading of Yankee Doodle Road from a present rural ditch section to a four lane road with concrete curb and gutter and related storm sewer facilities. Mr. Sandberg's property contains 390 feet of frontage with a single family homestead. A 7.5 acre parcel is hampered by a protective wetland incorporated in the middle one-third of his property and Mr. Colbert recommended that the property be assessed for a comparable single family residential frontage according to City policy under the following conditions: 1. That the parcel be unplatted. 2. That the parcel shall have a net area of 3 acres, excluding all public and dedicated right-of-way ponding easements. 3. That the parcel have a minimum 200 foot frontage on the public right- of-way where the connection is being made. Mr. Sandberg's property qualified, and therefore it was recommended that the assessment be reduced to a comparable single family frontage of 100 feet and that the additional assessments associated with the remaining frontage be assessed at the time of the rezoning of the development of any part or all of the balance of the property. Mr. Sandberg was present and had no objections to the recommendation. Egan moved, Vogt seconded the motion to recommend approval of the staff recommendation and forward it to the City Council. All members voted affirmatively. YD ASSOCIATES - PROJECT 4427 - YANKEE DOODLE ROAD 4 The Committee then considered a request of YD Associates under Project 46427 regarding street and storm sewer improvements on Yankee Doodle Road to review the proposed assessments against the property. Mr. Colbert discussed the proposed assessment and Vance Grannis, Sr. appeared on behalf of the owners, objecting to the proposed assessments. He indicated that there was not adequate benefit the improvements, to justify the assessments. Mr. Colbert pointed o that there is a hazardous intersection at Coachman Road, there is lack of ability for through -traffic and the upgrading of the street will improve the value of the adjacent property. No specific action was taken, noting that the assessments will not be levied until 1987 and Mr. Grannis indicated that an appraisal will be submitted within the next few months, to the City. PATRICK McCARTHY - PROJECT 46404 - LEXINGTON AVENUE TRUNK WATER MAIN The objections of Patrick McCarthy were next brought to the assessment committee pertaining to the assessments associated with the trunk water main along Lexington Avenue. Mr. Colbert reviewed with the committee members the projected assessments and stated that a letter from Arnold Kempe, the attorney for the owner, requesting a continuance, had been submitted to his office. After discussion, Vogt moved, Egan seconded the motion to continue ho - consideration of the objections, including Project 46411, Birch Park Addition trunk storm sewer, until the next meeting of the assessment committee, noting that the applicant was not present. All members voted yea. DON VOGTMAN - PROJECT #411 - SKOVDALE The objectioof Don Vogtman to the proposed trunk storm sewer assessments under Project All consisting of the Birch Park Adaition/Patrick Eagan Park area were brought to the committee by Mr. Colbert. The Qublicuibrks 9 -rector detailed the City's position and recommended that due to``JJthe recent building 5 placea on the property eliminating the previous low drainage basin and redirecting the drainage flow that the storm sewer system serviced by Project #411, it's the staff's recommendation that the property be deterrmmined benefited by the improvement and that the assessment O&s proposed _4 be reaffirmed. Don Vogtman was present and read a statement in opposition, including the fact that his land/should be treated similar to the adjacent lots which receive about 56% creoitd, based upon the large -lot allowance. He stated that his land is serving as !!! a temporary ponding area and it is fairly heavily wooded, offering absorption qualities, and further that the benefit is not in proportion to the proposed assessments. Committee members noted that the 75 foot frontage at present will be reduced at the time of Pilot Knob Road widening, with the balance of about 60 feet for access from Deerwood Drive to the northerly portion. Noting that Mr. Vogtman's property includes Lot 7 and the north half of Lot 6, Block 1, Skovdale, and that access to it for development would come from Deerwood Drive, Blomquist moved, Egan seconded the motion to recommend to the City Council that it allow a large -lot policy credit for the two lots, because of the fact that the parcels are platted, the fact that the other lots within Skovaale have received the large -lot credit, that all of Skovdale Addition was platted at one time and it would penalize the Vogtman property if it was not permitted; but in the event that the two parcels are divided into more than two single family lots, that the Council then may reconsider the assessments and increase the amount of the trunk storm sewer assessments at that time. Ail members voted yes. VICTOR STAFF - PROJECT #411 - SKOVDALE 2ND ADDITION The next objection brought before the Committee consisted of those from VYA't'victor Staff covering Lot 5, Block 1, Skovdale 2nd Addition, under Project N 6 #411, Birch Park Adaition/Patrick Eagan Park trunk storm sewer. At the September 19, 1985 final assessment hearing before the City Council, Darrel Baska, the attorney for Mr. and Mrs. Staff, submitted a written Notice of Appeal and objected to the assessments. Mr. Baska was present and indicated e� that the level of the adjacent pond had increased and caused a portion of the Staff property to be lost and that an action has been commenced against the City for inverse condemnation. Negotiations have taken place for settlement of the action. Colbert noted that the staff had recommended a deduct the area covered by water, and had adopted the large -lot formula with th balance of the lot assessed for storm sewer purposes. It was proposed the assessment be based on the area above the proposed areae h easement level of 830 feet. Egan moved, Blomquist seconded the motion to recommend to the City Council that it levy assessments for storm sewer sem" -�Q `{� purposes above pt�h)e 830 foot level, h@ asq�us �E�a�f the easement from the StafS. � acceptable settlement of the inverse condemnation action brought against the City. All voted yes. RONALD BOYLE - PROJECT #411 - BIRCH PARR ADDITION The objections from Mr. and Mrs. Ronald Boyle of Deerwood Drive to storm sewer assessments against their property were next considered by the Committee. Mr. Colbert reviewed the objections and noted that they were comparable to the Berg, Caponi and Rooney objections, all of whose property drains into JP -8. He stated that JP -8 does not have an outlet at the present time, but that the rise in the level of the pond will require interconnections within a very short period of time. Blomquist moved, Egan seconded the motion to recommend approval of the staff's recommendation that the assessment against the parcel be deferred until the property is directly benefited due to the installation of outlets in Pond JP -8. All voted yes. 7 LILLIAN HcCARTHY - PROJECT #411 BIRCH PARR ADDITION/PATRICK EAGAN PARR TRUNK STORK SEWER Mr. Colbert then brought before the Committee the objections of Lillian McCarthy, an owner on Lexington Avenue objecting to the trunk storm sewer assessments under Project #411. The parcel incorporates 3.91 acres with only 1.5 acres assessed at the Agricultural/Single Family rate, due to the large - lot credit proposed to be assessed against the property. There was no appearance on behalf of Ms. McCarthy. After discussion, Egan moved, Vogt seconded the motion to recommend that the proposed assessments with large -lot credit against the Lillian McCarthy property be approved by the City Council. All voted in favor. PARKLAND - SPECIAL ASSESSMENT POLICY - HOLLAND LAKE AREA A memorandum prepared by Tom Colbert was discussed by the members dated January 16, 1986 regarding proposed assessments for storm sewer improvements in the Holland Lake/Cliff Road area. He stated the estimated cost of the major storm sewer project is approximately $900,000.00, but that a large portion of the acreage, approximately 429 acres, consisting of County Park, (� resultfyin C —proposed assessment of approximately $300,000.00 O& T Agricultural/Single Family Residential rate. Preliminary discussion has been held with Dakota County representatives, indicating that they do not have the resources available to finance the estimated $300,000.00 and because of the need to negotiate the assessments, there was concern by Committee members that the City should continue to negotiate for contribution from the County. There wki also questions about improvements that would undoubtedly be installed in the park, including park buildings, parking lots, etc. which would add to the storm sewer runoff. e� J/p� The Committee recommended an Ordinance be (ed to control the construction of improvements on public property without City approval. 8 Egan moved, Vogt seconded the motion that the Committee be on record recommending to the City Council that it adopt a policy providing for one-half residential equivalent assessments against the County Park property for trunk storm sewer improvements, with the understanding that the City can impose restrictions on development, and in the event that future development of the park property takes place, that additional trunk storm sewer assessments could be levied against the benefited property. All members voted in favor. ADJOURNMENT Upon motion duly made and seconded, the meeting adjourned at 7:55 p.m. All voted yes. i PHH I 1 REPORT ON j TRUNK ASSESSMENT RATES i` �-,UTILITIE& AND STREETS EA.GAN, MINNESOTA P/ 1986. FILE N0. 49382 /S , %laseae, fq%iii s Ajoc&c&&, Am emvd"X,,q e st na"4 M I I i 1 I I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 2335 V. 7.....4 -41,A. St. P..d,, M—..& 55113 /)Aa...: 612 - 636-4600 December 15, 1985 City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55121 Re: Trunk Assessment Rate Report File No. 49382 Dear Mayor and Council: Glrnn R. C.M. P.E A'eirE A. Gmda n. P.E. Thom. E ?'n, a. P.F Rirhurd IP. Fmur. P.E, Fuben G. s1hu1111M. P Munir. L. Snr vol., P.F nonme C. B.rx.mr P.e levy A. Mork A. UdnSM RE Ted K. rleld. P E .5111h.e1 T. R.uunun n. P.E RoN, R. JAff de. P,F. noeid O. Lrnk.ru, P.E. Ch.d,s A. F..,,, Lro Al. Pv. eG1. ".., At Ou.n Transmitted herewith is our report for review and study of trunk assessment rates for utilities and streets for the City of Eagan. It is recommended the proposed rates for 1986 be retroactive beginning January 1, 1986. We would be happy to meet with the Council and other interested parties to re- view and discuss the contents of this report as may be required. Yours very truly, BONESTR00, ROSENE, ANDERLIK 5 ASSOCIATES, INC. Mark A. Hanson MAH: Ii I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of �� ark A. Hanson Date: December 15, 1985 Reg. No. 14260 Approved by: ./ ! n ��n A l� ' ''Thomas A. Colbert, P.E. Director of Public Works E -2481d Date: / Z. - Z- // - -i' Ono G, Ponesvem. P E. Reb," , kesene. P.E. J hsrPh C. And,,hk, P.E. Bradford.4. Le.rberR, P.E. R,rh..d F, 7.-^ P.E lama Coh.n, P E Glrnn R. C.M. P.E A'eirE A. Gmda n. P.E. Thom. E ?'n, a. P.F Rirhurd IP. Fmur. P.E, Fuben G. s1hu1111M. P Munir. L. Snr vol., P.F nonme C. B.rx.mr P.e levy A. Mork A. UdnSM RE Ted K. rleld. P E .5111h.e1 T. R.uunun n. P.E RoN, R. JAff de. P,F. noeid O. Lrnk.ru, P.E. Ch.d,s A. F..,,, Lro Al. Pv. eG1. ".., At Ou.n Transmitted herewith is our report for review and study of trunk assessment rates for utilities and streets for the City of Eagan. It is recommended the proposed rates for 1986 be retroactive beginning January 1, 1986. We would be happy to meet with the Council and other interested parties to re- view and discuss the contents of this report as may be required. Yours very truly, BONESTR00, ROSENE, ANDERLIK 5 ASSOCIATES, INC. Mark A. Hanson MAH: Ii I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of �� ark A. Hanson Date: December 15, 1985 Reg. No. 14260 Approved by: ./ ! n ��n A l� ' ''Thomas A. Colbert, P.E. Director of Public Works E -2481d Date: / Z. - Z- // - -i' 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 TRUNK ASSESSMENT RATE REPORT EAGAN, MINNESOTA LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL INDEX INTRODUCTION I. UTILITY ASSESSMENT - TRUNK AREA II. UTILITY ASSESSMENT - LATERAL BENEFIT FROM TRUNK III. MAJOR STREET ASSESSMENTS Table 1 - Major Street Costs Table 2 - Revenue for Major Street Table 3 - Road Unit Equivalency Table CALCULATION FOR EQUIVALENT ASSESSMENT RATES SUMMARY TRUNK ASSESSMENTS APPENDIX A - MAJOR STREET CONSTRUCTION 2487d - 1 - Page No. . 1. 2. 3. 7. 10. 11. 12. 13. 15. 18. 19. 1 r t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of a study undertaken annually to review trunk assessment rates for utilities and streets in the City of Eagan. As- sessment rates presented herein are used to finance oversizing costs associ- ated with constructing the trunk utility and major street system. This report is separated into three parts discussed as follows: I. UTILITY ASSESSMENT - TRUNK AREA II. UTILITY ASSESSMENT - LATERAL BENEFIT FROM TRUNK III. MAJOR STREET ASSESSMENT A. Road User Charge B. Equivalent - Zoning C. Lateral Storm Sewer E -2487d - 2 - I I 1 1 I. UTILITY ASSESSMENT _ TRUNK AREA Eagan assessment policy provides that pipe oversize costs be assessed against the service area causing the need for the oversize capacity. The costs associated with the pipe oversize is assessed on an area basis. By pol- icy, the trunk oversize is the difference in cost between the maximum lateral size and the installed trunk size. DEFINITION OF LATERAL UTILITIES Maximum Lateral Size Sanitary Sewer 8" Water Main - Residential 8" Water Main - Comm. -Ind. 12" Storm Sewer * Based on hydraulic calculation of need (See "Note", page 9) Because of inflation and the effects of the non-uniform rate of develop- ment, it is necessary to routinely re-evaluate the rates charged for pipe oversize. Standard procedure has been to annually evaluate the rate structure to adjust for inflation and other factors. Approximately every five years the entire trunk system is re-evaluated in a comprehensive study. From this study, the uncompleted portions of the system are identified and updated costs to complete the system are prepared. By this procedure, the comprehensive study is viewed as a detailed analysis of the costs to complete the system, from which assessment rates are prepared. This annual report is viewed as a fine tuning of the rate structure during the interim period between comprehen- sive studies. ' E -2487d - 3 - The latest comprehensive water distribution system and sanitary sewer sys- tem studies were completed in 1982. The comprehensive storm sewer system study was prepared in 1984. The annual rate studies essentially rely upon these comprehensive reports as benchmark data. However, the assessment ' portion of the Comprehensive Storm Sewer Plan was not prepared. As a result, ' rates presented herein for Trunk Storm Sewer Oversizing may need to be revised at the time the assessment portion of the Comprehensive Storm Sewer Plan is ' completed. Annual changes in the rate structure presented herein are evaluated by ap- plying construction cost trend factors to the previous years rate structure. ' Trend factors used to evaluate the rate structure for inflation are the EPA Index for sewers and a comparison of bid unit prices in the City of Eagan for commonly bid items in 1985 and past years. The most recent EPA Index available for purposes of this report indicate an annual inflation rate of ' 7.9% from the first quarter of 1984 to the first quarter of 1985. 11 ' - 4 - E -2487d 1 To determine the annual inflation rate in the City of Eagan based on bid unit prices for pipe construction associated with sanitary sewer, water main, ' and storm sewer each City Contract for 1984 and 1985 were reviewed. The aver- age bid unit price for 1983 and 1984 was determined by taking the average bid unit price for each contract as it relates to lineal footage of pipe bid and then averaging the total amount for each contract for that year. The average ' bid unit price for each contract was determined by taking an average of the five low bidders. A summary of the average bid unit price for 1983, 1984; and 1985 for lateral sanitary sewer, water main, and storm sewer pipe are ' listed as follows: 11 ' - 4 - E -2487d 1 AVERAGE BID UNIT PRICE FOR UTILITY CONSTRUCTION ' Annual Annual %,Decrease % Increase 1983 1984 1985 1984-1985 1983-1985 ' Sanitary Sewer $11.55/LF $13.25/LF $12.51/LF -5.6% + 4.1% (8" PVC 0'-12' dp.) ' Water Main $10.84/LF $11.91/LF $11.44/LF - 3.9% + 2.8% (6" DIP 714 dp.) Storm Sewer $18.82/LF $19.24/LF $18.30/LF - 4.9% - 1.4% (12" RCP 0'-10' dp.) The inflation rate based on the EPA Index (+7.9%) and the recent bid unit prices in the City of Eagan for 1983, 1984, and 1985, indicate the EPA Index is substantially higher. As indicated, the inflation rate for sanitary sewer and water main construction between 1983 and 1985 was minimal (+2.8% to 4.1%) ' while a decrease existed for storm sewer construction. It should be noted, ' however, that during the latter part of the 1985 construction season, a price war did exist among concrete pipe suppliers thus reducing the cost of concrete ' pipe utilized in storm sewer construction. Although the bid unit prices in Eagan for the construction of pipe indicate a minimal increase over recent ' years other items associated with pipe construction have increased dramatical- ly. These historically have included condemnation and contract litigation for it is a significant number of trunk sanitary and storm sewer systems. While virtually impossible to predict the future cost of these items, their poten- tial does exist and will significantly affect the estimated cost of completing ' the system. Therefore, it is recommended an increase of 4% to 5% be applied to the in City Eagan 1985 rates for trunk sanitary and storm sewer facilities the of - 5 - E-2487d I ' for 1986 and that the rates for financing the trunk water system remain at the 1985 level. The proposed rates for 1986 are as follows: 1 ' UTILITY ASSESSMENT - TRUNK AREA 1986 Percent Current 1985 Rate Proposed Rates Increase Trunk Sanitary Unplatted $1,190/Ac. $1,240/Ac. + 4.2% ' Sewer Oversize Platted Res. * $570/lot $595/lot + 4.4% (@ 2.1 lots/Ac.) Trunk Water Main Agricultural or $1,190/Ac. $1,190/Ac. No change Oversize Residential $570/lot $570/lot No change ' Water Supply & Single Family $500/lot $500/lot No change Storage Multi -Family** $400/unit $400/unit No change Water Supply & Storage & Main Oversizing Comm. & Ind. $3,020/Ac. $3,020/Ac. No change ' Trunk Storm Sewer Single Family $0.048/sq.ft. $0.050/s.f. + 4.2% Oversize Multi -Family $0.061/sq.ft. $0.064/s.f. + 4.9% Comm. & Ind. $0.072/sq.ft. $0.075/s.f + 4.2% ' ' * Lots which are platted at the time trunk facilities are ordered in. ** Multi -family is defined as R-3 and greater zoning and the unit cost is ' approximately 0.8 of the cost of a single family lot. *** For accounting purposes, Main Oversizing shall be $1,190/acre and Water Supply and Storage shall be $1,830/acre. [l 1 E -2487d 1 I II. UTILITY ASSESSMENT - LATERAL BENEFIT FROM TRUNK ' Eagan assessment policy provides that the lateral benefit received from trunk sanitary sewer and trunk water main be assessed against the property be- 1 ing serviced. It is proposed to assess the lateral benefit from trunk rate for sanitary sewer and water main on a footage basis. It is recommended the base rate presented in the 1985 report for sanitary sewer and water main re- main the same for 1986 due to the results of actual construction costs stabil- izing as discussed in the previous section. It is again recommended that all ' related appurtenances and overhead costs be added to the base rate in deter- mining the lateral benefit rate for trunk sanitary sewer and water main. Re- lated appurtenances would include such things as manholes, pipe and manhole overdepth (greater than 8' deep), rock stabilization, trench compaction, res- toration, etc. for sanitary sewer while water main would include such things ' as hydrants, valves, fittings, rock stabilization, trench compaction, restora- tion, etc. The necessary amount of related appurtenances would then be deter- mined by designing a lateral system to service the benefited parcel in lieu of ' the trunk facility being constructed. In the event it is not feasible to de- termine a related appurtenance ratio, a range of values from previous projects ' and a recommended value for both sanitary sewer and water main are listed herein. RELATED APPURTENANCE RATIOS I 1 ' E -2487d Sanitary Sewer Water Main Range of Values 1.45 to 2.55 1.3 to 1.63 - 7 - Recommended Value I 11 L 1 1 1 The range of values for sanitary sewer is much greater than for water main due to costs associated with sanitary sewer overdepth which may be significant for a given parcel dependent upon the terrain. The recommended value for san- itary sewer lateral benefit takes into account sanitary sewer construction up to 16 feet in depth. Overhead costs include legal, engineering, administration and bond inter- est. It is recommended the overhead rate for 1986 be 30% of the lateral bene- fit from trunk rate. The recommended 1986 lateral benefit from trunk sanitary sewer and trunk water main rate is summarized herein which reflects no increase in costs. BASE RATE 1986 LATERAL BENEFIT FROM TRUNK SANITARY SEWER AND TRUNK WATER MAIN 1985 1986 Percent Actual Rate Estimated Rate Increase Sanitary Sewer $12.98/Centerline ft. $12.98/Centerline ft. No change Water Main, Single Fam. $12.18/Centerline ft. $12.67/Centerline ft. No change Multi-Fam. $20.07/centerline ft. $20.87/centerline ft. No change Comm/Ind. RECOMMENDED VALUE 1 E -2487d 1 SANITARY SEWER WATER MAIN Rate/center- line ft. Rate/centerline ft. Multi -Family ._ Single Family Comm/Ind. Base Rate $12.98 $12.18 $20.07 Correlated Appurtenances Ratio 1.7 1.5 1.5 Total $22.07 $18.27 $30.11 Overhead (Legal, Engrng., Admin. 6 Bond Interest) +30% +30% 30% Total $28.69 $23.75 $39.14 1 E -2487d 1 ' The recommended value for the 1986 lateral benef=_t from trunk rate for sanitary sewer is $28.69/centerline ft. and for water main at the single-family ' and Multi -family, Comm/Ind. rate is $23.75 and $39.14/centerline foot, respec- ttively. ' Note: The Eagan assessment policy for recovering costs associated with lateral ' the trunk storm sewer amount will be determined as the amount of storm sewer required within a development to convey drainage from outside its boundaries. 1 [1 1 1 11 1 1 E -2487d benefit from trunk storm sewer is to assess the lateral storm sewer amount re- quired to convey drainage within each development. Storm sewer required to convey drainage from outside its boundaries is considered trunk storm sewer ' and will be the responsibility of the trunk storm sewer fund. Therefore, the ' the trunk storm sewer amount will be determined as the amount of storm sewer required within a development to convey drainage from outside its boundaries. 1 [1 1 1 11 1 1 E -2487d I ' III. MAJOR STREET ASSESSMENTS A. ROAD USER CHARGE Early in the development of Eagan Township, a Major Street Plan was adop- ted which provided major collector streets, principally county roads, designed as 9 ton/axle capacity with 52' wide paving and minor collector streets desig- nated as 7 to 9 ton/axle capacity from 36' to 44' wide paving. The oversize costs for these streets above the cost of a normal residential street at 5-7 ' ton/axle capacity 32' wide were paid for from county road turnback.funds and, ' in some cases, general obligation funds. A more detailed policy was developed in 1977 to provide more positive fi- nancing from new development due to the increased traffic requiring the con- struction of a major street system. Because of inequities which result from assessing lots or additions directly abutting major streets, the policy in- cluded a benefit charge to be levied with each building permit. Each new building places an additional burden on the Major Street System. Commercial ' and Industrial buildings were levied proportionately larger charges based on use and size of building. The user charge was to supplement other sources of ' funds available for the Major Street construction to provide a portion of the ' required cash flow to construct the needed major streets. In 1977, the Major Street construction financing plan was adopted which ' established the Road User charge of $75 per residential unit to be levied with the issuance of each building permit. However, due to inflation and improve- ments reflected in design considerations, the road unit charge has been in- creased to $280 in 1985 to maintain the necessary cash flow to assist in the ' continued construction of major streets. 'E -2487d - 10 - ' Table 1 shows the projected capital cost to complete the Major Street Sys- tem for the City of Eagan by the year 2005. These costs are separated into two types, County and City. City streets are further separated into Municipal ' State Aid and Non -State Aid Collectors reflecting eligibility for Municipal State Aid Funds. Capital costs shown for County Streets are 45% of the total cost which represents the City's responsibility. A more detailed breakdown of the cost per street is included in Appendix A located at the back of this re- port. 1A.1v i tMAJOR STREET COSTS Capital Cost Projection County Streets $ 8,315,800 ' City Streets - Municipal State Aid 9,234,120 Non -State Aid Collectors 7,144,280 Total Eagan's Cost $24,694,280 ' Revenue sources for the costs described in Table 1 will include: (1) Min- nesota Gas Tax (M.S.A.) funds, (2) commercial, industrial and residential ' equivalent assessments and (3) the major street benefit charge to be levied with the issuance of building permits. Each year the City receives an allotment of money acquired by the State of ' Minnesota through gasoline taxes to be used in the construction of Major Streets. Income from Municipal State Aid Funds was projected through the year ' 2005 by assuming the 1985 allotment represents an average amount based on future needs. 1 - E -2487d 11l ' A substantial income is also expected to be obtained from assessing resi- dential equivalents where unrestricted driveway access is to be allowed, such ' as on Minor Collector streets, and from assessing multifamily and commercial - industrial property on all Major Streets where access will be allowed. Due to the complexity of determining assessments, each segment of street was reviewed ' briefly to determine the estimated assessment amount based on similar projects previously assessed. In general, it is estimated approximately 40-45% of the ' project cost will be recovered through special assessments._ To determine a fair and equitable road unit charge for 1986, commonly bid items were reviewed between 1984 and 1985. Similar to utility construction, a ' very minimal increase in the unit prices was experienced during this time. However, because overall project costs continue to rise as previously indi- cated, it is recommended a 3.5% increase be applied to the 1985 Road Unit Charge. Table 2 shows projected revenues for Major Street Construction which ' recommends an increase to the road unit charge from $280 per residential unit for 1985 to $290 per residential unit for 1986. mens v n ' REVENUE FOR MAJOR STREET ' 1986-2005 (20 years) Revenue MSA Funds $11,800,000 Estimated Assessments 9,791,000 Road Unit Charge 3,770,000 ' ($290/unit x 20 yrs x 650 unit/yr) TOTAL REVENUE FOR EAGAN $25,361,000 ' in 1 2 revenues ex- The information presented Tables and shows anticipated ceed expenditures by 2.7%. Due to the difficulty in not only estimating the amount of revenues, but also the expenditures, it is felt a slight surplus to - 12 - 'E -2487d I 1 the revenue side is desirable. Therefore, it is recommended the road unit charge for 1986 be increased by $10/unit to $290/unit based on the Road Unit Equivalency Table presented in Table 3. ' TABLE 3 ROAD UNIT EQUIVALENCY TABLE Zoning ' R-1, R-2, R-3 R-4 ' Comm./Ind. New Comm./Ind. Bldg. Additions 1 1 11 1 1 Road Units 1.0/residential unit 0.8/residential unit 3.0/acre 3.0/acre with acreage as determined by building inspector. One remaining source of revenue received by the City of Eagan for streets is the Major Street Levy. The Major Street Levy is formerly known as County Turnback Funds. The amount of funds obtained from this tax levy in recent years is approximately $150,000 to $170,000 per year. As recommended in pre- vious sewer and water rate studies, the Major Street Levy Funds can be used to finance the City's responsibility for reconstruction/repair projects and the annual seal coating maintenance program. B. EQUIVALENT ZONING The Eagan assessment policy as it relates to construction of major streets is that the abutting property be assessed for the benefit received based on its zoning classification. Three zoning classifications are utilized in de- termining the equivalent assessment rate for a given street width and design section. Also included with the construction of most major streets is a con- crete or bituminous trailway. Eagan assessment policy as it relates to trail - ways is that certain zoning classifications are assessed for these improve- ' E -2487d 1 - 13 - I 1 1 11 1 1 ments. Summarized below is the 1985 assessment rates in conjunction with the proposed 1986 assessment rates. A review of bid unit prices from 1984 to 1985 in the City of Eagan show that costs associated with street construction have experienced only a slight increase through that period. However, similar to utility construction overall project costs associated with street construction have also increased dramatically which are not reflected in commonly bid items. Therefore, it is recommended an increase of 4% be added to the 1985 Equivalent Assessment Rates for street construction in the City of Eagan for 1986. Included on the following pages are the bid unit prices for each pay item used in determining the assessment rate for each zoning classification in 1986. A summary of each of the equivalent proposed assessment rates for 1986 are listed below: 1985 1984 Proposed Percent Rate/F.F. Rate/F.F. Increase STREET: Residential Equivalent (32' wide) $32.45 $33.75 +4.0% Multiple Equivalent (44' wide) $60.92 $63.36 +4.0% Commercial/Industrial Equivalent (52' wide) $75.43 $78.45 +4.0% TRAILWAY (Bituminous or Concrete) $11.36 $11.81 +4.0% 1 1 1 1 ' E -2487d - 14 - I 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 CALCULATION FOR EQUIVALENT ASSESSMENT RATES A) STREET Cu.yds. Excavation (50% of total) @ $1.20/cu.yd. $14.31 a) Residential Equivalent Rate (32' wide street) Aggregate Base Cl. 5 (10" Thick) @ $7.00/ton 10.85 0.41 Ton Rate F.F. 5.95 Cu.yds. Excavation (25% of total) $1.19/cu.yd. $ 7.08 0.73 Ton Aggregate base Cl. 5, (6" Thick) @ $7.00/ton 5.11 0.16 Ton Base course mixture, (1�" Thick) 2331 @ $11.50/tone 1.84 0.16 Ton Wear course mixture, (112" Thick) 2341 @ $12.50/ton 2.00 0.0176 Ton Bituminous mat'l. for mixture @ $210.00/ton 3.70 0.086 Gals. Bituminous mat'l. for tack coat @ $1.00/gal. 0.09 1 Lin.ft. Surmountable concrete curb & gutter @ $4.10/lin.ft. 4.10 0.00069 Acre Restoration @ $1,160.00/acre 0.80 $48.74 $24.72 14.62 +5% Contingencies 1.24 $63.36 $25.96 +30% Legal, Engrng., Admin. & Bond Interest 7.79 TOTAL........................................... $33.75 b) Multiple Equivalent Rate (44' wide street) 11.90 Cu.yds. Excavation (50% of total) @ $1.20/cu.yd. $14.31 1.55 Ton Aggregate Base Cl. 5 (10" Thick) @ $7.00/ton 10.85 0.41 Ton Base course mixture (3" Thick) 2331 @ $11.50/ton 4.72 0.21 Ton Wear course mixture (1'" Thick) 2341 @ $12.50/ton 2.63 0.0321 Ton Bituminous mat'l. for mixture @ $210.00/ton 6.74 0.114 Gals. Bituminous mat'l. for tack coat @ $1.00/gal. 0.11 1.0 Lin.ft. B618 concrete curb & gutter @ $6.00/lin.ft. 6.00 0.00091 Acre Restoration @ $1,160.00/acre 1.06 Total $46.42 +5% Contingencies 2.32 $48.74 +30% Legal, Engrng., Admin. & Bond Interest 14.62 TOTAL.......................................... $63.36 1 ' E -2487d 1 - 15 - c) Commercial/Industrial Equivalent Rate (52' wide street) B) TRAILWAY (Concrete or Bituminous) 1 Lin.ft. Granular base & surfacing @ $8.65/lin.ft. $ 8.65 Total $ 8.65 +5% Contingencies 0.43 $ 9.08 +30% Legal, Engrng., Admin. & Bond Interest 2.73 TOTAL ........................................... $11.81 - 16 - E -2487d Rate/F. F. 12.03 Cu.yds. Excavation (50% of total) @ $1.20/cu.yd. $14.43 2.18 Ton Aggregate Base Cl. 5 (12" thick) @ $7.00/ton 15.26 0.65 Ton Base course mixture (4" Thick), 2331 @ $11.50/ton 7.48 0.25 Ton Wear course mixture (1'2" Thick), 2341 @ $12.50/ton 3.13 0.0463 Ton Bituminous mat'l. for mixture @ $210.00/ton 9.72 0.132 Gals. Bituminous mat'l. for tack coat @ $1.00/gal. 0.13 1.0 Lin.ft. B618 concrete curb & gutter @ $6.00/lin.ft. 6.00 0.00115 Acre Restoration @ $1,160.00/acre 1.33 Total $57.48 +5% Contingencies 2.87 $60.35 +30% Legal, Engrng., Admin. & Bond Interest 18.10 TOTAL ........................................... $78.45 B) TRAILWAY (Concrete or Bituminous) 1 Lin.ft. Granular base & surfacing @ $8.65/lin.ft. $ 8.65 Total $ 8.65 +5% Contingencies 0.43 $ 9.08 +30% Legal, Engrng., Admin. & Bond Interest 2.73 TOTAL ........................................... $11.81 - 16 - E -2487d I 1 11 1 C. LATERAL STORM SEWER The Eagan assessment policy for lateral storm sewer within major streets is that the benefited property be assessed. However, included as part of all street construction is a certain amount of lateral storm sewer to convey drainage within that street. Therefore, included herein is a lateral storm sewer equivalent assessment rate per front foot which is based on a lateral storm sewer design within street right-of-way. Summarized herein is the method of determining the lateral storm sewer equivalent assessment rate which does not recommend an increase from the 1985 rate to the 1986 rate. LATERAL STORM SEWER EQUIVALENT ASSESSMENT RATE 0.2 Lin.ft RCP storm sewer pipe @ $25.00/Lin.ft. 0.001 Each Storm manhole @ $850.00/each 0.0015 Each Catch basin @ $750.00/each 0.2 Lin.ft. Mechanical trench compaction @ $1.00/lin.ft. 1 1 1 ' E -2487d +5% Contingencies +30% Legal, Engrng., Admin. 6 Bond Interest TOTAL........................................... - 17 - Rate/F.F. $ 5.00 0.85 1.13 0.20 $ 7.18 $ 0.36 $ 7.54 2.26 $ 9.80 SUMMARY TRUNK ASSESSMENTS I. UTILITY ASSESSMENT TRUNK AREA II. UTILITY ASSESSMENT LATERAL BENEFIT FROM TRUNK Proposed 1986 Rates Lateral Benefit from Trunk Sanitary Sewer $28.69/centerline ft. Lateral Benefit from Trunk Water Main, Single Family $23.75/centerline ft. Multi -Family Comm/Ind. $39.14/centerline ft. III. STREET Proposed 1986 Rates A. Road User Charge $290/residential unit B. Equivalent Zoning STREET - Residential Equivalent (32') $33.75/F.F. Multiple Equivalent (44') $63.36/F.F. Commercial/Industrial Equivalent (52') $78.45/F.F. TRAILWAY (Concrete or Bituminous) $11.81/F.F. C. Lateral Storm Sewer Equivalent Assessment Rate $ 9.80/F.F. (1) For accounting purposes Main Oversizing shall be $1,190/acre and Water Supply and Storage shall be $1,830/acre. - 18 - E -2487d Proposed 1986 Rates Trunk Sanitary Unplatted $1,240/Ac. Sewer Oversize Platted Res. $595/lot Trunk Water Main Agricultural or $1,190/Ac. Oversize Residential $570/lot Water Supply & Single Family $500/lot Storage Multi -Family $400/Unit Water Supply & Storage & Main Oversizing Comm. & Ind. $3,020/Ac. Trunk Storm Sewer Single Family $0.050/s.f. Oversize Multi -Family $0.064/s.f. Comm. & Ind. $0.075/s.f. II. UTILITY ASSESSMENT LATERAL BENEFIT FROM TRUNK Proposed 1986 Rates Lateral Benefit from Trunk Sanitary Sewer $28.69/centerline ft. Lateral Benefit from Trunk Water Main, Single Family $23.75/centerline ft. Multi -Family Comm/Ind. $39.14/centerline ft. III. STREET Proposed 1986 Rates A. Road User Charge $290/residential unit B. Equivalent Zoning STREET - Residential Equivalent (32') $33.75/F.F. Multiple Equivalent (44') $63.36/F.F. Commercial/Industrial Equivalent (52') $78.45/F.F. TRAILWAY (Concrete or Bituminous) $11.81/F.F. C. Lateral Storm Sewer Equivalent Assessment Rate $ 9.80/F.F. (1) For accounting purposes Main Oversizing shall be $1,190/acre and Water Supply and Storage shall be $1,830/acre. - 18 - E -2487d APPENDIX A MAJOR STREET CONSTRUCTION - 19 - 2487d Proj. Length Estimated Eagan Cost Miles Rate/Mile Proj. Cost (45% Proj.Cost) DAKOTA COUNTY Pilot Knob Rd. - Duckwood Dr. to Co. Rd. 30 1.83 $868,000 $1,588,440 $ 714,800 Pilot Knob Rd. - Co. Rd. 30 to Apple Valley 2.0 868,000 1,736,000 781,200 Co. Rd. 30 - Johnny Cake to T.H. #3 3.86 868,000 3,350,480 1,507,720 Cliff Rd. - Cedar to Pilot Knob (Except I -35E) 1.5 868,000 1,302,000 585,900 Cliff Rd. - Pilot Knob to T.H. #3 2.9 868,000 2,517,200 1,132,740 Lexington Ave. - '4 mi. N. Co. Rd. 30 to Yankee Doodle 1.8 868,000 1,562,400 703,080 Lone Oak Rd. - T.H. #13 to T.H. #55 (Except I -35E) 2.1 868,000 1,822,800 820,260 Lone Oak Rd. - T.H. #55 to Inver Grove Heights. 1.0 868,000 868,000 390,600 Yankee Doodle - T.H. #13 to T.H. #49 3.1 868,000 2,690,800 1,210,860 Dodd Rd. - Co. Rd. #30 to Wescott Rd. 1.2 868,000 1,041,600 468,720 $8,315,880 EAGAN MUNICIPAL STATE AID Wescott Rd. - T.H. 149 to Elrene Rd. 1.0 $500,760 $ 500,760 Deerwood - I -35E to Pilot Knob 0.5 868,000 434,000 Dodd Rd. - Co. Rd. 30 to Cliff 1.2 500,760 600,910 Blackhawk Rd. - Co. Rd. 30 to T.H. #13 1.9 500,760 951,440 Rahn Rd. - Beau D Rue to Shale Lane 1.3 500,760 650,990 Wilderness Run Rd. - Lexington to Dodd Rd. 1.3 500,760 650,990 Wescott Hills Dr. - Wescott Rd. to Wilderness Run 1.7 868,000 1,475,600 Johnny Cake - Woodgate to Co. Rd. 1130 0.3 500,760 150,230 - 19 - 2487d Proj. Length Estimated Eagan Cost Miles Rate/Mile Proj. Cost (45i Proj.Cost) EAGAN MUNICIPAL STATE AID - Continued Johnny Cake - Co. Rd. 30 to Deerwood 0.6 868,000 520,800 Deerwood - I -35E to Pilot Knob 0.5 868,000 434,000 Wescott Rd. - Lexington to Elrene 1.2 868,000 1,041,600 Covington Ln. - Beacon'Hills to Co. Rd. 32 0.5 868,000 q. 434,000 Nicols Rd. - Co. Rd. 32 to Cedarvale Blvd. 1.6 868,000 1,388,800 $9,234,120 EAGAN NON STATE AID COLLECTOR Elrene Rd. - Yankee Doodle to Wescott 1.1 $500,760 $ 550,840 Wilderness Run Rd. - W. of Lexington 0.2 500,760 100,150 Thomas Lk. Rd. - Co. Rd. 30 to Deerwood 0.6 868,000 520,800 Northview Park Rd. - Lexington to Dodd 1.6 868,000 1,388,800 Wescott Hills Dr. -'Wescott to Yankee Doodle 1.0 868,000 868,000 Center Section 16 - Blue Cross to Federal Drive 1.4 868,000 1,215,200 Section 1 - East and West 0.5 500,760 250,380 Denmark - In Section 10 0.5 500,760 250,380 Elrene Road - Wescott to Dodd Road 0.8 868,000 694,400 Section 29, SW 3t - Rahn Rd. to Blackhawk Rd. 0.7 500,760 350,530 Dodd Road - Cliff Rd. to Apple Valley 1.1 868,000 954,800 $7,144,280 2487d - 20 - PHONE 454.8100 VILLAGE OF EAGAN 3790 PILOT KNOB ROAD EAGAN. MINNESOTA 55122 May 10, 1973 Mr. E. E. Parranto Parranto Realty Inc. 1200 Commerce Building St. Paul, Minnesota 55102 RE: Lot 6 Block 3, Effress Addition Dear Mr. Parranto: Your request to have the Sherman Court Sewer and Water Lateral Assessments in the amount of $3320.00 removed from the above lot was given careful consideration. Due to the fact that this is an ex- tremely large lot which may be subdivided in the future, we feel there definitely is a benefit to this lot. Assessments are levied on a parcel of property according to the benefit derived and, therefore, we feel we cannot deviate from our assessment.policy and shift this assessment to the other lots on Sherman Court as their benefit wouldn't be that much greater. Any agreement you may hove had with the purchaser regarding the fact that this Lot was assessed both on Pilot Knob Road and Sherman Court is strictly private and the Village cannot become involved. We are enclosing a copy of a previous letter listing the assess- ments on this lot. Very truly yours Q�j 4R (Mrs.) Alyce Bolke Clerk-Teeasurer Encl. CC: Association of American Cereal Chemists AB:ck VI May 14, 1973 Mr. Paul Hauge 3908 Sibley Memorial St. Paul, Minnesota Dear PaulY received from Alice worth of assessments Highway 55122 realtors • appraisers • consultants commerce building aul, minnesota 55101 shone (612) 224-1341 ential sales/2767 hwy,55/454-1341 I enclose a copy of a letter that I Bolke regarding our request to remove 3,320. from Lot 6, Block 3, Effress Addition. If you will look at the plat,of Effress Addition, you will see that their total frontage on the culdusac is less than 10% of the total frontage available. Therefore, we feel that it should be removed entirely. In addition to this, if you will check the minutes of the meeting on the granting of a permit to American Cereal Chemists, one of the consideration was that Effress would provide a special sewer stub down County Road 31 to serve Lot 6. This was done for them and the assessments were assumed by Cereal Chemists. It seems to us unfair that they should be saddled with both assessments. If there is a legal problem invblved, I would like to meet with you together with Honnen Weiss, attorney for Effress to solve the matter. Very truly yours, Ada ;E. Parranto`'o EEP/nd encl. �, R neo NO C Q 49 II i tl _ia :ra uv nnne �ocn-nrc anmrr May 29, 1973 Mr. E. E. Parranto Parranto Brothers, Inc. 1220 Commerce Building St. Paul, MN 55101 RE: Eagan - Effress Addition Assessments Dear Pete: %'UD14QU vrgJ HOUAJH Z C1Y-AJ.IATF, aw,roT areQ ,ones urTTn2 sor-ca n'roa;rvniM ,auoseaxxrM uxe.r.rnra.M nuva.H .fl .mn9 rn Wl.a soao�p The Eagan Assessment Committee on May 23rd reviewed your request of May 14th concerning removing $3,320.00 worth of assessments on Lot 6, Block 3, Effress Addition and imposing the assessment on other lots not owned by American Cereal Chemists. It was the Assessment Committee recommendation to the Council that no shift in assewsments take place because it appeared to be an agreement between American Cereal Chumists and the developer on a private basis and such a shift would not be Permitted. If such an understanding was reached it would seem that the only way a change could take place would be to pay off the assessment on the American Cereal Chemists property in full. Very truly yours, Paul H. Hauge PHH:kw OctObor 199 1972 Edward Parranto 1202 Co®oroe Building St.Poul, MN V Dear Petoi Following is the breakdown of Lot 6 Bloch 30 Tffroso Addition which you requeatode PILOT KNOB ASSESSFI6 V Water Lateral, 200° at 04.60 par foot o 8920,00 Sower Lateral, 200° at 86,90 ger foot o 81380.00 Pair of Sorvico Stubo 8450.00 SIMM COM Water Lateral, 2000 at 06.00 par. 8mat3-. 81200.00 Sower Lateral, 2000 at 88.35 p= foot 81670.00 Pair of servico stubo 8450.00 Tho ontiro lot has storm donor of $1949.09 Tho orator axon in tho acount of 3 6 TOTAL ASSESSMM FOR LO, `' $9415.59 Call mo if you nood additional inforntion. J SPECIAL, ASSESSMENT DEPARTMENT Ann Oooro Assosomant Clerk a AGENDA Village of Fagan Assessment Committee October 23, 1973 6:30 p.m. 1. Consideration of method of assessment for water service to Carl Lange property in Section 22. 2. Consideration of assessment for James Lel-ov=?or sewer lateral, Section 8. L_; 3. Review Metro Sewer Board request for re�vction in assess- ment for Camanche Road and Kennebec Drive. 4. Consideration of easement requirements inn--Cedarvale area on Texaco property. io-a3-? -s i i0 WE AGF NDA Village of Fagan Assessment Committee October 23, 1973 6:30 p.m. 1. Consideration of method of assessment for water service to Carl Lange property in Section 22. 2. Consideration of assessment for James Lemke for sewer lateral, Section S. 3. Review Metro Sewer Board renuest for reduction in assess— ment for Camanche Road and Kennebec Drive. 4. Consideration of easement requirements ii, -tiarvale area on Texaco property. i