05/21/1986 - City Council RegularUL
ADMINISTRATIVE AGENDA
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
MAY 21, 1986
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY ADMINISTRATOR
1. Seasonal Workers/Utility Division
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS'
1. Final Plat Configuration - Hampton Heights
MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCILMEMBERS
FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES
DATE: MAY 19, 1986
SUBJECT: ADMINISTRATIVE AGENDA
ADMINISTRATOR
Item 1. (New) Seasonal Workers/Utility Division --It is the recom-
mendation of Superintendent of Utilities and Buildings Connolly
that the following people be hired as seasonal workers for the
Utility Division: Mark Dornseif, Blaine Robertson, Richard Robohm
and Andrew Dornseif.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the hiring of the
above-named personnel as seasonal workers for the Utility Division
of the Public Works Department.
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
1. Final Plat Configuration - Hampton Heights --The staff is in
the process of finalizing all information relating to the final
plat application for the Hampton Heights subdivision. There are
three main issues that must be resolved before this final plat
process can be presented to the Council for formal approval. They
are identified as follows:
1. Configuration of Pacific Avenue "stub" street to east bound-
ary line.
2. The designation and configuration of the remaining undevel-
oped property to be retained by Dr. Lyle Hay located
between Hampton Heights and Yankee Doodle Road adjacent to
Coachman Road.
3. Formal approval of a variance to street design standards
allowing a 10% street grade.
Street Configuration: Enclosed on page is a copy of the
final plat showing the area of concern. As can be seen, this stub
street will service four houses on a dead end street without any
provision for a temporary cul de sac. Due to the anticipation
that the property owner to the east will not subdivide and/or
develop his property in the near future, this "temporary" stub
street could be of a long duration.
Due the many configurations and revisions this plat encountered
during the preliminary process, its final list of conditions
inadvertantly omitted the requirement for the construction of a
full, temporary cul de sac similar to other subdivisions (Oak
Cliff 4th, Brittany 9th, etc.). Because this was not specifically
listed as a condition, the developer did not anticipate this need
and has since pre -sold those lots without a cul de sac provision
contained in the purchase agreement. The developer feels that the
City's requirement to provide a temporary cul de sac within his
.subdivision or, purchase land from Mr. Lemieux at this point in
time with pending final plat approval imminent, is restrictive as
he is unable to comply without the consent of external property
owners. The staff has recommended an alternative that the four
affected lots be platted as outlots to restrict their development
until Pacific Avenue is extended to the east to Federal Drive.
The developer has indicated this will result in a lawsuit resulting
from purchase agreements already executed by future homeowners.
The developer will be trying to acquire a permanent easement from
Mr. Lemieux to allow the construction of a cul de sac on his
property and the status will be made available at the May 21
Council meeting.
Outlot Configuration: The City requires that any time a parcel of
land is subdivided, the entire parcel must be platted with any
fVture development to be designated as an outlot. Dr. Hay has
retained ownership of the undeveloped land north of Hampton Heights
which is proposed to b designated as two outlots as shown on the
map enclosed on page. Dr. Hay has requested that one outlot
be designated for the existing, protected wetland to allow him to
dedicate this property to the City for either a parkland dedication
credit or pure donation. The Parks Department has no need or
desire ofa wetland and will not accept it for any credit of land
dedication. The Public Works Department is concerned that if this
wetland is designated as a separate outlot, it will eventually go
tax forfeit and come under the City's jurisdiction with all
related liabilities of full ownership.
Subsequently, the staff- is requiring the developer to either plat
the northerly undeveloped property as one entire outlot or delete
it from the plat. This deletion would require Council approval as
a variance to the"current subdivision ordinance.
Street Grades: This subdivision has two locations where street
grades exceed the 8% allowed by City ordinance and are being
constructed at 10%. Due to the severe topography of this pro-
perty's development into a single-family subdivision, the staff
has. worked with the developer to minimize the number and locations
of street grades that would exceed the current ordinance require-
ment of 8%. The enclosed map on page/(Iq shows the location and
length of street grades that are being pl nned at 10%. This again
will require formal Council variance to the ordinance prior to
final plat approval.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the
following requirements for final plat approval of the Hampton
Heights Addition: 1) the requirement of a temporary cul de sac or
removal of lots from development at the eastern stub street of
Pacific Avenue; 2) the platting of the remaining property north of
Hampton Heights as one outlot or its deletion from the plat
boundaries altogether; and 3) a 10% street grade in excess of the
8% ordinance.
/S/ Thomas L. Hedges
City A inistrator / )
ff% � � � % a•ia.]7xi
14
L �/ IY1716o a -,•`/ /o'' 15 1 1
1 1 r�� �,-�/
1 1 I I eo.ee
'00 ��1r
1� 22
�^lavu,
1+ 2l .al
I =/ l- 11•iele / /i 20 W/ /
1 1 1 =/ I� II17t1 O e C/ O
L.erte 1 1
-'/ t i
r11i-1. �r.
tir I
BOARDWALK �
a �J ��` !• ter— ar •• � T� Z�
d ` a
BALTIC AVE. I C
a
��• tea* —..—. , c r .
e
ST CHARLES PL
/ • ip I m
� x i
ellp
op
I`PO �I Ij I • y
n.'
Fr 09
a O l B
I
- T
' I
I.I%I
.ui Rlf .......... .I.IIq '
Pe'�'eJ. AY Mrq YI
.u�01'6- uq.�.my I.r1
I '
BOARDWALK i
Y/. I F uol�eaaY3 � ' I
BALTIC
x
ST. CHARLES PLI aA
o
1
o
r
{{{11{Ze
A
/
I
/
uoysaa�g
I
1
�
i
I
T
rt1
0 0 1 B
I
�
I
I
•cnr cra.z
I
I I
P
r/
AGENDA /
REGULAR MEETING
EAGAN CITY COUNCIL
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
CITY HALL
WEDNESDAY, MAY 21, 1986
6:30 P.M.
I. 6:30 - ROLL CALL & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
7.1 11. 6:35 - ADOPT AGENDA & APPROVAL OF MINUTES
,( III. 6:40 - DEPARTMENT HEAD BUSINESS
I A. Finance Department
Z B. Public Works Department
A." IV. 6:55 - CONSENT AGENDA
7A.
B.
9 C.
. /D D.
D•/( E.
�.13 F.
�.I3 G.
p• Itf H.
J.
Contractor Licenses
Personnel Items
Project 444R, Receive Report/Order Public Hearing (Holland Lake
Storm Sewer Outlet) ,
Project 468, Receive Report/Order Plans and Specs (Rahncliff
Addition - Trunk Watermain)
Contract 86-14, Receive Bids/Award Contract (Greensboro
Addition)
Project 475, Receive Report/Order Public Hearing (Daniel Drive -
Northview Meadows 2nd Addition)
Project 411, Approve Easement Acquisition Payment (Victor Staff)
Project 458, Receive Assessment Roll/Order Public Hearing
(Eagandale Center Industrial Park - Storm Sewer)
Project 471, Receive Assessment Roll/Order Public Hearing (West
Service Road - Storm Sewer)
Project 478, Receive Petition/Order Feasibility Report (Windtree
7th Addition)
V. 7:00 - PUBLIC HEARINGS
FA A. Public Hearing for Project 474, Eagandale Lemay Lake 2nd
Addition - Streets & Utilities
D.36 B. Public Hearing for Consideration and Review of the Sperry Tax
/ Increment Financing Plan
VI. OLD BUSINESS
c0 A. Preliminar Plat for Deerfield Addition (Eagan 40 Planned
Development) Containing 324 Apartment Units on Approximately 40
Acres Located at County Road 30 and Thomas Lake Road, NW 1/4 of
Section 28
�.6 B. Eagandale Office Park 3rd Addition - Reconsideration of Plat
/ Configuration
VII. NEW BUSINESS
69 A. Off -Sale Liquor License for Town Centre 70/Curtis Johnson
T.
6 B. James Unker for a 25' Variance from 50' Setback Requirement
I Along Public Street for Lot 10, Block 3, Clearview,Addition,
Located East of Lenore Lane & Fronting on Cliff Road, SE 1/4 of
/ Section 29
W C. William Huttner Construction, Inc. for 8.5' Variance from the
P50' Setback Requirement for Public Streets, Lot 1, Block 3,
Hillcrest Addition, Located NE Quadrant of Pilot Knob Road and
Rebecca Lane, NE 1/4 of Section 33
D. Corporate Construction, Inc., for 12.2' Variance from 40'
Sideyard Setback Requirement Along Public Street, Lot 1, Block
1, Birch Park Addition, Located NW Quadrant of Windcrest Ave.
and Denmark Ave, NW 1/4 of Section 22
$3 E. Conditional Use Permit for Chemical Dependency Center & a
P' Rezoning from R-1 Single Family Residential) to L.B. (Limited
Business) Located in Former Peace Reform Church Building in
Cedar Grove #4, Block 6, Lots 12-16 & 20, NE 1/4 of Section 30
(Diamond Drive on East and Nicola Road on West)
p `03 F. Preliminary Plat, T.E.M. Addition, Consisting of 3 Single Family
Lots on 3.6 Acres and a Rezoning from A to R-1, Located Golden
Meadow Road on the North & Schwanz Lake to the Southwest, NW 1/4
of Section 25
a. ((0 G. Preliminary Plat, Windtree 7th & 8th Additions (Judith Bright),
Consisting of 74 Single Family Lots on Approximately 35 Acres on
Outlot A of Windtree 6th Addition, Located North of Wescott Road
and East of Elrene Road, SW 1/4 of Section 13
H. Peter Stalland, Blackhawk Plaza One Year Preliminary Plat
1 Extension, Expiring 6/4/86, Located in NW Quadrant of County
Road 30 & I -35E, SE 1/4 of Section 20
I. Group W Cable - Transfer of Ownership
P•
VIII. ADDITIONAL ITEMS
A. On -Sale Liquor License Amendment
Ip /6Q B. Parks Department, Receive Bids/Award Contract (Skid Loader)
C. Contract 86-13, Approve Plans/Order Advertisement for Bids
(Wescott Road)
x./69 D. Contract 86-16, Approve Plans/Order Advertisement for Bids
(Eagandale Lemay Lake 2nd Addition)
/p,/70 E. Contract 86-17, Approve Plans/Order Advertisement for Bids
(Sperry Consolidation Facility)
/]/ F. Gun Club Lake Water Management Organization Budget Approval/
PPayment
IR. VISITORS TO BE HEARD (for those -persons not on the agenda)
X. ADJOURNMENT
MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR 8 CITY COUNCILMEMBERS
FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES
DATE': MAY 16, 1986
SUBJECT: AGENDA INFORMATION
ADOPT AGENDA APPROVE.MINUTES'
After approval is given to the May 21, 1986, agenda and regular
City Council meeting ,minutes for the May 6 meeting and special
City Council meeting minutes for April 29 (to be distributed on
Monday, May 19, 1986), the following items are in order for
consideration.
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
A. Finance Department, Review and Acceptance of 1985 Annual
Financial Report, -The Finance Department completed the Annual Finan-
cial Report for 1985 and that document has been fully examined by
Deloitte Haskins + Sells, independent, certified, public account-
ants. A copy of the financial report was distributed previously
to the City Council for their review. The format used for this
year's Annual Financial Report is consistent with the last two (2)
years. The report contained a transmittal letter that was prepared
by the Director of Finance and reviewed and signed by the City
Administrator, that outlines and explains the contents of the
financial report.
The approved General Fund budget for 1985 was $5,121,64,0. The
General Fund budget for both revenues and expenditures was adjusted
during 1985 to $5,180,000. The total expenditures and other
•financing uses as indicated in the letter of transmittal and audit
report was $5,149,755 --slightly less that the adjusted appropri-
ation. The total revenues and other financial sources is
$6,04'7,90'8 --substantially higher than the revenues that were budget-
ed for 1985. As an example, license and permits were budgeted at
$464,350 while the actual dollars received for that revenue source
in 1985 was $980,350. This type of increase occurs due to the
difference in the extraordinary construction activity that occurred
in 1985 and the conservative revenue forecasting that was performed
in the fall of 1984 for building activity. The contingency fund
budgeted in the amount $217,720 plus an additional $30,000, was
expended in 1985. For purposes of financial reporting, the
contingency is added into each of the Departmental expenditures
during the operating year. The fund balance increase for 1985 is
$898,153 which reflects healthy fiscal operations for the year.
The Director of Finance, City Administrator and representatives of
Deloitte Haskins + Sells will be available for questions at the
meeting on Tuesday.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the Annual
Financial Report for the City -of Eagan for the fiscal year ending
December 31., 1985.' /
Agenda Information Memo
May 21, 1986, City Council Meeting
Page Two
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
B. Public Works Department --There are two (2) items to be consi-
dered under Public Works Department:
1. Claim for Damages, Brian Lucas (Rahn Road Pothole) --Enclosed
on pages -13 and is a copy of a letter staff received
from Mr. 'Lucas, requesting the City of Eagan to reimburse him
for damages incurred to his vehicle. Mr. Lucas claims that the
damages resulted from his car hitting a pothole on Rahn Road
south of Beau D'Rue Drive. Due to -the—fact-- that—the --Public Works
Street Maintenance division is not able to insure that Rahn Road
remains free of potholes during the spring season in -its continuous
deteriorating condition, the Public Works Director would like
direction from the Council as to how to handle this and anticipated
similar future claims.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve/deny the claim
submitted by Brian Lucas for vehicle damage resulting from a
Rahn Road pothole.
0
•
•
4 rte. ka.. a it
Suite 120 • 4555 Erin Drive • St. Paul, Minnesota 55121
May 11, 1986
Mr. Tom Colbert
Director of Public Works
City of Eagan
Eagan, MN 55122
Dear Mr. Colbert:
As a sales representative for a national airline, I certainly
can empathize with complaint handling. Since deregulation of
our industry, we certainly have had our fair share of customer
® grievances. Rarely do I take the initiative to voice my dis-
content about a personal happening, unless I believe I have
good cause.
About two weeks ago I was driving southbound on Rahn Road from
the Beau D' Rue intersection (Cedarvale) when my car hit a huge
pothole. Since it was night and the traffic was steady, I could
not avoid hitting two more large craters. Each time my car took
a big dip and I could hear my right wheel hitting the fender with
a thud noise.
The next day I noticed a definite grinding noise coming from the
front right side. After concluding that something serious had
happened, I took the car into Car X for an inspection. The
mechanic there told me that I needed a new right wheel bearing
and new CV boot. He indicated that if I had continued to drive
my car with that condition, I might have had my wheel fall off the
axle. Needless to say, I got the wheel fixed right away.,
My car is a 1982 Audi 4000 with 70,000 miles on it. That's a
lot of miles but the mechanics I talked to said that wheel bear-
ings usually last six or seven years and to have a boot replaced
is rare before the car reaches 100,000 miles._ The two mechanics
at Car X and the one mechanic at Metropolitan Audi who I dis-
cussed this with all concurred that a hard impact from a large
pothole was the most probable cause..
I have noticed that you did repair some of the potholes on Rahn
Road, unfortunately it came too late for me. I am asking the
City of Eagan, of which I am a resident of and work within, to
reimburse me for the expenses involved in repairing my car to
its normal condition. Your handling of this matter will be
appreciated.
Sincerely,
Brian K. -Lucas
4395 Svensk Lane
Eagan, MN 55123
452-2492 Home
452-8100 Work
1014 County Rd. 42 W. #{ t-,-? 3s--
Burnsville, MN 55337
(612) 435-1874
SERVICE MGR.
0�
CUST. ORDER
DATE 1 19
CUSTOMER4 14 of /( 5,-//
ADDRESS �" ' W R h/2y
�,� y�,✓ y S z - 8/00
CITY
��JJTELEPHONE
MAKE OF CZ A R — LIC. NO. MILEAGE
BANK CASH K
CARD
CHARGE TRANSFER WARRANTY 'MERCHANDISE pAlO OUT
RETURNED
BRAKES
AMOUNT QTY. `'. EXHAUST AMOUNT
FRONTBRAKES
EX.
( I PADS OR SHOES $ PER SET
❑ RESURFACE ROTORS OR DRUMS
❑NEWGREASESEALS ❑ADD FLUID IF NEEDED
❑ CLEAN -INSPECT -REPACK WHEEL BEARINGS
EX.
EX.
EX.
MU.
REAR BRAKES
MU.
( I PADS OR SHOES S PER SET
❑ RESURFACE ROTORS OR DRUMS l
❑, REBUILD WHEEL CYLINDERS (I
❑ ADD FLUID IF NEEDED
OA
OA
T. P.
T. P.
NEW ROTORS OR DRUMS
CLAMPS
L -R - FR. L -R - RE.
GASKETS
CALIPERS - WHEEL CYLINDERS
FLANGES
L -R - FR. L -R - RE.
HANGERS
MASTER CYLINDER
OIL SEALS
BRAKE HARDWARE KIT
_TOTAL EXHAUST
SHOCK ABSORBERS
HOSE OR BRAKE LINES
MIS TS
FRONT
Was ,�'C
D REAR
o�T
ov
TOTAL BRAKES
LABOR
TOTALSHOCKS
BRAKES
SPRINGS ..:
EXHAUST
FRONT
SHOCKS
REAR
SPRINGS
OTHER
TOTAL SPRINGS
TOTAL LABOR
OTHER
I `- I TOT
IC: IPARTS TOTAL I lDA I OU
CAR -X FULL WARRANTIES
U.S. and Foreign Car Mufflers/Shocks/Brakes—See Warranty Certificate, LABOR TOTAIJ D U
U.S. and Foreign Car Pipes -. YOUR CAR -X PIPE IS UNDER WARRANTY to; one year from date of installation. SUBTOTAL D U
Should it wear out or rust out during that period, simply present this sales invoice or other evidence of date of installa-
tion and your car with the defective pipe to any CAR -X Muffler Shop. A new pipe will be installed at NO CHARGE for TAX Q
the pipe or for its installation.
For the location of the nearest CAR X Muffler Shop, consult your Yellow Pages or contact CAR -X Service Systems, Inc. a UR
at 444 N. Michigan Avenue, Chicago, Illinois 60611. C/
This warranty is made by CAR -X Service Systems, Inc., and gives you specific legal rights. you may also have other rights which vary from state to state. CAR -X is a
federaliy registered trademark of CAR -X Service Systems, Inc. Seller is a licensee of CAR -X Service Systems, Inc.
I hereby authorize the above repair work to be done along with the necessary material, and hereby grant you and/or your employees permission to operate thetar or
truck herein described on streets, highways or elsewhere for the purpose of testing a r inspection. An express mechanic's lien is hereby acknowledged on above
car or truck to secure the amount of repairs thereto.
X3594
625111 1 R 51841
Agenda Information
May 21, 1986, City
Page Three
Memo
Council Meeting
2. Project 460, Nicols Road Construction Schedule - State Aid
Financing --At the February 18, 1986 public hearing, the upgrading
of Nicols Road was approved for construction in 1986. Nicols
Road is presently designated as—County State Aid Highway #23
and is proposed to be turned back to the City jurisdiction in
the near future. As a part of that turn -back process, the County
is required to perform a certain amount of additional maintenance
which was determined to be equivalent to a 2" bituminous overlay.
Because of the pending City construction of this road, it was
determined to be more cost efficient to have the County participate
in this construction to the extent of their equivalent bituminous
overlay which is approximately $100,000.
• The City recently designated this segment of Nicols Road as a
Municipal State Aid Street. Before this designation can be approved
by the State, it required the revocation of the previous County
State Aid Highway designation. Because of the time frames associa-
ted with this revocation of County State Aid designation and
implementation of Municipal State Aid designation, the City was
not able to have our recognized construction financing needs
approved by the state in a time frame for inclusion in our 1986
State Aid allocation formula. The earliest these construction
needs can be identified would be for the 1987 construction alloca-
tions. However, if Nicols Road is upgraded in 1986, it will
have been upgraded and construction needs substantially reduced
when the 1987 allocations are to be determined. This results
in a loss of approximately $40,000 (5%) of our 1987 construction
fund allocation from the State. If Nicols Road construction
• were deferred until 1987, our future construction allocation
would be increased by that amount, which could be used to help
finance this road improvement.
In a related issue, the City has received notice from the
Commissioner of Highways that due to revenue shortfalls being
experienced by the State, the legislature has amended the 1987
allocations relating to Municipal State Aid financing. The result
is that Eagan will lose approximately $39,800 from the 1987
anticipated State Aid allocation construction financing.
The Public Works Director will be available to discuss these
impacts in greater detail at the Council meeting, in hopes of
receiving some direction as to when the construction of Nicols
Road would be most appropriate. Because of current workloads
and the plan preparation schedule, construction would not be
able to begin until approximately the middle of July, making the
completion during 1986 questionable.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To reaffirm or delay the
construction schedule of Project 460 (Nicols Road) for 1986 or
1987.
Agenda Information Memo
May 21, 1986, City Council Meeting
Page Four
There are ten (10) items on the agenda referred to as Consent
Items requiring one (1) motion by the City Council. If the
City Council wishes to discuss any of the items in further detail,
those items should be removed from the Consent Agenda and placed
under Additional Items unless the discuss required is brief.
CONTRACTOR LICENSES
A. Contractor Licenses --Attached on page is a list of
contractors who are renewing or who have been elected and retained
as the builder by a customer either living in or planning to
reside within the City of Eagan. These contractors have references
from other municipalities or their client permit applications
are awaiting City Council approval for a contractor license.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM:
contractor licenses as presented.
I
To approve the list of
Is
•
CONTRACTORS' LICENSE
MAY 20, 1986
1
GENERAL CONTRACTORS
.1.
DAKOTA BUILDERS INC
2.
DEZURIK COMPANY
3.
GILBERTSON CONSTRUCTION
4.
GUSTAFSON & ASSOCIATES
5.
M.W. JOHNSON CONSTRUCTION
6.
MCDONNELL.CONSTRUCTION
7.
MINNESOTA PETROLEUM SERVICE
8.
NEW IMAGE BUILDERS INC
9.
NULOOK REMODELERS
®
10.
S. PETERSEN CONSTRUCTION
11.
J.B. SWEDENBORG CONSTRUCTION
INC
12.
RELIABLE BUILDERS INC
13.
TECH. CON S. INC
14.
VAIL BUILDERS INC
15.
NCL CONSTRUCTION
HEATING & VENTILATING
MASONRY, CEMENT WORK
1.
FARMINGTON PLBG & HTG
1. BOB'S MASONRY INC
2.
GENERAL SHEET METAL
2. NORTH STAR BRICK WORK
®
PLUMBERS
SWIMMING POOL
1.
A-AARONS PLBG & SEWER
1. VALLEY POOLS INC
2.
BERQUAL PLBG.
3.
PAYCHECK PLBG.
WATER SOFTENER
4.
REGENCY PLBG.
1. KEYSTONE WATER PERFORMANCE
5.
TERRY STURM PLBG.
1
Agenda Information Memo
May 21, 1986, City Council Meeting
Page Five
PERSONNEL ITEMS
B. PERSONNEL ITEMS:
There are three items to be given consideration:
Item 1., Seasonal Workers/Park Department --Over 40 applications
were received by the City for seasonal positions in our Park
Department. After screening and interviews by Superintendent
of Parks VonDeLinde, it is his recommendation that the following
seven (;8) people be hiredas seasonal workers: Kevin Doehling,
Peter Ellinson, Steven Helland, Steven Martin, Hugh Peterson,
James Schovid, John VonBan'k and Tom Parker. In addition, it is rec-
ommended that Charles Barker be hired as seasonal ballfield
attendant.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the hiring
of the above listed personnel as seasonal workers for the Parks
Maintenance division.
Item 2, Engineering Tech Intern/Assistant--In the 1986 budget,
approval was given for two (2) Engineering Tech Interns/Assistants,
one for the Engineering Department and one for the Park Department.
Over 30 applications have been received for these positions.
After screeening of the applications by Administrative Assistant
Duffy, Assistant City Engineer Hefti, and Director of Parks and
Recreation Vraa, seven applicants have been called in for inter-
views. Those interviews will be held Friday morning, May 16.
• Recommendations for hiring for these two vacancies will be forwarded
with the Administrative Packet on Monday.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: . To approve the hiring
of two temporary Eng-ineering Tech Intern/Assistants.
Item 3, Resignation/Road Maintenance Worker --On May 15, 1986,
the City received a letter of resignation from Robert J. Shockley,
road maintenance worker, notifying the City that he intended
to retire, effective May 30, lH6. It will be necessary for
the Council to formally accept the resignation and to authorize
the filling of the vacancy.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To accept the resignation
of Robert J. Shockley, road maintenance worker, and to approve
the filling of the vacant position.
r
Agenda Information Memo
May 21, 1986, City Council Meeting
Page Six
PROJECT 444R, RECEIVE REPORT/ORDER PUBLIC HEARING
C. Project 444R, Receive Report/Order Public Hearing (Holland
Lake Storm Sewer Outlet) --On August 6, 1985, a public hearing
was held to discuss the proposed trunk area storm sewer improve-
ments including a lift station from the Holland Lake area around
Cliff Road in the southeastern portion of the City. This project
was initiated because of the increasing water level for the several
drainage basins located within this general drainage district.
At that time, there were comments and concerns from the Dakota
County Parks system as to variability to pay for their estimated
assessment obligation. Since that time, a special assessment
policy was adopted creating a special rate for storm sewer assess- •
ments over undeveloped regional parks.
Subsequent to this action, the staff then met again with representa-
tives of the County on several occasions to discuss various options.
The end result was a request from the County to be removed from
any consideration with this storm sewer project based on their
intention to handle all drainage within that park system.
Therefore, a new feasibility report has been prepared significantly
altering the proposed storm sewer facilities, ponding requirements
and lift station sizing. Any potential future desire by the
County to connect to our trunk system would result in future
assessments, county storm sewer improvements and restrictions
on time periods for the use of our system.
Therefore, this report is being presented with staff's request •
that a new public hearing be scheduled for June 17, to further
discuss the various options in greater detail with all potentially
affected property owners. Due to the above -normal rainfall
conditions experienced in the past two years, the need for this
major storm sewer outlet is becoming critical.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the revised
feasibility report for Project 444R (Holland Lake -Storm Sewer
Outlot) and order the public hearing for June 17, 1986.
PROJECT 468, RECEIVE REPORT/ORDER PLANS & SPECIFICATIONS
D. Project 468, Receive Report/Order Plans and Specifications
(Rahncliff Addition -Trunk Water Main) --As a part of the Rahncliff
Addition (southwest quadrant of Cliff Road and I -35E) the developer
intends to install all streets and utilities privately to service
this subdivision. However, there is a segment of trunk water
main with an appropriate pressure reducing station that must
be installed to connect this subdivision to the high pressure
system on the south side of 35E which is the trunk fund responsi-
bility.
-/
Agenda Information
May 21, 1986, City
Page Seven
Memo
Council Meeting
Therefore, staff has prepared a feasibility report discussing
the City's obligation to be financed through .the trunk water
fund. Due to the fact that all property within this benefitted
area has previously paid its related trunk area assessments,
there are no assessments associated with this project. Therefore,
no public hearing is necessary. The staff is requesting the
Council receive this report and order the preparation of detailed
plans and specifications to proceed with the improvement project.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the feasibility
report for Project 468 ('Rahncliff 1st Addition - Trunk Water
• Main') and authorize the preparation of plans and specifications.
•
AQ
Agenda Information
May 21, 1986, City
Page Eight
Memo
Council Meeting
CONTRACT 86-14, RECEIVE BIDS/AWARD CONTRACT
E. Contract 86-14, Receive Bids/Award Contract (Greensboro
Addition) --At 10:30 a.m. on Thursday, May 15, the staff received
formal bids for the installation of streets and utilities to
service the Greensboro Addition located north of Wescott Road
approximately 1/2 mile east of Lexington Avenue. Enclosed on
page /Y is tabulation of the bids received showing the relation-
ship of the low bidder to the estimate contained in the feasibility
report presented at the public hearing held on April 15, 1986.
All bids will be checked for accuracy on their extensions and
additions and any variations will be reported by the Public Works
Director at the Council meeting.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To
Contract 86-14 (Greensbor Addition) and
Ceca Utilities in the amount of $242,739.60,
receive the bids for
award the contract to
r]
1.
2.
3.
• 4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Our File No. 49386
CITY CONTRACT NO. 86-14
GREENSBORO ADDITION
UTILITY & STREET IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT NO. 470
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
CONTRACTORS
Ceca Utilities
Nodland Associates'
Encon Utilities
Northdale Construction
S. J. Louis Construction
Burschville Construction
Brown & Cris
M. Danner Trucking
Orfei & Sons .
Lake Area Utilities
/Z-",
BID TIME:.10:30 A.M., C.D.S.T.
BID DATE: Thursday, May 15, 1986
TOTAL BASE BID
242,739.60
2.50,.799.00
251,190.00
252,385.70
257,545.10
262,597.00
274,979.10
278,326.00
283,693.99
283,699.00
ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE------------ _ $275,000.00
5077d PEAS. REPORT EST.--------- 301,815.00
% UNDER ENG. EST.--------- 11.7%
% UNDER FEAS. REPORT EST.— 19 Ask
Agenda Information Memo
May 21, 1986, City Council Meeting
Page Nine
PROJECT 475/DANIEL DRIVE (NORTHVIEW MEADOWS 2ND)
F. Project 475, Receive Report/Order Public Hearing (Daniel Drive
- Northview Meadows 2nd Addition) --In response to a petition
received from the developer of the proposed Northview Meadows 2nd
Addition, the Council authorized the preparation of the feasibility
report for the installation of streets and utilities along Daniel
Drive (Old South Wescott Hills Drive). The developer is installing
the internal streets and utilities for this single family subdivi-
sion privately.
This report has now been completed .and: is—being--presented to the
Council in consideration of scheduling the public hearing.
• ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the feasibility
report for Project 475 (Daniel Drive - Northview Meadows 2nd
Addition) and schedule the public hearing to be held June 17, 1986.
PROJECT 411/APPROVE EASEMENT ACQUISITION PAYMENT
G. Project 411, Approve Easement Acquistion Payment (Victor
Staff) --Victor and Sharon Staff, owners of Lot 5, Block 1„ Skovdale
2nd Addition, previously appealed the proposed trunk area storm
sewer assessments under Project 411 which provided for the outlet
to the Birch Park ponds adjacent to their east property line.
They also filed an inverse condemnation action against the City
as a result of the establishment of ,the permanent, controlled
• water elevation which encroached onto their property.
This assessment appeal was considered by the Special Assessment
Committee at their January 16, 1986, meeting and their recommenda-
tion to reduce the trunk area assessment and to negotiate an
acquisition of a ponding easement was approved by Council action
at the February 4th meeting.
Subsequently, our City Attorney's office has negotiated this
easement acquisition in accordance with the City's rate schedule.
Therefore„ the staff is recommending concurrence by the Council
for payment for this easement acquisition and authorization
to execute the settlement agreement which dismisses the inverse
condemnation action also.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the settlement
agreement for Project 411 for Lot 5, Block 1, Skovdale 2nd Addition
(Victor Staff) providing for payment for acquisition of an easement
and authorize the Mayor to execute said agreement.
/3
Agenda Information Memo
May 21, 1986, City Council Meeting
Page Ten
PROJECT 458/EAGANDALE CENTER INDUSTRIAL PARK
H. Project 458, Receive Assessment Roll/Order Final Assessment
Hearing (Eagandale Center Industrial Park - Storm Sewer) --In
response to concerns regarding potential appeals for special
assessments associated with the above -referenced project, the
Council determined that the final assessment should be adopted
prior to awarding the contract for the installation of the util-
ities. On May 6, formal bids were received and authorization
was given to proceed with the preparation of the final assessment
roll which has now been completed and is being presented to
the Council in consideration of scheduling the formal public
hearing.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the final assess- •
ment roll for Project 458 (Eagandale Center Industrial Park
- storm sewer) and order the final assessment hearing to be
scheduled for June 17, 1986.
PROJECT 471/WEST SERVICE ROAD
I. Project 471, Receive Assessment Rolls/Order Final Assessment
Hearing (West Service Road - Storm Sewer) --In response to a
petition received from the proposed developers of property adjacent
to the West Service Road, the Council authorized the preparation
of a feasibility report and scheduled the public hearing. Due
to the developer's waiver of the public hearing process and
guarantee of all costs associated, the Council authorized the
preparation of plans and specifications which were combined
under the same contract with Project 458, previously discussed.
These projects were combined because of their similarities,
location and economies of scale theory. Therefore, because
the contract cannot be awarded until the final assessment hearing
is held for Project 458, it is appropriate that the final assess-
ment roll for Project 471 also be held at the same time to deter-
mine if there are any objections or appeals anticipated.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the assessment
roll for Project 471 (West Service Road - storm sewer) and order
the final assessment hearing to be held June 17, 1986.
/I/
\J
Agenda Information Memo
May 21, 1986, City Council Meeting
Page Eleven
PROJECT 478, RECEIVE PETITION/ORDER FEASIBILITY REPORT
J. Project 478, Receive Petition/Order Feasibility Report (Windtree
7th Addition) --We have received a petition from the developers
of the proposed Windtree 7th Addition requesting Council authoriza-
tion to prepare a feasibility report to discuss the installation
of streets and utilities through the public hearing process.
The developer has agreed to guarantee all costs associated with
the preparation of this report if for some reason it is not approved
at the time of the public hearing. Later on in the agenda, the
Council will be considering a prelim nary - plat --approvalfor the
® Windtree 7th and 8th Addition. The developer is only petitioning
for the 7th Addition, as they intendto continue their phased
development.
10
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the petition
and authorize the preparation of the feasibility report for Project
478 (Windtree 7th Addition - Streets and Utilities).
11b,
Agenda Information Memo
May 21, 1986, City Council Meeting
Page Twelve
PROJECT 474/EAGANDALE LEMAY LAKE 2ND ADDITION
A. Project 474, Eagandale Lemay Lake 2nd Addition - Streets
& Utilities) --In response to a petition received from the developer
of the above -referenced subdivision, the Council authorized
the preparation of a feasibility report which was completed
and presented on April 15th with the public hearing being scheduled
for May 21. Enclosed on pages_Z7 through 35 is a copy of
the feasibility report for the Council's information and review
during the public hearing. All notices have been published
in the legal newspaper and sent to all property owners proposed
to be assessed under this project. The consulting engineer
and Public Works Director will be_._avai7able--- to. discuss, this
project in further detail at the Council meeting.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing
and approve/deny Project 474, Eagandale Lemay Lake 2nd Addition
(Streets and Utilities).
/6
•
L
REPORT
ON
EAGANDALE LEMAY LAKE 2nd ADDITION
® UTILITY & STREET IMPROVEMENTS
0
PROJECT No. 474
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
FILE No. 49370
Baaed400, Rade~., felm"ih 9 Yq""se�r .9im
r�
Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates, Inc.
2335 W. Trunk Highway 36
St. Paul, MN 55113
612.636-4600
April 7, 1986
Engineers & Architects
Honorable Mayor and Council
City of Eagan
3830 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, MN 55122
Re: Eagandale LeMay Lake 2nd Addn.
Utility & Street Improvement .
Project No. 474
File No. 49390
Dear Mayor and Council:
all. G. tlunabuu, P E,
Rubra W. R.rnr, P.E,
J.gih C. Anderlik, P.L.
tlmd/urd A. P.E.
Rirhurd E. Turner, P.E.
lum. C. Ohun, P.E.
Glenn R. C.A. P.E.
A'rirh A. Gbrdun. Y.E.
Thum. E. Nuyn, P E.
Ruha,d W. P.E.
Robyn G. &hunirb, P,E-
Murvm L. Sorvula, P.E.
Donald C. tlurkardr, P.E.
lrrry A. Rovrdun. P.E.
AN,k A. Moan. P.E.
Ted A. hod, P.E.
Mirhurl T Ruunnunn. P.E.
RulnmR Yl'VJ' l5E
Duvld O. Lmkum. P.E.
Thum. W. Puenun. Y.E.
Mirhuel C. Lynch, P E.
Auren L. Willa. P.E.
Jume, R. Afuland, P.E.
Arnnuh P. dndrnun. P.E.
Aeilh A. tlarhvann, P.E.
Murk R- R.Ift, P.E.
Robyrf C Runk. A.I.A.
Th., . E. A... , P.E.
Sruu L. Yu un X. PE.
Churles A. E'rirbun
Lru Af. P.—Aky
Nurlun Al. OLun
Suran .N. Ebrlin
Transmitted herewith is our report for LeMay Lake 2nd Addition, Project No.
474. This report covers sanitary sewer, water main, storm sewer and street
construction and includes a preliminary assessment roll.
We would be pleased to meet with the Council and other interested parties at a
mutually convenient time to discuss any aspect of this report.
Yours very truly,
BONESTR00, ROSEENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Marr. Hanson
MAH:li
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 Minnesota.
T Mark A. Hanson
Date: March 10, 1986 Reg. No. 14260
Approved By:
Department of P jic Works
Date :
4308d 30 Year
n 7
9`ri -r. Cryv
SCOPE: This project provides for the construction of sanitary sewer, water
main, storm sewer and street to serve the proposed Eagandale LeMay Lake 2nd
Addition. Eagandale LeMay Lake 2nd Addition will be located in the southwest
quadrant of Lone Oak Road and I -35E (Parcels 030-26, 020-26, 010-01, and
010-04). Eagandale LeMay 2nd Addition includes one platted lot approximatey 4
acres in size and two outlots approximately 8 acres in size. The platted lot
will include a 120 room Residence Inn while the two outlots are not intended
to be developed at this time, however, are presently zoned for commercial use.
FEASIBILITY AND RECOMMENDATION: The project—iseasible_from_an .engineering
• standpoint and is in accordance with the Master Utility and Street Plan for
the City of Eagan. The project can best be carried out as one contract.
DISCUSSION:
Sanitary Sewer - Sanitary sewer proposed herein includes constructing an 8"
diameter PVC sanitary sewer within Eagandale Place as shown on the attached
drawing. The sanitary sewer will be constructed at a proper elevation to pro-
videgravity service to the abutting lot and outlots in Eagandale LeMay Lake
2nd Addition. The sanitary sewer will connect to the existing sanitary sewer
in Eagandale Place at two separate locations. Sanitary sewer service stubs
® will also be extended to the property line at 7 different locations.
Water Main - Water main proposed herein includes constructing an 8" diameter
D.I.P. water main within Eagandale Place as shown on the attached drawing.
The water main will connect to an existing 8" and 12" diameter water main in
Eagandale Place at two separate locations. At the time the 12" diameter water
main was extended from Eagandale Place, it was not known how the adjacent
properties would develop. Therefore, the 12" was extended in anticipation of
a heavy water use. However, based on the proposed Residence Inn development
and the future light commercial use that is anticipated, it is not felt the
Page 1.
4308d
l�
12" main will be required. As a result, an 8" diameter water main is proposed
to be constructed in Eagandale Place in conjunction with the proper number of
valves, hydrants and service extensions. In addition, an 8" diameter water
stub is proposed from Eagandale Place to the north to Outlot A as indicated.
This 8" stub will be extended in the future and connect to the existing 16"
trunk in Lone Oak Road once its alignment can be determined based on future
development.
STORM SEWER: Storm sewer proposed herein includes constructing two separate
lateral storm sewer systems as shown on the attached drawing. The lateral
storm sewers will range in size from 15" to 24" and will connect to the exist- •
ing storm sewer system in Eagandale Place. As noted, the southerly system
will extend to I -35E right-of-way and will convey runoff generated from a por-
tion of that right-of-way. Presently runoff from this portion of right-of-way
is conveyed overland to the existing storm .sewer in Eagandale Place. However,
this overland drainage will be blocked as a result of the grading within
Eagandale LeMay Lake 2nd Addition.
Street - Street construction proposed herein includes constructing Eagandale
Place to a 9 ton design thickness and 36' wide width. Bituminous surfacing,
B618 concrete curb and gutter and sodding of the boulevards is also included.
The existing cul-de-sac located at the southerly end of the existing portion
of Eagandale Place will be removed as shown, thus requiring the reconstruction
of the existing driveway to the cul-de-sac. It is also proposed to construct
a 5' wide concrete sidewalk as shown on the attached drawing. The developer
has also requested the final wearing course be constructed in the spring of
1987.
4308d Page 2.
2a
AREA TO BE INCLUDED:
ASSESSMENT AND CONSTRUCTION AREA
N 1/2, SECTION 10
Parcel 010-01, 010-04, 020-26, 030-26
EAGANDALE LEMAY LAKE 1ST ADDITION
Lot 1, Block 1
COST ESTIMATE: A detailed cost estimate is presented in Appendix A located at
the back of this report. A summary of these costs is as follows:
Sanitary Sewer $ 25,650
Water Main 59,700
® Storm Sewer 65,460
Street 153,270
TOTAL ............ $304,080
The total estimated project cost is $304,080 which includes contingencies
and all related overhead. Overhead costs are estimated at 30% and include
legal,, engineering, administration and bond interest.
ASSESSMENTS: Assessments are proposed to be levied against the benefited
.property. A preliminary assessment roll is included at the back of this re-
port in Appendix B. All lateral costs will be revised based on final costs.
® These assessments will be spread over a period of time as determined by the
City Council at the Public Hearing. The interest rates will be based upon the
latest bond sale at the time of the final assessment hearing.
SANITARY SEWER: It is proposed to assess the total cost of lateral sanitary
sewer on an area basis to the benefited lot and outlots in Eagandale LeMay
Lake 2nd Addition. Trunk area sanitary sewer was previously assessed.
WATER MAIN: It is proposed to assess the total cost of lateral water main on
an area basis to the benefited lot and outlots in Eagandale LeMay Lake 2nd Ad-
dition. In addition, it is proposed to upgrade the trunk area water assess -
Page 3.
4308d
Z/
previously levied at the multiple family rate to a
ment from that which was p Y
ould be determined based
commercial/ industrial rate. This difference which w
on the 1986 Trunk Area Assessment Rates and would be assessed to a portion of
Parcel 020-26, 030-26 and 010-04 as shown on the attached drawing.
STOP R: It is proposed to assess the -total cost of lateral storm sewer
Eagandale LeMay Lake 2nd
on an area basis to the benefited lot and outlots in
Addition. Trunk area storm sewer was previously assessed.
STREET: It is proposed to assess the total cost of street including sidewalk
on an area basis to the benefited lot and outlots in Eagandale LeMay Lake 2nd
•
Addition.
4308d
Page 4.
Z?2
•
REVENUE: Revenue sources to cover the cost of this project are as follows:
C. STORM SEWER
Lateral $ 65,460
Lateral Assessment $ 65,460
$ 65,460 $ 65,460 - 0 -
E. STREET
Lateral $153,270
Lateral Assessment $153,270
$153,270 $153,270 - 0 -
The trunk fund balance for this project is +$16,488.
43084
Page 5.
y3
Project
Cost
Revenue Balance
A. SANITARY SEWER
Lateral
$ 25,650
Lateral Assessment
$
25,650
$ 25,650
$
25,650 - 0 -
B. WATER MAIN
Lateral
$ 59,700
®
Lateral Assessment
$
59,700
Trunk Area Upgrade Assessment
16,488
$ 59,700
$
76,188 +$16,488
C. STORM SEWER
Lateral $ 65,460
Lateral Assessment $ 65,460
$ 65,460 $ 65,460 - 0 -
E. STREET
Lateral $153,270
Lateral Assessment $153,270
$153,270 $153,270 - 0 -
The trunk fund balance for this project is +$16,488.
43084
Page 5.
y3
PROJECT SCHEDULE
Present Feasibility Report April 15, 1986
Public Hearing May 20, 1986
Approve Plans & Specifications May 20, 1986
Open Bids/Award Contract June 17, 1986
Construction Completion Fall, 1986
Final Assessment Hearing Spring, 1987
First Payment Due with Real Estate Taxes May, 1988
Page 6.
43084
'Z C/
APPENDIX A
PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE
EAGANDALE LEMAY LAKE 2ND ADDITION
UTILITY AND STREET IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT NO. 474
4308d
TOTAL WATER MAIN .................................. $ 59,700
Page 7.
z5
A. SANITARY SEWER
620
Lin.ft.
8" PVC Sanitary sewer @ $13.00/lin.ft.
$ 8,060
140
Lin.ft.
6" PVC Sanitary sewer @ $8.00/lin.ft.
1,120
5
Each
Std. 4' dia. MH w/cstg. @ $950.00/each
4,750
30
Lin.ft.
MH depth greater than 8' dp. @ $70.00/lin.ft.
2,100
2
Each
Connect 8" PVC to existing sanitary sewer @_$500.00/ea.
1,000
100
Cu.yds.
Rock stabilization below pipe @ $10.00/cu.yd.
1,000
•
760
Lin.ft.
Mechanical trench compaction @ $1.00/lin.ft.
760
Total
$ 18,790
+52 Contingencies
940
$ 19,730
+302 Legal, Engrng., Admin. 6 Bond Interest
5,920
TOTAL SANITARY SEWER ...............................
$ 25,650
B. WATER MAIN
1,600
Lin.ft.
8" DIP Water main in pl. @ $15.00/lin.ft.
$ 24,000
10
Lin.ft.
6" DIP Water main in pl. @ $12.00/lin.ft.
120
2
Each
Hydrant @ $1,000.00/each
2,000
®
4
Each
8" Resilient wedge gate valve 6 box @ $450.00/each
1;800
8,000
Lbs.
Fittings in pl. @ $1.50/lb.
12,000
2
Each
Connect 8" DIP to existing water main @ $600.00/ea.
1,200
100
Cu.yds.
Rock stabilization below pipe @ $10.00/cu.yd.
1,000
1,610
Lin.ft.
Mechanical trench compaction @ $1.00/lin.ft.
1,610
Total
$ 43,730
+52 Contingencies
2,190
$ 45,920
+302 Legal, Engrng., Admin. 5 Bond Interest
13,780
4308d
TOTAL WATER MAIN .................................. $ 59,700
Page 7.
z5
C. STORM SEWER
450
Lin.ft.
24" RCP Storm sewer @ $36.00/lin.ft.
$
16,200
160
Lin.ft.
21" RCP Storm sewer @ $32.00/lin.ft.
5,120
175
Lin.ft.
18" RCP Storm sewer @ $26.00/lin.ft.
4,550
350
Lin.ft.
15" RCP Storm sewer @ $22.00/lin.ft.
7,700 .
6
Each
Std. 4' dia. MH w/cstg. @ $1,200.00/each
7,200 .
1
Each
Std. CB MH w/cstg. @ $900.00/each
900
3
Each
Std. CB w/cstg. @ $850.00/each
2,550
1
Each
Relocate existing CB @ $700.00/each
700
1
Each
15" RCP flared end w/trash guard @ $500.00/each
500
8
Cu.yds.
Rip rap @ $50.00/cu. yd. _' — — -- ---
400
100
Cu.yds.
Rock stabilization below pipe @ $10.00/cu.yd.
1,000 40
1,135
Lin.ft.
Mechanical trench compaction @ $1.00/lin.ft.
1,135
Total
$
47,955
+5% Contingencies
2,395
$
50,350
+30G Legal, Engrng., Admin. 6 Bond Interest
15,110
TOTAL STORM SEWER .................................
$
65,460
•
43084 Page 8.
76
D. STREET
6,760
Sq.yds.
Subgrade preparation @ $0.50/sq.yd.
$ 3,380
200
Cu.yds.
Select granular borrow @ $6.00/cu.yd.
1,200
700
Cu.yds.
Subgrade correction @$3.00/cu.yd.
2,100
150
Lin.ft.
Remove concrete curb 6 gutter @ $2.00/lin.ft.
300
600
Sq.yds.
Remove bituminous pavement @ $1.00/sq.yd.
600
3,300
Ton
Class 5 100% crushed quarry rock @ $7.00/ton
23,100
1,060
Ton
2331 Bituminous base course @ $11.00/ton
11,660
530
Ton
2341 Bituminous wear course @ $13.00/ton
6,890
85
Ton
Bituminous material for mixture @ $200.00/ton
17,000
300
Gal.
Bituminous material for tack coat @ $1.50/gal.
450
3,200
Lin.ft.
B618 concrete curb 5 gutter @ $5.00/lin.ft.
16,000
9,500
Sq.ft.
Concrete sidewalk (5' wide) @ $2.00/sq.ft.
19,000
4,300
Sq.yds.
Sod w/3" topsoil @ $2.00/sq.yd.
8,600
2.0
Acres
Seed with mulch 6 fertilizer @ $1,000.00/Ac.
2,000
Total
$112,280
+5% Contingencies
5,620
$117,,900
+30% Legal, Engrng., Admin. 6 Bond Interest
35,370
TOTAL STREET .....................................
$153,270
is
Page 9.
4308d
'�-7
APPENDIX B
PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL
EAGANDALE LEMAY LAKE 2ND ADDITION
UTILITY AND STREET IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT NO. 474
A. SANITARY SEWER
Parcel
4.36
Ac. $ 811
$ 3,534
Outlot A
8.04
Total
Description
Outlot B
Area
Ac. 811
Cost/Ac.
Assessment
LEMAY LAKE 2ND
ADDITION
$ 16,488
Lot 1, Block 1
4.36
Ac.
$1,261
$
5,498
Outlot A
8.04
Ac.
1,261
10,139
Outlot B
7.94
Ac.
1,261
10,013
20.34
Ac.
$
25,650
B. WATER MAIN
a) Lateral
LEMAY LAKE 2ND
ADDITION
Lot 1, Block 1
4.36
Ac.
$2,935
$
12,797
Outlot A
8.04
Ac.
2,935
23,598
Outlot B
7.94
Ac.
2,935
23,305
20.34
Ac.
$
59,700
b) Trunk Area Upgrading
N 1/2, SECTION
10
Parcel 010-04
0.14
Ac.
$1,830/Ac.(I)
$
256
Parcel 020-26
3.44
Ac.
1,830/Ac.
6,295
Parcel 030-26
5.43
Ac.
1,830/Ac.
9,937
$ 16,488
LEMAY LAKE 2ND ADDITION
Lot 1, Block 1
4.36
Ac. $ 811
$ 3,534
Outlot A
8.04
Ac. 811
6,517
Outlot B
7.94
Ac. 811
6,437
20.34
Ac.
$ 16,488
(1) Rate determined by difference of 1986 commercial/industrial rate and resi—
dential rate ($3,020/Ac. —$1,190/Ac. = $1,830/Ac.)
Page 10.
4308d 7 �
•
C. STORM SEWER
Total
Parcel
Area
Cost/Ac.
Assessment
Description
LEMAY LAKE 2ND ADDITION
$ 14,032
4.36
Ac.
$3,218
Lot 1, Block 1
3,218
25,875
Outlot A
8.04
Ac.
3,218
25,553
7.94
Ac_
Outlot B
$ 65,460
20.34
Ac.
D. STREET
LEMAY LAKE 2ND ADDITION
$ 32,854
4.36
Ac.
$7,535
Lot 1, Block 1
-7,535 "–
— 60,585
8.04
Ac.
• Outlot A
7.94
Ac.
7,535
59,831
Outlot B
$153,270
20.34
Ac.
•
4308d
Page 11.
I :•
SUMMARY
PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL
EAGANDALE LEMAY LAKE 2ND ADDITION
PROJECT NO. 474
Parcel
Water Main
Sanitary
Trunk
Storm
Total
Description
Sewer
Lateral
Area
Sewer
Street
Assessment
EAGANDALE LEMAY
LAKE 2ND ADDITION
Lot 1, Blk. 1
$ 5,498
$12,797
$3,534
^$14,032
$32,854
$ 68,715
Outlot A
10,139
23,598
6,517
25,875
60,585
126,714
OuYlot B
10,013
23,305
6,437
25,553
59,831
125,139
Page 12.
4308d
EAGANDALE CENTER
1 i
1 1
1 �
, 1
1 1
LONE
PARK f'•7
____----------___--------------------- ___-
1
LAKE
010-57
-------------------- �---
OUTLOT A
1 ,
1
'! as
' d d
r
/
t i
t 1
PROPOSED B°
i
�p
SANITARY SEWER
f
A\O�
0 100, 200'
/ ' Gropnic Scale in Feet
V ooh
9
p
�
III
P�
pop �5
; ;
U
LAKE
010-57
-------------------- �---
OUTLOT A
1 ,
1
'! as
' d d
r
/
t i
t 1
EAGANDALE LEMAY LAKE 2nd ADDITION
SANITARY SEWER
PROJECT No. 474
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
3/
SONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK
& ASSOCIATES, INC.
Consulting Engineers
St. Paul. Minn.
Date: Aprl1, 1986
Comm. 49390 11 FIG. No.
PROPOSED B°
i
`
SANITARY SEWER
f
0 100, 200'
/ ' Gropnic Scale in Feet
9
I i
III
w' •
; ;
U
a.
LOT I
i
BLOCK I
LU 11
'
in i
Q, I'
PROPOSED 8"
SANITARY SEWER
t r
/ r
010-02
010-01
r
OUTLOT B
,/ i/
010-05
EAGANDALE LEMAY LAKE 2nd ADDITION
SANITARY SEWER
PROJECT No. 474
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
3/
SONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK
& ASSOCIATES, INC.
Consulting Engineers
St. Paul. Minn.
Date: Aprl1, 1986
Comm. 49390 11 FIG. No.
i EAGANOALE CENTER /NOUSTR AL PARK 11'
LONE 0 K IROAD j
---------------------------------------------
,
------,
---------------
�� 11 OUTLOT A
\ , ,
PROPOSED 8"
�. WATER MAIN
.//0 / 0 100 200'
I ; Gropric Smle in Feel
w �I
U
(Li 1
0- LOT I BLOCK I
/ !
1 0� J
IV QO Q i1 I % / `I
Il
LLJ
I it
gyp. 1/ 41 / ,• / "/
,
010-i 2
LEVA Y LAKE
I,I/
010-57 OUTLOT 8 010-05
EAGANDALE LEMAY LAKE 2nd ADDITION DONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK
& ASSOCIATES, INC.
WATER MAIN Consulting Engineers
PROJECT No. 474 St. ,Paul. Minn.
EAGAN. MINNESOTA at®• ApliL,1986 FIG. No, 2
Comm. 49390 11
•
EAGANDALE UWPV KH
hVVVSrR 4L AN
LONE 0 K ROAD
01042
EAGANDALE LEMAY LAKE 2nd ADDITION
ASSESSEMENTS
PROJECT No. 474
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
�53
BONESTROO, ROSENE. ANDERLIK
& ASSOCIATES, INC.
Consulting Engineers
St. Paul, Minn.
Date: AprM. 1966
Comm. 49390 FIG. No. 3
11
EAGANDALE CENTER
a—�
LEMAY LAKE
010-57
LONE
PARK
AD F
l •7
------------
I ,
A 00\
P
�
OUTLOT A
�; ..
LEMAY LAKE
010-57
LONE
PARK
AD F
i
EAGANDALE LEMAY LAKE 2nd ADDITION
STORM SEWER
PROJECT No. 474
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK
& ASSOCIATES, INC.
Consulting Engineers
St. Paul. Minn.
Date: Ap'iL 1986
Comm. 49390
FIG. No. 4
l •7
------------
I ,
i
EAGANDALE LEMAY LAKE 2nd ADDITION
STORM SEWER
PROJECT No. 474
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK
& ASSOCIATES, INC.
Consulting Engineers
St. Paul. Minn.
Date: Ap'iL 1986
Comm. 49390
FIG. No. 4
------------
OUTLOT A
�; ..
ROPOSED
STORM SEWER
+ ��
I'D 100' 200'
Gropnic Srule in Feei
4-1
I
U
'
0-
I
'
LOT 1
� I
I
ti
BLOCK I
41
i
i I
w�;
24'
IPROPOSED
STORM SEWER
, / j ,
,
010-02
010-01
010-05
OUTLOT B
� � ,� ��
i
EAGANDALE LEMAY LAKE 2nd ADDITION
STORM SEWER
PROJECT No. 474
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK
& ASSOCIATES, INC.
Consulting Engineers
St. Paul. Minn.
Date: Ap'iL 1986
Comm. 49390
FIG. No. 4
i `i EAGANDALE CENTER /NDUSTRAL PARK
LONE OAK ROAD
--------------------------------------------------------
1
-----------------
I I I I
I , I
I I
I � �
I OUTLOT A
V
I` PROPOSED 5' WIDE I '
CONCRETE SIDEWALK i
I i
PROPOSED STREET
IMPROVEMENTS
l36' F -FI i 0 100' 200'
I I
I
I Gropnic Style in Feel
i
I I I if
'
1
w
Q I I I i i
v a Lor I it ;
vp i BLOCK 1 I ;/
w f
y �t� J
REVE
Z I. y�CUL-DE-SAC
Q w I � �•,
I
RECONSTRUCT
DRIVEWAY i'
LEMAY LAKE 010 02
/
010-01
010-57 JII OUTLOT B 010-05
EAGANDALE LEMAY LAKE 2nd ADDITION
STREET IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT No. 474
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
35
SONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK
& ASSOCIATES, INC.
Consulting Engineers
St. Paul. Minn.
Date; April, 1986
Comm. 49390 11 FIG. NO. 5
Agenda Information Memo
May 21, 1986, City Council Meeting
Page Thirteen
SPERRY TIF
B. Public Hearing for Consideration and Review of the Sperry Tax
Increment Financing Plan --The City Administrator and Director of
Finance have held several meetings—with representatives of the
Sperry Corporation to finalize the development program document
and tax increment financing plan for Economic Development District
#1. The City Administrator explained at the last City Council
meeting held on May 6, that a problem had arisen regarding
separate tax parcels as it relates to the Sperry tax increment
financing plan. There was some concern that platting may be
required in order to establish a separate taxing district for the
new project that would allow the increment to properly retire the
tax increment bonds. Since that City Council meeting, the Director
of Assessing for Dakota County has allowed the new building a
separate tax parcel description which will allow the i'•ncrement to
function properly. The City Administrator presented the types of
uses that are agreeable by the City Council for inclusion in the
tax increment financing plan. Screening of the building was
eliminated. The following is a cost breakdown for the project:
Discount
$6,963
Capitalized Interest
63,555
Issuance
7,000
Park Trail
32,000
Signals
55,000
Storm Drainage
139,000
Water Distribution
83,800
Sanitary Lines
48,000
Fire Loop
•
125,000
Irrigation/Hydrants
60,000
On -Site Loop Road
45,000
$665,318
The difference which is estimated at $34,682 can be applied to
engineering and administrative expenses that were incurred for the
design of the aforementioned project cost. If the project costs
exceed the $700,000, the Sperry Corporation will be required to
fund the difference,. All projects that are financed by the use of
tax increment bonds must be publicly bid by the City. The City
and Sperry Corporation will enter into various agreements that
cover such items as cost overruns, inspection and project coordina-
tion and guarantees that an adequate tax increment will be gener-
ated if the Sperry Corporation is sold in the future.
3b
Agenda Information Memo
May 21, 1986, City Council Meeting
Page Fourteen
A copy of the revised development program and' tax increment
financing plan for Economic Development District #1 are enclosed
for City Council review on pages 39 through.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THISITEM: Close the public hearing
with final action taken at the June 17, 1986, City Council meeting
to adopt the development program and tax increment financing plan
for the Sperry project. (The reason for no action until June 17
allows the 30 -day review by Dakota County and Independent School
District #197 to be satisfied.
•
37
•
CITY OF EAGAN, MINNESOTA
Tax Increment Financing Plan
Economic Development District #1
May 6, 1986
39
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Pace
INTRODUCTION .............................................. 1
BACKGROUND
................................................
1
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM
.......................................
Objectives
1
...........................................
1
Project Description ..................................
2
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING �......................
2
Statutory Authorization ..............................
2
Basis for Findings
...................................
3
District'Certification and Duration of Tax
Increment Financing District .......................
3
Prior Planned Improvements ...........................
4
Original Assessed Value ...............................
4
Bonded Indebtedness
..................................
4
Estimated Captured Assessed Value and Tax Increment ..
4
Estimated Sources,and Uses of Funds ..................
5
Uses of Tax Increment
5
................................
Additional Financings .................................
5
Fiscal Disparities
...................................
6
Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions .................
6
EXHIBIT
A - Development Program for Economic Development
District No. 1 ................................... A-1
J�
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT No. 1
CITY OF EAGAN, MINNESOTA
INTRODUCTION
This Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "Plan") has been
prepared by the City of Eagan, Minnesota (the "City") under the
requirements of the Minnesota Tax Increment Financing Act (the
"Act"), Minnesota Statutes, Sections 273.71-273.78. The City
herein proposes and describes the. establishment of a Tax Incre-
ment Financing District within the coterminous Economic Develop-
ment District No. 1, for purposes of financing public improve-
ments required to support a major private -sector development,
® consisting of a proposal by Sperry Corporation to construct and
operate a 295,000 square foot office and computer center and
related facilities (the "Improvements").
BACKGROUND
The City Council has called for a public hearing on the
formation of both Economic Development District No. 1 and the Tax
Increment Financing District, for May 21, 1986. On June 17, 1986,
subject to public input, the Council will consider both the
Development Program and the Tax Increment Financing Plan. Economic
Development District No. 1 is being established as a Development
District pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 472A.
A copy of the proposed Development Program for Economic
Development District No. 1 and a legal description of the
® District are attached as an, Exhibit to this Plan and are hereby
incorporated by reference as part of this Plan.
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM
Objectives
The objectives sought to be accomplished by the City in
establishing Economic Development District No. 1 are as follows:
1. To promote and secure the prompt development of a
major office and technology facility contributing to the tax
base of the City and promoting employment opportunities in a
manner consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan.
2. To reduce the cost of
manner permitting the completion
economic basis.
E
development of property in a
of a facility on an
3. To secure the construction and provide monies for
the payment of the costs of public improvements in and
adjacent to the District, which are necessary for the orderly
and complete development of the District in a manner which
will promote the attractiveness of the area and promote
public safety.
4. To promote economic development which will add to
the employment opportunities in the community, and add to
the tax base of the community by increasing taxable values
and increasing the need for commercial development.
Project Description
The actions expected to be taken by the City within the
Economic Development District No. 1 include: acquisition and in-
stallation of traffic signals, construction of new bicycle paths,
construction of new utility laterals (including water, sanitary
and storm sewers) and other project improvements consistent with
the objectives of the Development Program. Further details of
the specific public actions are included in the Development
Program of the Project, appended to this Plan. No land will be
acquired by the City in connection with the Development Program.
No contracts have been entered into at this time in connection
with any such development activities.
Anticipated private developments within Economic
Development District No. 1 include the construction and operation
of a 295,000 square foot office and computer center by Sperry
Corporation, the owners of the property within the District. It
is expected that construction on this Development will commence
in the summer of 1986, and be completed at the end of 1987, and •
have,a final estimated market value of approximately $15,100,000.
Further details of this project are included in the Development
Program of the Project, appended to this Plan.
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING
Statutory Authorization
Pursuant to the provisions of the Act, the City is
authorized to create the Tax Increment Financing District
coterminous with Economic Development District No. 1, to issue
the Bonds to finance public improvements within the Project for
the purpose of stimulating private development and to utilize tax
increments captured from the Tax Increment Financing District due
to new private development to meet debt service obligations on
these Bonds.
2 -
Basis for Findings
The City has established the following facts:
a) The parcel of land within the District (as identi-
fied in Exhibit A) is owned by Sperry Corporation. With the
inducement, provided by the Development Program and the offer
of a $1 million low-interest loan by the State of. Minnesota,
Sperry Corporation is expected to construct the Development.
The Development is expected to have a value of approximately
$15,100,000 and have approximately 700 employees. The Tax
Increment Financing District therefore qualifies as an
"Economic Development" district under Statutes 273.73,
Subdivision 12.
® b) The Development Program for Economic Development
District No. 1, and this Plan, have been reviewed by the
Planning Commission of the City, and found to be in
conformance with the Comprehensive Guide Plan of the City.
c) The opportunity and feasibility for development of
Economic Development District No. 1 by private parties is
maximized through the use of tax increment financing. Given
the unavailability of funding from other governmental
sources other than the $1 million low-interest loan offered
by the State of Minnesota and the necessity of the improve-
ments to be constructed as an inducement to the Development,
the use of tax increment financing will maximize the
development opportunities within Economic Development
District No. 1.
d) Pursuant to Section 273.76, Subdivision 3, of the
® Act, the City elects the method of tax increment computation
as defined in clause (b), whereby the contribution ratio for
the City under the Fiscal Disparities requirements (Chapter
473F) will be applied against commercial/industrial
properties within the Tax Increment Financing District.
District Certification and Duration of Tax Increment Financing
District
The City expects to request a certification of this
District in 1986, following a scheduled public hearing on May 21,
1986, and following a thirty -day review period by Dakota County
and affected school districts.
As an Economic Development Tax Increment Financing
District, the maximum life of the District is the lesser of (i)
eight years from the date of collection of the first increment,
which is expected to be July, 1988, or (ii) 10 years from the
4-
- 3 -
date of approval of this Tax Increment Financing Plan, which is
expected to be June 17, 1986. The City retains the option of
terminating the District upon the redemption of the Bonds.
Prior Planned Improvements
No building permits have been issued by the City for
any parcels within the Tax Increment Financing District, in the
first fifteen months of the eighteen month time period preceding
the expected date of approval of the Tax Increment Financing
District by the City.
Oriainal Assessed Value
It is anticipated that the District will be approved on
June 17, 1986, and that certification will be requested of the
Dakota County Auditor soon thereafter. The Original Assessed
Value of the District will therefore be the value assessed in
1986 for taxes payable in 1987. The original assessed valuation
of the District has not yet been determined because the creation
of the District will require identification of a new tax parcel,
but it is expected that the original assessed value will not
exceed $2 million at any time follotiing the adjustments required
by Section 273.76, Minnesota Statutes. Pursuant to Section
273.76, Minnesota Statutes, the Original Assessed Value of the
District for each of the next 10 years will be required to be
adjusted annually by the average percentage increase in the
assessed valuation of the property included in the District
during the previous five years.
Bonded Indebtedness
It is currently anticipated that the City will issue
the Bonds in a principal amount not to exceed $700,000. This
amount includes enough capitalized interest to meet debt service
obligations up to the point that sufficient tax increments are
estimated to be generated to meet debt service obligations.
Estimated Captured Assessed Value and Tax Increment
Current financial projections for the Tax Increment
Financing District, based on assumptions that include an estimated
final market value of the Improvements of $15,100,000, an estimated
assessed valuation of the Improvements of $6,493,000, a constant
mill rate of 102.138 mills, a fiscal disparities contribution
ratio of 28.8877%, and the termination of the District in the
year 1996, suggest that the total tax increment to be generated
by the District will equal at least $400,000, of which $200,000
will be retained by the City for payment of debt service on the
Bonds. Assuming no inflation in property values after the
0
- 4 -
Improvement's initial assessment, it is estimated that the
District will have an annual Captured Assessed Values following
completion of the Improvement $6,493,000, less any adjustment
required by Section 273.76, Minnesota Statutes.
Estimated Uses of Funds
It is estimated that the proceeds of the Bonds will be
expended approximately as follows:
Uses:
Capitalized interest $ 63,555
Construction Costs for
Improvements
Traffic Signals $ 55,000
® Bike Trail 32,000
Utilities and Other 535,482
622,482
Costs of Issuance
Bond Discount 7,000
Bond Discount 6,963
$700,000
Uses of Tax Increments
Under Section 273.75, Subdivision 4, of the Act, the
City will use the tax increments generated from the Captured
Assessed Value of the District to pay the principal and interest
on the Bonds issued to finance the Improvements. Pursuant to
Section 273.75, Subdivision 2, of the Act, the City elects to
retain 100°% of all increments collected, however, to the extent
that receipts of tax increment exceed the debt service require-
ments for the bonds to be issued an amount up to 50% of the
increments are expected to be returned to the County Auditor for
distribution to affected taxing jurisdictions.
Notwithstanding the above, the City retains the option,
at any time during the life of the District, to retain some
portion less than 100% of the annual tax increment, and pass on
the remaining portion to the other taxing jurisdictions.
The City also retains the option, pursuant to Section
273.74, Subdivision 4, of modifying this Plan to include further
expenditures of tax increments for additional public purposes.
Additional Financings
The City presently anticipates no other additional
financing for the District.'
0
- 5 -
Fiscal Disparities
Pursuant to Section 273.76, Subdivision 3 of the Act,
the City elects to utilize the method of computing Captured
Assessed Value as defined under clause (b).
Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions
Because the proposed Improvements are occurring con-
tingent on the City's provision of the improvements contemplated
by the Development Program as financed by tax increments, it is
determined that this Tax Increment Financing District will have
no impact on other taxing jurisdiction during the life of the
District. The other jurisdictions will continue to receive
property taxes from the District based on the Original Assessed
Value, as adjusted for inflation in accordance with Section
273.76, Subd. 1 of the Act. At the termination of the District,
the other taxing jurisdictions will receive the entire assessed
value of the new development as part of their tax base.
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM
EAGAN TAX INCREMENT PROJECT
DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 1
A. STATEMENT OF INTENT
It is the intent of the City of Eagan to organize a
development district and undertake a development program within
the meaning of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 472A, and to designate
the project area as Development District No. '1 (the "District")
for purposes of carrying out the improvements hereinafter
described and establishing the project area as a tax increment
financing district pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 273.71
to 273.78, in the financing of the -improvements herein—described.
In particular, there has been presented to the City a plan for
the construction of certain improvements in order to induce the
construction of an office and computer center to provide
employment opportunities and enhance the tax base of the City.
B. STATEMENT OF NEED
There is a need for new development in the City to
provide employment opportunities, to increase the tax base and to
improve the general economy of the state and the City. This need
can be accomplished through the attraction of commercial and
industrial development. In the case of the District, significant
development can be attracted by the Program described herein.
The action herein proposed to be taken by the City is found to
have a public purpose in accordance with Chapter 472A, Minnesota
Statutes, and is necessary to meet those needs.
C. AUTHORITY TO ESTABLISH A TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT AND TO
IMPLEMENT A DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.
The City has power to establish a tax increment
financing district under Minnesota Statutes, Sections 273.71 to
273.78, and to undertake development programs as defined in
Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 472A. The City has authority under
Minnesota Statutes, Section 472A.03 to acquire, construct, recon-
struct, improve, alter, extend, operate, maintain or promote
developments aimed at improving the physical facilities, quality
of life and quality of transportation.
D. DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM OBJECTIVES
The objectives sought to be accomplished by the City in
establishing its Development District No. 1 and in carrying out
the Development Program for the District are as follows:
1. To promote and secure the prompt development of a
major office and computer facility contributing to the tax
base of the City and promoting employment opportunities in a
manner consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan.
2. To reduce the cost of development of property in a
manner permitting the completion of the facility on an
economic basis.
3. To provide monies for the payment of the costs of
improvements in and adjacent to the District, which are
necessary for the orderly and complete development of the
District and which will provide public safety.
E. DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT ACTIVITIES
The objectives of this development district will be
accomplished through the following actions by the City:
1. Purchase and install traffic signals at the
intersection of Towerview Road and Pilot Knob Road and at
the future main entrance intersection opposite Jurdy Road on
Pilot Knob Road.
2. Construct bicycle trail improvement from Quarry
Hill Park to Pilot Knob Park through the District.
3. New installation of utilities, including water,
sanitary sewer -and storm sewer.'
4. Other project improvements within the Development
District which are consistent with the objectives of the •
Development Program, including fire loop, street, street
lighting and site improvements.
Sperry Corporation is expected to construct a 250,000
square foot office and computer facility in the northeast
portion of the District. This facility is expected to
employ approximately and to have a market value
upon completion of approximately $15,100,000.
F. LAND USE
All development on lands in Economic Development
District No. 1 will be subject to the following uses and
requirements.
1. Permitted Uses
Development District No. 1 is designated as Research
and Development on the adopted Comprehensive Plan, and any
5'7
A-2
•
•,
G
H
permitted use in such areas as defined by the Eagan Compre-
hensive Plan will be permitted, provided the use does not
have a significant adverse effect on surrounding uses in
terms of noise, traffic generation, congestion and
appearance as determined by the City. The "Research and
Development" classification provides special standards which
promote compatibility with adjacent residential uses.
2. Additional Regulations and Controls or
Restrictions to be Imposed.
a. All new development shall conform to the
applicable State and local codes and ordinances.
DESIGN STANDARDS
1. Site Design
Conformance with the Eagan Zoning Ordinance set forth
in the Eagan City Code must be complied with reference to all
site preparation, construction of buildings, parking areas,
etc., landscaping and all other provisions thereof.
2. Required Documents
The Public Works Director of the City of Eagan shall be
provided with all documents that he may require including,
but not limited to site plan, grading and storm drainage
plans, utility and lighting plan and all other he deems
necessary to determine the conformance of the proposed
development with the design standards.
3. Comprehensive Plan
The objectives of the City of Eagan Comprehensive Guide
Plan shall be adhered to in order to control the uses of the,
property, including economic viability, environmental impact,
community facilities, parks and open space and transportation.
LAND ACQUISITION
No properties to be acquired by the City in connection
with the Development Program.
I. RELOCATION OF DISPLACED PERSONS
There is no relocation contemplated in Development
District No. 1.
�_
A-3
J. MAINTENANCE OF PROJECT AREA
The City Administrator shall be responsible for the
administration of Development District No. 1 on behalf of the
City of Eagan.
K. GEOGRAPHIC MODIFICATION
In accordance with M.S.A. 273.74, Subd. 4, the geo-
graphic area of the District may be reduced but may not be
enlarged after five (5) years following the date of the
designation of the District. This 'District may, therefore, be
expanded until 1991. Geographic modification shall be in
accordance with M.S.A. 273.74.
L. ATTACHMENTS
There are attached hereto for further elucidation and
description, the following maps and drawings:
11
q
A-4
Agenda Information
May 21, 1986, City
Page Fifteen
Memo
Council Meeting
PRELMINARY PLAT/DEERFIELD ADDITION
A. Preliminary Plat for Deerfield Addition Containing 324 Apart-
ment Units on Approximately 40 Acres --At the May 6, 1986, City
Council meeting, action was taken to extend the Eagan 40 Planned
Development agreement for a period of three (3) years. The
preliminary plat for Deerfield Addition was also reviewed, and
given consideration by the City Council at the May 6 meeting.
Upon review, it was determined that the location and density
of apartment units as shown in the proposed Deerfield Addition
•is not consistent with the layout of units and density in the
approved Eagan 40 Planned Development. The developer was directed
to revise the plat so that the number of units as shown in each
of the three (3) parcels--idenified as parcels A, B and C --
do not exceed the maximums that were allowed when the Eagan
40 Planned Development was adopted. As an example, parcel A
had a maximum number of units at 16, Parcel B at 230, and Parcel
C at 92. The proposed' Deerfield Addition exceeded Parcel C
by approximately 90 units. The developer has modified' the proposed
Deerfield Addition an'3 for a copy of his new drawings and the
Planner's review, refer to pages Jam/ through &/ For a copy
of the parcel distribution of dwelling units as adopted in the
PUD agreement, refer; to page( 6. If any member of the City
Council has misplaced' any other report or additional information
that was distributed with the last City Council packet and
referenced as page •92 through 118, feel free to contact the
City Administrator's office and that information will be made
• available. The APC minutes are enclosed on pages 6.7,- and 63
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the
preliminary plat for Deerfield Addition as modified, or to give
consideration to additional review by the Advisory Planning
Commission at their next meeting.
�D
MEMO TO: THOMAS L HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR
FROM: DALE C RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER
DATE: MAY 15, 1986
SUBJECT: UPDATE ON THE EAGAN 40 PRELIMINARY PLAT a PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
From the. May 6, 1986, minutes, staff is trying to address the
concerns of the City Council for the Eagan 40 Planned Development.
The first issue that was a concern was in regard to the planned
development extension. According to the minutes, the extension was
approved on a 3 to 2 vote and it was questioned whether a 4/5th's
vote is required. The City Attorney's office is reviewing this
issue and will provide a recommendation or answer to the City
Council on May 21.
The second issue was in regard to the density of the development in
• regard to the parcels or planned development agreement. Enclosed
with this memorandum is a copy of the Planned Development Agreement
which will allow each Councilmember to review and make his own
decision in regard to this agreement.
The last item the Planning Department would like to address is in
regard to the enclosed revised site plan submitted for the May 21
meeting. The applicants did take into account some of the Council's
concern regarding the density on the south side of Deerfield Road.
The revised plan now proposes to have three buildings of 36 units
each, or 108 units, on the south side of Deerfield Road or Parcel C.
From the original plan submitted, this would be 72 units less than
what was originally submitted to the Planning Commission and the
City Council. Two buildings have been transferred to the north side
of Deerfield Road or Parcel B. The overall density has remained the
same .of 324 on Parcels B and C, and 14 units are still being
proposed for Parcel A. Therefore, the densities have been
transferred but not reduced in the revised plan. The one negative
impact. in shifting the units north is that it appears that more
grading will be required with the new 'plan submitted than the
original plan.
The applicants would like to make a presentation to the City
Council regarding the changes and shifts which have occurred from
the original plan to the revised and, also, some background into the
product of which they would like to provide on this site. Mr.
Sellegren has indicated to staff that he feels this presentation is
vital in order to have a good understanding of the development which
is being proposed.
Hopefully, this addresses the issues that were brought up at the May
6 meeting and if anyone has any questions or would like additional
information, please feel free to con''act us so this information can
be provided.
TUy Planner
DCR/jj
Enclosure �/
21
Uf�7 N� ILIA%
---------- (DIPFLEY ROAD)
CO. no.
• T
m
I I OUTLOT
/JDA
OUTLOT D
`Ot
MT M
I �
i
PUD
OUTLCT C
TLH
�Y
__Im2_r
PUD
� I PUD ��G'�i"5= L- --
I \.•R
5 R Hill, nc CHAR IES R. NENRICN `DEERFlELD DEVELOPMENT r C�
S/ ENGINEERS I SURVEYORS 57.s
ewrE PRELWIN�RY PUT
mut YY .,,,, Ewo�N �DLTD
I
RECEIVEp MAY i 3
5� �
ce
I
III;
---------- IDIFFLEY ROAD) --- _----_----
....__r—
II CO. RD. 30 +
L17BLDG B
36 DU
p� o
m. (moi � �L�P`- \�\. �I :' �•i
�\ C
- ` R IV
12.8 AC.
pJ PHASE 3
6 1
/
PHASE S5Ec
R IV
/ , I
3.4 AC.
PHASE 2��
BIpD S , 9I
36 UU
— � ]e STALL /
fEHF �" LI_ is
+ 7
i LLS PI
p� 3�OG3 / � •�
III
.
PHASE 2
PUD
/amesrc. run, Inc.
"" -� MANNERS / Ems /SURVEYORS
R III
S.] AC.
PHASE 1
PUD
OUT,OT A
.
PHASE 4
F_a
m 1- fI { R@•...
PUD
M, NAND
i.
I �
I
I. 41
PUD /
LGT
"a",
a I /
SITE PLAN { PHASING !••I I
1 V" -
CHARLES R. HENRICH
DEERFIELD DF.VELOF
.11. e ... L. onne
SITE PLAN { PHASING !••I I
CHARLES R. HENRICH
DEERFIELD DF.VELOF
.11. e ... L. onne
EDINA. VA.
EAGI<D
SITE PLAN { PHASING !••I I
r
-
���—
_ r - _. - (OIFFLET ROAD)
36 DU
�_
�. �] o wr �l-'� 1r• ,� ti 0 / 1 1 Y.f A 111 ` '!
9mw 1/ x a,i r xxAc.
PHASE 4 I
41 a It
PUD
n IV
—'. air _ _, �PH�S� .2 I •/ .�¢� 6" �- '\ `\
PDD
36 LLS
t\ ,,
go
•` A % , '!0e' ter,..: l; �`��� I; ` \�. L ,...�� I ,/'~/ �� ��'/ i -
Jamul ill, Inc. CNARLES R. MENRIOH PEER DEVELOPMENT PRELIMINARY
V IF exNnFAex Axne N AO LTO ORAOINO PLAN
PLANNERS ®NEERSISURVE�ORS Foix., Pn, uFxF
r
AMENDED EAGAN ESTATES
PLANNED -DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
THIS AMENDED AGREEMENT is made this pFf day of Ov �,
1982, by and between the CITY OF EAGAN, Dakota County, Minnesota (City), and
Eagan 40, a limited partnership, with address at 313 Skyway Building, St.,
Paul, Minnesota (Developer) and the Southworth Corporation and William C.
Morton & Sons, Inc. (Owners).
W I T H E S S E T H:
WHEREAS, Owners, Developer and. the City have executed the Agreement
Concerning Planned Development In the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota„
(Agreement) dated November 5, 1975, regarding a Planned Development in Eagan
known as Eagan Estates (the Development); and,
® WHEREAS, the Developer had requested that the name of the Development be
changed to Eagan 40 Planned Development and that the land use be changed
according to Exhibit "A" attached hereto; and,
WHEREAS, the parties desire to amend the Planned Development Agreement to
change the name of the development to Eagan 40 Planned Development, to allow
338 residential units, to revise the Land Use Plan to provide for R-3 and R-4
use, and to generally upgrade the agreement to present standards;
WHEREAS, Developer and Owner have agreed that Developer may proceed with
the Development and terms of this Agreement; and,
WHEREAS, it is the intention of Developer to proceed with the Development
whereby the Subject .Land will be subdivided pursuant to Minnesota Statutes,
Chapters 505 and 462, and the Subdivision Ordinances of Eagan providing for
the platting of land and to obtain final approval from Eagan for plats as the
Development progresses;
® WHEREAS, Developer proposes a Planned Development in Eagan to be known as
EAGAN 40 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT containing 40 acres more or less, and legally
described as the Northeast one-quarter (NE 1/4) of the Northwest, one-quarter
(NW 1/4) of Section 28, Township 27, Range 23, more particuiarly shown in
Exhibits A, B, C, and Amended Exhibit "D" attached hereto and incorporated
herein by reference, and
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby agreed by and between the parties hereto as
follows:
1. Development. Owner intends to have Developer develop the Subject
Land substantially in accordance with the general plans shown on the Exhibits
and Eagan agrees to permit the Development subject to obtaining final approval
for each plat of the Development from Eagan before proceeding with any work on
said plat, unless otherwise agreed by Eagan. In the event that the agreement
between the Owner and Developer relating to the development of the Subject
Land is terminated, and this Agreement has not been terminated, then wherever
Developer is designated herein Owner shall, upon written notice to Eagan, be
1
53
automatically substituted to and for Developer and be subject to all obliga-
tions, conditions, requirements, and provisions of the Developer, and be
entitled to all rights and benefits herein relating to Developer.
2. Exhibits. Said Exhibits attached and a part of this Agreement are:
Exhibit "A" - Sketch Plan (or preliminary plat)
Exhibit "B" - Staging Plan
Exhibit "C" - Parks and Circulation Plan
Exhibit "D" - Land Use Plan
3. Approval Ily Eagan. Eagan hereby approves the Development as shown in
the Exhibits; provided, however, that insofar as the Exhibits may vary from
the written terms of this Agreement, said written terms shall govern.
4. Term of Planned Development. The Developer represents that it will
complete the development of the entire 40 acres more or less, within ten (10)
years from the date of the original contract.and Eagan.therefore-limits its
approval to said ten (10) year period. Developer agrees that it will not
contest the withdrawal of said approval at the end of said ten (10) year
period. Developer may request two extensions of three (3) years each by
submitting a written request to Eagan at least 180 days prior to the succes-
sive anniversary dates of this Agreement. Eagan may in its sole discretion
approve or deny the requested three (3) year extension.
5. Rezoning. Eagan agrees to rezone said land to Planned Development.
6. Density. Density in said development shall be as more particularly
shown in Exhibit D; provided however, that the following specific conditions
shall apply with respect to density:
a. A maximum of 338 residential units shall be allowed.
b. However, in any event, overall density shall not exceed 8.5
units per acre.
7. Major Street Dedications. Developer agrees to dedicate, without cost •
to Eagan, the following width of right of way for major, minor, or collector
streets hereinafter described as shown on Exhibit "A", said dedication to be
made when requested by Eagan and in no event, later than the filing of the
final plat on the segments of said streets.
a. C.S.A.H. 30 - as required by city and county
b. All roads - 60 feet (full right -of -Way)
8. Major and Minor Street Access. The parties mutually recognize and
agree that it is the intent of the Developer to have only those accesses'to
abutting major and minor streets from said development as more particularly
shown on Exhibit "A" and further agrees that as final plats are presented to
permanently restrict access to those shown on Exhibit "A" or in the
alternative, to deliver recordable easements so restricting said access, to
Eagan; provided however, that if subsequent events, particularly development
on the opposite sides of said minor and major streets indicate that additional
accesses are advisable based on sound planning practice, Eagan agrees to
reasonably consider Developer's application for said additional accesses.
2
5V
part
ree that all
9. Assessments. The Ea an relatedlto the De elopmentushalliberassessed
r-required and installed by g
pursuant to Chapter 429 of Minnesota State Statutes.
10. Park, Trail and Pond Dedication. (a) Parks, trails, and ponds shall
be dedicated as follows: Developer and Owner Will dedicate to Eagan at the
time of final plat approval certain parts of the Subject Land as public parks,
trail easements, trailways or storm water holding areas (collectively,
Dedicated Areas). The Dedicated Areas are' shown generally on Exhibit "C".
The total acreage of Dedicated Areas, manner of dedication and credit given
pursuant to Eagan ordinances for required__ dedication are specified on Exhibit
"E". Developer and Owner will make such dedication for park land by warranty
deed and for a trailway or ponding area by a designation as such on the final
plat. Owner shall pay all assessments, levied or pending, prior to the
dedication under this paragraph. able seof dedicated
eli at d areas will
relevantbeunrestricted
except as required by appEagan
11. Sidewalks. Concrete sidewalks, in such widths and in such location
as required by the applicable ordinance of Eagan in effect at the time of
final plat approval, shall be constructed for lands within a plat
contemporaneously with the improvement of street within the plat and be paid
for by the Developer.
12. Street Lights. Developer agrees to provide and Eagan agrees to
accept a street lighting system for each plat pursuant to the applicable
ordinance in effect at the time of a final plat approval. The system 'shall be
subject to approval by Eagan and shall be implemented under the following
provisions:
(01) The Developer shall pay all chargesfor each light installed as
per the approved street lighting plan.
(02) The Developer shall pay all operating costs of the street
lighting system until the Development is go% completred and
accepted by the City of Eagan.
ating
® (03) will be billed equally Eto all homes oragan will elots rbenefited swhich
There I after the City of in the
subdivision, and the Developer will inform prospective
purchasers or homes or lots to this effect. The Developer
shall continue to be responsible for undeveloped lots
regardless of subsequent ownership.
13. PondinE Dedication. Developer agrees to dedicate easements for
ponding areas as shown on Exhibit "A" without cost to Eagan for public ponding
purposes when reasonably required for said purpose based on the recommendation
of the City Engineer; said dedication to be made without cost to Eagan.
14. Preservation of Trees. Developer agrees to comply with Eagan
Ordinances currently in effect related to preservation of trees and
specifically will exercise reasonable efforts in residential areas to save
mature, undiseased trees on the Subject Land which do not have tobe rem utilities el
for reasonable installation of buildings, streets , sidewalks,
drainage improvements and construction activities rated thereto. Developer
3
J�
agrees to mark trees to be saved over six (6) inches in diameter as measured
at a point two (2) feet above grade that are adjacent to construction areas
with a red band prior to any excavation, and to protect such trees by snow
fences or other suitable enclosures and notify Eagan when the enclosures are
completed prior to any excavation, if required by Eagan. Eagan recognizes
that development of those areas designated for nonresidential use on Exhibit
"D" will require extensive grading, filling and removal of trees. All
diseased trees shall be removed according to City ordinance requirements.
15. Retaining Walls. Parts of the Subject Land may be uneven with
respect to topography and it is generally the intent of both Eagan and
Developer to reasonably retain the existing topography consistent with
normal construction practices and necessities and Developer agrees to
building retaining walls pursuant to reasonable requests of Eagan as the
development progresses.
16. Screening. Coincidental with the submission of each plat for
final approval, Developer shall submit a landscape and screening plan for
any residential lots with a side yard or rear yard abutting a major or minor
arterial or collector street. Eagan may require reasonable landscaping and
screening of said lots abutting on such public streets at the expense of
Developer and where said screening is required, it shall be a part of the
Developer's Agreement required by Eagan for the plat and be completed prior
to release of the sudivision or landscape bond as provided in that
Agreement.
17. Compliance with City Ordinances. Developer and Owner agree to
comply with all Eagan City Council Ordinances.
18. Notices. Whenever in this Agreement it shall be required or
permitted that notice or demand be given or served by either party to this
Agreement to or on the other party, such notice or demand shall be delivered
personally or mailed by United States mail to the addresses hereinafter set
forth by certified mail (return receipt requested). Such notice or demand
shall be deemed timely given when delivered personally or when deposited in
the mail in accordance with the above. Notice sent by one party shall be
sent to the other two (2) parties. The addresses of the parties hereto are
as follows, until changed by notice given as above:
If to the CITY, at: City of Eagan
3795 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, Mn 55122
If to the OWNER, at: William C. Morton & Sons, Inc.
Attn: Craig R. Morton, President
6807 Washington Ave. So.
Minneapolis, MN 55435
If to the DEVELOPER, at: Eagan 40
c/o Mr. Daniel F. Dolan
650 Northern Federal Building
St. Paul, MN 55102
5�
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment as
of the day and year first above written.
Approved as to4CityAttorne
CITY OF EAGAN
Paul H. Hauge, Bea to Blomquist, Mayor
t
ATTEST
Llix
E. T
VanOverbeke, City Clerk
EAGAN 4 'a limitedd p�rship
Daniel F.Do an
® Its general partner
•
OWNERS:
WILLIAM C. MORTON &SSOOfN,S,,IINC.
BY:''/� �I
Craig -A. Morton
Its President
S7
Patricia L. Morton
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
SS
COUNTY OF DAKOTA )
On this '9?y day of ��;�1982, before me a Notary Public
within and for said County, personally appeared BEATTA BLOMQUIST and EUGENE
VANOVERBEKE to me personally known, who being each by me duly sworn, each
did say that they are respectively the Mayor and Clerk of the CITY OF EAGAN,
the municipality named in the foregoing instrument, and that the seal
affixed to said instrument was signed and sealed in behalf of said
municipality by authority of its City Council and said Mayor and Clerk
acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deed of said
municipality.
(S E A L
:?, 1 s3
STATE OF MINNESOTA• ,) ;,• - ti"•.•rnvo wx --,_- • . -- __ —
SS
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) •
On this 29th day of november , 1982, before me a Notary Public
within and for said County personally appeared CRAIG R. MORTON to me
personally known, who, being by me duly swears that he is the President of
the corporation named in the foregoing instrument, and that the corporation
does not have a corporate seal and that said instrument was signed and
sealed in behalf of said corporation by authority of its Board of Directors
and said CRAIG R. MORTON acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and
deed of the corporation.
DE1NI V. DAVIS
-- HCrAFT MMIC - da; nLSOTA
HENN-PINI COUNTY
d1•; congission expires May 3,19,78
F-lvvr*ea
) SS
COUNT OF Offi ase y )
On this /5�e day of 4A, 1982, before me a Notary Public •
within and for said County, personally appeared DANIEL F. DOLAN to me known
to be one of the general partners of the partnership that executed the
within instrument, and acknowledged to me that such partnership executed the
same.
STATE OF MINNESOTA ) L
, EO.'!N;E PAILVERSTEDT
) SS I.,.s NOTARY PUBLIC - MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) WASHINGTON COUNTY
My Commission Expires June 12, 1888
On this 29th day of November , 1982, before me, a t c
within and for said county, personally appeared PATRICIA L. MORTON, to me
known to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing
instrument, and acknowledged that she executed the same as her free act and
deed. --- +
DEAN T!. D,6 SIS
HENN-PIN mCCJNTY � //c/\/ 0�^--w's -•�/. l/ .
My commission expires May 3, 19Ca o
�Q
EXHIBIT "A" (SKETCH PLAN)
SY
Ceu�.rF� �.e.aL1 3-�.• ��.
Parcel
A
Parcel B 2.2 acres±
19.2 Acres ± Land use
Land use R-4 R-3
230 Dwelling Units 16 D.U.
c
pR��a
Q-� f•1.
jAleeass
Parcel c
13 acres ±
Land use R-3
92 Dwelling Units
R1
EXHIBIT "B - D"
Total units not to exceed 338
Z
Coi.tr.rE7 '�.epd SO
x
OO
}
Proposed traffic circulation
plan
PR6 ped
d eC 633
EXHIMT "C"
Note: Park dedication shall be cash at the amount determined
at the time of final plat application.
W
APC Minutes
April 22, 1986
EAGAN 40 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT - EXTENSION AND
DEERFIELD ADDITION - PRELIMINARY PLAT
Chairperson McCrea then opened the hearing for an extension of planned
development for Eagan 40 Planned Development and the preliminary plat of
Deerfield Addition containing 324 apartment units on approximately 40 acres
located in part of the northwest quarter of Section 28, at County Road 30 and
Thomas Lake Road. City Planner Runkle indicated that the extension of the
planned development should be considered prior to preliminary plat and gave a
brief history of the planned development. He indicated that a letter was
submitted by the developer requesting an extension of the PUD which was tabled
at the November 1985 PUD Review.
At this time, David Bohne arrived.
A revsion
to the
ubdivisio
nMarch n22,e1986.
d
ing
PUD's hadlbeen enactedSeffective
aCitydAttorneyoDavof
•
Assistant e
Keller advised that if the aeveloper had maae
a written request for extension
of PUD, it would help support the Advisory Planning Commission's
it
decision, if
should decide to recommend approval of
an extension of a PUD. An
appearance was made by Mr. Dan Dolan,
owner of the subject parcel. There were
no appearances by any members of the
general public. After some discussion,
member Hall moved, ana Voracek
seconded the motion to recommend a three-year
extension of the planned development. All
voted in favor except Chairperson
McCrea who voted nay.
Charles Hall then moved, McCrea seconded the motion to recommena approval
of the preliminary plat of Deerfield
Addition, containing 324 apartment units
on approximately 40 acres, subject to the following
conaitions:
1• The developer shall comply with all
standard engineering
recommenaations which apply.
2. The developer shall do the necessary grading at the southwest
of Thomas Lake
•
corner
Road and Diffley Road to provide for a minimum of a 400 foot
site distance.
3. If the utilities are installed under a public contract, then Council
must authorize the project before final plat approval.
4. This development shall dedicate the following right-of-way widths:
a. 65 feet half right-of-way for Diffley Road.
b. 80 feet full right-of-way for Thomas Lake Road.
C. 66 feet full right-of-way for Deerfield Road.
5. This development shall be responsible for dedicating a minimum of 20
foot width utility easement for water main and 30 feet utility and drainage
easement for sanitary ana storm sewer not within public right-of-way.
.0 v
2
APC Minutes
April 22, 1986
6. The development shall be required to obtain the necessary permits and
approvals from the following:
a. MPCA - Sanitary sewer extension permit.
b. Minnesota Dept, of Health - Water main approval.
c. Dakota County - Grading within right-of-way permit.
a. Williams Brothers Pipeline - Grading within easement permit.
7. This development will be responsible for its trunk area storm sewer,
future street upgrading, multiple equivalent assessments, and trailway
assessments at the rates in effect at the time of final platting.
•
B. This development shall be responsible for all costs of installing the
internal public streets and utilities.
9. A time extension be granted to the original 10 year P.D. Agreement for
enough time to complete the project. (The original Agreement had an option to
request 2 three year extensions).
10. An Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) be prepared and submitted
for staff review prior to the issuance of any building permits.
11. The garage shall be included in the rental unit price if only 2
stalls per unit are provided with the project.
12. The developer shall provide a cash dedication in accordance with
standard requirements, in addition to dedicating a trailway along, the south
side of Diffley Road.
40 13. A detailed landscaping plan shall be Submitted including a bona which
shall not be released less than one year after landscaping is completed.
14. Because the PD provides a total of 338 units of which 322 are now
being used, the parcel east of Thomas Lake Road shall be developed as a
residential parcel with no more than 16 units.
All voted in favor.
City Planner Runkle advised the Commission that the plan had been revises
somewhat, moving one of the apartments further away from the development just
south of the proposed plat.
RESIDENCE INN - COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT
The hearing regarding the request for a Comprehensive Plan amendment to RB
(Roadside Business) from LB (Limited Business) for Residence Inn consisting of
a 120 unit hotel on 4.36 acres (located within the Eaganaale LeMay Lake 2nd
Addition Planned Development) and part of the north half of Section 10, south
0
3
Agenda Information
May 21, 1986, City
Page Sixteen
Memo.
Council Meeting
EAGANDALE OFFICE PARK 3RD ADDITION
RECONSIDERATION OF PLAT CONFIGURATION
B. Eagandale Office Park 3rd Addition - Reconsideration of Plat
Configuration --Enclosed on page 4,$ is a letter that staff
received from the Opus Corporation requesting the Council to
reconsider its action of December 3, 1985, wherein the Council
required the proposed plat for the above -referenced subdivision
to eliminate the "trap court" cul-de-sac and replace it with
a private access drive and related cross easements. Enclosed
on page 4 is a copy of the -December. .3 Council -minutes.
Enclosed on page is the original site plan configuration
• the cul-de-sTc—
showing. Enclosed on page is a revised
site plan configuration showing no public right-of-way for access.
•
Due to the fact that all proposed lots have adequate access to
existing public right-of-way, it is not recommended that additional
public right-of-way, especially a cul-de-sac, be constructed
resulting in additional maintenance liabilities to the City.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve/deny the develo-
pers request to construct a cul-de-sac servicing Eagandale Office
Park 3rd Addition.
(P 4
OPUS CORPORATION
DESIGNERS • BUILDERS • DEVELOPERS
May 2, 1986
Mr. Tom Colbert
Public Works Director
City of Eagan
3830 Pilot Knob Road
,Eagan, Minnesota 55121
Re: Trapp Court Cul-de-sac
Dear Mr. Colbert: ^`
• Opus Corporation, in behalf of Mor'-hwestern Mutual Life Insurance
Company, requests the city Council to reconsider its action not to allow
a cul-de-sac to be constructed off of Trapp Road to provide access to
the Sperry Office Building.
1
Opus will appear at the Mayes Council meeting to explain the reasons and
justification for requesting this reconsideration. Thank you:
Sincerely yours,
-c��r�lr/a�cc
Robert A. Worthi gton, AICP
Executive Director, Governmental Affairs
® RAW:jo
cc: Tom Hedges
Rick Hefti
Dale Runkle
OPUS AND AFFILIATES IN MINNEAPOLIS • CHICAGO • PHOENIX • MILWAUKEE • TAMPA • PENSACOLA
EXECUTIVE OFFICES: 800 OPUS CENTER • 9900 BREN ROAD EAST • PO. BOX 150 • MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55440 (612) 936-4444
Council Minutes
December 3, 1985
YORRTON I S YORRTON II - IR FINANCING
The final resolutions for the proposed industrial revenue bond issues for
Yorkton I and Yorkton II were submitted and the applicant requested approval.
Mike Gresser appeared for the applicant and Tom Hedges indicated that the City
has not received a letter from bond counsel satisfying the City staff's
concerns that the bonds could become taxable due to the procedural variance
required for the application. In addition, the final documents for the bond
project had not been received for review by the City Administrator or City
Attorney. After discussion, Egan moved, Thomas seconded the motion to
approve the final resolutions for the two bona issues, each in the sum of
$600,000.00, subject however, to submission and approval by the City staff of
the bond counsel letter described above, and -approval of the -final transcript
for the bond issues. All voted yes. •
EAGANDALE INDUSTRIAL PARR 3RD ADDITION - PRELIMINARY PLAT
The application for preliminary plat approval of Eagandale Industrial Park
3rd Addition consisting of a replat of Eagandale Industrial Park Lots 2, 3,
and 4, Block 2, came to the Council. The APC recommended approval at its
November 26, 1985 meeting, subject to certain conditions. The plat would
combine four existing lots and three new lots, north of Corporate Center Drive
and west of Trapp Road, according to Dale Runkle. There was considerable
discussion concerning the cul-de-sac proposed to be converted to a private
cross easement built to City standards. Gerald Sunde of Sunde Engineering was
present and recommended that the cul-de-sac remain a public street. After
review, Smith moved, Thomas seconded the motion to approve the preliminary
plat application for Eagandale Industrial Park 3rd Addition, subject to the
following conditions:
d 1. The proposed public cul-de-sac shall be eliminated and a private
street be provided for access to the lots.
2. The owner and developer will be responsible for any damage to any
retaining wall and grading damages as a result of necessary maintenance of
the City's storm and sanitary sewer lines within the sanitary and storm sewer
easement along the southwesterly boundary of the property.
3. The watermain that the developer proposes to construct shall be built
in accordance with City specifications and properly verified that the
contractor adhered to City standards.
4. This development will be responsible for obtaining the necessary MWCC
connection permits.
.5. The cul-de-sac, Trapp Court, shall be constructed in accordance with
City standards for a tear drop design and 9 ton standards.
6. This development shall dedicate a 20 foot utility and drainage
easement adjacent to all publicly dedicated right-of-way.
W
11
-' PRELIMINARY PLAT OF:
EAGANDALE OFFICE PARK 3RD ADDITION
4r14
GH
i
'___- - J�• - > L0�
Ad
SLI=r, ����%
;-_'_•�
/
SLI=r, ����%
;-_'_•�
PRELZZY PLAT OF,
tAGANDALt OFFICE PARK 3RD AbbITION
yt)y
... I
iidTFr�gT:?ice I aL
LOT � 5
XN.�\\\ 14 I
•\ \\� \ \� �\ I I VIII\\1 l
_ i�
IF
Agenda Information Memo
May 21, 1986, City Council Meeting
Page Seventeen
OFF -SALE LIQUOR LICENSE/TOWN CENTRE 70
A. Off -Sale Liquor License for Town Centre 70/Curtis Johnson --An
application was submitted by Curtis 0. Johnson and Carolyn Johnson
for an off -sale liquor license at the Town Centre/Eagan Shopping,
Center. At the last regular meeting of the City Council, authoriza-
tion was given to amend the City Code to allow a fifth off -sale
liquor license for the north central portion of the City and
Town Centre 70 qualifies as a location--€-or--this license. For
® additional information regarding an investigation by the Police
Department and the general information and personal information
required as a part of the off -sale liquor license application,
refer to attachments without page number.
If affirmative action is taken regarding the off -sale liquor
license application, the City cannot issue the license until
the ordinance is officially amended. The amendment will not
take place until after the June 17 meeting, realizing the City
Council might change the entire policy for controlling the number
of off -sale liquor licenses.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED'ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny an
off -sale liquor license for Curtis. 0. Johnson, for a location
at the Town Centre/Eagan Shopping Center.
VARIANCE/JAMES UNKER
• B. James Unker for a 25' Variance from 50' Setback Requirement
Along Public Street for Lot 10, Block 3, Clearview Addition --An ap-
plication was submitted to the Planning Department requesting
a 2'5' front yard setback north of Cliff Road in the Clearview
Addition. For additional information on this item, please refer
to the Planning Department report, a copy of which is enclosed
on pages �Zo through 3 There are no conditions in the
Clearview —Addition develo ment agreement pertaining to setback
restrictions on this, lot.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the
variance permit as requested by James Unker.
�y
SUBJECT:
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING:
DATE OF REPORT:
CITY OF EAGAN
VARIANCE
JAMES UNKER
LOT 10, BLOCK 3, CLEARVIEW ADDITION
(SE i, SECTION 29)
R-1 SINGLE FAMILY
MAY 21, 1986
MAY 13, 1986
REPORTED BY: JIM STURM
APPLICATION: An application has been submitted requesting a
25' front yard setback north of Cliff Road in the Clearview
Addition.
COMMENTS. This one -acre+ lot abutts the Woodgate 2nd Addition
to the east and another acre+ lot to the west. The applicant
wishes to construct a garage near Cliff Road for 3 main reasons.
1) This garage will visually shield Cliff Road from the existing
house thus, 2) maximizing the private area in the front yard
and 3) create a noise "buffer" from Cliff Road. A letter from
the applicants detailing these hardships is attached for your
review. The neighbors to the west have a garage 30' from the
Cliff Road right-of-way and the proposed garage will be 25'
from the same right-of-way.
A public hearing has been scheduled at the June 3, 1986, City
Council meeting for the vacation of the 25' easement area.
The vacation will not affect this variance in any manner.
This lot has not been split, however, all setbacks meet City
Code requirements.now and will if the lot is split as proposed.
There are no conditions in the Clearview Addition Development
Agreement pertaining to setback restrictions on this lot.
If approved, this variance shall be subject to all code require-
ments.
JS/jj
N
71
E
0
SIGMA
SURVEYING
SERVICES
3908 Sibley Memorial Highway
Eagan, Minnesota 55.122
Phone: (612), 452-3077
Lot Division Certificate For:
Mr. JIM UNK'ER
Ct
- \\ EAST 189.00 -
90.0
S( �\
99.0
i L -i
r� -} PARCEL (�
^I l- A'
—P.O.L. 27,518 S9. Ff. IW 1
PARCEL00
25,200 S4. Ff. i i INN s 0D .)
r
Lu - -
� I o M
• �. - 24.2 - `. J - L,
Q I 40.0
z.i r="LL
toPropomad b r,
Y, OI I 1
M 4f'a/ /+ i. a�-DRIVEgWgAY N 1z �Y
i� F' / O SETS�CK EMENr D 1
Gaia.K
i P.
t o .e' eA 5 40 ARBA 'I k "
... 200 0o T ff 90:0/ 1 y 91.56 "
---F---VV- Z5 2 - , -,1 EST _187.5
-:....,..._,.: .77,x,
4 ( CLIFF ROAD)
—N—
I " =,5 0,
N—,,1_50
1�
C.S.A.H. No. 32
April 23, 1986
Mr. Dale C. Runkle
City Planner
Eagan Municipal Center
3830 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, MN 55122
Re: Application for Setback Variance
Lot 10, Block 3, Cedarview
Dear Mr. Runkle:
Enclosed is our application for a setback variance to allow a
detached ,garage to be built 25 feet from the south boundary of our
property at Lot 10, Block 3, Clearview, 1775 Cliff Road. This would
require a variance of either 25 or 50 feet depending on the status of
a 25 foot easement which Dakota County has agreed to revoke, and the
City of Eagan has agreed to vacate. Assuming the easement is vacated,
the variance would be 25 feet.
We are requesting the variance because of hardships resulting from
unusual characteristics of our property. The primary concern is the
high level of noise from traffic on Cliff Road. Our house is situated
near the rear of the lot to reduce the noise level, but noise is
still very bothersome. Locating the garage closer to Cliff Road will
increase.the area that will be shielded from noise by the garage..It
will also decrease the area that will be subject to viewing from
Cliff Road, thereby increasing our privacy. Because the house is near
the rear of the lot, our primary yard area is between the house and
Cliff Road, so increasing privacy is very important. If we have to
locate the garage closer- to the house, our usable yard area will be
greatly decreased.
The setback variance would not affect our neighbors since our
neighbors to the west, the Amundsons, have a garage that is about the
same distance to Cliff Road, 30.8 feet from their south lot line. Our •
neighbors to the east, in Woodgate, 2nd Addition are separated from
us by an outlot that is about 125 feet wide, our lot is barely
visible from their lots, and their lots face away from ours. The
garage would be well below the level of Cliff Road so that it would
not be conspicuous.
Attached is a copy of a recent survey showing the location of our
house and the Amundsons' garage, with the proposed garage, setback
line and easement area sketched in. The survey was done for a lot
split application which we may pursue in the future.
Thank you for your consideration of this request.
V ry trytly yours,
�</ice
J es T. Unker
UV 2� �-
Nancy A Unker %3
1775 Cliff Road /
Eagan, MN 55122
Agenda Information Memo
May 21, 1986, City Council Meeting
Page Eighteen
VARIANCE/WILLIAM HUTTNER CONSTRUCTION, INC
C. William Huttner Construction, Inc.. for 8.5' Variance from
the 50' Setback Requirement for Public Streets --An application was
submitted to the Planning Department requesting a variance of
9.5 feet in. the Hillcrest Addition. For additional information
on the item, refer to the Planning Department report, a copy
of which is enclosed on pages through _'. There are
no conditions in the Hillcrest Addition agreement considering
various variance applications.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the
• variance permit as requested by William Huttner Construction,
Inc.
0
7T
SUBJECT`.
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING:
DATE OF REPORT:
REPORTED BY:
CITY OF EAGAN
VARIANCE (FRONT YARD)
WILLIAM'HUTTNER CONSTRUCTION INC
LOT 1, BLOCK 3, HILLCREST ADDN.
R-1, SINGLE FAMILY
MAY 21, 1986
MAY 13, 1986
JIM STURM
• APPLICATION: An application has been submitted requesting a
variance of 9.5' on Lot 1, Block 3, of the Hillcrest Addition.
COMMENTS: This lot has front yard setback requirements of 30'
along Rebecca Lane and 50' along Pilot Knob Road. The 9.5'
variance is needed along the Pilot Knob property line, and access
to the home is from Rebecca Lane.
The garage has been placed 5' from the western property line
to allow maximum building expansion to the west.
There are no conditions in the Hillcrest Addition concerning
variance applications.
If approved, this variance shall be subject to all other Code
® requirements.
JS/jj
;61"
V�
s
J
VALL Y
71 rLlnl` eoeF
..AT
X
2iii
CITY OF EAGAN
SUBJECT: VARIANCE (FRONT YARD)
APPLICANT: WILLIAM HUTTNER CONSTRUCTION INC
LOCATION: LOT 1, BLOCK 3, HILLCREST ADDN.
EXISTING ZONING: R-1, SINGLE FAMILY
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: MAY 21, 1986
DATE OF REPORT: MAY 13, 1986
REPORTED BY: JIM STURM
APPLICATION: An application has been submitted requesting a
variance of 9.5' on Lot 1, Block 3, of the Hillcrest Addition.
COMMENTS. This lot has front yard setback requirements of 30'
along Rebecca Lane and 50' along Pilot Knob Road. The 9.5'
variance is needed along the Pilot Knob property line, and access
to the home is from Rebecca Lane.
The garage has been placed 5' from the western property line
to allow maximum building expansion to the west.
There are no conditions in the Hillcrest Addition concerning
variance applications.
If approved, this variance shall be subject to all other Code
® requirements.
JS/jj
77
Certificate for:
1
Huttner Construction
za-
DELMAR H. SCHWANZ
14ND SURVEVORS INC
Rp.pgwl UnEn LAOS of Thp SIAIF of Minn oln
147SO SOUTH ROBERT TRAIL ROSEMOUNT. MINNESOTA 55068
SURVE R'S CERTIFICATE
� HitOIDfMf. a NI`I-ff-zy� __-- bs
Drainage S utility " T
Iease*nt
14or It
1
40
h O.�L�OffO
,VOrlE
a MR
N
PHONE - 612 823-1768
IQ
X
�I
SCALE
1 inch = 30 feet
Id./ ds.a� sws rc /� ✓
a E/.for M ,
,sEBdcc.y 4.4W
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct representatioh of'Lot
Block 3, HILLCREST ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Dakota
County, Minnesota.
Also showing the location of a proposed house thereon.
Dated: May 5, 1986
,X;A4 a,
MINNESOTA REGISTRATION NO. 8625
E
E
Agenda Information Memo
May 21, 1986, City Council Meeting
Page Nineteen
VARIANCE/CORPORATE CONSTRUCTION
D. Corporate Construction, Inc., for 12..21' Variance from 40'
Sideyard Setback Requirement Along Public Street, Lot 1, Block
1,, Birch Park Addition --An application was submitted to the Planning
Department requesting a variance of 12.2' in the Birchpark Addition.
For additional information on the item, refer to the Planning
Department report, a copy of which is enclosed on pages 90
through gj,1 . There are no conditions in the Birchpark Addition
development agreement pertaining to setback restrictions on this
lot.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the
®
variance permit as, requested by Corporate Construction, Inc.
•
CITY OF EAGAN
SUBJECT: VARIANCE
APPLICANT: CORPORATE CONSTRUCTION INC
LOCATION: LOT- 1, BLOCK 1, BIRCH PARK ADDN (NA, SEC. 22)
EXISTING ZONING: PD (R-1,.SINGLE FAMILY)
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: MAY 21, 1986
DATE OF REPORT: MAY 14, 1986
REPORTED BY: JIM STURM
APPLICATION: An application. has been submitted requesting a
•
variance of 12.17' on Lot 1, Block 1, of the Birch Park Addition.
COMMENTS: The subject lot is on the corner of Windcrest and
Denmark Avenues. Setbacks along Denmark Avenue are 40' due
to the 80' right-of-way.. The variance is required along the
Denmark Avenue side since the. house will be approximately 28'
and 32' from that property line. This area will function as
a side yard as access is provided from Windcrest Avenue.
This 3 -car garage home meets all other code setback requirements.
There are no conditions in the Birch Park Addition Development
Agreement pertaining to setback restrictions on this lot.
If approved, this variance shall be subject to all Code require-
ments.
JS/jj
_ g0
T/
0
•
SURVEYORS. CERTIFICATE ''SIENNA CORPORATION
NOTE: THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION SHOWN
HEREON WILL BECOME VALID
- UPON FILING THE PLAT OF
BIRCH PARK.
REVIsm 5/6 ffi TO SHOW
PROPOSED HObE FOR I �;
C(RMRATE W STRUCTION I ]?
N 3.48'51"
cps.7 30.00 52.33 .. 79. 70
Z 50 1 2311 W c 50
T` EO u�/a. 29.16 mcni O m
vm W N
I
U3
0.0. c a me
�1 b
IV IU
n w I / nil N
W
m
50
I: I
C 1 /
m ml _
o m
49.83 (ewe)
- , p I' 52.99 ` I
137.16 Q=2.05'51°
SO ... 30.09 ..
(377? 3 8'08'S7" E ' R=1361.07
S
ENMATRK- -A-V EN
•
Agenda Information Memo
May 21, 1986, City Council Meeting
Page Twenty
CONDITIONAL, USE PERMIT & REZONING/ON-BELAY
E. Conditional Use Permit for Chemical Dependency Center and a
Rezoning from R-1 to LB, Located in Former Peace Reform Church
Building --A public hearing was held by the Advisory Planning
Commission at their last regular meeting held on Tuesday, April
22, 1986, to consider two (2) applications submitted by On -Belay
of Minnesota, Inc., for a rezoning from R-1 to LB and a
conditional use permit to allow for a chemical dependency
rehabilitation center. The Advisory—PLanni.ng_Commission is
recommending denial of the rezoning and conditional use permit.
• For additional information on this item, refer to the Plar}�'ng
Department report and APC minutes enclosed, on pages Y�
through. Mayor Blomquist and members of the City Council
as well as City Administration have received letters from
residents regarding these applications. A letter was drafted and
dated April 2, 1986, and was sent as a standard response letter
to all residents submitting a letter to City Hall. This letter
is enclosed on age for your review. Enclosed on pages
C)V/_ and is a copy of a letter received from homeowner
in the Cedar Grove area. Also enclosed on pages _�� through
167,-' is a copy of a resolution prepared by the City Attorney's
office.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve or deny the
rezoning from R-1 to LB and conditional use permit for, the
chemical dependency center - On -Belay, Inc.
NJ
CITY OF EAGAN
SUBJECT: REZONING &CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
APPLICANT: ON -BELAY OF MINNESOTA INC
LOCATION: LOTS 12-16, 20-24, BLOCK 6, CEDAR GROVE #4..,.
EXISTING ZONING: R-1 (SINGLE FAMILY)
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: APRIL 22., 1986
DATE OF REPORT,: APIRL 16, 1986
REPORTED BY: JIM STURM
® APPLICATION: Two separate applications have been submitted
requesting a rezoning from R-1 (Single Family) to LB (Limited
Business) for a 24 hour adolescent Chemical Dependency Rehabilita-
tion Center in the old Peace Reformed Church along Nicols Road. The
LB district requires conditional use permits for hospitals and
private schools. The On -Belay Rehabilitation Center will provide
limited sources of this nature.
The 1980 Comprehensive Guide Plan designates this site R-1 and,
therefore, an amendment to the Guide Plan will be necessary.
ON -BELAY OF MINNESOTA INC: The On -Belay organization provides
residential chemical dependency counseling for both male and female'
adolescents between the ages of 12-18. There is a three _step
approach to the treatment process:
® 1. Assessment Evaluation
The client stays in. the facility for a 7-10 day period to assess
the need of the primary treatment.
Included in this phase psychological testing and evaluation,
physical examination, chemical awareness education, interviewing
and observation by the On -Belay staff. The results then
determine the appropriate treatment.
2. Treatment
This is a 4-8 week phase (24 hours - 7 days a week) that
includes: lectures, group counseling, individual counseling,,
recreational_ therapy and family sessions. .
The third phase of the rehabilitation process is.the,
3. Aftercare
The adolescents meet once a week
Individual and family group sessions
request.
in peer support groups. -
are also available upon
REZONING & CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - ON -BELAY OF MINNESOTA INC
APRIL 22, 1986
PAGE 2
HISTORY: On -Belay of Minnesota, Inc., began in 1976 with a
10 -unit halfway house in Minnetonka, MN. Expansion since then
includes:
1979 -Louis House - A treatment center in Plymouth, MN.
1982 -Louis House North - A 22 -bed facility in Blaine, MN.
1983-A 25=bed facility in Columbus, -OH.
1985-A large counseling/referral clinic in Ridgewood, NJ.
Each facility is served by an Advisory Committee that includes.
neighbors, school officials, law enforcement personnel, social
services staff (County personnel) and City staff. This group
does not make the actual organization policies, but rather acts
as a liaison to the surrounding community. The current fee
is $195.00 per day that includes room, board and the three step
rehabilitation process.
EAGAN FACILITY
The proposed 48 bed facility will provide 19 beds for girls
on the lower level of the building and 29 beds for boys on a
7 -day -a -week schedule. A typical day will be:
6:00 AM
- Wake up.
7:00 AM
- Breakfast.
8:30 AM
- School - tutoring provided with assistance from
the students' own school.
11:30AM
- Lunch
1:30 PM
- Group session
2:30 PM
- Break
3:30 PM
- Group
5:00 PM
- Dinner
Evening
- Potential for group or family counseling, recreation
on or off site, aerobics class (the sanctuary will
be converted into a gymnasium).
10:15PM
- Lights out.
Security
As with the Blaine Center (Louis House North), this will
be a locked facility. All windows will have alarm sensors,
all doors will be locked at night, cameras will be mounted
in hallways and bed checks will take place approximately
every 20 minutes.
On -Belay does not accept adolescents that have: 1) a history
of court involvement, 2) psychological disorders where medica-
tion is needed or, 3) a record of past violent behavior.
City staff was assured that the Eagan Police Department
would not be responsible for runaways. Parents or On -Belay
staff would handle these situations.
p�
•
Staff
The proposed staff would number approximately 22, with rotating
shifts. Two - five would be at the facility at night, depending
on the occupancy rate. All staff would have a minimum of
1 year experience and either be Certified Chemical Dependency
Practioners or other professionally trained staff.
If approved, the Conditional Use Permit shall be subject to
the following conditions:
1. The Eagan facility provide a 48 bed maximum capacity.
2. All building improvements be approved by the Protective
Inspections Department.
a
61
-:7 -25W71 -
e
dd.
ff
I
0
�N I
a nAUGE, EIDE & FELLER, P.A.
r
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
CEDARVALE PROFESSIONAL BUILDINGS
3908 SIBLEY MEMORIAL HIGHWAY
EAGAN. MINNESOTA 55122
PAUL H. HAUGE
KEVIN W. EIDE AREA CODE 612
DAVID G. KE LLER
TELEPHONE 454.4224
'
LORI M. BELLIN
MICHAEL J. MAYER
March 26, 1986
Mr. Thomas L. Hedges
City Administrator .
3830 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, Minnesota 55122 - -. -- -- -----
Re: On -Belay Rehabilitation Center -Peace Reformed Church
Dear Tom:
You have asked what applications may be necessary in the event that a request
is made through the City for the approval of a rehabilitation center at the
current Peace Reformed Church on Nichols Road which according to our
information would be converted to a rehabilitation center by the On -Belay
organization. It is my understanding that the City has not received an
application and therefore, we do not have specific information concerning the
intended use.
Id
any event; from the information we have that the following applications
would appear to be appropriate:
1.
It is our understanding the current zoning of the property is R-1', with
3 �6
the church possibly operating under a non -conforming use and therefore, a�
application to
rezone would be necessary (Code Chapter 11). We are
uncertain at this time exactly which zoning category would be requested
with P -public facilities a possibility under either a permitted or
conditional use depending on the specific nature of the organization and
the proposed facility. A conditional use permit may be required under
Code Section 11.40 again depending upon the specific nature of the use and
type of organization.
2.
The land use designation under the 1980 Comprehensive Guide indicates RI
and it would appear that an amendment to the Comprehensive Guide may be
necessary (M.S.A. 462.355).,
3.
An application for preliminary plat approval under the Subdivision
Ordinance Code" Chapter 13 would also be required.
1 4.
A possibility of.a signed permit application, building permit application
•
if revisions to the structure are intended and the other appropriate
permits including electrical, plumbing, etc, may be required.
I
•
11
Mr. Thomas L. Hedges
March 26, 1986
Page Two
We have not reviewed the issue of nonconforming use or the expansion or
rebuilding of the structure and it would not appear appropriate to do so until
the specific information is submitted to the City.
Verruly yours,
HAUGE, EIDE S REL R, P.A.
Paul H. Hauge
PHH:cjb
APC Minutes
April 22, 1986
ON -BELAY OF MINNESOTA, INC. - REZONING a CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
Chairperson McCrea then convened the public hearing on the application of
On -Belay of Minnesota, Inc. for rezoning from R-1 (Single Family Residential)
to LB (Limited Business District) and a conditional use permit for an
adolescent Chemical Dependency Center, located in the former Peace Reformed
Church building in Lots 12through 16, and Lots 20 through 24, Block 6, Cedar
Grove No. 4, in part of the northeast quarter of Section 30 (Diamond Drive on•
the east and Nicola Road on the west). City Planner Runkle introduced the
application, indicating that if approved, it may also be necessary to provide
a Comprehensive Guide amendment.
Also present representing the applicant were Mr. John Cross, Judy Lewis
(Operations Manager) and David Rosenkor. The Commission was advised by the
applicant that it was the applicant's intent to close the Diamond Drive
access, use part of the parking lot for a play area and fence the north side
® of the property. Mr. Rosenkor who was the Director of the program, described
the program, the staff and the screening process used. Mr. John Newton, a
member of the teaching staff at one of On -Belay's other facilities, described
the work they do with chemical dependent adolescents to maintain their
scholastic status.
Ms. Jo Krueger, Burnsville Senior High School Nurse appeared describing
the problem of alcoholism and chemical dependency within the local high school
system. Also appearing was a coach from Coon Rapids Senior High who strongly
supported the system and described the impact on their school and the children
within. An appearance was also made by Reverend Marty Heist who had many
years of experience in this area. A letter was read from Dorothy Mosso
indicating the lack of programs for chemically dependent Dakota County
adolescents. A local resiaent and a former patient at On -Belay recommended
the program.
Mr. John Michael of 4253 Amber stated that the question was not the
• quality of the program, but whether this was an appropriate use, being a
business and multi -residential use within an R-1 neighborhood. Mr. Garrett
-
Laslow, a chemical dependent city therapist from Burnsville, indicated that
the On -Belay program was their sole source when referring adolescent
chemically dependent individuals to a program. Council chambers were filled
to capacity with local residents appearing to object to this proposal.
Additional issues raised were noise, possible crime, reduction in property
values, the proposed higher intensity use of the property in the neighborhood,
the availability of such sites such as the Ridges for this type of a program,
that there may be several churches looking for such location which would not
change the use of the property, and that the City and other organizations
might help On -Belay find a more suitable site. Commission members agreed that
the activities of On -Belay would be of benefit to the community but the
question was whether it was an appropriate use in this particular
neighborhood. It was pointed out that there had been previous discussions by
the Commission and City Council, indicating that there may be too much
commercial property in the City already, and that LB (Limited Business) would
not be appropriate in an area surrounded by single family homes. It was
indicated that the proposed use might not be appropriate under Public
Facilities as On -Belay is not a non-profit organization as. described in the
ordinance. /
(/i �/5
APC Minutes
April 22, 1,986
Harrison moved to recommend denial of the proposed rezoning, Wilkins
seconded the motion, for reasons including the following:
1. The Minnesota Legislature has clearly intended that State licensed
residential facilities be permitted single family uses if they serve 6 or
fewer persons in a single family residential district, and also have directed
municipalities to allow as permitted uses State licensed residential
facilities serving 7 through 16 persons as permitted multi -family residential
uses for purposes of zoning. The subject application does not comply with the
intent of the Legislature to allow such uses within residentially zoned areas,
in that the application provides for a 48 -bed facility, substantially
exceeding the Legislative intent within residential districts.
2. Single family residential uses surround the subject property on three
sides with Public Facility uses on the west side of Nicols Road and it would
appear that Limited Business use would not be a desirable use in that
location.
3. It is understood that the applicant is a Minnesota for-profit
corporation and without rezoning, the property would not be allowed to operate
its facility in the existing Peace Reformed Church building, in the event that
the parcel is construed to be a non -conforming public facility use.
4. Nicols Road adjacent to the parcel and to the west, has been down-
graded from a County Road to a City Street, with the understanding that the
traffic count has been substantially reduced after the opening of new Cedar
Avenue (County Highway #77) directly to the west, and the intent of the City
and the neighboring uses to retain primarily a residential character for
Nicols Road.
5. If the use were changed to a Limited Business use, necessitating a
business land use designation, it would cause a substantial revision in the •
character of the neighborhood and potentially allow uses within the Limited
Business category including both permitted and conditional uses described in'
Eagan Code, Section 11.20, Suba. 9.
6. The proposal is for a 24 hour use whose intensity is greater than in
Limited Business use areas.
7. Should the property be rezoned to Limited Business, it is possible
that future uses in the event of the abandonment of the On -Belay facility,
would have to be permitted even though they may be seriously incompatible with
the primarily residential area. See Comprehensive Guide Plan, City of Eagan,
1980, page iv -13.
8. There has been a great deal of neighborhood concern regarding the lack
of compatibility of the proposed On -Belay Center with the primarily
residentialneighborhood, as evidenced by the response from the neighbors and
the opposition in the form of Petition(s) submitted opposing the proposed use,
including objections regarding traffic, safety, economic impact on the
neighborhood, etc.
r/3
APC Minutes
April 22, 1986
Z
9. In addition, the Land Use Guide at pages IV -1 and IV -2 provides a
flexibility, or that the plan should be flexible or should serve as a guide
and should possess a degree of flexibility but "the burden of proof and
justification should be the responsibility of the, person or persons proposing
the revision". It is the determination of the Planning Commission that
although a public hearing',o,n the revisions, of, -.the Comprehensive Guide Plan has
not taken place, that the applicant has not sustained the burden of proof,
that there should be a revision in Che use of the property to a Limited
Business character.
10. The availability of an existing facility that could house a
rehabilitation center with some revisions to the structure, should not of
itself constitute the basis for amending the zoning to allow a use that may
not be compatible with the neighborhood.
it. The existing Peace Reformed Church structure could potentially be
used for a church or related facility and therefore, the City's action in
denying the applications does not deprive the owner from an adequate use of
the existing facility.
12. Information received by the City through the Dakota County Social
Services indicates that the proposed chemical dependency type of unit is a
very competitive type use and the fee schedule may make the proposal
financially unstable.
All voted in favor.
T. E. M. ADDITION - PRELIMINARY PLAT d REZONING
The public hearing was then convened on the application for rezoning and
application for the preliminary plat consisting of 3 single family lots on 3.6
® acres and rezoning from A (Agricultural) to R-1, located in part of the
northwest quarter of Section 25, Golden Meadow Road on the north, and Schwanz
Lake to the southwest. City Planner Runkle introduced the application
indicating that the City utilities would be made use of and the lake dedicated
to the Park Department. Mr. Wayne Cordes appeared on behalf of Mr. Murr and
indicated that the turnaround area encroaching upon the proposed lot had been
removed and that the drainfieLd would no longer be used when City utilities
were brought in. Discussion centered around the storm sewer assessment which
would have to be paid due to the loss of large lot credit upon development.
There were no members of the public present to respond.. Trygg moved, Wilkins
seconded the motion to recommend approval of the rezoning. All voted in
favor.
Trygg moved, Wilkins seconded the motion to recommend approval of the
preliminary plat,,subject to the following conditions:
1. All standard plat conditions shall be adhered to.
2. This development shall dedicate a 30 foot half right-of-way for Golden
Meadow Road. '
7
of
3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD, P.O. BOX -21199
EAGAN. MINNESOTA 55121
PHONE: (612) 454-8100
April 2, 1986
TO RESIDENTS OF THE CITY OF EAGAN
Re: OnBelay Rehabilitation Center/Peace Reformed Church
Dear Resident:
BEA BLOMQUIST
Mayor
THOMAS EGAN
JAMES A. SMRH
MC ELLISON
THEODORE WACHTER
Council Members
THOMAS HEDGES
ON AdinMrmoi
EUGENE VAN OVERBEKE
City Clerk
I have been asked by members of the Eagan City Council to write
you relating to the concerns that you have about the proposed
OnBelay Rehabilitation Center at the Peace Reformed Church located
at Nicols Road. It is my understanding that you have contacted at
.least one of the Councilmembers or Mayor, either in writing or by
telephone.
For your information, the OnBelay Center has submitted applications
to the City which will receive their first hearing on April 22,
1986, begining at 7:00 p.m. before the Advisory Planning Commission
at the Eagan Municipal Center at 3830 Pilot Knob Road. There are
requirements for rezoning, conditional use permit and possibly the
necessity to replat the property.
If the Advisory Planning Commission recommends approval of the
application, the earliest that it would be heard by the Eagan City
Council, if the Advisory Planning Commission makes a recom-
mendation regarding the applications, would be May 21, 1986, at
7:00 p.m., also at the Eagan Municipal Center. We would encourage
any interested persons to be present at those meetings.
Sincerely,
Thomas A. Hedge
City Administrator
TLH/kf
/�
THE LONE OAK TREE... THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY
4/2/8E
Dear Mayor Bea Blomquist,
My name is Waldemar Rewald an I am writing on behalf of
my family concerning the proposed drug treatment center on
Nicols Road Eagan, MN.
The drug treatment center proposal causes great concern
and worry to us because the site is in a residential area
not suited for such a facility. Our fears are certainly
neighborhood to raise a family and someday retire. In the
past years we have sadly seen the property value of our home
and the security of our family deteriorate.
What is par•ticular•ly alarming for us and our
neighborhood is the open door policy at the drug treatment
center. How can we feel secure for the safety of our
children and our homes when these people who have deep and
® sincere problems are allowed to roam freely, literally in
our backyards. We are not against drug treatment centers,
but they do not belong in a residential area.
The quality of living and our property has already
depreciated greatly. Now upon our r•etir•ement the value of
our• home is even less and with the proposed drug treatment
center moving in next door to our home the result would be
traumatic for• our residential neighborhood. please take
this letter to heart and ask, yourself how you would feel as
a homeowner• having such a facility next your home. Would
legitimate. When my
wife and
I moved into
this neighborhood
®
twenty years ago we
felt this
area would be
an excellent
lifetime investment.
It would
be a quiet,
peaceful
neighborhood to raise a family and someday retire. In the
past years we have sadly seen the property value of our home
and the security of our family deteriorate.
What is par•ticular•ly alarming for us and our
neighborhood is the open door policy at the drug treatment
center. How can we feel secure for the safety of our
children and our homes when these people who have deep and
® sincere problems are allowed to roam freely, literally in
our backyards. We are not against drug treatment centers,
but they do not belong in a residential area.
The quality of living and our property has already
depreciated greatly. Now upon our r•etir•ement the value of
our• home is even less and with the proposed drug treatment
center moving in next door to our home the result would be
traumatic for• our residential neighborhood. please take
this letter to heart and ask, yourself how you would feel as
a homeowner• having such a facility next your home. Would
it be safe for your children and family? Our dreams of a
secure and tranquil neighborhood would certainly be
shattered if this drug treatment center is allowed to exist
in our neighborhood.
Please consider this matter- sincerely and with empathy.
The proposed site has always been a church, there must be 401
other alternatives to preserve this Christian atmosphere.
Please feel free to respond to my letter. I invite you into
my home so we can discuss the alternatives and came to a
compromise that myself and my family can live with.
SWcere.ly,
�e-wa .i 7 l l,CIJ fsQ-e
Waldemar Rewald
2125 Quartz lane
Eagan, Mn
454-4624
F7
•
^' PROPOSED
RESOLUTION
CITY OF EAGAN
ON -BELAY OF MINNESOTA, INC. APPLICATION
WHEREAS, two applications were submitted by On -Belay of Minnesota, Inc.
for rezoning from R-1 (Single Family) to LB (Limited Business) for a 24 -Hour
Adolescent Chemical Dependency Rehabilitation Center in the existing Peace
Reformed Church building on Nicols Road; and
WHEREAS, at the present time, the property is zoned R-1 (Single Family);
and
WHEREAS, the current Comprehensive Guide designation for the site is R -I
® with a density of 1 to 3 residential units per acre; and
WHEREAS, the On -Belay organization provides residential chemical
dependency counselling for both male and female adolescents between the ages
of 12 through 18; and
WHEREAS, the Eagan Advisory Planning Commission at its regular meeting on
April 22, 1986 held a public hearing concerning the applications of On -Belay;
and
WHEREAS, neighboring residents ana owners who showed an interest in the
® application appeared at the hearing with Petition(s) in favor of/opposea to
the applications;
ALTERNATE I.
NOW, THEREFORE, upon motion by - seconded by
it was Resolved that the Advisory Planning
Commission,recommena to the City Council as follows:
1. Thatthe application for rezoning of the property from R-1 to LB be
approved.
111
2. That the application for conditional use permit for the On -Belay
Center at the existing Peace Reformed Church, be recommended for approval,
subject to the following conditions:
a. The Eagan On -Belay facility shall provide for a maximum 48-bea
capacity.
b. Ali building improvements shall be approved by the Eagan
Protective Inspections Dept.
C. Ail applicable City ordinances and regulations shall be complied
with.
d. All State and County regulations shall be complied with and proof
of compliance shall be submitted to the City staff for its review.
e. The Comprehensive Guide use for the property shall berevised to
accommodate the proposed use.
f. Other conditions:
Those in favor: is
Those against:
ALTERNATE II.
NOW THEREFORE, upon motion by seconded by
it was Resolved to recommend to the City Council
as follows:
1. That the application for rezoning from R-1 (Single Family) to LB
(Limited Business) and the application for conditional use permit for 24 -Hour
Adolescent Chemical Dependency Rehabilitation Center be recommended for denial
for reasons including the following:
9q
2
a. The Minnesota Legislature has clearly intended that State licensed '
residential facilities be permitted single family uses if they serve 6 or
fewer persons in a single family residential district, and also have directed
municipalities to allow as permitted uses State licensed residential
facilities serving 7 through 16 persons as permitted multi -family residential
uses for purposes of zoning. The subject application does not comply with the
intent of the Legislature to allow such uses within residentially zones areas,
in that the application pro vi aes for-�a— 48-bea -facility, -substantially
® exceeding the Legislative intent within residential districts.
b. Single family residential uses surround the subject property on
three sides with Public Facility uses on the west side of Nicols Road and it
would appear that Limited Business use would not be a desirable use in that
location.
C. It is understood that the applicant is a Minnesota for-profit
corporation and without rezoning, the property would not be allowed to operate
its facility in the existing Peace Reformed Church building, in the event that
® the parcel is construed to be a non -conforming public facility use.
a. Nicols Road adjacent to the parcel and to the west, has been down-
graded from a County Road to a City Street, with the understanding that the
traffic count has been substantially reduced after the opening of new Cedar
Avenue (County Highway #77) directly to the west, and the intent of the City
and the neighboring uses to retain primarily a residential character for
Nicols Road.
e. If the use were changed to a Limited Business use, necessitating a
business land use designation, it would cause a substantial revision in the
character of the neighborhood and potentially allow uses within the Limited
Business category including both permitted and conditional uses described in
Eagan Code, Section 11.20, Suba. 9. "
3
f. The proposal is for a 24 hour use whose intensity is greater than
in Limited Business use areas.
g. In the event that the Limited Business lana use likewise uses
could result in the event that the On -Belay facility is abandoned, which may
not be compatible in any respect to primarily residential area. See
Comprehensive Guide Plan, City of Eagan, 1980, page iv -13.
h. There has been a great deal of neighborhood concern regarding the
lack of compatibility of the proposea..,_On-J3-e-lay..Center with -the primarily
residential neighborhood, as evidenced by the response from the neighbors and
the opposition in the form of Petition(s) submitted opposing the proposed use,
including objections regarding traffic, safety, economic impact on the
neighborhood, (other objections:)
i. In addition, the Lana Use Guide at pages IV -1 and IV -2 provides a
flexibility, or that the plan should be flexible or should serve as a guide
and should posses a degree of flexibility but "the burden of proof and
justification should be the responsibility of the person or persons proposing
the revision". It is the determination of the Planning Commission that
members, although a public hearing on the revisions of the Comprehensive Guide
Plan has not taken place, that the applicant has not sustained the burden of
proof, that there should be a revision in the use of the property to a Limited
Business character.
�. The availability of an existing facility that could house a
rehabilitation center with some revisions to the structure, should not of
itself constitute the basis for .amending the zoning to allow a use that may
not be compatible with the neighborhood.
k. The existing Peace Reformed Church structure could potentially be
used for a church or related facility and therefore, the City's action in
denying the applications does not deprive the owner from an adequate use of
the existing facility. /Q / 4
1. Information received by the City through the Dakota County Social
Services indicates that the proposed chemical dependency type of unit is a
very competitive type use and the fee schedule may make the proposal
financially unstable.
M. Other reasons:
is
Dated:
Those in favor:
Those against:
ATTEST:
By:
•
E. J. Van Overbeke, Clerk
107,--
CITY
0v
5
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF EAGAN
By:
Beatta Blomquist, Mayor
Agenda Information Memo
May 21, 1986, City Council Meeting
Page Twenty -One
PRELIMINARY PLAT/T.E.M. ADDITION
F. Preliminary Plat, T.E.M. Addition, Consisiting of 3 Single
Family Lots on 3.6 Acres and a Rezoning from A to R-1., Located
at Golden Meadow Road on the North and Schwanz Lake to the South-
west --A public hearing was held by the Advisory Planning Commission
at their last regular meeting on April 22, to consider two (2)
applications submitted by Thomas Murr, requesting a rezoning
from A to R-1 and a preliminary plat approval for T.E.M. Addition.
The Advisory Planning Commission is recommending approval of
these applications. For additional information on this ite ,
O
refer to the Planning and Engineering reports found on pages I[
• through IV— .
The Advisory Parks and Recreation Commission has reviewed the
preliminary plat and has no recommendation to the City Council
regarding, dedication requirements. The reason for inaction on
this item is due to a previous purchase .agreement with Mr. Murr
for the .acquisition of a portion of his parcel to be. incorporated
into Trapp Farm Park. Therefore, with this agreement, parks
dedication requirements were fulfilled for the preliminary plat.
For action that was taken by the Advisory Planning Commission,
refer to a copy of those minutes found on pages /Q through
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the
rezoning and preliminary plat for T.E.M.. Addition as requested
by Thomas Murr.
/03
r-
Il
CITY OF EAGAN
SUBJECT: REZONING
APPLICANT: PRELIMINARY PLAT (T.E.M. ADDITION)
LOCATION
EXISTING ZONING:
THOMAS MURR
NW a SECTION 25
DATE OF 'PUBLIC HEARING: A (AGRICULTERAL)
DATE OF REPORT: APRIL 22, 1986
REPORTED BY: PLANNING & ENGINEERING
® APPLICATION: An application has been submitted requesting a
rezoning and preliminary plat approval for the T.E.M. Addition. This
plat consists of 3 single-family lots on 3.6 acres fronting on Golden
Meadow Road.
COMMENTS: The applicant has an existing home on the proposed middle
lot (Lot 2). It will contain 76,102 sq. ft-.. Lot 1 to the west
will contain 49,694 sq. ft. Both will have 138' of Schwanz Lake
frontage. Lot 3 is a triangular piece containing 18,736 sq. ft. No
setback variances will be required, and all 3 lots were stubbed for
sewer and water when Golden Meadow Road was improved.
The existing driveway servicing 'Lot 2 has a turnaround area that
encroaches on Lot 1. This will need to be removed at the time Lot 1
is sold. Also, the existing septic tank encroaches under Lot 1. It
is staff's recommendation that the applicant hook-up with City
utilities at the time Lot 1 is developed to eliminate potential
• septic tank conflicts.
The park dedication hasbeen completed.
ASSESSMENTS:. This development shall be responsible for the trunk
area storm sewer assessment that the City gave a large lot credit
for. . Project 383 assessed the original parcel 030-29 for 39,592
sq. ft._ ($1,706.40 - $0.0431/sq. ft.) of the total net area of 2.40
acres (104,544 sq. ft.). With the development of - Parcel 030-29, the
large lot credit no longer applies. This development will be
responsible for 64,952 sq.. ft. (104,544-39,592) at the rates in
effect at the time of final platting. Based on 1986 rates, this
amount to $3,2-48. -
�� Z
S
PRELIMINARY PLAT - T.E.M. ADDITION
APRIL 22, 1986
PAGE 2
CONDITIONS:
1. All standard plat conditions shall be adhered to.
2. This development shall dedicate a 30' half right-of-way for
Golden Meadow Road.
3. This development shall be responsible for the trunk area
storm sewer assessment that the City gave credit for under
the large lot policy at the rates in effect at the time of
final platting.
E
•
r
•
Ll
dos
0
Preliminary Plat of:
TEM. ADDITION
QUNSET rr;M ADDITION'
Wr
i/ \ 1 Q • LRT J ,• r
of z
M
� r' ex�rox
1. -
�1 aMN
�y4 y 1 L oVCVQYINO
VICE0.
l.N Ib Yom. IM.M iR
11Ob�)
.4Y N- . R30G S.R.
10.33.01
N.I i_ . I...SII S{M1
(SSi N.w1
�1 aMN
�y4 y 1 L oVCVQYINO
VICE0.
APC Minutes
April 22, 1986
9. In addition, the Land Use Guide at pages IV -1 and IV -2 provides a
flexibility, or that the plan should be flexible or should serve as a guide
and should possess a degree of flexibility but "the burden of proof and
justification should be the responsibilityof the person or persons proposing
the revision". It is the determination of the Planning Commission that
although a public hearing on the revisions of the Comprehensive Guide Plan has
not taken place, that the applicant has -not sustained the burden of proof,
that there should be a revision in the use of the property to a Limited
Business character.
10. The availability of an existing facility that could house a
rehabilitation center with some revisions to the structure, should not of
itself constitute the basis for amending the zoning to allow a use that may
not be compatible with the neighborhood.
® 11. The existing Peace Reformed Church structure could potentially be
used for a church or related facility and therefore, the City's action in
denying the applications does not deprive the owner from an adequate use of
the existing facility.
12. Information received by the City through the Dakota County Social
Services indicates that the proposed chemical dependency type of unit is a
very competitive type use and the fee schedule may make the proposal
financially unstable.
All voted in favor.
T. E. M..ADDITION - PRELIMINARY PLAT a REZONING
The public hearing was then convened on the application for rezoning and
application for the preliminary plat consisting of 3 single family Lots on 3.6
® acres and rezoning from A (Agricultural) to R-1, located in part of the
northwest quarter of Section 25, Golden Meadow Road on the north, and Schwanz
Lake to the southwest. City Planner Runkle introduced the application
indicating that the City utilities would be made use of and the lake dedicated
to the Park Department. Mr. Wayne Cordes appeared on behalf of Mr.. Murr and
indicated that the turnaround area encroaching upon the proposed lot had been
removed and that the drainfield would no longer be used when City utilities
were brought in. Discussion centered around the storm sewer assessment which
would have to be paid due to the loss of Large lot credit upon development.
There were no members of the public present to respond. Trygg moved, Wilkins
seconded .the motion to recommend approval of the rezoning. Ali voted in
favor.
Trygg moved, Wilkins seconded the motion to recommend approval of the
preliminary plat, subject to the following conditions:
1. All standard plat conditions shall be adhered to.
2. This development shall dedicate a 30 foot half right-of-way for Golden
Meadow Road.
/to
7
APC Minutes
April 22, 1986
3. This development shall be responsible for the trunk area storm sewer
assessment that the City gave credit for under the large lot policy at the
rates in effect at the time of final platting.
4. That septic tanks will not be allowed and all lots will be connected
to City service.
All voted in favor.
WINDTREE 7th AND 8th ADDITIONS - PRELIMINARY PLAT
Chairperson McCrea then called the public_ hearing for the application of
Richardson Properties for a preliminary plat consisting of 74 single family
lots of approximately 35 acres on Out Lot A of Windtree 6th Addition, located
in part of the southwest quarter of Section 13, north of Wescott Road and east
of Elrene Road. City Planner Runkle indicated that the proposal had been
before the Planning Commission at a prior date, however, the plat had been
somewhat revised to allow for the preservation of more of the natural
amenities and to provide 85 foot wide lots at the setback line with all lots
meeting or exceeding the 12,000 square foot requirement. Mr. Peter Kenebly
appeared on behalf of the applicant. Questions from the public were
addressed.
Mr. Steve Bryant of West Publishing appeared and advised that West
Publishing was anticipating an expansion of their facility directly east of
this property, which at this time had no screening for Lots 12 through 16.
The builder and developer agreed to the requirement that the proposed buyers
be advised of .the expansion of West Publishing in the L-1 property directly
east of this proposed plat.
Wilkins moved, Voracek seconded the motion to recommend approval of the is
preliminary plat of Windtree 7th and 8th Additions, subject to the following
conditions:
1. The applicant revise the grading plan to suit 2% grade for 100 feet at
street intersections with exception as noted in report.
2. The City shall approve of phasing plans.
3. This development is responsible for a 5 foot concrete walkway along
Wescott Road.
4. This development shall dedicate a. 50 foot half right-of-way for
Wescott Road and a 40 foot half right-of-way for Elrene Road.
5. This development shall dedicate a ponaing and utility easement for JP -
18 to encompass the 871 high water level and a minimum 20 foot utility
easement over any storm sewer line not built within City right-of-way.
6. This development is responsible.for trunk area storm sewer and lateral
benefit from trunk water main assessments at the rates in effect at the time
of final platting.
/6�
•
Agenda Information
May 21, 198'6, City
Page Twenty -Two
Memo
Council Meeting
PRELIMINARY PLAT, WINDTREE 7TH ,.,& 8TH ADDITIONS
G. Preliminary Plat for Windtreee7th and 8th Additions (Judith
Bright), Consisting of 74 Single Family Lots on Approximately
35 Acres on Outlot A of Windtree 6th Addition --A public hearing
was held by the Advisory Planning Commission to consider a
preliminary plat application submitted by Richardson Properties
for Windtree 7th and 8th Additions. The plat consists of 74
single family lots on 35.4 acres, north of Wescott Road and east
of Elrene Road. Action was taken by the APC to recommend approval
of the preliminary plat to the City Council. For additional informa-
tion on this item, refer to the Planning and Engineering report,
a copy is enclosed on pages /// through
The Advisory Parks and Recreation Commission, at its May 1 meeting,
noted that Windtree development has completed its park dedication
requirements, Wescott Station Park, therefore no land or cash
dedication is required. The Commission did recommend that the
Windtree 7th and 8th Additions be responsible for a bituminous
trail along Wescott 'Road through the extent of their plat with
which Richardson Properties is in agreement.
For additional information and action that was taken by the Advisory
Planning Commission, refer to a copy of those minutes found on
pages 1/T through y0
ACTION TO BBE -CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the
preliminary plat for Windtree 7th and 8th Additions.
//b
CITY OF EAGAN
SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY PLAT (WINDTREE 7TH a 8TH ADDITION!
APPLICANT: RICHARDSON PROPERTIES
LOCATION: SW a, SECTION 13
EXISTING ZONING: R-1 (SINGLE FAMILY)
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: APRIL 22, 1986
DATE OF REPORT: APRIL 16, 1986
REPORTED BY: PLANNING & ENGINEERING
APPLICATION; An application has been submitted requesting pre-
liminary plat approval for the Windtree 7th & 8th Additions.
This plat consists of 74 single-family lots on 35.4 acres north
of Wescott Road and east of Elrene Road.
ZONING & LAND USE. The Windtree Addition is zoned R-1 (single
family) with the original layout containing 121 total lots.
The 7th and 8th Additions are located south and east of the
previously platted 5th & 6th Additions and south of Wescott
Station Park. West Publishing forms the eastern property line.
The 7th Addition will contain 39 lots and the 8th Addition 35
lots, giving the project an overall density of 2.1 units per
acre. Almost all lots exceed either the 12,000 sq. ft. minimum
size and 85' width at the 30' setback, line. The lots vary in
size from one at 12,000 sq. .ft. to 57,900 sq.. ft., with most
in the 15-20,000 sq. ft. range.
As with the other additions, the topography is rolling with
numerous hillsides and depressions. There is a variety of mature
trees; maples, aspens, ash and oak are the most common.
GRADING/DRAINAGE: The grading plan the applicant submitted is
feasible. The appl'icant's grading plan meets all existing City
Code requirements with the exception of the 2% maximum grade for
109' at all intersections. Staff feels the applicant can meet
this requirement for .all intersections except east of Ridgewood
Drive on Brentwood Lane. This short segment of Brentwood Lane
between Ridgewood Drive and the access street to Wescott Road is
too short to accommodate a 2% grade east of Ridgewood, and a 2%
grade west of the access street. To meet this would mean the
applicant would need to lower the intersection of Ridgewood Drive
and Brentwood Lane 4'. This would cause excessive slopes going
westerly on Brentwood Lane and also excessive grading in this
vicinity. If the applicant provides a 2% grade on Brentwood Lane
west of the Wescott Road access street, then the grade
approaching the Ridgewood Drive intersection would be abodt 6%.
Staff does not feel this will pose any significant problems
because westbound traffic on Brentwood Lane will not have to stop
WINDTREE 7TH 8 8TH ADD
APRIL 22, 1986
PAGE 2
on an uphill grade. Staff feels it is more important to provide
a flatter grade on Brentwood Lane approaching the Wescott Road
access street to allow the traffic to slow down enough to make
the right-hand turn onto the access street.
This proposed development is located within Major Drainage
District J as shown on the attached, Figure 1. Most of the
drainage from this area is to the north into Pond JP -18. This
pond presently has no positive gravity outlet. Staff does not
feel a positive gravity outlet will be necessary with the
completion of this development. Presently, there is no standing
water in this pond and this pond also has much storage
capability.
The applicant proposes to drain street runoff from a low point at
Brentwood Lane located in the proposed 8th Addition northerly
through backyards between the proposed 7th and 8th Additions. •
This storm water would then be picked up near the north end of
the 8th Addition with storm sewer conveyed under Windtree Drive
to the northeast and into Pond JP -18. This plan will leave some
water ponding on portions of Lots 1 through 4, in the vicinity of
Block 1, of the proposed 8th Addition. This water has a natural
passage way to the north if it rises to an elevation of 907.
UTILITIES: Sanitary sewer and water main of sufficient size,
capacity and depth exist within the existing Windtree 4th, 5th
and 6th Additions. These utilities are of sufficient size,
capacity and depth to provide service to the proposed Windtree
7th and 8th Additions.
This development will not require any trunk sanitary sewer or
water main projects.
STREETS: Existing streets which abut this proposed development 40
include Elrene Road on the west, and Wescott Road on the south.
Ridgewood Drive, Windtree Drive and Stonewood Road all dead-end
into this proposed development. All the previous streets are
under the City of Eagan's jurisdiction. The City's Street Master
Plan classifies Elrene Road as a collector street and Wescott
Road -as a minor arterial street.
The street layout the developer proposes meets with staff
approval. The City will require the developer to construct a 5'
concrete sidewalk along Wescott Road as per standard City policy
regarding minor arterial streets.
RIGHT-OF-WAY/EASEMENTS: The north 50' half right-of-way of
Wescott Road exists as an easement. Staff recommends this
proposed development plat the north 50' half right-of-way of
Wescott Road with the Windtree 7th Addition. This development
proposes on dedicating the City's standard of 60' full right-of-
way for residential streets. This development shall also
dedicate a 40' half right-of-way for Elrene Road.
//v
WINDTREE 7TH & 8TH ADD
APRIL 22, 1986
PAGE 3
Staff recommends the developer provided whatever drainage
easements will be necessary for the overland storm water runoff
he proposes between Ridgewood Drive and Windtree Drive north of
Brentwood Lane. The City will also -require a ponding easement
over Pond JP -18 to encompass the 871. high water elevation. The
City will also need a minimum 20' wide drainage and utility
easement over all storm sewer lines not constructed within City
right-of-way.
PERMITS: This development will require permits or approvals from
the following agencies.
1. MPCA sanitary sewer extension permit.
2. Mn. Dept. of Health- plzi appYoval- for -water main
• extension.
3. MWCC sanitary sewer extension approval.
ASSESSMENTS: This proposed development for Outlot A of the
Windtree 6th Addition is responsible for the following
assessments:
ASSESSMENT SUMMARY TABLE
Description
Trunk Area Storm Sewer
Add'1 Benefit from
Trunk Water Main
1986 Rate Est. Qty.
$ 0.05/sq.ft. 1,222,830/sq.ft. (1)
$11.88/f.f. 1,507/f.f. (2)
$61,141
$17,903
• 5' Conc. Sidewalk $11.81/f.f. 1,717/f.f. $20,278
(1) Includes estimated 20% credit for street R.W.
(2) Includes 150' corner lot credit for Elrene Road
The developer will be responsible for the amount based on the final pla
areas at the rates in effect at the time of final platting.
113
WINDTREE 7TH 8 8TH ADD
APRIL 22, 1986
PAGE 4
CONDITIONS:
1. The applicant revise grading plan to suit 2% grade for 100'
at street intersections with exception as noted in report.
2. The City shall approve of phasing plans.
3. This development is responsible for a 5' concrete walkway
along Wescott Road.
4. This development shall dedicate a 50' half right-of-way for
Wescott Road and a 40' half right-of-way for Elrene Road.
5. This development shall dedicate a ponding and utility
easement for JP -18 to encompass the 871 high water level and
a minimum 20' utility easement- ovei Ahy'storm sewer line not
built within City right-of-way.
6. This development is responsible for trunk area storm sewer
and lateral benefit from trunk water main assessments at the
rates in effect at the time of final platting.
7. All costs of internal public improvements within this
development will be the sole responsibility of this
development.
8. The minimum lot size of 12,0.00 S.F. with 85' frontage
shall be adhered to unless a variance is requested.
9. All conditions that were imposed on the first phase of
Windtree shall be adhered to.
0
•
//✓
--
Q
sauwc
..8
it i i'.P
-.
osr R6
tl
LOLFir
COUNSC
41
�=
d
x�iG^NI
Q� ti
n' Crx f le
CPQ:1 W
a e
KE.
//✓
SHEET NO. 1 OF ] SHEETS ��
................
................
................
................
SUBJECT PARCEL
FIG. #1
City of eagan - approved: standard -
PUBLIC STORM SEWER plate #:
C -
WORK
MASTER PLAN
—{ G q e, VUAYK- be r e d
/d
K- erro r
APC Minutes
April 22, 1986
3. This development shall be responsible for the trunk area storm sewer
assessment that the City gave credit for under the large lot policy at the
rates in effect at the time of final platting.
4. That septic tanks will not be allowed and all lots will be connected
to City service.
All voted in favor.
WINDTREE 7th AND 8th ADDITIONS - PRELIMINARY PLAT
Chairperson McCrea then called the public hearing for the application of
® Richardson Properties for a preliminary plat consisting of 74 single family
lots of approximately 35 acres on Outlet A of Windtree 6th Addition, located
in part of the southwest quarter of Section 13, north of Wescott Road and east
of Elrene Road. City Planner Runkle indicated that the proposal had been
before the Planning Commission at a prior date, however, the plat had been
somewhat revised to allow for the preservation of more of the natural
amenities and to provide 85 foot wide lots at the setback line with all lots
meeting or exceeding the 12,000 square foot requirement. Mr. Peter Kenebly
appeared on behalf of the applicant. Questions from the public were
addressee.
Mr. Steve Bryant of West Publishing appeared and advised that West
Publishing was anticipating an expansion of their facility directly east of
this property, which at this time had no screening for Lots 12 through 16.
The builaer and developer agreed to the requirement that the proposed buyers
be advised of .the expansion of West Publishing in the L-1 property directly
• east of this proposed plat.
Wilkins moved, Voracek seconded the motion to recommend approval of the
preliminary plat of Winatree 7th and 8th Additions, subject to the following
conditions:
1: The applicant revise the grading plan to suit 2% grade for 100 feet at
street intersections with exception as noted in report.
2. The City shall approve of phasing plans.
3. This development is responsible for a 5 foot concrete walkway along
Wescott Road.
4. This development shall dedicate a 50 foot half right-of-way for
Wescott Road and a 40 foot half right-of-way for Elrene Road.
5. This development shall dedicate a ponding and utility easement for JP -
18 to encompass the 871 high water level and a minimum 20 foot utility
easement over any storm sewer line not built within City right-of-way.
6. This development is responsible for trunk area storm sewer and lateral
benefit from trunk water main assessments at the rates in effect at the time
of final platting. //�F
APC Minutes
April 22, 1986
7. All costs of internal public improvements within this development will
be the sole responsibility of this development.
8. The minimum lot size of 12,000 square feet with 85 foot widths at the
front setback shall be adhered to.
9. All conditions that were imposed on the first phase of Windtree shall
be adhered to.
All voted in favor.
RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTHS - AMENDMENT TO EAGAN CITY CODE - CHAPTER 13
Chairperson McCrea then convened the hearing regaraing the amendments to
the Eagan City Code, Chapter 13, entitled Subdivision Regulations. Harrison
moved, Hall seconded the motion to recommend that the revision to right-of-way
widths be referred to the Developers Task Force for study. All voted in
favor.
Harrison then moved, Voracek seconded the motion to recommend approval of
the revision to Section 13.40 to clarify that the amendment of Chapter 13 was
separate from the procedures for preliminary and final plat. Legal counsel
was also advised to have the amendment draft properly reflect that all
proceeaings for preliminary plat and final plat, whether initiated by owners,
the Advisory Planning Commission or City Council, must have a public hearing
with published notice, in addition to mailea notice to all property owners
within 350 feet of the boundary of the proposed plat. All voted in favor
except Hall who voted nay.
SIGN ORDINANCE •
The Commission discussed at length the difficulty of addressing the sign
applications being presented in regard to Town Centre 100 and Town Centre 70, -
without knowing the overall plan for signs as the commercial area develops.
The item was tabled until the developer could provide a more comprehensive
plan to the Planning Commission.
ADJOURNMENT
Wilkins moved, Harrison seconded the motion to adjourn the meeting at
10:15 p.m. All voted in favor.
Secretary - APC
7-6
9
DGK
Agenda Information
May 21, 1986, City
Page Twenty -Three
Memo
Council Meeting
PRELIMINARY PLAT EXTENSION/BLACKHAWK PLAZA
H. Peter Stalland, Blackhawk Plaza One Year Preliminary Plat
Extension --The City has received a letter from Peter Stalland
representing Norse Development Company, requesting an extension
of one (1) year for the Blackhawk Plaza preliminary plat. For
a copy of Mr. Stalland's request, refer to page /ZZ and for
a copy of the plat, refer to a site plan that was approved June
4, 1985 by City Council action, enclosed on page(s) /7--3
•
ACTION TO
BE CONSIDERED ON THIS
ITEM: To approve
or deny the
extension
for one (1) year
for the preliminary
plat entitled
•
Blackhawk
Plaza.
•
NORSE DEVELOPMENT CO.
ONE CORPORATE CENTER. FINANCIAL PLAZA
7261 OHMS LANE
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55435
Mr. Thomas Hedges
City Manager
City of Eagan
P.O. Box 21199
3830 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, MN 55121
Re: Blackhawk Plaza
Dear Tom,
May 5, 1986
:v
0
TELEPHONE
(613) 835.5577
As you may recall, on June 4, 1985 the City Council approved a preliminary
® plat for Blackhawk Plaza located at the corner of Diffley and I -35E. Since
it is unlikely that we wiil.be able to submit a final plat application prior
to the end of our one year period pursuant to City Ordinance ® 13.20(3),
we hereby request an extension of another year period for continued effectiveness
of our preliminary plat. I assume that you will need to place this matter
before the Council; I will look forward to hearing from you as to the date.
For a variety of reasons, we have not been able to proceed with the development
of this project as quickly as we had originally anticipated. However, we
are getting much closer to finalizing our development plans. Without an
extension from the Council, we would suffer substantial financial damage.
Thank you for your consideration.
• You
Pet
KPS;jj
cc Dale Runkle
AREA USE DUMMARYM.y . '
wui m l�'..r meltll �IIW
_ SHOPPING CENTER
EXCEPTIUII •T,
f_
L-------
1 �r'
6
nu.m .r u.e .u.raen ......_ _ .. _,
ENGINEERING _
COMPRNY, INC.?'f��,u
PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN
BLACKHAWK PLAZA
NORSE DEVELOI
COMPANY
01m
" \d"1� '•moi.
g�R '•
ti
3,
D • �OS�
DIM
0 T
/
h
t 4
:I�
- � •—
-Y
o9'uN
.E 5Q'
1 e
S
`
VTER
."��•
JbffY
PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN
BLACKHAWK PLAZA
NORSE DEVELOI
COMPANY
01m
Agenda Information Memo
May 21, 1986, City Council Meeting
Page Twenty -Four
GROUP W/TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP
I. Group W Cable System/Transfer of Ownership --Group W Cable of
Burnsville/Eagan, Inc., has requested the consent of the Cities of
Burnsville and Eagan to the transfer of ownership and control in
Group W to a group of five Buyers (Transaction #1) and the
transfer of ownership and control and ultimate transfer of the
Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance to North Central Cable
Communications, L.P. (Transaction #:2). Under the Franchise Ordi-
nance,, Group W is obligated to receive the Cities' approval for
both transactions. For further background and a more in-depth
explanation of Transactions #1 and #2,, refer to Commission legal
counsel Tom Creighton's memo enclosed on pages1l,.5through1w_.
Transaction #1:
Briefly, Transaction #1 involves Westinghouse Broadcasting and
Cable, Inc. 's (the parent company of Group W') sale and transfer of
100% of its stock in Group W Cable to a group of five Buyers.
These Buyers, including their affiliates and assignees, are:
American Television and Communications Corporation, Comcast Corpora-
tion, Daniels & Associates, Inc., TCI Holdings, 'Inc. and Century
Southwest Cable Television, Inc. The Burnsville/Eagan Cable Commis-
sion, with the assistance of Tom Creighton, has done extensive
research into three areas of the transferees' (Buyers') qualifica-
tions: 1,) legal, 2) technical„ and 3) financial. After reviewing
the results of this investigation, the Commission found the Buyers'
qualifications to be satisfactory. On May 8, 1986, at a meeting of
the Burnsville/Eagan Cable Communications Commission, Transaction
#1 was approved subject to the conditions outlined in the resolu-
tion enclosed on pages through it1a . A copy of a resolution
•granting the Eagan City Council's approval to Transaction #1 is
enclosed on pages through /53 Since Transaction #1 is a
stock transfer in which Group W, Inc. and Group W of
Burnsville/Eagan, Inc. remain intact, it is not necessary to
transfer the cable franchise at the conclusion of Transaction #1.
Transaction#2:
The second transaction involves the specific transfer of Group W
of Burnsville/Eagan, Inc. to North Central Cable Communications,
L. P. An investigation into the same areas of qualification was
instituted by the Cable Commission for Transaction #2. While the
legal and technical qualifications seem to be satisfactory, North
Central has either not provided, or not .provided in sufficient
detail, the financial information necessary to make an informed
decision concerning Transaction #2. Please refer to the Findings
of Fact, Conclusions, and Recommended Resolution, enclosed on
pages -
through /4/ On May 8, 1986, the Burnsville/Eagan
Cable Communications Commission recommended denial of Transaction
/L�
Agenda Information Memo
May 21, 1986, City Council Meeting
Page Twenty -Five
#2. Also enclosed on pages 14 L through A is a copy of a
resolution denying approval of Transaction #2 by the Eagan City
Council.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: 1) To approve or deny Trans-
action #1 involving the sale and transfer of 100% of Westinghouse
Broadcasting and Cable, Inc. 's stock to a group of five Buyers;
and 2) to approve or deny Transaction #2 involving the specific
transfer of Group W of Burnsville/Eagan, Inc. to North Central
Cable Communications, L.P.
/z�k
n
O'CONNOR & HANNAN
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
ruwl.IAmw
.w.[•rv.a ior:.Icewo J... a+vxon+va•
•iaC.Jun•L•C+•
+°aur
lbssr. s. x
a
ivlo ..l.•
g.*1 .•[roll'' O LOx.o
•.W.[[uai.oxIn
L[.
L. 11—S
3800 IDS CENTER
u [
FIc..+a
[ Ix .. auao•
C.•Ia,LMaOx, Jw.
III. Ol wl.'u. O+O
+.xcx•.o•o �.
80 SOUTH EIGHTH STREET
WILL ,..<IA".xw
ou
ti.�u L.w n[a
MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 85402-2254
vuow L. c.+xl...L
[Wr [. "yo- L.
�[aucnvw.0
�w.•u J. a+lnu
�:w.°u'+"axiii:[Ix
:: ---A ixv.Ll[xauao
1612)341-3800
r4 Jy.OW�.I
LLL.•......
.. -Al a...[ouw
f•O.[. J. AIL It
TELEX 29-0584
G." J... AL..C.
p C
Ilrl[O[w�G� M. INC."
OOL
°:LL.,
TELECOPIER 16121 341-3800 12561
pyo
two... o. u[i°xp+
a.cu.L CCLw.[L
r.LOoo.I ...0+eu
.pl ...
... ur..,"ILIA..
WILLI.. IL .911
DIRECT DIAL NUMBER
IAEANERIAmcc ruwlx.,o.,o C. om[a waa,p IArn[c
a:-It
V: anm ..Lx ccxrcx Iola �CPMYLV.xl w[.u[ .... 2ME
17n LI Ga.ar"[[r a.,xVI O.G a00°. -,.:!.!antic
SIN ET NA....,+:bo
(612) 343-1298
....... .a
t. ED ..3.-.1A7
coal aio.noo
O•COLw.il LLI•.�...
°Ir CLLw.n YJL C°Lw.IL
w �IM1 I..IA� .•xl J. .1+0.•
'LT..
�C -
1......Z.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Directors of the Burnsville%Eagan-Cable "-
® Communications Commission
FROM: Thomas D. Creighton
DATE: April 10, 1986
RE: Group W Cable, Incorporated Request for Approval of
Transfer of Ownership and Control
CHRIST—
NORMw •Lc•s•
N"rvL,
a.
Cn...[r [o[xarcl.•
!.DREW + All •
n"ccxu va.•icva•
o•Llo •, [.sau•
u�+. o. v.LLco°a•
Please find below a summary and analysis of proposed transactions
number 1 and 2 regarding a request from Group W Cable, Incorporated,
to the Member Cities of the Burnsville/Eagan Cable Communications
• Commission to approve the sale and transfer of all of the issued
and outstanding shares of.the capital stock of Group W Cable,
Incorporated ("Group WI') to a group of five Buyers (Transaction
#1) and the sale of the stock in Group W Cable of Burnsville/Eagan,
Incorporated and transfer of the cable franchise to North Central
Cable Communications Company, L.P. (Transaction #2).
The purpose of this report is to provide the Commission
with an understanding of the transactions and the standard for
reviewing whether to approve such transactions.
/-,7 15'
TRANSACTION #1
I. Introduction
This portion of .the memorandum provides an analysis of
the proposed Transaction #1 involving the'proposed sale and
transfer of all of the issued and outstanding shares of the
capital stock of Group W from Westinghouse Broadcasting and
Cable, Incorporated ("Westinghouse"), to a group of five Buyers.
II. Description of 'Transaction
The proposed Transaction #1 involves the following entities:
1. Westinghouse Broadcasting and Cable, Incorporated ("Westinghouse"
2. American Television and Communications Corporation
and its affiliates and assignees_("ATC");
3. Comcast Corporation and its affiliates and assignees
("Comcast");
4. Daniels & Associates, Inc. and its affiliates and assignees
("Daniels");
5. TCI Holdings, Inc. and its affiliates and assignees
("TCIH"); and
6. Century Southwest Cable Television, Inc. and its affiliates
and assignees ("Century").
Numbers two through six, above, or their designated affiliates
or assignees are hereby referred to collectively as "Buyers".
Sometime in June of 1986 (hereinafter referred to as the
"closing") the Buyers are jointly and severally obligated to
close the purchase of Group W's stock from Westinghouse subject
to the terms and conditions of a purchase agreement dated as
of December 23, 1985.
Upon the closing, the stock and assets of Group W will
be owned by the Buyers in the following approximate proportions:
2 -
TCIH and
its
affiliates or
assignees
32.68
ATC and
its
affiliates or
assignees
26.48
Comcast
and
its affiliates
or assignees
25.48
Century
and
its affiliates
or assignees
12:•08
Daniels
and
its affiliates
or assignees
3.68
100.08
The Buyers have agreed that, upon the closing, they will
elect the following individuals to serve as directors of Group W:
Name
Presently an
officer of;
Thomas W. Binning ATC
®Stewart Blair TCIH
Julian A. Brodsky Comcast
Thomas A. Marinkovich Daniels
Leonard Tow Century
office Held
Executive Vice President
Senior Vice President
Senior Vice President
President
President
After the closing, Group W will be supervised by the Board
of Directors specified above and each Buyer will have primary
operational responsibility for a group of cable systems which
it has agreed to subsequently purchase or dispose of pursuant
to the purchase agreement.
• For the purpose of our analysis the six suburban Minnesota
systems have been assigned to Daniels. Daniels & Associates
has assigned its interests to Daniels -Hauser Holding Company
("D -H Holdings"), a Colorado general partnership consisting
of Daniels & Associates, Inc. and North Central Cable Communications,
L.P. as general partners. North Central Cable Communications,
L.P. ("North Central") is a. Minnesota limited partnership consisting
of Hauser Cable Communications Incorporated as general partner
and R.E. Hauser Incorporated as limited partner_.
The Buyers have also agreed that as soon as possible after
the closing Group W will transfer control and ownership of the
Group W subsidiaries to the individual.Buyers (in our case Daniels
which has assigned its interest to D -H Holdings). This transaction
is described as Transaction #2, below, and cannot occur without
your specific review and approval. Nevertheless, the management
of your system will be immediately undertaken by North Central,
as agreed by the Buyers., upon the conclusion of Transaction
#1. Although Transactions #1 and #2 require your approval,
this change in management of your system can legally occur without
your approval.
III. Standard of Review
11
The Commission's task in Transaction #1 is to review Transaction
#1 and to recommend to its Member Cities approval or denial
of the transfer of stock from Westinghouse to the group of Buyers.
The Cities must make the ultimate determination. The standard
of review is that the Cities' consent shall not be unreasonably
withheld. For the purpose of determining whether it will consent
to the
change
of
control
in Group
W, the Commission has made
•
inquiry
into
the
legal,
technical,
and financial qualifications
of the Buyers.
The analysis of the proposed Transaction #1 is somewhat
different from the analysis of the proposed Transaction #2.
Since proposed Transaction #1 is a stock transfer, in which
Group W Incorporated and Group W of Burnsville/Eagan, Incorporated
remain intact, it is not necessary to transfer the franchise
at the conclusion of Transaction #1. Therefore, the performance
• of your cable communications franchise is still guaranteed by.
Group W Incorporated who will be controlled by new stock owners
The assets of Group W Incorporated appeal to remain intact at
the conclusion of Transaction #1. Only the management of Group
W, Incorporated (through its Board of Directors) and of the
six Minnesota suburban systems through North Central will be
affected.
The.purchase agreement between Westinghouse and the Buyers
requires that the Buyers assume all Group.W Incorporated systems
"as is". The Buyers are not permitted-ta—r-equest or make -any
• franchise modifications, nor have you been requested.by the
Buyers to make any such franchise modifications.
The Commission should consider the following factors in
determining whether to recommend approval or denial of the transfer
to the Group of Buyers:
1) Legal and character qualifications of Group W and the
Buyers;
2) Technical ability of Group W as a result of the change
in control (and if necessary the technical ability
of the Buyers); and
3) Financial stability of Group W as a result of the change
of control (and if necessary the financial stability
of the stockholder, although such stockholders, as
was Westinghouse, are not required to pledge any of
their corporate assets to insure the financial stability
of Group W Incorporated).
IV. Analysis
A. Legal qualifications
The legal qualifications standard relates primarily to
an analysis of whether the entities involved in the transaction
are duly organized and authorized to own the cable system and
franchise.
- 5 -
/IY
Each of the entities involved in this transaction are duly
organized and authorized to own a cable system and franchise.
Two of the Buyers are the two largest cable companies in the
United States.
The character qualifications of the Buyers are satisfactory.
Therefore, based upon our review of the information provided,
it would appear that the commission or Cities could not reasonably
withhold approval of Transfer #1 based upon the legal or character
qualifications of the Buyers.
B. Technical ability --:--•-•--.. --- .-- - ---
The technical ability factor relates to the technical expertise
and experience in operating and maintaining a cable system.
Since Group W Incorporated will remain in existence, the technical
ability of the franchise holder is not at question. However,
a review of the Buyers may be undertaken. In such a review,
it is noted that the Buyers have extensive cable television
experience. Therefore, in reviewing the technical abilities
of the Buyers, it would be unreasonable to assume that the Buyers
are not technically qualified to own and operate your cable
•
system.
Since North Central has.been designated as the manager
of your cable systems, it may be a valid inquiry to determine
the technical ability of such management. The analysis found
in Transaction #2, below, more fully analyzes the technical
ability of North Central. Based upon the information provided
to us, North Central through its principals, have extensive
cable management capability and experience sufficient to satisfy
the technical ability factor as applied to your respective cable
system.
Based upon our review.of the information provided, it would
appear that neither the Commission nor Cities could reasonably
withhold approval of Transfer #1 based upon the technical ability
of the Buyers.
C. Financial stability
The financial stability factor relates to whether the transferee
has the financial resources available or committed to not only
• acquire the system, but also to meet the existing franchise
requirements. It was not necessary to evaluate the financial
resources of the Buyers for the purpose of Transaction #1.
The Buyers, as stockholders, are not required to commit their
individual corporate assets to the performance of Group W Incorporated
or its subsidiaries. Although Westinghouse Incorporated has
at times apparently provided financial assistance to Group W,
Incorporated, as a stockholder Westinghouse would not be required
is
to commit financial resources to the performance of its subsidiary.
Therefore, apparently nothing has changed as to the stockholder
resources available to Group w Incorporated. Additionally,
the assets of Group W Incorporated apparently remain intact
at the conclusion of Transaction #1. This, also, does not change
from that situation which existed prior to the closing of Transaction 41.
As the new corporate board of directors proceeds to transfer
systems in Group W Incorporated to the ultimate Buyers, obviously,
the resources available to Group W Incorporated will dwindle.
- 7 -
/3/
While this 'is of concern, Group W, Inc. could have apparently
at any time, even prior to Transaction #1, "sold -off" its other
existing systems. A Court would have likely concluded that
the Member Cities would not have had authority to stop Group
W, Inc. from diluting its assets by selling other systems.
Therefore, a logical analysis would be that the Member Cities
cannot control what the new corporate board will do with the
other Group W Systems. So long as Group W, Inc. exists and
guarantees performance of the existing franchises, we cannot
discern a reasonable basis to deny the transfer based on the
financial stability of Group W, Inc. in light of the considerable
financial resources available to Group W at the conclusion of
Transaction #1.
V. Conclusion
As a result of the above, it would appear that the Commission
or Cities could not reasonably withhold approval of Transfer #1.
•
transaction 1
BEFORE AFTER
Westinghouse Broadcasting and -------------------j American Television and
Cable, Inc. Communications Corporation (26.48)
Century Southwest Cable
Television, Inc. (12.08)
Comcast Corporation (25.48)
Daniels -Hauser Holdings (3.68)
TCI Holdings, Inc. (32.68)
(all of the above "and its affiliates
or assignees")
1008 stock ownership 1008 stock ownership
I
i
.Group W, Inc. Group W, Inc.
1008 stock ownership 1008 stock ownership
Group W of Burnsville/Eagan, Inc. Group W of Burnsville/Eagan, Inc.
Transaction #2
I. INTRODUCTION
This portion of the memorandum provides an analysis of
the proposed Transaction #2 involving, the sale of the stock
in Group W Cable of Burnsville/Eagan, Inc. and Group W,. Inc.
and transfer of the cable franchise to North Central Cable Communications
Company, L.P. The purpose of this section is to provide the
Commission with an understanding of Transaction #,2 and the standard
for reviewing whether to approve it.
II. DESCRIPTION OF TRANSACTION-- --
The proposed transaction involves the following entities: •
1. Daniels & Associates, Inc. ("Daniels") -- a Delaware
Corporation.
2. Daniels - Hauser Holding Company ("D -H Holdings") --
a Colorado general partnership consisting of Daniels
& Associates, Inc. and North Central Cable Communications,
L.P. as general partners.
3. North Central Cable Communications, L.P. ("North Central")
-- a Minnesota limited partnership consisting of
Hauser Cable Communications Inc. as general partner,
and R.E. Hauser, Inc. as limited partner.
4. Hauser Cable Communications, Inc. ("Hauser") -- a Delaware
corporation. •
We have reviewed the necessary documentation to conclude
that each of the entities is duly organized and in existence.
We have reviewed a Certification Regarding Daniels -Hauser Holdings,
which constitutes the partnership agreement of D -H Holdings,
a Certificate of Formation issued by the Minnesota Secretary
of State and Limited Partnership Agreement creating North Central,
and a Certificate of Formation issued by the Delaware Secretary
of State and Articles of Incorporation creating Hauser. Additionally,
A3
—lo—
0
we have reviewed an Application of Foreign Corporation for a
Certificate of Authority to Transact Business in Minnesota on
behalf of Hauser. The genuineness of all documents and authenticity
of all signatures has been presumed. The organizational existence
of Daniels has been certified by the Buyers.
To facilitate an understanding of the transaction, it should
be kept in mind that each of the aforementioned organizations
is a separate and distinct entity. North Central, Hauser, and
D -H Holdings are entities which have been newly created for
the purpose of accomplishing Transaction #2.
From the information we have reviewed, it appears that
Daniels is an original member of the Buyer group to acquire
the stock in Group W Cable, Inc: from Westinghouse Broadcasting
and Cable, Inc. (Transaction #1). The Purchase Agreement allows
Daniels to assign its rights to, purchase stock to other entities.
We have reviewed a certification indicating that Daniels has
assigned its rights and obligations in Transaction #1 to D -H
Holdings. In effect, D -H Holdings is a member of the Buyer
® group.
As stated above, upon the closing of Transaction #1 in
June of 1986, D -H Holdings, in conjunction with the other four
members of the Buyer group, will own 100 percent of the outstanding
stock in Group W Cable, Inc. D -H Holdings' approximate proportion
of ownership is 3.6 percent. The Buyer group has agreed among
themselves how they intend to operate Group W, Inc., after the
closing of Transaction #1. The Buyers have agreed to elect
certain individuals to the Board of Directors to supervise the
business of Group W, Inc.
D -H Holdings has an option to purchase and immediately
receive transfer of your specific system, from Group W, Inc.
at any time after the closing of Transaction #1. If D -H Holdings.
exercises this option, it will immediately transfer your system
to North Central: Until such time as D -H Holdings exercises
this option, North Central will manage your system, which will
remain owned by Group W, Inc.
The apparent reason for the complexity and subsequent transfers
of your system is certain potential tax ramifications arising
from the transactions. Congress is currently considering legislatioro
which may dramatically increase the tax liability of the transaction.
It is possible that enactment of the tax legislation or other
unanticipated changes in the business or regulatory climate
may delay the exercise of the option to purchase by D -H Holdings
and the subsequent transfer of your system to North Central.
Nevertheless, the management of your system will be immediately
undertaken by North Central, as agreed by the Buyers, upon the
conclusion of Transaction #1. Although Transactions #1 and
#2 require your approval, this change in management of your
system can legally occur without your approval.
III. STANDARD OF REVIEW
The Commission's task in Transaction #2 is to review the
information provided regarding the transaction and to recommend
to its member Cities approval or denial of the transfer of stock
and transfer of the franchise from Group W, Inc. to D -H Holdings
and subsequently to North Central. Once again, the Cities must
- 12
/3)(1
make the ultimate determination. The franchise and state statute
provides the Cities with the express right to approve or disapprove
the transfer of ownership in Group W of Burnsville/Eagan, Inc.
and the transfer of the franchise. The standard of review is
that the Cities' consent shall not be unreasonably withheld.
For the purpose of determining whether it will consent to the
change in control and transfer of the franchise, the Commission
has made inquiry into the legal,, technical, and financial qualifications
of North Central.
In analyzing Transaction #2, the-Commkssion--must consider
whether North Central meets all of the criteria originally considered.
in initially granting the franchise to Group W of Burnsville/Eagan,
Inc. Note, however, that this analysis is not a comparison
between Group W and North Central to determine which is more
qualified. Rather, the analysis is an application of the same
factors to determine whether North Central satisfies the standards
to the reasonable satisfaction of the City.
The Commission should consider the following factors in
• determining whether to recommend approval or denial of the transfer
to North Central:
1) Legal and character qualifications of North Central;
2) Technical ability of North Central; and
3) Financial stability of North Central.
IV. ANALYSIS
The sources of information used in examining the legal.,
technical, and financial abilities of North Central include
the Municipal Request For Information and other supplemental
information provided by Group W and North Central.
- 13 -
/37
A. Legal Qualifications
The legal qualifications standard relates primarily to
an analysis of whether the entities involved in the transaction
are duly organized and authorized to own the cable system and
franchise. Certain entities, such as certain television broadcasting
stations, national television networks, and certain telephone
companies, are prohibited by Federal law from owning, operating,
or controlling a cable television system. We have reviewed
the Federal cross -ownership prohibitions and have determined
them to be inapplicable. Moreover, we ode been --provided with
the necessary documentation which shows that each of the entities •
involved in this transaction are duly organized and authorized
to own a cable system and franchise.
The character qualifications of North Central, as well
as the principals of the organization, are satisfactory. North
Central has provided information showing that neither it nor
any principal has ever been convicted'in a criminal proceeding
of any crimes against character.
Based upon our review of the information provided, it would 0
appear that the Commission or Cities could not reasonably withhold
approval of the transfer based upon the legal or character qualifications
of North Central.
B. Technical Ability
The technical ability factor relates to the technical expertise
and experience in operating and maintaining a cable system.
This analysis focuses upon the current and former experiences
- 14 -
�J�
of the transferee. Since North Central is a new entity, it
has not directly owned or operated any cable systems. Therefore,
the ability of its managing principals must be reviewed. Information
has been provided concerning such other individuals' and entities'
experiences in owning, operating, and managing cable systems.
Hauser Cable Communications, Inc., as general partner of
North Central, will be primarily responsible for the management
of North Central. A majority interest in Hauser will be.held
by Gustave M. Hauser, or a company controlled by Mr. Hauser.
Additionally, John D. Evans, or a company controlled by Mr.
® Evans, will also own stock in Hauser.
Moreover, Hauser has stated that it intends to enter into
a standard management agreement with Hauser Communications,
Inc. ("HC") to be responsible for the day-to-day supervisory
management of North Central and the cable systems.
The information which we have reviewed indicates that Mr.
Hauser, Mr. Evans, and HC have extensive cable management capability
and experience sufficient to satisfy the technical ability factor
• as applied to your respective cable system. Mr. Hauser is Chairman.
and Chief Executive Officer of HC, Arlington Cable Partners,
and SuburbanCablevision Company. He formerly served as Chairman
and Chief Executive Officer of Warner Amex Cable Communications,
Inc. He has been involved in cable television and other electronic
communications since the early 1960's. Mr. Evans, as President
of HC and Arlington Cable Partners, has 13 years of management
experience in the cable television industry. He manages a 34,000
subscriber cable system in Arlington, Virginia and a 33,000
- 15' -
/3�1
subscriber system in Brooklyn Park, Minnesota. He has also
served as System and Regional Manager for over 90,000 subscribers
in Columbus, Ohio, for American Television and Communications.
Hauser Communications, Inc., which will be the manager
of your cable system, has experience,in managing the Arlington
System, Brooklyn Center system, and is intending to acquire
a 23,000 subscriber system in Montgomery County, Maryland.
Based upon our review.of the information provided, it would
appear that neither the Commission nor Cities could reasonably
withhold approval of :the transfer based upon the technical ability
of the transferee.
C. Financial Stability
The financial stability factor relates to whether the transferee
has the financial resources available or committed to not only
acquire the system, but also to meet the existing franchise
requirements. The Commission has engaged Mr. Kevin P. Cattoor,
Financial Communications Consultant, to undertake a review of
this factor. Mr. Cattoor has prepared an independent report
of his analysis and the Commission is referred thereto.
D. Other Relevant Factors
Other appropriate factors which have been reviewed for
the purpose of determining whether to approve or deny this transaction
are contained in the Municipal Request For Information. The
most significant factor to be considered is whether the cable
franchise will be transferred intact and whether North Central
will agree to comply with all existing franchise requirements.
The information which we have reviewed indicates that North
Central is not currently requesting any franchise modifications
0
as a condition of the transfer. Moreover, the Purchase Agreement
among the parties to Transaction #1 specifically prohibits any
franchise modifications. In,other words, all systems are to
be sold and transferred "as -is". Consequently, North Central
will agree to receive transfer of the franchise intact..
With respect to the franchise requirements regarding the
existing service area and line extensions, North Central has
indicated -that it will comply with the existing franchise requirements
and obligations. The construction practices of North Central
regarding aerial and underground installation -and standards .
• will also conform to existing franchise requirements. North
Central has not proposed any modifications to the channel capacity
or system design and will assume all existing franchise obligations
regarding future activation of channel capacity and upstream
capabilities, interconnection, performance testing and system
maintenance and customer complaint policies. North Central
does not propose any addition or deletion of any programming
services.
® In the area of local programming and public access, North
Central will agree to assume all existing franchise commitments,
including equipment, facilities, staff_, and funding. With respect
to'the information contained on Form M, North Central has indicated
a desire in the future to divest itself of the local origination
and access programming functions and transfer these obligations
to the Commission or Cities. Additionally, North Central would
desire the creation of a non-profit corporation to administer
the community programming commitment and would propose a contribution
17 -
/sZ/
of $ .45 per subscriber (with an annual escalation) toward access
in addition to the 5 percent franchise fee.
It is essential that the Commission understand that the
information contained in Form M is not a current request for
a franchise modification. Moreover, the statements made are
not a definite proposal which the Commission or Cities must
accept should it approve the transfer to North Central. North
Central will agree to accept the transfer of the franchise as
it exists without any modification of community programming
obligations. To the extent North Central would seek any -franchise
modification subsequent to a transfer, the Commission would •
be free to accept or refect any proposal at that time consistent
with any applicable law which would affect the negotiations
at the time they took place.
It is our opinion that any statements made by North Central
with respect to its desire to seek any franchise modifications
in the future are legally irrelevant to consideration of the
transfer under current applicable law. In other words, the
Commission or Cities could not unreasonably withhold approval •
of the transfer based upon anticipated requests for future franchise
modifications. Current litigation involving the,new Federal
law related to "commercial impracticability" may affect this
analysis. Prior to your final consideration, the most current
legal decisions in this area must be reviewed. The key point
for the Commission's consideration is.whether North Central -
will agree to accept the existing obligations and commitments
in the franchise. To this extent, North Central has agreed.
With respect to proposed rates, North Central is not proposing
any changes in the applicable franchise requirements and will
operate consistent with federal law in setting rates. For those
rates which are deregulated under federal law, North Central
is permitted to charge whatever it desires. Any regulated rate
will remain the same.
North Central has also indicated that it will comply with
all federal, state, and local laws relating to discrimination,
equal opportunity employment programs and affirmative action
programs. Moreover, North Central will abide by all existing
® franchise requirements relating to staff positions and managers,
to the extent these issues are subject to the Commission's control.
Based upon our review of the information constituting other
appropriate factors, and recognizing the uncertainty as to judicial
interpretations of the 1984 Federal Cable Act, it does not appear
that there is any legally justifiable reason to withhold approval
of the transfer to North Central in the areas of legal, technical
or other relevant considerations.
The area of financial ability to perform the franchise
40
commitment's appears to be the only remaining question for the
Commission's consideration, albeit an extremely significant
consideration. Upon the completion of Mr. Cattoor's analysis,
a staff recommendation as to financial ability will be forthcoming.
Until such time, the Commission should not approve or disapprove
Transaction #2.
- 19 -
E
Transaction 2
BEFORE
Group W, Inc. -----`-------------
1008 stock ownership
�I
Group W of Burnsville/Eagan, Inc.
Daniels -Hauser Holdings ----------
1008 stock ownership
Group W of Burnsville/Eagan, Inc.
46
STEP 1 AFTER
-------------�j Daniels -Hauser Holdings
100% stock ownership
Group W of Burnsville/Eagan, Inc.
i
CD
N
STEP 2 1
------------------> North Central Cable Communication, L.P.
100% stock ownership \
Group W of Burnsville/Eagan, Inc.
M
II RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL
REGARDING THE TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP
{/.�.. OF GROUP W CABLE, INC.
WHEREAS, the Burnsville/Eagan Cable Communications Commission
(hereinafter "Commission") is delegated the authority and
responsibility to coordinate., administer and enforce the
Cable Communications Franchise Ordinances, as amended,
of its.Member Cities pursuant to the terms of a Joint and
Cooperative Agreement for the Administration of a Cable
Television Franchise; and
® WHEREAS, Group W Cable, Inc., a New York Corporation (hereinafter
"Group W Cable"), by and through Group W Cable of Burnsville/Eagan,
Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary, owns, operates and maintains
a cable television system in the Member Cities pursuant
to the terms and conditions of the Cable Communications
Franchise Ordinances, as amended, in effect in the Member
Cities; and
WHEREAS, Group W Cable's parent corporation, Westinghouse Broadcasting
and Cable, Inc., an Indiana Corporation (hereinafter "Westinghouse.")
desires to sell and otherwise transfer all of the issued
and outstanding shares of the capital stock of Group W
Cable to Century Southwest Cable Television, Inc., a Delaware
Corporation; TCI Holdings, Inc., a Colorado Corporation;
American Television and Communications Corporation, a Delaware
Corporation; and affiliates of, or subsidiaries or partnerships
owned or controlled by, Houston Industries Incorporated,
a Texas Corporation, Comcast Corporation, a Pennsylvania
Corporation, Daniels & Associates, Inc., a, Delaware Corporation,
41 and American Television and Communications Corporation Y
(hereinafter "Buyers"), and thereby transfer control of
l
Group W Cable to the Buyers; and
WHEREAS, Group W Cable has requested the consent from the Member
Cities to a change in ownership and control of Group W
Cable to the Buyers and the transfer of ownership and control
and ultimate transfer of the Cable Communications Franchise
Ordinance as amended to North Central Cable Communications,
L.P.; and
WHEREAS, the Commission has reviewed the legal, technical, and
financial qualifications of Buyers and found them adequate
to own and operate Group W Cable; and
WHEREAS, the Commission is continuing to review the legal, technical,
and financial qualifications of North Central Cable Communications,
L.P. as it relates to the transfer of ownership and control
and ultimate transfer of the Cable Communications Franchise
Ordinance, as amended; and
WHEREAS, the Commission is only willing to recommend to its
Member Cities approval of the transfer of control of Group •
W Cable to Buyers subject to the actual closing of the
stock sale in June, 1986; and
WHEREAS,, the Commission has been advised by Group W Cable that
the approval of such stock transfer to Buyers shall in
no way be interpreted as an approval of the transfer of
ownership and control and ultimate transfer of the Cable
Communications Franchise Ordinance to North Central Cable
Communications, L.P.
lq�
- 2 -
1,
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Burnsville/Eagan Cable
Communications Commission:
1. That the,Burnsville/Eagan Cable Communications Commission
recommends to its Member Cities approval by resolution of
the sale by Westinghouse of all of the issued and outstanding
shares of the capital stock of Group W Cable, Inc. and the
transfer of control of Group W Cable, Inc. to the Buyers
subject to an actual closing of the stock sale transaction
in June, 1986 pursuant to the terms and conditions currently
understood by the Commission as evidenced by the Notice
• of transfer to said Commission and its Member Cities.
2. That the approval of the transfer of ownership and control
of Group W Cable, Inc. to the Buyers is hereby deemed not
to include any approval, either express or implied, as to
any subsequent transfer of ownership or control or transfer
of the Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance to North
CentraliCable Communications, L.P., or to any other entity
or individual.
® 3. That the Burnsville/Eagan Cable Communications Commission
will continue to review the request of Group W Cable, Inc.
regarding a change in control and transfer of the Cable
Communications Franchise Ordinance as amended to North Central
Cable Communications, L.P. and will in the future prepare
a separate recommendation for its Member Cities regarding
such change in control and transfer.
4. That this recommendation and its acceptance by the Member
Citiesishall be null, void and of no effect should any entity
or individual successfully litigate that the recommendation
N7
3 -
0 or approval is also an approval, either express or implied,
as to any subsequent transfer of ownership or control or i
transfer of the Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance
to North Central Cable Communications, L.P.,, or to any other
entity or individual.
5. That this approval is specifically conditioned upon payment
in full prior to an actual closing of the stock sale transaction
in June, 1986 of all expenses incurred by Commission related
to the Request for Approval of Transfer dated February 4,
1986, including those related expenses incurred prior to
February 4, 1986, but incurred in preparation for the receipt
of. the Request for Approval.
The above listed resolution was moved by Commission Director
en I and duly seconded by Commission
Director � Id
The following Commission Directors voted in the affirmative:
wua �{� ca dig (2 i krc �i erceJ Ike'—i z-) C l i s
Frw,� 1C�
The following Commission Directors voted in the negative: •
/Vd h(
The above resolution was duly adopted this day
of 1986.
111/'� � �;►
/4 /4
- 4 -
Y-
I
f�
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF DAKOTA
CITY OF
RESOLUTION NO. APPROVING
THE TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP
OF GROUP W CABLE, INC.
WHEREAS, Group W Cable, Inc., a New York Corporation (hereinafter
"Group W Cable"), by and through Group W Cable of Burnsville/Eagan,
Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary, owns, operates and maintains
a cable television system in the City pursuant to the terms
and conditions of City Ordinance -No --"--'(hereinafter
® "Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance"); and
WHEREAS, Group W Cable's parent corporation, Westinghouse Broadcasting
and Cable, Inc., an Indiana Corporation (hereinafter -"Westinghouse"),
desires to sell and otherwise transfer all of the issued
and outstanding shares of the capital stock of Group W
Cable to Century Southwest Cable Television, Inc., a Delaware
Corporation; TCI Holdings, Inc., a Colorado Corporation;
American Television and Communications Corporation, a Delaware
® Corporation; and affiliates of, or subsidiaries or partnerships
owned or controlled by, Houston Industries Incorporated,
a Texas Corporation, Comcast Corporation, a Pennsylvania
Corporation, Daniels & Associates, Inc., a Delaware Corporation,
and American Television and Communications Corporation
(hereinafter "Buyers"), and thereby transfer control of
Group W Cable to the Buyers; and
WHEREAS, Group W Cable has requested the consent from the City
to a change in ownership and control of Group W Cable to
16
10
y the Buyers and the transfer of ownership and control and
ultimate transfer of the Cable Communications Franchise
Ordinance as amended to North Central Cable Communications,
L.P.; and
WHEREAS, the Burnsville/Eagan Cable Communications Commission
(hereinafter "Commission") has been delegated the authority
and responsibility to coordinate, administer and enforce
the Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance on behalf
of City pursuant to the terms of a Joint and Cooperative
Agreement for the Administration' -of a -Cable Television
Franchise and
WHEREAS, the Commission has held a public hearing on behalf
of City and has reviewed the legal, technical, and financial
qualifications of Buyers and found them adequate to own
and operate Group W Cable; and
WHEREAS, the Commission has separately reviewed the legal, technical,
•
and financial qualifications of North Central Cable Communications,
L.P. as it relates to the transfer of ownership and control
and ultimate transfer of the Cable Communications Franchise •
Ordinance,.as amended; and
WHEREAS, the Commission has recommended to City approval of
the transfer of control of Group W Cable to Buyers subject
to the actual closing of the stock sale in June, 1986; and
WHEREAS, the Commission and City have been advised by Group W
Cable, the Buyers, and North Central that the approval
of such stock transfer to Buyers shall in no way be interpreted
as an approval, either express or implied, of the transfer
of ownership and control and ultimate transfer of the Cable
Communications Franchise Ordinance to North Central Cable
Communications, L.P. 150
- 2 -
a
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City
of
1. That the City hereby approves the sale by Westinghouse of
all of the issued and outstanding shares of the capital
stock of Group W Cable, Inc. and the transfer of control
of Group W Cable, Inc. to the Buyers subject to an actual
closing of the stock sale transaction in June, 1986 pursuant
to the terms and conditions currently understood by the
City as evidenced by the Notice of Transfer to said. Commission
and City.
® 2. That the approval of the transfer of ownership and control
of Group W Cable, Inc. to the Buyers is hereby.deemed not
to include any approval, either express or implied, as to
any subsequent transfer of ownership or control or transfer
of the Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance to North
Central Cable Communications, L.P., or to any other entity
or individual.
3. That the Burnsville/Eagan Cable Communications Commission
® separately review the request of Group W Cable, Inc. regarding
a change in control and transfer of the Cable Communications
Franchise Ordinance as amended to North Central Cable Communications,
L.P. and prepare a separate recommendation for City regarding
such change in control and transfer.
4. That this approval by City shall be null, void and of no
effect should any entity or individual successfully litigate
that the approval is also an approval, either express or
implied, as to any subsequent transfer of ownership or control
AS�
- 3 -
P or transfer of the Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance
to North Central Cable Communications, L.P., or to any other
entity or individual.
5. That this approval is specifically conditioned upon payment
in full prior to an actual closing of the stock sale transaction
in June, 1986 of all expenses incurred by Commission and
City related to the Request for Approval of Transfer dated
February 4, 1986, including those related expenses incurred
prior to February 4, 1986, but incurred in preparation for
the receipt of the Request for Approval._
6. That this approval is specifically conditioned upon the •
understanding that any changes or modifications in the cable
communications Franchise ordinance or cable communications
system (in place or proposed) which are subject to regulation
or control by City and/or Commission shall not be made without
the prior review and approval of City and/or Commission
pursuant to such procedures as are contained in the cable
communications Franchise or otherwise applicable law.
The above listed resolution was moved by Council Member
and duly seconded by Council Member
The following Council Members voted in the affirmative:
The following Council Members voted in the negative:
Passed and adopted this
ATTEST:
day of
Mayor
15L City Official
- 4 -
1986.
•
CERTIFICATION
The undersigned, the (Title) of the
City) , Minnesota, does hereby certify
that attached hereto is a true and correct copy of Resolution
No. , which Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council
on (Date) 1986 and is in full force and effect on
the date hereof.
Name:
Title:
A
RESOLUTION NO. 5.8.86.8 ADOPTING FINDINGS
OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDED
RESOLUTION REGARDING THE TRANSFER OF
OWNERSHIP AND CONTROL OF GROUP W CABLE,
INC. AND THE TRANSFER OF THE FRANCHISE
ORDINANCE TO NORTH CENTRAL CABLE COMMUNI-
CATIONS, L.P.
INTRODUCTION
The Burnsville/Eagan Cable Communications.Commission
(hereinafter "Commission"') is organized pursuant to the
terms of a Joint and Cooperative Agreement for the Admin-
istration of a Cable Television Franchise (hereinafter
"Agreement"), as authorized by Minnesota Statutes Section
471.59, as amended. The Member Cities'of"the--Commission are
Burnsville and Eagan, Minnesota (hereinafter "Member
Cities").
This proceeding involves the Commission's review, on
behalf of the Member Cities, of a request by Group W Cable,
Inc. and Group W Cable of Burnsville/Eagan, Inc. (herein-
after collectively "Group W") to approve the transfer of
ownership and control of Group W and transfer of the Cable
Communications Franchise Ordinance to North Central Cable
Communications, L.P. (hereinafter "North Central").
Notice is hereby given that the Member Cities will make
the final determination of this matter. Further, notice is
hereby given that the Member Cities, may at their own dis-
cretion, accept or reject the Commission's recommendation
and,that said recommendation has no legal effect unless ex-
pressly adopted by the Member Cities as their final deci-
sion.
ATEMENT OF ISSUE
The purpose of this proceeding is to determine whether
the Member Cities of the Commission should consent to the
transfer of ownership and control of Group W and the trans-
fer of the Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance (herein-
after "Franchise") to North Central.
Based upon all the proceedings herein, the Commission
makes the following:.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. On February 10, 1986, the Commission and its Member
Cities received an official notice from Group W Cable,
Inc., by and on behalf of its wholly-owned subsidiary
Group W Cable of Burnsville/Eagan, Inc., requesting two
forms of approval:
16` 4
a) Consent to a change in control and transfer of
ownership in Group W to a group of five Buyers
(transaction onej; and
b) Consent to a change in control and transfer of
ownership in Group W and transfer of the Cable
Communications Franchise Ordinance to North
Central Cable Communications, L.P. (trans-
action two).
On February 18, 1986, the Commission sent to Group W and
North Central a Municipal Request for Information Re-
garding Request For Approval and Transfer for the pur-
pose of inquiring into the legal, technical, financial,
and other qualifications of North Central, as authorized
and required by state law and the Franchise.
® 3. The Commission requested the return of the Municipal
Request For Information from Group W and North Central
by March 4, 1986 so that it would have sufficient time
to review the information. North Central filed its
response to the Municipal Request For Information on
March 24, 1986.
4. The Commission received on April 14, 15, and 17 a
request from Group W, North Central, and the Buyers,
respectively to bifurcate its consideration of the two
transactions. Group W, North Central, and the Buyers
stated in effect that consent to the first transaction
would in no way be construed or viewed as consideration
or consent to the second transaction.
® 5. The Commission gave notice and held a public hearing on
April 10, 1986 for the purpose of providing the public
with an opportunity to comment on the two transactions.
6. On April 10, 1986 the Commission reviewed and discussed
the information it had received from Group W and North
Central. The Commission determined to continue the
public hearing to May 8, 1986, for the purpose of
receiving further information and to receive a final
staff recommendation. The Commission further directed
staff to proceed with the preparation of appropriate
documents that recommend denial of transactions numbers
1 and 2 unless Hauser -Daniels Inc. satisfy Commission
Legal Counsel, in writing, that the transactions are
unrelated and/or that the approval of transactions
number 1 does not imply or expressly confer the approval
of transaction number 2. Upon receipt of such documen-
tation, staff could proceed with preparation of a final
recommendation as to both transactions.
-2-
,
7. The proposed transaction two involves Daniels & Associ-
ates, Inc., a Delaware Corporation; Daniels -Hauser Hold-
ing Company, a Colorado general partnership; North
Central Cable Communications L.P., a Minnesota limited
partnership; and Hauser Cable Communications, Inc., a
Delaware Corporation.
8. .The Commission has reviewed the necessary documentation
of each of the entities identified in Finding No. 7 to
conclude that each of the entities is duly organized and
authorized to own and operate a cable system.
9. The Commission has reviewed the character qualifications
of North Central and its principals and found them to be
satisfactory.
10. The.Commission has reviewed the technical- ability -of
North Central for the purpose of establishing its tech-
nical expertise and experience in operating and main- •
taining a cable system. Since North Central is a new
organization created for the purpose of accomplishing
the transaction, the Commission inquired into the tech-
nical ability of its managing principals.
11. The information provided shows that Mr. Gustave Hauser,
Mr. John D. Evans, and Hauser Communications, inc. have
extensive cable management experience. Mr. Hauser has
been involved in cable television and other electronic
communications since the early 1960's. Mr. Evans has 13
years of management experience in the cable television
industry, including Arlington, Virginia, Columbus, Ohio,
and Brooklyn Center, Minnesota. Hauser Communications,
as a manager of cable systems, has experience in
Arlington and Brooklyn Center.
12. The technical ability of the individuals and other en- •
tities related to North Central in owning, operating,
and managing cable systems is satisfactory.
13. The Commission has attempted to review the financial
capability of North Central for the purpose of determin-
ing whether it has the financial resources available or
committed to not only acquire the cable system, but also
to meet the franchise.commitments to operate the cable
system. The Commission engaged an independent financial
communications consultant to assist in this analysis.
14. North Central has not provided sufficient information
regarding closing costs and working capital to determine
whether the amounts are reasonable or whether such funds
are available to North Central and if available, are
adequate. North Central estimates $1 million for this
factor, but has failed to provide sufficient detailed
information of the specific amounts.
3 -
1$
15. North Central has not documented their analysis or
assumptions to support a projected household growth of 2
percent in the franchise area. The Commission deter-
mines this projection is unreasonable in light of the 10
percent actual household growth experienced by the
Member Cities in 1984-85. Future expansion of the sys-
tem is therefore undercapitalized,.
16. North Central has not provided its assumptions regarding
the percentage price increases for basic and pay ser-
vices. The Commission is unable to determine the rea-
sonableness of this projection.
17. North Central has not provided sufficient detailed in-
formation at this time to enable the Commission to de-
termine the reasonableness of its operating expense
® assumptions including but not limited to repairs and
maintenance, system maintenance, postage and billing,
converter maintenance, vehicle operation, light, heat,
power, and pole rental.
18. North Central has not provided sufficient detailed in-
formation at this time to enable the Commission to de-
termine the reasonableness of its administrative expense
assumptions, including but not limited to telephone,
insurance, rent, legal fees, repairs and maintenance,
consulting services, and employee benefits.
19. North Central has not provided sufficient detailed in-
formation at this time to enable the Commission to de-
termine the reasonableness of its marketing expense
assumptions, including but not limited to telephone
• marketing, data processing, contract sales, direct .sales.
override, direct mail promotions, mass media promotions,
and subscriber maintenance.
20. For all expenses, North Central has not documented its
assumptions for general inflation on a line -by-line
basis.
21. North Central has not provided sufficient detailed in-
formation at this time to enable the Commission to de-
termine the reasonableness of its capital expenditure
assumptions, including but not limited to office elec-
tronics, billing computer, telephone installation and
future construction.
22. The Commission has requested from North Central the
financial information and operational assumptions to
review the items listed above for the purpose of analyz-
ing its overall financial plan and financial ability.
However, despite the request, North Central has not
adequately provided the information.
- 4 -
167
23. North Central has not provided supporting documentation
showing the terms and conditions of its financing avail-
able to meet the franchise requirements and operational
plans. For the purpose of reviewing its overall finan-
cial plan, confirmation of the terms and conditions of
financing are necessary. Moreover, North Central has
not provided supporting documentation of the terms and
conditions of its financing for the purpose of reviewing
its impact on the operational plans of the system.
24. The cablesystem has experienced short-term operating
expense shortfalls in the recent preceding years. While
it is assumed by the Commission that any transferee of
the system would attempt to remediate such shortfalls,
North Central has failed to demonstrate that it could
financially withstand such short-term deficits.
25. The information which has been supplied by North Central
represents in large part financial information for six
cable systems in Minnesota. The Commission represents
one of those six systems. The Commission finds it
impossible to analyze the financial ability of North
Central relative to this system without system specific
financial information.
26. North Central has established as its financial goals a
minimum operating margin of 40%, subscriber penetrations
from 43% to 55%, and a minimum rate of return on invest-
ment of 15%. North Central has not supplied sufficient
financial information and documentation for the Commis-
sion to determine whether its financial plans will
achieve the aforementioned goals. As a result of exist-
ing experience in the system, the Commission determines
these goals and projections are unreasonable.
27. Absent sufficient financial information from North
Central, the Commission determines that the financial
ability of North Central to meet existing and future
obligations is inadequate. The Commission also notes
for the record that the existence of sufficient finan-
cial information would not in and of itself have led to
a finding of adequate financial ability. The existence
of such information would have served only as a basis
for the Commission to perform a complete financial
analysis which may or may not have resulted in a deter-
mination that North Central was financially able to
fulfill existing and future obligations.
28. Based upon the financial information received from North
Central as of this date, the Commission determines the
financial qualifications of North Central are unsatis-
factory and unacceptable.
Pertinent Franchise Provision
The standard of review in this matter is the relevant
portion of Article XII, Section 1 of Cable Communications
Franchise Ordinance, which provides in part as follows:
A. This Franchise shall not be assigned or trans-
ferred, either in whole or in part, or leased,
sublet or mortgaged in any manner, not shall
title thereto, either legal or equitable or
any right, interest or property therein, pass
to or vest in any person without the prior
written consent of City, which consent shall
not be unreasonably withheld. Further Grantee
shall not sell or transfer any stock or owner-
ship interest so as to-create.a-new controll-
ing interest except with the consent of City,
which consent shall not be unreasonably with-
held. The transfers described in this para-
graph shall, in the sole discretion of City,
be considered a sale or transfer of Franchise
within the meaning and intent in the following
paragraph.
Similarly, Minnesota Statutes Section 238.083, subdivi-
sion 4 provides:
Within 30 days after the public hearing, the fran-
chising authority shall approve or deny in writing
the sale or transfer request. The approval must
not be unreasonably withheld.
Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact, the
® Burnsville/Eagan Cable Communications Commission makes the
following:
CONCLUSIONS
1. The Commission, on behalf its Member Cities, gave proper
notice of the public hearing in this matter, has ful-
filled all relevant substantive and procedural require-
ments of law or rules and has the authority to make a
determination as to Transaction No. 2 and to recommend
that determination to its Member cities.
2. North Central has met the legal and character qualifica-
tions.
3. Based upon information received from North Central as of
this date, North Central has met the technical qualifi-
cations.
- 6 -
4. North Central has not met the financial qualifications
nor has North Central demonstrated it has.the financial
qualifications sufficient to own and operate the cable
system.
5. Any of the foregoing Findings of Fact which might be
properly termed Conclusions are hereby adopted as such.
THIS REPORT IS NOT AN ORDER AND NO AUTHORITY IS GRANTED
HEREIN. THE MEMBER CITIES OF THE COMMISSION MUST ISSUE
A FINAL DETERMINATION WHICH MAY -ADOPT OR DIFFER FROM THE
FOLLOWING RECOMMENDATION.
It is the recommendation of the.Burnsville/Eagan Cable
Communications Commission to its Member Cities that it adopt
the following:
RESOLUTION
IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED and based upon the Findings of
Fact and Conclusions of the Burnsville/Eagan Cable Communi-
cations Commission (attached hereto and made a part hereof)
that the City denies the request to transfer the ownership
of and control of Group W Cable of Burnsville/Eagan, Inc.
and transfer of the Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance
to North Central Cable Communications L.P.
The above listed Findings of Fact, Conclusions and
recommended resolution was moved by Commission Director
Pierce and duly seconded by Commission Director Cooper.
The following Commission Directors voted in the affirma-
tive,: Wood, Jensen, Glish, Cooper, Pierce, Krob, Franke,
Bertz,
The following Commission Directors voted in the -nega-
tive: NONE
7 -
166
a
The above resolution was duly adopted this ?'qday of.
1986.
- 8 -
r,Qgs
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF DAKOTA
CITY OF
RESOLUTION NO. DENYING THE REQUEST TO
TRANSFER OWNERSHIP AND CONTROL
OF GROUP W CABLE OF BURNSVILLE/EAGAN, INC. AND TRANSFER OF
THE CABLE COMMUNICATIONS FRANCHISE ORDINANCE TO
NORTH CENTRAL CABLE COMMUNICATIONS, L.P.
WHEREAS, Group W Cable, Inc., a New York Corporation, by and
through Group W Cable of Burnsville/Eagan, Inc., a wholly-owned
subsidiary, (hereinafter collectively "Group W Cable")
owns, operates and maintains a cable television system
in the City pursuant to the terms and conditions of City
Ordinance No. (hereinafter "Cable Communications Franchise
Ordinance"); and
WHEREAS, Group W Cable has requested the consent from the City
to a transfer of ownership and control of Group W Cable
and transfer of the Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance
as amended to North Central Cable Communications, L.P.,
(hereinafter "North Central"); and
WHEREAS, the Burnsville/Eagan Cable Communications Commission
(hereinafter "Commission") has been delegated the authority
and responsibility to coordinate, administer and enforce
the Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance on behalf
of City pursuant to the terms of a Joint and Cooperative
Agreement for the Administration of a Cable Television
Franchise; and
WHEREAS, the Commission has held a public hearing on behalf
of City and has reviewed the legal, technical, and financial
qualifications of North Central; and
WHEREAS, the Commission has recommended to City denial of the
transfer of ownership and control of Group W Cable and
'j/ transfer of the Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance
to North Central.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City
of
1. Based upon the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of the
Burnsville/Eagan Cable Communications Commission (attached
hereto and made a part hereof,) the City denies the request
to approve the transfer of ownership and control of Group
W Cable of Burnsville/Eagan, Inc.:and—transfer of—the Cable
® Communications Franchise Ordinance to North Central Cable
Communications, L.P.
The above listed resolution was moved by Council Member
and duly seconded by Council Member
The following Council Members voted in the affirmative:
® The following Council Members voted in the negative:
Passed and adopted this day of
ATTEST:
Mayor
City Official
�6
- 2 -
1986..
CERTIFICATION
The undersigned, the (Title) of the
(City) Minnesota, does hereby certify
that attached hereto is a true and correct copy of Resolution
No.
which
Resolution was
duly adopted
by the City
Council
on
(Date)
, 1986 and is
in full force
and effect
on
the date hereof.
Name:
Title:
1W
r
11
Agenda Information Memo
May 21, 1986, City Council Meeting
Page Twenty -Six
(ADDITIONAL' ITEMS.
ON -SALE LIQUOR LICENSE AMENDMENT
A. On -Sale. Liquor License Amendment --At the February 18, 1986,
City Council meeting an on -sale liquor license amendment was
proposed that changes the policy to allow 1)four on -sale liquor
licenses for hotel type uses, 2) three on sale licenses for larger
supper club sit down on -sale restaurants with a minimum real
estate tax evaluation of $350,000, and 3), two liquor licenses
reserved for smaller restaurants with Council approved exceptions
to certain strict liquor license requirements, with the under-
standing however, that the food/liquor ratio and minimum imum seating
/
requirements will be adhered to. Enclosed on pages � through
is a copy of the on -sale liquor license amendment.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve
on -sale liquor license amendment as presented.
146-
or deny the
ORDINANCE NO. , 2ND SERIES
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EAGAN, MINNESOTA, AMENDING EAGAN CITY CODE
CHAPTER 5 ENTITLED 'BEER, WINE AND LIQUOR LICENSING AND REGULATION" BY
DEFINING AND REDEFINING CERTAIN DEFINITIONS; BY CHANGING PROVISIONS RELATING
TO LIQUOR ON -SALE LICENSE REQUIREMENTS AND, BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE, EAGAN
CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 5.99 WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN
PENALTY PROVISIONS.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EAGAN DOES ORDAIN:
Section 1. Eagan City Code Section 5.01 is hereby amended in its
entirety, to read:
Section 5.01. DEFINITIONS. As used in this Chapter, unless otherwise
stated in specific sections, the following words and terms shall have the
meanings stated:
23. "Restaurant" means an establishment, other than a hotel or
motel, under the control of a single proprietor or manager, having appropriate
facilities for the serving of meals, (consisting of a full menu as
distinguished from exclusively "fast food" items such as pizza, hamburgers and
other sandwiches) and where, in consideration of payment therefor, meals are
regularly served at tables to the general public, ,which employs an adequate
staff to provide the usual and suitable service to its guests, the principal
part of the business (meaning at least 60% of the gross income from sales
during each calendar quarter) being the serving of foods, and which shall have
seating facilities for seating not less than 30 guests at one time. and -have
an--appraised--vatae--of-at-feast-$280;000.-00-as-to-the-bnifding-or-pertien-ef
the -banding -associates -with -signer -saes-
Section 2. Eagan City Code Section 5.52 is hereby amended in its entirety
to read:
® SECTION 5.52. LIQUOR LICENSE RESTRICTIONS AND REGULATIONS.
Suba. 11. No more than twe4ve--Ei2) eighteen (18) on -sale licenses
may be .issued. except--that--a--thirteenth--sneh--estabtishment-which-is-an
integra3-pert-ef-a-hetet-or-mete}-having-ever-69-.rooms-er--in--a--borfeing--or
portion-of-a--baiftling--esseeiatee--with--serving--figaor--the--roatne-ef-which
exeeetls-$599;999..-99. All on -sale licenses shall be for premises situated in a
commercial or industrial use district under a conditional use permit. The
nine (9) licenses available March 5, 1986 shall be distributed to qualified
applicants as follows:
A. Four (4) licenses for hotels/motels;
B. Three (3) licenses for restaurants with at least $350
valuation (exclusion of leasehold improvements, equipment or c
and;
C. Two (2) for other restaurants.
%v6
Section 3. Eagan City Code Chapter L entitled "General Provisions and
Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for
Violation" and Section 5.99 entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby
adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein.
Section 4. Effective Date. This_ orainance shall take effect upon its
adoption and publication according to law.
ATTEST: CITY OF EAGAN
CITY COUNCIL
By:
Its Clerk Its Mayor
Date Ordinance Adopted:
Date Ordinance Published:
/(0 7
•
Agenda Information
May 21, 1986, City
Page 'Twenty -Seven
Memo
Council Meeting
RECEIVED BIDS/AWARD CONTRACT/SKID LOADER
B. Parks Department, Receive Bids/Award Contract (Skid Loader) --
A bid opening for the Skid Loader for the Parks Department was
held at 10:00 a.m. on Friday, May -16, 1986. The Director of
Parks and Recreation is reviewing the bids received to determine
if they conform to required specifications. A recommendation
regarding accepting the bid of the lowest qualified bidder will
be forwarded with the Additional Information Packet on Monday.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the bids and
award the contract for the Parks Department Skid Loader to the
lowest qualified bidder.
16 �
Agenda Information
May 21„ 1986, City
Page Twenty -Eight
Memo
Council Meeting
CONTRACT 86-13, APPROVE PLANS/ORDER ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS'
C. Contract 86-13, Approve Plans/Order Advertisment for Bids
(Wescott Road) --On March 19, a pu5lie hearing was held to discuss
the installation of streets and utilities to upgrade Wescott
Road from Lexington Avenue to � mile east. As a result of that
public hearing, the project was approved and detailed plans and
specifications were ordered for preparation which have now been
completed and are being presented to the Council for their review,
approval and authorization to advertise for formal bid solicita-
tions.. The Consulting Engineer and- :-Rub Lc_.,Work Director will
be available to discuss the details of this project at the Council
meeting. All easements required are in the process of acquisition
and Council has previously authorized adverse condemnation, as
may be necessary, to facilitate the installation of this public
improvement.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the plans for
Contract 86-13 (Wescott Road) and order the advertisement for
a bid opening to be held at 10:30 a.m. on Friday, June 13, 1986.
CONTRACT 86-16, APPROVE PLANS/ORDER AD FOR BIDS
D. Contract 86-16„ Approve Plans/Order Advertisement for Bids
(Eagandale Lemay Lake 2nd Addition) --Earlier on the agenda there
is a public hearing to discuss the installation of streets and
utilities to service the Eagandale Lemay Lake 2nd Addition.
At the time of submitting the petition, the developer agreed
to accept all costs associated through the -simultaneous preparation
of detailed plans and specifications to expedite this proposed
improvement. If this project is approved as a result of the
public hearing, it would be in order for the Council to consider
approval of the detailed plans and specifications which have
now been completed and are being presented to the Council for
their review, approval and authorization to advertise for bid
solicitations.
If Project 474under the Public Hearings is denied or continued
for any reason, this item can be deleted or continued accordingly.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: Approve the plans for
Contract 86-16 (Eagandale Lemay Lake 2nd Addition.) and order
ads for a formal bid opening to be held at 10:30 a.m. on Friday,
June 13, 1986.
Iq
•
Agenda Information Memo
May 21, 11986, City Council Meeting
Page Twenty -Nine
CONTRACT 86-17,APPROVE PLANS/ORDER AD FOR BIDS
E. Contract 86-17, Approve Plans/Order Advertisement for Bids
(Sperry Consolidation Facility) --Earlier in the agenda there is
a public hearing for approval of the Tax Increment Financing
plan for the Sperry Consolidation Facility to be constructed
on the southwest corner of Towerview Road and Pilot Knob Road.
If this 'TIF plan is approved, all .improvements to be installed
under this financing method must be constructed under a City
contract. Sperry Corporation has ..already .had the detailed plans
and specifications for these proposed improvements prepared by
• the James R. Hill consulting ,firm. Therefore, the only involve-
ment the City would have would be in the formal approval of these
plans and the formal bid solicitation, contract award and final
payment requirements. Therefore, these plans are being presented
to the Council for their formal approval with a request for authori-
zation to advertise for formal bid solicitation.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the plans for
Contract 86-17 (Sperry Consolidation Facility) and order the
ad for a bid opening to be held at 11.:00 a.m. on Friday, June
13, 1986.
/,o
Agenda Information Memo
May 21, 1986, City Council Meeting
Page Thirty
GUN CLUB LAKE WMO BUDGET APPROVAL/PAYMENT
F. Gun Club Lake Water Management Organization Budget Approval/
Payment --Enclosed on pages---/ LL� through 17-5is a copy of
a letter received from the Gun Club Lake WMO, identifying the
budgets for the 1986 and 1987 operational expenses. The Joint
Powers Agreement that was executed between the cities of Eagan,
Inver Grove Heights and Mendota Heights indicated that all budgets
approved by the WMO must receive concurrent approval from the
affected communities and that any objections must be submitted
by August 1 of the year preceding the proposed budget year.
The Gun Club WMO was not formulated to the extent that a budget
for 1986 could have been prepared and presented to the Council
for their consideration prior to July 1 of 1985. Due to the
legislatures mandate that the water management plan be completed
by the end of 1986, considerable expense will be incurred during
the 1986 calendar year.. Therefore, the WMO is requesting all
three communities to prefinance their 1986 allocation, in addition
to adopting the 1987 budget. With the adoption of this legislation,
there is also a provision whereby cities couldlevy a special
tax to finance these expenditures up to a maximum of 1 mil.
The Gun Club is presently preparing identification of the various
watershed boundaries within the community to be forwarded to
the County by July 1, in anticipation of this special tax levy
being submitted by this fall.
The Public Works Director who is one of the City's three representa-
tives to this organization will be available at the Council meeting •
to further discuss the proposed budget, time schedules and method
of financing,these required expenditures.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the 1986 and
1987 budget for the Gun Club Lake WMO and authorize the City
Clerk to forward Eagan's share by the requested time frames.
RECEIVED t'191
James E. Danielson, Secretary/Treasurer
Gun Club Lake WMO
750 South Plaza Drive
Mendota Heights, MN 55120
May 13, 1986
Eugene VanOverbeke, Clerk
City of Eagan
3830 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, Minnesota 55122
Dear Mr. VanOverbeke:
On May 5, 1986, the Gun Club Lake Watershed—Management Organization ('WMO)
adopted a budget for 1986 and 1987 (attached). In accordance with the provision
of the Joint Powers Agrement (Section 9, Subd. 2), Members agreed to contribute
40 each year to the general funds. Each Member's percentage share is based on an
average of the following two percentages:
1) The percentage of the total assessed valuation of all real property
within the watershed which lies within the Member's boundaries; and
2) The percentage of the total area in the watershed which lies within the
Member's boundaries.
I am enclosing a copy of the calculations which shows the percentage break—
downs for each community's allocation to the annual budget (see attached). The
1986 bills are due, 50% by June 15, 1986 and 50% by August 1, 1986. The 1987
bill is due January 31, 1987.
1/2 Due June 15, 1986 $16,079.36
1/2 Due August 1, 1986 16,079.37
®
$32,158.73
Please make the check payable to the Gun Club Lake Watershed Managcmant
Organization. Mail the check by June 15 and August 1, 1986 to James E.
Danielson, Secretary/Treasurer, Gun Club Lake WMO, c/o City of Mendota Heights,
750 South Plaza Drive, Mendota Heights, MN 55120.
Respectfully yours, n
li e - . Y�✓
Danielson
QSQm�es,E.
ecreary/Treasurer
JED:dfw
cc: Tom Colbert
John Sachi
172--
GUN CLUB LAKE WATER MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION
PROPOSED 1986/87 BUDGETS
PLAN PREPARATION
INSURANCE
LEGAL
AUDIT
ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF SERVICES
PRINTING, SUPPLIES & POSTAGE
CONTINGENCY
1986
$25,000
2,500
2,000
1,000
2,000
500
3,000
$36,000
C
4/28/86
1987
$10,000
2,500
2,200
1,000
1,000
500
1,700
$18,900
•
E
4/28/86
TOTAL 1986 BILLS
Eagan
Mendota Heights
Inver Grove Heights
Total City
Valuation
$229.7M
$18,000.00
% Valuation
in Gun Club
$193.6M
$ 76.5M = $ 17.OM
$112.1M = $ 5.4M
1/2 Budget
$18,000 =
$18,000 --
Area
Area Valuation
$16,025.40 + $16,133.33 =
$ 1,177.20 + $ 1,416.67 =
$ 797.40 + $ 450.00 =
$216.OM
$16,133.33
$ 1,416.67
$ 450.00
$18,000.00
1986 Bill
$32,158.73
$ 2,593.87
$ 1,247.40
$36,000.00
1986 BILLING
CALCULATIONS
1986 Budget Amount =
$36,000
Land Area Calculation
Eagan
%
In Gun Club
1/2 Budget
22,440 Ac
Eagan
89.03% X
$18,000 =
$16,025.40
Mendota Heights
6.54% X
$-18,000 =
$ 1,177..20
Inver Grove Heights
4.43% X
$18,000 =
$ 797.40
TOTAL 1986 BILLS
Eagan
Mendota Heights
Inver Grove Heights
Total City
Valuation
$229.7M
$18,000.00
% Valuation
in Gun Club
$193.6M
$ 76.5M = $ 17.OM
$112.1M = $ 5.4M
1/2 Budget
$18,000 =
$18,000 --
Area
Area Valuation
$16,025.40 + $16,133.33 =
$ 1,177.20 + $ 1,416.67 =
$ 797.40 + $ 450.00 =
$216.OM
$16,133.33
$ 1,416.67
$ 450.00
$18,000.00
1986 Bill
$32,158.73
$ 2,593.87
$ 1,247.40
$36,000.00
ASSESSED
VALUATION CALCULATION
•
7, Area in
Gun Club
Eagan
18,915 Ac X
22,440 Ac
Mendota
Heights 1,390 Ac X
6,263 Ac
Inver Grove
940 Ac X
Heights
19,600 Ac
TOTAL
ASSESSED
VALUATION
®
% Valuation
Eagan
193.6 X
216.0
Mendota
Heights 17.0 X
216.0
Inver Grove
Heights 5.4 X
216.0
TOTAL 1986 BILLS
Eagan
Mendota Heights
Inver Grove Heights
Total City
Valuation
$229.7M
$18,000.00
% Valuation
in Gun Club
$193.6M
$ 76.5M = $ 17.OM
$112.1M = $ 5.4M
1/2 Budget
$18,000 =
$18,000 --
Area
Area Valuation
$16,025.40 + $16,133.33 =
$ 1,177.20 + $ 1,416.67 =
$ 797.40 + $ 450.00 =
$216.OM
$16,133.33
$ 1,416.67
$ 450.00
$18,000.00
1986 Bill
$32,158.73
$ 2,593.87
$ 1,247.40
$36,000.00
1987 BILLING CALCULATIONS
1987 Budget Amount = $18,900
Land Area Calculation
% In Gun Club 1/2 Budget .
Eagan 89.039 X $ 9,450 =
Mendota Heights 6.547 X -$-9,450 =
Inver Grove Heights 4.43% X $ 9,450 =
ASSESSED VALUATION CALCULATION
7 Area in
Gun Club
Eagan 18,915 Ac X
22,440 Ac
Mendota Heights 1,390 Ac X
6,263 Ac
Inver Grove 940 Ac X
Heights 19,600 Ac
TOTAL
ASSESSED VALUATION
% Valuation
Eagan 214.1 X
238.6
Mendota Heights 18.8 X
238.6
Inver Grove Heights 5.7 X
238.6
TOTAL 1987 BILLS
Eagan
Mendota Heights
Inver Grove Heights
Total City
Valuation
$254.OM
$ 84.7M
$119.5M
1/2 Budget
$ 9,450 =
$ 9,450 =
$ 9,450 =
Area Valuation
$ 8,413.33 + $ 8,479.65 =
$ 618.03 + $ 744.60 =
$ 418.64 + $ 225.75 =
175
4/28/86
$ 8,413.33
$ 618.03
$ 418.64
$ 9,450.00
% Valuation
in Gun Club
$214. 1M
$ 18.8M
$ 5.7M
$238.6M
$ 8,479.65
$ 744.50
$ 225.75
$ 9,"450.00
1987 Bill,
$16,892.98
$ 1,362.63
$ 644.39
®.
•
MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCILMEMBERS
FROM. CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES
DATE: MAY 16, 1986
SUBJECT: INFORMATIVE
FOURTH OF JULY CELEBRATION
Enclosed on pages�Zthrough� is a copy of a letter sent
to Lowell Johnson, Chairman of .the Eagan A th of July Association
regarding the City's position on liability insurance for the
fireworks display.
COUNCIL ACTION CONCERNING DOWNZONING
The City Administrator sent a brief memo to members of the Advisory
® Planning Commission regarding action that was taken on April
29 concerning a new direction on potential for downzoning certain
parcels of property. A copy,of the memo is enclosed on page.
HRA ASSISTED HOUSING REPORT
Enclosed on pages / gd through is the most recent copy of
the assisted housing and community development report as provided
by the Dakota County HRA.
AUDITORS' COMMENTARY REPORT
Enclosed without page number is a copy of the Auditors' Commentary
Report for the Council's review. The commentary contains the
findings and recommendations resulting from Deloitte Haskins +
Sells' review of the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report of
1985.
/s/ Thomas L. Hedges
City Administrator
fi�
I,
111N �.
3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD, P.O. BOX 21199
EAGAN. MINNESOTA,55121
PHONE: (612) 454-8100
May 8, 1986
MR LOWELL JOHNSON, CHAIRMAN
EAGAN 4TH OF JULY ASSOC
C/O. SOUTH COUNTRY REALTY INC
1570 CENTURY POINT
EAGAN MN 55121
Re: City of Eagan Contribution and Liability Insurance
Dear Mr. Johnson:
BEA BLOMQUIST
Mayer
THOMAS EGAN
JAMES A SMITH
MC ELLISON
THEODORE WACHTER
Cw ix,l M.ben
THOMAS HEDGES
GN A:ImnetralO
EUGENE VAN OVERBEKE
City Clerk
In official action that was taken by the Eagan City Council at a
regular meeting held on May 6, 1986, an appropriation in the
amount of $1,000 was authorized to the Eagan 4th of July Associa-
tion. The City Council is extremely pleased with the volunteer
effort that so many of you extend for this community- wide
celebration each and every 4th of July.
Unfortunately, I bear some bad news regarding liability insurance.
The City of Eagan was placed on notice approximately 30 days ago
that its carrier, Home Insurance Company, is no longer insuring
municipalities. Our insurance policy with Home Insurance Company
terminates June 30, 1986'. The City of Eagan is looking at all of
their alternatives and is confident that another insurance option
exists for the City's general liability and worker's compensation;
however, many of the activities that are high-risk related will
not be insured. As a result, the City is performing an in-depth
risk management study to determine any and all potential risk with
the understanding that certain activities that have been previously
performed within the City may have to be cancelled or terminated
due to the lack of liability insurance. One of these events is the
fireworks display that normally occurs on the evening of July 4th.
The City of Eagan cannot assume any responsibility or exposure
for the traditional fireworks display. If a decision is made by
the Eagan 4th of July Association to again have a fireworks
display, it will be necessary that your non-profit corporation
assume any and all liability for this event.
It is discouraging and gravely unfortunate that local governments
and business throughout our country are experiencing the threat of
exposure and high-risk for activities such as a community -wide
fireworks display in celebration of our Country's birthday.
177
THE LONE OAK TREE ... THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY
•
EAGAN 4TH OF JULY ASSOC
MAY 8, 1986
Page Two
I am certain that you and the 'volunteers who are involved with the
Eagan 4th of July Association will be understanding of the City's
posture regarding the fireworks display.
As. usual, the City is more than happy to help in all other ways,
such as, additional police protection during the holidays, mainte-
nance personnel assistance, and the general fund appropriation in
the amount of $1,000. If you have any questions, please feel free
to contact me at any time.
Sincerely,
Thomas L. Hedges
City Administrator
TLH/kf
�7�
MEMO TO: CHAIRMAN AND ALL MEMBERS OF THE ADVISORY
PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES
DATE: MAY 6, 1986
SUBJECT: CITY COUNCIL ACTION CONCERNING DOWN ZONING
At a special meeting held on Tuesday, April 29, 1985,.the Eagan
City Council directed its staff to study the potential for a
down -zoning of certain parcels of property located within the
City of Eagan. The study is intended to identify parcels which
are zoned or planned in a manner which staff finds to be
inconsistant with the realities of the City's present development
circumstances. It is evident that some legal precedents do
suggest that cities may down zone without excessive liability, if •
such down zoning is based upon objective planning principles
which are applied uniformly to all similar property.
The ultimate intent of this Council direction is to consider the
downzoning of identified parcels, understanding that litigation
may result from such decisions. This Council direction is only
in the assessment stage and should not be expected to result in
downzonings in the immediate future. The Advisory Planning
Commission will ,be kept informed of all developments in this
area. If you have any questions concerning this matter, please
contact Dale Runkle.
City Administrator
TLH/JH/jh
cc: Dale Runkle, City Planner
79
DAkOTA
1
NO�
`!!il'
�
COUNT'
Serving People and Communities
E M 0 R A N D U M
DAKOTA COUNTY
HOUSING &
REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY
2496- 145th STREET WEST
ROSEMOUNT, MINNESOTA 55068
612-423-4800
J
T0: HRA Commissioners; Dakota County Commissioners; City Managers; Fred
Joy, County Administrator; and Dla, ounty Planning Department .
FROM: Mark Ulfers, Executive Director`
® SUBJECT: STATUS REPORT FOR ASSISTED HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DATE: May 8, 1986
Enclosed are the April Status Reports for all the Assisted Housing Programs in
Dakota County and the Community Development Programs administered by the Dakota
County HRA.
If you would like additional information on any of the programs, please feel
free to call me.
Enclosure
a
/�o
Brief description of assisted housing programs:
1. Section 8 Existing: Eligible low and moderate income households pay 30% of
their monthly adjusted gross income (less an established allowance for uti-
lities) for rent in market rate rental units. The Dakota County HRA (or
South St. Paul HRA) pays the rest. The rental units must pass federal
inspection standards and the rent plus an allowance for utilities paid by
the renter, must not exceed established Fair Market Rent limits.
2. Moderate Rehab: The Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation program offers owners
of rental property assistance for making building repairs which will bring
their properties into compliance with Housing Quality Standards. The owner,
in turn, agrees to rent to households eligible for Section 8 Rent
Assistance. The rental of these units is coordinated through the Dakota
County HRA and the rent payments for the tenants is the same as Section 8
Existing. Besides the existing units in place, this program is no longer
available.
3. Section 8 New Construction: The developers of these units receive a subsidy
for construction of these units. The ow'hers'in'turh; are required to rent
these units to eligible low and moderate income households. The rental
payments for tenants are the same as Section 8 Existing. These rental deve-
lopments are owned by private developers. Besides the existing units in
place, this program is no longer available except for Section 202 projects
for senior citizens.
4. Low Rent Housing: The Dakota County HRA (or South St. Paul HRA) owns and
manages the housing units offered through the Low Rent Housing Program.
These housing units are rented to eligible low and moderate income house-
holds who pay 30% of their monthly adjusted gross income (less an
established allowance for utilities) for rent.
5. 235 Home Ownership: This program offered assistance to eligible low and
moderate households for purchasing a home. The program is no longer
available.
6. 236 Rental: The developers of these units receive a subsidy for construc-
tion of these units. The owners, in turn, are required to rent these units
to eligible low and moderate income households. The rental payments for
tenants are the same as Section 8 Existing. Besides the existing units in
place, this program is no longer available.
DAKOTA COUNTY ASSISTED HOUSING REPORT MAY, 1966
I
I
SECTION B
EXISTING
1
0 1
MODERATE
I
SECTION 0
NEW I
LOW
RENT
1
235 HOME
1 236 RENTAL
I CURRENT
I
COMMUNITIES I
ELD
I
FAMILY TOTALI
ELD
REHAB
FAMILY
I
TOTALI
CONSTRUCTION I
ELD FAMILY TOTALI
HOUSING
I-
FAMILY
I FAMILY
I TOTALS
6RAYD1
--------------I--------------I--------------I-------
I
0 I
0
I 0
13
13 I
ROSEMOUNT ----I
--------------
10
I--- -------
ELD FAMILY
41 1
---I-------------I-----------------I---------------I---------I---
TOTAL[
TOTAL
I TOTAL
I ELD
FAMILY
TOTAL]
APPLE VALLEY -----I
-------------- I
I1
-------------
42
53 1,
I
0
---------------I-------
0
0 1
0
56
--- I--------`.-I------I------I
56;1
0
43
43 1
0
1 0
-----
1 11
---- —
141-
----- I
152 1
BURNSVILLE 1
57
104
161 1
0
0
0 1
0
- ----
87
I
87 1
--------
0
56
-- I
56 1
-----=
0
I —
1 180
I---
1 57
----
427
I
484 1
EAGAN 1
-------------- -------- I
32
----------
164
------
196 1
I
0
---------------1--=-
6
0 1
0
33
33 1
0
17
17 1
0
1 144
1 32
358
390 1
FARMINGTON 1
21
50
71 1
0
0
0 1
75
- ------
0
I
75 1
------
0
-----
2
I ------
2
0
8 1
0
0
B I
0
0
0 I
0 1
0
1 0
0
O I
1
4
1 0 1
96
56
152 1
HASTINGS 1
------------ -----I----------------I--
59
151
210 1
4
--------I----------I-------
14
IB I
109
0
109 1
0
10
10 1
0
1 0 1
172
175
347 1
INVER GROVE HEIGHTS 1
30
185
215 1
0
0
0 1
0
40
40 1
0
6
-I------I—
6 1
31
-=—I------
1 202 1
30
464
494 1
LAKEVILLE 1
13
44
57 1
0
0
0 1
24
0
24 1
0
11
11 1
2 1
0 1
37
57
94 1
LILYDALE 1
--------------= I
0
------
B
---..---1--------=-
0 1
0
0
B 1
I
0
0
0 1
0
0
0 1
0 1
0 1
0
0
0 1
MEND-MENDOTA --- I
2
1
3 1
0
B
B I
------------
0
0
I
0 1
-----------I
0
0
----
0 1
---I
0 I
------ I
0 I
-----------I'
-
2
I
3 1
MENDOTA HEIGHTS
1 A
0
0 1
0
1
1 1
0
12
12 1
0
0
0
-- ----------1-=------
-I----
-I--
I
0 I
0
I 0
13
13 I
ROSEMOUNT ----I
--------------
10
I--- -------
31
41 1
---I-------------I-----------------I---------------I---------I---
0
0
0 1
-
39
--
28
---I-------
67 1
0
-----I--
30
30 1
---=I-----1------------1
2 1
0
1 49
91
140 1
SOUTH ST. PAUL t
1 32
136
160 1
0
0
0 1
0
44
44 1
300
0
300 1
2 1
----I-------=-------I
0
1 332
182
514 1
SUNFISH LAKE
-----------------I----------I--
1 0
1
1.1
8
8
0 1
0
0
0 1
0
0
0 1
0 1
0
1 0
1
1 1
WEST ST. PAUL
1 197
158
355 1
--------I--------I-------------I---I----I—
0
6
6 1
0
0
B I
Be
7
07 1
0 I
0
--------
1 277
171
I
448 1
OTHER -------
1 1
6
7 1
0
0
8 1
0
0
B I
0
0
0 I
0 1
0
1 0
0
O I
I I I I
TOTALS 1 464 1073 1530 1 4 21 25 1 247 300 547 1 380 182 562 1 41 1 526 1 1695 2143 3230 1
I I I
I I I 1 I I I
*South St. Paul administers separate Section 8 Existing and Low Rent Housing Program.
0
Brief description of Community Development Programs:
1. Weatherization: Through a joint effort of the Dakota County HRA and
Economic Assistance, low-income homeowners and rental units occupied by low-
income tenants are being weatherized to reduce the consumption of precious
,fuels, promote energy conservation, and reduce the burden of high heating
costs on low-income county residents who can least afford rapidly rising
utility bills.
2. MHFA Home Improvement Loans: The Dakota County HRA administers this State
program as a Title I lender. Loans are made to eligible homeowners
(adjusted gross income less than $24,000 annually) for code compliance items
and certain general improvements. An interest rate of 3% to 11.5% is
charged depending on the applicant's income.
3. MHFA.Home Rehab Loan: These loans are made to eligible low-income
homeowners adjusted gross income under $7,000 annually) for rehabilitation
items that directly affect the health, safety, energy conservation and
accessibility of the home. These are deferred loans and are available to
households with adjusted gross incomes under $7,000 annually. This program
is administered by the Community Development staff of the Dakota County HRA.
4. •MHFA Home Energy Loan: These loans are made to eligible homeowners for
energy items,. The interest rate is 8% for homeowners with adjusted gross
incomes of less than $24,000 annually and an interest rate 9% for those with
adjusted gross incomes,of more than $24,000 annually. This program is admi-
nistered by the Community Development staff of the Dakota County HRA.
5. Rental Rehab: Rental Rehabilitation loans are available to owners of rental
units. There are no income or asset limitations. The loan amount cannot
exceed $15,000 per one dwelling unit and for structures with more than one
unit the loan limit is $7,500 per unit with a maximum of $37,500. The
interest rate on the loan is 11%. This program is administered by the
Community Development staff of the Dakota County HRA.
6. CDBG Rehab Loan: Various housing rehabilitation programs have been done
using Community Development Block Grant funds. They have assisted low and
moderate income homeowners in making repairs to their homes with low
interest loans ,and grants (grantsare no longer available). This program
is administered by the Community Development staff of the Dakota County HRA.
7. MHFA Solar Bank: Deferred loans 'are given to eligible low and moderate
income homeowners for energy items. The eligible homeowners are referred
from Northern States Power Company. This program is administered by the
Community Development staff of the Dakota County HRA.
8. 312 Loans: These loans are given to eligible owners of residential struc-
tures at an interest rate of 3%. The loan funds must be used to bring the
property into compliance with local codes, rehabilitation standards and some
types of general improvements. Commercial and mixed use (commercial and
residential) properties may apply for loans with an interest rate of 9%.
This program is administered by the Community Development staff of the
Dakota County HRA in HUD approved target areas.
1�
DAKOTA CSIRITY NRA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT MAY 1976 -APRIL 1986
I NEATHERIIATION
COMMUNITIES I ELD FAX TOTAL
MHFA NOME IMPROV LOAN
ELD LG SR TOTAL
MMFA HOME REHAB LOAN
ELD L6 SM TOTAL
ffA NOME ENERGY LOAN
ELD L6 64 TOTAL
RENTAL RENAB LOAN
ELD LB SM TOTAL
COBS RFNAB LOAN
ELD LG SM TOTAL
----I—I—I—
COBS REHAB LOAN - MH,
ELD LG SM TOTAL
--I---I—I—
MHFA SOLAR BANK LOAN
ELD LG SM TSTA.
--1—I--I--
712 loans
L.FAM S.FAM COMM
—1--I--I--I—I
i
ELD TOTALI
—I—I—I—
APPLE VALLEY I
11 711 72
—I—I—I--
11
B1
31
4
—I—I—I--
01
11
01
B
—I—I—I---
BI
11
41
5
--I---I—I—
01
BI
01
0
BI
a
0I
0
01
—I—I--I—
01
01
0
0I
—I—I--I—
BI
BI 8
01
—I--I—I—I—I
01
01
BI
BI
—--I—I—I--
BURNSVILLE 1
16 1 129 1 145
—I—I—I—
G I
1 1
2 1
3
—I—I--I--
1 1
0 1
4 1
5
--I--I—I--
8 1
0 1
2 1
2
---I—I—I—
B 1
0 1
0 1
0
---I—I—I—
1 1
B 1
3 1
4
0 1
0 1
2 1
2
8 1
8 1
8 I B
0 1
0 1
0 I
B 1
0 1
CANNON FALLS I
1 1 2 1 3
0 1
0 1
0 1
0
0 1
B I
1 I
1
0 1
0 1
2 1
2
0 1
8 1
0 1
0
0 1
0 1
0 I
0
0 1
—I—I—I--
0 1
0 1
0
0 1
--I---I---I---
B I
0 1 0
0 1
—I---I---I---I—I
0 1
0 I
0 1
A I
----I—I--I—
CASTLE ROOK 1
0 1 4 1 4
—I—I--I--
8 1
0 1
1 I
1
—I--I—I--
B 1
I I
1 1
2
----I—I—I---
0 1
0 1
0 I
0
--I--I—I—
0 I
0 1
0 1
0
—I--I—I—
0 1
0 1
B 1
0
B I
8 1
0 1
0
B 1
0 1
0 1 0
0 1
0 1
0 1
0 1
0 1
EAGAN 1
5 1 54 1 59
B I
1 1
5 1
6
3 1
1 1
2 1
6
1 1
1 1
6 1
B
0 1
0 1
0 I
0
1 I
—I—I—I—
1 1
2 1
4
0 1
—I—I—I--
0 1
0 1
0
0 I
—I—I—I—
B I
0 1 0
S 1
—I—I—I—I—I
0 1
0 1
0 1
0 1
--I-1--I---
FARMINGTON 1
21 1 113 1 134
—I—I—I--
0 1
2 1
7 1
9
--I—I—I--
2 1
11
4 1
7
---I---I—I----
2 1
1 1
17 I
IS
--I--I—I—
8 1
A I
0 1
8
7 1
1 1
4 1
12
0 1
—I—I—I—
0 1
0 1
0
8 1
—I--I—I—
6 1
8 I 0
0 I
----I—I--I—I
8 1
0 1
1 1
1 1
HASTINGS 1
—I—I—
47 1 131 1 178
—I—I—I—
5 1
6 1
22 1
33
—1-1-1—
21 1
4 1
11 1
36
--1----1—I—
1 1
2 1
3 1
6
----I—I—
4 I
1 1
5 1
10
—I—I—I—
13 1
7 1
IB 1
38
B 1
0 1
0 1
0
0 1
0 1
4 1 4
1 1
3 1
0 1
B 1
4 1
HAMPTON 1
5 1 Il 1 16
0 1
B 1
2 1
2
3 1
8 1
1 1
4
0 I
B 1
0 1
B
B 1
0 1
0 1
0
B I
1 I
1 1
2
B 1
0 1
0 1
0
0 1
0 1
0 I 0
8 1
0 I
B I
0 1
0 1
INVER GROVE 1
20 1 105 1 125
3 1
4 1
10 1
17
4
2 1
15 1
21
0 1
8 1
6 1
6
0 1
0 1
0 1
0
1 1
4 1
B 1
13
0 1
0 1
0 I
8
B 1
0 1
2 I 2
0 I
0 1
0 1
0 I
0 1
LAKEVILLE 1
16 1 85 1 101
0 1
0 1
2 1
2
2 1;1
1
2 1
5
0 1
0 1
4 1
4
B I
8 1
0 1
0
4 1
—_1—_I
0 1
2 1
---- 1---
6
B 1
____1—I____I--
0 1
0 1
0
0 1
--- 1 ----
B I
1—_1_____
0 1 0
0 1
—1
0 1
---- 1_____1
0 1
0 I
--- I
0 I
--- 1
--__—__—I-1
LILYDALE 1
--- 1—__
0 1 0 1 B
—1--1—_1—_
B I
8 1
0 1
0
_____I--I—I_____
0 I
0 1
8 1
8
____I_____1—_1---
0 1
0 1
0 1
0
—__I
0 1
---- 1_—I---
8 1
B I
0
0 1
—1-1-1—
B 1
0 1
B
0 1
--1--I-1—
0 1
0 1
0
0 1
--1--1--I—_
0 1
0 1 0
0 1
—I-1--1--'1-1
0 1
0 1
0 1
0 1
——1-1--I—_
MENDOTA 1
2 1 2 1 4
--1—I---1—
2 1
B 1
0 1
2
_--1--I--1—__
2 1
�0 1
0 1
2
—'1--"I-1----
0 1
0 1
0 I
0
—1---1--1—_
8 1
B 1
0 1
0
1 1
0 I
0 I
1
0 1
—I—I—I—
0 1
0 1
0
B 1
--I—I--I—
0 1
B I 0
0 1
—I—I---I-1--I',
1 1
0 1
1 1
2 1
—I—I—I--
MENDOTA REIGHT51
9 1 11 1 20
—I—I--I—
0 1
1 1
2 1
3
--1--I—I—
3 110
1
2 1
5
----I--I—I---
1 1
0 1
S 1
6
--I—I—I--
1 1
0 1
B 1
1
—I—I—I—
2 I
11
1 I
4
B I
B 1
0 1
8
0 I
B I
0 1 0
0 I
B I
B 1
0 1
B R
MIESVILLE I
1 I 1 1 2
B I
0 I
8 1
0
0 1
�0 I
0 1
0
8 1
0 1
B 1
0
0 1
B I
B I
B
0 1
0 1
0 1
0
B 1
0 1
0 1
0
0 1
0 1
B 1 0
B I
--I—I—I--I--I
8 1
0 1
0 1
8 1
—I—I—I----
NORTHFIELD 1
5 1 10 1 15
—I—I—I--
0 1
6 1
1 1
1
—I—I--I--
0 1
I0 1
B I
0
—I—I—I--
0 1
0 I
1 I
1
--I---I---I—
0 1
0 1
0 1
0
—I--I--I—
0 1
0 1
0 1
B
—I----I—I—
0 1
0 1
0 1
8
—I—I—I—
B I
0 1
0 1 B
0 1
0 1
6 1
0 1
B I
RAVENNA 1
11 01 0
BI
01
01
0
01
ia
BI
0
BI
01
11
1
BI
01
61
0
01
--I—I--I—
BI
BI
0
81
—I--I--I—
01
01
0
01
--I--I—I—
01
01 0
01
—I—I—I--I--I
01
01
01
BI
I—I--I—
RANDOLPH 1
2 1 9 1 11
--I—I—I—
8 1
1 1
1 1
2
—I—I—I---
0 I
8 1
B 1
B
---I—I—I---
0 1
1 1
1 1
2
--I--I—I---
0 1
0 1
0 1
0
0 I
1 1
B 1
1
B I
B I
0 I
A
0 1
B I
0 I 0
0 1
0 1
0 1
0 1
a I
ROSEMOUNT 1
9 1 67 1 76
0 1
1 1
6 1
7
6 1
0 1
B 1
6
B I
0 1
19 1
19
B 1
0 1
0 I
B
I I
—I—I—I—
0 1
3 1
4
0 1
---I—I—I—
B 1
0 1
0
0 1
—I—I—I—
0 1
0 1 0
B I
—I--1--I—I—I
11
6 1
0 1
1 1
—I--I—I—
MR ST. PAIL 1
78 1 196 1 274
—I—I—I—
0 1
0 1
B 1
0
—I—I--I—
9 1
0 1
8 1
0
—I--I--I--
6 1
0 1
1 1
6
—I—I—I—
B
0 1
B
0
0 1
0 1
0 1
0
8 1
6 1
B I
0
0 1
0 1
0 1 0
0 1
0 1
0 1
0 1
0 1
SUNFISH LAKE I
0 1 6 1 0
0 1
0 I
B 1
8
8 1
0 1
6 1
0
0 1
0 1
0 1
0
0 I
B 1
0 1
6
B I
B I
8 1
0
B I
—1—I—I—
8 1
0 1
0
0 1
—I—I—I—
8 1
0 1 0
0 1
—I--I--I—I—I
0 1
0 1
0 1
0 I
—I—I—I—
VERMILLION I
1 1 3 1 4
—I—I—I—
0 1
0 1
0 1
0
—I--I—I—
1 1
0 I
0 1
0
—I--I—I—
0 1
0!
0 1
0
--I—I—I--
0 I
8 1
0 1
0
—I--1—I—
0 I
0 1
8 1
B
0 1
—I—I—I—
0 1
0 1
0
B I
—I—I—I—
0 1
0 1 0
0 I
—I—I—I—I—I
B 1
0 1
0 1
0 1
I—I—I—
NEST ST.PAIL 1
51 1 74 1 125
—I—I—I—
20 1
6 1
31 1
57
—I—I—I—
14 1
6 1
15 1
35
—I—I—I—
5 1
0 1
1 1
6
—I—I—I—
19 1
B 1
13 1
32
—I—I—I—
56 1
—I—I—I—
15 1
54 1
125
B 1
—I—I—I—
0 1
0 1
0
B I
—I—I—I—
8 1
2 1 2
1 1
—I—I-1—I—I
9 1
8 1
0 1
IB I
I—I—I—
I I I
I I
` TOTALS 1290 11078 11368
I I I
I I I
—I—I—I—
I
I
31 I
I
I
I
I
23 I
I
I
I
95 1119
I
I
—I—I—I—
I
I
61 I
I
I
I
I
16 I
I
I
I
SBI 135
I
I
—I—I—I—
i
I
10 I
I
I
I
I
6 1
I
I
I
I
68 I
I
I
83
—I—I—I—
I
24 I
I
I
I
1 1
I
I
I
I
IBI
I
I
43
I
I
87 I
I
I
I
I
31 I
I
I
I
% 1214
I
I
I
I
0 1
I
I
I—I—I—
I
I
B I
I
I
I
I
2 I
I
I
2
I
0 1
I
I
1
0 1
I
I
I
8 1 B
I
I
I
I
2 1
I
I
I
14 I
I
I
I
B I
I
I
I
I
2 I
I
I
I
1
IA I
I
I
*MH - Mobile Home
UL
ADMINISTRATIVE AGENDA
REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
MAY 21, 1986
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY ADMINISTRATOR
1. Seasonal Workers/Utility Division
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS'
1. Final Plat Configuration - Hampton Heights
MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCILMEMBERS
FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES
DATE: MAY 19, 1986
SUBJECT: ADMINISTRATIVE AGENDA
ADMINISTRATOR
Item 1. (New) Seasonal Workers/Utility Division --It is the recom-
mendation of Superintendent of Utilities and Buildings Connolly
that the following people be hired as seasonal workers for the
Utility Division: Mark Dornseif, Blaine Robertson, Richard Robohm
and Andrew Dornseif.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the hiring of the
above-named personnel as seasonal workers for the Utility Division
of the Public Works Department.
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
1. Final Plat Configuration - Hampton Heights --The staff is in
the process of finalizing all information relating to the final
plat application for the Hampton Heights subdivision. There are
three main issues that must be resolved before this final plat
process can be presented to the Council for formal approval. They
are identified as follows:
1. Configuration of Pacific Avenue "stub" street to east bound-
ary line.
2. The designation and configuration of the remaining undevel-
oped property to be retained by Dr. Lyle Hay located
between Hampton Heights and Yankee Doodle Road adjacent to
Coachman Road.
3. Formal approval of a variance to street design standards
allowing a 10% street grade.
Street Configuration: Enclosed on page is a copy of the
final plat showing the area of concern. As can be seen, this stub
street will service four houses on a dead end street without any
provision for a temporary cul de sac. Due to the anticipation
that the property owner to the east will not subdivide and/or
develop his property in the near future, this "temporary" stub
street could be of a long duration.
Due the many configurations and revisions this plat encountered
during the preliminary process, its final list of conditions
inadvertantly omitted the requirement for the construction of a
full, temporary cul de sac similar to other subdivisions (Oak
Cliff 4th, Brittany 9th, etc.). Because this was not specifically
listed as a condition, the developer did not anticipate this need
and has since pre -sold those lots without a cul de sac provision
contained in the purchase agreement. The developer feels that the
City's requirement to provide a temporary cul de sac within his
.subdivision or, purchase land from Mr. Lemieux at this point in
time with pending final plat approval imminent, is restrictive as
he is unable to comply without the consent of external property
owners. The staff has recommended an alternative that the four
affected lots be platted as outlots to restrict their development
until Pacific Avenue is extended to the east to Federal Drive.
The developer has indicated this will result in a lawsuit resulting
from purchase agreements already executed by future homeowners.
The developer will be trying to acquire a permanent easement from
Mr. Lemieux to allow the construction of a cul de sac on his
property and the status will be made available at the May 21
Council meeting.
Outlot Configuration: The City requires that any time a parcel of
land is subdivided, the entire parcel must be platted with any
fVture development to be designated as an outlot. Dr. Hay has
retained ownership of the undeveloped land north of Hampton Heights
which is proposed to b designated as two outlots as shown on the
map enclosed on page. Dr. Hay has requested that one outlot
be designated for the existing, protected wetland to allow him to
dedicate this property to the City for either a parkland dedication
credit or pure donation. The Parks Department has no need or
desire ofa wetland and will not accept it for any credit of land
dedication. The Public Works Department is concerned that if this
wetland is designated as a separate outlot, it will eventually go
tax forfeit and come under the City's jurisdiction with all
related liabilities of full ownership.
Subsequently, the staff- is requiring the developer to either plat
the northerly undeveloped property as one entire outlot or delete
it from the plat. This deletion would require Council approval as
a variance to the"current subdivision ordinance.
Street Grades: This subdivision has two locations where street
grades exceed the 8% allowed by City ordinance and are being
constructed at 10%. Due to the severe topography of this pro-
perty's development into a single-family subdivision, the staff
has. worked with the developer to minimize the number and locations
of street grades that would exceed the current ordinance require-
ment of 8%. The enclosed map on page/(Iq shows the location and
length of street grades that are being pl nned at 10%. This again
will require formal Council variance to the ordinance prior to
final plat approval.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the
following requirements for final plat approval of the Hampton
Heights Addition: 1) the requirement of a temporary cul de sac or
removal of lots from development at the eastern stub street of
Pacific Avenue; 2) the platting of the remaining property north of
Hampton Heights as one outlot or its deletion from the plat
boundaries altogether; and 3) a 10% street grade in excess of the
8% ordinance.
/S/ Thomas L. Hedges
City A inistrator / )
ff% � � � % a•ia.]7xi
14
L �/ IY1716o a -,•`/ /o'' 15 1 1
1 1 r�� �,-�/
1 1 I I eo.ee
'00 ��1r
1� 22
�^lavu,
1+ 2l .al
I =/ l- 11•iele / /i 20 W/ /
1 1 1 =/ I� II17t1 O e C/ O
L.erte 1 1
-'/ t i
r11i-1. �r.
tir I
BOARDWALK �
a �J ��` !• ter— ar •• � T� Z�
d ` a
BALTIC AVE. I C
a
��• tea* —..—. , c r .
e
ST CHARLES PL
/ • ip I m
� x i
ellp
op
I`PO �I Ij I • y
n.'
Fr 09
a O l B
I
- T
' I
I.I%I
.ui Rlf .......... .I.IIq '
Pe'�'eJ. AY Mrq YI
.u�01'6- uq.�.my I.r1
I '
BOARDWALK i
Y/. I F uol�eaaY3 � ' I
BALTIC
x
ST. CHARLES PLI aA
o
1
o
r
{{{11{Ze
A
/
I
/
uoysaa�g
I
1
�
i
I
T
rt1
0 0 1 B
I
�
I
I
•cnr cra.z
I
I I
P
r/
AGENDA /
REGULAR MEETING
EAGAN CITY COUNCIL
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
CITY HALL
WEDNESDAY, MAY 21, 1986
6:30 P.M.
I. 6:30 - ROLL CALL & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
7.1 11. 6:35 - ADOPT AGENDA & APPROVAL OF MINUTES
,( III. 6:40 - DEPARTMENT HEAD BUSINESS
I A. Finance Department
Z B. Public Works Department
A." IV. 6:55 - CONSENT AGENDA
7A.
B.
9 C.
. /D D.
D•/( E.
�.13 F.
�.I3 G.
p• Itf H.
J.
Contractor Licenses
Personnel Items
Project 444R, Receive Report/Order Public Hearing (Holland Lake
Storm Sewer Outlet) ,
Project 468, Receive Report/Order Plans and Specs (Rahncliff
Addition - Trunk Watermain)
Contract 86-14, Receive Bids/Award Contract (Greensboro
Addition)
Project 475, Receive Report/Order Public Hearing (Daniel Drive -
Northview Meadows 2nd Addition)
Project 411, Approve Easement Acquisition Payment (Victor Staff)
Project 458, Receive Assessment Roll/Order Public Hearing
(Eagandale Center Industrial Park - Storm Sewer)
Project 471, Receive Assessment Roll/Order Public Hearing (West
Service Road - Storm Sewer)
Project 478, Receive Petition/Order Feasibility Report (Windtree
7th Addition)
V. 7:00 - PUBLIC HEARINGS
FA A. Public Hearing for Project 474, Eagandale Lemay Lake 2nd
Addition - Streets & Utilities
D.36 B. Public Hearing for Consideration and Review of the Sperry Tax
/ Increment Financing Plan
VI. OLD BUSINESS
c0 A. Preliminar Plat for Deerfield Addition (Eagan 40 Planned
Development) Containing 324 Apartment Units on Approximately 40
Acres Located at County Road 30 and Thomas Lake Road, NW 1/4 of
Section 28
�.6 B. Eagandale Office Park 3rd Addition - Reconsideration of Plat
/ Configuration
VII. NEW BUSINESS
69 A. Off -Sale Liquor License for Town Centre 70/Curtis Johnson
T.
6 B. James Unker for a 25' Variance from 50' Setback Requirement
I Along Public Street for Lot 10, Block 3, Clearview,Addition,
Located East of Lenore Lane & Fronting on Cliff Road, SE 1/4 of
/ Section 29
W C. William Huttner Construction, Inc. for 8.5' Variance from the
P50' Setback Requirement for Public Streets, Lot 1, Block 3,
Hillcrest Addition, Located NE Quadrant of Pilot Knob Road and
Rebecca Lane, NE 1/4 of Section 33
D. Corporate Construction, Inc., for 12.2' Variance from 40'
Sideyard Setback Requirement Along Public Street, Lot 1, Block
1, Birch Park Addition, Located NW Quadrant of Windcrest Ave.
and Denmark Ave, NW 1/4 of Section 22
$3 E. Conditional Use Permit for Chemical Dependency Center & a
P' Rezoning from R-1 Single Family Residential) to L.B. (Limited
Business) Located in Former Peace Reform Church Building in
Cedar Grove #4, Block 6, Lots 12-16 & 20, NE 1/4 of Section 30
(Diamond Drive on East and Nicola Road on West)
p `03 F. Preliminary Plat, T.E.M. Addition, Consisting of 3 Single Family
Lots on 3.6 Acres and a Rezoning from A to R-1, Located Golden
Meadow Road on the North & Schwanz Lake to the Southwest, NW 1/4
of Section 25
a. ((0 G. Preliminary Plat, Windtree 7th & 8th Additions (Judith Bright),
Consisting of 74 Single Family Lots on Approximately 35 Acres on
Outlot A of Windtree 6th Addition, Located North of Wescott Road
and East of Elrene Road, SW 1/4 of Section 13
H. Peter Stalland, Blackhawk Plaza One Year Preliminary Plat
1 Extension, Expiring 6/4/86, Located in NW Quadrant of County
Road 30 & I -35E, SE 1/4 of Section 20
I. Group W Cable - Transfer of Ownership
P•
VIII. ADDITIONAL ITEMS
A. On -Sale Liquor License Amendment
Ip /6Q B. Parks Department, Receive Bids/Award Contract (Skid Loader)
C. Contract 86-13, Approve Plans/Order Advertisement for Bids
(Wescott Road)
x./69 D. Contract 86-16, Approve Plans/Order Advertisement for Bids
(Eagandale Lemay Lake 2nd Addition)
/p,/70 E. Contract 86-17, Approve Plans/Order Advertisement for Bids
(Sperry Consolidation Facility)
/]/ F. Gun Club Lake Water Management Organization Budget Approval/
PPayment
IR. VISITORS TO BE HEARD (for those -persons not on the agenda)
X. ADJOURNMENT
MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR 8 CITY COUNCILMEMBERS
FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES
DATE': MAY 16, 1986
SUBJECT: AGENDA INFORMATION
ADOPT AGENDA APPROVE.MINUTES'
After approval is given to the May 21, 1986, agenda and regular
City Council meeting ,minutes for the May 6 meeting and special
City Council meeting minutes for April 29 (to be distributed on
Monday, May 19, 1986), the following items are in order for
consideration.
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
A. Finance Department, Review and Acceptance of 1985 Annual
Financial Report, -The Finance Department completed the Annual Finan-
cial Report for 1985 and that document has been fully examined by
Deloitte Haskins + Sells, independent, certified, public account-
ants. A copy of the financial report was distributed previously
to the City Council for their review. The format used for this
year's Annual Financial Report is consistent with the last two (2)
years. The report contained a transmittal letter that was prepared
by the Director of Finance and reviewed and signed by the City
Administrator, that outlines and explains the contents of the
financial report.
The approved General Fund budget for 1985 was $5,121,64,0. The
General Fund budget for both revenues and expenditures was adjusted
during 1985 to $5,180,000. The total expenditures and other
•financing uses as indicated in the letter of transmittal and audit
report was $5,149,755 --slightly less that the adjusted appropri-
ation. The total revenues and other financial sources is
$6,04'7,90'8 --substantially higher than the revenues that were budget-
ed for 1985. As an example, license and permits were budgeted at
$464,350 while the actual dollars received for that revenue source
in 1985 was $980,350. This type of increase occurs due to the
difference in the extraordinary construction activity that occurred
in 1985 and the conservative revenue forecasting that was performed
in the fall of 1984 for building activity. The contingency fund
budgeted in the amount $217,720 plus an additional $30,000, was
expended in 1985. For purposes of financial reporting, the
contingency is added into each of the Departmental expenditures
during the operating year. The fund balance increase for 1985 is
$898,153 which reflects healthy fiscal operations for the year.
The Director of Finance, City Administrator and representatives of
Deloitte Haskins + Sells will be available for questions at the
meeting on Tuesday.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the Annual
Financial Report for the City -of Eagan for the fiscal year ending
December 31., 1985.' /
Agenda Information Memo
May 21, 1986, City Council Meeting
Page Two
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
B. Public Works Department --There are two (2) items to be consi-
dered under Public Works Department:
1. Claim for Damages, Brian Lucas (Rahn Road Pothole) --Enclosed
on pages -13 and is a copy of a letter staff received
from Mr. 'Lucas, requesting the City of Eagan to reimburse him
for damages incurred to his vehicle. Mr. Lucas claims that the
damages resulted from his car hitting a pothole on Rahn Road
south of Beau D'Rue Drive. Due to -the—fact-- that—the --Public Works
Street Maintenance division is not able to insure that Rahn Road
remains free of potholes during the spring season in -its continuous
deteriorating condition, the Public Works Director would like
direction from the Council as to how to handle this and anticipated
similar future claims.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve/deny the claim
submitted by Brian Lucas for vehicle damage resulting from a
Rahn Road pothole.
0
•
•
4 rte. ka.. a it
Suite 120 • 4555 Erin Drive • St. Paul, Minnesota 55121
May 11, 1986
Mr. Tom Colbert
Director of Public Works
City of Eagan
Eagan, MN 55122
Dear Mr. Colbert:
As a sales representative for a national airline, I certainly
can empathize with complaint handling. Since deregulation of
our industry, we certainly have had our fair share of customer
® grievances. Rarely do I take the initiative to voice my dis-
content about a personal happening, unless I believe I have
good cause.
About two weeks ago I was driving southbound on Rahn Road from
the Beau D' Rue intersection (Cedarvale) when my car hit a huge
pothole. Since it was night and the traffic was steady, I could
not avoid hitting two more large craters. Each time my car took
a big dip and I could hear my right wheel hitting the fender with
a thud noise.
The next day I noticed a definite grinding noise coming from the
front right side. After concluding that something serious had
happened, I took the car into Car X for an inspection. The
mechanic there told me that I needed a new right wheel bearing
and new CV boot. He indicated that if I had continued to drive
my car with that condition, I might have had my wheel fall off the
axle. Needless to say, I got the wheel fixed right away.,
My car is a 1982 Audi 4000 with 70,000 miles on it. That's a
lot of miles but the mechanics I talked to said that wheel bear-
ings usually last six or seven years and to have a boot replaced
is rare before the car reaches 100,000 miles._ The two mechanics
at Car X and the one mechanic at Metropolitan Audi who I dis-
cussed this with all concurred that a hard impact from a large
pothole was the most probable cause..
I have noticed that you did repair some of the potholes on Rahn
Road, unfortunately it came too late for me. I am asking the
City of Eagan, of which I am a resident of and work within, to
reimburse me for the expenses involved in repairing my car to
its normal condition. Your handling of this matter will be
appreciated.
Sincerely,
Brian K. -Lucas
4395 Svensk Lane
Eagan, MN 55123
452-2492 Home
452-8100 Work
1014 County Rd. 42 W. #{ t-,-? 3s--
Burnsville, MN 55337
(612) 435-1874
SERVICE MGR.
0�
CUST. ORDER
DATE 1 19
CUSTOMER4 14 of /( 5,-//
ADDRESS �" ' W R h/2y
�,� y�,✓ y S z - 8/00
CITY
��JJTELEPHONE
MAKE OF CZ A R — LIC. NO. MILEAGE
BANK CASH K
CARD
CHARGE TRANSFER WARRANTY 'MERCHANDISE pAlO OUT
RETURNED
BRAKES
AMOUNT QTY. `'. EXHAUST AMOUNT
FRONTBRAKES
EX.
( I PADS OR SHOES $ PER SET
❑ RESURFACE ROTORS OR DRUMS
❑NEWGREASESEALS ❑ADD FLUID IF NEEDED
❑ CLEAN -INSPECT -REPACK WHEEL BEARINGS
EX.
EX.
EX.
MU.
REAR BRAKES
MU.
( I PADS OR SHOES S PER SET
❑ RESURFACE ROTORS OR DRUMS l
❑, REBUILD WHEEL CYLINDERS (I
❑ ADD FLUID IF NEEDED
OA
OA
T. P.
T. P.
NEW ROTORS OR DRUMS
CLAMPS
L -R - FR. L -R - RE.
GASKETS
CALIPERS - WHEEL CYLINDERS
FLANGES
L -R - FR. L -R - RE.
HANGERS
MASTER CYLINDER
OIL SEALS
BRAKE HARDWARE KIT
_TOTAL EXHAUST
SHOCK ABSORBERS
HOSE OR BRAKE LINES
MIS TS
FRONT
Was ,�'C
D REAR
o�T
ov
TOTAL BRAKES
LABOR
TOTALSHOCKS
BRAKES
SPRINGS ..:
EXHAUST
FRONT
SHOCKS
REAR
SPRINGS
OTHER
TOTAL SPRINGS
TOTAL LABOR
OTHER
I `- I TOT
IC: IPARTS TOTAL I lDA I OU
CAR -X FULL WARRANTIES
U.S. and Foreign Car Mufflers/Shocks/Brakes—See Warranty Certificate, LABOR TOTAIJ D U
U.S. and Foreign Car Pipes -. YOUR CAR -X PIPE IS UNDER WARRANTY to; one year from date of installation. SUBTOTAL D U
Should it wear out or rust out during that period, simply present this sales invoice or other evidence of date of installa-
tion and your car with the defective pipe to any CAR -X Muffler Shop. A new pipe will be installed at NO CHARGE for TAX Q
the pipe or for its installation.
For the location of the nearest CAR X Muffler Shop, consult your Yellow Pages or contact CAR -X Service Systems, Inc. a UR
at 444 N. Michigan Avenue, Chicago, Illinois 60611. C/
This warranty is made by CAR -X Service Systems, Inc., and gives you specific legal rights. you may also have other rights which vary from state to state. CAR -X is a
federaliy registered trademark of CAR -X Service Systems, Inc. Seller is a licensee of CAR -X Service Systems, Inc.
I hereby authorize the above repair work to be done along with the necessary material, and hereby grant you and/or your employees permission to operate thetar or
truck herein described on streets, highways or elsewhere for the purpose of testing a r inspection. An express mechanic's lien is hereby acknowledged on above
car or truck to secure the amount of repairs thereto.
X3594
625111 1 R 51841
Agenda Information
May 21, 1986, City
Page Three
Memo
Council Meeting
2. Project 460, Nicols Road Construction Schedule - State Aid
Financing --At the February 18, 1986 public hearing, the upgrading
of Nicols Road was approved for construction in 1986. Nicols
Road is presently designated as—County State Aid Highway #23
and is proposed to be turned back to the City jurisdiction in
the near future. As a part of that turn -back process, the County
is required to perform a certain amount of additional maintenance
which was determined to be equivalent to a 2" bituminous overlay.
Because of the pending City construction of this road, it was
determined to be more cost efficient to have the County participate
in this construction to the extent of their equivalent bituminous
overlay which is approximately $100,000.
• The City recently designated this segment of Nicols Road as a
Municipal State Aid Street. Before this designation can be approved
by the State, it required the revocation of the previous County
State Aid Highway designation. Because of the time frames associa-
ted with this revocation of County State Aid designation and
implementation of Municipal State Aid designation, the City was
not able to have our recognized construction financing needs
approved by the state in a time frame for inclusion in our 1986
State Aid allocation formula. The earliest these construction
needs can be identified would be for the 1987 construction alloca-
tions. However, if Nicols Road is upgraded in 1986, it will
have been upgraded and construction needs substantially reduced
when the 1987 allocations are to be determined. This results
in a loss of approximately $40,000 (5%) of our 1987 construction
fund allocation from the State. If Nicols Road construction
• were deferred until 1987, our future construction allocation
would be increased by that amount, which could be used to help
finance this road improvement.
In a related issue, the City has received notice from the
Commissioner of Highways that due to revenue shortfalls being
experienced by the State, the legislature has amended the 1987
allocations relating to Municipal State Aid financing. The result
is that Eagan will lose approximately $39,800 from the 1987
anticipated State Aid allocation construction financing.
The Public Works Director will be available to discuss these
impacts in greater detail at the Council meeting, in hopes of
receiving some direction as to when the construction of Nicols
Road would be most appropriate. Because of current workloads
and the plan preparation schedule, construction would not be
able to begin until approximately the middle of July, making the
completion during 1986 questionable.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To reaffirm or delay the
construction schedule of Project 460 (Nicols Road) for 1986 or
1987.
Agenda Information Memo
May 21, 1986, City Council Meeting
Page Four
There are ten (10) items on the agenda referred to as Consent
Items requiring one (1) motion by the City Council. If the
City Council wishes to discuss any of the items in further detail,
those items should be removed from the Consent Agenda and placed
under Additional Items unless the discuss required is brief.
CONTRACTOR LICENSES
A. Contractor Licenses --Attached on page is a list of
contractors who are renewing or who have been elected and retained
as the builder by a customer either living in or planning to
reside within the City of Eagan. These contractors have references
from other municipalities or their client permit applications
are awaiting City Council approval for a contractor license.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM:
contractor licenses as presented.
I
To approve the list of
Is
•
CONTRACTORS' LICENSE
MAY 20, 1986
1
GENERAL CONTRACTORS
.1.
DAKOTA BUILDERS INC
2.
DEZURIK COMPANY
3.
GILBERTSON CONSTRUCTION
4.
GUSTAFSON & ASSOCIATES
5.
M.W. JOHNSON CONSTRUCTION
6.
MCDONNELL.CONSTRUCTION
7.
MINNESOTA PETROLEUM SERVICE
8.
NEW IMAGE BUILDERS INC
9.
NULOOK REMODELERS
®
10.
S. PETERSEN CONSTRUCTION
11.
J.B. SWEDENBORG CONSTRUCTION
INC
12.
RELIABLE BUILDERS INC
13.
TECH. CON S. INC
14.
VAIL BUILDERS INC
15.
NCL CONSTRUCTION
HEATING & VENTILATING
MASONRY, CEMENT WORK
1.
FARMINGTON PLBG & HTG
1. BOB'S MASONRY INC
2.
GENERAL SHEET METAL
2. NORTH STAR BRICK WORK
®
PLUMBERS
SWIMMING POOL
1.
A-AARONS PLBG & SEWER
1. VALLEY POOLS INC
2.
BERQUAL PLBG.
3.
PAYCHECK PLBG.
WATER SOFTENER
4.
REGENCY PLBG.
1. KEYSTONE WATER PERFORMANCE
5.
TERRY STURM PLBG.
1
Agenda Information Memo
May 21, 1986, City Council Meeting
Page Five
PERSONNEL ITEMS
B. PERSONNEL ITEMS:
There are three items to be given consideration:
Item 1., Seasonal Workers/Park Department --Over 40 applications
were received by the City for seasonal positions in our Park
Department. After screening and interviews by Superintendent
of Parks VonDeLinde, it is his recommendation that the following
seven (;8) people be hiredas seasonal workers: Kevin Doehling,
Peter Ellinson, Steven Helland, Steven Martin, Hugh Peterson,
James Schovid, John VonBan'k and Tom Parker. In addition, it is rec-
ommended that Charles Barker be hired as seasonal ballfield
attendant.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the hiring
of the above listed personnel as seasonal workers for the Parks
Maintenance division.
Item 2, Engineering Tech Intern/Assistant--In the 1986 budget,
approval was given for two (2) Engineering Tech Interns/Assistants,
one for the Engineering Department and one for the Park Department.
Over 30 applications have been received for these positions.
After screeening of the applications by Administrative Assistant
Duffy, Assistant City Engineer Hefti, and Director of Parks and
Recreation Vraa, seven applicants have been called in for inter-
views. Those interviews will be held Friday morning, May 16.
• Recommendations for hiring for these two vacancies will be forwarded
with the Administrative Packet on Monday.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: . To approve the hiring
of two temporary Eng-ineering Tech Intern/Assistants.
Item 3, Resignation/Road Maintenance Worker --On May 15, 1986,
the City received a letter of resignation from Robert J. Shockley,
road maintenance worker, notifying the City that he intended
to retire, effective May 30, lH6. It will be necessary for
the Council to formally accept the resignation and to authorize
the filling of the vacancy.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To accept the resignation
of Robert J. Shockley, road maintenance worker, and to approve
the filling of the vacant position.
r
Agenda Information Memo
May 21, 1986, City Council Meeting
Page Six
PROJECT 444R, RECEIVE REPORT/ORDER PUBLIC HEARING
C. Project 444R, Receive Report/Order Public Hearing (Holland
Lake Storm Sewer Outlet) --On August 6, 1985, a public hearing
was held to discuss the proposed trunk area storm sewer improve-
ments including a lift station from the Holland Lake area around
Cliff Road in the southeastern portion of the City. This project
was initiated because of the increasing water level for the several
drainage basins located within this general drainage district.
At that time, there were comments and concerns from the Dakota
County Parks system as to variability to pay for their estimated
assessment obligation. Since that time, a special assessment
policy was adopted creating a special rate for storm sewer assess- •
ments over undeveloped regional parks.
Subsequent to this action, the staff then met again with representa-
tives of the County on several occasions to discuss various options.
The end result was a request from the County to be removed from
any consideration with this storm sewer project based on their
intention to handle all drainage within that park system.
Therefore, a new feasibility report has been prepared significantly
altering the proposed storm sewer facilities, ponding requirements
and lift station sizing. Any potential future desire by the
County to connect to our trunk system would result in future
assessments, county storm sewer improvements and restrictions
on time periods for the use of our system.
Therefore, this report is being presented with staff's request •
that a new public hearing be scheduled for June 17, to further
discuss the various options in greater detail with all potentially
affected property owners. Due to the above -normal rainfall
conditions experienced in the past two years, the need for this
major storm sewer outlet is becoming critical.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the revised
feasibility report for Project 444R (Holland Lake -Storm Sewer
Outlot) and order the public hearing for June 17, 1986.
PROJECT 468, RECEIVE REPORT/ORDER PLANS & SPECIFICATIONS
D. Project 468, Receive Report/Order Plans and Specifications
(Rahncliff Addition -Trunk Water Main) --As a part of the Rahncliff
Addition (southwest quadrant of Cliff Road and I -35E) the developer
intends to install all streets and utilities privately to service
this subdivision. However, there is a segment of trunk water
main with an appropriate pressure reducing station that must
be installed to connect this subdivision to the high pressure
system on the south side of 35E which is the trunk fund responsi-
bility.
-/
Agenda Information
May 21, 1986, City
Page Seven
Memo
Council Meeting
Therefore, staff has prepared a feasibility report discussing
the City's obligation to be financed through .the trunk water
fund. Due to the fact that all property within this benefitted
area has previously paid its related trunk area assessments,
there are no assessments associated with this project. Therefore,
no public hearing is necessary. The staff is requesting the
Council receive this report and order the preparation of detailed
plans and specifications to proceed with the improvement project.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the feasibility
report for Project 468 ('Rahncliff 1st Addition - Trunk Water
• Main') and authorize the preparation of plans and specifications.
•
AQ
Agenda Information
May 21, 1986, City
Page Eight
Memo
Council Meeting
CONTRACT 86-14, RECEIVE BIDS/AWARD CONTRACT
E. Contract 86-14, Receive Bids/Award Contract (Greensboro
Addition) --At 10:30 a.m. on Thursday, May 15, the staff received
formal bids for the installation of streets and utilities to
service the Greensboro Addition located north of Wescott Road
approximately 1/2 mile east of Lexington Avenue. Enclosed on
page /Y is tabulation of the bids received showing the relation-
ship of the low bidder to the estimate contained in the feasibility
report presented at the public hearing held on April 15, 1986.
All bids will be checked for accuracy on their extensions and
additions and any variations will be reported by the Public Works
Director at the Council meeting.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To
Contract 86-14 (Greensbor Addition) and
Ceca Utilities in the amount of $242,739.60,
receive the bids for
award the contract to
r]
1.
2.
3.
• 4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Our File No. 49386
CITY CONTRACT NO. 86-14
GREENSBORO ADDITION
UTILITY & STREET IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT NO. 470
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
CONTRACTORS
Ceca Utilities
Nodland Associates'
Encon Utilities
Northdale Construction
S. J. Louis Construction
Burschville Construction
Brown & Cris
M. Danner Trucking
Orfei & Sons .
Lake Area Utilities
/Z-",
BID TIME:.10:30 A.M., C.D.S.T.
BID DATE: Thursday, May 15, 1986
TOTAL BASE BID
242,739.60
2.50,.799.00
251,190.00
252,385.70
257,545.10
262,597.00
274,979.10
278,326.00
283,693.99
283,699.00
ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE------------ _ $275,000.00
5077d PEAS. REPORT EST.--------- 301,815.00
% UNDER ENG. EST.--------- 11.7%
% UNDER FEAS. REPORT EST.— 19 Ask
Agenda Information Memo
May 21, 1986, City Council Meeting
Page Nine
PROJECT 475/DANIEL DRIVE (NORTHVIEW MEADOWS 2ND)
F. Project 475, Receive Report/Order Public Hearing (Daniel Drive
- Northview Meadows 2nd Addition) --In response to a petition
received from the developer of the proposed Northview Meadows 2nd
Addition, the Council authorized the preparation of the feasibility
report for the installation of streets and utilities along Daniel
Drive (Old South Wescott Hills Drive). The developer is installing
the internal streets and utilities for this single family subdivi-
sion privately.
This report has now been completed .and: is—being--presented to the
Council in consideration of scheduling the public hearing.
• ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the feasibility
report for Project 475 (Daniel Drive - Northview Meadows 2nd
Addition) and schedule the public hearing to be held June 17, 1986.
PROJECT 411/APPROVE EASEMENT ACQUISITION PAYMENT
G. Project 411, Approve Easement Acquistion Payment (Victor
Staff) --Victor and Sharon Staff, owners of Lot 5, Block 1„ Skovdale
2nd Addition, previously appealed the proposed trunk area storm
sewer assessments under Project 411 which provided for the outlet
to the Birch Park ponds adjacent to their east property line.
They also filed an inverse condemnation action against the City
as a result of the establishment of ,the permanent, controlled
• water elevation which encroached onto their property.
This assessment appeal was considered by the Special Assessment
Committee at their January 16, 1986, meeting and their recommenda-
tion to reduce the trunk area assessment and to negotiate an
acquisition of a ponding easement was approved by Council action
at the February 4th meeting.
Subsequently, our City Attorney's office has negotiated this
easement acquisition in accordance with the City's rate schedule.
Therefore„ the staff is recommending concurrence by the Council
for payment for this easement acquisition and authorization
to execute the settlement agreement which dismisses the inverse
condemnation action also.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the settlement
agreement for Project 411 for Lot 5, Block 1, Skovdale 2nd Addition
(Victor Staff) providing for payment for acquisition of an easement
and authorize the Mayor to execute said agreement.
/3
Agenda Information Memo
May 21, 1986, City Council Meeting
Page Ten
PROJECT 458/EAGANDALE CENTER INDUSTRIAL PARK
H. Project 458, Receive Assessment Roll/Order Final Assessment
Hearing (Eagandale Center Industrial Park - Storm Sewer) --In
response to concerns regarding potential appeals for special
assessments associated with the above -referenced project, the
Council determined that the final assessment should be adopted
prior to awarding the contract for the installation of the util-
ities. On May 6, formal bids were received and authorization
was given to proceed with the preparation of the final assessment
roll which has now been completed and is being presented to
the Council in consideration of scheduling the formal public
hearing.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the final assess- •
ment roll for Project 458 (Eagandale Center Industrial Park
- storm sewer) and order the final assessment hearing to be
scheduled for June 17, 1986.
PROJECT 471/WEST SERVICE ROAD
I. Project 471, Receive Assessment Rolls/Order Final Assessment
Hearing (West Service Road - Storm Sewer) --In response to a
petition received from the proposed developers of property adjacent
to the West Service Road, the Council authorized the preparation
of a feasibility report and scheduled the public hearing. Due
to the developer's waiver of the public hearing process and
guarantee of all costs associated, the Council authorized the
preparation of plans and specifications which were combined
under the same contract with Project 458, previously discussed.
These projects were combined because of their similarities,
location and economies of scale theory. Therefore, because
the contract cannot be awarded until the final assessment hearing
is held for Project 458, it is appropriate that the final assess-
ment roll for Project 471 also be held at the same time to deter-
mine if there are any objections or appeals anticipated.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the assessment
roll for Project 471 (West Service Road - storm sewer) and order
the final assessment hearing to be held June 17, 1986.
/I/
\J
Agenda Information Memo
May 21, 1986, City Council Meeting
Page Eleven
PROJECT 478, RECEIVE PETITION/ORDER FEASIBILITY REPORT
J. Project 478, Receive Petition/Order Feasibility Report (Windtree
7th Addition) --We have received a petition from the developers
of the proposed Windtree 7th Addition requesting Council authoriza-
tion to prepare a feasibility report to discuss the installation
of streets and utilities through the public hearing process.
The developer has agreed to guarantee all costs associated with
the preparation of this report if for some reason it is not approved
at the time of the public hearing. Later on in the agenda, the
Council will be considering a prelim nary - plat --approvalfor the
® Windtree 7th and 8th Addition. The developer is only petitioning
for the 7th Addition, as they intendto continue their phased
development.
10
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the petition
and authorize the preparation of the feasibility report for Project
478 (Windtree 7th Addition - Streets and Utilities).
11b,
Agenda Information Memo
May 21, 1986, City Council Meeting
Page Twelve
PROJECT 474/EAGANDALE LEMAY LAKE 2ND ADDITION
A. Project 474, Eagandale Lemay Lake 2nd Addition - Streets
& Utilities) --In response to a petition received from the developer
of the above -referenced subdivision, the Council authorized
the preparation of a feasibility report which was completed
and presented on April 15th with the public hearing being scheduled
for May 21. Enclosed on pages_Z7 through 35 is a copy of
the feasibility report for the Council's information and review
during the public hearing. All notices have been published
in the legal newspaper and sent to all property owners proposed
to be assessed under this project. The consulting engineer
and Public Works Director will be_._avai7able--- to. discuss, this
project in further detail at the Council meeting.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing
and approve/deny Project 474, Eagandale Lemay Lake 2nd Addition
(Streets and Utilities).
/6
•
L
REPORT
ON
EAGANDALE LEMAY LAKE 2nd ADDITION
® UTILITY & STREET IMPROVEMENTS
0
PROJECT No. 474
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
FILE No. 49370
Baaed400, Rade~., felm"ih 9 Yq""se�r .9im
r�
Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates, Inc.
2335 W. Trunk Highway 36
St. Paul, MN 55113
612.636-4600
April 7, 1986
Engineers & Architects
Honorable Mayor and Council
City of Eagan
3830 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, MN 55122
Re: Eagandale LeMay Lake 2nd Addn.
Utility & Street Improvement .
Project No. 474
File No. 49390
Dear Mayor and Council:
all. G. tlunabuu, P E,
Rubra W. R.rnr, P.E,
J.gih C. Anderlik, P.L.
tlmd/urd A. P.E.
Rirhurd E. Turner, P.E.
lum. C. Ohun, P.E.
Glenn R. C.A. P.E.
A'rirh A. Gbrdun. Y.E.
Thum. E. Nuyn, P E.
Ruha,d W. P.E.
Robyn G. &hunirb, P,E-
Murvm L. Sorvula, P.E.
Donald C. tlurkardr, P.E.
lrrry A. Rovrdun. P.E.
AN,k A. Moan. P.E.
Ted A. hod, P.E.
Mirhurl T Ruunnunn. P.E.
RulnmR Yl'VJ' l5E
Duvld O. Lmkum. P.E.
Thum. W. Puenun. Y.E.
Mirhuel C. Lynch, P E.
Auren L. Willa. P.E.
Jume, R. Afuland, P.E.
Arnnuh P. dndrnun. P.E.
Aeilh A. tlarhvann, P.E.
Murk R- R.Ift, P.E.
Robyrf C Runk. A.I.A.
Th., . E. A... , P.E.
Sruu L. Yu un X. PE.
Churles A. E'rirbun
Lru Af. P.—Aky
Nurlun Al. OLun
Suran .N. Ebrlin
Transmitted herewith is our report for LeMay Lake 2nd Addition, Project No.
474. This report covers sanitary sewer, water main, storm sewer and street
construction and includes a preliminary assessment roll.
We would be pleased to meet with the Council and other interested parties at a
mutually convenient time to discuss any aspect of this report.
Yours very truly,
BONESTR00, ROSEENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Marr. Hanson
MAH:li
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 Minnesota.
T Mark A. Hanson
Date: March 10, 1986 Reg. No. 14260
Approved By:
Department of P jic Works
Date :
4308d 30 Year
n 7
9`ri -r. Cryv
SCOPE: This project provides for the construction of sanitary sewer, water
main, storm sewer and street to serve the proposed Eagandale LeMay Lake 2nd
Addition. Eagandale LeMay Lake 2nd Addition will be located in the southwest
quadrant of Lone Oak Road and I -35E (Parcels 030-26, 020-26, 010-01, and
010-04). Eagandale LeMay 2nd Addition includes one platted lot approximatey 4
acres in size and two outlots approximately 8 acres in size. The platted lot
will include a 120 room Residence Inn while the two outlots are not intended
to be developed at this time, however, are presently zoned for commercial use.
FEASIBILITY AND RECOMMENDATION: The project—iseasible_from_an .engineering
• standpoint and is in accordance with the Master Utility and Street Plan for
the City of Eagan. The project can best be carried out as one contract.
DISCUSSION:
Sanitary Sewer - Sanitary sewer proposed herein includes constructing an 8"
diameter PVC sanitary sewer within Eagandale Place as shown on the attached
drawing. The sanitary sewer will be constructed at a proper elevation to pro-
videgravity service to the abutting lot and outlots in Eagandale LeMay Lake
2nd Addition. The sanitary sewer will connect to the existing sanitary sewer
in Eagandale Place at two separate locations. Sanitary sewer service stubs
® will also be extended to the property line at 7 different locations.
Water Main - Water main proposed herein includes constructing an 8" diameter
D.I.P. water main within Eagandale Place as shown on the attached drawing.
The water main will connect to an existing 8" and 12" diameter water main in
Eagandale Place at two separate locations. At the time the 12" diameter water
main was extended from Eagandale Place, it was not known how the adjacent
properties would develop. Therefore, the 12" was extended in anticipation of
a heavy water use. However, based on the proposed Residence Inn development
and the future light commercial use that is anticipated, it is not felt the
Page 1.
4308d
l�
12" main will be required. As a result, an 8" diameter water main is proposed
to be constructed in Eagandale Place in conjunction with the proper number of
valves, hydrants and service extensions. In addition, an 8" diameter water
stub is proposed from Eagandale Place to the north to Outlot A as indicated.
This 8" stub will be extended in the future and connect to the existing 16"
trunk in Lone Oak Road once its alignment can be determined based on future
development.
STORM SEWER: Storm sewer proposed herein includes constructing two separate
lateral storm sewer systems as shown on the attached drawing. The lateral
storm sewers will range in size from 15" to 24" and will connect to the exist- •
ing storm sewer system in Eagandale Place. As noted, the southerly system
will extend to I -35E right-of-way and will convey runoff generated from a por-
tion of that right-of-way. Presently runoff from this portion of right-of-way
is conveyed overland to the existing storm .sewer in Eagandale Place. However,
this overland drainage will be blocked as a result of the grading within
Eagandale LeMay Lake 2nd Addition.
Street - Street construction proposed herein includes constructing Eagandale
Place to a 9 ton design thickness and 36' wide width. Bituminous surfacing,
B618 concrete curb and gutter and sodding of the boulevards is also included.
The existing cul-de-sac located at the southerly end of the existing portion
of Eagandale Place will be removed as shown, thus requiring the reconstruction
of the existing driveway to the cul-de-sac. It is also proposed to construct
a 5' wide concrete sidewalk as shown on the attached drawing. The developer
has also requested the final wearing course be constructed in the spring of
1987.
4308d Page 2.
2a
AREA TO BE INCLUDED:
ASSESSMENT AND CONSTRUCTION AREA
N 1/2, SECTION 10
Parcel 010-01, 010-04, 020-26, 030-26
EAGANDALE LEMAY LAKE 1ST ADDITION
Lot 1, Block 1
COST ESTIMATE: A detailed cost estimate is presented in Appendix A located at
the back of this report. A summary of these costs is as follows:
Sanitary Sewer $ 25,650
Water Main 59,700
® Storm Sewer 65,460
Street 153,270
TOTAL ............ $304,080
The total estimated project cost is $304,080 which includes contingencies
and all related overhead. Overhead costs are estimated at 30% and include
legal,, engineering, administration and bond interest.
ASSESSMENTS: Assessments are proposed to be levied against the benefited
.property. A preliminary assessment roll is included at the back of this re-
port in Appendix B. All lateral costs will be revised based on final costs.
® These assessments will be spread over a period of time as determined by the
City Council at the Public Hearing. The interest rates will be based upon the
latest bond sale at the time of the final assessment hearing.
SANITARY SEWER: It is proposed to assess the total cost of lateral sanitary
sewer on an area basis to the benefited lot and outlots in Eagandale LeMay
Lake 2nd Addition. Trunk area sanitary sewer was previously assessed.
WATER MAIN: It is proposed to assess the total cost of lateral water main on
an area basis to the benefited lot and outlots in Eagandale LeMay Lake 2nd Ad-
dition. In addition, it is proposed to upgrade the trunk area water assess -
Page 3.
4308d
Z/
previously levied at the multiple family rate to a
ment from that which was p Y
ould be determined based
commercial/ industrial rate. This difference which w
on the 1986 Trunk Area Assessment Rates and would be assessed to a portion of
Parcel 020-26, 030-26 and 010-04 as shown on the attached drawing.
STOP R: It is proposed to assess the -total cost of lateral storm sewer
Eagandale LeMay Lake 2nd
on an area basis to the benefited lot and outlots in
Addition. Trunk area storm sewer was previously assessed.
STREET: It is proposed to assess the total cost of street including sidewalk
on an area basis to the benefited lot and outlots in Eagandale LeMay Lake 2nd
•
Addition.
4308d
Page 4.
Z?2
•
REVENUE: Revenue sources to cover the cost of this project are as follows:
C. STORM SEWER
Lateral $ 65,460
Lateral Assessment $ 65,460
$ 65,460 $ 65,460 - 0 -
E. STREET
Lateral $153,270
Lateral Assessment $153,270
$153,270 $153,270 - 0 -
The trunk fund balance for this project is +$16,488.
43084
Page 5.
y3
Project
Cost
Revenue Balance
A. SANITARY SEWER
Lateral
$ 25,650
Lateral Assessment
$
25,650
$ 25,650
$
25,650 - 0 -
B. WATER MAIN
Lateral
$ 59,700
®
Lateral Assessment
$
59,700
Trunk Area Upgrade Assessment
16,488
$ 59,700
$
76,188 +$16,488
C. STORM SEWER
Lateral $ 65,460
Lateral Assessment $ 65,460
$ 65,460 $ 65,460 - 0 -
E. STREET
Lateral $153,270
Lateral Assessment $153,270
$153,270 $153,270 - 0 -
The trunk fund balance for this project is +$16,488.
43084
Page 5.
y3
PROJECT SCHEDULE
Present Feasibility Report April 15, 1986
Public Hearing May 20, 1986
Approve Plans & Specifications May 20, 1986
Open Bids/Award Contract June 17, 1986
Construction Completion Fall, 1986
Final Assessment Hearing Spring, 1987
First Payment Due with Real Estate Taxes May, 1988
Page 6.
43084
'Z C/
APPENDIX A
PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE
EAGANDALE LEMAY LAKE 2ND ADDITION
UTILITY AND STREET IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT NO. 474
4308d
TOTAL WATER MAIN .................................. $ 59,700
Page 7.
z5
A. SANITARY SEWER
620
Lin.ft.
8" PVC Sanitary sewer @ $13.00/lin.ft.
$ 8,060
140
Lin.ft.
6" PVC Sanitary sewer @ $8.00/lin.ft.
1,120
5
Each
Std. 4' dia. MH w/cstg. @ $950.00/each
4,750
30
Lin.ft.
MH depth greater than 8' dp. @ $70.00/lin.ft.
2,100
2
Each
Connect 8" PVC to existing sanitary sewer @_$500.00/ea.
1,000
100
Cu.yds.
Rock stabilization below pipe @ $10.00/cu.yd.
1,000
•
760
Lin.ft.
Mechanical trench compaction @ $1.00/lin.ft.
760
Total
$ 18,790
+52 Contingencies
940
$ 19,730
+302 Legal, Engrng., Admin. 6 Bond Interest
5,920
TOTAL SANITARY SEWER ...............................
$ 25,650
B. WATER MAIN
1,600
Lin.ft.
8" DIP Water main in pl. @ $15.00/lin.ft.
$ 24,000
10
Lin.ft.
6" DIP Water main in pl. @ $12.00/lin.ft.
120
2
Each
Hydrant @ $1,000.00/each
2,000
®
4
Each
8" Resilient wedge gate valve 6 box @ $450.00/each
1;800
8,000
Lbs.
Fittings in pl. @ $1.50/lb.
12,000
2
Each
Connect 8" DIP to existing water main @ $600.00/ea.
1,200
100
Cu.yds.
Rock stabilization below pipe @ $10.00/cu.yd.
1,000
1,610
Lin.ft.
Mechanical trench compaction @ $1.00/lin.ft.
1,610
Total
$ 43,730
+52 Contingencies
2,190
$ 45,920
+302 Legal, Engrng., Admin. 5 Bond Interest
13,780
4308d
TOTAL WATER MAIN .................................. $ 59,700
Page 7.
z5
C. STORM SEWER
450
Lin.ft.
24" RCP Storm sewer @ $36.00/lin.ft.
$
16,200
160
Lin.ft.
21" RCP Storm sewer @ $32.00/lin.ft.
5,120
175
Lin.ft.
18" RCP Storm sewer @ $26.00/lin.ft.
4,550
350
Lin.ft.
15" RCP Storm sewer @ $22.00/lin.ft.
7,700 .
6
Each
Std. 4' dia. MH w/cstg. @ $1,200.00/each
7,200 .
1
Each
Std. CB MH w/cstg. @ $900.00/each
900
3
Each
Std. CB w/cstg. @ $850.00/each
2,550
1
Each
Relocate existing CB @ $700.00/each
700
1
Each
15" RCP flared end w/trash guard @ $500.00/each
500
8
Cu.yds.
Rip rap @ $50.00/cu. yd. _' — — -- ---
400
100
Cu.yds.
Rock stabilization below pipe @ $10.00/cu.yd.
1,000 40
1,135
Lin.ft.
Mechanical trench compaction @ $1.00/lin.ft.
1,135
Total
$
47,955
+5% Contingencies
2,395
$
50,350
+30G Legal, Engrng., Admin. 6 Bond Interest
15,110
TOTAL STORM SEWER .................................
$
65,460
•
43084 Page 8.
76
D. STREET
6,760
Sq.yds.
Subgrade preparation @ $0.50/sq.yd.
$ 3,380
200
Cu.yds.
Select granular borrow @ $6.00/cu.yd.
1,200
700
Cu.yds.
Subgrade correction @$3.00/cu.yd.
2,100
150
Lin.ft.
Remove concrete curb 6 gutter @ $2.00/lin.ft.
300
600
Sq.yds.
Remove bituminous pavement @ $1.00/sq.yd.
600
3,300
Ton
Class 5 100% crushed quarry rock @ $7.00/ton
23,100
1,060
Ton
2331 Bituminous base course @ $11.00/ton
11,660
530
Ton
2341 Bituminous wear course @ $13.00/ton
6,890
85
Ton
Bituminous material for mixture @ $200.00/ton
17,000
300
Gal.
Bituminous material for tack coat @ $1.50/gal.
450
3,200
Lin.ft.
B618 concrete curb 5 gutter @ $5.00/lin.ft.
16,000
9,500
Sq.ft.
Concrete sidewalk (5' wide) @ $2.00/sq.ft.
19,000
4,300
Sq.yds.
Sod w/3" topsoil @ $2.00/sq.yd.
8,600
2.0
Acres
Seed with mulch 6 fertilizer @ $1,000.00/Ac.
2,000
Total
$112,280
+5% Contingencies
5,620
$117,,900
+30% Legal, Engrng., Admin. 6 Bond Interest
35,370
TOTAL STREET .....................................
$153,270
is
Page 9.
4308d
'�-7
APPENDIX B
PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL
EAGANDALE LEMAY LAKE 2ND ADDITION
UTILITY AND STREET IMPROVEMENT
PROJECT NO. 474
A. SANITARY SEWER
Parcel
4.36
Ac. $ 811
$ 3,534
Outlot A
8.04
Total
Description
Outlot B
Area
Ac. 811
Cost/Ac.
Assessment
LEMAY LAKE 2ND
ADDITION
$ 16,488
Lot 1, Block 1
4.36
Ac.
$1,261
$
5,498
Outlot A
8.04
Ac.
1,261
10,139
Outlot B
7.94
Ac.
1,261
10,013
20.34
Ac.
$
25,650
B. WATER MAIN
a) Lateral
LEMAY LAKE 2ND
ADDITION
Lot 1, Block 1
4.36
Ac.
$2,935
$
12,797
Outlot A
8.04
Ac.
2,935
23,598
Outlot B
7.94
Ac.
2,935
23,305
20.34
Ac.
$
59,700
b) Trunk Area Upgrading
N 1/2, SECTION
10
Parcel 010-04
0.14
Ac.
$1,830/Ac.(I)
$
256
Parcel 020-26
3.44
Ac.
1,830/Ac.
6,295
Parcel 030-26
5.43
Ac.
1,830/Ac.
9,937
$ 16,488
LEMAY LAKE 2ND ADDITION
Lot 1, Block 1
4.36
Ac. $ 811
$ 3,534
Outlot A
8.04
Ac. 811
6,517
Outlot B
7.94
Ac. 811
6,437
20.34
Ac.
$ 16,488
(1) Rate determined by difference of 1986 commercial/industrial rate and resi—
dential rate ($3,020/Ac. —$1,190/Ac. = $1,830/Ac.)
Page 10.
4308d 7 �
•
C. STORM SEWER
Total
Parcel
Area
Cost/Ac.
Assessment
Description
LEMAY LAKE 2ND ADDITION
$ 14,032
4.36
Ac.
$3,218
Lot 1, Block 1
3,218
25,875
Outlot A
8.04
Ac.
3,218
25,553
7.94
Ac_
Outlot B
$ 65,460
20.34
Ac.
D. STREET
LEMAY LAKE 2ND ADDITION
$ 32,854
4.36
Ac.
$7,535
Lot 1, Block 1
-7,535 "–
— 60,585
8.04
Ac.
• Outlot A
7.94
Ac.
7,535
59,831
Outlot B
$153,270
20.34
Ac.
•
4308d
Page 11.
I :•
SUMMARY
PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL
EAGANDALE LEMAY LAKE 2ND ADDITION
PROJECT NO. 474
Parcel
Water Main
Sanitary
Trunk
Storm
Total
Description
Sewer
Lateral
Area
Sewer
Street
Assessment
EAGANDALE LEMAY
LAKE 2ND ADDITION
Lot 1, Blk. 1
$ 5,498
$12,797
$3,534
^$14,032
$32,854
$ 68,715
Outlot A
10,139
23,598
6,517
25,875
60,585
126,714
OuYlot B
10,013
23,305
6,437
25,553
59,831
125,139
Page 12.
4308d
EAGANDALE CENTER
1 i
1 1
1 �
, 1
1 1
LONE
PARK f'•7
____----------___--------------------- ___-
1
LAKE
010-57
-------------------- �---
OUTLOT A
1 ,
1
'! as
' d d
r
/
t i
t 1
PROPOSED B°
i
�p
SANITARY SEWER
f
A\O�
0 100, 200'
/ ' Gropnic Scale in Feet
V ooh
9
p
�
III
P�
pop �5
; ;
U
LAKE
010-57
-------------------- �---
OUTLOT A
1 ,
1
'! as
' d d
r
/
t i
t 1
EAGANDALE LEMAY LAKE 2nd ADDITION
SANITARY SEWER
PROJECT No. 474
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
3/
SONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK
& ASSOCIATES, INC.
Consulting Engineers
St. Paul. Minn.
Date: Aprl1, 1986
Comm. 49390 11 FIG. No.
PROPOSED B°
i
`
SANITARY SEWER
f
0 100, 200'
/ ' Gropnic Scale in Feet
9
I i
III
w' •
; ;
U
a.
LOT I
i
BLOCK I
LU 11
'
in i
Q, I'
PROPOSED 8"
SANITARY SEWER
t r
/ r
010-02
010-01
r
OUTLOT B
,/ i/
010-05
EAGANDALE LEMAY LAKE 2nd ADDITION
SANITARY SEWER
PROJECT No. 474
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
3/
SONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK
& ASSOCIATES, INC.
Consulting Engineers
St. Paul. Minn.
Date: Aprl1, 1986
Comm. 49390 11 FIG. No.
i EAGANOALE CENTER /NOUSTR AL PARK 11'
LONE 0 K IROAD j
---------------------------------------------
,
------,
---------------
�� 11 OUTLOT A
\ , ,
PROPOSED 8"
�. WATER MAIN
.//0 / 0 100 200'
I ; Gropric Smle in Feel
w �I
U
(Li 1
0- LOT I BLOCK I
/ !
1 0� J
IV QO Q i1 I % / `I
Il
LLJ
I it
gyp. 1/ 41 / ,• / "/
,
010-i 2
LEVA Y LAKE
I,I/
010-57 OUTLOT 8 010-05
EAGANDALE LEMAY LAKE 2nd ADDITION DONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK
& ASSOCIATES, INC.
WATER MAIN Consulting Engineers
PROJECT No. 474 St. ,Paul. Minn.
EAGAN. MINNESOTA at®• ApliL,1986 FIG. No, 2
Comm. 49390 11
•
EAGANDALE UWPV KH
hVVVSrR 4L AN
LONE 0 K ROAD
01042
EAGANDALE LEMAY LAKE 2nd ADDITION
ASSESSEMENTS
PROJECT No. 474
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
�53
BONESTROO, ROSENE. ANDERLIK
& ASSOCIATES, INC.
Consulting Engineers
St. Paul, Minn.
Date: AprM. 1966
Comm. 49390 FIG. No. 3
11
EAGANDALE CENTER
a—�
LEMAY LAKE
010-57
LONE
PARK
AD F
l •7
------------
I ,
A 00\
P
�
OUTLOT A
�; ..
LEMAY LAKE
010-57
LONE
PARK
AD F
i
EAGANDALE LEMAY LAKE 2nd ADDITION
STORM SEWER
PROJECT No. 474
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK
& ASSOCIATES, INC.
Consulting Engineers
St. Paul. Minn.
Date: Ap'iL 1986
Comm. 49390
FIG. No. 4
l •7
------------
I ,
i
EAGANDALE LEMAY LAKE 2nd ADDITION
STORM SEWER
PROJECT No. 474
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK
& ASSOCIATES, INC.
Consulting Engineers
St. Paul. Minn.
Date: Ap'iL 1986
Comm. 49390
FIG. No. 4
------------
OUTLOT A
�; ..
ROPOSED
STORM SEWER
+ ��
I'D 100' 200'
Gropnic Srule in Feei
4-1
I
U
'
0-
I
'
LOT 1
� I
I
ti
BLOCK I
41
i
i I
w�;
24'
IPROPOSED
STORM SEWER
, / j ,
,
010-02
010-01
010-05
OUTLOT B
� � ,� ��
i
EAGANDALE LEMAY LAKE 2nd ADDITION
STORM SEWER
PROJECT No. 474
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK
& ASSOCIATES, INC.
Consulting Engineers
St. Paul. Minn.
Date: Ap'iL 1986
Comm. 49390
FIG. No. 4
i `i EAGANDALE CENTER /NDUSTRAL PARK
LONE OAK ROAD
--------------------------------------------------------
1
-----------------
I I I I
I , I
I I
I � �
I OUTLOT A
V
I` PROPOSED 5' WIDE I '
CONCRETE SIDEWALK i
I i
PROPOSED STREET
IMPROVEMENTS
l36' F -FI i 0 100' 200'
I I
I
I Gropnic Style in Feel
i
I I I if
'
1
w
Q I I I i i
v a Lor I it ;
vp i BLOCK 1 I ;/
w f
y �t� J
REVE
Z I. y�CUL-DE-SAC
Q w I � �•,
I
RECONSTRUCT
DRIVEWAY i'
LEMAY LAKE 010 02
/
010-01
010-57 JII OUTLOT B 010-05
EAGANDALE LEMAY LAKE 2nd ADDITION
STREET IMPROVEMENTS
PROJECT No. 474
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
35
SONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK
& ASSOCIATES, INC.
Consulting Engineers
St. Paul. Minn.
Date; April, 1986
Comm. 49390 11 FIG. NO. 5
Agenda Information Memo
May 21, 1986, City Council Meeting
Page Thirteen
SPERRY TIF
B. Public Hearing for Consideration and Review of the Sperry Tax
Increment Financing Plan --The City Administrator and Director of
Finance have held several meetings—with representatives of the
Sperry Corporation to finalize the development program document
and tax increment financing plan for Economic Development District
#1. The City Administrator explained at the last City Council
meeting held on May 6, that a problem had arisen regarding
separate tax parcels as it relates to the Sperry tax increment
financing plan. There was some concern that platting may be
required in order to establish a separate taxing district for the
new project that would allow the increment to properly retire the
tax increment bonds. Since that City Council meeting, the Director
of Assessing for Dakota County has allowed the new building a
separate tax parcel description which will allow the i'•ncrement to
function properly. The City Administrator presented the types of
uses that are agreeable by the City Council for inclusion in the
tax increment financing plan. Screening of the building was
eliminated. The following is a cost breakdown for the project:
Discount
$6,963
Capitalized Interest
63,555
Issuance
7,000
Park Trail
32,000
Signals
55,000
Storm Drainage
139,000
Water Distribution
83,800
Sanitary Lines
48,000
Fire Loop
•
125,000
Irrigation/Hydrants
60,000
On -Site Loop Road
45,000
$665,318
The difference which is estimated at $34,682 can be applied to
engineering and administrative expenses that were incurred for the
design of the aforementioned project cost. If the project costs
exceed the $700,000, the Sperry Corporation will be required to
fund the difference,. All projects that are financed by the use of
tax increment bonds must be publicly bid by the City. The City
and Sperry Corporation will enter into various agreements that
cover such items as cost overruns, inspection and project coordina-
tion and guarantees that an adequate tax increment will be gener-
ated if the Sperry Corporation is sold in the future.
3b
Agenda Information Memo
May 21, 1986, City Council Meeting
Page Fourteen
A copy of the revised development program and' tax increment
financing plan for Economic Development District #1 are enclosed
for City Council review on pages 39 through.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THISITEM: Close the public hearing
with final action taken at the June 17, 1986, City Council meeting
to adopt the development program and tax increment financing plan
for the Sperry project. (The reason for no action until June 17
allows the 30 -day review by Dakota County and Independent School
District #197 to be satisfied.
•
37
•
CITY OF EAGAN, MINNESOTA
Tax Increment Financing Plan
Economic Development District #1
May 6, 1986
39
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Pace
INTRODUCTION .............................................. 1
BACKGROUND
................................................
1
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM
.......................................
Objectives
1
...........................................
1
Project Description ..................................
2
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING �......................
2
Statutory Authorization ..............................
2
Basis for Findings
...................................
3
District'Certification and Duration of Tax
Increment Financing District .......................
3
Prior Planned Improvements ...........................
4
Original Assessed Value ...............................
4
Bonded Indebtedness
..................................
4
Estimated Captured Assessed Value and Tax Increment ..
4
Estimated Sources,and Uses of Funds ..................
5
Uses of Tax Increment
5
................................
Additional Financings .................................
5
Fiscal Disparities
...................................
6
Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions .................
6
EXHIBIT
A - Development Program for Economic Development
District No. 1 ................................... A-1
J�
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT No. 1
CITY OF EAGAN, MINNESOTA
INTRODUCTION
This Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "Plan") has been
prepared by the City of Eagan, Minnesota (the "City") under the
requirements of the Minnesota Tax Increment Financing Act (the
"Act"), Minnesota Statutes, Sections 273.71-273.78. The City
herein proposes and describes the. establishment of a Tax Incre-
ment Financing District within the coterminous Economic Develop-
ment District No. 1, for purposes of financing public improve-
ments required to support a major private -sector development,
® consisting of a proposal by Sperry Corporation to construct and
operate a 295,000 square foot office and computer center and
related facilities (the "Improvements").
BACKGROUND
The City Council has called for a public hearing on the
formation of both Economic Development District No. 1 and the Tax
Increment Financing District, for May 21, 1986. On June 17, 1986,
subject to public input, the Council will consider both the
Development Program and the Tax Increment Financing Plan. Economic
Development District No. 1 is being established as a Development
District pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 472A.
A copy of the proposed Development Program for Economic
Development District No. 1 and a legal description of the
® District are attached as an, Exhibit to this Plan and are hereby
incorporated by reference as part of this Plan.
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM
Objectives
The objectives sought to be accomplished by the City in
establishing Economic Development District No. 1 are as follows:
1. To promote and secure the prompt development of a
major office and technology facility contributing to the tax
base of the City and promoting employment opportunities in a
manner consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan.
2. To reduce the cost of
manner permitting the completion
economic basis.
E
development of property in a
of a facility on an
3. To secure the construction and provide monies for
the payment of the costs of public improvements in and
adjacent to the District, which are necessary for the orderly
and complete development of the District in a manner which
will promote the attractiveness of the area and promote
public safety.
4. To promote economic development which will add to
the employment opportunities in the community, and add to
the tax base of the community by increasing taxable values
and increasing the need for commercial development.
Project Description
The actions expected to be taken by the City within the
Economic Development District No. 1 include: acquisition and in-
stallation of traffic signals, construction of new bicycle paths,
construction of new utility laterals (including water, sanitary
and storm sewers) and other project improvements consistent with
the objectives of the Development Program. Further details of
the specific public actions are included in the Development
Program of the Project, appended to this Plan. No land will be
acquired by the City in connection with the Development Program.
No contracts have been entered into at this time in connection
with any such development activities.
Anticipated private developments within Economic
Development District No. 1 include the construction and operation
of a 295,000 square foot office and computer center by Sperry
Corporation, the owners of the property within the District. It
is expected that construction on this Development will commence
in the summer of 1986, and be completed at the end of 1987, and •
have,a final estimated market value of approximately $15,100,000.
Further details of this project are included in the Development
Program of the Project, appended to this Plan.
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING
Statutory Authorization
Pursuant to the provisions of the Act, the City is
authorized to create the Tax Increment Financing District
coterminous with Economic Development District No. 1, to issue
the Bonds to finance public improvements within the Project for
the purpose of stimulating private development and to utilize tax
increments captured from the Tax Increment Financing District due
to new private development to meet debt service obligations on
these Bonds.
2 -
Basis for Findings
The City has established the following facts:
a) The parcel of land within the District (as identi-
fied in Exhibit A) is owned by Sperry Corporation. With the
inducement, provided by the Development Program and the offer
of a $1 million low-interest loan by the State of. Minnesota,
Sperry Corporation is expected to construct the Development.
The Development is expected to have a value of approximately
$15,100,000 and have approximately 700 employees. The Tax
Increment Financing District therefore qualifies as an
"Economic Development" district under Statutes 273.73,
Subdivision 12.
® b) The Development Program for Economic Development
District No. 1, and this Plan, have been reviewed by the
Planning Commission of the City, and found to be in
conformance with the Comprehensive Guide Plan of the City.
c) The opportunity and feasibility for development of
Economic Development District No. 1 by private parties is
maximized through the use of tax increment financing. Given
the unavailability of funding from other governmental
sources other than the $1 million low-interest loan offered
by the State of Minnesota and the necessity of the improve-
ments to be constructed as an inducement to the Development,
the use of tax increment financing will maximize the
development opportunities within Economic Development
District No. 1.
d) Pursuant to Section 273.76, Subdivision 3, of the
® Act, the City elects the method of tax increment computation
as defined in clause (b), whereby the contribution ratio for
the City under the Fiscal Disparities requirements (Chapter
473F) will be applied against commercial/industrial
properties within the Tax Increment Financing District.
District Certification and Duration of Tax Increment Financing
District
The City expects to request a certification of this
District in 1986, following a scheduled public hearing on May 21,
1986, and following a thirty -day review period by Dakota County
and affected school districts.
As an Economic Development Tax Increment Financing
District, the maximum life of the District is the lesser of (i)
eight years from the date of collection of the first increment,
which is expected to be July, 1988, or (ii) 10 years from the
4-
- 3 -
date of approval of this Tax Increment Financing Plan, which is
expected to be June 17, 1986. The City retains the option of
terminating the District upon the redemption of the Bonds.
Prior Planned Improvements
No building permits have been issued by the City for
any parcels within the Tax Increment Financing District, in the
first fifteen months of the eighteen month time period preceding
the expected date of approval of the Tax Increment Financing
District by the City.
Oriainal Assessed Value
It is anticipated that the District will be approved on
June 17, 1986, and that certification will be requested of the
Dakota County Auditor soon thereafter. The Original Assessed
Value of the District will therefore be the value assessed in
1986 for taxes payable in 1987. The original assessed valuation
of the District has not yet been determined because the creation
of the District will require identification of a new tax parcel,
but it is expected that the original assessed value will not
exceed $2 million at any time follotiing the adjustments required
by Section 273.76, Minnesota Statutes. Pursuant to Section
273.76, Minnesota Statutes, the Original Assessed Value of the
District for each of the next 10 years will be required to be
adjusted annually by the average percentage increase in the
assessed valuation of the property included in the District
during the previous five years.
Bonded Indebtedness
It is currently anticipated that the City will issue
the Bonds in a principal amount not to exceed $700,000. This
amount includes enough capitalized interest to meet debt service
obligations up to the point that sufficient tax increments are
estimated to be generated to meet debt service obligations.
Estimated Captured Assessed Value and Tax Increment
Current financial projections for the Tax Increment
Financing District, based on assumptions that include an estimated
final market value of the Improvements of $15,100,000, an estimated
assessed valuation of the Improvements of $6,493,000, a constant
mill rate of 102.138 mills, a fiscal disparities contribution
ratio of 28.8877%, and the termination of the District in the
year 1996, suggest that the total tax increment to be generated
by the District will equal at least $400,000, of which $200,000
will be retained by the City for payment of debt service on the
Bonds. Assuming no inflation in property values after the
0
- 4 -
Improvement's initial assessment, it is estimated that the
District will have an annual Captured Assessed Values following
completion of the Improvement $6,493,000, less any adjustment
required by Section 273.76, Minnesota Statutes.
Estimated Uses of Funds
It is estimated that the proceeds of the Bonds will be
expended approximately as follows:
Uses:
Capitalized interest $ 63,555
Construction Costs for
Improvements
Traffic Signals $ 55,000
® Bike Trail 32,000
Utilities and Other 535,482
622,482
Costs of Issuance
Bond Discount 7,000
Bond Discount 6,963
$700,000
Uses of Tax Increments
Under Section 273.75, Subdivision 4, of the Act, the
City will use the tax increments generated from the Captured
Assessed Value of the District to pay the principal and interest
on the Bonds issued to finance the Improvements. Pursuant to
Section 273.75, Subdivision 2, of the Act, the City elects to
retain 100°% of all increments collected, however, to the extent
that receipts of tax increment exceed the debt service require-
ments for the bonds to be issued an amount up to 50% of the
increments are expected to be returned to the County Auditor for
distribution to affected taxing jurisdictions.
Notwithstanding the above, the City retains the option,
at any time during the life of the District, to retain some
portion less than 100% of the annual tax increment, and pass on
the remaining portion to the other taxing jurisdictions.
The City also retains the option, pursuant to Section
273.74, Subdivision 4, of modifying this Plan to include further
expenditures of tax increments for additional public purposes.
Additional Financings
The City presently anticipates no other additional
financing for the District.'
0
- 5 -
Fiscal Disparities
Pursuant to Section 273.76, Subdivision 3 of the Act,
the City elects to utilize the method of computing Captured
Assessed Value as defined under clause (b).
Impact on Other Taxing Jurisdictions
Because the proposed Improvements are occurring con-
tingent on the City's provision of the improvements contemplated
by the Development Program as financed by tax increments, it is
determined that this Tax Increment Financing District will have
no impact on other taxing jurisdiction during the life of the
District. The other jurisdictions will continue to receive
property taxes from the District based on the Original Assessed
Value, as adjusted for inflation in accordance with Section
273.76, Subd. 1 of the Act. At the termination of the District,
the other taxing jurisdictions will receive the entire assessed
value of the new development as part of their tax base.
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM
EAGAN TAX INCREMENT PROJECT
DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 1
A. STATEMENT OF INTENT
It is the intent of the City of Eagan to organize a
development district and undertake a development program within
the meaning of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 472A, and to designate
the project area as Development District No. '1 (the "District")
for purposes of carrying out the improvements hereinafter
described and establishing the project area as a tax increment
financing district pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 273.71
to 273.78, in the financing of the -improvements herein—described.
In particular, there has been presented to the City a plan for
the construction of certain improvements in order to induce the
construction of an office and computer center to provide
employment opportunities and enhance the tax base of the City.
B. STATEMENT OF NEED
There is a need for new development in the City to
provide employment opportunities, to increase the tax base and to
improve the general economy of the state and the City. This need
can be accomplished through the attraction of commercial and
industrial development. In the case of the District, significant
development can be attracted by the Program described herein.
The action herein proposed to be taken by the City is found to
have a public purpose in accordance with Chapter 472A, Minnesota
Statutes, and is necessary to meet those needs.
C. AUTHORITY TO ESTABLISH A TAX INCREMENT DISTRICT AND TO
IMPLEMENT A DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.
The City has power to establish a tax increment
financing district under Minnesota Statutes, Sections 273.71 to
273.78, and to undertake development programs as defined in
Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 472A. The City has authority under
Minnesota Statutes, Section 472A.03 to acquire, construct, recon-
struct, improve, alter, extend, operate, maintain or promote
developments aimed at improving the physical facilities, quality
of life and quality of transportation.
D. DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM OBJECTIVES
The objectives sought to be accomplished by the City in
establishing its Development District No. 1 and in carrying out
the Development Program for the District are as follows:
1. To promote and secure the prompt development of a
major office and computer facility contributing to the tax
base of the City and promoting employment opportunities in a
manner consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan.
2. To reduce the cost of development of property in a
manner permitting the completion of the facility on an
economic basis.
3. To provide monies for the payment of the costs of
improvements in and adjacent to the District, which are
necessary for the orderly and complete development of the
District and which will provide public safety.
E. DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT ACTIVITIES
The objectives of this development district will be
accomplished through the following actions by the City:
1. Purchase and install traffic signals at the
intersection of Towerview Road and Pilot Knob Road and at
the future main entrance intersection opposite Jurdy Road on
Pilot Knob Road.
2. Construct bicycle trail improvement from Quarry
Hill Park to Pilot Knob Park through the District.
3. New installation of utilities, including water,
sanitary sewer -and storm sewer.'
4. Other project improvements within the Development
District which are consistent with the objectives of the •
Development Program, including fire loop, street, street
lighting and site improvements.
Sperry Corporation is expected to construct a 250,000
square foot office and computer facility in the northeast
portion of the District. This facility is expected to
employ approximately and to have a market value
upon completion of approximately $15,100,000.
F. LAND USE
All development on lands in Economic Development
District No. 1 will be subject to the following uses and
requirements.
1. Permitted Uses
Development District No. 1 is designated as Research
and Development on the adopted Comprehensive Plan, and any
5'7
A-2
•
•,
G
H
permitted use in such areas as defined by the Eagan Compre-
hensive Plan will be permitted, provided the use does not
have a significant adverse effect on surrounding uses in
terms of noise, traffic generation, congestion and
appearance as determined by the City. The "Research and
Development" classification provides special standards which
promote compatibility with adjacent residential uses.
2. Additional Regulations and Controls or
Restrictions to be Imposed.
a. All new development shall conform to the
applicable State and local codes and ordinances.
DESIGN STANDARDS
1. Site Design
Conformance with the Eagan Zoning Ordinance set forth
in the Eagan City Code must be complied with reference to all
site preparation, construction of buildings, parking areas,
etc., landscaping and all other provisions thereof.
2. Required Documents
The Public Works Director of the City of Eagan shall be
provided with all documents that he may require including,
but not limited to site plan, grading and storm drainage
plans, utility and lighting plan and all other he deems
necessary to determine the conformance of the proposed
development with the design standards.
3. Comprehensive Plan
The objectives of the City of Eagan Comprehensive Guide
Plan shall be adhered to in order to control the uses of the,
property, including economic viability, environmental impact,
community facilities, parks and open space and transportation.
LAND ACQUISITION
No properties to be acquired by the City in connection
with the Development Program.
I. RELOCATION OF DISPLACED PERSONS
There is no relocation contemplated in Development
District No. 1.
�_
A-3
J. MAINTENANCE OF PROJECT AREA
The City Administrator shall be responsible for the
administration of Development District No. 1 on behalf of the
City of Eagan.
K. GEOGRAPHIC MODIFICATION
In accordance with M.S.A. 273.74, Subd. 4, the geo-
graphic area of the District may be reduced but may not be
enlarged after five (5) years following the date of the
designation of the District. This 'District may, therefore, be
expanded until 1991. Geographic modification shall be in
accordance with M.S.A. 273.74.
L. ATTACHMENTS
There are attached hereto for further elucidation and
description, the following maps and drawings:
11
q
A-4
Agenda Information
May 21, 1986, City
Page Fifteen
Memo
Council Meeting
PRELMINARY PLAT/DEERFIELD ADDITION
A. Preliminary Plat for Deerfield Addition Containing 324 Apart-
ment Units on Approximately 40 Acres --At the May 6, 1986, City
Council meeting, action was taken to extend the Eagan 40 Planned
Development agreement for a period of three (3) years. The
preliminary plat for Deerfield Addition was also reviewed, and
given consideration by the City Council at the May 6 meeting.
Upon review, it was determined that the location and density
of apartment units as shown in the proposed Deerfield Addition
•is not consistent with the layout of units and density in the
approved Eagan 40 Planned Development. The developer was directed
to revise the plat so that the number of units as shown in each
of the three (3) parcels--idenified as parcels A, B and C --
do not exceed the maximums that were allowed when the Eagan
40 Planned Development was adopted. As an example, parcel A
had a maximum number of units at 16, Parcel B at 230, and Parcel
C at 92. The proposed' Deerfield Addition exceeded Parcel C
by approximately 90 units. The developer has modified' the proposed
Deerfield Addition an'3 for a copy of his new drawings and the
Planner's review, refer to pages Jam/ through &/ For a copy
of the parcel distribution of dwelling units as adopted in the
PUD agreement, refer; to page( 6. If any member of the City
Council has misplaced' any other report or additional information
that was distributed with the last City Council packet and
referenced as page •92 through 118, feel free to contact the
City Administrator's office and that information will be made
• available. The APC minutes are enclosed on pages 6.7,- and 63
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the
preliminary plat for Deerfield Addition as modified, or to give
consideration to additional review by the Advisory Planning
Commission at their next meeting.
�D
MEMO TO: THOMAS L HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR
FROM: DALE C RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER
DATE: MAY 15, 1986
SUBJECT: UPDATE ON THE EAGAN 40 PRELIMINARY PLAT a PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
From the. May 6, 1986, minutes, staff is trying to address the
concerns of the City Council for the Eagan 40 Planned Development.
The first issue that was a concern was in regard to the planned
development extension. According to the minutes, the extension was
approved on a 3 to 2 vote and it was questioned whether a 4/5th's
vote is required. The City Attorney's office is reviewing this
issue and will provide a recommendation or answer to the City
Council on May 21.
The second issue was in regard to the density of the development in
• regard to the parcels or planned development agreement. Enclosed
with this memorandum is a copy of the Planned Development Agreement
which will allow each Councilmember to review and make his own
decision in regard to this agreement.
The last item the Planning Department would like to address is in
regard to the enclosed revised site plan submitted for the May 21
meeting. The applicants did take into account some of the Council's
concern regarding the density on the south side of Deerfield Road.
The revised plan now proposes to have three buildings of 36 units
each, or 108 units, on the south side of Deerfield Road or Parcel C.
From the original plan submitted, this would be 72 units less than
what was originally submitted to the Planning Commission and the
City Council. Two buildings have been transferred to the north side
of Deerfield Road or Parcel B. The overall density has remained the
same .of 324 on Parcels B and C, and 14 units are still being
proposed for Parcel A. Therefore, the densities have been
transferred but not reduced in the revised plan. The one negative
impact. in shifting the units north is that it appears that more
grading will be required with the new 'plan submitted than the
original plan.
The applicants would like to make a presentation to the City
Council regarding the changes and shifts which have occurred from
the original plan to the revised and, also, some background into the
product of which they would like to provide on this site. Mr.
Sellegren has indicated to staff that he feels this presentation is
vital in order to have a good understanding of the development which
is being proposed.
Hopefully, this addresses the issues that were brought up at the May
6 meeting and if anyone has any questions or would like additional
information, please feel free to con''act us so this information can
be provided.
TUy Planner
DCR/jj
Enclosure �/
21
=I.
IJf�7 N� ILIA%
---------- (DIPFLEY ROAD)
CO. no. —
90\
OUTLOT D /
`Ot
MT M
I I
/
�Y
PUD
PUD
OV LCH C I �• �Ce '
I \.•R
^•• James R Hill incCXIRLES 0. NENRICN
_ / `DEEPFlELD pEVELOPNENT
Ell
e _ _ _ nu cuma�s wrvE PRELWINARY pull=
UT CI
iIIme / ENGINEERS / SIMVEYDfS EAO�M IO�LTD
pf111,L YR �Ni� C
I
RECEIVED
MAY 1 3
5� �
ce
I
III;
---------- IDIFFLEY ROAD) --- _----_----
....__r—
II CO. RD. 30 +
L17BLDG B
36 DU
p� o
m. (moi � �L�P`- \�\. �I :' �•i
�\ C
- ` R IV
12.8 AC.
pJ PHASE 3
6 1
/
PHASE S5Ec
R IV
/ , I
3.4 AC.
PHASE 2��
BIpD S , 9I
36 UU
— � ]e STALL /
fEHF �" LI_ is
+ 7
i LLS PI
p� 3�OG3 / � •�
III
.
PHASE 2
PUD
/amesrc. run, Inc.
"" -� MANNERS / Ems /SURVEYORS
R III
S.] AC.
PHASE 1
PUD
OUT,OT A
.
PHASE 4
F_a
m 1- fI { R@•...
PUD
M, NAND
i.
I �
I
I. 41
PUD /
LGT
"a",
a I /
SITE PLAN { PHASING !••I I
1 V" -
CHARLES R. HENRICH
DEERFIELD DF.VELOF
.11. e ... L. onne
SITE PLAN { PHASING !••I I
CHARLES R. HENRICH
DEERFIELD DF.VELOF
.11. e ... L. onne
EDINA. VA.
EAGI<D
SITE PLAN { PHASING !••I I
r
-
���—
_ r - _. - (OIFFLET ROAD)
36 DU
�_
�. �] o wr �l-'� 1r• ,� ti 0 / 1 1 Y.f A 111 ` '!
9mw 1/ x a,i r xxAc.
PHASE 4 I
41 a It
PUD
n IV
—'. air _ _, �PH�S� .2 I •/ .�¢� 6" �- '\ `\
PDD
36 LLS
t\ ,,
go
•` A % , '!0e' ter,..: l; �`��� I; ` \�. L ,...�� I ,/'~/ �� ��'/ i -
Jamul ill, Inc. CNARLES R. MENRIOH PEER DEVELOPMENT PRELIMINARY
V IF exNnFAex Axne N AO LTO ORAOINO PLAN
PLANNERS ®NEERSISURVE�ORS Foix., Pn, uFxF
r
AMENDED EAGAN ESTATES
PLANNED -DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
THIS AMENDED AGREEMENT is made this pFf day of Ov �,
1982, by and between the CITY OF EAGAN, Dakota County, Minnesota (City), and
Eagan 40, a limited partnership, with address at 313 Skyway Building, St.,
Paul, Minnesota (Developer) and the Southworth Corporation and William C.
Morton & Sons, Inc. (Owners).
W I T H E S S E T H:
WHEREAS, Owners, Developer and. the City have executed the Agreement
Concerning Planned Development In the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota„
(Agreement) dated November 5, 1975, regarding a Planned Development in Eagan
known as Eagan Estates (the Development); and,
® WHEREAS, the Developer had requested that the name of the Development be
changed to Eagan 40 Planned Development and that the land use be changed
according to Exhibit "A" attached hereto; and,
WHEREAS, the parties desire to amend the Planned Development Agreement to
change the name of the development to Eagan 40 Planned Development, to allow
338 residential units, to revise the Land Use Plan to provide for R-3 and R-4
use, and to generally upgrade the agreement to present standards;
WHEREAS, Developer and Owner have agreed that Developer may proceed with
the Development and terms of this Agreement; and,
WHEREAS, it is the intention of Developer to proceed with the Development
whereby the Subject .Land will be subdivided pursuant to Minnesota Statutes,
Chapters 505 and 462, and the Subdivision Ordinances of Eagan providing for
the platting of land and to obtain final approval from Eagan for plats as the
Development progresses;
® WHEREAS, Developer proposes a Planned Development in Eagan to be known as
EAGAN 40 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT containing 40 acres more or less, and legally
described as the Northeast one-quarter (NE 1/4) of the Northwest, one-quarter
(NW 1/4) of Section 28, Township 27, Range 23, more particuiarly shown in
Exhibits A, B, C, and Amended Exhibit "D" attached hereto and incorporated
herein by reference, and
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby agreed by and between the parties hereto as
follows:
1. Development. Owner intends to have Developer develop the Subject
Land substantially in accordance with the general plans shown on the Exhibits
and Eagan agrees to permit the Development subject to obtaining final approval
for each plat of the Development from Eagan before proceeding with any work on
said plat, unless otherwise agreed by Eagan. In the event that the agreement
between the Owner and Developer relating to the development of the Subject
Land is terminated, and this Agreement has not been terminated, then wherever
Developer is designated herein Owner shall, upon written notice to Eagan, be
1
53
automatically substituted to and for Developer and be subject to all obliga-
tions, conditions, requirements, and provisions of the Developer, and be
entitled to all rights and benefits herein relating to Developer.
2. Exhibits. Said Exhibits attached and a part of this Agreement are:
Exhibit "A" - Sketch Plan (or preliminary plat)
Exhibit "B" - Staging Plan
Exhibit "C" - Parks and Circulation Plan
Exhibit "D" - Land Use Plan
3. Approval Ily Eagan. Eagan hereby approves the Development as shown in
the Exhibits; provided, however, that insofar as the Exhibits may vary from
the written terms of this Agreement, said written terms shall govern.
4. Term of Planned Development. The Developer represents that it will
complete the development of the entire 40 acres more or less, within ten (10)
years from the date of the original contract.and Eagan.therefore-limits its
approval to said ten (10) year period. Developer agrees that it will not
contest the withdrawal of said approval at the end of said ten (10) year
period. Developer may request two extensions of three (3) years each by
submitting a written request to Eagan at least 180 days prior to the succes-
sive anniversary dates of this Agreement. Eagan may in its sole discretion
approve or deny the requested three (3) year extension.
5. Rezoning. Eagan agrees to rezone said land to Planned Development.
6. Density. Density in said development shall be as more particularly
shown in Exhibit D; provided however, that the following specific conditions
shall apply with respect to density:
a. A maximum of 338 residential units shall be allowed.
b. However, in any event, overall density shall not exceed 8.5
units per acre.
7. Major Street Dedications. Developer agrees to dedicate, without cost •
to Eagan, the following width of right of way for major, minor, or collector
streets hereinafter described as shown on Exhibit "A", said dedication to be
made when requested by Eagan and in no event, later than the filing of the
final plat on the segments of said streets.
a. C.S.A.H. 30 - as required by city and county
b. All roads - 60 feet (full right -of -Way)
8. Major and Minor Street Access. The parties mutually recognize and
agree that it is the intent of the Developer to have only those accesses'to
abutting major and minor streets from said development as more particularly
shown on Exhibit "A" and further agrees that as final plats are presented to
permanently restrict access to those shown on Exhibit "A" or in the
alternative, to deliver recordable easements so restricting said access, to
Eagan; provided however, that if subsequent events, particularly development
on the opposite sides of said minor and major streets indicate that additional
accesses are advisable based on sound planning practice, Eagan agrees to
reasonably consider Developer's application for said additional accesses.
2
5V
part
ree that all
9. Assessments. The Ea an relatedlto the De elopmentushalliberassessed
r-required and installed by g
pursuant to Chapter 429 of Minnesota State Statutes.
10. Park, Trail and Pond Dedication. (a) Parks, trails, and ponds shall
be dedicated as follows: Developer and Owner Will dedicate to Eagan at the
time of final plat approval certain parts of the Subject Land as public parks,
trail easements, trailways or storm water holding areas (collectively,
Dedicated Areas). The Dedicated Areas are' shown generally on Exhibit "C".
The total acreage of Dedicated Areas, manner of dedication and credit given
pursuant to Eagan ordinances for required__ dedication are specified on Exhibit
"E". Developer and Owner will make such dedication for park land by warranty
deed and for a trailway or ponding area by a designation as such on the final
plat. Owner shall pay all assessments, levied or pending, prior to the
dedication under this paragraph. able seof dedicated
eli at d areas will
relevantbeunrestricted
except as required by appEagan
11. Sidewalks. Concrete sidewalks, in such widths and in such location
as required by the applicable ordinance of Eagan in effect at the time of
final plat approval, shall be constructed for lands within a plat
contemporaneously with the improvement of street within the plat and be paid
for by the Developer.
12. Street Lights. Developer agrees to provide and Eagan agrees to
accept a street lighting system for each plat pursuant to the applicable
ordinance in effect at the time of a final plat approval. The system 'shall be
subject to approval by Eagan and shall be implemented under the following
provisions:
(01) The Developer shall pay all chargesfor each light installed as
per the approved street lighting plan.
(02) The Developer shall pay all operating costs of the street
lighting system until the Development is go% completred and
accepted by the City of Eagan.
ating
® (03) will be billed equally Eto all homes oragan will elots rbenefited swhich
There I after the City of in the
subdivision, and the Developer will inform prospective
purchasers or homes or lots to this effect. The Developer
shall continue to be responsible for undeveloped lots
regardless of subsequent ownership.
13. PondinE Dedication. Developer agrees to dedicate easements for
ponding areas as shown on Exhibit "A" without cost to Eagan for public ponding
purposes when reasonably required for said purpose based on the recommendation
of the City Engineer; said dedication to be made without cost to Eagan.
14. Preservation of Trees. Developer agrees to comply with Eagan
Ordinances currently in effect related to preservation of trees and
specifically will exercise reasonable efforts in residential areas to save
mature, undiseased trees on the Subject Land which do not have tobe rem utilities el
for reasonable installation of buildings, streets , sidewalks,
drainage improvements and construction activities rated thereto. Developer
3
J�
agrees to mark trees to be saved over six (6) inches in diameter as measured
at a point two (2) feet above grade that are adjacent to construction areas
with a red band prior to any excavation, and to protect such trees by snow
fences or other suitable enclosures and notify Eagan when the enclosures are
completed prior to any excavation, if required by Eagan. Eagan recognizes
that development of those areas designated for nonresidential use on Exhibit
"D" will require extensive grading, filling and removal of trees. All
diseased trees shall be removed according to City ordinance requirements.
15. Retaining Walls. Parts of the Subject Land may be uneven with
respect to topography and it is generally the intent of both Eagan and
Developer to reasonably retain the existing topography consistent with
normal construction practices and necessities and Developer agrees to
building retaining walls pursuant to reasonable requests of Eagan as the
development progresses.
16. Screening. Coincidental with the submission of each plat for
final approval, Developer shall submit a landscape and screening plan for
any residential lots with a side yard or rear yard abutting a major or minor
arterial or collector street. Eagan may require reasonable landscaping and
screening of said lots abutting on such public streets at the expense of
Developer and where said screening is required, it shall be a part of the
Developer's Agreement required by Eagan for the plat and be completed prior
to release of the sudivision or landscape bond as provided in that
Agreement.
17. Compliance with City Ordinances. Developer and Owner agree to
comply with all Eagan City Council Ordinances.
18. Notices. Whenever in this Agreement it shall be required or
permitted that notice or demand be given or served by either party to this
Agreement to or on the other party, such notice or demand shall be delivered
personally or mailed by United States mail to the addresses hereinafter set
forth by certified mail (return receipt requested). Such notice or demand
shall be deemed timely given when delivered personally or when deposited in
the mail in accordance with the above. Notice sent by one party shall be
sent to the other two (2) parties. The addresses of the parties hereto are
as follows, until changed by notice given as above:
If to the CITY, at: City of Eagan
3795 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, Mn 55122
If to the OWNER, at: William C. Morton & Sons, Inc.
Attn: Craig R. Morton, President
6807 Washington Ave. So.
Minneapolis, MN 55435
If to the DEVELOPER, at: Eagan 40
c/o Mr. Daniel F. Dolan
650 Northern Federal Building
St. Paul, MN 55102
5�
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment as
of the day and year first above written.
Approved as to4CityAttorne
CITY OF EAGAN
Paul H. Hauge, Bea to Blomquist, Mayor
t
ATTEST
Llix
E. T
VanOverbeke, City Clerk
EAGAN 4 'a limitedd p�rship
Daniel F.Do an
® Its general partner
•
OWNERS:
WILLIAM C. MORTON &SSOOfN,S,,IINC.
BY:''/� �I
Craig -A. Morton
Its President
S7
Patricia L. Morton
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
SS
COUNTY OF DAKOTA )
On this '9?y day of ��;�1982, before me a Notary Public
within and for said County, personally appeared BEATTA BLOMQUIST and EUGENE
VANOVERBEKE to me personally known, who being each by me duly sworn, each
did say that they are respectively the Mayor and Clerk of the CITY OF EAGAN,
the municipality named in the foregoing instrument, and that the seal
affixed to said instrument was signed and sealed in behalf of said
municipality by authority of its City Council and said Mayor and Clerk
acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deed of said
municipality.
(S E A L
:?, 1 s3
STATE OF MINNESOTA• ,) ;,• - ti"•.•rnvo wx --,_- • . -- __ —
SS
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) •
On this 29th day of november , 1982, before me a Notary Public
within and for said County personally appeared CRAIG R. MORTON to me
personally known, who, being by me duly swears that he is the President of
the corporation named in the foregoing instrument, and that the corporation
does not have a corporate seal and that said instrument was signed and
sealed in behalf of said corporation by authority of its Board of Directors
and said CRAIG R. MORTON acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and
deed of the corporation.
DE1NI V. DAVIS
-- HCrAFT MMIC - da; nLSOTA
HENN-PINI COUNTY
d1•; congission expires May 3,19,78
F-lvvr*ea
) SS
COUNT OF Offi ase y )
On this /5�e day of 4A, 1982, before me a Notary Public •
within and for said County, personally appeared DANIEL F. DOLAN to me known
to be one of the general partners of the partnership that executed the
within instrument, and acknowledged to me that such partnership executed the
same.
STATE OF MINNESOTA ) L
, EO.'!N;E PAILVERSTEDT
) SS I.,.s NOTARY PUBLIC - MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) WASHINGTON COUNTY
My Commission Expires June 12, 1888
On this 29th day of November , 1982, before me, a t c
within and for said county, personally appeared PATRICIA L. MORTON, to me
known to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing
instrument, and acknowledged that she executed the same as her free act and
deed. --- +
DEAN T!. D,6 SIS
HENN-PIN mCCJNTY � //c/\/ 0�^--w's -•�/. l/ .
My commission expires May 3, 19Ca o
�Q
EXHIBIT "A" (SKETCH PLAN)
SY
Ceu�.rF� �.e.aL1 3-�.• ��.
Parcel
A
Parcel B 2.2 acres±
19.2 Acres ± Land use
Land use R-4 R-3
230 Dwelling Units 16 D.U.
c
pR��a
Q-� f•1.
jAleeass
Parcel c
13 acres ±
Land use R-3
92 Dwelling Units
R1
EXHIBIT "B - D"
Total units not to exceed 338
Z
Coi.tr.rE7 '�.epd SO
x
OO
}
Proposed traffic circulation
plan
PR6 ped
d eC 633
EXHIMT "C"
Note: Park dedication shall be cash at the amount determined
at the time of final plat application.
W
APC Minutes
April 22, 1986
EAGAN 40 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT - EXTENSION AND
DEERFIELD ADDITION - PRELIMINARY PLAT
Chairperson McCrea then opened the hearing for an extension of planned
development for Eagan 40 Planned Development and the preliminary plat of
Deerfield Addition containing 324 apartment units on approximately 40 acres
located in part of the northwest quarter of Section 28, at County Road 30 and
Thomas Lake Road. City Planner Runkle indicated that the extension of the
planned development should be considered prior to preliminary plat and gave a
brief history of the planned development. He indicated that a letter was
submitted by the developer requesting an extension of the PUD which was tabled
at the November 1985 PUD Review.
At this time, David Bohne arrived.
A revsion
to the
ubdivisio
nMarch n22,e1986.
d
ing
PUD's hadlbeen enactedSeffective
aCitydAttorneyoDavof
•
Assistant e
Keller advised that if the aeveloper had maae
a written request for extension
of PUD, it would help support the Advisory Planning Commission's
it
decision, if
should decide to recommend approval of
an extension of a PUD. An
appearance was made by Mr. Dan Dolan,
owner of the subject parcel. There were
no appearances by any members of the
general public. After some discussion,
member Hall moved, ana Voracek
seconded the motion to recommend a three-year
extension of the planned development. All
voted in favor except Chairperson
McCrea who voted nay.
Charles Hall then moved, McCrea seconded the motion to recommena approval
of the preliminary plat of Deerfield
Addition, containing 324 apartment units
on approximately 40 acres, subject to the following
conaitions:
1• The developer shall comply with all
standard engineering
recommenaations which apply.
2. The developer shall do the necessary grading at the southwest
of Thomas Lake
•
corner
Road and Diffley Road to provide for a minimum of a 400 foot
site distance.
3. If the utilities are installed under a public contract, then Council
must authorize the project before final plat approval.
4. This development shall dedicate the following right-of-way widths:
a. 65 feet half right-of-way for Diffley Road.
b. 80 feet full right-of-way for Thomas Lake Road.
C. 66 feet full right-of-way for Deerfield Road.
5. This development shall be responsible for dedicating a minimum of 20
foot width utility easement for water main and 30 feet utility and drainage
easement for sanitary ana storm sewer not within public right-of-way.
.0 v
2
APC Minutes
April 22, 1986
6. The development shall be required to obtain the necessary permits and
approvals from the following:
a. MPCA - Sanitary sewer extension permit.
b. Minnesota Dept, of Health - Water main approval.
c. Dakota County - Grading within right-of-way permit.
a. Williams Brothers Pipeline - Grading within easement permit.
7. This development will be responsible for its trunk area storm sewer,
future street upgrading, multiple equivalent assessments, and trailway
assessments at the rates in effect at the time of final platting.
•
B. This development shall be responsible for all costs of installing the
internal public streets and utilities.
9. A time extension be granted to the original 10 year P.D. Agreement for
enough time to complete the project. (The original Agreement had an option to
request 2 three year extensions).
10. An Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) be prepared and submitted
for staff review prior to the issuance of any building permits.
11. The garage shall be included in the rental unit price if only 2
stalls per unit are provided with the project.
12. The developer shall provide a cash dedication in accordance with
standard requirements, in addition to dedicating a trailway along, the south
side of Diffley Road.
40 13. A detailed landscaping plan shall be Submitted including a bona which
shall not be released less than one year after landscaping is completed.
14. Because the PD provides a total of 338 units of which 322 are now
being used, the parcel east of Thomas Lake Road shall be developed as a
residential parcel with no more than 16 units.
All voted in favor.
City Planner Runkle advised the Commission that the plan had been revises
somewhat, moving one of the apartments further away from the development just
south of the proposed plat.
RESIDENCE INN - COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT
The hearing regarding the request for a Comprehensive Plan amendment to RB
(Roadside Business) from LB (Limited Business) for Residence Inn consisting of
a 120 unit hotel on 4.36 acres (located within the Eaganaale LeMay Lake 2nd
Addition Planned Development) and part of the north half of Section 10, south
0
3
Agenda Information
May 21, 1986, City
Page Sixteen
Memo.
Council Meeting
EAGANDALE OFFICE PARK 3RD ADDITION
RECONSIDERATION OF PLAT CONFIGURATION
B. Eagandale Office Park 3rd Addition - Reconsideration of Plat
Configuration --Enclosed on page 4,$ is a letter that staff
received from the Opus Corporation requesting the Council to
reconsider its action of December 3, 1985, wherein the Council
required the proposed plat for the above -referenced subdivision
to eliminate the "trap court" cul-de-sac and replace it with
a private access drive and related cross easements. Enclosed
on page 4 is a copy of the -December. .3 Council -minutes.
Enclosed on page is the original site plan configuration
• the cul-de-sTc—
showing. Enclosed on page is a revised
site plan configuration showing no public right-of-way for access.
•
Due to the fact that all proposed lots have adequate access to
existing public right-of-way, it is not recommended that additional
public right-of-way, especially a cul-de-sac, be constructed
resulting in additional maintenance liabilities to the City.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve/deny the develo-
pers request to construct a cul-de-sac servicing Eagandale Office
Park 3rd Addition.
(P 4
OPUS CORPORATION
DESIGNERS • BUILDERS • DEVELOPERS
May 2, 1986
Mr. Tom Colbert
Public Works Director
City of Eagan
3830 Pilot Knob Road
,Eagan, Minnesota 55121
Re: Trapp Court Cul-de-sac
Dear Mr. Colbert: ^`
• Opus Corporation, in behalf of Mor'-hwestern Mutual Life Insurance
Company, requests the city Council to reconsider its action not to allow
a cul-de-sac to be constructed off of Trapp Road to provide access to
the Sperry Office Building.
1
Opus will appear at the Mayes Council meeting to explain the reasons and
justification for requesting this reconsideration. Thank you:
Sincerely yours,
-c��r�lr/a�cc
Robert A. Worthi gton, AICP
Executive Director, Governmental Affairs
® RAW:jo
cc: Tom Hedges
Rick Hefti
Dale Runkle
OPUS AND AFFILIATES IN MINNEAPOLIS • CHICAGO • PHOENIX • MILWAUKEE • TAMPA • PENSACOLA
EXECUTIVE OFFICES: 800 OPUS CENTER • 9900 BREN ROAD EAST • PO. BOX 150 • MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55440 (612) 936-4444
Council Minutes
December 3, 1985
YORRTON I S YORRTON II - IR FINANCING
The final resolutions for the proposed industrial revenue bond issues for
Yorkton I and Yorkton II were submitted and the applicant requested approval.
Mike Gresser appeared for the applicant and Tom Hedges indicated that the City
has not received a letter from bond counsel satisfying the City staff's
concerns that the bonds could become taxable due to the procedural variance
required for the application. In addition, the final documents for the bond
project had not been received for review by the City Administrator or City
Attorney. After discussion, Egan moved, Thomas seconded the motion to
approve the final resolutions for the two bona issues, each in the sum of
$600,000.00, subject however, to submission and approval by the City staff of
the bond counsel letter described above, and -approval of the -final transcript
for the bond issues. All voted yes. •
EAGANDALE INDUSTRIAL PARR 3RD ADDITION - PRELIMINARY PLAT
The application for preliminary plat approval of Eagandale Industrial Park
3rd Addition consisting of a replat of Eagandale Industrial Park Lots 2, 3,
and 4, Block 2, came to the Council. The APC recommended approval at its
November 26, 1985 meeting, subject to certain conditions. The plat would
combine four existing lots and three new lots, north of Corporate Center Drive
and west of Trapp Road, according to Dale Runkle. There was considerable
discussion concerning the cul-de-sac proposed to be converted to a private
cross easement built to City standards. Gerald Sunde of Sunde Engineering was
present and recommended that the cul-de-sac remain a public street. After
review, Smith moved, Thomas seconded the motion to approve the preliminary
plat application for Eagandale Industrial Park 3rd Addition, subject to the
following conditions:
d 1. The proposed public cul-de-sac shall be eliminated and a private
street be provided for access to the lots.
2. The owner and developer will be responsible for any damage to any
retaining wall and grading damages as a result of necessary maintenance of
the City's storm and sanitary sewer lines within the sanitary and storm sewer
easement along the southwesterly boundary of the property.
3. The watermain that the developer proposes to construct shall be built
in accordance with City specifications and properly verified that the
contractor adhered to City standards.
4. This development will be responsible for obtaining the necessary MWCC
connection permits.
.5. The cul-de-sac, Trapp Court, shall be constructed in accordance with
City standards for a tear drop design and 9 ton standards.
6. This development shall dedicate a 20 foot utility and drainage
easement adjacent to all publicly dedicated right-of-way.
W
11
-' PRELIMINARY PLAT OF:
EAGANDALE OFFICE PARK 3RD ADDITION
4r14
GH
i
'___- - J�• - > L0�
Ad
SLI=r, ����%
;-_'_•�
/
SLI=r, ����%
;-_'_•�
PRELZZY PLAT OF,
tAGANDALt OFFICE PARK 3RD AbbITION
yt)y
... I
iidTFr�gT:?ice I aL
LOT � 5
XN.�\\\ 14 I
•\ \\� \ \� �\ I I VIII\\1 l
_ i�
IF
Agenda Information Memo
May 21, 1986, City Council Meeting
Page Seventeen
OFF -SALE LIQUOR LICENSE/TOWN CENTRE 70
A. Off -Sale Liquor License for Town Centre 70/Curtis Johnson --An
application was submitted by Curtis 0. Johnson and Carolyn Johnson
for an off -sale liquor license at the Town Centre/Eagan Shopping,
Center. At the last regular meeting of the City Council, authoriza-
tion was given to amend the City Code to allow a fifth off -sale
liquor license for the north central portion of the City and
Town Centre 70 qualifies as a location--€-or--this license. For
® additional information regarding an investigation by the Police
Department and the general information and personal information
required as a part of the off -sale liquor license application,
refer to attachments without page number.
If affirmative action is taken regarding the off -sale liquor
license application, the City cannot issue the license until
the ordinance is officially amended. The amendment will not
take place until after the June 17 meeting, realizing the City
Council might change the entire policy for controlling the number
of off -sale liquor licenses.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED'ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny an
off -sale liquor license for Curtis. 0. Johnson, for a location
at the Town Centre/Eagan Shopping Center.
VARIANCE/JAMES UNKER
• B. James Unker for a 25' Variance from 50' Setback Requirement
Along Public Street for Lot 10, Block 3, Clearview Addition --An ap-
plication was submitted to the Planning Department requesting
a 2'5' front yard setback north of Cliff Road in the Clearview
Addition. For additional information on this item, please refer
to the Planning Department report, a copy of which is enclosed
on pages �Zo through 3 There are no conditions in the
Clearview —Addition develo ment agreement pertaining to setback
restrictions on this, lot.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the
variance permit as requested by James Unker.
�y
SUBJECT:
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING:
DATE OF REPORT:
CITY OF EAGAN
VARIANCE
JAMES UNKER
LOT 10, BLOCK 3, CLEARVIEW ADDITION
(SE i, SECTION 29)
R-1 SINGLE FAMILY
MAY 21, 1986
MAY 13, 1986
REPORTED BY: JIM STURM
APPLICATION: An application has been submitted requesting a
25' front yard setback north of Cliff Road in the Clearview
Addition.
COMMENTS. This one -acre+ lot abutts the Woodgate 2nd Addition
to the east and another acre+ lot to the west. The applicant
wishes to construct a garage near Cliff Road for 3 main reasons.
1) This garage will visually shield Cliff Road from the existing
house thus, 2) maximizing the private area in the front yard
and 3) create a noise "buffer" from Cliff Road. A letter from
the applicants detailing these hardships is attached for your
review. The neighbors to the west have a garage 30' from the
Cliff Road right-of-way and the proposed garage will be 25'
from the same right-of-way.
A public hearing has been scheduled at the June 3, 1986, City
Council meeting for the vacation of the 25' easement area.
The vacation will not affect this variance in any manner.
This lot has not been split, however, all setbacks meet City
Code requirements.now and will if the lot is split as proposed.
There are no conditions in the Clearview Addition Development
Agreement pertaining to setback restrictions on this lot.
If approved, this variance shall be subject to all code require-
ments.
JS/jj
N
71
E
0
SIGMA
SURVEYING
SERVICES
3908 Sibley Memorial Highway
Eagan, Minnesota 55.122
Phone: (612), 452-3077
Lot Division Certificate For:
Mr. JIM UNK'ER
Ct
- \\ EAST 189.00 -
90.0
S( �\
99.0
i L -i
r� -} PARCEL (�
^I l- A'
—P.O.L. 27,518 S9. Ff. IW 1
PARCEL00
25,200 S4. Ff. i i INN s 0D .)
r
Lu - -
� I o M
• �. - 24.2 - `. J - L,
Q I 40.0
z.i r="LL
toPropomad b r,
Y, OI I 1
M 4f'a/ /+ i. a�-DRIVEgWgAY N 1z �Y
i� F' / O SETS�CK EMENr D 1
Gaia.K
i P.
t o .e' eA 5 40 ARBA 'I k "
... 200 0o T ff 90:0/ 1 y 91.56 "
---F---VV- Z5 2 - , -,1 EST _187.5
-:....,..._,.: .77,x,
4 ( CLIFF ROAD)
—N—
I " =,5 0,
N—,,1_50
1�
C.S.A.H. No. 32
April 23, 1986
Mr. Dale C. Runkle
City Planner
Eagan Municipal Center
3830 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, MN 55122
Re: Application for Setback Variance
Lot 10, Block 3, Cedarview
Dear Mr. Runkle:
Enclosed is our application for a setback variance to allow a
detached ,garage to be built 25 feet from the south boundary of our
property at Lot 10, Block 3, Clearview, 1775 Cliff Road. This would
require a variance of either 25 or 50 feet depending on the status of
a 25 foot easement which Dakota County has agreed to revoke, and the
City of Eagan has agreed to vacate. Assuming the easement is vacated,
the variance would be 25 feet.
We are requesting the variance because of hardships resulting from
unusual characteristics of our property. The primary concern is the
high level of noise from traffic on Cliff Road. Our house is situated
near the rear of the lot to reduce the noise level, but noise is
still very bothersome. Locating the garage closer to Cliff Road will
increase.the area that will be shielded from noise by the garage..It
will also decrease the area that will be subject to viewing from
Cliff Road, thereby increasing our privacy. Because the house is near
the rear of the lot, our primary yard area is between the house and
Cliff Road, so increasing privacy is very important. If we have to
locate the garage closer- to the house, our usable yard area will be
greatly decreased.
The setback variance would not affect our neighbors since our
neighbors to the west, the Amundsons, have a garage that is about the
same distance to Cliff Road, 30.8 feet from their south lot line. Our •
neighbors to the east, in Woodgate, 2nd Addition are separated from
us by an outlot that is about 125 feet wide, our lot is barely
visible from their lots, and their lots face away from ours. The
garage would be well below the level of Cliff Road so that it would
not be conspicuous.
Attached is a copy of a recent survey showing the location of our
house and the Amundsons' garage, with the proposed garage, setback
line and easement area sketched in. The survey was done for a lot
split application which we may pursue in the future.
Thank you for your consideration of this request.
V ry trytly yours,
�</ice
J es T. Unker
UV 2� �-
Nancy A Unker %3
1775 Cliff Road /
Eagan, MN 55122
Agenda Information Memo
May 21, 1986, City Council Meeting
Page Eighteen
VARIANCE/WILLIAM HUTTNER CONSTRUCTION, INC
C. William Huttner Construction, Inc.. for 8.5' Variance from
the 50' Setback Requirement for Public Streets --An application was
submitted to the Planning Department requesting a variance of
9.5 feet in. the Hillcrest Addition. For additional information
on the item, refer to the Planning Department report, a copy
of which is enclosed on pages through _'. There are
no conditions in the Hillcrest Addition agreement considering
various variance applications.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the
• variance permit as requested by William Huttner Construction,
Inc.
0
7T
SUBJECT`.
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
EXISTING ZONING:
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING:
DATE OF REPORT:
REPORTED BY:
CITY OF EAGAN
VARIANCE (FRONT YARD)
WILLIAM'HUTTNER CONSTRUCTION INC
LOT 1, BLOCK 3, HILLCREST ADDN.
R-1, SINGLE FAMILY
MAY 21, 1986
MAY 13, 1986
JIM STURM
• APPLICATION: An application has been submitted requesting a
variance of 9.5' on Lot 1, Block 3, of the Hillcrest Addition.
COMMENTS: This lot has front yard setback requirements of 30'
along Rebecca Lane and 50' along Pilot Knob Road. The 9.5'
variance is needed along the Pilot Knob property line, and access
to the home is from Rebecca Lane.
The garage has been placed 5' from the western property line
to allow maximum building expansion to the west.
There are no conditions in the Hillcrest Addition concerning
variance applications.
If approved, this variance shall be subject to all other Code
® requirements.
JS/jj
;61"
V�
s
J
VALL Y
71 rLlnl` eoeF
..AT
X
2iii
CITY OF EAGAN
SUBJECT: VARIANCE (FRONT YARD)
APPLICANT: WILLIAM HUTTNER CONSTRUCTION INC
LOCATION: LOT 1, BLOCK 3, HILLCREST ADDN.
EXISTING ZONING: R-1, SINGLE FAMILY
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: MAY 21, 1986
DATE OF REPORT: MAY 13, 1986
REPORTED BY: JIM STURM
APPLICATION: An application has been submitted requesting a
variance of 9.5' on Lot 1, Block 3, of the Hillcrest Addition.
COMMENTS. This lot has front yard setback requirements of 30'
along Rebecca Lane and 50' along Pilot Knob Road. The 9.5'
variance is needed along the Pilot Knob property line, and access
to the home is from Rebecca Lane.
The garage has been placed 5' from the western property line
to allow maximum building expansion to the west.
There are no conditions in the Hillcrest Addition concerning
variance applications.
If approved, this variance shall be subject to all other Code
® requirements.
JS/jj
77
Certificate for:
1
Huttner Construction
za-
DELMAR H. SCHWANZ
14ND SURVEVORS INC
Rp.pgwl UnEn LAOS of Thp SIAIF of Minn oln
147SO SOUTH ROBERT TRAIL ROSEMOUNT. MINNESOTA 55068
SURVE R'S CERTIFICATE
� HitOIDfMf. a NI`I-ff-zy� __-- bs
Drainage S utility " T
Iease*nt
14or It
1
40
h O.�L�OffO
,VOrlE
a MR
N
PHONE - 612 823-1768
IQ
X
�I
SCALE
1 inch = 30 feet
Id./ ds.a� sws rc /� ✓
a E/.for M ,
,sEBdcc.y 4.4W
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct representatioh of'Lot
Block 3, HILLCREST ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Dakota
County, Minnesota.
Also showing the location of a proposed house thereon.
Dated: May 5, 1986
,X;A4 a,
MINNESOTA REGISTRATION NO. 8625
E
E
Agenda Information Memo
May 21, 1986, City Council Meeting
Page Nineteen
VARIANCE/CORPORATE CONSTRUCTION
D. Corporate Construction, Inc., for 12..21' Variance from 40'
Sideyard Setback Requirement Along Public Street, Lot 1, Block
1,, Birch Park Addition --An application was submitted to the Planning
Department requesting a variance of 12.2' in the Birchpark Addition.
For additional information on the item, refer to the Planning
Department report, a copy of which is enclosed on pages 90
through gj,1 . There are no conditions in the Birchpark Addition
development agreement pertaining to setback restrictions on this
lot.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the
®
variance permit as, requested by Corporate Construction, Inc.
•
CITY OF EAGAN
SUBJECT: VARIANCE
APPLICANT: CORPORATE CONSTRUCTION INC
LOCATION: LOT- 1, BLOCK 1, BIRCH PARK ADDN (NA, SEC. 22)
EXISTING ZONING: PD (R-1,.SINGLE FAMILY)
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: MAY 21, 1986
DATE OF REPORT: MAY 14, 1986
REPORTED BY: JIM STURM
APPLICATION: An application. has been submitted requesting a
•
variance of 12.17' on Lot 1, Block 1, of the Birch Park Addition.
COMMENTS: The subject lot is on the corner of Windcrest and
Denmark Avenues. Setbacks along Denmark Avenue are 40' due
to the 80' right-of-way.. The variance is required along the
Denmark Avenue side since the. house will be approximately 28'
and 32' from that property line. This area will function as
a side yard as access is provided from Windcrest Avenue.
This 3 -car garage home meets all other code setback requirements.
There are no conditions in the Birch Park Addition Development
Agreement pertaining to setback restrictions on this lot.
If approved, this variance shall be subject to all Code require-
ments.
JS/jj
_ g0
T/
0
•
SURVEYORS. CERTIFICATE ''SIENNA CORPORATION
NOTE: THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION SHOWN
HEREON WILL BECOME VALID
- UPON FILING THE PLAT OF
BIRCH PARK.
REVIsm 5/6 ffi TO SHOW
PROPOSED HObE FOR I �;
C(RMRATE W STRUCTION I ]?
N 3.48'51"
cps.7 30.00 52.33 .. 79. 70
Z 50 1 2311 W c 50
T` EO u�/a. 29.16 mcni O m
vm W N
I
U3
0.0. c a me
�1 b
IV IU
n w I / nil N
W
m
50
I: I
C 1 /
m ml _
o m
49.83 (ewe)
- , p I' 52.99 ` I
137.16 Q=2.05'51°
SO ... 30.09 ..
(377? 3 8'08'S7" E ' R=1361.07
S
ENMATRK- -A-V EN
•
Agenda Information Memo
May 21, 1986, City Council Meeting
Page Twenty
CONDITIONAL, USE PERMIT & REZONING/ON-BELAY
E. Conditional Use Permit for Chemical Dependency Center and a
Rezoning from R-1 to LB, Located in Former Peace Reform Church
Building --A public hearing was held by the Advisory Planning
Commission at their last regular meeting held on Tuesday, April
22, 1986, to consider two (2) applications submitted by On -Belay
of Minnesota, Inc., for a rezoning from R-1 to LB and a
conditional use permit to allow for a chemical dependency
rehabilitation center. The Advisory—PLanni.ng_Commission is
recommending denial of the rezoning and conditional use permit.
• For additional information on this item, refer to the Plar}�'ng
Department report and APC minutes enclosed, on pages Y�
through. Mayor Blomquist and members of the City Council
as well as City Administration have received letters from
residents regarding these applications. A letter was drafted and
dated April 2, 1986, and was sent as a standard response letter
to all residents submitting a letter to City Hall. This letter
is enclosed on age for your review. Enclosed on pages
C)V/_ and is a copy of a letter received from homeowner
in the Cedar Grove area. Also enclosed on pages _�� through
167,-' is a copy of a resolution prepared by the City Attorney's
office.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THE MATTER: To approve or deny the
rezoning from R-1 to LB and conditional use permit for, the
chemical dependency center - On -Belay, Inc.
NJ
CITY OF EAGAN
SUBJECT: REZONING &CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
APPLICANT: ON -BELAY OF MINNESOTA INC
LOCATION: LOTS 12-16, 20-24, BLOCK 6, CEDAR GROVE #4..,.
EXISTING ZONING: R-1 (SINGLE FAMILY)
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: APRIL 22., 1986
DATE OF REPORT,: APIRL 16, 1986
REPORTED BY: JIM STURM
® APPLICATION: Two separate applications have been submitted
requesting a rezoning from R-1 (Single Family) to LB (Limited
Business) for a 24 hour adolescent Chemical Dependency Rehabilita-
tion Center in the old Peace Reformed Church along Nicols Road. The
LB district requires conditional use permits for hospitals and
private schools. The On -Belay Rehabilitation Center will provide
limited sources of this nature.
The 1980 Comprehensive Guide Plan designates this site R-1 and,
therefore, an amendment to the Guide Plan will be necessary.
ON -BELAY OF MINNESOTA INC: The On -Belay organization provides
residential chemical dependency counseling for both male and female'
adolescents between the ages of 12-18. There is a three _step
approach to the treatment process:
® 1. Assessment Evaluation
The client stays in. the facility for a 7-10 day period to assess
the need of the primary treatment.
Included in this phase psychological testing and evaluation,
physical examination, chemical awareness education, interviewing
and observation by the On -Belay staff. The results then
determine the appropriate treatment.
2. Treatment
This is a 4-8 week phase (24 hours - 7 days a week) that
includes: lectures, group counseling, individual counseling,,
recreational_ therapy and family sessions. .
The third phase of the rehabilitation process is.the,
3. Aftercare
The adolescents meet once a week
Individual and family group sessions
request.
in peer support groups. -
are also available upon
REZONING & CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - ON -BELAY OF MINNESOTA INC
APRIL 22, 1986
PAGE 2
HISTORY: On -Belay of Minnesota, Inc., began in 1976 with a
10 -unit halfway house in Minnetonka, MN. Expansion since then
includes:
1979 -Louis House - A treatment center in Plymouth, MN.
1982 -Louis House North - A 22 -bed facility in Blaine, MN.
1983-A 25=bed facility in Columbus, -OH.
1985-A large counseling/referral clinic in Ridgewood, NJ.
Each facility is served by an Advisory Committee that includes.
neighbors, school officials, law enforcement personnel, social
services staff (County personnel) and City staff. This group
does not make the actual organization policies, but rather acts
as a liaison to the surrounding community. The current fee
is $195.00 per day that includes room, board and the three step
rehabilitation process.
EAGAN FACILITY
The proposed 48 bed facility will provide 19 beds for girls
on the lower level of the building and 29 beds for boys on a
7 -day -a -week schedule. A typical day will be:
6:00 AM
- Wake up.
7:00 AM
- Breakfast.
8:30 AM
- School - tutoring provided with assistance from
the students' own school.
11:30AM
- Lunch
1:30 PM
- Group session
2:30 PM
- Break
3:30 PM
- Group
5:00 PM
- Dinner
Evening
- Potential for group or family counseling, recreation
on or off site, aerobics class (the sanctuary will
be converted into a gymnasium).
10:15PM
- Lights out.
Security
As with the Blaine Center (Louis House North), this will
be a locked facility. All windows will have alarm sensors,
all doors will be locked at night, cameras will be mounted
in hallways and bed checks will take place approximately
every 20 minutes.
On -Belay does not accept adolescents that have: 1) a history
of court involvement, 2) psychological disorders where medica-
tion is needed or, 3) a record of past violent behavior.
City staff was assured that the Eagan Police Department
would not be responsible for runaways. Parents or On -Belay
staff would handle these situations.
p�
•
Staff
The proposed staff would number approximately 22, with rotating
shifts. Two - five would be at the facility at night, depending
on the occupancy rate. All staff would have a minimum of
1 year experience and either be Certified Chemical Dependency
Practioners or other professionally trained staff.
If approved, the Conditional Use Permit shall be subject to
the following conditions:
1. The Eagan facility provide a 48 bed maximum capacity.
2. All building improvements be approved by the Protective
Inspections Department.
a
61
-:7 -25W71 -
e
dd.
ff
I
0
�N I
a nAUGE, EIDE & FELLER, P.A.
r
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
CEDARVALE PROFESSIONAL BUILDINGS
3908 SIBLEY MEMORIAL HIGHWAY
EAGAN. MINNESOTA 55122
PAUL H. HAUGE
KEVIN W. EIDE AREA CODE 612
DAVID G. KE LLER
TELEPHONE 454.4224
'
LORI M. BELLIN
MICHAEL J. MAYER
March 26, 1986
Mr. Thomas L. Hedges
City Administrator .
3830 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, Minnesota 55122 - -. -- -- -----
Re: On -Belay Rehabilitation Center -Peace Reformed Church
Dear Tom:
You have asked what applications may be necessary in the event that a request
is made through the City for the approval of a rehabilitation center at the
current Peace Reformed Church on Nichols Road which according to our
information would be converted to a rehabilitation center by the On -Belay
organization. It is my understanding that the City has not received an
application and therefore, we do not have specific information concerning the
intended use.
Id
any event; from the information we have that the following applications
would appear to be appropriate:
1.
It is our understanding the current zoning of the property is R-1', with
3 �6
the church possibly operating under a non -conforming use and therefore, a�
application to
rezone would be necessary (Code Chapter 11). We are
uncertain at this time exactly which zoning category would be requested
with P -public facilities a possibility under either a permitted or
conditional use depending on the specific nature of the organization and
the proposed facility. A conditional use permit may be required under
Code Section 11.40 again depending upon the specific nature of the use and
type of organization.
2.
The land use designation under the 1980 Comprehensive Guide indicates RI
and it would appear that an amendment to the Comprehensive Guide may be
necessary (M.S.A. 462.355).,
3.
An application for preliminary plat approval under the Subdivision
Ordinance Code" Chapter 13 would also be required.
1 4.
A possibility of.a signed permit application, building permit application
•
if revisions to the structure are intended and the other appropriate
permits including electrical, plumbing, etc, may be required.
I
•
11
Mr. Thomas L. Hedges
March 26, 1986
Page Two
We have not reviewed the issue of nonconforming use or the expansion or
rebuilding of the structure and it would not appear appropriate to do so until
the specific information is submitted to the City.
Verruly yours,
HAUGE, EIDE S REL R, P.A.
Paul H. Hauge
PHH:cjb
APC Minutes
April 22, 1986
ON -BELAY OF MINNESOTA, INC. - REZONING a CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
Chairperson McCrea then convened the public hearing on the application of
On -Belay of Minnesota, Inc. for rezoning from R-1 (Single Family Residential)
to LB (Limited Business District) and a conditional use permit for an
adolescent Chemical Dependency Center, located in the former Peace Reformed
Church building in Lots 12through 16, and Lots 20 through 24, Block 6, Cedar
Grove No. 4, in part of the northeast quarter of Section 30 (Diamond Drive on•
the east and Nicola Road on the west). City Planner Runkle introduced the
application, indicating that if approved, it may also be necessary to provide
a Comprehensive Guide amendment.
Also present representing the applicant were Mr. John Cross, Judy Lewis
(Operations Manager) and David Rosenkor. The Commission was advised by the
applicant that it was the applicant's intent to close the Diamond Drive
access, use part of the parking lot for a play area and fence the north side
® of the property. Mr. Rosenkor who was the Director of the program, described
the program, the staff and the screening process used. Mr. John Newton, a
member of the teaching staff at one of On -Belay's other facilities, described
the work they do with chemical dependent adolescents to maintain their
scholastic status.
Ms. Jo Krueger, Burnsville Senior High School Nurse appeared describing
the problem of alcoholism and chemical dependency within the local high school
system. Also appearing was a coach from Coon Rapids Senior High who strongly
supported the system and described the impact on their school and the children
within. An appearance was also made by Reverend Marty Heist who had many
years of experience in this area. A letter was read from Dorothy Mosso
indicating the lack of programs for chemically dependent Dakota County
adolescents. A local resiaent and a former patient at On -Belay recommended
the program.
Mr. John Michael of 4253 Amber stated that the question was not the
• quality of the program, but whether this was an appropriate use, being a
business and multi -residential use within an R-1 neighborhood. Mr. Garrett
-
Laslow, a chemical dependent city therapist from Burnsville, indicated that
the On -Belay program was their sole source when referring adolescent
chemically dependent individuals to a program. Council chambers were filled
to capacity with local residents appearing to object to this proposal.
Additional issues raised were noise, possible crime, reduction in property
values, the proposed higher intensity use of the property in the neighborhood,
the availability of such sites such as the Ridges for this type of a program,
that there may be several churches looking for such location which would not
change the use of the property, and that the City and other organizations
might help On -Belay find a more suitable site. Commission members agreed that
the activities of On -Belay would be of benefit to the community but the
question was whether it was an appropriate use in this particular
neighborhood. It was pointed out that there had been previous discussions by
the Commission and City Council, indicating that there may be too much
commercial property in the City already, and that LB (Limited Business) would
not be appropriate in an area surrounded by single family homes. It was
indicated that the proposed use might not be appropriate under Public
Facilities as On -Belay is not a non-profit organization as. described in the
ordinance. /
(/i �/5
APC Minutes
April 22, 1,986
Harrison moved to recommend denial of the proposed rezoning, Wilkins
seconded the motion, for reasons including the following:
1. The Minnesota Legislature has clearly intended that State licensed
residential facilities be permitted single family uses if they serve 6 or
fewer persons in a single family residential district, and also have directed
municipalities to allow as permitted uses State licensed residential
facilities serving 7 through 16 persons as permitted multi -family residential
uses for purposes of zoning. The subject application does not comply with the
intent of the Legislature to allow such uses within residentially zoned areas,
in that the application provides for a 48 -bed facility, substantially
exceeding the Legislative intent within residential districts.
2. Single family residential uses surround the subject property on three
sides with Public Facility uses on the west side of Nicols Road and it would
appear that Limited Business use would not be a desirable use in that
location.
3. It is understood that the applicant is a Minnesota for-profit
corporation and without rezoning, the property would not be allowed to operate
its facility in the existing Peace Reformed Church building, in the event that
the parcel is construed to be a non -conforming public facility use.
4. Nicols Road adjacent to the parcel and to the west, has been down-
graded from a County Road to a City Street, with the understanding that the
traffic count has been substantially reduced after the opening of new Cedar
Avenue (County Highway #77) directly to the west, and the intent of the City
and the neighboring uses to retain primarily a residential character for
Nicols Road.
5. If the use were changed to a Limited Business use, necessitating a
business land use designation, it would cause a substantial revision in the •
character of the neighborhood and potentially allow uses within the Limited
Business category including both permitted and conditional uses described in'
Eagan Code, Section 11.20, Suba. 9.
6. The proposal is for a 24 hour use whose intensity is greater than in
Limited Business use areas.
7. Should the property be rezoned to Limited Business, it is possible
that future uses in the event of the abandonment of the On -Belay facility,
would have to be permitted even though they may be seriously incompatible with
the primarily residential area. See Comprehensive Guide Plan, City of Eagan,
1980, page iv -13.
8. There has been a great deal of neighborhood concern regarding the lack
of compatibility of the proposed On -Belay Center with the primarily
residentialneighborhood, as evidenced by the response from the neighbors and
the opposition in the form of Petition(s) submitted opposing the proposed use,
including objections regarding traffic, safety, economic impact on the
neighborhood, etc.
r/3
APC Minutes
April 22, 1986
Z
9. In addition, the Land Use Guide at pages IV -1 and IV -2 provides a
flexibility, or that the plan should be flexible or should serve as a guide
and should possess a degree of flexibility but "the burden of proof and
justification should be the responsibility of the, person or persons proposing
the revision". It is the determination of the Planning Commission that
although a public hearing',o,n the revisions, of, -.the Comprehensive Guide Plan has
not taken place, that the applicant has not sustained the burden of proof,
that there should be a revision in Che use of the property to a Limited
Business character.
10. The availability of an existing facility that could house a
rehabilitation center with some revisions to the structure, should not of
itself constitute the basis for amending the zoning to allow a use that may
not be compatible with the neighborhood.
it. The existing Peace Reformed Church structure could potentially be
used for a church or related facility and therefore, the City's action in
denying the applications does not deprive the owner from an adequate use of
the existing facility.
12. Information received by the City through the Dakota County Social
Services indicates that the proposed chemical dependency type of unit is a
very competitive type use and the fee schedule may make the proposal
financially unstable.
All voted in favor.
T. E. M. ADDITION - PRELIMINARY PLAT d REZONING
The public hearing was then convened on the application for rezoning and
application for the preliminary plat consisting of 3 single family lots on 3.6
® acres and rezoning from A (Agricultural) to R-1, located in part of the
northwest quarter of Section 25, Golden Meadow Road on the north, and Schwanz
Lake to the southwest. City Planner Runkle introduced the application
indicating that the City utilities would be made use of and the lake dedicated
to the Park Department. Mr. Wayne Cordes appeared on behalf of Mr. Murr and
indicated that the turnaround area encroaching upon the proposed lot had been
removed and that the drainfieLd would no longer be used when City utilities
were brought in. Discussion centered around the storm sewer assessment which
would have to be paid due to the loss of large lot credit upon development.
There were no members of the public present to respond.. Trygg moved, Wilkins
seconded the motion to recommend approval of the rezoning. All voted in
favor.
Trygg moved, Wilkins seconded the motion to recommend approval of the
preliminary plat,,subject to the following conditions:
1. All standard plat conditions shall be adhered to.
2. This development shall dedicate a 30 foot half right-of-way for Golden
Meadow Road. '
7
of
3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD, P.O. BOX -21199
EAGAN. MINNESOTA 55121
PHONE: (612) 454-8100
April 2, 1986
TO RESIDENTS OF THE CITY OF EAGAN
Re: OnBelay Rehabilitation Center/Peace Reformed Church
Dear Resident:
BEA BLOMQUIST
Mayor
THOMAS EGAN
JAMES A. SMRH
MC ELLISON
THEODORE WACHTER
Council Members
THOMAS HEDGES
ON AdinMrmoi
EUGENE VAN OVERBEKE
City Clerk
I have been asked by members of the Eagan City Council to write
you relating to the concerns that you have about the proposed
OnBelay Rehabilitation Center at the Peace Reformed Church located
at Nicols Road. It is my understanding that you have contacted at
.least one of the Councilmembers or Mayor, either in writing or by
telephone.
For your information, the OnBelay Center has submitted applications
to the City which will receive their first hearing on April 22,
1986, begining at 7:00 p.m. before the Advisory Planning Commission
at the Eagan Municipal Center at 3830 Pilot Knob Road. There are
requirements for rezoning, conditional use permit and possibly the
necessity to replat the property.
If the Advisory Planning Commission recommends approval of the
application, the earliest that it would be heard by the Eagan City
Council, if the Advisory Planning Commission makes a recom-
mendation regarding the applications, would be May 21, 1986, at
7:00 p.m., also at the Eagan Municipal Center. We would encourage
any interested persons to be present at those meetings.
Sincerely,
Thomas A. Hedge
City Administrator
TLH/kf
/�
THE LONE OAK TREE... THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY
4/2/8E
Dear Mayor Bea Blomquist,
My name is Waldemar Rewald an I am writing on behalf of
my family concerning the proposed drug treatment center on
Nicols Road Eagan, MN.
The drug treatment center proposal causes great concern
and worry to us because the site is in a residential area
not suited for such a facility. Our fears are certainly
neighborhood to raise a family and someday retire. In the
past years we have sadly seen the property value of our home
and the security of our family deteriorate.
What is par•ticular•ly alarming for us and our
neighborhood is the open door policy at the drug treatment
center. How can we feel secure for the safety of our
children and our homes when these people who have deep and
® sincere problems are allowed to roam freely, literally in
our backyards. We are not against drug treatment centers,
but they do not belong in a residential area.
The quality of living and our property has already
depreciated greatly. Now upon our r•etir•ement the value of
our• home is even less and with the proposed drug treatment
center moving in next door to our home the result would be
traumatic for• our residential neighborhood. please take
this letter to heart and ask, yourself how you would feel as
a homeowner• having such a facility next your home. Would
legitimate. When my
wife and
I moved into
this neighborhood
®
twenty years ago we
felt this
area would be
an excellent
lifetime investment.
It would
be a quiet,
peaceful
neighborhood to raise a family and someday retire. In the
past years we have sadly seen the property value of our home
and the security of our family deteriorate.
What is par•ticular•ly alarming for us and our
neighborhood is the open door policy at the drug treatment
center. How can we feel secure for the safety of our
children and our homes when these people who have deep and
® sincere problems are allowed to roam freely, literally in
our backyards. We are not against drug treatment centers,
but they do not belong in a residential area.
The quality of living and our property has already
depreciated greatly. Now upon our r•etir•ement the value of
our• home is even less and with the proposed drug treatment
center moving in next door to our home the result would be
traumatic for• our residential neighborhood. please take
this letter to heart and ask, yourself how you would feel as
a homeowner• having such a facility next your home. Would
it be safe for your children and family? Our dreams of a
secure and tranquil neighborhood would certainly be
shattered if this drug treatment center is allowed to exist
in our neighborhood.
Please consider this matter- sincerely and with empathy.
The proposed site has always been a church, there must be 401
other alternatives to preserve this Christian atmosphere.
Please feel free to respond to my letter. I invite you into
my home so we can discuss the alternatives and came to a
compromise that myself and my family can live with.
SWcere.ly,
�e-wa .i 7 l l,CIJ fsQ-e
Waldemar Rewald
2125 Quartz lane
Eagan, Mn
454-4624
F7
•
^' PROPOSED
RESOLUTION
CITY OF EAGAN
ON -BELAY OF MINNESOTA, INC. APPLICATION
WHEREAS, two applications were submitted by On -Belay of Minnesota, Inc.
for rezoning from R-1 (Single Family) to LB (Limited Business) for a 24 -Hour
Adolescent Chemical Dependency Rehabilitation Center in the existing Peace
Reformed Church building on Nicols Road; and
WHEREAS, at the present time, the property is zoned R-1 (Single Family);
and
WHEREAS, the current Comprehensive Guide designation for the site is R -I
® with a density of 1 to 3 residential units per acre; and
WHEREAS, the On -Belay organization provides residential chemical
dependency counselling for both male and female adolescents between the ages
of 12 through 18; and
WHEREAS, the Eagan Advisory Planning Commission at its regular meeting on
April 22, 1986 held a public hearing concerning the applications of On -Belay;
and
WHEREAS, neighboring residents ana owners who showed an interest in the
® application appeared at the hearing with Petition(s) in favor of/opposea to
the applications;
ALTERNATE I.
NOW, THEREFORE, upon motion by - seconded by
it was Resolved that the Advisory Planning
Commission,recommena to the City Council as follows:
1. Thatthe application for rezoning of the property from R-1 to LB be
approved.
111
2. That the application for conditional use permit for the On -Belay
Center at the existing Peace Reformed Church, be recommended for approval,
subject to the following conditions:
a. The Eagan On -Belay facility shall provide for a maximum 48-bea
capacity.
b. Ali building improvements shall be approved by the Eagan
Protective Inspections Dept.
C. Ail applicable City ordinances and regulations shall be complied
with.
d. All State and County regulations shall be complied with and proof
of compliance shall be submitted to the City staff for its review.
e. The Comprehensive Guide use for the property shall berevised to
accommodate the proposed use.
f. Other conditions:
Those in favor: is
Those against:
ALTERNATE II.
NOW THEREFORE, upon motion by seconded by
it was Resolved to recommend to the City Council
as follows:
1. That the application for rezoning from R-1 (Single Family) to LB
(Limited Business) and the application for conditional use permit for 24 -Hour
Adolescent Chemical Dependency Rehabilitation Center be recommended for denial
for reasons including the following:
9q
2
a. The Minnesota Legislature has clearly intended that State licensed '
residential facilities be permitted single family uses if they serve 6 or
fewer persons in a single family residential district, and also have directed
municipalities to allow as permitted uses State licensed residential
facilities serving 7 through 16 persons as permitted multi -family residential
uses for purposes of zoning. The subject application does not comply with the
intent of the Legislature to allow such uses within residentially zones areas,
in that the application pro vi aes for-�a— 48-bea -facility, -substantially
® exceeding the Legislative intent within residential districts.
b. Single family residential uses surround the subject property on
three sides with Public Facility uses on the west side of Nicols Road and it
would appear that Limited Business use would not be a desirable use in that
location.
C. It is understood that the applicant is a Minnesota for-profit
corporation and without rezoning, the property would not be allowed to operate
its facility in the existing Peace Reformed Church building, in the event that
® the parcel is construed to be a non -conforming public facility use.
a. Nicols Road adjacent to the parcel and to the west, has been down-
graded from a County Road to a City Street, with the understanding that the
traffic count has been substantially reduced after the opening of new Cedar
Avenue (County Highway #77) directly to the west, and the intent of the City
and the neighboring uses to retain primarily a residential character for
Nicols Road.
e. If the use were changed to a Limited Business use, necessitating a
business land use designation, it would cause a substantial revision in the
character of the neighborhood and potentially allow uses within the Limited
Business category including both permitted and conditional uses described in
Eagan Code, Section 11.20, Suba. 9. "
3
f. The proposal is for a 24 hour use whose intensity is greater than
in Limited Business use areas.
g. In the event that the Limited Business lana use likewise uses
could result in the event that the On -Belay facility is abandoned, which may
not be compatible in any respect to primarily residential area. See
Comprehensive Guide Plan, City of Eagan, 1980, page iv -13.
h. There has been a great deal of neighborhood concern regarding the
lack of compatibility of the proposea..,_On-J3-e-lay..Center with -the primarily
residential neighborhood, as evidenced by the response from the neighbors and
the opposition in the form of Petition(s) submitted opposing the proposed use,
including objections regarding traffic, safety, economic impact on the
neighborhood, (other objections:)
i. In addition, the Lana Use Guide at pages IV -1 and IV -2 provides a
flexibility, or that the plan should be flexible or should serve as a guide
and should posses a degree of flexibility but "the burden of proof and
justification should be the responsibility of the person or persons proposing
the revision". It is the determination of the Planning Commission that
members, although a public hearing on the revisions of the Comprehensive Guide
Plan has not taken place, that the applicant has not sustained the burden of
proof, that there should be a revision in the use of the property to a Limited
Business character.
�. The availability of an existing facility that could house a
rehabilitation center with some revisions to the structure, should not of
itself constitute the basis for .amending the zoning to allow a use that may
not be compatible with the neighborhood.
k. The existing Peace Reformed Church structure could potentially be
used for a church or related facility and therefore, the City's action in
denying the applications does not deprive the owner from an adequate use of
the existing facility. /Q / 4
1. Information received by the City through the Dakota County Social
Services indicates that the proposed chemical dependency type of unit is a
very competitive type use and the fee schedule may make the proposal
financially unstable.
M. Other reasons:
is
Dated:
Those in favor:
Those against:
ATTEST:
By:
•
E. J. Van Overbeke, Clerk
107,--
CITY
0v
5
CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF EAGAN
By:
Beatta Blomquist, Mayor
Agenda Information Memo
May 21, 1986, City Council Meeting
Page Twenty -One
PRELIMINARY PLAT/T.E.M. ADDITION
F. Preliminary Plat, T.E.M. Addition, Consisiting of 3 Single
Family Lots on 3.6 Acres and a Rezoning from A to R-1., Located
at Golden Meadow Road on the North and Schwanz Lake to the South-
west --A public hearing was held by the Advisory Planning Commission
at their last regular meeting on April 22, to consider two (2)
applications submitted by Thomas Murr, requesting a rezoning
from A to R-1 and a preliminary plat approval for T.E.M. Addition.
The Advisory Planning Commission is recommending approval of
these applications. For additional information on this ite ,
O
refer to the Planning and Engineering reports found on pages I[
• through IV— .
The Advisory Parks and Recreation Commission has reviewed the
preliminary plat and has no recommendation to the City Council
regarding, dedication requirements. The reason for inaction on
this item is due to a previous purchase .agreement with Mr. Murr
for the .acquisition of a portion of his parcel to be. incorporated
into Trapp Farm Park. Therefore, with this agreement, parks
dedication requirements were fulfilled for the preliminary plat.
For action that was taken by the Advisory Planning Commission,
refer to a copy of those minutes found on pages /Q through
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the
rezoning and preliminary plat for T.E.M.. Addition as requested
by Thomas Murr.
/03
r-
Il
CITY OF EAGAN
SUBJECT: REZONING
APPLICANT: PRELIMINARY PLAT (T.E.M. ADDITION)
LOCATION
EXISTING ZONING:
THOMAS MURR
NW a SECTION 25
DATE OF 'PUBLIC HEARING: A (AGRICULTERAL)
DATE OF REPORT: APRIL 22, 1986
REPORTED BY: PLANNING & ENGINEERING
® APPLICATION: An application has been submitted requesting a
rezoning and preliminary plat approval for the T.E.M. Addition. This
plat consists of 3 single-family lots on 3.6 acres fronting on Golden
Meadow Road.
COMMENTS: The applicant has an existing home on the proposed middle
lot (Lot 2). It will contain 76,102 sq. ft-.. Lot 1 to the west
will contain 49,694 sq. ft. Both will have 138' of Schwanz Lake
frontage. Lot 3 is a triangular piece containing 18,736 sq. ft. No
setback variances will be required, and all 3 lots were stubbed for
sewer and water when Golden Meadow Road was improved.
The existing driveway servicing 'Lot 2 has a turnaround area that
encroaches on Lot 1. This will need to be removed at the time Lot 1
is sold. Also, the existing septic tank encroaches under Lot 1. It
is staff's recommendation that the applicant hook-up with City
utilities at the time Lot 1 is developed to eliminate potential
• septic tank conflicts.
The park dedication hasbeen completed.
ASSESSMENTS:. This development shall be responsible for the trunk
area storm sewer assessment that the City gave a large lot credit
for. . Project 383 assessed the original parcel 030-29 for 39,592
sq. ft._ ($1,706.40 - $0.0431/sq. ft.) of the total net area of 2.40
acres (104,544 sq. ft.). With the development of - Parcel 030-29, the
large lot credit no longer applies. This development will be
responsible for 64,952 sq.. ft. (104,544-39,592) at the rates in
effect at the time of final platting. Based on 1986 rates, this
amount to $3,2-48. -
�� Z
S
PRELIMINARY PLAT - T.E.M. ADDITION
APRIL 22, 1986
PAGE 2
CONDITIONS:
1. All standard plat conditions shall be adhered to.
2. This development shall dedicate a 30' half right-of-way for
Golden Meadow Road.
3. This development shall be responsible for the trunk area
storm sewer assessment that the City gave credit for under
the large lot policy at the rates in effect at the time of
final platting.
E
•
r
•
Ll
dos
0
Preliminary Plat of:
TEM. ADDITION
QUNSET rr;M ADDITION'
Wr
i/ \ 1 Q • LRT J ,• r
of z
M
� r' ex�rox
1. -
�1 aMN
�y4 y 1 L oVCVQYINO
VICE0.
l.N Ib Yom. IM.M iR
11Ob�)
.4Y N- . R30G S.R.
10.33.01
N.I i_ . I...SII S{M1
(SSi N.w1
�1 aMN
�y4 y 1 L oVCVQYINO
VICE0.
APC Minutes
April 22, 1986
9. In addition, the Land Use Guide at pages IV -1 and IV -2 provides a
flexibility, or that the plan should be flexible or should serve as a guide
and should possess a degree of flexibility but "the burden of proof and
justification should be the responsibilityof the person or persons proposing
the revision". It is the determination of the Planning Commission that
although a public hearing on the revisions of the Comprehensive Guide Plan has
not taken place, that the applicant has -not sustained the burden of proof,
that there should be a revision in the use of the property to a Limited
Business character.
10. The availability of an existing facility that could house a
rehabilitation center with some revisions to the structure, should not of
itself constitute the basis for amending the zoning to allow a use that may
not be compatible with the neighborhood.
® 11. The existing Peace Reformed Church structure could potentially be
used for a church or related facility and therefore, the City's action in
denying the applications does not deprive the owner from an adequate use of
the existing facility.
12. Information received by the City through the Dakota County Social
Services indicates that the proposed chemical dependency type of unit is a
very competitive type use and the fee schedule may make the proposal
financially unstable.
All voted in favor.
T. E. M..ADDITION - PRELIMINARY PLAT a REZONING
The public hearing was then convened on the application for rezoning and
application for the preliminary plat consisting of 3 single family Lots on 3.6
® acres and rezoning from A (Agricultural) to R-1, located in part of the
northwest quarter of Section 25, Golden Meadow Road on the north, and Schwanz
Lake to the southwest. City Planner Runkle introduced the application
indicating that the City utilities would be made use of and the lake dedicated
to the Park Department. Mr. Wayne Cordes appeared on behalf of Mr.. Murr and
indicated that the turnaround area encroaching upon the proposed lot had been
removed and that the drainfield would no longer be used when City utilities
were brought in. Discussion centered around the storm sewer assessment which
would have to be paid due to the loss of Large lot credit upon development.
There were no members of the public present to respond. Trygg moved, Wilkins
seconded .the motion to recommend approval of the rezoning. Ali voted in
favor.
Trygg moved, Wilkins seconded the motion to recommend approval of the
preliminary plat, subject to the following conditions:
1. All standard plat conditions shall be adhered to.
2. This development shall dedicate a 30 foot half right-of-way for Golden
Meadow Road.
/to
7
APC Minutes
April 22, 1986
3. This development shall be responsible for the trunk area storm sewer
assessment that the City gave credit for under the large lot policy at the
rates in effect at the time of final platting.
4. That septic tanks will not be allowed and all lots will be connected
to City service.
All voted in favor.
WINDTREE 7th AND 8th ADDITIONS - PRELIMINARY PLAT
Chairperson McCrea then called the public_ hearing for the application of
Richardson Properties for a preliminary plat consisting of 74 single family
lots of approximately 35 acres on Out Lot A of Windtree 6th Addition, located
in part of the southwest quarter of Section 13, north of Wescott Road and east
of Elrene Road. City Planner Runkle indicated that the proposal had been
before the Planning Commission at a prior date, however, the plat had been
somewhat revised to allow for the preservation of more of the natural
amenities and to provide 85 foot wide lots at the setback line with all lots
meeting or exceeding the 12,000 square foot requirement. Mr. Peter Kenebly
appeared on behalf of the applicant. Questions from the public were
addressed.
Mr. Steve Bryant of West Publishing appeared and advised that West
Publishing was anticipating an expansion of their facility directly east of
this property, which at this time had no screening for Lots 12 through 16.
The builder and developer agreed to the requirement that the proposed buyers
be advised of .the expansion of West Publishing in the L-1 property directly
east of this proposed plat.
Wilkins moved, Voracek seconded the motion to recommend approval of the is
preliminary plat of Windtree 7th and 8th Additions, subject to the following
conditions:
1. The applicant revise the grading plan to suit 2% grade for 100 feet at
street intersections with exception as noted in report.
2. The City shall approve of phasing plans.
3. This development is responsible for a 5 foot concrete walkway along
Wescott Road.
4. This development shall dedicate a. 50 foot half right-of-way for
Wescott Road and a 40 foot half right-of-way for Elrene Road.
5. This development shall dedicate a ponaing and utility easement for JP -
18 to encompass the 871 high water level and a minimum 20 foot utility
easement over any storm sewer line not built within City right-of-way.
6. This development is responsible.for trunk area storm sewer and lateral
benefit from trunk water main assessments at the rates in effect at the time
of final platting.
/6�
•
Agenda Information
May 21, 198'6, City
Page Twenty -Two
Memo
Council Meeting
PRELIMINARY PLAT, WINDTREE 7TH ,.,& 8TH ADDITIONS
G. Preliminary Plat for Windtreee7th and 8th Additions (Judith
Bright), Consisting of 74 Single Family Lots on Approximately
35 Acres on Outlot A of Windtree 6th Addition --A public hearing
was held by the Advisory Planning Commission to consider a
preliminary plat application submitted by Richardson Properties
for Windtree 7th and 8th Additions. The plat consists of 74
single family lots on 35.4 acres, north of Wescott Road and east
of Elrene Road. Action was taken by the APC to recommend approval
of the preliminary plat to the City Council. For additional informa-
tion on this item, refer to the Planning and Engineering report,
a copy is enclosed on pages /// through
The Advisory Parks and Recreation Commission, at its May 1 meeting,
noted that Windtree development has completed its park dedication
requirements, Wescott Station Park, therefore no land or cash
dedication is required. The Commission did recommend that the
Windtree 7th and 8th Additions be responsible for a bituminous
trail along Wescott 'Road through the extent of their plat with
which Richardson Properties is in agreement.
For additional information and action that was taken by the Advisory
Planning Commission, refer to a copy of those minutes found on
pages 1/T through y0
ACTION TO BBE -CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the
preliminary plat for Windtree 7th and 8th Additions.
//b
CITY OF EAGAN
SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY PLAT (WINDTREE 7TH a 8TH ADDITION!
APPLICANT: RICHARDSON PROPERTIES
LOCATION: SW a, SECTION 13
EXISTING ZONING: R-1 (SINGLE FAMILY)
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: APRIL 22, 1986
DATE OF REPORT: APRIL 16, 1986
REPORTED BY: PLANNING & ENGINEERING
APPLICATION; An application has been submitted requesting pre-
liminary plat approval for the Windtree 7th & 8th Additions.
This plat consists of 74 single-family lots on 35.4 acres north
of Wescott Road and east of Elrene Road.
ZONING & LAND USE. The Windtree Addition is zoned R-1 (single
family) with the original layout containing 121 total lots.
The 7th and 8th Additions are located south and east of the
previously platted 5th & 6th Additions and south of Wescott
Station Park. West Publishing forms the eastern property line.
The 7th Addition will contain 39 lots and the 8th Addition 35
lots, giving the project an overall density of 2.1 units per
acre. Almost all lots exceed either the 12,000 sq. ft. minimum
size and 85' width at the 30' setback, line. The lots vary in
size from one at 12,000 sq. .ft. to 57,900 sq.. ft., with most
in the 15-20,000 sq. ft. range.
As with the other additions, the topography is rolling with
numerous hillsides and depressions. There is a variety of mature
trees; maples, aspens, ash and oak are the most common.
GRADING/DRAINAGE: The grading plan the applicant submitted is
feasible. The appl'icant's grading plan meets all existing City
Code requirements with the exception of the 2% maximum grade for
109' at all intersections. Staff feels the applicant can meet
this requirement for .all intersections except east of Ridgewood
Drive on Brentwood Lane. This short segment of Brentwood Lane
between Ridgewood Drive and the access street to Wescott Road is
too short to accommodate a 2% grade east of Ridgewood, and a 2%
grade west of the access street. To meet this would mean the
applicant would need to lower the intersection of Ridgewood Drive
and Brentwood Lane 4'. This would cause excessive slopes going
westerly on Brentwood Lane and also excessive grading in this
vicinity. If the applicant provides a 2% grade on Brentwood Lane
west of the Wescott Road access street, then the grade
approaching the Ridgewood Drive intersection would be abodt 6%.
Staff does not feel this will pose any significant problems
because westbound traffic on Brentwood Lane will not have to stop
WINDTREE 7TH 8 8TH ADD
APRIL 22, 1986
PAGE 2
on an uphill grade. Staff feels it is more important to provide
a flatter grade on Brentwood Lane approaching the Wescott Road
access street to allow the traffic to slow down enough to make
the right-hand turn onto the access street.
This proposed development is located within Major Drainage
District J as shown on the attached, Figure 1. Most of the
drainage from this area is to the north into Pond JP -18. This
pond presently has no positive gravity outlet. Staff does not
feel a positive gravity outlet will be necessary with the
completion of this development. Presently, there is no standing
water in this pond and this pond also has much storage
capability.
The applicant proposes to drain street runoff from a low point at
Brentwood Lane located in the proposed 8th Addition northerly
through backyards between the proposed 7th and 8th Additions. •
This storm water would then be picked up near the north end of
the 8th Addition with storm sewer conveyed under Windtree Drive
to the northeast and into Pond JP -18. This plan will leave some
water ponding on portions of Lots 1 through 4, in the vicinity of
Block 1, of the proposed 8th Addition. This water has a natural
passage way to the north if it rises to an elevation of 907.
UTILITIES: Sanitary sewer and water main of sufficient size,
capacity and depth exist within the existing Windtree 4th, 5th
and 6th Additions. These utilities are of sufficient size,
capacity and depth to provide service to the proposed Windtree
7th and 8th Additions.
This development will not require any trunk sanitary sewer or
water main projects.
STREETS: Existing streets which abut this proposed development 40
include Elrene Road on the west, and Wescott Road on the south.
Ridgewood Drive, Windtree Drive and Stonewood Road all dead-end
into this proposed development. All the previous streets are
under the City of Eagan's jurisdiction. The City's Street Master
Plan classifies Elrene Road as a collector street and Wescott
Road -as a minor arterial street.
The street layout the developer proposes meets with staff
approval. The City will require the developer to construct a 5'
concrete sidewalk along Wescott Road as per standard City policy
regarding minor arterial streets.
RIGHT-OF-WAY/EASEMENTS: The north 50' half right-of-way of
Wescott Road exists as an easement. Staff recommends this
proposed development plat the north 50' half right-of-way of
Wescott Road with the Windtree 7th Addition. This development
proposes on dedicating the City's standard of 60' full right-of-
way for residential streets. This development shall also
dedicate a 40' half right-of-way for Elrene Road.
//v
WINDTREE 7TH & 8TH ADD
APRIL 22, 1986
PAGE 3
Staff recommends the developer provided whatever drainage
easements will be necessary for the overland storm water runoff
he proposes between Ridgewood Drive and Windtree Drive north of
Brentwood Lane. The City will also -require a ponding easement
over Pond JP -18 to encompass the 871. high water elevation. The
City will also need a minimum 20' wide drainage and utility
easement over all storm sewer lines not constructed within City
right-of-way.
PERMITS: This development will require permits or approvals from
the following agencies.
1. MPCA sanitary sewer extension permit.
2. Mn. Dept. of Health- plzi appYoval- for -water main
• extension.
3. MWCC sanitary sewer extension approval.
ASSESSMENTS: This proposed development for Outlot A of the
Windtree 6th Addition is responsible for the following
assessments:
ASSESSMENT SUMMARY TABLE
Description
Trunk Area Storm Sewer
Add'1 Benefit from
Trunk Water Main
1986 Rate Est. Qty.
$ 0.05/sq.ft. 1,222,830/sq.ft. (1)
$11.88/f.f. 1,507/f.f. (2)
$61,141
$17,903
• 5' Conc. Sidewalk $11.81/f.f. 1,717/f.f. $20,278
(1) Includes estimated 20% credit for street R.W.
(2) Includes 150' corner lot credit for Elrene Road
The developer will be responsible for the amount based on the final pla
areas at the rates in effect at the time of final platting.
113
WINDTREE 7TH 8 8TH ADD
APRIL 22, 1986
PAGE 4
CONDITIONS:
1. The applicant revise grading plan to suit 2% grade for 100'
at street intersections with exception as noted in report.
2. The City shall approve of phasing plans.
3. This development is responsible for a 5' concrete walkway
along Wescott Road.
4. This development shall dedicate a 50' half right-of-way for
Wescott Road and a 40' half right-of-way for Elrene Road.
5. This development shall dedicate a ponding and utility
easement for JP -18 to encompass the 871 high water level and
a minimum 20' utility easement- ovei Ahy'storm sewer line not
built within City right-of-way.
6. This development is responsible for trunk area storm sewer
and lateral benefit from trunk water main assessments at the
rates in effect at the time of final platting.
7. All costs of internal public improvements within this
development will be the sole responsibility of this
development.
8. The minimum lot size of 12,0.00 S.F. with 85' frontage
shall be adhered to unless a variance is requested.
9. All conditions that were imposed on the first phase of
Windtree shall be adhered to.
0
•
//✓
--
Q
sauwc
..8
it i i'.P
-.
osr R6
tl
LOLFir
COUNSC
41
�=
d
x�iG^NI
Q� ti
n' Crx f le
CPQ:1 W
a e
KE.
//✓
SHEET NO. 1 OF ] SHEETS ��
................
................
................
................
SUBJECT PARCEL
FIG. #1
City of eagan - approved: standard -
PUBLIC STORM SEWER plate #:
C -
WORK
MASTER PLAN
—{ G q e, VUAYK- be r e d
/d
K- erro r
APC Minutes
April 22, 1986
3. This development shall be responsible for the trunk area storm sewer
assessment that the City gave credit for under the large lot policy at the
rates in effect at the time of final platting.
4. That septic tanks will not be allowed and all lots will be connected
to City service.
All voted in favor.
WINDTREE 7th AND 8th ADDITIONS - PRELIMINARY PLAT
Chairperson McCrea then called the public hearing for the application of
® Richardson Properties for a preliminary plat consisting of 74 single family
lots of approximately 35 acres on Outlet A of Windtree 6th Addition, located
in part of the southwest quarter of Section 13, north of Wescott Road and east
of Elrene Road. City Planner Runkle indicated that the proposal had been
before the Planning Commission at a prior date, however, the plat had been
somewhat revised to allow for the preservation of more of the natural
amenities and to provide 85 foot wide lots at the setback line with all lots
meeting or exceeding the 12,000 square foot requirement. Mr. Peter Kenebly
appeared on behalf of the applicant. Questions from the public were
addressee.
Mr. Steve Bryant of West Publishing appeared and advised that West
Publishing was anticipating an expansion of their facility directly east of
this property, which at this time had no screening for Lots 12 through 16.
The builaer and developer agreed to the requirement that the proposed buyers
be advised of .the expansion of West Publishing in the L-1 property directly
• east of this proposed plat.
Wilkins moved, Voracek seconded the motion to recommend approval of the
preliminary plat of Winatree 7th and 8th Additions, subject to the following
conditions:
1: The applicant revise the grading plan to suit 2% grade for 100 feet at
street intersections with exception as noted in report.
2. The City shall approve of phasing plans.
3. This development is responsible for a 5 foot concrete walkway along
Wescott Road.
4. This development shall dedicate a 50 foot half right-of-way for
Wescott Road and a 40 foot half right-of-way for Elrene Road.
5. This development shall dedicate a ponding and utility easement for JP -
18 to encompass the 871 high water level and a minimum 20 foot utility
easement over any storm sewer line not built within City right-of-way.
6. This development is responsible for trunk area storm sewer and lateral
benefit from trunk water main assessments at the rates in effect at the time
of final platting. //�F
APC Minutes
April 22, 1986
7. All costs of internal public improvements within this development will
be the sole responsibility of this development.
8. The minimum lot size of 12,000 square feet with 85 foot widths at the
front setback shall be adhered to.
9. All conditions that were imposed on the first phase of Windtree shall
be adhered to.
All voted in favor.
RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTHS - AMENDMENT TO EAGAN CITY CODE - CHAPTER 13
Chairperson McCrea then convened the hearing regaraing the amendments to
the Eagan City Code, Chapter 13, entitled Subdivision Regulations. Harrison
moved, Hall seconded the motion to recommend that the revision to right-of-way
widths be referred to the Developers Task Force for study. All voted in
favor.
Harrison then moved, Voracek seconded the motion to recommend approval of
the revision to Section 13.40 to clarify that the amendment of Chapter 13 was
separate from the procedures for preliminary and final plat. Legal counsel
was also advised to have the amendment draft properly reflect that all
proceeaings for preliminary plat and final plat, whether initiated by owners,
the Advisory Planning Commission or City Council, must have a public hearing
with published notice, in addition to mailea notice to all property owners
within 350 feet of the boundary of the proposed plat. All voted in favor
except Hall who voted nay.
SIGN ORDINANCE •
The Commission discussed at length the difficulty of addressing the sign
applications being presented in regard to Town Centre 100 and Town Centre 70, -
without knowing the overall plan for signs as the commercial area develops.
The item was tabled until the developer could provide a more comprehensive
plan to the Planning Commission.
ADJOURNMENT
Wilkins moved, Harrison seconded the motion to adjourn the meeting at
10:15 p.m. All voted in favor.
Secretary - APC
7-6
9
DGK
Agenda Information
May 21, 1986, City
Page Twenty -Three
Memo
Council Meeting
PRELIMINARY PLAT EXTENSION/BLACKHAWK PLAZA
H. Peter Stalland, Blackhawk Plaza One Year Preliminary Plat
Extension --The City has received a letter from Peter Stalland
representing Norse Development Company, requesting an extension
of one (1) year for the Blackhawk Plaza preliminary plat. For
a copy of Mr. Stalland's request, refer to page /ZZ and for
a copy of the plat, refer to a site plan that was approved June
4, 1985 by City Council action, enclosed on page(s) /7--3
•
ACTION TO
BE CONSIDERED ON THIS
ITEM: To approve
or deny the
extension
for one (1) year
for the preliminary
plat entitled
•
Blackhawk
Plaza.
•
NORSE DEVELOPMENT CO.
ONE CORPORATE CENTER. FINANCIAL PLAZA
7261 OHMS LANE
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55435
Mr. Thomas Hedges
City Manager
City of Eagan
P.O. Box 21199
3830 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, MN 55121
Re: Blackhawk Plaza
Dear Tom,
May 5, 1986
:v
0
TELEPHONE
(613) 835.5577
As you may recall, on June 4, 1985 the City Council approved a preliminary
® plat for Blackhawk Plaza located at the corner of Diffley and I -35E. Since
it is unlikely that we wiil.be able to submit a final plat application prior
to the end of our one year period pursuant to City Ordinance ® 13.20(3),
we hereby request an extension of another year period for continued effectiveness
of our preliminary plat. I assume that you will need to place this matter
before the Council; I will look forward to hearing from you as to the date.
For a variety of reasons, we have not been able to proceed with the development
of this project as quickly as we had originally anticipated. However, we
are getting much closer to finalizing our development plans. Without an
extension from the Council, we would suffer substantial financial damage.
Thank you for your consideration.
• You
Pet
KPS;jj
cc Dale Runkle
AREA USE DUMMARYM.y . '
wui m l�'..r meltll �IIW
_ SHOPPING CENTER
EXCEPTIUII •T,
f_
L-------
1 �r'
6
nu.m .r u.e .u.raen ......_ _ .. _,
ENGINEERING _
COMPRNY, INC.?'f��,u
PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN
BLACKHAWK PLAZA
NORSE DEVELOI
COMPANY
01m
" \d"1� '•moi.
g�R '•
ti
3,
D • �OS�
DIM
0 T
/
h
t 4
:I�
- � •—
-Y
o9'uN
.E 5Q'
1 e
S
`
VTER
."��•
JbffY
PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN
BLACKHAWK PLAZA
NORSE DEVELOI
COMPANY
01m
Agenda Information Memo
May 21, 1986, City Council Meeting
Page Twenty -Four
GROUP W/TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP
I. Group W Cable System/Transfer of Ownership --Group W Cable of
Burnsville/Eagan, Inc., has requested the consent of the Cities of
Burnsville and Eagan to the transfer of ownership and control in
Group W to a group of five Buyers (Transaction #1) and the
transfer of ownership and control and ultimate transfer of the
Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance to North Central Cable
Communications, L.P. (Transaction #:2). Under the Franchise Ordi-
nance,, Group W is obligated to receive the Cities' approval for
both transactions. For further background and a more in-depth
explanation of Transactions #1 and #2,, refer to Commission legal
counsel Tom Creighton's memo enclosed on pages1l,.5through1w_.
Transaction #1:
Briefly, Transaction #1 involves Westinghouse Broadcasting and
Cable, Inc. 's (the parent company of Group W') sale and transfer of
100% of its stock in Group W Cable to a group of five Buyers.
These Buyers, including their affiliates and assignees, are:
American Television and Communications Corporation, Comcast Corpora-
tion, Daniels & Associates, Inc., TCI Holdings, 'Inc. and Century
Southwest Cable Television, Inc. The Burnsville/Eagan Cable Commis-
sion, with the assistance of Tom Creighton, has done extensive
research into three areas of the transferees' (Buyers') qualifica-
tions: 1,) legal, 2) technical„ and 3) financial. After reviewing
the results of this investigation, the Commission found the Buyers'
qualifications to be satisfactory. On May 8, 1986, at a meeting of
the Burnsville/Eagan Cable Communications Commission, Transaction
#1 was approved subject to the conditions outlined in the resolu-
tion enclosed on pages through it1a . A copy of a resolution
•granting the Eagan City Council's approval to Transaction #1 is
enclosed on pages through /53 Since Transaction #1 is a
stock transfer in which Group W, Inc. and Group W of
Burnsville/Eagan, Inc. remain intact, it is not necessary to
transfer the cable franchise at the conclusion of Transaction #1.
Transaction#2:
The second transaction involves the specific transfer of Group W
of Burnsville/Eagan, Inc. to North Central Cable Communications,
L. P. An investigation into the same areas of qualification was
instituted by the Cable Commission for Transaction #2. While the
legal and technical qualifications seem to be satisfactory, North
Central has either not provided, or not .provided in sufficient
detail, the financial information necessary to make an informed
decision concerning Transaction #2. Please refer to the Findings
of Fact, Conclusions, and Recommended Resolution, enclosed on
pages -
through /4/ On May 8, 1986, the Burnsville/Eagan
Cable Communications Commission recommended denial of Transaction
/L�
Agenda Information Memo
May 21, 1986, City Council Meeting
Page Twenty -Five
#2. Also enclosed on pages 14 L through A is a copy of a
resolution denying approval of Transaction #2 by the Eagan City
Council.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: 1) To approve or deny Trans-
action #1 involving the sale and transfer of 100% of Westinghouse
Broadcasting and Cable, Inc. 's stock to a group of five Buyers;
and 2) to approve or deny Transaction #2 involving the specific
transfer of Group W of Burnsville/Eagan, Inc. to North Central
Cable Communications, L.P.
/z�k
n
O'CONNOR & HANNAN
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
ruwl.IAmw
.w.[•rv.a ior:.Icewo J... a+vxon+va•
•iaC.Jun•L•C+•
+°aur
lbssr. s. x
a
ivlo ..l.•
g.*1 .•[roll'' O LOx.o
•.W.[[uai.oxIn
L[.
L. 11—S
3800 IDS CENTER
u [
FIc..+a
[ Ix .. auao•
C.•Ia,LMaOx, Jw.
III. Ol wl.'u. O+O
+.xcx•.o•o �.
80 SOUTH EIGHTH STREET
WILL ,..<IA".xw
ou
ti.�u L.w n[a
MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 85402-2254
vuow L. c.+xl...L
[Wr [. "yo- L.
�[aucnvw.0
�w.•u J. a+lnu
�:w.°u'+"axiii:[Ix
:: ---A ixv.Ll[xauao
1612)341-3800
r4 Jy.OW�.I
LLL.•......
.. -Al a...[ouw
f•O.[. J. AIL It
TELEX 29-0584
G." J... AL..C.
p C
Ilrl[O[w�G� M. INC."
OOL
°:LL.,
TELECOPIER 16121 341-3800 12561
pyo
two... o. u[i°xp+
a.cu.L CCLw.[L
r.LOoo.I ...0+eu
.pl ...
... ur..,"ILIA..
WILLI.. IL .911
DIRECT DIAL NUMBER
IAEANERIAmcc ruwlx.,o.,o C. om[a waa,p IArn[c
a:-It
V: anm ..Lx ccxrcx Iola �CPMYLV.xl w[.u[ .... 2ME
17n LI Ga.ar"[[r a.,xVI O.G a00°. -,.:!.!antic
SIN ET NA....,+:bo
(612) 343-1298
....... .a
t. ED ..3.-.1A7
coal aio.noo
O•COLw.il LLI•.�...
°Ir CLLw.n YJL C°Lw.IL
w �IM1 I..IA� .•xl J. .1+0.•
'LT..
�C -
1......Z.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Directors of the Burnsville%Eagan-Cable "-
® Communications Commission
FROM: Thomas D. Creighton
DATE: April 10, 1986
RE: Group W Cable, Incorporated Request for Approval of
Transfer of Ownership and Control
CHRIST—
NORMw •Lc•s•
N"rvL,
a.
Cn...[r [o[xarcl.•
!.DREW + All •
n"ccxu va.•icva•
r....... .... `.S.
o•Llo •, [.sau•
u�+. o. v.LLco°a•
Please find below a summary and analysis of proposed transactions
number 1 and 2 regarding a request from Group W Cable, Incorporated,
to the Member Cities of the Burnsville/Eagan Cable Communications
• Commission to approve the sale and transfer of all of the issued
and outstanding shares of.the capital stock of Group W Cable,
Incorporated ("Group WI') to a group of five Buyers (Transaction
#1) and the sale of the stock in Group W Cable of Burnsville/Eagan,
Incorporated and transfer of the cable franchise to North Central
Cable Communications Company, L.P. (Transaction #2).
The purpose of this report is to provide the Commission
with an understanding of the transactions and the standard for
reviewing whether to approve such transactions.
/-,7 15'
TRANSACTION #1
I. Introduction
This portion of .the memorandum provides an analysis of
the proposed Transaction #1 involving the'proposed sale and
transfer of all of the issued and outstanding shares of the
capital stock of Group W from Westinghouse Broadcasting and
Cable, Incorporated ("Westinghouse"), to a group of five Buyers.
II. Description of 'Transaction
The proposed Transaction #1 involves the following entities:
1. Westinghouse Broadcasting and Cable, Incorporated ("Westinghouse"
2. American Television and Communications Corporation
and its affiliates and assignees_("ATC");
3. Comcast Corporation and its affiliates and assignees
("Comcast");
4. Daniels & Associates, Inc. and its affiliates and assignees
("Daniels");
5. TCI Holdings, Inc. and its affiliates and assignees
("TCIH"); and
6. Century Southwest Cable Television, Inc. and its affiliates
and assignees ("Century").
Numbers two through six, above, or their designated affiliates
or assignees are hereby referred to collectively as "Buyers".
Sometime in June of 1986 (hereinafter referred to as the
"closing") the Buyers are jointly and severally obligated to
close the purchase of Group W's stock from Westinghouse subject
to the terms and conditions of a purchase agreement dated as
of December 23, 1985.
Upon the closing, the stock and assets of Group W will
be owned by the Buyers in the following approximate proportions:
2 -
TCIH and
its
affiliates or
assignees
32.68
ATC and
its
affiliates or
assignees
26.48
Comcast
and
its affiliates
or assignees
25.48
Century
and
its affiliates
or assignees
12:•08
Daniels
and
its affiliates
or assignees
3.68
100.08
The Buyers have agreed that, upon the closing, they will
elect the following individuals to serve as directors of Group W:
Name
Presently an
officer of;
Thomas W. Binning ATC
®Stewart Blair TCIH
Julian A. Brodsky Comcast
Thomas A. Marinkovich Daniels
Leonard Tow Century
office Held
Executive Vice President
Senior Vice President
Senior Vice President
President
President
After the closing, Group W will be supervised by the Board
of Directors specified above and each Buyer will have primary
operational responsibility for a group of cable systems which
it has agreed to subsequently purchase or dispose of pursuant
to the purchase agreement.
• For the purpose of our analysis the six suburban Minnesota
systems have been assigned to Daniels. Daniels & Associates
has assigned its interests to Daniels -Hauser Holding Company
("D -H Holdings"), a Colorado general partnership consisting
of Daniels & Associates, Inc. and North Central Cable Communications,
L.P. as general partners. North Central Cable Communications,
L.P. ("North Central") is a. Minnesota limited partnership consisting
of Hauser Cable Communications Incorporated as general partner
and R.E. Hauser Incorporated as limited partner_.
The Buyers have also agreed that as soon as possible after
the closing Group W will transfer control and ownership of the
Group W subsidiaries to the individual.Buyers (in our case Daniels
which has assigned its interest to D -H Holdings). This transaction
is described as Transaction #2, below, and cannot occur without
your specific review and approval. Nevertheless, the management
of your system will be immediately undertaken by North Central,
as agreed by the Buyers., upon the conclusion of Transaction
#1. Although Transactions #1 and #2 require your approval,
this change in management of your system can legally occur without
your approval.
III. Standard of Review
11
The Commission's task in Transaction #1 is to review Transaction
#1 and to recommend to its Member Cities approval or denial
of the transfer of stock from Westinghouse to the group of Buyers.
The Cities must make the ultimate determination. The standard
of review is that the Cities' consent shall not be unreasonably
withheld. For the purpose of determining whether it will consent
to the
change
of
control
in Group
W, the Commission has made
•
inquiry
into
the
legal,
technical,
and financial qualifications
of the Buyers.
The analysis of the proposed Transaction #1 is somewhat
different from the analysis of the proposed Transaction #2.
Since proposed Transaction #1 is a stock transfer, in which
Group W Incorporated and Group W of Burnsville/Eagan, Incorporated
remain intact, it is not necessary to transfer the franchise
at the conclusion of Transaction #1. Therefore, the performance
• of your cable communications franchise is still guaranteed by.
Group W Incorporated who will be controlled by new stock owners
The assets of Group W Incorporated appeal to remain intact at
the conclusion of Transaction #1. Only the management of Group
W, Incorporated (through its Board of Directors) and of the
six Minnesota suburban systems through North Central will be
affected.
The.purchase agreement between Westinghouse and the Buyers
requires that the Buyers assume all Group.W Incorporated systems
"as is". The Buyers are not permitted-ta—r-equest or make -any
• franchise modifications, nor have you been requested.by the
Buyers to make any such franchise modifications.
The Commission should consider the following factors in
determining whether to recommend approval or denial of the transfer
to the Group of Buyers:
1) Legal and character qualifications of Group W and the
Buyers;
2) Technical ability of Group W as a result of the change
in control (and if necessary the technical ability
of the Buyers); and
3) Financial stability of Group W as a result of the change
of control (and if necessary the financial stability
of the stockholder, although such stockholders, as
was Westinghouse, are not required to pledge any of
their corporate assets to insure the financial stability
of Group W Incorporated).
IV. Analysis
A. Legal qualifications
The legal qualifications standard relates primarily to
an analysis of whether the entities involved in the transaction
are duly organized and authorized to own the cable system and
franchise.
- 5 -
/IY
Each of the entities involved in this transaction are duly
organized and authorized to own a cable system and franchise.
Two of the Buyers are the two largest cable companies in the
United States.
The character qualifications of the Buyers are satisfactory.
Therefore, based upon our review of the information provided,
it would appear that the commission or Cities could not reasonably
withhold approval of Transfer #1 based upon the legal or character
qualifications of the Buyers.
B. Technical ability --:--•-•--.. --- .-- - ---
The technical ability factor relates to the technical expertise
and experience in operating and maintaining a cable system.
Since Group W Incorporated will remain in existence, the technical
ability of the franchise holder is not at question. However,
a review of the Buyers may be undertaken. In such a review,
it is noted that the Buyers have extensive cable television
experience. Therefore, in reviewing the technical abilities
of the Buyers, it would be unreasonable to assume that the Buyers
are not technically qualified to own and operate your cable
•
system.
Since North Central has.been designated as the manager
of your cable systems, it may be a valid inquiry to determine
the technical ability of such management. The analysis found
in Transaction #2, below, more fully analyzes the technical
ability of North Central. Based upon the information provided
to us, North Central through its principals, have extensive
cable management capability and experience sufficient to satisfy
the technical ability factor as applied to your respective cable
system.
Based upon our review.of the information provided, it would
appear that neither the Commission nor Cities could reasonably
withhold approval of Transfer #1 based upon the technical ability
of the Buyers.
C. Financial stability
The financial stability factor relates to whether the transferee
has the financial resources available or committed to not only
• acquire the system, but also to meet the existing franchise
requirements. It was not necessary to evaluate the financial
resources of the Buyers for the purpose of Transaction #1.
The Buyers, as stockholders, are not required to commit their
individual corporate assets to the performance of Group W Incorporated
or its subsidiaries. Although Westinghouse Incorporated has
at times apparently provided financial assistance to Group W,
Incorporated, as a stockholder Westinghouse would not be required
is
to commit financial resources to the performance of its subsidiary.
Therefore, apparently nothing has changed as to the stockholder
resources available to Group w Incorporated. Additionally,
the assets of Group W Incorporated apparently remain intact
at the conclusion of Transaction #1. This, also, does not change
from that situation which existed prior to the closing of Transaction 41.
As the new corporate board of directors proceeds to transfer
systems in Group W Incorporated to the ultimate Buyers, obviously,
the resources available to Group W Incorporated will dwindle.
- 7 -
/3/
While this 'is of concern, Group W, Inc. could have apparently
at any time, even prior to Transaction #1, "sold -off" its other
existing systems. A Court would have likely concluded that
the Member Cities would not have had authority to stop Group
W, Inc. from diluting its assets by selling other systems.
Therefore, a logical analysis would be that the Member Cities
cannot control what the new corporate board will do with the
other Group W Systems. So long as Group W, Inc. exists and
guarantees performance of the existing franchises, we cannot
discern a reasonable basis to deny the transfer based on the
financial stability of Group W, Inc. in light of the considerable
financial resources available to Group W at the conclusion of
Transaction #1.
V. Conclusion
As a result of the above, it would appear that the Commission
or Cities could not reasonably withhold approval of Transfer #1.
•
transaction 1
BEFORE AFTER
Westinghouse Broadcasting and -------------------j American Television and
Cable, Inc. Communications Corporation (26.48)
Century Southwest Cable
Television, Inc. (12.08)
Comcast Corporation (25.48)
Daniels -Hauser Holdings (3.68)
TCI Holdings, Inc. (32.68)
(all of the above "and its affiliates
or assignees")
1008 stock ownership 1008 stock ownership
I
i
.Group W, Inc. Group W, Inc.
1008 stock ownership 1008 stock ownership
Group W of Burnsville/Eagan, Inc. Group W of Burnsville/Eagan, Inc.
Transaction #2
I. INTRODUCTION
This portion of the memorandum provides an analysis of
the proposed Transaction #2 involving, the sale of the stock
in Group W Cable of Burnsville/Eagan, Inc. and Group W,. Inc.
and transfer of the cable franchise to North Central Cable Communications
Company, L.P. The purpose of this section is to provide the
Commission with an understanding of Transaction #,2 and the standard
for reviewing whether to approve it.
II. DESCRIPTION OF TRANSACTION-- --
The proposed transaction involves the following entities: •
1. Daniels & Associates, Inc. ("Daniels") -- a Delaware
Corporation.
2. Daniels - Hauser Holding Company ("D -H Holdings") --
a Colorado general partnership consisting of Daniels
& Associates, Inc. and North Central Cable Communications,
L.P. as general partners.
3. North Central Cable Communications, L.P. ("North Central")
-- a Minnesota limited partnership consisting of
Hauser Cable Communications Inc. as general partner,
and R.E. Hauser, Inc. as limited partner.
4. Hauser Cable Communications, Inc. ("Hauser") -- a Delaware
corporation. •
We have reviewed the necessary documentation to conclude
that each of the entities is duly organized and in existence.
We have reviewed a Certification Regarding Daniels -Hauser Holdings,
which constitutes the partnership agreement of D -H Holdings,
a Certificate of Formation issued by the Minnesota Secretary
of State and Limited Partnership Agreement creating North Central,
and a Certificate of Formation issued by the Delaware Secretary
of State and Articles of Incorporation creating Hauser. Additionally,
A3
—lo—
0
we have reviewed an Application of Foreign Corporation for a
Certificate of Authority to Transact Business in Minnesota on
behalf of Hauser. The genuineness of all documents and authenticity
of all signatures has been presumed. The organizational existence
of Daniels has been certified by the Buyers.
To facilitate an understanding of the transaction, it should
be kept in mind that each of the aforementioned organizations
is a separate and distinct entity. North Central, Hauser, and
D -H Holdings are entities which have been newly created for
the purpose of accomplishing Transaction #2.
From the information we have reviewed, it appears that
Daniels is an original member of the Buyer group to acquire
the stock in Group W Cable, Inc: from Westinghouse Broadcasting
and Cable, Inc. (Transaction #1). The Purchase Agreement allows
Daniels to assign its rights to, purchase stock to other entities.
We have reviewed a certification indicating that Daniels has
assigned its rights and obligations in Transaction #1 to D -H
Holdings. In effect, D -H Holdings is a member of the Buyer
® group.
As stated above, upon the closing of Transaction #1 in
June of 1986, D -H Holdings, in conjunction with the other four
members of the Buyer group, will own 100 percent of the outstanding
stock in Group W Cable, Inc. D -H Holdings' approximate proportion
of ownership is 3.6 percent. The Buyer group has agreed among
themselves how they intend to operate Group W, Inc., after the
closing of Transaction #1. The Buyers have agreed to elect
certain individuals to the Board of Directors to supervise the
business of Group W, Inc.
D -H Holdings has an option to purchase and immediately
receive transfer of your specific system, from Group W, Inc.
at any time after the closing of Transaction #1. If D -H Holdings.
exercises this option, it will immediately transfer your system
to North Central: Until such time as D -H Holdings exercises
this option, North Central will manage your system, which will
remain owned by Group W, Inc.
The apparent reason for the complexity and subsequent transfers
of your system is certain potential tax ramifications arising
from the transactions. Congress is currently considering legislatioro
which may dramatically increase the tax liability of the transaction.
It is possible that enactment of the tax legislation or other
unanticipated changes in the business or regulatory climate
may delay the exercise of the option to purchase by D -H Holdings
and the subsequent transfer of your system to North Central.
Nevertheless, the management of your system will be immediately
undertaken by North Central, as agreed by the Buyers, upon the
conclusion of Transaction #1. Although Transactions #1 and
#2 require your approval, this change in management of your
system can legally occur without your approval.
III. STANDARD OF REVIEW
The Commission's task in Transaction #2 is to review the
information provided regarding the transaction and to recommend
to its member Cities approval or denial of the transfer of stock
and transfer of the franchise from Group W, Inc. to D -H Holdings
and subsequently to North Central. Once again, the Cities must
- 12
/3)(1
make the ultimate determination. The franchise and state statute
provides the Cities with the express right to approve or disapprove
the transfer of ownership in Group W of Burnsville/Eagan, Inc.
and the transfer of the franchise. The standard of review is
that the Cities' consent shall not be unreasonably withheld.
For the purpose of determining whether it will consent to the
change in control and transfer of the franchise, the Commission
has made inquiry into the legal,, technical, and financial qualifications
of North Central.
In analyzing Transaction #2, the-Commkssion--must consider
whether North Central meets all of the criteria originally considered.
in initially granting the franchise to Group W of Burnsville/Eagan,
Inc. Note, however, that this analysis is not a comparison
between Group W and North Central to determine which is more
qualified. Rather, the analysis is an application of the same
factors to determine whether North Central satisfies the standards
to the reasonable satisfaction of the City.
The Commission should consider the following factors in
• determining whether to recommend approval or denial of the transfer
to North Central:
1) Legal and character qualifications of North Central;
2) Technical ability of North Central; and
3) Financial stability of North Central.
IV. ANALYSIS
The sources of information used in examining the legal.,
technical, and financial abilities of North Central include
the Municipal Request For Information and other supplemental
information provided by Group W and North Central.
- 13 -
/37
A. Legal Qualifications
The legal qualifications standard relates primarily to
an analysis of whether the entities involved in the transaction
are duly organized and authorized to own the cable system and
franchise. Certain entities, such as certain television broadcasting
stations, national television networks, and certain telephone
companies, are prohibited by Federal law from owning, operating,
or controlling a cable television system. We have reviewed
the Federal cross -ownership prohibitions and have determined
them to be inapplicable. Moreover, we ode been --provided with
the necessary documentation which shows that each of the entities •
involved in this transaction are duly organized and authorized
to own a cable system and franchise.
The character qualifications of North Central, as well
as the principals of the organization, are satisfactory. North
Central has provided information showing that neither it nor
any principal has ever been convicted'in a criminal proceeding
of any crimes against character.
Based upon our review of the information provided, it would 0
appear that the Commission or Cities could not reasonably withhold
approval of the transfer based upon the legal or character qualifications
of North Central.
B. Technical Ability
The technical ability factor relates to the technical expertise
and experience in operating and maintaining a cable system.
This analysis focuses upon the current and former experiences
- 14 -
�J�
of the transferee. Since North Central is a new entity, it
has not directly owned or operated any cable systems. Therefore,
the ability of its managing principals must be reviewed. Information
has been provided concerning such other individuals' and entities'
experiences in owning, operating, and managing cable systems.
Hauser Cable Communications, Inc., as general partner of
North Central, will be primarily responsible for the management
of North Central. A majority interest in Hauser will be.held
by Gustave M. Hauser, or a company controlled by Mr. Hauser.
Additionally, John D. Evans, or a company controlled by Mr.
® Evans, will also own stock in Hauser.
Moreover, Hauser has stated that it intends to enter into
a standard management agreement with Hauser Communications,
Inc. ("HC") to be responsible for the day-to-day supervisory
management of North Central and the cable systems.
The information which we have reviewed indicates that Mr.
Hauser, Mr. Evans, and HC have extensive cable management capability
and experience sufficient to satisfy the technical ability factor
• as applied to your respective cable system. Mr. Hauser is Chairman.
and Chief Executive Officer of HC, Arlington Cable Partners,
and SuburbanCablevision Company. He formerly served as Chairman
and Chief Executive Officer of Warner Amex Cable Communications,
Inc. He has been involved in cable television and other electronic
communications since the early 1960's. Mr. Evans, as President
of HC and Arlington Cable Partners, has 13 years of management
experience in the cable television industry. He manages a 34,000
subscriber cable system in Arlington, Virginia and a 33,000
- 15' -
/3�1
subscriber system in Brooklyn Park, Minnesota. He has also
served as System and Regional Manager for over 90,000 subscribers
in Columbus, Ohio, for American Television and Communications.
Hauser Communications, Inc., which will be the manager
of your cable system, has experience,in managing the Arlington
System, Brooklyn Center system, and is intending to acquire
a 23,000 subscriber system in Montgomery County, Maryland.
Based upon our review.of the information provided, it would
appear that neither the Commission nor Cities could reasonably
withhold approval of :the transfer based upon the technical ability
of the transferee.
C. Financial Stability
The financial stability factor relates to whether the transferee
has the financial resources available or committed to not only
acquire the system, but also to meet the existing franchise
requirements. The Commission has engaged Mr. Kevin P. Cattoor,
Financial Communications Consultant, to undertake a review of
this factor. Mr. Cattoor has prepared an independent report
of his analysis and the Commission is referred thereto.
D. Other Relevant Factors
Other appropriate factors which have been reviewed for
the purpose of determining whether to approve or deny this transaction
are contained in the Municipal Request For Information. The
most significant factor to be considered is whether the cable
franchise will be transferred intact and whether North Central
will agree to comply with all existing franchise requirements.
The information which we have reviewed indicates that North
Central is not currently requesting any franchise modifications
0
as a condition of the transfer. Moreover, the Purchase Agreement
among the parties to Transaction #1 specifically prohibits any
franchise modifications. In,other words, all systems are to
be sold and transferred "as -is". Consequently, North Central
will agree to receive transfer of the franchise intact..
With respect to the franchise requirements regarding the
existing service area and line extensions, North Central has
indicated -that it will comply with the existing franchise requirements
and obligations. The construction practices of North Central
regarding aerial and underground installation -and standards .
• will also conform to existing franchise requirements. North
Central has not proposed any modifications to the channel capacity
or system design and will assume all existing franchise obligations
regarding future activation of channel capacity and upstream
capabilities, interconnection, performance testing and system
maintenance and customer complaint policies. North Central
does not propose any addition or deletion of any programming
services.
® In the area of local programming and public access, North
Central will agree to assume all existing franchise commitments,
including equipment, facilities, staff_, and funding. With respect
to'the information contained on Form M, North Central has indicated
a desire in the future to divest itself of the local origination
and access programming functions and transfer these obligations
to the Commission or Cities. Additionally, North Central would
desire the creation of a non-profit corporation to administer
the community programming commitment and would propose a contribution
17 -
/sZ/
of $ .45 per subscriber (with an annual escalation) toward access
in addition to the 5 percent franchise fee.
It is essential that the Commission understand that the
information contained in Form M is not a current request for
a franchise modification. Moreover, the statements made are
not a definite proposal which the Commission or Cities must
accept should it approve the transfer to North Central. North
Central will agree to accept the transfer of the franchise as
it exists without any modification of community programming
obligations. To the extent North Central would seek any -franchise
modification subsequent to a transfer, the Commission would •
be free to accept or refect any proposal at that time consistent
with any applicable law which would affect the negotiations
at the time they took place.
It is our opinion that any statements made by North Central
with respect to its desire to seek any franchise modifications
in the future are legally irrelevant to consideration of the
transfer under current applicable law. In other words, the
Commission or Cities could not unreasonably withhold approval •
of the transfer based upon anticipated requests for future franchise
modifications. Current litigation involving the,new Federal
law related to "commercial impracticability" may affect this
analysis. Prior to your final consideration, the most current
legal decisions in this area must be reviewed. The key point
for the Commission's consideration is.whether North Central -
will agree to accept the existing obligations and commitments
in the franchise. To this extent, North Central has agreed.
With respect to proposed rates, North Central is not proposing
any changes in the applicable franchise requirements and will
operate consistent with federal law in setting rates. For those
rates which are deregulated under federal law, North Central
is permitted to charge whatever it desires. Any regulated rate
will remain the same.
North Central has also indicated that it will comply with
all federal, state, and local laws relating to discrimination,
equal opportunity employment programs and affirmative action
programs. Moreover, North Central will abide by all existing
® franchise requirements relating to staff positions and managers,
to the extent these issues are subject to the Commission's control.
Based upon our review of the information constituting other
appropriate factors, and recognizing the uncertainty as to judicial
interpretations of the 1984 Federal Cable Act, it does not appear
that there is any legally justifiable reason to withhold approval
of the transfer to North Central in the areas of legal, technical
or other relevant considerations.
The area of financial ability to perform the franchise
40
commitment's appears to be the only remaining question for the
Commission's consideration, albeit an extremely significant
consideration. Upon the completion of Mr. Cattoor's analysis,
a staff recommendation as to financial ability will be forthcoming.
Until such time, the Commission should not approve or disapprove
Transaction #2.
- 19 -
E
Transaction 2
BEFORE
Group W, Inc. -----`-------------
1008 stock ownership
�I
Group W of Burnsville/Eagan, Inc.
Daniels -Hauser Holdings ----------
1008 stock ownership
Group W of Burnsville/Eagan, Inc.
46
STEP 1 AFTER
-------------�j Daniels -Hauser Holdings
100% stock ownership
Group W of Burnsville/Eagan, Inc.
i
CD
N
STEP 2 1
------------------> North Central Cable Communication, L.P.
100% stock ownership \
Group W of Burnsville/Eagan, Inc.
M
II RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL
REGARDING THE TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP
{/.�.. OF GROUP W CABLE, INC.
WHEREAS, the Burnsville/Eagan Cable Communications Commission
(hereinafter "Commission") is delegated the authority and
responsibility to coordinate., administer and enforce the
Cable Communications Franchise Ordinances, as amended,
of its.Member Cities pursuant to the terms of a Joint and
Cooperative Agreement for the Administration of a Cable
Television Franchise; and
® WHEREAS, Group W Cable, Inc., a New York Corporation (hereinafter
"Group W Cable"), by and through Group W Cable of Burnsville/Eagan,
Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary, owns, operates and maintains
a cable television system in the Member Cities pursuant
to the terms and conditions of the Cable Communications
Franchise Ordinances, as amended, in effect in the Member
Cities; and
WHEREAS, Group W Cable's parent corporation, Westinghouse Broadcasting
and Cable, Inc., an Indiana Corporation (hereinafter "Westinghouse.")
desires to sell and otherwise transfer all of the issued
and outstanding shares of the capital stock of Group W
Cable to Century Southwest Cable Television, Inc., a Delaware
Corporation; TCI Holdings, Inc., a Colorado Corporation;
American Television and Communications Corporation, a Delaware
Corporation; and affiliates of, or subsidiaries or partnerships
owned or controlled by, Houston Industries Incorporated,
a Texas Corporation, Comcast Corporation, a Pennsylvania
Corporation, Daniels & Associates, Inc., a, Delaware Corporation,
41 and American Television and Communications Corporation Y
(hereinafter "Buyers"), and thereby transfer control of
l
Group W Cable to the Buyers; and
WHEREAS, Group W Cable has requested the consent from the Member
Cities to a change in ownership and control of Group W
Cable to the Buyers and the transfer of ownership and control
and ultimate transfer of the Cable Communications Franchise
Ordinance as amended to North Central Cable Communications,
L.P.; and
WHEREAS, the Commission has reviewed the legal, technical, and
financial qualifications of Buyers and found them adequate
to own and operate Group W Cable; and
WHEREAS, the Commission is continuing to review the legal, technical,
and financial qualifications of North Central Cable Communications,
L.P. as it relates to the transfer of ownership and control
and ultimate transfer of the Cable Communications Franchise
Ordinance, as amended; and
WHEREAS, the Commission is only willing to recommend to its
Member Cities approval of the transfer of control of Group •
W Cable to Buyers subject to the actual closing of the
stock sale in June, 1986; and
WHEREAS,, the Commission has been advised by Group W Cable that
the approval of such stock transfer to Buyers shall in
no way be interpreted as an approval of the transfer of
ownership and control and ultimate transfer of the Cable
Communications Franchise Ordinance to North Central Cable
Communications, L.P.
lq�
- 2 -
1,
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Burnsville/Eagan Cable
Communications Commission:
1. That the,Burnsville/Eagan Cable Communications Commission
recommends to its Member Cities approval by resolution of
the sale by Westinghouse of all of the issued and outstanding
shares of the capital stock of Group W Cable, Inc. and the
transfer of control of Group W Cable, Inc. to the Buyers
subject to an actual closing of the stock sale transaction
in June, 1986 pursuant to the terms and conditions currently
understood by the Commission as evidenced by the Notice
• of transfer to said Commission and its Member Cities.
2. That the approval of the transfer of ownership and control
of Group W Cable, Inc. to the Buyers is hereby deemed not
to include any approval, either express or implied, as to
any subsequent transfer of ownership or control or transfer
of the Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance to North
CentraliCable Communications, L.P., or to any other entity
or individual.
® 3. That the Burnsville/Eagan Cable Communications Commission
will continue to review the request of Group W Cable, Inc.
regarding a change in control and transfer of the Cable
Communications Franchise Ordinance as amended to North Central
Cable Communications, L.P. and will in the future prepare
a separate recommendation for its Member Cities regarding
such change in control and transfer.
4. That this recommendation and its acceptance by the Member
Citiesishall be null, void and of no effect should any entity
or individual successfully litigate that the recommendation
N7
3 -
0 or approval is also an approval, either express or implied,
as to any subsequent transfer of ownership or control or i
transfer of the Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance
to North Central Cable Communications, L.P.,, or to any other
entity or individual.
5. That this approval is specifically conditioned upon payment
in full prior to an actual closing of the stock sale transaction
in June, 1986 of all expenses incurred by Commission related
to the Request for Approval of Transfer dated February 4,
1986, including those related expenses incurred prior to
February 4, 1986, but incurred in preparation for the receipt
of. the Request for Approval.
The above listed resolution was moved by Commission Director
en I and duly seconded by Commission
Director � Id
The following Commission Directors voted in the affirmative:
wua �{� ca dig (2 i krc �i erceJ Ike'—i z-) C l i s
Frw,� 1C�
The following Commission Directors voted in the negative: •
/Vd h(
The above resolution was duly adopted this day
of 1986.
111/'� � �;►
/4 /4
- 4 -
Y-
I
f�
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF DAKOTA
CITY OF
RESOLUTION NO. APPROVING
THE TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP
OF GROUP W CABLE, INC.
WHEREAS, Group W Cable, Inc., a New York Corporation (hereinafter
"Group W Cable"), by and through Group W Cable of Burnsville/Eagan,
Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary, owns, operates and maintains
a cable television system in the City pursuant to the terms
and conditions of City Ordinance -No --"--'(hereinafter
® "Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance"); and
WHEREAS, Group W Cable's parent corporation, Westinghouse Broadcasting
and Cable, Inc., an Indiana Corporation (hereinafter -"Westinghouse"),
desires to sell and otherwise transfer all of the issued
and outstanding shares of the capital stock of Group W
Cable to Century Southwest Cable Television, Inc., a Delaware
Corporation; TCI Holdings, Inc., a Colorado Corporation;
American Television and Communications Corporation, a Delaware
® Corporation; and affiliates of, or subsidiaries or partnerships
owned or controlled by, Houston Industries Incorporated,
a Texas Corporation, Comcast Corporation, a Pennsylvania
Corporation, Daniels & Associates, Inc., a Delaware Corporation,
and American Television and Communications Corporation
(hereinafter "Buyers"), and thereby transfer control of
Group W Cable to the Buyers; and
WHEREAS, Group W Cable has requested the consent from the City
to a change in ownership and control of Group W Cable to
16
10
y the Buyers and the transfer of ownership and control and
ultimate transfer of the Cable Communications Franchise
Ordinance as amended to North Central Cable Communications,
L.P.; and
WHEREAS, the Burnsville/Eagan Cable Communications Commission
(hereinafter "Commission") has been delegated the authority
and responsibility to coordinate, administer and enforce
the Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance on behalf
of City pursuant to the terms of a Joint and Cooperative
Agreement for the Administration' -of a -Cable Television
Franchise and
WHEREAS, the Commission has held a public hearing on behalf
of City and has reviewed the legal, technical, and financial
qualifications of Buyers and found them adequate to own
and operate Group W Cable; and
WHEREAS, the Commission has separately reviewed the legal, technical,
•
and financial qualifications of North Central Cable Communications,
L.P. as it relates to the transfer of ownership and control
and ultimate transfer of the Cable Communications Franchise •
Ordinance,.as amended; and
WHEREAS, the Commission has recommended to City approval of
the transfer of control of Group W Cable to Buyers subject
to the actual closing of the stock sale in June, 1986; and
WHEREAS, the Commission and City have been advised by Group W
Cable, the Buyers, and North Central that the approval
of such stock transfer to Buyers shall in no way be interpreted
as an approval, either express or implied, of the transfer
of ownership and control and ultimate transfer of the Cable
Communications Franchise Ordinance to North Central Cable
Communications, L.P. 150
- 2 -
a
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City
of
1. That the City hereby approves the sale by Westinghouse of
all of the issued and outstanding shares of the capital
stock of Group W Cable, Inc. and the transfer of control
of Group W Cable, Inc. to the Buyers subject to an actual
closing of the stock sale transaction in June, 1986 pursuant
to the terms and conditions currently understood by the
City as evidenced by the Notice of Transfer to said. Commission
and City.
® 2. That the approval of the transfer of ownership and control
of Group W Cable, Inc. to the Buyers is hereby.deemed not
to include any approval, either express or implied, as to
any subsequent transfer of ownership or control or transfer
of the Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance to North
Central Cable Communications, L.P., or to any other entity
or individual.
3. That the Burnsville/Eagan Cable Communications Commission
® separately review the request of Group W Cable, Inc. regarding
a change in control and transfer of the Cable Communications
Franchise Ordinance as amended to North Central Cable Communications,
L.P. and prepare a separate recommendation for City regarding
such change in control and transfer.
4. That this approval by City shall be null, void and of no
effect should any entity or individual successfully litigate
that the approval is also an approval, either express or
implied, as to any subsequent transfer of ownership or control
AS�
- 3 -
P or transfer of the Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance
to North Central Cable Communications, L.P., or to any other
entity or individual.
5. That this approval is specifically conditioned upon payment
in full prior to an actual closing of the stock sale transaction
in June, 1986 of all expenses incurred by Commission and
City related to the Request for Approval of Transfer dated
February 4, 1986, including those related expenses incurred
prior to February 4, 1986, but incurred in preparation for
the receipt of the Request for Approval._
6. That this approval is specifically conditioned upon the •
understanding that any changes or modifications in the cable
communications Franchise ordinance or cable communications
system (in place or proposed) which are subject to regulation
or control by City and/or Commission shall not be made without
the prior review and approval of City and/or Commission
pursuant to such procedures as are contained in the cable
communications Franchise or otherwise applicable law.
The above listed resolution was moved by Council Member
and duly seconded by Council Member
The following Council Members voted in the affirmative:
The following Council Members voted in the negative:
Passed and adopted this
ATTEST:
day of
Mayor
15L City Official
- 4 -
1986.
•
CERTIFICATION
The undersigned, the (Title) of the
City) , Minnesota, does hereby certify
that attached hereto is a true and correct copy of Resolution
No. , which Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council
on (Date) 1986 and is in full force and effect on
the date hereof.
Name:
Title:
A
RESOLUTION NO. 5.8.86.8 ADOPTING FINDINGS
OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDED
RESOLUTION REGARDING THE TRANSFER OF
OWNERSHIP AND CONTROL OF GROUP W CABLE,
INC. AND THE TRANSFER OF THE FRANCHISE
ORDINANCE TO NORTH CENTRAL CABLE COMMUNI-
CATIONS, L.P.
INTRODUCTION
The Burnsville/Eagan Cable Communications.Commission
(hereinafter "Commission"') is organized pursuant to the
terms of a Joint and Cooperative Agreement for the Admin-
istration of a Cable Television Franchise (hereinafter
"Agreement"), as authorized by Minnesota Statutes Section
471.59, as amended. The Member Cities'of"the--Commission are
Burnsville and Eagan, Minnesota (hereinafter "Member
Cities").
This proceeding involves the Commission's review, on
behalf of the Member Cities, of a request by Group W Cable,
Inc. and Group W Cable of Burnsville/Eagan, Inc. (herein-
after collectively "Group W") to approve the transfer of
ownership and control of Group W and transfer of the Cable
Communications Franchise Ordinance to North Central Cable
Communications, L.P. (hereinafter "North Central").
Notice is hereby given that the Member Cities will make
the final determination of this matter. Further, notice is
hereby given that the Member Cities, may at their own dis-
cretion, accept or reject the Commission's recommendation
and,that said recommendation has no legal effect unless ex-
pressly adopted by the Member Cities as their final deci-
sion.
ATEMENT OF ISSUE
The purpose of this proceeding is to determine whether
the Member Cities of the Commission should consent to the
transfer of ownership and control of Group W and the trans-
fer of the Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance (herein-
after "Franchise") to North Central.
Based upon all the proceedings herein, the Commission
makes the following:.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. On February 10, 1986, the Commission and its Member
Cities received an official notice from Group W Cable,
Inc., by and on behalf of its wholly-owned subsidiary
Group W Cable of Burnsville/Eagan, Inc., requesting two
forms of approval:
16` 4
a) Consent to a change in control and transfer of
ownership in Group W to a group of five Buyers
(transaction onej; and
b) Consent to a change in control and transfer of
ownership in Group W and transfer of the Cable
Communications Franchise Ordinance to North
Central Cable Communications, L.P. (trans-
action two).
On February 18, 1986, the Commission sent to Group W and
North Central a Municipal Request for Information Re-
garding Request For Approval and Transfer for the pur-
pose of inquiring into the legal, technical, financial,
and other qualifications of North Central, as authorized
and required by state law and the Franchise.
® 3. The Commission requested the return of the Municipal
Request For Information from Group W and North Central
by March 4, 1986 so that it would have sufficient time
to review the information. North Central filed its
response to the Municipal Request For Information on
March 24, 1986.
4. The Commission received on April 14, 15, and 17 a
request from Group W, North Central, and the Buyers,
respectively to bifurcate its consideration of the two
transactions. Group W, North Central, and the Buyers
stated in effect that consent to the first transaction
would in no way be construed or viewed as consideration
or consent to the second transaction.
® 5. The Commission gave notice and held a public hearing on
April 10, 1986 for the purpose of providing the public
with an opportunity to comment on the two transactions.
6. On April 10, 1986 the Commission reviewed and discussed
the information it had received from Group W and North
Central. The Commission determined to continue the
public hearing to May 8, 1986, for the purpose of
receiving further information and to receive a final
staff recommendation. The Commission further directed
staff to proceed with the preparation of appropriate
documents that recommend denial of transactions numbers
1 and 2 unless Hauser -Daniels Inc. satisfy Commission
Legal Counsel, in writing, that the transactions are
unrelated and/or that the approval of transactions
number 1 does not imply or expressly confer the approval
of transaction number 2. Upon receipt of such documen-
tation, staff could proceed with preparation of a final
recommendation as to both transactions.
-2-
,
7. The proposed transaction two involves Daniels & Associ-
ates, Inc., a Delaware Corporation; Daniels -Hauser Hold-
ing Company, a Colorado general partnership; North
Central Cable Communications L.P., a Minnesota limited
partnership; and Hauser Cable Communications, Inc., a
Delaware Corporation.
8. .The Commission has reviewed the necessary documentation
of each of the entities identified in Finding No. 7 to
conclude that each of the entities is duly organized and
authorized to own and operate a cable system.
9. The Commission has reviewed the character qualifications
of North Central and its principals and found them to be
satisfactory.
10. The.Commission has reviewed the technical- ability -of
North Central for the purpose of establishing its tech-
nical expertise and experience in operating and main- •
taining a cable system. Since North Central is a new
organization created for the purpose of accomplishing
the transaction, the Commission inquired into the tech-
nical ability of its managing principals.
11. The information provided shows that Mr. Gustave Hauser,
Mr. John D. Evans, and Hauser Communications, inc. have
extensive cable management experience. Mr. Hauser has
been involved in cable television and other electronic
communications since the early 1960's. Mr. Evans has 13
years of management experience in the cable television
industry, including Arlington, Virginia, Columbus, Ohio,
and Brooklyn Center, Minnesota. Hauser Communications,
as a manager of cable systems, has experience in
Arlington and Brooklyn Center.
12. The technical ability of the individuals and other en- •
tities related to North Central in owning, operating,
and managing cable systems is satisfactory.
13. The Commission has attempted to review the financial
capability of North Central for the purpose of determin-
ing whether it has the financial resources available or
committed to not only acquire the cable system, but also
to meet the franchise.commitments to operate the cable
system. The Commission engaged an independent financial
communications consultant to assist in this analysis.
14. North Central has not provided sufficient information
regarding closing costs and working capital to determine
whether the amounts are reasonable or whether such funds
are available to North Central and if available, are
adequate. North Central estimates $1 million for this
factor, but has failed to provide sufficient detailed
information of the specific amounts.
3 -
1$
15. North Central has not documented their analysis or
assumptions to support a projected household growth of 2
percent in the franchise area. The Commission deter-
mines this projection is unreasonable in light of the 10
percent actual household growth experienced by the
Member Cities in 1984-85. Future expansion of the sys-
tem is therefore undercapitalized,.
16. North Central has not provided its assumptions regarding
the percentage price increases for basic and pay ser-
vices. The Commission is unable to determine the rea-
sonableness of this projection.
17. North Central has not provided sufficient detailed in-
formation at this time to enable the Commission to de-
termine the reasonableness of its operating expense
® assumptions including but not limited to repairs and
maintenance, system maintenance, postage and billing,
converter maintenance, vehicle operation, light, heat,
power, and pole rental.
18. North Central has not provided sufficient detailed in-
formation at this time to enable the Commission to de-
termine the reasonableness of its administrative expense
assumptions, including but not limited to telephone,
insurance, rent, legal fees, repairs and maintenance,
consulting services, and employee benefits.
19. North Central has not provided sufficient detailed in-
formation at this time to enable the Commission to de-
termine the reasonableness of its marketing expense
assumptions, including but not limited to telephone
• marketing, data processing, contract sales, direct .sales.
override, direct mail promotions, mass media promotions,
and subscriber maintenance.
20. For all expenses, North Central has not documented its
assumptions for general inflation on a line -by-line
basis.
21. North Central has not provided sufficient detailed in-
formation at this time to enable the Commission to de-
termine the reasonableness of its capital expenditure
assumptions, including but not limited to office elec-
tronics, billing computer, telephone installation and
future construction.
22. The Commission has requested from North Central the
financial information and operational assumptions to
review the items listed above for the purpose of analyz-
ing its overall financial plan and financial ability.
However, despite the request, North Central has not
adequately provided the information.
- 4 -
167
23. North Central has not provided supporting documentation
showing the terms and conditions of its financing avail-
able to meet the franchise requirements and operational
plans. For the purpose of reviewing its overall finan-
cial plan, confirmation of the terms and conditions of
financing are necessary. Moreover, North Central has
not provided supporting documentation of the terms and
conditions of its financing for the purpose of reviewing
its impact on the operational plans of the system.
24. The cablesystem has experienced short-term operating
expense shortfalls in the recent preceding years. While
it is assumed by the Commission that any transferee of
the system would attempt to remediate such shortfalls,
North Central has failed to demonstrate that it could
financially withstand such short-term deficits.
25. The information which has been supplied by North Central
represents in large part financial information for six
cable systems in Minnesota. The Commission represents
one of those six systems. The Commission finds it
impossible to analyze the financial ability of North
Central relative to this system without system specific
financial information.
26. North Central has established as its financial goals a
minimum operating margin of 40%, subscriber penetrations
from 43% to 55%, and a minimum rate of return on invest-
ment of 15%. North Central has not supplied sufficient
financial information and documentation for the Commis-
sion to determine whether its financial plans will
achieve the aforementioned goals. As a result of exist-
ing experience in the system, the Commission determines
these goals and projections are unreasonable.
27. Absent sufficient financial information from North
Central, the Commission determines that the financial
ability of North Central to meet existing and future
obligations is inadequate. The Commission also notes
for the record that the existence of sufficient finan-
cial information would not in and of itself have led to
a finding of adequate financial ability. The existence
of such information would have served only as a basis
for the Commission to perform a complete financial
analysis which may or may not have resulted in a deter-
mination that North Central was financially able to
fulfill existing and future obligations.
28. Based upon the financial information received from North
Central as of this date, the Commission determines the
financial qualifications of North Central are unsatis-
factory and unacceptable.
Pertinent Franchise Provision
The standard of review in this matter is the relevant
portion of Article XII, Section 1 of Cable Communications
Franchise Ordinance, which provides in part as follows:
A. This Franchise shall not be assigned or trans-
ferred, either in whole or in part, or leased,
sublet or mortgaged in any manner, not shall
title thereto, either legal or equitable or
any right, interest or property therein, pass
to or vest in any person without the prior
written consent of City, which consent shall
not be unreasonably withheld. Further Grantee
shall not sell or transfer any stock or owner-
ship interest so as to-create.a-new controll-
ing interest except with the consent of City,
which consent shall not be unreasonably with-
held. The transfers described in this para-
graph shall, in the sole discretion of City,
be considered a sale or transfer of Franchise
within the meaning and intent in the following
paragraph.
Similarly, Minnesota Statutes Section 238.083, subdivi-
sion 4 provides:
Within 30 days after the public hearing, the fran-
chising authority shall approve or deny in writing
the sale or transfer request. The approval must
not be unreasonably withheld.
Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact, the
® Burnsville/Eagan Cable Communications Commission makes the
following:
CONCLUSIONS
1. The Commission, on behalf its Member Cities, gave proper
notice of the public hearing in this matter, has ful-
filled all relevant substantive and procedural require-
ments of law or rules and has the authority to make a
determination as to Transaction No. 2 and to recommend
that determination to its Member cities.
2. North Central has met the legal and character qualifica-
tions.
3. Based upon information received from North Central as of
this date, North Central has met the technical qualifi-
cations.
- 6 -
4. North Central has not met the financial qualifications
nor has North Central demonstrated it has.the financial
qualifications sufficient to own and operate the cable
system.
5. Any of the foregoing Findings of Fact which might be
properly termed Conclusions are hereby adopted as such.
THIS REPORT IS NOT AN ORDER AND NO AUTHORITY IS GRANTED
HEREIN. THE MEMBER CITIES OF THE COMMISSION MUST ISSUE
A FINAL DETERMINATION WHICH MAY -ADOPT OR DIFFER FROM THE
FOLLOWING RECOMMENDATION.
It is the recommendation of the.Burnsville/Eagan Cable
Communications Commission to its Member Cities that it adopt
the following:
RESOLUTION
IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED and based upon the Findings of
Fact and Conclusions of the Burnsville/Eagan Cable Communi-
cations Commission (attached hereto and made a part hereof)
that the City denies the request to transfer the ownership
of and control of Group W Cable of Burnsville/Eagan, Inc.
and transfer of the Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance
to North Central Cable Communications L.P.
The above listed Findings of Fact, Conclusions and
recommended resolution was moved by Commission Director
Pierce and duly seconded by Commission Director Cooper.
The following Commission Directors voted in the affirma-
tive,: Wood, Jensen, Glish, Cooper, Pierce, Krob, Franke,
Bertz,
The following Commission Directors voted in the -nega-
tive: NONE
7 -
166
a
The above resolution was duly adopted this ?'qday of.
1986.
- 8 -
r,Qgs
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF DAKOTA
CITY OF
RESOLUTION NO. DENYING THE REQUEST TO
TRANSFER OWNERSHIP AND CONTROL
OF GROUP W CABLE OF BURNSVILLE/EAGAN, INC. AND TRANSFER OF
THE CABLE COMMUNICATIONS FRANCHISE ORDINANCE TO
NORTH CENTRAL CABLE COMMUNICATIONS, L.P.
WHEREAS, Group W Cable, Inc., a New York Corporation, by and
through Group W Cable of Burnsville/Eagan, Inc., a wholly-owned
subsidiary, (hereinafter collectively "Group W Cable")
owns, operates and maintains a cable television system
in the City pursuant to the terms and conditions of City
Ordinance No. (hereinafter "Cable Communications Franchise
Ordinance"); and
WHEREAS, Group W Cable has requested the consent from the City
to a transfer of ownership and control of Group W Cable
and transfer of the Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance
as amended to North Central Cable Communications, L.P.,
(hereinafter "North Central"); and
WHEREAS, the Burnsville/Eagan Cable Communications Commission
(hereinafter "Commission") has been delegated the authority
and responsibility to coordinate, administer and enforce
the Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance on behalf
of City pursuant to the terms of a Joint and Cooperative
Agreement for the Administration of a Cable Television
Franchise; and
WHEREAS, the Commission has held a public hearing on behalf
of City and has reviewed the legal, technical, and financial
qualifications of North Central; and
WHEREAS, the Commission has recommended to City denial of the
transfer of ownership and control of Group W Cable and
'j/ transfer of the Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance
to North Central.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City
of
1. Based upon the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of the
Burnsville/Eagan Cable Communications Commission (attached
hereto and made a part hereof,) the City denies the request
to approve the transfer of ownership and control of Group
W Cable of Burnsville/Eagan, Inc.:and—transfer of—the Cable
® Communications Franchise Ordinance to North Central Cable
Communications, L.P.
The above listed resolution was moved by Council Member
and duly seconded by Council Member
The following Council Members voted in the affirmative:
® The following Council Members voted in the negative:
Passed and adopted this day of
ATTEST:
Mayor
City Official
�6
- 2 -
1986..
CERTIFICATION
The undersigned, the (Title) of the
(City) Minnesota, does hereby certify
that attached hereto is a true and correct copy of Resolution
No.
which
Resolution was
duly adopted
by the City
Council
on
(Date)
, 1986 and is
in full force
and effect
on
the date hereof.
Name:
Title:
1W
r
11
Agenda Information Memo
May 21, 1986, City Council Meeting
Page Twenty -Six
(ADDITIONAL' ITEMS.
ON -SALE LIQUOR LICENSE AMENDMENT
A. On -Sale. Liquor License Amendment --At the February 18, 1986,
City Council meeting an on -sale liquor license amendment was
proposed that changes the policy to allow 1)four on -sale liquor
licenses for hotel type uses, 2) three on sale licenses for larger
supper club sit down on -sale restaurants with a minimum real
estate tax evaluation of $350,000, and 3), two liquor licenses
reserved for smaller restaurants with Council approved exceptions
to certain strict liquor license requirements, with the under-
standing however, that the food/liquor ratio and minimum imum seating
/
requirements will be adhered to. Enclosed on pages � through
is a copy of the on -sale liquor license amendment.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve
on -sale liquor license amendment as presented.
146-
or deny the
ORDINANCE NO. , 2ND SERIES
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EAGAN, MINNESOTA, AMENDING EAGAN CITY CODE
CHAPTER 5 ENTITLED 'BEER, WINE AND LIQUOR LICENSING AND REGULATION" BY
DEFINING AND REDEFINING CERTAIN DEFINITIONS; BY CHANGING PROVISIONS RELATING
TO LIQUOR ON -SALE LICENSE REQUIREMENTS AND, BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE, EAGAN
CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 5.99 WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN
PENALTY PROVISIONS.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EAGAN DOES ORDAIN:
Section 1. Eagan City Code Section 5.01 is hereby amended in its
entirety, to read:
Section 5.01. DEFINITIONS. As used in this Chapter, unless otherwise
stated in specific sections, the following words and terms shall have the
meanings stated:
23. "Restaurant" means an establishment, other than a hotel or
motel, under the control of a single proprietor or manager, having appropriate
facilities for the serving of meals, (consisting of a full menu as
distinguished from exclusively "fast food" items such as pizza, hamburgers and
other sandwiches) and where, in consideration of payment therefor, meals are
regularly served at tables to the general public, ,which employs an adequate
staff to provide the usual and suitable service to its guests, the principal
part of the business (meaning at least 60% of the gross income from sales
during each calendar quarter) being the serving of foods, and which shall have
seating facilities for seating not less than 30 guests at one time. and -have
an--appraised--vatae--of-at-feast-$280;000.-00-as-to-the-bnifding-or-pertien-ef
the -banding -associates -with -signer -saes-
Section 2. Eagan City Code Section 5.52 is hereby amended in its entirety
to read:
® SECTION 5.52. LIQUOR LICENSE RESTRICTIONS AND REGULATIONS.
Suba. 11. No more than twe4ve--Ei2) eighteen (18) on -sale licenses
may be .issued. except--that--a--thirteenth--sneh--estabtishment-which-is-an
integra3-pert-ef-a-hetet-or-mete}-having-ever-69-.rooms-er--in--a--borfeing--or
portion-of-a--baiftling--esseeiatee--with--serving--figaor--the--roatne-ef-which
exeeetls-$599;999..-99. All on -sale licenses shall be for premises situated in a
commercial or industrial use district under a conditional use permit. The
nine (9) licenses available March 5, 1986 shall be distributed to qualified
applicants as follows:
A. Four (4) licenses for hotels/motels;
B. Three (3) licenses for restaurants with at least $350
valuation (exclusion of leasehold improvements, equipment or c
and;
C. Two (2) for other restaurants.
%v6
Section 3. Eagan City Code Chapter L entitled "General Provisions and
Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for
Violation" and Section 5.99 entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby
adopted in their entirety, by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein.
Section 4. Effective Date. This_ orainance shall take effect upon its
adoption and publication according to law.
ATTEST: CITY OF EAGAN
CITY COUNCIL
By:
Its Clerk Its Mayor
Date Ordinance Adopted:
Date Ordinance Published:
/(0 7
•
Agenda Information
May 21, 1986, City
Page 'Twenty -Seven
Memo
Council Meeting
RECEIVED BIDS/AWARD CONTRACT/SKID LOADER
B. Parks Department, Receive Bids/Award Contract (Skid Loader) --
A bid opening for the Skid Loader for the Parks Department was
held at 10:00 a.m. on Friday, May -16, 1986. The Director of
Parks and Recreation is reviewing the bids received to determine
if they conform to required specifications. A recommendation
regarding accepting the bid of the lowest qualified bidder will
be forwarded with the Additional Information Packet on Monday.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the bids and
award the contract for the Parks Department Skid Loader to the
lowest qualified bidder.
16 �
Agenda Information
May 21„ 1986, City
Page Twenty -Eight
Memo
Council Meeting
CONTRACT 86-13, APPROVE PLANS/ORDER ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS'
C. Contract 86-13, Approve Plans/Order Advertisment for Bids
(Wescott Road) --On March 19, a pu5lie hearing was held to discuss
the installation of streets and utilities to upgrade Wescott
Road from Lexington Avenue to � mile east. As a result of that
public hearing, the project was approved and detailed plans and
specifications were ordered for preparation which have now been
completed and are being presented to the Council for their review,
approval and authorization to advertise for formal bid solicita-
tions.. The Consulting Engineer and- :-Rub Lc_.,Work Director will
be available to discuss the details of this project at the Council
meeting. All easements required are in the process of acquisition
and Council has previously authorized adverse condemnation, as
may be necessary, to facilitate the installation of this public
improvement.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the plans for
Contract 86-13 (Wescott Road) and order the advertisement for
a bid opening to be held at 10:30 a.m. on Friday, June 13, 1986.
CONTRACT 86-16, APPROVE PLANS/ORDER AD FOR BIDS
D. Contract 86-16„ Approve Plans/Order Advertisement for Bids
(Eagandale Lemay Lake 2nd Addition) --Earlier on the agenda there
is a public hearing to discuss the installation of streets and
utilities to service the Eagandale Lemay Lake 2nd Addition.
At the time of submitting the petition, the developer agreed
to accept all costs associated through the -simultaneous preparation
of detailed plans and specifications to expedite this proposed
improvement. If this project is approved as a result of the
public hearing, it would be in order for the Council to consider
approval of the detailed plans and specifications which have
now been completed and are being presented to the Council for
their review, approval and authorization to advertise for bid
solicitations.
If Project 474under the Public Hearings is denied or continued
for any reason, this item can be deleted or continued accordingly.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: Approve the plans for
Contract 86-16 (Eagandale Lemay Lake 2nd Addition.) and order
ads for a formal bid opening to be held at 10:30 a.m. on Friday,
June 13, 1986.
Iq
•
Agenda Information Memo
May 21, 11986, City Council Meeting
Page Twenty -Nine
CONTRACT 86-17,APPROVE PLANS/ORDER AD FOR BIDS
E. Contract 86-17, Approve Plans/Order Advertisement for Bids
(Sperry Consolidation Facility) --Earlier in the agenda there is
a public hearing for approval of the Tax Increment Financing
plan for the Sperry Consolidation Facility to be constructed
on the southwest corner of Towerview Road and Pilot Knob Road.
If this 'TIF plan is approved, all .improvements to be installed
under this financing method must be constructed under a City
contract. Sperry Corporation has ..already .had the detailed plans
and specifications for these proposed improvements prepared by
• the James R. Hill consulting ,firm. Therefore, the only involve-
ment the City would have would be in the formal approval of these
plans and the formal bid solicitation, contract award and final
payment requirements. Therefore, these plans are being presented
to the Council for their formal approval with a request for authori-
zation to advertise for formal bid solicitation.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the plans for
Contract 86-17 (Sperry Consolidation Facility) and order the
ad for a bid opening to be held at 11.:00 a.m. on Friday, June
13, 1986.
/,o
Agenda Information Memo
May 21, 1986, City Council Meeting
Page Thirty
GUN CLUB LAKE WMO BUDGET APPROVAL/PAYMENT
F. Gun Club Lake Water Management Organization Budget Approval/
Payment --Enclosed on pages---/ LL� through 17-5is a copy of
a letter received from the Gun Club Lake WMO, identifying the
budgets for the 1986 and 1987 operational expenses. The Joint
Powers Agreement that was executed between the cities of Eagan,
Inver Grove Heights and Mendota Heights indicated that all budgets
approved by the WMO must receive concurrent approval from the
affected communities and that any objections must be submitted
by August 1 of the year preceding the proposed budget year.
The Gun Club WMO was not formulated to the extent that a budget
for 1986 could have been prepared and presented to the Council
for their consideration prior to July 1 of 1985. Due to the
legislatures mandate that the water management plan be completed
by the end of 1986, considerable expense will be incurred during
the 1986 calendar year.. Therefore, the WMO is requesting all
three communities to prefinance their 1986 allocation, in addition
to adopting the 1987 budget. With the adoption of this legislation,
there is also a provision whereby cities couldlevy a special
tax to finance these expenditures up to a maximum of 1 mil.
The Gun Club is presently preparing identification of the various
watershed boundaries within the community to be forwarded to
the County by July 1, in anticipation of this special tax levy
being submitted by this fall.
The Public Works Director who is one of the City's three representa-
tives to this organization will be available at the Council meeting •
to further discuss the proposed budget, time schedules and method
of financing,these required expenditures.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the 1986 and
1987 budget for the Gun Club Lake WMO and authorize the City
Clerk to forward Eagan's share by the requested time frames.
RECEIVED t'191
James E. Danielson, Secretary/Treasurer
Gun Club Lake WMO
750 South Plaza Drive
Mendota Heights, MN 55120
May 13, 1986
Eugene VanOverbeke, Clerk
City of Eagan
3830 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, Minnesota 55122
Dear Mr. VanOverbeke:
On May 5, 1986, the Gun Club Lake Watershed—Management Organization ('WMO)
adopted a budget for 1986 and 1987 (attached). In accordance with the provision
of the Joint Powers Agrement (Section 9, Subd. 2), Members agreed to contribute
40 each year to the general funds. Each Member's percentage share is based on an
average of the following two percentages:
1) The percentage of the total assessed valuation of all real property
within the watershed which lies within the Member's boundaries; and
2) The percentage of the total area in the watershed which lies within the
Member's boundaries.
I am enclosing a copy of the calculations which shows the percentage break—
downs for each community's allocation to the annual budget (see attached). The
1986 bills are due, 50% by June 15, 1986 and 50% by August 1, 1986. The 1987
bill is due January 31, 1987.
1/2 Due June 15, 1986 $16,079.36
1/2 Due August 1, 1986 16,079.37
®
$32,158.73
Please make the check payable to the Gun Club Lake Watershed Managcmant
Organization. Mail the check by June 15 and August 1, 1986 to James E.
Danielson, Secretary/Treasurer, Gun Club Lake WMO, c/o City of Mendota Heights,
750 South Plaza Drive, Mendota Heights, MN 55120.
Respectfully yours, n
li e - . Y�✓
Danielson
QSQm�es,E.
ecreary/Treasurer
JED:dfw
cc: Tom Colbert
John Sachi
172--
GUN CLUB LAKE WATER MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION
PROPOSED 1986/87 BUDGETS
PLAN PREPARATION
INSURANCE
LEGAL
AUDIT
ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF SERVICES
PRINTING, SUPPLIES & POSTAGE
CONTINGENCY
1986
$25,000
2,500
2,000
1,000
2,000
500
3,000
$36,000
C
4/28/86
1987
$10,000
2,500
2,200
1,000
1,000
500
1,700
$18,900
•
E
4/28/86
TOTAL 1986 BILLS
Eagan
Mendota Heights
Inver Grove Heights
Total City
Valuation
$229.7M
$18,000.00
% Valuation
in Gun Club
$193.6M
$ 76.5M = $ 17.OM
$112.1M = $ 5.4M
1/2 Budget
$18,000 =
$18,000 --
Area
Area Valuation
$16,025.40 + $16,133.33 =
$ 1,177.20 + $ 1,416.67 =
$ 797.40 + $ 450.00 =
$216.OM
$16,133.33
$ 1,416.67
$ 450.00
$18,000.00
1986 Bill
$32,158.73
$ 2,593.87
$ 1,247.40
$36,000.00
1986 BILLING
CALCULATIONS
1986 Budget Amount =
$36,000
Land Area Calculation
Eagan
%
In Gun Club
1/2 Budget
22,440 Ac
Eagan
89.03% X
$18,000 =
$16,025.40
Mendota Heights
6.54% X
$-18,000 =
$ 1,177..20
Inver Grove Heights
4.43% X
$18,000 =
$ 797.40
TOTAL 1986 BILLS
Eagan
Mendota Heights
Inver Grove Heights
Total City
Valuation
$229.7M
$18,000.00
% Valuation
in Gun Club
$193.6M
$ 76.5M = $ 17.OM
$112.1M = $ 5.4M
1/2 Budget
$18,000 =
$18,000 --
Area
Area Valuation
$16,025.40 + $16,133.33 =
$ 1,177.20 + $ 1,416.67 =
$ 797.40 + $ 450.00 =
$216.OM
$16,133.33
$ 1,416.67
$ 450.00
$18,000.00
1986 Bill
$32,158.73
$ 2,593.87
$ 1,247.40
$36,000.00
ASSESSED
VALUATION CALCULATION
•
7, Area in
Gun Club
Eagan
18,915 Ac X
22,440 Ac
Mendota
Heights 1,390 Ac X
6,263 Ac
Inver Grove
940 Ac X
Heights
19,600 Ac
TOTAL
ASSESSED
VALUATION
®
% Valuation
Eagan
193.6 X
216.0
Mendota
Heights 17.0 X
216.0
Inver Grove
Heights 5.4 X
216.0
TOTAL 1986 BILLS
Eagan
Mendota Heights
Inver Grove Heights
Total City
Valuation
$229.7M
$18,000.00
% Valuation
in Gun Club
$193.6M
$ 76.5M = $ 17.OM
$112.1M = $ 5.4M
1/2 Budget
$18,000 =
$18,000 --
Area
Area Valuation
$16,025.40 + $16,133.33 =
$ 1,177.20 + $ 1,416.67 =
$ 797.40 + $ 450.00 =
$216.OM
$16,133.33
$ 1,416.67
$ 450.00
$18,000.00
1986 Bill
$32,158.73
$ 2,593.87
$ 1,247.40
$36,000.00
1987 BILLING CALCULATIONS
1987 Budget Amount = $18,900
Land Area Calculation
% In Gun Club 1/2 Budget .
Eagan 89.039 X $ 9,450 =
Mendota Heights 6.547 X -$-9,450 =
Inver Grove Heights 4.43% X $ 9,450 =
ASSESSED VALUATION CALCULATION
7 Area in
Gun Club
Eagan 18,915 Ac X
22,440 Ac
Mendota Heights 1,390 Ac X
6,263 Ac
Inver Grove 940 Ac X
Heights 19,600 Ac
TOTAL
ASSESSED VALUATION
% Valuation
Eagan 214.1 X
238.6
Mendota Heights 18.8 X
238.6
Inver Grove Heights 5.7 X
238.6
TOTAL 1987 BILLS
Eagan
Mendota Heights
Inver Grove Heights
Total City
Valuation
$254.OM
$ 84.7M
$119.5M
1/2 Budget
$ 9,450 =
$ 9,450 =
$ 9,450 =
Area Valuation
$ 8,413.33 + $ 8,479.65 =
$ 618.03 + $ 744.60 =
$ 418.64 + $ 225.75 =
175
4/28/86
$ 8,413.33
$ 618.03
$ 418.64
$ 9,450.00
% Valuation
in Gun Club
$214. 1M
$ 18.8M
$ 5.7M
$238.6M
$ 8,479.65
$ 744.50
$ 225.75
$ 9,"450.00
1987 Bill,
$16,892.98
$ 1,362.63
$ 644.39
®.
•
MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCILMEMBERS
FROM. CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES
DATE: MAY 16, 1986
SUBJECT: INFORMATIVE
FOURTH OF JULY CELEBRATION
Enclosed on pages�Zthrough� is a copy of a letter sent
to Lowell Johnson, Chairman of .the Eagan A th of July Association
regarding the City's position on liability insurance for the
fireworks display.
COUNCIL ACTION CONCERNING DOWNZONING
The City Administrator sent a brief memo to members of the Advisory
® Planning Commission regarding action that was taken on April
29 concerning a new direction on potential for downzoning certain
parcels of property. A copy,of the memo is enclosed on page.
HRA ASSISTED HOUSING REPORT
Enclosed on pages / gd through is the most recent copy of
the assisted housing and community development report as provided
by the Dakota County HRA.
AUDITORS' COMMENTARY REPORT
Enclosed without page number is a copy of the Auditors' Commentary
Report for the Council's review. The commentary contains the
findings and recommendations resulting from Deloitte Haskins +
Sells' review of the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report of
1985.
/s/ Thomas L. Hedges
City Administrator
fi�
I,
111N �.
3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD, P.O. BOX 21199
EAGAN. MINNESOTA,55121
PHONE: (612) 454-8100
May 8, 1986
MR LOWELL JOHNSON, CHAIRMAN
EAGAN 4TH OF JULY ASSOC
C/O. SOUTH COUNTRY REALTY INC
1570 CENTURY POINT
EAGAN MN 55121
Re: City of Eagan Contribution and Liability Insurance
Dear Mr. Johnson:
BEA BLOMQUIST
Mayer
THOMAS EGAN
JAMES A SMITH
MC ELLISON
THEODORE WACHTER
Cw ix,l M.ben
THOMAS HEDGES
GN A:ImnetralO
EUGENE VAN OVERBEKE
City Clerk
In official action that was taken by the Eagan City Council at a
regular meeting held on May 6, 1986, an appropriation in the
amount of $1,000 was authorized to the Eagan 4th of July Associa-
tion. The City Council is extremely pleased with the volunteer
effort that so many of you extend for this community- wide
celebration each and every 4th of July.
Unfortunately, I bear some bad news regarding liability insurance.
The City of Eagan was placed on notice approximately 30 days ago
that its carrier, Home Insurance Company, is no longer insuring
municipalities. Our insurance policy with Home Insurance Company
terminates June 30, 1986'. The City of Eagan is looking at all of
their alternatives and is confident that another insurance option
exists for the City's general liability and worker's compensation;
however, many of the activities that are high-risk related will
not be insured. As a result, the City is performing an in-depth
risk management study to determine any and all potential risk with
the understanding that certain activities that have been previously
performed within the City may have to be cancelled or terminated
due to the lack of liability insurance. One of these events is the
fireworks display that normally occurs on the evening of July 4th.
The City of Eagan cannot assume any responsibility or exposure
for the traditional fireworks display. If a decision is made by
the Eagan 4th of July Association to again have a fireworks
display, it will be necessary that your non-profit corporation
assume any and all liability for this event.
It is discouraging and gravely unfortunate that local governments
and business throughout our country are experiencing the threat of
exposure and high-risk for activities such as a community -wide
fireworks display in celebration of our Country's birthday.
177
THE LONE OAK TREE ... THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY
•
EAGAN 4TH OF JULY ASSOC
MAY 8, 1986
Page Two
I am certain that you and the 'volunteers who are involved with the
Eagan 4th of July Association will be understanding of the City's
posture regarding the fireworks display.
As. usual, the City is more than happy to help in all other ways,
such as, additional police protection during the holidays, mainte-
nance personnel assistance, and the general fund appropriation in
the amount of $1,000. If you have any questions, please feel free
to contact me at any time.
Sincerely,
Thomas L. Hedges
City Administrator
TLH/kf
�7�
MEMO TO: CHAIRMAN AND ALL MEMBERS OF THE ADVISORY
PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES
DATE: MAY 6, 1986
SUBJECT: CITY COUNCIL ACTION CONCERNING DOWN ZONING
At a special meeting held on Tuesday, April 29, 1985,.the Eagan
City Council directed its staff to study the potential for a
down -zoning of certain parcels of property located within the
City of Eagan. The study is intended to identify parcels which
are zoned or planned in a manner which staff finds to be
inconsistant with the realities of the City's present development
circumstances. It is evident that some legal precedents do
suggest that cities may down zone without excessive liability, if •
such down zoning is based upon objective planning principles
which are applied uniformly to all similar property.
The ultimate intent of this Council direction is to consider the
downzoning of identified parcels, understanding that litigation
may result from such decisions. This Council direction is only
in the assessment stage and should not be expected to result in
downzonings in the immediate future. The Advisory Planning
Commission will ,be kept informed of all developments in this
area. If you have any questions concerning this matter, please
contact Dale Runkle.
City Administrator
TLH/JH/jh
cc: Dale Runkle, City Planner
79
DAkOTA
1
NO�
`!!il'
�
COUNT'
Serving People and Communities
E M 0 R A N D U M
DAKOTA COUNTY
HOUSING &
REDEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY
2496- 145th STREET WEST
ROSEMOUNT, MINNESOTA 55068
612-423-4800
J
T0: HRA Commissioners; Dakota County Commissioners; City Managers; Fred
Joy, County Administrator; and Dla, ounty Planning Department .
FROM: Mark Ulfers, Executive Director`
® SUBJECT: STATUS REPORT FOR ASSISTED HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DATE: May 8, 1986
Enclosed are the April Status Reports for all the Assisted Housing Programs in
Dakota County and the Community Development Programs administered by the Dakota
County HRA.
If you would like additional information on any of the programs, please feel
free to call me.
Enclosure
a
/�o
Brief description of assisted housing programs:
1. Section 8 Existing: Eligible low and moderate income households pay 30% of
their monthly adjusted gross income (less an established allowance for uti-
lities) for rent in market rate rental units. The Dakota County HRA (or
South St. Paul HRA) pays the rest. The rental units must pass federal
inspection standards and the rent plus an allowance for utilities paid by
the renter, must not exceed established Fair Market Rent limits.
2. Moderate Rehab: The Section 8 Moderate Rehabilitation program offers owners
of rental property assistance for making building repairs which will bring
their properties into compliance with Housing Quality Standards. The owner,
in turn, agrees to rent to households eligible for Section 8 Rent
Assistance. The rental of these units is coordinated through the Dakota
County HRA and the rent payments for the tenants is the same as Section 8
Existing. Besides the existing units in place, this program is no longer
available.
3. Section 8 New Construction: The developers of these units receive a subsidy
for construction of these units. The ow'hers'in'turh; are required to rent
these units to eligible low and moderate income households. The rental
payments for tenants are the same as Section 8 Existing. These rental deve-
lopments are owned by private developers. Besides the existing units in
place, this program is no longer available except for Section 202 projects
for senior citizens.
4. Low Rent Housing: The Dakota County HRA (or South St. Paul HRA) owns and
manages the housing units offered through the Low Rent Housing Program.
These housing units are rented to eligible low and moderate income house-
holds who pay 30% of their monthly adjusted gross income (less an
established allowance for utilities) for rent.
5. 235 Home Ownership: This program offered assistance to eligible low and
moderate households for purchasing a home. The program is no longer
available.
6. 236 Rental: The developers of these units receive a subsidy for construc-
tion of these units. The owners, in turn, are required to rent these units
to eligible low and moderate income households. The rental payments for
tenants are the same as Section 8 Existing. Besides the existing units in
place, this program is no longer available.
DAKOTA COUNTY ASSISTED HOUSING REPORT MAY, 1966
I
I
SECTION B
EXISTING
1
0 1
MODERATE
I
SECTION 0
NEW I
LOW
RENT
1
235 HOME
1 236 RENTAL
I CURRENT
I
COMMUNITIES I
ELD
I
FAMILY TOTALI
ELD
REHAB
FAMILY
I
TOTALI
CONSTRUCTION I
ELD FAMILY TOTALI
HOUSING
I-
FAMILY
I FAMILY
I TOTALS
6RAYD1
--------------I--------------I--------------I-------
I
0 I
0
I 0
13
13 I
ROSEMOUNT ----I
--------------
10
I--- -------
ELD FAMILY
41 1
---I-------------I-----------------I---------------I---------I---
TOTAL[
TOTAL
I TOTAL
I ELD
FAMILY
TOTAL]
APPLE VALLEY -----I
-------------- I
I1
-------------
42
53 1,
I
0
---------------I-------
0
0 1
0
56
--- I--------`.-I------I------I
56;1
0
43
43 1
0
1 0
-----
1 11
---- —
141-
----- I
152 1
BURNSVILLE 1
57
104
161 1
0
0
0 1
0
- ----
87
I
87 1
--------
0
56
-- I
56 1
-----=
0
I —
1 180
I---
1 57
----
427
I
484 1
EAGAN 1
-------------- -------- I
32
----------
164
------
196 1
I
0
---------------1--=-
6
0 1
0
33
33 1
0
17
17 1
0
1 144
1 32
358
390 1
FARMINGTON 1
21
50
71 1
0
0
0 1
75
- ------
0
I
75 1
------
0
-----
2
I ------
2
0
8 1
0
0
B I
0
0
0 I
0 1
0
1 0
0
O I
1
4
1 0 1
96
56
152 1
HASTINGS 1
------------ -----I----------------I--
59
151
210 1
4
--------I----------I-------
14
IB I
109
0
109 1
0
10
10 1
0
1 0 1
172
175
347 1
INVER GROVE HEIGHTS 1
30
185
215 1
0
0
0 1
0
40
40 1
0
6
-I------I—
6 1
31
-=—I------
1 202 1
30
464
494 1
LAKEVILLE 1
13
44
57 1
0
0
0 1
24
0
24 1
0
11
11 1
2 1
0 1
37
57
94 1
LILYDALE 1
--------------= I
0
------
B
---..---1--------=-
0 1
0
0
B 1
I
0
0
0 1
0
0
0 1
0 1
0 1
0
0
0 1
MEND-MENDOTA --- I
2
1
3 1
0
B
B I
------------
0
0
I
0 1
-----------I
0
0
----
0 1
---I
0 I
------ I
0 I
-----------I'
-
2
I
3 1
MENDOTA HEIGHTS
1 A
0
0 1
0
1
1 1
0
12
12 1
0
0
0
-- ----------1-=------
-I----
-I--
I
0 I
0
I 0
13
13 I
ROSEMOUNT ----I
--------------
10
I--- -------
31
41 1
---I-------------I-----------------I---------------I---------I---
0
0
0 1
-
39
--
28
---I-------
67 1
0
-----I--
30
30 1
---=I-----1------------1
2 1
0
1 49
91
140 1
SOUTH ST. PAUL t
1 32
136
160 1
0
0
0 1
0
44
44 1
300
0
300 1
2 1
----I-------=-------I
0
1 332
182
514 1
SUNFISH LAKE
-----------------I----------I--
1 0
1
1.1
8
8
0 1
0
0
0 1
0
0
0 1
0 1
0
1 0
1
1 1
WEST ST. PAUL
1 197
158
355 1
--------I--------I-------------I---I----I—
0
6
6 1
0
0
B I
Be
7
07 1
0 I
0
--------
1 277
171
I
448 1
OTHER -------
1 1
6
7 1
0
0
8 1
0
0
B I
0
0
0 I
0 1
0
1 0
0
O I
I I I I
TOTALS 1 464 1073 1530 1 4 21 25 1 247 300 547 1 380 182 562 1 41 1 526 1 1695 2143 3230 1
I I I
I I I 1 I I I
*South St. Paul administers separate Section 8 Existing and Low Rent Housing Program.
0
Brief description of Community Development Programs:
1. Weatherization: Through a joint effort of the Dakota County HRA and
Economic Assistance, low-income homeowners and rental units occupied by low-
income tenants are being weatherized to reduce the consumption of precious
,fuels, promote energy conservation, and reduce the burden of high heating
costs on low-income county residents who can least afford rapidly rising
utility bills.
2. MHFA Home Improvement Loans: The Dakota County HRA administers this State
program as a Title I lender. Loans are made to eligible homeowners
(adjusted gross income less than $24,000 annually) for code compliance items
and certain general improvements. An interest rate of 3% to 11.5% is
charged depending on the applicant's income.
3. MHFA.Home Rehab Loan: These loans are made to eligible low-income
homeowners adjusted gross income under $7,000 annually) for rehabilitation
items that directly affect the health, safety, energy conservation and
accessibility of the home. These are deferred loans and are available to
households with adjusted gross incomes under $7,000 annually. This program
is administered by the Community Development staff of the Dakota County HRA.
4. •MHFA Home Energy Loan: These loans are made to eligible homeowners for
energy items,. The interest rate is 8% for homeowners with adjusted gross
incomes of less than $24,000 annually and an interest rate 9% for those with
adjusted gross incomes,of more than $24,000 annually. This program is admi-
nistered by the Community Development staff of the Dakota County HRA.
5. Rental Rehab: Rental Rehabilitation loans are available to owners of rental
units. There are no income or asset limitations. The loan amount cannot
exceed $15,000 per one dwelling unit and for structures with more than one
unit the loan limit is $7,500 per unit with a maximum of $37,500. The
interest rate on the loan is 11%. This program is administered by the
Community Development staff of the Dakota County HRA.
6. CDBG Rehab Loan: Various housing rehabilitation programs have been done
using Community Development Block Grant funds. They have assisted low and
moderate income homeowners in making repairs to their homes with low
interest loans ,and grants (grantsare no longer available). This program
is administered by the Community Development staff of the Dakota County HRA.
7. MHFA Solar Bank: Deferred loans 'are given to eligible low and moderate
income homeowners for energy items. The eligible homeowners are referred
from Northern States Power Company. This program is administered by the
Community Development staff of the Dakota County HRA.
8. 312 Loans: These loans are given to eligible owners of residential struc-
tures at an interest rate of 3%. The loan funds must be used to bring the
property into compliance with local codes, rehabilitation standards and some
types of general improvements. Commercial and mixed use (commercial and
residential) properties may apply for loans with an interest rate of 9%.
This program is administered by the Community Development staff of the
Dakota County HRA in HUD approved target areas.
1�
DAKOTA CSIRITY NRA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT MAY 1976 -APRIL 1986
I NEATHERIIATION
COMMUNITIES I ELD FAX TOTAL
MHFA NOME IMPROV LOAN
ELD LG SR TOTAL
MMFA HOME REHAB LOAN
ELD L6 SM TOTAL
ffA NOME ENERGY LOAN
ELD L6 64 TOTAL
RENTAL RENAB LOAN
ELD LB SM TOTAL
COBS RFNAB LOAN
ELD LG SM TOTAL
----I—I—I—
COBS REHAB LOAN - MH,
ELD LG SM TOTAL
--I---I—I—
MHFA SOLAR BANK LOAN
ELD LG SM TSTA.
--1—I--I--
712 loans
L.FAM S.FAM COMM
—1--I--I--I—I
i
ELD TOTALI
—I—I—I—
APPLE VALLEY I
11 711 72
—I—I—I--
11
B1
31
4
—I—I—I--
01
11
01
B
—I—I—I---
BI
11
41
5
--I---I—I—
01
BI
01
0
BI
a
0I
0
01
—I—I--I—
01
01
0
0I
—I—I--I—
BI
BI 8
01
—I--I—I—I—I
01
01
BI
BI
—--I—I—I--
BURNSVILLE 1
16 1 129 1 145
—I—I—I—
G I
1 1
2 1
3
—I—I--I--
1 1
0 1
4 1
5
--I--I—I--
8 1
0 1
2 1
2
---I—I—I—
B 1
0 1
0 1
0
---I—I—I—
1 1
B 1
3 1
4
0 1
0 1
2 1
2
8 1
8 1
8 I B
0 1
0 1
0 I
B 1
0 1
CANNON FALLS I
1 1 2 1 3
0 1
0 1
0 1
0
0 1
B I
1 I
1
0 1
0 1
2 1
2
0 1
8 1
0 1
0
0 1
0 1
0 I
0
0 1
—I—I—I--
0 1
0 1
0
0 1
--I---I---I---
B I
0 1 0
0 1
—I---I---I---I—I
0 1
0 I
0 1
A I
----I—I--I—
CASTLE ROOK 1
0 1 4 1 4
—I—I--I--
8 1
0 1
1 I
1
—I--I—I--
B 1
I I
1 1
2
----I—I—I---
0 1
0 1
0 I
0
--I--I—I—
0 I
0 1
0 1
0
—I--I—I—
0 1
0 1
B 1
0
B I
8 1
0 1
0
B 1
0 1
0 1 0
0 1
0 1
0 1
0 1
0 1
EAGAN 1
5 1 54 1 59
B I
1 1
5 1
6
3 1
1 1
2 1
6
1 1
1 1
6 1
B
0 1
0 1
0 I
0
1 I
—I—I—I—
1 1
2 1
4
0 1
—I—I—I--
0 1
0 1
0
0 I
—I—I—I—
B I
0 1 0
S 1
—I—I—I—I—I
0 1
0 1
0 1
0 1
--I-1--I---
FARMINGTON 1
21 1 113 1 134
—I—I—I--
0 1
2 1
7 1
9
--I—I—I--
2 1
11
4 1
7
---I---I—I----
2 1
1 1
17 I
IS
--I--I—I—
8 1
A I
0 1
8
7 1
1 1
4 1
12
0 1
—I—I—I—
0 1
0 1
0
8 1
—I--I—I—
6 1
8 I 0
0 I
----I—I--I—I
8 1
0 1
1 1
1 1
HASTINGS 1
—I—I—
47 1 131 1 178
—I—I—I—
5 1
6 1
22 1
33
—1-1-1—
21 1
4 1
11 1
36
--1----1—I—
1 1
2 1
3 1
6
----I—I—
4 I
1 1
5 1
10
—I—I—I—
13 1
7 1
IB 1
38
B 1
0 1
0 1
0
0 1
0 1
4 1 4
1 1
3 1
0 1
B 1
4 1
HAMPTON 1
5 1 Il 1 16
0 1
B 1
2 1
2
3 1
8 1
1 1
4
0 I
B 1
0 1
B
B 1
0 1
0 1
0
B I
1 I
1 1
2
B 1
0 1
0 1
0
0 1
0 1
0 I 0
8 1
0 I
B I
0 1
0 1
INVER GROVE 1
20 1 105 1 125
3 1
4 1
10 1
17
4
2 1
15 1
21
0 1
8 1
6 1
6
0 1
0 1
0 1
0
1 1
4 1
B 1
13
0 1
0 1
0 I
8
B 1
0 1
2 I 2
0 I
0 1
0 1
0 I
0 1
LAKEVILLE 1
16 1 85 1 101
0 1
0 1
2 1
2
2 1;1
1
2 1
5
0 1
0 1
4 1
4
B I
8 1
0 1
0
4 1
—_1—_I
0 1
2 1
---- 1---
6
B 1
____1—I____I--
0 1
0 1
0
0 1
--- 1 ----
B I
1—_1_____
0 1 0
0 1
—1
0 1
---- 1_____1
0 1
0 I
--- I
0 I
--- 1
--__—__—I-1
LILYDALE 1
--- 1—__
0 1 0 1 B
—1--1—_1—_
B I
8 1
0 1
0
_____I--I—I_____
0 I
0 1
8 1
8
____I_____1—_1---
0 1
0 1
0 1
0
—__I
0 1
---- 1_—I---
8 1
B I
0
0 1
—1-1-1—
B 1
0 1
B
0 1
--1--I-1—
0 1
0 1
0
0 1
--1--1--I—_
0 1
0 1 0
0 1
—I-1--1--'1-1
0 1
0 1
0 1
0 1
——1-1--I—_
MENDOTA 1
2 1 2 1 4
--1—I---1—
2 1
B 1
0 1
2
_--1--I--1—__
2 1
�0 1
0 1
2
—'1--"I-1----
0 1
0 1
0 I
0
—1---1--1—_
8 1
B 1
0 1
0
1 1
0 I
0 I
1
0 1
—I—I—I—
0 1
0 1
0
B 1
--I—I--I—
0 1
B I 0
0 1
—I—I---I-1--I',
1 1
0 1
1 1
2 1
—I—I—I--
MENDOTA REIGHT51
9 1 11 1 20
—I—I--I—
0 1
1 1
2 1
3
--1--I—I—
3 110
1
2 1
5
----I--I—I---
1 1
0 1
S 1
6
--I—I—I--
1 1
0 1
B 1
1
—I—I—I—
2 I
11
1 I
4
B I
B 1
0 1
8
0 I
B I
0 1 0
0 I
B I
B 1
0 1
B R
MIESVILLE I
1 I 1 1 2
B I
0 I
8 1
0
0 1
�0 I
0 1
0
8 1
0 1
B 1
0
0 1
B I
B I
B
0 1
0 1
0 1
0
B 1
0 1
0 1
0
0 1
0 1
B 1 0
B I
--I—I—I--I--I
8 1
0 1
0 1
8 1
—I—I—I----
NORTHFIELD 1
5 1 10 1 15
—I—I—I--
0 1
6 1
1 1
1
—I—I--I--
0 1
I0 1
B I
0
—I—I—I--
0 1
0 I
1 I
1
--I---I---I—
0 1
0 1
0 1
0
—I--I--I—
0 1
0 1
0 1
B
—I----I—I—
0 1
0 1
0 1
8
—I—I—I—
B I
0 1
0 1 B
0 1
0 1
6 1
0 1
B I
RAVENNA 1
11 01 0
BI
01
01
0
01
ia
BI
0
BI
01
11
1
BI
01
61
0
01
--I—I--I—
BI
BI
0
81
—I--I--I—
01
01
0
01
--I--I—I—
01
01 0
01
—I—I—I--I--I
01
01
01
BI
I—I--I—
RANDOLPH 1
2 1 9 1 11
--I—I—I—
8 1
1 1
1 1
2
—I—I—I---
0 I
8 1
B 1
B
---I—I—I---
0 1
1 1
1 1
2
--I--I—I---
0 1
0 1
0 1
0
0 I
1 1
B 1
1
B I
B I
0 I
A
0 1
B I
0 I 0
0 1
0 1
0 1
0 1
a I
ROSEMOUNT 1
9 1 67 1 76
0 1
1 1
6 1
7
6 1
0 1
B 1
6
B I
0 1
19 1
19
B 1
0 1
0 I
B
I I
—I—I—I—
0 1
3 1
4
0 1
---I—I—I—
B 1
0 1
0
0 1
—I—I—I—
0 1
0 1 0
B I
—I--1--I—I—I
11
6 1
0 1
1 1
—I--I—I—
MR ST. PAIL 1
78 1 196 1 274
—I—I—I—
0 1
0 1
B 1
0
—I—I--I—
9 1
0 1
8 1
0
—I--I--I--
6 1
0 1
1 1
6
—I—I—I—
B
0 1
B
0
0 1
0 1
0 1
0
8 1
6 1
B I
0
0 1
0 1
0 1 0
0 1
0 1
0 1
0 1
0 1
SUNFISH LAKE I
0 1 6 1 0
0 1
0 I
B 1
8
8 1
0 1
6 1
0
0 1
0 1
0 1
0
0 I
B 1
0 1
6
B I
B I
8 1
0
B I
—1—I—I—
8 1
0 1
0
0 1
—I—I—I—
8 1
0 1 0
0 1
—I--I--I—I—I
0 1
0 1
0 1
0 I
—I—I—I—
VERMILLION I
1 1 3 1 4
—I—I—I—
0 1
0 1
0 1
0
—I--I—I—
1 1
0 I
0 1
0
—I--I—I—
0 1
0!
0 1
0
--I—I—I--
0 I
8 1
0 1
0
—I--1—I—
0 I
0 1
8 1
B
0 1
—I—I—I—
0 1
0 1
0
B I
—I—I—I—
0 1
0 1 0
0 I
—I—I—I—I—I
B 1
0 1
0 1
0 1
I—I—I—
NEST ST.PAIL 1
51 1 74 1 125
—I—I—I—
20 1
6 1
31 1
57
—I—I—I—
14 1
6 1
15 1
35
—I—I—I—
5 1
0 1
1 1
6
—I—I—I—
19 1
B 1
13 1
32
—I—I—I—
56 1
—I—I—I—
15 1
54 1
125
B 1
—I—I—I—
0 1
0 1
0
B I
—I—I—I—
8 1
2 1 2
1 1
—I—I-1—I—I
9 1
8 1
0 1
IB I
I—I—I—
I I I
I I
` TOTALS 1290 11078 11368
I I I
I I I
—I—I—I—
I
I
31 I
I
I
I
I
23 I
I
I
I
95 1119
I
I
—I—I—I—
I
I
61 I
I
I
I
I
16 I
I
I
I
SBI 135
I
I
—I—I—I—
i
I
10 I
I
I
I
I
6 1
I
I
I
I
68 I
I
I
83
—I—I—I—
I
24 I
I
I
I
1 1
I
I
I
I
IBI
I
I
43
I
I
87 I
I
I
I
I
31 I
I
I
I
% 1214
I
I
I
I
0 1
I
I
I—I—I—
I
I
B I
I
I
I
I
2 I
I
I
2
I
0 1
I
I
1
0 1
I
I
I
8 1 B
I
I
I
I
2 1
I
I
I
14 I
I
I
I
B I
I
I
I
I
2 I
I
I
I
1
IA I
I
I
*MH - Mobile Home