Loading...
07/01/1986 - City Council RegularADMINISTRATIVE AGENDA REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING EAGAN, MINNESOTA JULY 1, 1986 CITY ATTORNEY 1. YD Associates Assessment Appeal - Coachman Road/Project #348 2. O'Neil Lawsuit Update CITY ADMINISTRATOR 1. E.A.W. - Bur Oak Hills 2. Change Order #1, Contract 86-1 3. Athletic Site/Land Purchase Update 4. Resolution in Support of Northwest Orient & Republik Airlines 5. Comparable Worth Update & Review DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS 1. Contract 85-21, Approve Plans/Authorize Advertisement for Bids (Maintenance Facility Expansion) 2. Contract 86-13, Approve Cost Participation - Williams Brothers Pipeline (Wescott Road) /3� MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCILMEMBERS FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: JUNE 20, 1986 SUBJECT: ADMINISTRATIVE AGENDA CITY ATTORNEY Item 1.. YD Associates. -Assessment Appeal - Coachman Road/Project #348 --City Attorney Hauge has, requested that the YD Associates assessment appeal proposed settlement be placed on the agenda for review and consideration by the City Council. Please refer to pages-Athrough1<Z1 for a copy of a letter from Paul explain- ing the issue and request for settlement. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the YD Associates assessment appeal for Coachman Road, Project #348. Item 2. Robert O'Neil vs City of Eagan --Enclosed on page is a copy of a memo that was prepared by the City Attorney regarding the Robert O'Neil vs City of Eagan lawsuit. Paul will provide any further update regarding the status of this lawsuit. CITY ADMINISTRATOR Item 1. E.A.W. for Bur Oak Hills --The City Planner is requesting authorization to provide a negative declaration for the Bur ' Oak Hills development. Attached on page �1is a copy of a memo from the City Planner regarding this matter. Mayor Blomquist stated that John Tapper, representing Gopher Smelting, had con- tacted her during the past few days and asked that the Bur Oak Hills development be zoned industrial instead of residential. His request for the City's zoning that property .industrial relates to Gopher Smelting's plans for future expansion. If the Bur Oak Hills area were zoned industrial, there would be less objection for Gopher Smelting's expansion plans. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the E.A.W. for Bur Oak Hills as presented. Item 2. Change Order #1, Contract 86 -1 --The Director of Parks & Recreation is requesting authorization for the Change Order in the amount of $2,666.39 to Contract 86-1. For a review of the three (3) items that total the amount of the Change Order at Quarry Hill Park, refer to the attachment on page as prepared by the Director of Parks & Recreation. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny Change Order #1 for Contract 86-1 in the amount of $2,666.39. 13� ADMINISTRATIVE AGENDA PAGE TWO Item 3. Athletic Sites/Land Purchase Update --During the past year and one-half, the Director of Parks & Recreation and parks and recreation advisory commission has been reviewing options for the acquisition and development of a second athletic complex. Numerous options and locations have been given consideration,. The Commission has now narrowed their recommendation and the Director of Parks & Reoreation would like an opportunity to discuss their recommendation with the City Council. Due to other activi- ties occurring during the normal time for Department Head Business and given the nature of the recommendation, the Director of Parks & Recreation has asked to appear later on the City Council agenda. For information regarding the Commission's recommendation, refer to pages through Z�Z q The Director of Parks & Recre- ation will be prepared to make a presentation or answer questions whichever is desired by the City Council. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To provide direction to Parks & Recreation Director and Advisory Commission regarding further negotiations and a purchase agreement for acquisition of certain sites to be used as an athletic field complex in the future. Item 4. Resolution in Support of Northwest Orient/Republic Airlines --As a part of the informative memo, referenced as page 119, the paragraph suggested that future consideration of a resolution in the support of the Northwest Orient/Republic Airlines merger be given consideration on a future agenda. The airport advisory committee did act in support of this resolution, a copy is attached on pages through /s/ , at their meeting on June 26. Since a decision is anticipated by the end of July and the Minnesota Senators are asking for letters of support, the item was placed on the Administrative Agenda for consideration. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the resolution in support of the Northwest Orient/Republic Airlines. Item 5. Comparable Worth Update and Review --A comparable worth report was distributed with the June 17, 1986, City Council packet. The City Administrator would like an opportunity to answer any questions the report may have raised in the minds of the City Council and further, receive direction regarding the Personnel Committee's involvement with review and future consideration of the comparable worth results. Personnel Committee Chairman Tom Egan and the City Administrator will comment on a process that can be effective as the City Council further reviews and considers the adoption of a plan for paying all. employees a comparable salary for a position of comparable value. /3 ADMINISTRATIVE AGENDA PAGE THREE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS 1. Contract 85-21, Approve Plans/Authorize Advertisement for Bids (Maintenance Facility Expansion) --At the June 3 meeting, the Council approved the revised concept design for the remodeling and expansion of the maintenance facility under Contract 85-21. Enclosed on pagesthrough are copies of the final layout configuration and site plan which will be discussed in further detail at the.- Council meeting. Also, the architect will have a revised cost estimate based on these final plans which will be discussed at the time of plan review. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the plans for Contract 85-21 (Maintenance Facility Expansion) and authorize the advertisement for a bid opening to be held at 2.00 p.m. July 29, 1986. 2. Contract 86-13, Approve Cost Participation - Williams Brothers Pipeline (Wescott Road) --On June 17, the Council awarded the contract for the upgrading of Wescott Road from Lexington Avenue to one-half mile east. As a part of this road improvement, it will be necessary to relocate certain sections of the existing Williams Brothers Pipeline that are located outside of the old right-of-way limits. As a condition of allowing City work within their exclusive easements within recent dedicated public right-of- way, Williams Brothers requires City cost participation of approxi- mately $17,00'0 to relocate their existing facilities' to match the new grade and profile elevations. Williams Brothers will adjust the pipeline located within the old right-of-way by mainte- nance personnel of the Williams Brothers Pipeline subject to execution of this cost participation agreement. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the cost partici- pation agreement with Williams Brothers Pipeline for Contract 86-13 (Wescott Road) and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. /s/ Thomas L. Hedges City Administrator 13� HAUGE, EIDE & HELLER, P. A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW WATER -VIEW -OFFICE TOWER. SUITE 303 1200 YANKEE DOODLE ROAD EAGAN. MINNESOTA 55123 PAUL H. HAUGE KEVIN W. EIDE DAVID G. KELLER LORI M. BELLIN MICHAELJ. MAYER June 20, 1986 Thomas Hedges Eagan City Administrator 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55121 RE: YD Associates Assessment Appeal - Coachman Road - Project #348 Dear Tom: Issue: AREA CODE 612 TELEPHONE 456-9000 454-4224 On Thursday, June 19, 1986, Rich Hefti and I appeared in the Dakota County District Court on the assessment appeal brought by YD Associates consisting of Bill Muske and Vance Grannis as owners of the approximately 5 acre commercial parcel at the northeast corner of Coachman Road and Yankee Doodle Road. Project #348 is the project for the upgrading of Coachman Road accomplished in 1985 with the assessment hearing held in September of 1985. You may recall that the owners did not submit written objections at the time of the hearing and claimed that they did not receive written notice of the hearing, although the City records and Affidavit of Mailing indicates that Notices were sent for the two parcels involved. Appraisal and Assessment: Bill Cushman, an appraiser for Dakota County for the Yankee Doodle Road upgrading for the mile lying adjacent to the YD Associates property, was asked about a month ago to do an appraisal for the City for the purpose of the assessment appeal. The following includes the information relating to the assessments levied and the Cushman appraisal: PARCEL NO. 010-01 Triangular parcel 25,960 sq. ft. 011-52 Approximately 4 acres AMOUNT ASSESSED $11,775.67 $ 9,386.97 $21,162.64 l�z0 CUSHMAN APPRAISAL BENEFIT' $ 5,600.00 $ 9,386.97 $14,986.97 Thomas Hedges June 20, 1986 Page 2 Request for. Settlement: Prior to the Court trial on June 19, the property owners suggested that the compromise settlement would be as follows: Parcel 010-01 $ 5,600.00 Parcel 011=52 $ 4,458.00 The basis for the proposed settlement on parcel 011-52 is at the same percentage rate as on 010-01 and would again be reduced by an additional $4,928.00. In any event, the trial was held and Rich Hefti and I agreed that we would forward the request to the City Council and also ask that the property owners request permission to compromise based upon the total amount of the. Cushman appraisal of benefit, and each party react prior to the time that Judge Pav-lak renders his decision. I would appreciate if you would place this item on the Council Agenda for the July 1 meeting for consideration by the'City Council at that time. truly yours, GE, EIDEL�P.A. i" Paul H. Hauge PHH:ras Enclosure HAUGE', EIDE & HELLER, P. A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW WATER VIEW OFFICE TOWER, SUITE 303 1200 YANKEE DOODLE ROAD EAGAN, MINNESOTA, 55123 PAUL H. HAUGE 'iKEVIN W. EIDE DAVID G. KELLER LORI M. BELLIN MICHAEL J. MAYER Mr-. Thomas Hedges Eagan City Administrator 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 June 19, 1986 RE: Robert O'Neil vs. City of Eagan (Civil Action) Dear Tom: AREA CODE 812 TELEPHONE 456.9000 4544224' At the City Council meeting on June 17, 1986, the Council adopted a resolution to proceed with the Comprehensive Guide Planning, including commercial property, within the City. It is understood that the Council will be proceeding at a joint meeting of the Planning Commission on June 26, 1986, and that the planning staff will have material prepared at that time. I have talked with Chris Dietzen and Dave Sellergren of the Larkin, Hoffman office and eachhas�suggested that the Zouncil proceed with the Comp Guide review. Neither had any particular suggestions on the method of the Planning Commission and Council handling the commercial comprehensive plan revisions, but they indicated that the City should feel no pressure because of the outstanding lawsuit in proceeding or making their decision. If there are any other,comments or suggestions, I will certainly be in touch with you. PHH:ras Very truly yours, Zuau E & KELLER, P.A. i ge MEMO TO: THOMAS L HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM:, DALE C RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER DATE: JUNE 26, 1986 SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET FOR BUR OAK HILLS The environmental assessment review for Bur Oak Hills has been completed, and the 30=day review process ended on June 19, 1986. The resulting comments of this review process indicate additional review is not necessary or that a negative declaration be made for the Bur Oak Hills development, contingent on one finding by the Metropolitan Council. It was noted in the review process that the Bur Oak Hills development is in noise zone 4, according to the Airport Chapter of the development framework. Single family residential homes are provisional as long as certain criteria are adhered to. Staff has met with the Metropolitan Council and have resolved the issues of this EAW if the builder agrees to provide an interior noise level of the residential unit at a 45 decibel level. Marketing of the Bur Oak Hills Addition should indicate that there is a potential impact of noise from the airport and it is in noise zone 4, where the noise level is 65-70 dBA. With the developer adding these two conditions to the development, the EAW process is complete. City P1 nner DCR/jj lil3 CHANGE ORDER #1: CONTRACT 86 - 1 J.'. - Contract 86 - 1, 'Parks Construction Change Order #1 consists of three items, all of which are at Quarry Hill Park., The total amount of all three items amounts to $2,666.39. Item "A" is for an increase in sanitary sewer of 135 ft., 6" P.V.C., Bend and Riser; Item "B" is removal and salvage of cyclone fence, aggregate excavation and grading around well house; Item "C" is to raise an air. -relief manhole for the 12" water main which is within the park. Change Order Summary: "A" $1,591..75 "B" 500.00 "C" 574.64 Total: $2,666.39 FOR COUNCIL ACTION: To approve change order #1 for Contract 86 - 1 in the amount of $2,666.39. Original contract Change Order $313,753.81 2,666.39 Revised Contract $316,420.20 1�41 MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL TOM HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: KEN ORAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION DATE: JUNE 24, 1986 HE: ATHLETIC SITE/LAND PURCHASES - PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Parks System Plan completed in 1982 - 83, identified athletic needs for the City for the year 1990 and beyond. Facility planning efforts were based on a projected population of 37,500 for 1890, and 50,000 people for the year 2,000. Based on the athletic standards established and projected population, it was estimated that the City would require an additional fifty acres of usable athletic field space to meet 1990. (37,500 population) needs. A total of ninety acres was estimated to meet the year 2,000 (50,000 population) needs. However, it was then assumed that some of the athletic space needs could be shifted to neighborhood parks. While it was recognized that this was not desirable, the athletic space needs could be reduced to approximately thirty and fifty acres respectively. It was also assumed that the City would develop an aggressive approach to the development of neighborhood parks and the utilization of athletic facility developments for league play, by use from adults. Recognition of the need for athletic space of 30 acres by 1990 - 37,500 population, the Commission and Citizen Task Force recommended $450,000 be included in the Parks Bond Referendum for acquisition purposes. For the better part of a year and a half, the Advisory Parks and Recreation Commission has .spent many, many hours reviewing several site alternatives, possible designs, acquisition costs and projected costs for development. As the City Council 3s aware, the Commission previously recommended, and the Council has authorized the purchase of a 15 -acre parcel from the Ohmann Estate. Mrs. Lehmann, the property owner, continues to indicate her willingness to sell to the City, although no purchase agreement has been signed by the owner. Recent contact indicates that the estate is soon to be settled, and hopes of preceeding with the acquisition continues. With the proposed Fairway Hills Plat, the Commission has recommended that the proposed plan provide for a combination neighborhood park/soccer athletic field. / V5 Attached to this memorandum is the design schematic for this park. In making the recommendation of this site plan, the Commission has also reviewed the remaining deficiencies to meet the rapidly growing population needs. Based on the studies done by the Commission, they are recommending the City acquire the following parcels to meet the City's needs for athletic field space for both the immediate future and beyond. COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION 1. Fifteen (15) acre Ohmann parcel, to be developed as three soccer fields (youth) and neighborhood playground concept. (This will require a trade of five acres with Derrick Land Company as part of Fairway Hills Plat). 2. Acquisition of no less than seven (7) and no more than ten (1'0) acres of property adjacent to existing Northview athletic fields. This would provide for two (7 acres) or three (10 acres) softball fields., an expanded parking lot, and secondary access road, to the park. This acquisition would be contingent upon successful relocation of the Free Associations of Luthern Congregation's three acre parcel. (This three acres is part of the proposed acquisition with the remainder to be purchased from Jim Curry.) See Attachment B. for site plan. 3. That the Barr parcel, located on Highway #3, also be purchased for a ('future) athletic site. This is a forty-three acre parcel,, and is, currently being listed for sale. SUMMATION Commission is recommending the combined efforts to acquire the Ohmann and Northview, parcel. This should provide for three soccer and three softball fields; which would meet current need's. Also, acquire the Barr parcel for "future athletic site needs" beyond the 37,500 population threshold. COST The Commission's proposal for immediate acquisition of the Ohmann and Northview parcel would provide for approximately 25 acres with an expenditure of $375,000. The inclusion of the Barr parcel for future development is $225,000, or approximately $600,000 in total. All three parcels combined would provide .approximately sixty-eight (68) .gross acres, with -approximately - fifty-five (55) net, usable acres. All three acquisitions would meet both the immediate and future needs as identified in the Park Systems Plan. Funding for the $600,000. acquisition will be provided by the Parks Bond Fund of $450,000. and the remainder -from the Parks Site Fund. /9/1 FOR COUNCIL ACTION Staff is presenting the Commission's recommendations to the City Council for approval, in order that negotiations and a purchase agreement can be prepared for the acquisition of each site. Staff will provide additional information relative to each of the parcels, as well as additional explanation regarding current and future City needs. KV/bls 107 I OF wo-.I!l M, �8 0 Is j CITY OF RAGAN RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF THE WEST ORIENT AND REPUBLIC AIRLINES WHEREAS',, Northwest Orient and Repubic Airlines have proposed a merger of their companies and operations "and said merger is currently under review by various federal agencies; and WHEREAS, Northwest Orient Airlines is a new and welcome member of the Eagan business community; and WHEREAS, many businesses and residents of Eagan derive specific and direct benefit from the.operation of the airport and the merging airlines; and WHEREAS, the City of Eagan experiences a unique relationship with the Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport, being situated at the end of its principal arrival and departure runways; and WHEREAS, under the Preferential Runway System (PRS) of the airport, a majority of aircraft operations will continue to overfly a portion of the City; and WHEREAS, aircraft noise continues to be a serious issue affecting a significant portion of the City's residents; and WHEREAS, Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport serves as a hub for each of the merging airlines and that their hubbing operations represent well over half of all operations at the airport; and WHEREAS, the consolidation of duplicate operations with the same destination or origination point will reduce the number of a=ircraft operations at the airport; and WHEREAS, a reduction of the number of aircraft operations will have a direct, obvious and positive impact on the noise environment of the City; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Eagan supports the merger of Northwest Orient and Republic Airlines as a means of improving the efficiency and noise compatibility of the Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport's operations; and 1 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City supports those efforts which will bring about said merger in a timely manner and urges those agencies which are or will be reviewing the merger to facilitate its approval.and completion in the near future. MOTION MADE BY: SECONDED BY: THOSE IN FAVOR: THOSE OPPOSED: DATED: CITY OF EAGAN CITY COUNCIL By: Attest: Its Clerk CERTIFICATION I, E.J. VanOverbeke, Clerk of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota,, do hereby ce'rti.f'y that the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted by the City Council of the. City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, in a regular meeting thereof assembled this . day of , 1986. E.J. VanOverbeke, City Clerk City of Eagan �'5'/ 4*a� ............. ..... .... ... . .......... .- i VE111e S'17 -e- 124 7 T AM ALTEWATET x x Ll Nt oVF1 fiPAp OR. ON OV"A4'. •VK Roog PRWN VDG= n I w�x DwR ri I, II LJ ONR O I 9 I -1-4-,I—E%LSTIHG �•-J-: HCIST I I Trv. I u K H 1 Ki PtrvoeK _. _ _ VEH[CLE Na ProNG REPAIR LAD ,Fn -j BAY II I, II f II II I 11 Ll . 0 1/2 3410• I - O / \ r-1 FLOOR HOIST CUT tHTO 1 TO M. T Te 176 1 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE L REPAIR 128 o I LI O x I LJ LJ � ' W O I 9 I -1-4-,I—E%LSTIHG �•-J-: HCIST I I Trv. I u K H 1 Ki PtrvoeK _. _ _ VEH[CLE Na ProNG REPAIR LAD ,Fn -j BAY II _ II f II II I 1/2 3410• I ST.,O1 CHEW 36,000 HYDRAULIC FLOOR HOIST CUT tHTO 1 - X N d�I r�+C rvTwc mm rxna -LSr. EN�x2 -- VCff/CL �/�(PT /s y %DCPA-i/Z Ll 4D/v`LlNl,STIZA-F-/ . ON C�sr '--L002) 1 Ir+ ra �, fSTIBILILE im STAT IOL 14 Ill uu GENERI 1054P., OFF1C1 UTILITIESTREET 1 O 109 n' Y.y \ "STRECTA:UPERVISOR Ill. Q V PARKS SUPERvIro" — OF L PARM O A� 4 PLAN HALL F, 0-2 • .ele immimin RR O Ir 1'-1' 1R L11'IC Y'y� va va 20'--0' SCO VEHICLE MAIN L REPAI FIE —CONC. APRON — 50'-0' t Vn�c,s� �� oc�mrC� Bins, h �C( VENDIJd WST6AIRxirLHE I eon �% DN I z I I we 1 - a•e Ire I ' i VENDIJd WST6AIRxirLHE I eon �% DN I z I I we 1 F-1 AGENDA REGULAR MEETING EAGAN CITY COUNCIL EAGAN, MINNESOTA CITY HALL JULY 1, 1986 6:30 P.M. I. 6:30 - ROLL CALL & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE II. 6:32 - ADOPT AGENDA & APPROVAL OF MINUTES III. 6:35 - RETIREMENT/RECOGNITION OF EAGAN VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTERS BOB I GILES, JERRY ADAM,AND FIRE CHIEF BOB CHILDERS IV. 6:40 - RECEIVE BIDS/AWARD BOND SALE FOR $4,650,000 G.O. IMPROVEMENT BONDS, $3,000,000 MUNICIPAL STATE AID BONDS AND $700,000 TAX INCREMENT FINANCING BONDS FOR 1986 T. z III. 6:45 - DEPARTMENT HEAD BUSINESS IV. ,6}:55 - CONSENT AGENDA �15 A. Contractor Licenses p /0 B. Personnel Items C. Approve Final Plat, Town Center 70 -4th Addition I� /3 D. Project 478, Receive Report/Order Public Hearing, Windtree 7th Addition p14 E. Approve Grading Permit #EX -025-086, Overhill Farm 2nd Addition Ip./r� F. Public Improvement Final Acceptance, Blackhawk Oaks and Sunset / Addition p -1q G. Approve Grading Permit #EX 34-096, Fairway Hills Addition I !� H. Approve Grading Permit #EX 12-076, Burr Oaks Addition Ap./$ I. Approve Final Plat, Eagandale Lemay Lake 2nd Addition f,/7 J. Vacate Drainage and Utility Easement, Receive Petition/Order / Public Hearing, Eagandale Center Industrial Park #6 F./7 K. Vacate Ponding Easement, Receive Petition/Order Public Hearing, Lemay Lake Hills V. 7:00 - PUBLIC HEARINGS p•/V A. Public Hearing for Project 458, Eagandale Center Industrial Park / - Storm Sewer -Z� B. Final Assessment Hearing for Project 458, Eagandale Center / Industrial Park - Storm Sewer -Zq C. Final Assessment Hearing for Project 471, West Service Road - / Storm Sewer P.3r D. Public Hearing to Consider a Change in Inducement Resolution to Increase the Amount of Multifamily Housing Revenue Bonds from $10,000,000 to $11,875,000 for Thomas Lake Apartments (Dominium Group) VI, OLD BUSINESS P,39 A. Sign Policy Agreement for Town Centre 70 & 100_(Federal Land / Company) F -V9 B. Conditional Use Permit (Franchise Associates) To Allow a Drive - Through Arby's Restaurant and a 20' Pylon Sign Located on Lot 2, Block 1, Town Centre 70 3rd kddition, NW 1/4 of Sec. 15 / (Continued from the April 15, 1986, City Council Meeting) C. Review and Consideration of Temporary Advertising Sign Regulations (Continued from the June 17, 1986, City Council Meeting) VII. NEN BUSINESS P.66 A. Blue Bell Ice Cream Request to Allow On -Street Ice Cream Truck Sales p1 3 B. Variance (Richard Bakken) To Exceed 20% Building Lot Coverage on Lot 12, Block 1, Cinnamon Ridge, Located at Slater Road & Cinnamon Ridge Trail, SW 1/4 of Section 30 p.6 C. Variance (Frederick Dean) 12' Variance from the 40' Setback / Requirement Along Public Street, Lot 22, Block 2, Safari Estates First Addition, Located At Galaxie Avenue and Safari Trail, SW 1/4 of Section 32 2- D. Waiver of Plat (RMC Development Corp.) to Split Existing Duplex Lot, Lot 6, Block 1, Sun -Cliff First Addition, Located SW of Deer Hills Trail Abutting Sunrise Road, NW 1/4 of Sec.29 y.9Y E. Waiver of Plat (Sons Construction Company) to Split Existing / Duplex Lot, Lot 9, Block 1, Oakwood Heights 2nd Addition, .Located at Lynx Court and Cougar Drive, SW 1/4 of Section 25 P q� F. Preliminary Plat for Town Centre 100 Second Addition (Federal Land Company Consisting of 2 Lots for an Office & Bank and 1 Outlot on Approximately 4.9 Acres on Outlot A of Town Centre 100 First Addition, Located at Yankee Doodle Road and Denmark Avenue, Part of NW 1/4 of Section 15 �•//� G. Municipal Fee Policy VIII. ADDITIONAL ITEMS P,A A. Public Improvement Contracts p./1,31. Contract 86-10, Award Contract (Eagandale Center Industrial I Park - Storm Sewer //J 2. Contract 86-8, Receive Bids/Award Contract (Sealcoating) P /173. Contract 86-11, Receive Bids/Award Contract (Williams & LaRue, Wyndham Corporate Center - Utilities) IR. VISITORS TO BE HEARD (for those persons not on the agenda) X_ ADJOURNMENT MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCILMEMBERS FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: JUNE 26, 1986 SUBJECT: AGENDA INFORMATION ADOPT AGENDA/AP ROVE -MINUTES After approval is given to the July 1, 1986, agenda and regular City Council meeting minutes for the &une 17 meeting, the following items are in order for consideration: After twenty-three years as volunteer firefighters, Bob Childers ® and Jerry Adam are retiring. These two individuals were charter members of the first Eagan Fire Department. Bob Giles is also retiring from the volunteer Fire Department after 22 years. Chief Childers'last general meeting was held on June 23, at which time he and Jerry Adam': both received a standing ovation by their fellow firefighters for their years of public service and dedica- tion_ A plaque will be presented to Bob Childersin special recogni- tion, not only as a volunteer firefighter, but also as the Fire Chief. Framed certificates will be .g-iven to Jerry Adam and Bob Giles. All members of the volunteer Fire Department have been invited to attend the meeting for special recognition. ACTION TO BE. CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To accept the resignation of Bob Childers as the Eagan Fire Chief. At the June 3,, 1986 City Council meeting, a bond sale was set for the July 1, 1986 City Council meeting, at which time bids were to be received for three (3) separate public bond issues. The first issue is a $4,650,000 G.O. Improvement Bond which includes several public improvements of which the improvements and debt incurred for the payment of bond will be paid by special assess- ments, a $3,000,000 Municipal State Aid bond that will be used for various street improvements and the debt incurred will be paid through the annual receipt of future Municipal State Aid funding and a Tax Increment Bond in the amount of $700,000 to be used for various public improvements for the new Sperry sales and marketing facility and that debt will be paid utilizing 50% of the new tax increment. Bids will be received at noon on July 1 and tallied by the City's fiscal consultant, Miller and Schroeder Municipals Inc. The results of the bid each sale will be made available at the City Council meeting. Mr. Ernie Clark representing Miller and Schroeder Municipals Inc., will be present to review the bids. The Director of Finance and City Administrator will also participate Agenda Information Memo July 1,, 1986, City Council Meeting Page Two RECEIVE BIDS/AWARD BOND SALE CONT'D. in the bid opening and a review of the bids during Tuesday after- noon. Enclosed in each packet is a copy -of the bond perspectus that was prepared by Miller and Schroeder Municipals Inc., and mailed out to, perspective bond buyers for all three (3) issues. If, any member of the City Council would like additional information on any of the bonds that are being given consideration on Tuesday, feel free to contact the City Administrator's office,. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: 1) To most favorable bid for the $4,650,000 G.O. 2') To approve or deny the most favorable Municipal State Aid bond and 3) To approve able bid for the $700,000 Tax Increment used for the new Sperry facility. approve or deny the Improvement Bond sale, bid for the $3,000,000 - or deny the most favor - Financing bond to be 0 40 6. Agenda Information Memo July 1, 1986, City Council Meeting Page Three DEPARTMENT HEAD BUSINESS A. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT I. Stop Sign Petition '- Jade Lane a d Carnelian Lane --On June 3, the petition enclosed on pages 7d and 15 was received by staff requesting the installation of -a stop sign on Carnelian Lane at its intersection with Jade Lane. Enclosed on page 4 is a map showing the relationship of the requested stop sign to the existing stop signs at Nicols Road and Flint Drive and also shows the location of the 22 properties represented by the 24 signatures on the petition. In response to this petition, the letter enclosed on page � was sent to all signatories informing them of the staff's reOZ_ mendation and when this item would be formally considered by Council action. The existing stop sign on Carnelian at Flint Drive was installed as a result of a petition discussed in approximately 1980. At that time, there was concern expressed that with Carnelian being a neighborhood collector between Rahn Road and Nicols Road, the installation of excessive stop signs would be. detrimental to good traffic flow through the community. Therefore, based on previous discussion and present standards regarding the warrants necessary for the installation of a stop sign, staff cannot recom- mend concurrence with this petition request. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve/deny the installa- tion of a stop sign on Carnelian Lane at the intersection with Jade Lane. 0 r(CI UME J OILY 986 Date Received To Council 7�_/e_� 6 Approved PENTION STOP SIGN Ir Go%,v.t/L OF cY';4 D1T- 1- J �1 c l-lj L yel�YIv R/f IIAIv s/61vs o v [..l. I/we, the undersigned hereby petition the City Council of the City of Eagan to install stop signs on at the intersection with I/we,'request this installation for the following reasons: 1. �R� e�� iea �lu� C �o��nnC� Ce{i�D�gzr�1 Lr� N i� �L �y�gSl� InJ �G+rS 2. SChr"L hxS Ick-uP Aab (ZmLrasT- o -P Cycl�,zrrl/ 3. �ULiNl7 rr�T�rZSt✓CTiU,t� Al CRL'Nrz�i/jN L -N ffrt/D �/�D� Lti/. 4. �tSTgNC �Fr T� r� f �N STo� S'tG,JU �T Q/Tj`/�S�Cj�d,v o C4R1Ur3l1AtlJ Lnl. rL,nJT LM To I/we request that the City Council take this petition request under consideration at its earliest opportunity and that we be informed as to when it is scheduled so that we may appear in person if we so choose. NAME (Please print and initial) ADDRESS 2./C, �l rr7 /'J(/Jc'C?%,%� ✓�/�i' CL?✓�k'/�C.�1 ti3 «ro J<' C C oLJ d8 CC clue a�i3,�' CavhPliGh LGtan 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. S. 9. 10. h. 12. 2 ` X11/, t'-� �DQic55 O 9 /e'a •2y[e �ts�._ L /i/v e C6 3 Z©lff C CCL<Zl'CQv L�tIL� C(3__.�30 or lfG v G�3 �6v ®r I� 421 cJti v�cv� 0? 8n�� c.� `c � CG3 (S Va nt- qS — �b 117 _ 120-70 -2& 5 a-7 : o c / TL � �' C2C,c'�u�v ��� v2 l I � �•���°.,-.— e ��s 2 �z S 7 ^�•.,,.c, C 6 3 o s v 9 .51 j C je LU E TOI too _ O .SSr a .,. ; N• ,�.- tug 19 . .ae 4(1 ., ..t) 7 ! n t to J 23 a 2. ' ,L" 7 •••n1lyi / 6 `� B �/l. .1 �\ = Qii1\\ ♦f -�! i al • � j 3 • B • 9 11.E "'+a .p � /O �� - �i/ .a 4) 3 Z Z < w - Q . , ! 9. ss� /SAPPHIRE LANE S CNws,w, /• r 9 3q f a / , ,. - .�� a to -, • ( q A. eine'. Q 3 17 , . � q Y �� % _uui f t Tf (� /s • r , ko ✓. „•. G Z9 Q 3` �`jsY. .t ♦ c y 28 it of 3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD, PO. BOX 21199 EAGAN. MINNESOTA 55121 PHONE: (612) 454-8100 June 17, 1986 Re: Stop Sign Petition - Jade Lane & Carnelian Lane Dear Petitioner: BEA BLOMQUIST Mwor THOMAS EGAN JAMES A. SMITH MC ELLISON THEODORE WACHTER Coun l Members THOMAS HEDGES CIN A minislmlor EUGENE VAN OVERBEKE CIN Cleik Recently, the City received a petition with your -signature requesting the installation of a stop sign at the intersection of Jade Lane and Carnelian. This letter is to inform you that this petition will be presented to the Council at their regular meeting of July 1, 1986, at 6:30 p.m., for formal consideration. The City has adopted standard conditions and warrants which must be met before the installation of stop signs can be recommended. These conditions and warrants incorporate many of the criteria contained in the Uniform Traffic Control Devices, published by the Department of Transportation. Our Engineering Division has reviewed this intersection and has been unable to identify any of the specific conditions or warrants that would justify the installation of a stop sign. While the City recognizes the concerns listed under the reasons for signing the petition, in order to maintain uniformity necessary to ensure compliance with all traffic regulations, the staff cannot recommend approval when your request is considered at the July 1 meeting. In relationship to the "Children Playing" sign as requested, the City installs these signs only at designated playground, school, etc., locations where the congregation of children for extended periods of time are expected. To place these type of warning signs at every school bus stop location, or randomly through residential areas, would cause confusion to the travelling public and tend to de -emphasis the importance of these signs at their proper locations as mentioned previously. I regret that the staff cannot support your request as submitted. However, this letter is meant to provide you information regarding the background for staff's recommendations and to inform you that the Council will consider this item at the July 1 Council meeting. Sincerel ��/ Tilomas A. Colbert, P.E. Director of Public Works TAC/ jj THE LONE OAK TREE...THE SYMBOL OF S RENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY Agenda Information Memo July 1, 1986, City Council Meeting Page Four CONSENT•AGEND There are eleven (11) •,items on the agenda referred to as Consent Items requiring one (1) motion by the City Council. I£ 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 discussion required is brief. CONTRACTOR LICENSES A. Contractor Licenses --Attached on page� is a list of contractors who are renewing or who have been s lected 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 approvalfor a contractor license. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the list of contractor licenses as presented. L RACTORS' LICENSE JULY 1, 1986 GENERAL CONTRACTORS 1. ADVANCE DEVELOPERS INC 2. ALM BUILDERS INC 3. ANTCO CONSTRUCTION CO 4. BUTLER HOUSING CORP 5. CONSTRUCTION SPECIALISTS 6. GOODWIN BUILDERS INC ® 7. HAGMAN CONSTRUCTION INC 8. RIVERVIEW CONSTRUCTION INC 9. R.J. RYAN HOMEOWNER 1. BORDSEN, LES • 1. 3-D HEATING CO 2. J.K. HEATING CO PLUMBING 1. °nN'S PLBG & HTG 2. WESTONKA PLBG Agenda Information Memo July 1, 1986, City Council Meeting Page Five PERSONNEL ITEMS B. PERSONNEL ITEMS: There is one (1) item to be considered under Personnel: Item 1, Clerk -Typist (Pool) --The City -received a letter -of resigna- tion from Helga Brock, a part-time clerk typist in the typing pool. The resignation was effective June 25. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To accept the resignation of Helga Brock and to authorize the advertisement for a replacement for her position, part-time clerk typist in the typing pool • (Administration). • /0 Agenda Information Memo July 1, 1986, City Council Meeting Page Six APPROVE FINAL PLAT, TOWN CENTRE 70 -4TH ADDITION C. Approve Final Plat, Town Centre70 - 4th Addition --We have received an application for final plat approval for the above - referenced subdivision located between Town Centre 70 Drive and Yankee Doodle Road, west of Denmark Avenue as shown by the final plat enclosed' on page 11�1. All -conditions and requirements of preliminary plat approval granted by Council action on February 5, 1985 as it pertains to this development have been complied with. All final plat .application materials have been submitted, reviewed by staff and found to be in order for favorable Council action. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: for Town Centre 70 4th Addition and Clerk to execute all related documents. To approve the final plat authorize the Mayor and City TOWN CENTRE TO FOURTH ADDITION Nbr[.. Irs �•a n[. M w.. • � 1 Mean lew oan! IwM. 1 roa nnwin w M 4rM•• ,Cr ••card• F [ lnewrn. a lln o 1V•p [tTf•[ n rWRr i...iwp. �. eel• rl.[. bon•,• ••• nllln • •Irwn IAun w� `,.r rna In aau . '.a4anlM m[ uw.. 1 �Iw• u`i.:: uuwwu. �N)oeM mf•tMlvYaa•• R .' W eerlggM1 II LOT I T L '.' T OUTLOT A A BLOCK I IHIRE! •.. m .. +[en •m[m un .e..n Yn. ^w..ne....[nr..r[. wn..a nn�� .. rn e[ tM I IIwIM encrlp•e ^.aeaar rltuVM Int el 4•eY. [Y[• 1 elrip ,. Tfll [inc[ n f.id [blflfT. •eaerwana [e [M rwee0•e •1•[ Wlnl. 4 =a n [Y Mvn rn n•nN •N en *""[ • an'[ r 1 Im•„ LLOI[IP w• Manta aY n wenn •aV rin [er n•en ne ua llla� .ummn unl�. In �Itw•p •M:•el ••le .M•c•1 YM [e—n Vnw .•1 s •Ir1•. 1[ nM aYn nw la • pme Y. Y rmm .. Celan •n1 V[a loot, felon. mann tlr � n el ♦ n� [mrML YF [T•.,I n b p }n (e[•nln In•arr•na n ec sltlwe Yal•n n 1r• _ [Umf Cal :. • w 4 wl. , ^ la. •rurenrFi. w �iTTelnl�drral YN [usn,. 4�•wa r•I a� nn Mllc n..111�pn• r me nrr. ur.e 1 r.. one . vnnM t . e.•nler n uN. n.e n Ion mor IDrYC1 h u.. V .[ . wr a [ a •n u.[..aw .. n w u. Olt .a ulna rl...ae b u ..ie. eeWre.r. LM• . . w.LnreW n u. rl•[. a u.[ Wa• n. r ..lira• e�`weuwn nn..•. ao r e.nu.�tl van.. nn •• wa, rt�n b wl.rrtbn re. re..nln r.n..pr. c..al nc.a. n• Mal•btl�arb r ul• by 1 n N Jw•. [. •s.4n. rpbvnleT— a.n r•eun tunas. 4�.aa.. � , alr•t en aM e v el 1,_. WS1,. berell el 4,•4n. Illnw•o `•Wro••e llrl• nlr [In tvJSit e• Jfaw, wia.1!(^ b 4•a. •Y un• a b 0•pan 111.IY•• er VwAnn 1•I), nY eln 4. 4•• Twp Yn � 4n n rn•r r•en, o • ew [. er.•[er I�n[�nmp uu W un• ur W r n re, a utl br•lu n au• ma [ )rrwp.w •mmb w.n r.n rnie anv�a. _ u_ b"6IGre un• en •tl n.w.[•r none a,l. _ en pr u_ snllf Wl NI• In[ae•n! .. IIIM In 4 1ll.a n W bw,[ MY. rn maY• en el � e1 � • n .•If •aaa•M n el � wp e RHAV LVIDS VEYM I Agenda Information Memo July 1,.1986, City Council Meeting Page Seven PROJECT 478, RECEIVE REPORT/ORDER PUBLIC HEARING D. Project 478, Receive Report/Order Public Hearing (Windtree 7th Addition) --In response to a petition received from the develop- ers of the Windtree 7th Addition, the Council authorized the preparation of a feasibility report—to discuss the installation of streets and utilities. This report has now been completed and is being presented to the Council in consideration of scheduling a public hearing for formal discussion. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the feasibility report for Project 478, Windtree 7th Addition (Streets and • Utilities') and schedule the public hearing to be held August 5, 1986. • /3 Agenda Information Memo July 1, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Eight GRADING PERMIT #EX-25-086/OVERHILL _FARM 2ND ADDITION E. Approve Grading Permit #EX -25-086, Overhill Farm 2nd Addi- tion --Staff has received an application for a grading/excavation permit for the proposed Overhill Farm 2nd Addition. All applica- tion materials- have been submitted, reviewed by Staff and found to be in order for favorable, Council action. This grading plan conforms with the proposed final plat which is anticipated to be processed for formal Council approval in the near future. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve Grading Permit #EX -25-086, Overhill Farm 2nd Addition. Is PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS/PROJECTS 84-R AND 83-N F. Public Improvement Final Acceptance, Blackhawk Oaks (84-R) and Sunset Addition (83 -N) --The installation of public streets and utilities performed privately by the developer under Projects 84-R (Blackhawk Oaks) and 83-N (Sunset Addition) have been completed, inspected by representatives of the Public Works Department and found to be in compliance with City approved plans, specifications and the related subdivision development agreements. Based on the results of these reviews and inspections, it is recommended that these public improvements (sanitary sewer, water, storm sewer, streets and related appurtenances) be accepted for perpetual mainte- nance and that the related financial escrows be reduced accordingly. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the installation • of public improvements for Projects 84-R (Blackhawk Oaks) and 83-N (Sunset Addition), accept for perpetual maintenance and authorize the reduction of the related financial security. GRADING PERMIT #EX-34-096/FAIRWAY HILLS ADDITION G. Approve Grading Permit #EX -34-096, Fairway Hills Addition --We have received an application for a grading/excavation permit for the proposed Fairway Hills Addition located southeast of Cliff and Pilot Knob Roads. All application materials have been submitted, reviewed by Staff and found to be in order for favorable Council action. This grading plan conforms with the approved preliminary plat and final plat which is proposed to be processed in the near future. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: #EX -34-096, Fairway Hills Addition. T To approve Grading Permit Agenda Information Memo July 1, 1986, City Council.Meeting Pace Nine GRADING PERMIT #EX-12-076/BURR _OAKS ADDITION H. Approve Grading Permit #EX -12-076, Burr Oaks Addition --We have received an application for a grading permit for the Burr Oaks Addition located south and east of Burr Oak Park. Now that the 'required review process for the Epvironmental Assessment Work- sheet (EAW) has been completed, there are no restrictions against processing this grading permit for approval. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve Grading Permit #EX -12-076, Burr Oaks Addition. • APPROVE FINAL PLAT, EAGANDALE LEMAY LAKE 2ND ADDITION • I. Approve Final Plat, Eagandale Lemay Lake 2nd Addition --We have received an application of .final plat approval for the Eagandale Lemay Lake 2nd Addition, located southwest of Lone Oak Road and I -35E.. It will incorporate the proposed Residence Inn complex. Enclosed on pages/4�" /4)q are copies of the final plat which conforms with the preliminary plat approved by Council action on May 6, 1986. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the final plat for the Eagandale Lemay Lake 2nd Addition and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. /5" EAGANDALE LEMAY LAKE 2ND ADDITION F� a. !• 4 I - .P e e VICINRY MGP iLC q. TV. (a,IFS.Z] o. b 4LLI fT Lr J TL r• •— 1., tiundr land F►ur eving Inc. - _ - SHEET 2 OF 2 SHEETS ,•mob x f1 � �a4 �. �•„ � F � sd a��i.�. r��. is ' .-.....-..... .... .. A: , ,., m TL r• •— 1., tiundr land F►ur eving Inc. - _ - SHEET 2 OF 2 SHEETS .L LI .-.....-..... .... .. TL r• •— 1., tiundr land F►ur eving Inc. - _ - SHEET 2 OF 2 SHEETS • 'NlE�Sl4le-. Agenda Information Memo July 1, 1986, City Council Meeting Page Ten VACATE UTILITY EASEMENT, RECEIVE PETITION ORDER PUBLIC HEARING EAGANDALE CENTER INDUSTRIAL PARK #6 J. Vacate Drainage and Utility Easement, Receive Petition/Order Public Hearing (Eagandale Center Industrial Park #6) --We have received a petition to vacate a drainage and utility easement -over portions- of Lot 4, Block l of- Eagandale Center- Industrial Park #6. It would be appropriate for the Council to schedule a public hearing so that 'the staff can notify all potentially affected utilities and to receive their comments at the time of the public hearing. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the petition rto vacate drainage and utility easement (Lot 4, Block 1, Eagandale Center Industrial Park #6) and schedule the public hearing to be held August 5, 1986. K. Vacate Ponding Easement, Receive Petition/Order Public Hearing (Lemay Lake Hills Addition) --The staff has received a petition requesting the vacation of a ponding easement dedicated over portions of the Lemay Lake.Hills Addition. At the June 17 Council meeting, the Council formally took action to release any interests or rights to this ponding easement, due to the fact that comparable ponding easements have been dedicated as a part of the final plat for the Lemay Lake Hills Addition. However, in order to • clear title to the new platted properties, it is necessary to proceed with a formal vacation process. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the petition to vacate a ponding easement (Lemay Lake Hills Addition.) and schedule the public hearing to be held August '5, 1986. /7 Agenda Information July 1, 1986, City Page Eleven Memo Council Meeting PUBLIC HEARING, PROJECT 458 EAGANDALE CENTER INDUSTRIAL PARK_- STORM SEWER A. Public Hearing for Project 458, Eagandale Center Industrial Park - Storm Sewer --As a result of an evaluation performed by staff over the limited storm sewer capacity in the southern portion of the Eagandale Center Industrial Park, the Council- authorized the preparation of a feasibility report which was completed and presented to the Council on December 7, 1985 with the public hearing being scheduled for January 21. However, the formal notification for that public hearing was inadvertently omitted from that process. Subsequently, when this was discovered around June 1, the Council scheduled a new public hearing for July 1 • to discuss the merits of this proposed improvement. Enclosed on pages �� through 2 S is a copy of the feasibility report for the Council's information and review during this public hearing process. It should be noted that as a result of previous public hearing approval, detailed plans and specifications have already been prepared. As a result of the further detail study, the final proposed alignment of the storm sewer changed slightly from what is being proposed in the feasibility report. This will be explained in greater detail at the public hearing. Also, a neighborhood meeting was held on Tuesday, June 24 at City Hall with all affected property owners to explain the need and details of this particular storm sewer improvement. Based on this two hour neighborhood meeting, it is anticipated that the staff's presentation during this public hearing will be limited • subject to questions or concerns from the Council or audience. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing and approve/deny Project 458, Eagandale Center Industrial Park (Storm Sewer) and if approved, authorize the preparation of detailed plans and specifications. M REPORT ON EAGANDALE INDUSTRIAL PARK • STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT No. 458 FOR EAGAN, MINNESOTA ® 1985 FILE No. 49370 /� /3a�tedfi�aa, /Cades:e, fYw&,Zlliz % TY/// dda,c4a&d, JOta. eo.�ull:+iq `nyirerad SG Pain, i &mte"la /9 Ba.telu", o(alesce, 4 2335 W. i....aL ✓ 4k.aay 36 &. pa.r, JNi.. oza 55113 612-636-4600 October 31, 1985 Honorable Mayor and Council City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Re: Eagandale Industrial Park Storm Sewer Improvements Project 458 Our File No. 49370 Dear Mayor and Council: n 711/ Joto. Glmn R. Cuak, P.E. Keirh A. Gordnn, P. E T Orro O Bnn.noa. P. E. Thamm E. Nuy., P F. q L O Raberr IV, Fuser. P.E. Rlrhard IV. Porn,. P.E. t�4AH lunOh C. Anderlik. P.E. Robes G. Srhunirhr, P.E. B,udlmd A. Lrmberk, P.E. Marvin L. Sorvala. P E. Ruhmd E. 7urn.. P.E. DunalJ C, B.q.,dl, PF Jain. C. Olson, PE. Jerry A. BuurJon. P.E Alark A. Homan, PE. Trd K. Field. P.E. hllrharl T. Ruurmann. P. F. _ Rabe,, R. PJrJ/ed,. P.E. David O. Lorkoru. P.E. Charles A. F.'riakrmi r Leo ,N, Pawehky Harlan N. 04on Enclosed is our report for Eagandale Industrial Park Storm Sewer, Project 458. This report covers storm sewer improvements and includes a preliminary assessment roll. We would be pleased tomeetwith the Council 'and other interested parties at a mutually convenient time to discuss any aspect of this report. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK 6 ASSOCIATES, INC. Thomas E. Angus TEA: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 o Minnesota. Mark A. Hanson • // e: October. 31, 1985 Reg. No. 14260 Approved by:('/V Department of PubVc Works Date:_ IIS/%JSP 1716d M n U SCOPE: This project provides for the construction of storm sewer to serve the Eagandale Industrial Park area. The area is located generally north of Lone Oak Road and west of I -35E. This project is a continuation of the 54" storm sewer constructed as part of LeMay Lake 1st Addition, Project No. 424. This storm sewer is required to provide the proper storm sewer capacity to serve the Eagandale Industrical Park area based on its planned development density. FEASIBILITY AND RECOMMENDATION: This project is feasible from an engineering standpoint and is in accordance with the Comprehensive Storm Sewer Plan for the City of Eagan. The project as outlined can best be carried out as one • contract. DISCUSSION: The storm sewer that is proposed provides, for the extension of storm sewer north from the existing 54" storm sewer at the northwest corner of Lone Oak Road and Eagandale Boulevard. The extenions as proposed would consist 'of two 48" RCP storm sewers. One would extend easterly along Lone Oak Road and northerly along Center Court to the low area located at Center Court and West Service Road. The other would extend northerly along Eagandale Boulevard to the intersection of Eagandale • Boulevard and West Service Road. The upper 500 feet along Center Court to the intersection of Center Curve and West Service Road would consist of a 42" RCP storm sewer. Presently a 48" RCP storm sewer serves this area. This sewer was sized based on design standards at that time. However, since that time rainfall in— tensities have increased nearly 28% resulting in higher intensities used for storm sewer design. The density of development has also increased nearly 30% resulting in greater runoff from what was originally anticipated. The capacity of the existing 48" storm sewer is 90 cfs. Based on present development, this capacity has almost been reached. In order to allow the Page 1. 1716d 2/ continued development of the vacant land within the drainage area, as indi— cated on Figure 3, it is necessary to construct the proposed storm sewer at this time. Storm water ponding could alleviate this problem but is not desired by the developers. Also, the areas to be served are self contained watersheds with no outlets by overland drainage. For this reason, additional storm sewer must be provided to adequately protect facilities in the low areas. In order to convey the amount of storm water drainage from the existing low area, along Eagandale Boulevard, an existing catch basin manhole will be - rebuilt and a catch basin will be added. The rebuilt catch basin manhole will be a high capacity inlet structure which will increase the amount of water en— tering the storm sewer during a storm. EASEMENTS: The proposed construction will require acquisition of easements yr from all construction areas. The estimated. -amount of permanent easement re— quired from each parcel is listed below. Parcel EAGANDALE CENTER INDUSTRIAL PARK Block 4 Lot 15 Lot 16 Lot 17 Lot 18 Lot 19 Block 5 Lot 8 Lot 9 Block 6 Lot 3 Lot 4 Lot 5 Page 2. 1716d ZY Permanent Easement (Acs.) 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.15 0.14 0.30 0.25 0.13 0.12 0.05 • AREAS TO BE INCLUDED: The areas to be included for construction and assess- ment purposes are listed below. No construction will occur outside of those areas proposed to be assessed. Construction Area Assessment Area EAGANDALE CENTER INDUSTRIAL PARK EAGANDALE CENTER INDUSTRIAL PARK Block 4 Block 4 Lots 14-19 — Lots 1-7, 14-19 Block 5 Block 5 Lots 4, 5, 8, 9 Lots 2-14, 16-20 ® Block 6 Block 6 Lots 3, 4, 5 Lots 1-5 COST ESTIMATE: A detailed cost estimate is presented in Appendix A at the back of this report. The total estimated project cost is $408,940 which in- cludes contingencies and related overhead. .Costs for easement acquisition are not included in this amount. Overhead costs are estimated at 30% and include legal, engineering, administration, and bond interest. ASSESSMENTS: Assessments are proposed to be levied against the benefited properties. A preliminary assessment roll is included at the back of this re- port in Appendix B. All costs including overhead will be revised based on final costs. The total project cost is proposed to be assessed on an area basis to the benefited property. Therefore, all uphill areas with storm water drainage flowing into the proposed storm sewer are to be assessed at an estimted rate of $0.092 per square foot. REVENUE SOURCES: All project costs will be assessed, therefore, revenue will be entirely from assessments. Page 3. 1716d 7-3 PROJECT SCHEDULE Present Feasibility Report Public Hearing Approve Plans and Specifications open Bids and Award Contract Construction Completion Final Assessment Hearing First Payment Due with Real Estate Taxes Page 4. 1716d Z (/.H November 19, 1985 December 17, 1985 Spring, 1986 Spring, 1986 Fall, 1986 Fall, 1986 Spring, 1987 U • C APPENDIX A PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE EAGANDALE CENTER INDUSTRIAL PARK PROJECT NO. 458 STORM SEWER 400 Sq.yds. Remove bituminous surfacing @ $1.00/sq.yd. $ 400 160 Lin.ft-. Remove B618 curb & gutter-.@ $2.00/lin.ft. 320 250 Lin.ft. 48" RCP Storm sewer, 0'-10' dp. @ $60.00/lin.ft. 15,000 650 Lin.ft. 48" RCP Storm sewer, 10'-20' dp. @ $75.00/lin.ft. 48,750 1,200 Lin.ft. 48" RCP Storm sewer, 20'-30' dp. @ $110.00/lin.ft. 132,000 200 Lin.ft. 48" RCP Storm sewer, 30'-35' dp. @ $120.00/lin.ft. 24,000 300 Lin.ft. 42" RCP Storm sewer, 0'-10' dp. @ $45.00/lin.ft. 13,500 200 Lin.ft. 42" RCP Storm sewer, 10'-20' dp. @ $55.00/lin.ft. 11,000 50 Lin.ft. 21" RCP Storm sewer, 0'-10' dp. @ $24.00/lin.ft. 1,200 50 Lin.ft. 15" RCP Storm sewer, 0'-10' dp. @ $20.00/lin.ft. 1,000 8 Each MR 6' dia. w/cstg. @ $2,300.00/each 18,400 1 Each Reconstruct ex. CBMH as MH @ $1,000.00/each 1,000 1 Each 12' Low Pt. CB @ $3,000.00/each 3,000 1 Each 4' Low Pt. CB @ $1,500.00/each 1,500 2 Each Cut -in to existing CBMH @ $750.00/each 1,500 2 Each Cut -in to existing MH @ $750.00/each 1,500 500 Cu.yds. Rock stabilization below pipe @ $10.00/cu.yd. 5,000 400 Sq.yds. Bituminous street patching @ $15.00/sq.yd. 6,000 160 Lin.ft. B618 Conc. curb & gutter @ $7.00/lin.ft. 1,120 7 Acres Seed w/fertilizer & mulch @ $1,500.00/Ac. 10,500 2,900 Lin.ft. Mechanical trench compaction @ $1.00/lin.ft. 2,900 Sub -total $299,590 +5% Contingencies 14,980 $314,570 +30% Legal, Engrng., Admin. & Bond Interest 94,370 TOTAL STORM SEWER ............................... $408,940 1716d 76 Page 5. v6 Agenda Information Memo July 1,.198,6, City Council Meeting Page Twelve FINAI EAGANDALE B. Final Assessment Hearing for Project 458, Eagandale Center Industrial Park - Storm Sewer --As a result of the initial public hearing held on January 21 discussed previously, the Council directed "staff to prepare a final assessment roll oased on -competative bids so that a final assessment hearing could be held before a formal awardof contract. Because of the previous errors and omissions in the required public hearing notification process, the final assessment hearing originally scheduled for June 17 could not proceed. Subsequently, a new final assessment hearing ® was scheduled for July 1. As a result of the neighborhood, meeting held on June 24, as dis- cussed under the previous public hearing, all affected property owners collectively agreed to a modification to the original final assessment roll proposed by staff. This modification results in the remaining undeveloped property uniformally absorbing 75% of the proposed assessments against the existing developed property within the drainage district. Although this method is. not in concurrence with standard assessment policies or procedures, as long as it has been agreed to by 100% of the affected property owners, staff strongly recommends that this modified assessment roll be formally adopted. Enclosed on pagesthrough � nfo nis a summary sheet of the final assessment iation and a map showing the distribution • of the different assessment rates. The Public Works Director will be available to discuss in further detail this final assessment roll at the public hearing. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing and adopt the modified final assessment roll for Project 458, Eagandale Center Industrial Park (Storm Sewer) and authorize its certification to Dakota County. 74 t" Y FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING PROJECT NO: 458 SUBDIVISION/AREA: Ea¢andale Industrial Park FINAL ASSESSMEENT HEARING: July 1, 1986 IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED: F. R. = Feasibility Report FINAL F.R. WATER RATES RATES DArea OLaterals Is Service F1 Lat. Benefit/Trunk STORM ri Area Undeveloped $0.076/S.F. XO Laterals Developed $0.015/S.F. $0.092/S.F. NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: 37 NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: 10 years RATE OF INTEREST: A-ni FINAL SANITARY RATES Area Laterals Service Lat. Benefit/Trunk STREETS Gravel Base ❑ Surfacing Res. Equiv. TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $273.488.81 CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 86-10 PUBLIC HEARING DATE:_ January 21, 1986 and July 1 1986 Z� F. R. RATES ,t+ LONE 0" ROAD y EIC�NO�LE 'T IY Ot0•M ADOI TICK CCCLLLLLILd LATERAL ASSESSMENT AREA EAGANDALE INDUSTRIAL PARK LATERAL ASSESSMENT AREA PROJECT No. 458 EAGAN, MINNESOTA • e BONESTRO,O, ROSENE, ANDERLIK ✓S ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineers St. Paul, Minn. Date: Nov. I, 1985 Comm. 49370 FIG. No. 2 Agenda Information July 1., 1986, City Page Thirteen Memo Council Meeting FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING, PROJECT 471 WEST SERVICE ROAD - STORM -SEWER C. Final Assessment Hearing for Project 471., West Service Road - Storm Sewer --Subsequent to the original public hearing for instal- lation of storm sewer within Eagandale Center Industrial Park, additional development proposed along the West Service Road required an extension of the storm sewer being proposed under Project 458. That public hearing was properly noticed, discussed and approved on April 15, 1986. Because of the similarity and location of these two projects (458 and 471), they were both combined under the same contract for bidding purposes. Therefore, if ® the public hearing and final assessment hearing for Project 458 is approved without conditions, it is appropriate and timely to schedule the final assessment hearing for Project 471 as well. Enclosed on page 3) is a summary sheet showing the proposed final assessments based on competative bids received and the relationship to the estimate of the feasibility report presented at the public hearing on April 15. It is not anticipated that there will be any objections submitted, due to the waiver that was signed by the affected property owners when the original petition was submitted requesting this storm sewer extension project. The Public Works Director will be able to address any concerns from the Council or audience as they may arise. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing and adopt the final assessment roll for Project 471, West Service Road (Storm Sewer) and authorize the certification to the County. m FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING PROJECT NO: 471 SUBDIVISION/AREA: West Service Road - FINAL ASSESSMEENT HEARING: July 1, 1986 STORM Area QX Laterals $0.03987/S.F.$0.044/S STREETS ❑ Gravel Base Surfacing F1Res. Equiv. NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: 7 NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: 10 RATE OF INTEREST: 8.0% TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $36,696.73 CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 86-10 PUBLIC HEARING DATE: April 15, 1986 FwNO IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED: - - F. R. = Feasibility Report — - FINAL F.R. FINAL F.R. WATER RATES RATES SANITARY RATES RATES Area Area •D Lateralsn- Laterals Service Service E) Lat. Benefit/Trunk Lat. Benefit/Trunk STORM Area QX Laterals $0.03987/S.F.$0.044/S STREETS ❑ Gravel Base Surfacing F1Res. Equiv. NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: 7 NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: 10 RATE OF INTEREST: 8.0% TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $36,696.73 CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 86-10 PUBLIC HEARING DATE: April 15, 1986 FwNO • 0 Agenda Information Memo July 1, 1986., City Council Meeting Page Fourteen INDUCEMENT RESOLUTION CHANGE THOMAS LAKE APARTMENT PROJECT D. Public Hearing to Consider a Change in Inducement Resolution to Increase the Amount of Multfamily Housing Revenue Bonds from $10,000,000 to $11,875,000 for Thomas Lake Apartments --At the June 17, 1986- City Council meeting,- authorization was given to schedule a public hearing to consider a change in the inducement resolution of the Thomas Lake multifamily housing project that was approved in 1985. The original amount approved for multifamily housing bonds was $10,00.0,000 and the developer is requesting that the amount be increased to $11,875,000 due to additional! capitalized interest requirements and also for amenities the developer is proposing with the project. The City made a commit- ment to the neighborhood adjacent to the Thomas Lake project who requested notification of any future changes relative to the project. � The City Administrator sent a letter, enclosed on pages .iv through _a5__ to Lynn Trok who acted as a -neighborhood spokesperson for the Thomas Lake project. Action by the City Council to increase the amount of original inducement resolution will require an amended program for the construction of a multifamily housing developm�,9nt. For a copy of the amended programs, refer to pages �3 , through 3:;V. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or amended housing program proposed by the Dominium Group to the inducement amount for the Thomas Lake multifamily project to $11,875,00.0. 3/ deny the increase housing a- �a '• lit 3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD. P.O. BOX 21199 EAGAN, MINNESOTA 55121 PHONE; (612) 454-8100 June 24, 1986 LYNN TROK _ 4235 LODGEPOLE DR EAGAN MN 55122 Re: Thomas Lake Apartment Prolect Dear Lynn: BEA BLOMQUIST Mww THOMAS EGAN JAMES A, SMITH _ MC ELLISON THEODORE WACHTER Council Members THOMAS HEDGES City Adminisvbia EUGENE VAN OVERBEKE City Cleik During the City Council deliberations for the Thomas Lake Apartment project you assumed the role as the neighborhood contact person for public hearings, informational meetings, and correspondence from the City. Therefore, I felt you may be interested in a request that was made by the Dominium Group, representing the Thomas Lake Apartment project, to increase their multifamily finan- cing amount from $10,000,000 to $11,875,000. At the July 1 City Council meeting the change in amount for the inducement resolution will be given consideration. Any time a multifamily bond amount is changed, particularly by increasing the amount, a new public hearing is required. The reasons stated in the Dominium letter for increasing the amount are 1) the developer has been severely restricted in his ability to secure the types of sources of financing commitments that they earlier contemplated using because of the proposed changes being made by the Senate and Congress to current tax laws. The financing commitment that Dominium was able to secure requires that they incorporate within the project longer periods of capital- ized interest, therefore increasing the total cost of the develop- ment. Secondly, they are proposing significant improvements to the project in terms of amenities that will be provided to the project causing the necessity for additional project financing. To quote their letter, "we have spent considerable time in exploring ways to preserve larger areas of natural vegetation by utilizing greater amounts of retaining walls than we had initially proposed. The community facility has been greatly upgraded in terms of recrea- tional amenities and size. Lastly, we have made significant improvements to the unit interiors by providing such extra amen- ities as European cabinets, microwaves, wood trim and panelled doors to mention a few items." 52, THE LONE OAK TREE.. THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY LETTER TO LYNN TROK JUNE 24, 1986 PAGE TWO As you recall, the final plat, multifamily housing revenue bond financing and other actions pertaining to the Thomas Lake project have previously been approved by the City Council. This action is a procedural request by the developer to change the amount for the reasons stated. As a matter of communications, I wanted to notify you of the action so that if you noticed the item on the agenda published in the newspaper, you would be aware of action being considered by the City Council. If you or any of your neighbors have any questions- regarding action to be considered for, the Thomas Lake project this coming Tuesday, please feel free to contact me at any time. Sincerely, Thomas L. Hedger City Administrator TLH/kf 33 E • 1! 1 AMENDED PROGRAM FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A MULTIFAMILY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C (the "Act"), the City of Eagan (the "City") has been authorized to develop and administer programs of multifamily housing developments under the circumstances and within the limitations set forth in the Act. Minnesota Statutes, Section 462C.07 provides that such programs for multifamily housing developments may be financed by revenue bonds issued by the City or by a housing and redevelopment authority authorized to act on behalf of the City. _ The City has received a proposal from Jack Safar, David Brierton and Dominium Group that, pursuant to the authority found in the Act, the City approve a program providing for the acquisition of land and construction of approximately 228 units of residential rental housing ("Housing Units") by a Minnesota limited partnership to be formed in which Jack Safar, David Brierton and Dominium Group ® will be general partners (the "Developer"), located in an area in the City bounded by the High Line Trail on the North, Thomas Lake Road on the West, Thomas Lake on the South and Thomas Lake Park on the East (the "Project"). The acquisition of land and construction of the Project is to be funded through the issuance of up to $11,875,000 in revenue bonds issued either by the City or by The Dakota County Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "Authority") on behalf of the City (the "Bonds"). Following construction of the Project, the Developer will own and operate the Project as a multifamily residential rental project. Twenty percent (20%) (or such greater number required by applicable federal laws, either pending or enacted) of the units in the Project will be occupied by tenants whose incomes are not greater than eighty percent (80%) (or such lower percent required by applicable federal laws, either pending or enacted) of the area median income, adjusted for family size. It is estimated that initial rents for the Housing Units will range from $515 per month to $670 per month. The anticipated date of initial occupancy is June 1, 1987. • The City, in establishing this multifamily housing program (the "Program"), has considered the information contained in the City's 462C Housing Plan (the "Housing Plan"). The Project will be constructed and financed pursuant to Subdivisions 1 and 2 of Section 462C.05 of the Act. The Project is intended to meet the needs of low and moderate income by providing safe and sanitary rental housing at affordable rents by providing below-market rate financing for the Project. The occupancy requirements set forth in this Program will be enforceable by the City through a regulatory agreement between the City and the Developer. Section A. Definitions. The following terms used in this Program shall have the following meanings, respectively: (1) "Act" shall mean Minnesota Statutes, Section 462C.01, et seq., as currently in effect and as the same may be from time to time amended. (2) "Adjusted Gross Income" shall mean gross family income less $750 for each adult and less $500 for each other dependent in the family. 3V (3) "Authority" shall mean The Dakota County Housing and Redevelopment Authority.' (4) 'Bonds" shall mean the revenue bonds to be issued either by the City or by the Authority, on behalf of the City, to finance the Program. (5) "City" shall mean the City of Eagan, State of Minnesota. (6) "Developer" shall mean a Minnesota limited partnership to be formed in which Jack Safar, David Brierton and Dominium Group will be general partners. (7) "Housing Plan" shall mean the City of Eagan 462C Housing Plan, as amended, setting forth certain information required by the Act. (8) "Housing Unit" shall mean any one of the apartment units located in the Project, occupied by one person or family, and containing complete living facilities. (9) "Issuer" shall mean the City unless the City by resolution designates the Authority as the issuer of the Bonds. (10) "Land" shall mean the real property upon which the Project is situated. (11) "Program" shall mean the program for the financing of the Project pursuant to the Act. (12) "Project" shall mean the residential rental housing development consisting of approximately 228 market rate Housing Units to be constructed by the Developer on the Land. Section B. Program For Financing the Project. It is proposed that the City establish this Program to provide financing for acquisition and construction of the Project at a cost and upon such other terms and conditions as are set forth herein and as may be agreed upon in writing between the Issuer, the initial purchaser of the Bonds and the Developer. To do this, the City expects the Issuer to issue the Bonds as soon as the terms of the Bonds have been agreed upon by the Issuer, the Developer and the initial purchaser of the Bonds. The proceeds of the Bonds will be loaned to the Developer for construction and financing of the Project, the funding of any appropriate reserves and for paying the costs of issuing the Bonds. It is expected that a trustee will be appointed by the Issuer to monitor the construction of the Project in accordance with the Plan and Program and the payments of principal and interest on the Bonds. The cost of any additional security devices for the Bonds will be borne by the Developer and payable in addition to the principal and interest on the Bonds. It is contemplated that the Bonds shall contain a maturity of approximately thirty (30) years and will be priced to the market at the time of issuance. The City will hire no additional staff for the administration of the Program. Insofar as the Issuer will be contracting with underwriters, legal counsel, bond counsel, the trustee, and others, all of whom will be reimbursed from bond 35 • E proceeds and revenues generated by the Program, no administrative costs will be paid from the Issuer's budget with respect to this Program. The Bonds will not be general obligation bonds of the Issuer, but are to be paid only from properties pledged to the payment thereof, which may include additional security such as additional collateral, insurance or a letter of credit. Section C. Local Contributions To The Program. It is not contemplated that the City or the Authority will provide other financial incentives to the Developer in conjunction with the Project. Section D. Standards and Requirements Relating to the Financing of the Project Pursuant to the Program. The following standards and requirements shall apply with respect to the operation of the Project by the Developer pursuant to this Program: (1) Substantially all of the proceeds of the sale of the Bonds will be used to provide funds for the acquisition and construction of the Project and to provide for appropriate reserves. The funds will be made available to ® the Developer pursuant to the terms of the Bond offering, which may include certain covenants to be entered into between the Issuer and the Developer. (2) The Developer or subsequent owner of the Project, will not arbitrarily reject an application from a proposed tenant because of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, or status with regard to public assistance or disability. (3) No Housing Unit may be in violation of applicable zoning ordinances or other applicable land use regulations, including any urban renewal plan or development district plan, and including the state building code as set forth under Minnesota Statutes, Section 16.83, et seq. (4) Pursuant to Section 462C.05, Subdivision 2 of the Act, at least twenty percent (20%) of the Housing Units will be held for occupancy by ® families or individuals with Adjusted Gross Income not in excess of eighty percent (80%) of the median family income as estimated by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development for the Minneapolis - St. Paul metropolitan statistical area. (5) Pursuant to Section 462C.05, Subdivision 2 of the Act, the Project shall be designed to be affordable by persons and families with Adjusted Gross Income not in excess of the greater of (a) 110 percent of the median family income as estimated by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development for the Minneapolis -St. Paul standard metropolitan area or (b) 100 percent of the income limits established by the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency for the City and by other persons and families to the extent determined to be necessary by the Issuer in furtherance of the policy of economic integration. Subsection E. Evidence of Compliance. The Issuer may require from the Developer or such other person deemed necessary at or before the issuance of the Bonds, evidence satisfactory to the Issuer of the ability and intention of the Developer to complete the Project, and evidence satisfactory to the Issuer of g� 3 compliance with the standards and requirements for the making of the financing established by the Issuer, as set forth herein; and in connection therewith, the Issuer or its representatives may inspect the relevant books and records of the Developer in order to confirm such ability, intention and compliance. In addition, the Issuer may periodically require certification from either the Developer or such other person deemed necessary concerning compliance with various aspects of the Program. Subsection F. Issuance of Bonds. To finance the Program authorized by this Section, either the City or the Authority, on behalf of the City,may by resolution authorize, issue and sell its Revenue Bonds in an aggregate principal amount up to $11,875,000. The Bonds shall be issued pursuant to Section 462C.07, Subdivision 1 of the Act, and shall be payable primarily from the revenues of the Program authorized by this Section. The proceeds of the Bonds are presently expected to be applied to the Project Costs, including land acquisition, construction costs, capitalized interest and costs of issuance (including underwriter's discount). The Bonds are expected to be issued in July or August of 1986. Subsection G. Severability. The provisions of this Program are severable and if any of its provisions, sentences, clauses or paragraphs shall be held unconstitutional, contrary to statute, exceeding the authority of the City or otherwise illegal or inoperative by any court of competent jurisdiction, the decision of such court shall not affect or impair any of the remaining provisions. Subsection H. Amendment. The City shall not amend this Program while Bonds authorized hereby are outstanding, to the detriment of the holders of such Bonds. Subsection I. State Ceiling. No portion of the state ceiling for qualified mortgage bonds allocated pursuant to Section 103A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended, and Section 462C.09, Subd. 2a, of Minnesota Statutes will be needed for this Program. The City will apply to the Minnesota Department of Energy and Economic Development for a portion of the State ceiling imposed by H.R. 3838, adopted by the United States House of Representatives on December 17, 1985, or any other applicable volume limitation act enacted into law. Received by the Metropolitan Council this 13th day of June, 1986, by: Title: 3, 4 • Agenda Information Memo July 1, 1986, City Council Meeting Page Fifteen SIGN POLICY AGREEMENT/TOWN CENTRE 70 & 100 ADDITIONS A. Sign Policy Agreement for Town Centre 70 & 100--A public hearing was first scheduled at the May 27 meeting and then continued until the June 24 APC meeting to consider a pylon sign layout for the Town Centre 70 and 100 Additions. At the May 27 APC meeting, the sign layout was continued requesting that legal counsel prepare a sign agreement. between the City of Eagan and Federal Land Company. A pylon sign agreement was prepared and with minor modification, the APC is recommending said agreement to the City Council for approval.'/ copy of the revised agreement is enclosed on pages.39 through y 1. Since the exhibit attached to the sign policy agreement is difficult to read, the Planning Department has prepared a drawing for City Council review which is attached on page. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the sign policy agreement for Town Centre 70 & 100 Additions with or without modification. f� • 4 HAUGE, EIDE & HEI.LEit, P.A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW WATER VIEW OFFICE TOWER, SUITE 303 1200 YANKEE DOODLE ROAD EAGAN, MINNESOTA 55123 PAUL H. HAUGE KEVIN W. EIDE DAVID G. KELLER June 26, 1986 LORI M. BELLIN _ MICHAEL J. MAYER Mr. Dale Runkle -- _ City Planner __ I- _ 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota 55123 �• RE: Town Centre—Eagan, Pylon Sign Agreement Dear Dale: AREA CODE 612 TELEPHONE 456-9000 454-4224 Attached hereto please find a proposed final draft of the Town Centre—Eagan Pylon Sign Agremeent, redrafted pursuant to Advisory Planning Commission directions and further negotiation with the owners' representative. The following changes are noted: 1. A legal description (Exhibit "B") is now included. 2. Paragraph 1. provides that the original Exhibit "A" (location map) is on file with the City (reduction were not legible to the APC members). 3. Paragraph 2. now clearly indicates that all signs are still subject to the conditional use process except as to location. This should assure the Council and APC that pylon signs not in compliance with this agreement and/or City Code will not be erected. 4. Paragraph 4. now provides for written notice to future buyers as per APC directive. 5. The last sentence of Paragraph 5. was deleted as unnecessary in light of Paragraph 2. and due to the valid concern that potential buyers may refuse to purchase where some previous buyer has violated the agreement. 6. An APC member recommended that Paragraph 7. provide for mandatory recording rather than allowable (shall vs, may). The owner has requested that the word "may" be left in (as in the City's standard development contract) as any recording presents a reasonable risk of creating a cloud on title. 7. Paragraph 10. was added at the request of the owners to prevent any unfair prejudice to them in relation.to other developments should the sign ordinance requirements become less restrictive. 8. Exhibit "A" indicates that Town Centre 70 signs may be located on Town Centre Drive (assuming no additional variance situations are created). 39 Mr. Dale Runkle June 26, 1986 Page Two 9. Exhibit "A" also indicates that all undesignated pylon signs in Town Centre 100 (eight undesignated) will comply -with ordinance spacing requirements except as illustraped. DGK:cjb M Very yttruly /fyours, David G. Keller Assistant City Attorney • CITY OF EAGAN TOWN CENTRE-EAGAN PYLON SIGN AGREEMENT This Agreement, made and entered into this day of 1986 by and between the City of Eagan, a municipality oftheState of Minnesota, hereinafter called "City" and the Owners id ptified herein as .Federal Land Company, Eagan Tower Office Building Partnership, and Eagan Heights Commercial Park, whose addresses are, 3460 Washington Drive, Eagan, Minnesota 55122. • WHEREAS, the Owner or Owners have applied to the City for approval of various pylon and/or business signs pursuant to City Code Section 4.20; and WHEREAS, such signs are needed for businesses located within retail and office buildings located in Town Centre -Eagan, which real property is legally described on Exhibit "B" attached hereto; and WHEREAS, in certain situations variances are necessary due to thelot configurations of certain proposed commercial developments; and WHEREAS, the City of Eagan desires to prevent the overabundance of commercial pylon signs affecting the visibility and aesthetics of the area; • and WHEREAS, the City has requested an overall plan indicating the location of all pylon signs within Town Centre -Eagan in order to more appropriately address requests for individual pylon signs and avoid a multiplicity of hearings. M1 NOW THEREFORE, the City and Owner or Owners agree as follows: 1. All pylon signs on business premises shall be located as indicated on Exhibit "A" attached hereto with variances to the requirements of Eagan City Code Section 4.20 only in accord with said exhibit, an original of which is on file with the City. 2. The normal public hearing process —for a conditional use_ permit (Code Section 11.40, Subd. 4.B.) fora pylon sign (Code Section 4.20, Subd. 1.C.6.) shall be required for each sign except as to location, provided the proposed location complies with that Agreement. 3. All signs shall be erected, except that the locations shown on Exhibit "A" shall be allowed, in compliance with all of the applicable City Code provisions.. 4. The Owners shall provide written notice to potential buyers of the contents of this Agreement to avoid any unnecessary requests for pylon signs. 5. The terms of this Agreement shall be legally enforceable by either party in a court of competent jurisdiction and each of the parties retains the right to assert any legal, equitable, or administrative right of action or defense which may be available by law in order to implement or enforce the terms of this Agreement. 6. If any portion, section, sub -section, sentence, clause, paragraph or phrase of this Sign Agreement is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Agreement. 7. This Agreement may/shall be recorded with the Dakota County Recorder and the Owner (Owners) shall provide and execute any and all documents 2 necessary to implement the r.ecording of this Agreement. 8. The parties mutually recognize and agree that all terms and conditions of this recordable agreement shall run with the land herein described and shall be binding upon the heirs, successors, administrators and assigns of the owners referenced in this Agreement. 9. The undersigned owners include all the persons., firms or corporations that hold an interest in this Town Centre -Eagan and the undersigned officials are authorized to sign this Agreement and to bind the respective parties. 10. The City, by this Agreement, has granted the Owners certain variances ® with respect to the location of pylon signs within Town Centre -Eagan in exchange for a limitation on the number of pylon signs which can be erected in • Town Centre -Eagan. Therefore, should the provision in the Eagan City Code Section 4.20 which states that "no pylon sign may be located within 300 feet of any other pylon sign, measured on the same side of the street" be repealed, be declared invalid, or otherwise have no further force or effect, then this Agreement shall be null and void and no longer binding on the parties or their heirs, successor, assigns, or administrators. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands and seals. CITY OF EAGAN FEDERAL LAND COMPANY (Date: ) By: By: / Its Mayor - Date Its: Attest: Its Clerk By: / Date Its Signed Agreement Approved as to Form: Eagan City Attorney (Date: ) THIS INSTRUMENT DRAFTED BY: Hauge, Eide 5 Keller, P. A. Attorneys for the City of Eagan 1200 Yankee Dood Road Water View Office Tower, Suite 303 Eagan, MN 55123 (612) 456-9000 EAGAN TOWER OFFICE BUILDING PARTNERSHIP By: / Date Its: And: / Date Its: 40 EAGAN HEIGHTS COMMERCIAL PARK By: / Date Its: And: / Its: Date 41 • STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss. COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) On this day of , 19 ., before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared BEATTA BLOMQUIST and E. J. 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) STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss. COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) On this day of , 19 , before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared to me personally known to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that _he executed the same as h_ free act and deed. (S E A L) STATE OF MINNESOTA) • ) ss. COUNTY OF ) On this day of , 19 , before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared and to me personally known, who, being each by me duly sworn to be partners of the Partnership named in the foregoing instrument, and that the seal affixed to said instrument is the seal of said partnership and that said instrument was signed and sealed on behalf of said Partnership by said and and they acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deed of the Partnership. (S E A L) 7� 5 STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss. COUNTY OF ) On this day of , 19.. , before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared and to me personally known, who, being each by me duly sworn to be partners of the Partnership named in the foregoing instrument, and that the seal affixed to said instrument is the seal of said partnership and that said instrument was signed and sealed on behalf of said Partnership by said and and they acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deed of the Partnership. (S EA L) • STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss. COUNTY OF ) On this day of , 19before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared and to me personally known, who, being each by me duly sworn to be partners of the Partnership named in the foregoing instrument, and that the seal affixed to said instrument is the seal of said partnership and that said instrument was signed and sealed on behalf of said Partnership by said and and they acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deed of the Partnership. (S EA L) is V� - YGufD MEnYGIw 0 I i TOWN CE EAGAN .e...n� CONCEPT RAN - .a.wnm..nwa.w.r ELLNYL 4eD CONLANY _ .aiv: F0161ASFY, FAANG EWO(SON, FFLNIECTS NL' .' p!' MME EN(iNF£WNG CCf.V1N1 HC. • urruen nrtnsernw� I i TOWN CE EAGAN .e...n� CONCEPT RAN - .a.wnm..nwa.w.r ELLNYL 4eD CONLANY _ .aiv: F0161ASFY, FAANG EWO(SON, FFLNIECTS NL' .' p!' MME EN(iNF£WNG CCf.V1N1 HC. • Agenda Information Memo July 1, 1986, City Council Meeting Page Sixteen DRIVE-THROUGH & PYLON SIGN FOR ARBY'S RESTAURANT B. Conditional Use Permit to Allow :A Drive -Through Arby's Restaurant and a 20' Pylon Sign --At the April 15, 1986, City Council meeting a conditional use permit to allow a drive-through Arby's restaurant and -a 20' pylon sign as requested by Franchise Associates., Inc., was given consideration. It was reported at that meeting that the APC is recommending approval of the conditional use permit for, the drive-through and a denial of the conditional use permit for the pylon sign per their action of March 25. It was at the April 15 meeting that the City Council raised a concern about the number of signs and location of signage for the Town Centre 70 and 100 Additions and asked that a special study and report be prepared that provides a master 'plan layout of all future signs. The Arby's restaurant and pylon sign is included in the sign policy agreement as one of the sign locations which was identified under Item A., Old Business. Therefore, action is no longer required for the 20' pylon sign if the sign policy agreement is approved with or without modification. For information that was prepared by the Planning Department concerning the Conditional Use Permit for a drive-through Arby's restaurant, please refer to the Planning9 Report, a copy is attached and referenced as pages�through STi Also a copy of the Planning Commission minutes for the March 25 meeting are enclosed on page 53 for your review. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny a condi- tional use permit for a drive-through Arby's restaurant. FA CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCE APPLICANT: FRANCHISE ASSOCIATION - ARBY'S LOCATION: LOT 2, BLOCK 1,_ TOWN CTR 70 3RD ADDN EXISTING ZONING: CSC COMMUNITY SHOPPING CTR DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: MARCH 25, 1986 DATE OF REPORT: MARCH 17, 1986 REPORTED BY: JIM STURM APPLICATION: An application has been submitted requesting a ® conditional use permit to allow a drive-through facility and pylon sign for an Arby's Restaurant on Lot 2, Block 1, of the proposed Town Centre 70 3rd Addition. The variance is required since there will not be 300' between this pylon sign and the Burger King sign to the east. COMMENTS: Federal Land Company is in the process of final platting this lot, the Burger King site abutting to the east and the outlot to the west. This site will become Lot 2, Block 1, Town Centre 70 3rd Addition. Access for .Arby's will be provided by a 19' one-way loop drive with one entry -one exit. As with the Burger King Restaurant, the entry drive has been extended to 90' before the parking stalls begin. This will provide stacking for two cars should someone be exiting from the first two parking stalls. The 'rive -through facility will be on the west side of the building. The exit drive is 20' wide and will allow vehicular movement past cars waiting in line for the drive-through. Stacking for eight cars has been provided. City Code requires one parking stall per three seats based- upon the capacity of the restaurant. This 90 seat facility will require 30 stalls, and 98, 10' x 20' stalls are proposed. The trash area will be enclosed near the back of the building. A landscape plan has been submitted and approved by City staff. SIGNS: The proposed pylon sign will contain 110' of signage and Federal Land Company has set a 20' maximum height restriction on signage in the area. Code will require that this sign be kept 10' within the property line. The proposed location is on the northeast portion of the site. The distance to the Burger King sign will be approximately 160'. A .variance application has been submitted. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCE - FRANCHISE ASSN. - ARBY'S MARCH 25, 1986 PAGE 2 An additional double-faced ground sign is shown 6' from the front property line. This sign will have to be moved to the north 4' to meet code compliance. The sign will contain 40' of signage area and measure 4' x 10' on a 2' berm. If approved, this conditional use permit and variance shall be subject to the following conditions: 1) No building permit be issued until the lots are final platted. • YNJY�� DocD�E �G [•vG�rTd Lo. ✓;C zgj � ' I :•Prosy �" \I �U Y� - �',kwy•• � d �eu-u�v Y acv_-{ ,`- •,�e-�, ��I , r•a:�:. f=E`il yJCLP 1 Al 1 1 � tl 81NCH �I CHANGE COPY LETTERS •51GN AREA 9-0 SQ• FE= --r A PRELIMINARY Y� ' A EAUA RESTAURANT_ .... y am= 1...1..::.��::1=::n '1 RUST ARCNITECTB � FAOAN, MINNESOTA _ �s uin n�-nn APC Minutes March 25, 1986 ARBY'S - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT & VARIANCE - TOWN CENTRE 70 Chair McCrea convened the public hearing on the application of Franchise Associates/Arby's for a conditional use permit to allow a drive-through facility and pylon sign for Arby's Restaurant for Lot 2, Block 1, proposed Town Centre 70 3rd Addition on Yankee Doodfe""Road, and variance for pylon sign distance from the Burger King sign on the east. Dale Runkle discussed the application with the Planning Commission members and stated that the City Council has requested a master sign plan be prepared for review and approval by the Council. He also indicated that a proposed plan has been submitted by Federal Land Company and noted the fact that 300 foot spacing would not be possible between the Arby's ana_Burger King signs. Doug Kennedy, the Vice President of Franchise Associates, the Arby's franchisee in the twin cities area, was present and stated that the applicant would agree to move the sign to the northwest corner of the lot, which would ® make it 295 feet from the Burger King sign. Charles Bartholai of Federal Land Company was also present and noted that Federal Land has provided a tentative model sign proposal for the Town Centre area with the important elements being aesthetics and making sure that the signs do not interfere with the residential area. He recommended a total of 28 pylon signs with a maximum of 12 signs in the Town Centre 100 area and 16 signs in the Town Centre 70 area. In addition, the proposal would have three C_ additional limitations including one sign per lot, no sign in excess of 20 feet in height and that all signs be at least 200 feet distant from one another. There were no objections from the public. The proposed Kentucky Fried Chicken sign would be in excess of 300 feet of the proposed Arby's sign. Member Wilkins recommended that the entire planned development sign issue be reviewed separately and that the Commission deal only with the Arby's • application at the current meeting. In addition, a small four foot monument sign will be requested and there was a. question as to whether such a sign would be allowed under the Ordinance. Harrison moved to recommend approval of the conditional use permit application for the arive-through facility, subject to no building permit being issued until the lot has received final plat approval. Voracek seconded the motion and all voted in favor. Harrison then moved, Voracek seconded the motion to recommend denial of the conditional use permit and the variance for the pylon sign under the City Code noting that it does not conform with the distancd provisions and in addition, there appeaYs to be a proliferation of signs in the general area which is counter to the intent of the Eagan Sign Ordinance. All members voted in favor. Agenda Information Memo July 1, 1986, City Council Meeting Page Seventeen TEMPORARY ADVERTISING SIGN REGULATIONS C. Review and Consideration of Temporary Advertising Sign Regula- tions --At the June 17, 1986, City Council meeting., further consider- ation and review of temporary advertising sign regulations was continued due to the length of the agenda. By way of background, at the January 7, 1986, City Council meeting, the City staff was directed to prepare a policy considera- tion for the location of temporary advertising signs at the intersections of City collector and/or County roads. The policy was presented at the April 1, 1986, City Council meeting for review and consideration. For a copy of a memo of direction by •the City Administrator and the study completed by the Sign Inspec- tor and Chief Building Inspector, refer to pages through Following review and consideration of the temporary advertising sign policy, Councilmember Ellison suggested "that one sign be permitted at each intersection which would include several devel- opers and one standard with each developer potentially being able to place a sign on more than one standard. After discussion, Smith moved, Wachter seconded, the motion to continue consideration of the policy with the request that staff review the proposal and prepare and submit guidelines regarding locations, sizes, cost-, color priorities and users to the City Council for later consider- ation. All voted yea." Following the motion, specific direction was given to the City Administrator which is outlined in the attached memo enclosed on pages through to the Chief Building Inspector. Mr. Borgschatz, the City"s Sign Inspector, has reviewed the April 4 memo and for a copy of his findings,. refer to pages through The cost projected for a steel sign seems high; however, individual signs that are being purchased and placed by developers through -out the community at various intersections are expensive and may be similar in cost for one reader board'. The cost for a developer advertising on a reader board for a period of two (2) years may be less expensive than constructing their own free-standing sign.. There are many considerations, such as 1) the City monitoring, the program as outlined by our Sign Inspector, or 2) a revision to the ordinance allowing various sign companies to bid on the reader board and manage same for the City of Eagan per Eagan specifica- tions and location. In other words, a developer would contact the sign company directly and buy time on the reader board at the quote presented to the City. 3) Developers may be restricted with the information that can be placed on a reader board due to the size of advertising space, i.e., eliminating use of their logo and other marketing information. 4) Steel signs are certainly more expensive than wood signs but require much less maintenance. The City could erect the reader board signs during winter months, 5V Agenda Information Memo July 1, 1986, City Council Meeting Page Eighteen therefore providing both the management and construction/instal- lation service. Reader boards at stategic locations throughout the City would eliminate numerous temporary advertising signs that are being placed by developers and builders. Additional philosophy should be considered regarding 1) the amount of regulatory control the City desires to place on builders and developers advertising their businesses within the City. 2) If additional regulatory control is desired, whether the City or private sector should manage the installation of the signs. Because of the investments, certain developers and builders have made in temporary advertising signs, • any change in policy might require either a sunset or grandfather provision to slowly eliminate those signs that are currently in existence while freezing any replacement of new temporary adver- tising signs. Since the June 17 meeting the City Administrator received notice of a publication that is available from ICMA regarding temporary advertising signs. Apparently a study has been made nationwide of alternatives that cities have adopted to control and regulate temporary advertising signs within their communities. The City Administrator has sent for a copy of the document; however, to date the booklet has not arrived. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To discuss and provide additional direction as to whether the City wishes to amend its sign ordinance by regulating the use of reader boards for any and all temporary advertising signs throughout the City. • ,5�� C Agenda Information Memo April 1, 1986, City Council Meeting Page Twenty -Seven REVIEW CURRENT POLICY/TEMPORARY ADVERTISING SIGNS B. Review of Current Policy for Temporary Advertising- Signs --The City staff was directed, at a recent City Council meeting, to inventory all temporary advertising signs on major collector roads throughout the city. Further action taken at the January 7, 1986, City Council meeting directed the City staff to prepare options for revisions to the sign ordinance and sign policy concerning advertis- ing directional signs. Procedure requiring acceptable .maintenance conditions has been established by the Protective Inspections Department along with an inventory that was completed and copied to each member of the City Council during early March. There are many regulatory alternatives to review, however, the three (3) options listed in the Chief Building Official's Report were as follows: Option 1. Leave the City Code 4.20 subdivision 1C9 and allow the City Council to grant special permits using the criteria of City 4.20 subdivisions 2 & 3 which establish setbacks and standards. Option 2: Limit temporary signs to a one-year maximum time span, limited to Eagan developments only, area limitation of 24 sq.feet, limit top edge of sign at 9 feet above street lev=1. limit bottom edge of sign to 6 feet above s`re:-t level, a limit of two (2) signs per intersection corner, and a minimum of 50 feet separation between signs. Option 3: An immediate moratorium on all temporary advertising signs and phase out existing signs as permits expire. Enclosed on page is a copy of the sign survey of 31 inter- sections in Eagan. If any member of the City Council has misplaced the specific sign locations, an additional copy can be made avail- able. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or suggest a regulatory change for the control and issuance of temporary adver- tising signs. MEMO TO: BUILDING INSPECTOR PETERSON FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES c� DATE: JANUARY 10, 1986 SUBJECT: NEW POLICY FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION AND LOCATION OF TEMPORARY ADVERTISING SIGNS In official action that was taken by the Eagan City Council at their regular meeting held on Tuesday, January 7, 1986, staff was directed to prepare a policy consideration for the location of temporary advertising signs at the intersections of City collector and/or County roads. The City Council -commends your department on the excellent work that Elmer Borgschatz and you have performed in tightening up and carrying out regulatory provisions set for the location of signs throughout the City. In a discussion at the meeting, it is the desire of the City Council to develop additional policy that will further tighten up the location of temporary advertising signs throughout the City. First, the City Council would like an inventory of signs that are located on major City collector roads such as Blackhawk and all County roads throughout the City. This inventory or list of existing signs would include the duration (what amount of time is remaining of the two-year, temporary status) and the quality of the existing sign. Secondly, the City Council is asking that the policy for consider- ation include several of the following points: 1) temporary advertising signs must be placed in a specific location not to block any sight distance or view for the motorist; 2) consider- ation should be given to the adoption of criteria that would establish a distance between temporary advertising signs (much the same as general advertising) for aesthetic purposes; 3) a require- ment would exist that all adjacent property owners must be notified and provide consent for the placement of a temporary advertising sign; 4) the size and type of structure for a temporary advertising sign should again be reviewed; 5) consideration should be given to criteria that would establish a maintenance provision allowing City staff to require certain on-going maintenance of a temporary advertising sign; and 6) other conditions that might be suitable for a new temporary sign policy. The City Council would like the inventory completed and a policy to review by the first meeting in March. With the amount of growth that is occurring, we anticipate the request for many more temporary advertising signs; therefore, there is some urgency in preparing a new policy for City Council consideration. City Administrator TLH/kf 5, • • Cliff Rd & Nicols - SIGN SURVEY OF THIRTY ONE INTERSECTIONS IN EAGAN Hwy 149 -& Lone Oak Rd -- No sign Cliff Rd & Cinamin Ridge - Hwy 149 -& Yankee Doodle - 1 sign ( 3 sised, in sw corner Dodd Rd -& Diffley - 2 " ( SW corner ) Hwgr 3 -& Diffley - 1 " ( SW corner, Homeowners Produce for sale) no permit Cliff Rd-& Hwy 3 - 1 " ( SW corner ) Cliff Rd & Dodd Rd - 2 " ( 1 in NW, 1 in NE corner) Cliff Rd & Lexington - 2 " ( NE corner ) Cliff Rd & Pilot Knob - 3 " ( NW corner ) Cliff Rd & Thomas Lake - 3 ", ( 1 in NE , 2 in NW corner ) Cliff Rd & Safari B H - 2 " ( 1 in NE , 1 in S.E corner ) Cliff Rd & Johnny Cake - 1 " ( SE corner ) Cliff Rd & Galaxie - 1 " ( BE corner ) Cliff Rd & Rahn Rd - 3 " ( 3 in NE corner ) Cliff Rd & Nicols - 2 Cliff Rd & Slater - 1 " Cliff Rd & Cinamin Ridge - 0 " Cedar Ridge & Shale - 0 " Blackhawk & Hwy 30 - 3 Diffley & Thomas Lake - 2 " Diffley & Pilot Knob - 5 " Beerwood & Pilot Knob - 3 Diffley & Lexington - 7 Diffley & Trenton - 4 Wescott & Lexington - 2 Yamkee Doodle * Lex, - 5 " Yankee Doodle &Pilot Snob- 0 Yankee Doodle & Hwy 13 - 0 " Four Oaks & Hwy 13 - 1 Lone Oak & Hwy 13 - 0 " 1 BP in i3 corner, 1 BP in SE Corner ) 1 in SW corner Service station sign pending) no sign ) no sign ) 3 in SW corner) 1 in NW , 1 in NE corner ) 2 in NW, 3 in NE corner ) 1 in NE corner , � 2 in 9E corner Should be remov 1 in NE corner , 6 in SE corner ) 1 in SE corner, on Right/a/way & 3 signs in SW cor 2 in NW corner ) 1 NW, 1 SW, 3 BE & 1 in NE corner ) 2 pylon signs , Hotel and Super America ) sign NE corner) Lone Oak & Pilot Knob - 1 " ( Blackhawk Glen - No permit ) Lone Oak & Lexington - 3 " ( 2 in SE , 1 in NE corner ) Summary 1 intersection, 7 signs 2 It 5 II 1 n 4 n 6 3 7 2 g u 1 n 6 " 0 Total 31 intersections 61 signs MEMO TO: CHIEF BUILDING INSPECTOR PETERSON FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: APRIL 4, 1986 SUBJECT: CITY COUNCIL PROPOSAL TO CONSIDER CITY -OWNED/ STANDARDIZED TEMPORARY ADVERTISING SIGNS In official action that was taken by the City Council at their April 1, 1986, meeting, a concept was given consideration whereby the City would construct and install uniform, temporary advertising signs throughout approved locations within the City. These signs would be designed to accommodate several identification signs that would meet a specific specification and design standard. Please make reference to the example that was prepared by City Council - member Ellison and is attached for your reference. The City Council is concerned about the number of temporary advertising signs that are located at busy intersections throughout the community. I would like you to give consideration to this new concept that was proposed by the City Council and determine the feasibility of the project. Please take into consideration the following: 1. Locations: It would be necessary to determine the loca- tions that are suitable for installing a City -owned stan- dardized sign. 2. Size: Please prepare a set of specifications that would standardize the sign and each reader board/identification sign. 3. Cost: Please estimate the cost for construction and installation of these signs. Also determine which each of the individual reader board/identifications would cost to construct and, further, what. is fair in terms of rental charges by the City. 4. Priority: Please determine a method in which the reader board/identification signs would be rented considering priority of space on the City sign and, further, the duration of time that those identification signs would be allowed. 5. Number of Signs: Please determine how many signs could be placed on one of the overall signs and, further, whether more than one size of sign should be given consideration. Please see #2 above. 6. Locations: Currently, a development is allowed two (2) temporary advertising signs in addition to any signs that are allowed on the subject development parcel. It would be necessary to determine the procedure for allowing a location and consideration for the two additional signs a developer might request. 7. Other Criteria: Please give consideration to any other criteria that might be appropriate in considering this project. �9 It appears that the City Council would like to proceed with this concept for controlling and providing a beautification to temporary \'- advertising signs throughout the community. It would be necessary to provide some type of transition such as, requiring developers to remove their temporary advertising signs and possibly provide 'a free or reduced rent for, the first year to off -set expenses that they have incurred in the construction of their temporary adver- tising sign. Again,please give this priority consideration. If you need further assistance due to your departmental schedule, please con- tact my office and I will provide some administrative assistance either through our new intern or one -of my Administrative Assis- tants. , GV 40 City Administrator cc: Honorable Mayor & City Councilmembers TLH/kf • brvg`' W, W�,Ae +Rjef,r J 4 SA F/1 R OHMS H LL i OPPERS �> O, , t homFS+�r, 7 C-�. MEMO TO: CITY ADMINISTRATOR, TOM HEDGES CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL, DALE PETERSON FROM: ELMER A BORGSCHATZ DATE: JUNE 12, 1986 HE: CITY COUNCIL PROPOSAL TO CONSIDER CITY OWNED/STANDARDIZED TEMPORARY ADVERTISING SIGNS In reference to memo dated April 4, 1986 we have gathered some information that may be helpful to study a program which could be considered to eliminate a problem relative to a reader board identification. I have been very much impressed by the concept, however there may be some pitfalls as we will allude to when we refer to the seven points set forth in your letter. • 1. LOCATIONS - I would estimate that six reader boards are needed to cover the present activity in the City. The developments are spread into most areas of the City, however it may be difficult to lease six prime spots as the use of right-of-ways would not be advisable. 2. SIZE - The attached sign detail by a reputable advertising company in Eagan meets the recommendation of the Council, however the all -steel sign cost estimate also attached seems high. 3. COSTS - In accordance with estimates we have for an all steel constructed sign with steel posts, removable (12" x 72" adv. panels) which would include reflectorized panels would cost approximately $5,250 per unit. The land use cost is estimated at $600 per unit. $100 maintenance cost annually may be low. Assuming a ten-year life expectancy of the all -steel sign, the following calculations indicate the projected income necessary to provide the ® service: To meet the annual costs which would be change of script: 3 @ $1,143, depreciation of $525, interest of $525, lease of site - $600 and $100 for maintenance for a total of $2,893. A monthly rental fee of $33 per panel would be necessary. 4. PRIORITY - It is suggested that the reader board be leased to the applicants who have shown the greatest activity in number of units processed in the preceding six months. 5. NUMBER OF SIGNS - We believe that signs should be uniform for aesthetic values. At the moment, it would seem difficult to locate more than six signs in strategic locations within the City. Six signs filled would allow for 48 users and not knowing -the acceptance by the industry, the outlay of approximately $36,000 looks large. 6. LOCATION - It is our contention that location could be found for six good spots. I believe Council and management could be a better judge of the temporary advertising needs, hopefully the reader board would eliminate part of the problem. 6 7. OTHER CRITERIA - Space on the reader board on an annual basis, if renewals are wanted, arrangements and fees should be made 30 days before expiration. Vacancies do not destroy the effect of the board. EH/js ,63 Ll — — — — --- 1111r-171111r-7.-.---------c- FABRICATOR S Si E SIGNERS.. -r? - .21 �o June 6, 1986 Mr. Elmer ©orgschatz City of Eagan ® 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 5$122 q MO. 945 PIERCE BUTLER ROUTE • 488-6711 • SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 5511 RE: Twin post directional signs Dear Elmer: To furnish and install a 161 tall twin post structure with eight double faced directional panels,as shown on Drawing #86-R-193, our price to you is $4,737.00. For optional reflective copy, add $512.00. The following is a cost breakdown for your review: Furnished Installed Total • Poles 700.00 1300.00 2000.00 Reflective 1211 x 7211 D/F panels 291.00 90.00 381.00 Non -reflective 1211 x 7211 DIF panels 227.00 90.00 317.00 Sincerely, LAWRENCE SIGNS, INC. Mike Gifford MG:ds 6� '— -inn VIEW O ,V AHG Lq, Nbf! D L��& C TOS as counn �[FFUGioptLED AuV AA'Yo+/L WHIIG ON, b�rJ1E _KRS_PF ML VIEW Of le14 – I�EC\42 i Agenda Information Memo July 1, 1986, City Council Meeting Page Nineteen BLUE BELL ICE CREAM REQUEST A. Blue Bell Ice Cream Request to Allow On -Street Ice Cream Truck Sales --During the summer of 1984, the City experienced a growing number of vendors selling such items as shrimp_, paintings and flowers at various intersections throughout the community. The City Council determined that these sales presented a safety problem for the distractions caused to motorists who would stop and purchase these items. There was also an issue raised about the liability of allowing ice cream trucks to solicit and sell ® ice cream and beverages on City streets throughout the community. At the July 2, 1984 City Council meeting, the City Clerk's office was given a direction that no one be allowed to solicit within the City either on a door to door basis or by parking in a specific location. This also included the ice cream vehicles which stopped their solicitation late in 1984. Non profit groups such as boy scout and girl scout groups were given an exception and have been allowed through the City Clerk's office to solicit donations door to door. Late this spring the Blue Bell Ice Cream Company presented a petition and request for reconsideration by the City Council to allow on -street sales of beverages and ice cream food items throughout the community. Blue Bell has addressed the liability issue by providing the City with a copy of a letter from Mid Continent Agencies Inc., that they presently have an adequate liability insurance and further, the safety practice and record of Blue Bell Ice Cream Company. Enclosed is a copy of that letter from the insurance company, a copy of a petition that was presented by the Blue Bell Company and some other related documents, referenced on pages through _ 'Z for consideration by the City Council. A representative of Blue Bell Ice Cream will be present, requesting that the City Council allow a solicitor's license for on -street sale of beverages and ice cream related goods throughout the community. Also enclosed as a part of the aforementioned documents are copies of ordinances and other pertinent information supplied by Blue Bell for City Council review. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny granting of a solicitation license to the Blue Bell Ice Cream Company to allow the sale of soft drink beverages and ice cream related foods. M 111DBell T 71 3218 Snelling Avr. Miuucapulis, MN 55.106 fi 12 724-5205 April 5, 1986 Police Chief Bertha 3830 Pilot knob Road = Eagan, MN. 55121 Dear Chief Bertha, For the past seven years the Blue Hell Ice Cream truck has been a summer companion to thousands of Eagan residents young and old alike. I am writing this letter in the hope that I can convince the council to allow us to operate in Eagan once again. Late last summer I received a letter from the City explaining that Eagan City Code, sec. 9.15 -Prohibiting ® parking for the purpose of advertising or selling merchandise, was going to be strictly enforced. We complied with the request and did not operate after receiving the letter. We did however receive numerous calls (not just from children) inquiring as to the whereabouts of the "ice cream man". The point in the letter requesting we cease operation mentioned a safety hazard. We consider ourselves a very safety conscious company and train our drivers extensively with both written and slide safety programs. In support of our safety record I would like to present certain facts= We Have operated in Eagan from approximately May 1st through September 1st each year. The truck works an average of six days per week and sells an average of 200 ice cream bars per day. That means over our seven years of operation we have • sold about 150,000 ice cream bars. In all this time and with all those sales we have never had a single accident take place. I feel this is an excellent record and if we are allowed to operate again our commitment to safety will remain just as strong. I am enclosing a letter from our insurance carrier explaining our limits of liability and our safety record. I am also enclosing the results of a recent Saturday afternoon survey we tool: in Eagan asking people if they wanted to have the ice cream truck back: in their neighborhoods. I am happy to report that at least 9B% of the People we asked said they saw no reason we should not be allowed to operate. In recent years the cities of Richfield, St. Louis Park, Mound and Fridley have altered their ordinances to allow ice cream trucks. I am enclosing a copy of a letter from the city manager of Richfield explaining his experience with Blue Bell. (The letter was originally written to the city of St. Cloud in support of our application to vend there.) I am also enclosing copies of the altered ordinances from these cities in the hope they can be used as a model in Eagan. The Blue Bell truck has also provided a welcome summer job, usually for an Eagan college student. In conclusion, we are asking that the council consider a way for the "ice cream man/women" to be able to come back to Eagan. We feel our record shows that we have been a responsible and safety conscious company. We also feel we have provided_a desired service in a fun and positive manner. I would be happy to work with the city to develop a ordinance that would allow our operation. Thank you for your consideration of this proposal. Sincerely; Glenn Baron Blue Bell Ice Cream Inc. 7 E • • • MID-CONTINENT AGENCIES, INC. 7154 SHADY OAK RD. EDEN PRAIRIE. MN 55344 PHONE: 612-941-0990 Apcil 16, 1986 Dear Members: Blue Bell Ice Cream is insured with WesLern National Mutual Insurance Cunlpany. The Company is au A raLed Company as listed in A. M. Best, the leading source of insurance company rating material. The attached Cer'LificaLe of Insurance shows Blue Bell Ice Cream's cauceen for the general public in the event of an accident. Please note that for a loss, the limit of liability is 95D0,000 aggregate for bath general liability and auLomobile liability, with a $1,000,000 umbrella. Blue Bell ice Cream has put togeLiler a Safety Progralrl for its vendors. Safety is of keynote concern to Blue Bell Ice Cream and of great concern to WesLern NaLional Insurance Company, as Lhey stand behind Blue Bell Claims. The following is a listing of the procedures by these two companies to insure a low incidence of accidents. 1. Driver VLL-if iCatlOrl A. Motor vehicle records are run oil all drivers and reviewed with each driver be'for'e l:hey are allowed to drive. B. Ally prior accidenL is reviewed wiLh each driver before they are allowed to drive. c. A safetyManual has been developed and is constantly L+eir:g updated to inform the vendors of proper' safe Ly procedures. 3. Safe Ly films, posters and SLuffers are used all an ooguing basis to keep safety a Lop priori Ly a all Limes. These items are supplied by Lhe Insurance company and the NaLiurial Safely Cuuucii. The experience thaL we have had with Blue Bell Ice Cream has been Llial the management is very concerned about loss conte'ul anti safely. We believe Blue Be L1 Ice Cream to be an excellent insured and a communiLy—nlirided company. SirI cer'el;i, William K. Velin Mid—ConLiri�iiL Agencies, Inc.9 WI(V%j j �/ 1� ill 4f�e� INC. 3218 Snelling Ave. Minneapolis, MN 55406 612-729-5205 REQUEST FOR EXAMINATION We the undersigned of EAGAN, Mn., voice our concerti over the disappearance of the familiar neighborhood ice cream truck. Over the past years Blue Bell Ice Cream. Inc. has provided our neighborhoods with safe, clean, and courteous service. We would be interested in the City Hall of Eagan reexamining the possibility of having a Blue Bell Ice Cream truck return to our neighborhood this summer. NAME 1. F.-VIT"YTOR TEL. Ll U, e(i l ?o J/5 Z" Jy�J tl, ,�-1 ,De /s- 2 - s� CL 42 C- LQ U I'ILJ X06 20. ts - pull pdl j� "realm, .�j INC. :1218 Snelling Ave. Minneapolis. MN 554061 812.729.5120.5 NAME: ADDRESS l TEL. /C I �+�r\ v -1 (','Y`t.J f,•..-\ I i[" .,:/J `� � 22.`95(GVm. terra P/ /� _97 L 7 (��,,za. 23. - �� 1,. Y ( 111 :' ti Y' 16 .31 i 111 (,'; 5 24. �:� � _y�� It;.:`( ��. < <i' �� �� I`t`s Z.'1�.Y� ..uk�. y►j�� -- `j'7(:Jr-> r 26. • 27- 28. 7•2s. i l4) 29. Les�r_ ,,t• '/S - 0 c o s 30, r.&ra�4.,�t. 3�5 E�1.,�.�y`�,,!n�� . -/syc3 31 • Gco �iLC►� n. 3-0 4-.D-. %t�t,�F (�iYL Aj 5 33. 3z(, 7b�-� '•�' JL 34. LE�c•.�r.�C�l� �L(,� < L/ S- z - 5.3E•.3 • 35. C,.Lid u� f�i- C'vr�ca.— '3 � 7 I C/ S-d ' !r 3 • - 7 - 36 l� lr't�l¢1 %1t7%A��-.. �2��j Ll L59 -7 :� �!�: 37- C� � 3i 38. f ;L-19 ',tc eJ it A -�/cc cu ry,,:ta t !) .3: 2 `1 / i 39. � Uli �-Y 7/4a 4o. ✓ �/� - r 41.vo 3.44 1+3- 44. ./, 45.V<. C�'cn>�tilrn 46.Yy�vz<•% NAME: 47 - 50 -..,TC 51. �21 52. 53. 54. 55 56. jq'VYA 57. 58. ,JVrr„rl 59. 6o. 61. 11416" 411111 INC. 3218 Snelling Ave. Minneapolis, MN 55406 612.729-5205 ADDRESS - 3Q 3 C/q ke Rid 5,9 0 I f 11 11 3z 71- 62. !f- Z7 Y - c 'Z, 63 T) k 64 65 L l.fb�t C�4�C1�� ,3.x'7/ �L�.�/ic.. /�12 66,J7OUL-C -5,2&ct \1,,411ri- Idl (cr, TEL. 0 3 TQ 67. fT) C1 C9 I F('-o,c h,) i 31-ju)-7 Vk-L. uu.,ALL ic, -01- qc 68.3L 51t 51 Lt 69.. 70.. 71. Z 10 72. L'TT ♦ 1 1 P11416j, p 1pe r.Iream, P INC. 3218 Snelling Ave. Minneapolis, MN 55406 612-729-5205 NAPM: tri ADDRESS: TEL. 74.' 75. 7 (. , �/S77 �'/ OA 79. 80. 81. 82. 83 �M 3� � a-. ,�l�e2 - � �,•t S�sf _ Cd` 3 �. 84. 1,700 vAA� Ko-4EiI? '?71-147 91y6 85.• ISL 8 .. 87. -77 88. J AA01. 00),� (,, ks k•J / • 89. c Ccs 9o. 91 r 93• 94. Kr�tE /�PCc�Ji�/c�ae.vl 95 96 • 97 `,1 I1 r� I, 98. V j 1 100. R,*t , 1 7 v v 1700 h-, m /700 l'ZC''t at�c VaiG� d 14q cuiz- OAKS/700 ysz- 35�� 671 VTV-9q&O 1�5�z �-ayao 'If sy-y» P � ,ua al lGalt1roam, ii INC. :3218 Snelling Ave. Minneapolis. MN 55406 612 729-5205 NAME: •' ADDRESS: 101. 102. 103. �w <� w1 �2,u _ 3 k 104. *1'-o C- luv I 1 1_) 106. ��•����%'�,� ��.:.1�, ��_ , „ -, lz _,�9 I.rC> 107. ° : •�!�% 108. 109 110. 112. ,/ 113 . C7l ,cc:. _> 114. 4- n. 115. ;^--c L' 116. %�l� l`� �.L/700 118. 119. 120. 121. 122. 123. 124. 125. 126. 127. TEL. 7//0 t/Su _ gsSG 506 � r j Cx Q, ., R n r# 3Ts 4' 'Lt °toy :j l VAj 23 OKAY, SFETLE. ICE - TRY TO FLIP E .REAM ME! � TRUCK - f J The Far Side/By Gary Larson Wf�ERE!! r r , I '1 �i ".Suri.srfed nota that I'm alt our of chocolate liulgc?' tennis the Menace/BY H. Ketcham "Shouldn't you be headln' south for the wlnter9" fi lu UT � �REAM I- rra3aue+ s � 'C J C Wf�ERE!! r r , I '1 �i ".Suri.srfed nota that I'm alt our of chocolate liulgc?' tennis the Menace/BY H. Ketcham "Shouldn't you be headln' south for the wlnter9" fi lu � r s � C ° e saving is perking space fog'+he Ice-cream n Dy YO Minneapolis Tribune Mmmmm! Ice cream heaven on wheels By Ruth Hammond Staff Writer Two trucks [he( come into nor neighbor. hood ring bells to announce their arrival. One is the garbage truck, the other is the Blae Bell Ice cream truck. No one goes running out to greet the garbage truck. The Ice cream truck Is another story. Droves of children appear as If from thin al r. A few grown-ups also approach the truck, though not at quite the same veloc- By, when the Blue Bell truck rolls around, vc"those who resist temptation cannot help hot get nostalgic for the Ice cream peddlers of their childhood. In my home- townwe hod two kinds of Ice cream peddie rs: the Sammy bar boys and Inc Mr. Snftee Duck drivers. The Sammy -bar boys rode a big tricycle with a freezer In the front. They trundled as fast as their Ices could pednl down our brick mein street or Wong the Memorial Day parade route. Sammy ban had vanilla Ice cream on the Inside, chocolate casting on the outside. and i think they cost a nickel or, at most, a dime. The chocolate coating would fragment when you bit Into It and you had to be very careful to cutch any loose blls In your paper wrapping, to be rescued later through deft work of the tongue. Dropping part of vour Sammy bar acro the pavement — from which you v'id hardly lick it up if your mo:1er -ire watching—a;, one of me Seem G rent Trnacdics of :11ldhmW. z:yaturaay September 12, 1901 1B. IJ 11 0 5984 Norlhwoal Publications * 0 Steve Massey State launches plan to polish its image _ Page 6 L J Lynda McDonnell Section Content legislation could hurt Minnesota Page 2 i •;• Partners stock their ice cream trucks --with frozen assets Buzz Magnuson/ Stall Photogrnphor Steve Bohrer dispenses treats to young customers. Twin Cities indicators umo TWIN CITIES UNEMPLOYMENT �,.rcr u.en. ,.nr O.y urn, .,i fca.omic 9.c�ir In thou 1983 9e no .— _ 76.1 _ 57 70 53 By Judith Willie Basineas Weiler tern Baron was a history major at the University of Wisconsin, worrying about his mounting college debts, when the hoopla surrounding the U.S. Bicentennial suggested a money -making scheme. "I purchased a mobile ice cream vending truck and worked out an arrangement with the City of Madison to vend at all the Bicentennial events there that year,".recalls Baron, 30. "It just seemed like a good idea to put myself through college." The business was so successful that it grew to four trucks the second year and 10 the third. Managing it took up more and more time, eventually propelling Baron out of college after his third year and into the ice cream business full time. Now he and a partner, Steve Craver, Small business also 30, own Blue Bell Ice Cream Co., whose 35 trucks roam the streets of Minneapolis, St. Paul, and most Twin Cities suburbs from May through September. Blue Bell also maintains its original Madison business, which Baron considers saturated at 10 trucks, and a year-old pushcart operation that sells ice cream in the downtowns df Minneapolis and St. Paul. While independent ice cream trucks pop up now and then around the area, Blue Bell, with annual sales around $200,000, is the only sizable company in the business. The short season here helps keep competition down, but small, locally owned operations are typical of the $100 million mobile ice cream industry, according to At Reynolds, manager of market development for the Good Humor Corp., Fairfield, N. J. .a. FREIGHT CAR LOADINGS 198 _ _ _ —A 1--_4 - 57. "There are some economic reasons for that," says Reynolds, whose company sells frozen novelty products to distributors like Blue Bell. "It's kind of a tough business. The owner has to be an entrepreneur and keep his hands right on things. If you have five different locations you are trying to run, you have to entrust it to managers, and there is always a little problem there." Reynolds, who started his career peddling ice cream from a Coad Humor pushcart in the Bronx in 1946, is a kind of unofficial historian of lie induslry because of his long involvement. The 19205 were the years when things really got going, he says. "Good Humor got started in 1920 on a cold January night in Youngstown, Ohio. Harry Burl was a quality ice cream maker and confectioner there, and he was experimenting with a block of Please see Ice cream/ 11 Indicators hint at `growth By Lynda McDonnell recession CU ®O M 04 Ln LO cn ■ tttttttte O mc .0 ■ ttt� Qi L c CU ®O February 13, 1986 Mr. Elmer Malinen — City Administrator City of St. Cloud City Hall St. Cloud, MN 56301 Dear Mr. Malinen: It is my understanding that the City of St. Cloud may be considering changes to your ordinances or adopting a new ordinance that would permit companies that wish to sell ice cream products or similar products from vehicles in residential neighborhoods as well as other areas of the community. Two years ago, the writer worked with Blue Bell Ice Cream, Inc. to seek amendments to our city ordinances that would permit ice cream vendors and similar vendors to drive their vehicles throughout our residential, . commercial and industrial neighborhoods using the usual sound mechanisms that are attached to those trucks to let persons know of their approach in the various neighbor- hoods. After two years of experience permitting this type of operation, I can report that we are very pleased with the results. Blue Bell Ice Cream, Inc. of Minneapolis has been selling their.ice cream products from their trucks throughout our community and I am not aware of one complaint. Blue Bell has cooperated with our volunteer organizations which from time to time sell products in our parks to help raise monies for our sports by either providing a truck to loan to the volunteer organization or to ask their regular drivers not to take their vehicles near those parks where fund raising activities are occurring. Blue Bell Ice Cream has also cooperated with the city by not selling on July 4 when we hold our community celebration and have our various civic organi- zations selling ice cream products and other food products on that day. �9 telephone: 669-7521 (612) an equal opportunity employer tr. O Q ■ tttttttte O UO February 13, 1986 Mr. Elmer Malinen — City Administrator City of St. Cloud City Hall St. Cloud, MN 56301 Dear Mr. Malinen: It is my understanding that the City of St. Cloud may be considering changes to your ordinances or adopting a new ordinance that would permit companies that wish to sell ice cream products or similar products from vehicles in residential neighborhoods as well as other areas of the community. Two years ago, the writer worked with Blue Bell Ice Cream, Inc. to seek amendments to our city ordinances that would permit ice cream vendors and similar vendors to drive their vehicles throughout our residential, . commercial and industrial neighborhoods using the usual sound mechanisms that are attached to those trucks to let persons know of their approach in the various neighbor- hoods. After two years of experience permitting this type of operation, I can report that we are very pleased with the results. Blue Bell Ice Cream, Inc. of Minneapolis has been selling their.ice cream products from their trucks throughout our community and I am not aware of one complaint. Blue Bell has cooperated with our volunteer organizations which from time to time sell products in our parks to help raise monies for our sports by either providing a truck to loan to the volunteer organization or to ask their regular drivers not to take their vehicles near those parks where fund raising activities are occurring. Blue Bell Ice Cream has also cooperated with the city by not selling on July 4 when we hold our community celebration and have our various civic organi- zations selling ice cream products and other food products on that day. �9 telephone: 669-7521 (612) an equal opportunity employer From our experience here in Richfield, the writer can recommend the ordinances that we have adopted two years 6rgc to any community. As I say, we have had the best of cooperation from the vendor and no complaints from our residents or businesses. If you would like to discuss this in any further detail, please feel free to write or call.on me. Si cerely y , ohn G. Ca twrig t City Manage JGC/eja is cc: Glenn Baron Blue Bell Ice Cream, Inc. 3218 Snelling Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55406 MFA APRIL 16, 1984 8c ORDINANCE NO. 16 -94 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LOUIS PARK MUNICIPAL CODE RELATED TO NOISE: AMENDING SECTION 11-511(3); ADDING SECTION 11-513.101, "EXCEPTION FOR FOOD/BEVERAGE_VEHICLES" THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN: Section 1. The St. Louis Park Municipal -Code, Section 11-511,- "Declaration of Nuisance; Actions Prohibited,''Subsection 3, is hereby amended to read: (3) Except as permitted by Section 11-513.101, no person may call attention to his business or his goods or attract the attention of the public to any building, structure, vehicle or any other area by creating noise • pollution, including but not limited to: Crying out, sounding a horn, ringing a bell, or issuing music or sound broadcasts through any radio receiving set, musical instrument, phonograph, stereo, loudspeaker, sound amplifier or other machine or device for the production or repro- duction of sound. In addition, no person shall create noise pollution through the use of any such sound production or reproduction devices in any activities or proceedings of his business, including, but not limited to, the use of loudspeakers for communications. Section 2. The St. Louis Park Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding Section 11-513.101 to read: C ction 11-513.1OL Exception for Food/Beverage Vehicles. Notwithstanding y other provision to the contrary, food/beverage vehicles may sound a nually operated bell between noon and 9 p.m. daily which produces a ise level measured at a distance of 50 feet from the source no greater an the following: -,idential/business/industrial zoning districts 65 decibels. Sec. 3. Penalty Clause. Persons violating the provisions of this ordinance shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. Sec. 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect 15 days after its publication. Adopted by the City Council April 16, 1984. Attest: City Clerk Reviewed for administration: Mayor Approved as to form and legality: City Manager 9/ City Attorney AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER VI, SECTION 6.14 OF THE ORDINANCE CODE ENTITLED "SOUND TRUCKS" City of Richfield Does Ordain: Chapter VI, Section 6.14 of the Ordinance Code of the City of Richfield entitled "Sound Trucks" is hereby amended in the following respects: = I. By amending Subdivision 1 thereof to read as follows: Subdivision 1. Definitions. _"Broadcasting vehicle" is any vehicle, motor propelled or otherwise, on which'is attached: (1) any device for amplifying and broadcasting through one or more loud speakers speech or music, whether produced from records, radio reception or vocally through microphone, and which projects sound from such vehicle with a total speaker volume of more than one watt; or (2) any unamplified projection of sound for the purpose of attracting attention to a commercial enterprise whether or not conducted in or on such vehicle. II. By amending paragraphs 3 and 4 of Subdivision 6 thereof to read as follows: {3}--Breadeastsng-7eh#eles-shall-flet-breadeest whsle -en -the -streets -and -alleys --,n- res #dentia} areas-ef-the-eity-. 44}(3) No broadcasting vehicle shall be operated • t on stree:Fs—aiid alle sin--re.E clan* al areas of e city, excep y special permission of the \ j council. In granting such permission, the council may place conditions and restrictions on the activity which relates to the time, location and manner of broadcasting. Pa sed—by-"tiie City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this day of , 1984. John N. Hamilton, Mayor ATTEST: Sylvia K. Bergh, City Clerk p v Agenda Information Memo July 1, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Twenty VARIANCE/RICHARD BAKKEN B. Variance (Richard Bakken) to Exceed 208 Building Lot Coverage -- An application for a variance was submitted by Richard Bakken of 4528 Cinnamon Ridge Trail for the purpose of building an addi- tion onto his existing duplex home that will exceed the 208 lot coverage permitted by City Code. - For additional -information on this item, refer to the Planning Department report found on pages through. For additional information regarding staff processing of the variance, refer to a memo and attachment prepared by Jim Sturm • Planner 1 found on pages g% through 'V'T . ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON TTHIS ITEM: To approve or deny the variance to exceed 20% building lot coverage of Lot 12, Block 1 for Richard Bakken. g3 CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: VARIANCE APPLICANT.: RICHARD BAKKEN LOCATION: SW;, SEC. 30 = EXISTING ZONING: R-2 WITHIN P.D. (CINNAMON RIDGE) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: JULY 1, 1986 DATE OF REPORT: JUNE 25, 1986 REPORTED BY: JIM STURM APPLICATION: An application has been submitted by Richard Bakken of ® 4528 Cinnamon Ridge Trail requesting a variance to build an addition onto his existing duplex home that will exceed the 20% lot coverage permitted by City Code. COMMENTS: This duplex lot has been separated by the Waiver of Plat process. The proposed 24' x 38' 1 -story addition would connect dwelling unit 'B' to a detached garage built in 1983. This struc- ture has been designed to accomodate a second story in the future. The lot coverage would be 2496 s.f. or 280 of � of the duplex lot. The submitted site plan shows the proposed addition 5'-6' from the property line, matching that of the detached garage. There is no significant vegetation to be concerned with. A letter from the applicant has been attached for your review. If approved, this variance shall be subject to all applicable ordinances. JS/jj 13 B n.le t.:q ; u rte q TRAIL I 551047'381✓. 118.00 —— ` 30 •`0'45V1,' 938.7 V76 45 Lk ve, :� Ir iI.Ui531 455$] 45L4 45� �� ,j 51 W L� 73 i I , o- • q TRAIL I 551047'381✓. 118.00 —— ` 30 938.7 Lk ve, 5.•6 I i N N I " -! n]0. U • :.�... B3 II/IIN •� LCI m \UNI\ UW -T „I. I^m, - 'Sr�l ID i.ke ;, GAIL Ido a1. \\AR \a j0 :.: 934.6 as$. — — — -- — ... 118.00 $51°47'35' '. Op$" CINNAMON RIDGE TRAIL "'^� e°+ . June 19, 1986 To: City Council Members of Eagan. I Richard Bakken am appling for a building -variance, because of the building code for 20% lot coverage. My building will not exceed property line set backs. The reason for the variance is for more living space. I like the neighborhood and location. I talked to a real estate service, about selling my home and purchasing a larger home, but I paid 65,000, for my home, and I was told that with the apartment project in the neighborhood I could only get about 60,000. for my home. The cost of a larger home would cost over 100,000. Their for I would like to add living space to my home. None of my neighbor object to my building plans. Please give this application for a variance your upmost concern. b10 MEMO TO: THOMAS L HEDGES, r CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: JIM STURM, PLANNER I DATE: JUNE 25, 1986 SUBJECT: RICHARD BAKKEN VARIANCE On June 9, 1986, Mr. Richard Bakken submitted plans to the City's Inspection Department requesting a building permit for a 24' x 38' addition to a duplex home in the Cinnamon Ridge 1st Addition. Upon review of these plans, it was noticed that the lot coverage would exceed the 20% maximum allowed in an R-2 district (28% proposed). The applicant was told there were two options: 1) reduce the size of the addition to meet Code requirements or 2) apply for a variance. After numerous calls to all departments, a meeting with re- presentatives from Inspections, Planning and Administration was scheduled for Friday, June 13, to explain the options and clear up any past misunderstandings. Mr. Bakken walked out of that meeting after three minutes, before those issues could be discussed. A letter was drafted immediately by the Inspection/Planning Depart- ments to explain the variance option (see attached). Staff did not endorse the variance at any point through this period, but the applicant insisted on pursuing this alternative. JS/jj M I M 3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD. P.O. BOX 21199 EAGAN, MINNESOTA 55121 PHONE- (612) 454-8100 June 13, 1986 MR DICK BAAKEN .4528 CINNAMON RIDGE.TR, EAGAN, MN 55122 Dear Mr. Baaken: BEA BLOMQUIST Moya THOMAS EGAN JAMES A SMITH JERRY THOMAS THEODORE WACHTER CWM1I MBmbBls THOMAS HEDGES City Adminstrolor EUGENE VAN OVERBEKE City Cleu We apologize for any inconvenience to you in your effort to expand the above referenced dwelling unit. It is unfortunate that your 2:30 P.M. meeting with City staff on June 13, 1986 ended so abruptly. We are sure that if the discussion could have lasted longer, many of your concerns/questions would have been resolved. The City Code is designed to protect the health, welfare and property values of all individuals in Eagan. All residential districts have limits to the amount of building coverage allowed per lot. The expansion you have proposed exceeds the allowable 20% maximum coverage in R-2 (duplex) districts. If you wish to proceed with your original plan, you must demonstrate your hardship to the City Council through the variance process. The variance application can be obtained through the City Planning Department. The application will then be processed and placed on the next available City Council meeting. Council meetings are scheduled on the first and third Tuesday of each month and the application complete with a $50 non-refundable fee must be received before the Tuesday preceding the Council meeting. Included in the application requirements are an abstractor's certificate of all the names and addresses of property owners within 200' of your property, an exhibit (site plan), 8 1/2" x 11", detailing your expansion proposal and having the application signed by a Notary Public. We hope this letter clarifies your proposed building expansion variance option. Sincerely, CS'V� Chief Building Official DP/js CC: Tom Hedges, City Administrator p THE LONE OAK TREE... THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY Agenda Information Memo July 1, 1986, City Council Meeting Page Twenty -One VARIANCE/FREDERICK DEAN C. Variance (Frederick Dean) for a 12' Variance from the 40' Setback Requirement Along Public Street, Lot 22, Block 2, Safari Estates First Addition, Located At Galaxie Avenue and Safari Trail, SW 1/4 of Section 32 --An application was submitted by Frederick Dean, requesting an 11'+ se-tback variance along Galaxie Avenue on Lot 22, Block 2 of the Safari Estates First Addition. For additional information 'on this item, refer to the Planning Department report, a copy is enclosed on pages L%D through • ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the variance as presented by Frederick Dean for a setback along Galaxie Avenue. E CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: VARIANCE APPLICANT: FREDRICK DEAN LOCATION: LOT 22, BLOCK -21 SAFARI ESTATES EXISTING ZONING: R-1 (SINGLE FAMILY) 1ST ADDITION DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: JULY 1, 1986 DATE OF REPORT: JULY 25, 1986 REPORTED BY: JIM STURM APPLICATION: An application has been submitted requesting an 11'+ setback variance along Galaxie Avenue on Lot 22, Block 2, of the Safari Estates 1st Addition. COMMENTS: The house has been placed on the lot so that the garage side will act as a buffer to Galaxie Avenue. This street has an 80' right-of-way and, therefore, the setback is 40' from the property line. The driveway is connected to Safari .Trail. If the house was shifted so that the garage side was closer to Lot 21, a variance would still be necessary. There are three -car garages throughout this subdivision, and the lot directly across the street, Lot 1, Block 1, received a similar variance in October 1985. If approved, this variance shall be subject to all applicable Code requirements. • JS/jj Is Pv.4I1 V nAwt. SAFARI ESTATES I1 LA SURVEY FOR: MADERA HOMES AV E.Ota��aee GALAXIE N 14°48 14 E 19 125. 3o.05 j 51 -- 110 O M — Z .ov N W N I 1 m L I 1 N N L --r — --38.0-- 30.001 N N 18'00'06''E' �/ 12 9.00 % • Agenda Information July 1, 1986, City Page Twenty -Two Memo Council Meeting WAIVER OF PLAT/RMC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION D. Waiver of Plat to Split Existing Duplex Lot, Lot 6, Block 1, Sun Cliff First Addition --An application for a waiver of plat was submittedby RMC Development Corporation in order 'to split an existing duplex lot in the Sun Cliff First Addition, referenced as Lot 6, Block 1. For additional -information on this item, refer to the Planning Department report found on page 4415 ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the waiver of plat as presented. VA • CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: WAIVER OF PLAT APPLICANT: R.M.C. DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LOCATION: LOT 6, BLOCK"1, SUN CLIFF 1ST ADDITION EXISTING ZONING: P.D. 79-1 (EAGAN HILLS WEST) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: JULY 1, 1986 DATE OF REPORT: 'JUNE 23, 1986 REPORTED BY: JIM STURM APPLICATION: An application has been submitted by R.M.C. Develop- ment Corporation requesting a Waiver of Platin order to split an existing duplex lot in the Sun Cliff lst Addition. Lot 6, Block 1 has frontage on Sunrise Road and is serviced by separate utilities. One side of the duplex will have a front setback of 27.20' which is permitted in the Sun Cliff Development Contract Conditions. All other setbacks meet the Development Contract Conditions and Code requirements. If approved, this Waiver of Plat shall be subject to all applicable Code requirements. SUN CLIFF ADDMONS City of Eagan .wuc[ ocv[wrur nc 93 " 42.eo " 57.00 N 39.45'z I"E SUNRISE 65'!/" W O� L9.o2 � I I I e •gene. J z I_! 7 r NV es I I'JN C _ _ISII 410 O I 25.26-0 _ a•3'2 R•!!2.. ]7 RORD Agenda Information Memo July 1, 1986, City Council Meeting Page Twenty -Three WAIVER OF PLAT/SONS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY E. Waiver of Plat (Sons Construction Company) to Split Existing Duplex Lot in Oakwood Heights 2nd Addition --An application was submitted by Sons Construction Company requesting a waiver of plat in order to split a twin home for individual ownership, referenced as- Lot 9, Block 1 of Oakwood Heights 2nd Addition. For additional information 'and a location of the waiver of plat, refer to the Planning Department report found on page QS . ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the ® waiver of plat for Sons Construction Company to split an existing duplex lot. • CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: WAIVER OF PLAT APPLICANT: SONS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LOCATION: LOT 9, BLOCK 1, OAKWOOD HEIGHTS 2ND ADDN. EXISTING ZONING: R-2 WITHIN LEXINGTON S P.D. DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: JULY 1, 1986 DATE OF REPORT: •.JUNE 25, -1986 REPORTED BY: JIM STURM APPLICATION SUMMARY: An application has been submitted by Sons ® Construction Company requesting a Waiver of Plat in order to split a twinhome for individual ownership. This lot, on the corner of Lynx Court and Cougar Drive, has separate utilities. All setbacks meet Code requirements. If approved, this Waiver. of Plat shall be subject to all applicable Ordinances. JS/jj OAKWOOD HEIGHTS 2ND ADDITION S W! COUGAR DRIVE U-7 I L Agenda Information Memo July 1, 1986, City Council Meeting Page Twenty -Four PRELIMINARY PLAT/TOWN CENTRE -100 SECOND ADDITION F. Preliminary Plat for Town Centre 100 Second Addition Consisting of 2 Lots for an Office and Bank and 1 Outlot on Approximately 4.9 Acres on Outlot A of Town Centre 100 First Addition --A public hearing was held by the Advisory Planning Commission at their May 27 meeting and due to a continuance, again at the June 24 meeting, to consider a preliminary plat entitled Town Centre 100 Second Addition. The Advisory Planning Commission is repoln- mending approval of the preliminary plat. Enclosed on page through Q is a copy of the updatedplanning report by he Planning De artment and the original Planning and Engineering report concerning the proposed preliminary plat. For additional information and action that was taken by the Advisory Planning Commission, refer to page(s) ld - Q ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the preliminary plat for Town Centre 100 Second Addition. 9x CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY PLAT - TOWN CENTRE 100 SECOND ADDITION APPLICANT: FEDERAL LAND CO LOCATION: M, SECTION 15 EXISTING ZONING: P.D. (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: DATE OF REPORT: REPORTED -BY: JUNE 24, 1986 : JUNE 18, 1986 PLANNING (JIM STURM) APPLICATION SUMMARY: At. the May 27 Planning Commission meeting, this Preliminary Plat application was continued to allow the applicant and their design team more time to detail the building structure and site plan layout on Lot 2. There was a concern • of the building/site size relationship and the amount of parking to meet Code requirements. A new site plan has been submitted along with a building. perspective that better illustrates the proposed finished product. LOT 1: Lot 1 will also be platted at this time. Signal Hills Bank will be building their headquarters here beginning later this year or early next year. They will be scheduled for the Advisory Planning Commission 8 City Council for site plan review - for the drive-thru facility and proposed signage. Enclosed are "preliminary only." drawings for your review. The architectural styling has been approved by the bank and the overall site layout will change in detailing only. LOT 2: The basic layout has not changed but an addition 15'. have. been added to the width of the lot. The 2 story bank building • will contain approximately. 13,300 S.F. and !have its main access at the SE corner.. Code required one parking stall for each 150 S.F. of .net leasable office space. At- the 80o ratio, .86 stalls would be required; 67 are shown. All building and parking setbacks meet Code requirements. A preliminary landscape plan has been submitted. The proposed trash enclosure is shown 20' from. the Town Centre Drive property line and will need year=round screening if kept in this location. Staff recommends -that this trash enclosure be incorporated into the building itself for both convenience and aesthetic reasons. Berming will be necessary along Town Centre Drive as will a 5' Sidewalk on Lots 1 8 2 and the Outlot. CONDITIONS; 1. The developer shall be responsible for a 6' sidewalk along Town Centre Drive. 2. A detailed landscape plan shall be submitted, bonded and not released until after a full year from the time of installation. 3. All standard plat conditions shall be adhered to. 9� � -w R Lim W. 0 0 I I zd� 114'.1 1 z - "". I TOWN LE TRE FRof;. fwPI EAGhN; MNCOAD NAT�ck ARCHITECTS INC. H -el H r IIG• NATWICK ARC i^ � r• �:'�wt,1�, � Ail la+ s�¢'�j•i"�7�9. r., 4„ - � ( / 5^' ./ .4,+JiF4 i �Yi fj � v4 :i+ y ie � +. r :l• -r, ,ty�$ y S�''�� i -�, y,".� Samara+:- SY:. r'- :✓1'� .. .�1;� d �t a- v v"`.__ �k'7fU ��u-[. t' i ��"p E::�G. �.. � •$: ...A1.1u l n.. �.. ( H + ., dt �•✓,. 17�CL �%" � .�C_..-•T r : l�M1T�.:+i C�.�1. �: 4 :.v : 7�!�§f. ��7 i+1 � ��. �i:� '.t. Mat 4 L" G e•p� ;�Y f, I "`°,'C"y2L � r rl(�y.+ I �� r.y LI Y ri'["'.(� aI" A:f"�•i/ �•�(C [/i•J r CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY PLAT - TOWN CENTRE 100 2ND ADDN. APPLICANT: FEDERAL LAND COMPANY LOCATION: N', SECTION 15 EXISTING ZONING: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (COMMERCIAL SHOPPING CTR) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING:. MAY 27, 1986 DATE OF REPORT: -MAY 22,, 1986 REPORTED BY: PLANNING & ENGINEERING APPLICATION: An application has been submitted by Federal Land ® Company requesting- Preliminary Plat approval for Town Centre 100 2nd Addn. The site consists of 2 lots and an outlot totaling 4.94 acres. Lot 1 contains 2.25 acres and a bank is being proposed on this site. Lot 2, 1.0 acre, will be an office building and reviewed in detail later in this report. The outlot -will con- sist of 1.69 acres and no specific use has been designated at this time. This area is.zoned CSC within the Planned Development. The site is surrounded by roads on all four sides: Yankee Doodle Road to the north, Town Centre Dr. to the south and east, and Denmark Avenue to the west. The area is quite flat and there is no significant vegetation to be concerned with. Lot 2 A two-story brick office building containing 14,400 sq. ft. ® is being proposed on this lot. Access is from a single 24' drive from Town Centre Dr. This entry drive narrows to 20' along the western edge of the building and should be enlarged to 24' to permit safe 2 -way vehicular movement. Also, staff is recommending the elimination of several parking stalls to allow for safe 'backing out' situations. (See site plan.) City Code requires 1 stall per 150 sq. ft. of net leasable floor area in office buildings. With an 80% 'net' ratio, 77 -stalls are required. 69 were shown on the submitted site plan before the staff recommendation. The building coverage is 17%; 30% is allowed in CSC districts. All building and parking setbacks meet Code requirements. GRADING/DRAINAGE: Town Centre 100 Addition addressed the grading and drainage concerns for this parcel, Outlot A. Staff will review the site plan -with more specific grading and drainage plans over Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, of the 2nd Addn. during the building permit review process. UTILITIES: The City installed sanitary sewer and water main within Denmark Ave., Town Centre Dr., and Town Centre Dr. West last summer under City Contract 85-8. _ STREETS: The City also constructed Town Centre Dr. and Town Centre Dr. West under City Contract 85-8 last summer. The completion of this contract is scheduled for this summer. The City constructed Denmark Avenue under City Contract 85-9, also last summer. The final wear course is scheduled to be installed on Denmark Ave. this summer. Denmark Ave. is a 52' wide City collector street. Town Centre Dr. and Town Centre Dr. West are 48' wide City commercial streets capable of handling 4 lanes of traffic. Yankee Doodle Road borders this development along the north and is under the jurisdiction of Dakota County Highway Department. The County will maintain a controlled access along this area between Denmark Ave. and Town Centre Dr. West. - Staff recommends one access maximum on Denmark Ave. This access must line up directly across from the previously approved Burger King access. Along Town Centre Dr., staff recommends that Lot 1, Block 2, have a maximum of 2 driveway accesses onto Town Centre Dr. and Lot 2 have one access onto Town Centre Dr. The setback for a driveway from Denmark Ave. must be a minimum of 100' from the east concrete curb and gutter on Denmark Ave. to the curb return radius on Town Centre Dr. 11 The Town Centre 100 Addition development dedicated all the necessary public right-of-way and easements with the exception of O the drainage and utility easements along the interior lot lines. ASSESSMENTS: City assessment records indicate area related assessments have been levied over Town Centre 100 Addition at the appropriate rates. /Or that all trunk Outlot A of the E CONDITIONS: 1. Lot 1, Block 1, shall have a maximum of 1 driveway along Denmark Ave. in line with the previously approved Burger King driveway and a maximum of 2 driveway accesses along Town Centre Dr. with the appropriate setbacks and separations, and Lot 2, Block 1, be allowed 1 access driveway onto Town Centre Dr. with the appropriate separation. _ 2. All standard plat conditions shall be adhered to. 3. A detailed grading and erosion control plan be submitted for approval by staff. 4. A detailed landscape plan and financial guarantee shall be submitted and not released until 1 year after completion. The landscape plan shall be submitted on an approved grading plan at the time of final plat. 102,-- • r, �Q/ ® EXHIBIT "B" i / )'Auxjg DOODLE COAD (CDLWrr FOLD HC 21)-- v ouuuou ,1 O .rjLA0OLlU42Q yipcn auooLr>au�2-CAC UQER. Pwrra rflur rc 4o ra a y wil It 1.CSc USES / • • 2 _Lc 6_C._v E Ea // ` j.OENE RAL BUSINESS / �onanvarvoav\C fuu=auvu�ovvvo�ql p.LiMITED SI SIHF6S a Y.Yti O, •�{�. T•r . R 4.•-•w. WYi wmmn®nrf7.l',aw smm�ae0mms J c � � •'~• ....... T. LiM/TED BUS,NESB oil / // •a / � e�^ JM tO to m In 1Y•2792! m 2* Ci n\4a12� a 2znnn _. PROPOSED SKEPCH PLAN EAGAN HEIGHTS COMMERCIAL PARK _ • A PLANNED UNIT.DEVELOPMENT -�.�.. BY THE. FEDERAL_.LAND_COMPANY_-•_ -. LOCATEA W c _GAOANr.M.tNNEBOTA_..—__ / ■ ■ �p 1 Ills S. 0\ IS 4rec USES Q Jim, "`• . rt IBI In a 10!1 qs Te r_ouww L I� 0 0 amts P�aem 4'% � ..' L 1. - / 11nnrmr•anoa"mum now ►ammm®rrd _ _ .. N.1.1'....r• w � W(LI uat Y• .. •-•u-.. rw A � •0 Y.Yti O, •�{�. T•r . R 4.•-•w. WYi wmmn®nrf7.l',aw smm�ae0mms J c � � •'~• ....... T. LiM/TED BUS,NESB oil / // •a / � e�^ JM tO to m In 1Y•2792! m 2* Ci n\4a12� a 2znnn _. PROPOSED SKEPCH PLAN EAGAN HEIGHTS COMMERCIAL PARK _ • A PLANNED UNIT.DEVELOPMENT -�.�.. BY THE. FEDERAL_.LAND_COMPANY_-•_ -. LOCATEA W c _GAOANr.M.tNNEBOTA_..—__ / ■ ■ �p 1 Ills S. 0\ IS 4rec USES Q Jim, "`• . rt IBI In a 10!1 qs Te r_ouww L I� 0 0 amts P�aem 4'% � ..' L 1. - / 11nnrmr•anoa"mum now ►ammm®rrd _ _ .. N.1.1'....r• w � W(LI uat Y• .. •-•u-.. rw _ DAKOTA COUNTY ROAD NO. 28 _ YANKEE DOODLE ROAD IIII , • T 0 W N I E II T R E I� ti 1 � 2 I, OUTLOT I0 !I T l Q BLOCK II II I - I I lil I r - 3 O r I TOWN 'j CENTRE DRIVE 1 mu.l...l rw .I \T mrr 1...N YOAIr • N 1 r•e se.Y w rm .rns _. - . �•. 1. Y .r1Y.Y 1. 1. rr. 1l rr ...IYr. W rlllir r.rer rwYle r..nrr..ai.eY. 7 .1 aUr I .... rrb..r 1. W rW Y wr �� le rrb .ewr� iiJJ w 1. 1 MAY 1.n. LSA • '; 1 M ...I.r l 41.100 w. w. 11 Mi. •.1 .. .au • n.r. w.n. ., 4iln. � � M.0 Mlaa Fill roue A � �• �'���, 110dRAA UIdw1 eY. r0e Or14 e1Y1i rY1.0/Ir '..'a( J/2 _-� �/�•-j� Ir.OY� . 7 rrlrrr • YANKEE DOODLE RD. _ LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT L BLOC[ 1 TOWN CLYTIIL 100 SECOND 000 SITE DATA BUILDING 0119 OO 1 00 o011F100 OOOCLO LO TOTAL 00. TLOT 00 OVILI00 10,000 OYILOIOO COYOOAO■ 11�. SCALE; 1- 30' 1, 1 a WEST --- -- -- EEO, • �m APC Minutes June 24, 1986 3. Paragraph 6 be revised to indicate that the agreement "shall" be recorded. . 4. Clarification that there will be no deviations from the locations indicated on the exhibit or exhibits. 5. The exhibit or exhibits shall be of sufficient size to clearly indicate the exact location of signs including distances from lot lines and right-of-ways. 6. The agreement shall indicate that -the original full-size layout plan be on record and on file with the City. All voted yea. Dale Runkle then indicated to the Planning Commission that a ® representative of Arby's, Mr. Doug Kennedy, was present requesting verification as to the location of the pylon sign on the Arby's lot. Voracek moved, Wilkins seconded the motion to recommend approval of the Arby's pylon sign as described in the Town Centre Eagan Pylon Sign Agreement, assuming that when completed, the exhibits accurately depict the location of said sign in accordance with previous requests. All voted in favor. TOWN CENTRE 100 SECOND ADDITION - FEDERAL LAND CO. - PRELIMINARY PLAT Chairman Harrison next convened the public hearing regarding Town Centre 100 Second Addition's request for preliminary plat consisting of two lots for an office and bank, with one outlot for future commercial development, resulting from a replat of Outlot A, Town Centre 100 First Addition, located in part of the northwest quarter of Section 15, in the southeast quadrant of Yankee Doodle Road and Denmark Avenue. ® City Planner Runkle introduced the proposal indicating that the lot for the proposed office did now include a site plan showing 67 parking spaces, only four short of the required number. Reduction was requested by staff for additional green space and ease of turn -around. He also indicated that at this time it was proposed that a second lot for the Signal Hills Bank be proposed for preliminary plat, although it was not necessary for the bank to go forward at this time. However, he advised the Planning Commission that the plans were basically complete and complied with staff recommendations. In addition, the proposal would be back before the Commission and City Council for the required conditional use permit for a drive -up facility. Mr. Charles Bartholdi appeared on behalf of Federal Land Company and explained Federal Land's role as owner of Outlot A, Town Centre 100 2nd Addition, being divided into three parcels for the Signal Hills Bank facility on the west end, an office building in the middle, and proposed restaurant site on the east end. He also indicated that the middle lot had been widened 15 feet to accommodate more green space, parking and traffic flow. Mr. John Natwick, architect for the proposed builder of the office building, was present to address questions and indicated the location of the entrances and designs in relation to Yankee Doodle Road. Mr. Dave Anderson was present on behalf of Signal Hills Bank. It was indicated that in addition to the �d g 2 APC Minutes June 24, 1986 preliminary plat, a variance from the parking requirements would be necessary. Mulrooney moved, Voracek seconded the motion to recommend approval of Town Centre 100 Second Addition, consisting of Lots 1 and 2, and Outlot A for future commercial development, subject to the following conditions: 1. Lot 1, Block 1, shall have a maximum . of l driveway along Denmark Avenue in line with the previously approved Burger King driveway and a maximum of 2 driveway accesses along Town Centre Dr, with the appropriate setbacks and separations, and Lot 2, Block 1, be allowed 1 access driveway onto Town Centre Drive with the appropriate separation. 2. All standard plat conditions shall be adhered to. 3. A detailed grading and erosion control plan shall be submitted for approval by staff. 4. A detailed landscape plan and financial guarantee shall be submitted • and not released until one year after completion. The landscape plan shall be submitted on an approved grading plan at the time of final plat. 5. The developer shall be responsible for a 6 foot sidewalk along Town Centre Drive. 6. The trash container shall be incorporated into the building for the convenience of the occupants, and aesthetics of the site. All voted yes. Mulrooney moved, Hall seconded the motion to recommend approval of the variance for a reduction of 4 parking spaces based on staff recommendations regarding green space. All voted yea. OVERBILL PROPERTIES, INC. - REZONING 49 The public hearing was then convened regarding the request of Overhill Properties, Inc. for rezoning from R-2 to R-1 for Lots 1, 2, 5, 6, and 7 of Block 2, Overhill Farms 1st Addition, located in part of the southwest quarter of Section 25, in the northeast quadrant of Dodd and Cliff Roads, by Chairman Harrison. City Planner Runkle introduced the request and indicated the staff's recommendation that two duplex lots remain to the west of the existing duplex lots for continuity and flow. Mr. Dave Dehler appeared indicating that Lot 1 was perhaps too small for a twin home. The Commission discussed the Comprehensive Guide which indicated that the property was designated R -II. Hall moved, Mulrooney seconded the motion to recommend approval of the rezoning of Lots 5, 6, and 7 with Lots 1 and 2 remaining as duplex lots, pursuant to staff recommendation, and due to the size of Lot 2 and the triple frontage of Lot 1. Mulrooney and Hall voted in favor; Voracek, Wilkins and Harrison voted against. Wilkins then moved to rezone Lots 1, 2, 5, 6, and 7, Block 2 to R-1 Single Family, Harrison seconded the motion. Harrison, Voracek and Wilkins voted in favor; Hall and Mulrooney voted against. /0/ 3 Agenda Information Memo July 1, 1986, City Council Meeting Page Twenty -Five MUNICIPAL FEE POLICY G. Municipal Fee Policy --During 1985, Administrative Assistant Hohenstein made great strides in developing a master policy for the purpose of consolidating certain fees and licenses throughout the City. Action was taken by the City Council as a result of that study to update many of the fees that were inappropriate for certain licenses and permits,. A Municipal Fee Policy was prepared by Administrative 'Assistant Hohenstein and was reviewed by all department heads that will provide a uniform structure for all fees comprised within a single comprehensive document. It is also the intent of the City Administrator that all fees be evaluated as a part of the budget process to more closely forecast ope,rat,ing revenues. For a copy of the Municipal Fee Policy, refer to pages 4// through //7,- for your review. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To Municipal Fee Policy as presented.. • approve or deny the MUNICIPAL FEE POLICY I. PURPOSE The purpose of the policy is to provide a uniform structure for municipal fees comprised within a single comprehensive document. The fee schedule document_ will be reviewed with a consideration for amendment on a regular basis. All amendments shall incorporate the entire remainder of the schedule such that it can be updated only as a whole. In this way,the City may maintain and update its fee schedule in a timely and consistent manner. II. POLICY It is the policy of the City of Eagan to maintain a comprehensive and current schedule of all municipal fees. ® The fee schedule will be reviewed and updated as a part of the annual budget preparation process. This will facilitate the regular consideration of fee levels relative to City costs and comparative fee levels. The City will be better able to guage the propriety of its fees and to anticipate its revenues. III. PROCEDURE Policy implementation shall be accomplished as follows: A. Objectives 1. To maintain a current comprehensive fee schedule for City Hall and public use. 2. To maintain continuity between departments' fees through comprehensive review. 3. To streamline the fee amendment process by establishing a uniform procedure and specific deadline ® for recommended changes. B. Fees Included All fees charged by the City, including but not limited to those for licenses, permits, goods, and services of the City, are covered by this policy. C. Effective Data The comprehensive municipal fee schedule is in effect as of January 1, 1986. A copy of the current schedule is attached. Any amendments to the schedule must replace the document in its entirety. Amendments will take effect on January 1 of the year following their approval. D. Amendment Procedures The comprehensive fee schedule will be reviewed each August as a part of the Annual Municipal Budget preparation. All changes or additions anticipated for the following year must be recommended at that time. The only exceptions to this deadline are the water and sewer rates which are determined upon approval of the utility budget. These fees must be presented for Council approval in or before December of each year to be included in the following year's schedule. Failure MUNICIPAL FEE POLICY PAGE 2 to submit and effect recommended changes on these deadlines will result in their continuation until the next budget review of schedule amendments. E. Resolution to Amend With the exception of liquor related fees, which are defined within the City Code, all fees listed in the Comprehensive Fee Schedule are amendable through a resolution of the City Council. Itis the policy of the City of Eagan to include the entire fee schedule with approved changes in each resolution to amend. In this way, the fee schedule is reauthorized in its entirety, thereby eliminating a proliferation of resolutions covering the schedule's discrete elements. The City may prepare such amendments only as necessary to correspond with the deadlines above. IV. RESPONSIBILITY The City Clerk/Finance Director, or designee, shall be responsible for the .coordination of the comprehensive fee schedule and its amendment. As with other budget expenditures and revenues, all fee recommendations shall channel through this office. V. AUTHORITY This policy has been authorized by the City Administrator upon review by the management staff. APPROVED DATE 11 Agenda Information Memo July 1, 1986, City Council Meeting Page Twenty -Six PUBLIC 'IMPROVEMENT CONTRACTS Item 1. Contract 86-10, Award Contract (Eagandale Center- Industrial Park - Storm Sewer) --On May 6, 1985, the Council received the bids for the installation of storm sewer to service the southern portion of Eagandale Center Industrial Park. However, the contract documents provided that the contract -.would not be awarded until such time that the Council could complete the final assessment hearing process. The final assessment hearing for both projects incorporated by this public improvement contract are being addressed earlier on this agenda. If the public hearing and two final assessment hearings are all completed and subsequently approved by Council action, it would then be appropriate to proceed with • the official award of contract to allow construction to begin. Enclosed on pageis a copy of the bids received showing a comparison of th low bidder to the estimates contained in the feasibility report presented at the respective public hearings for each project. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: Award Contract 86-10 (Eagandale Industrial Park/[Vest Service Road - Storm Sewer) to F.F. Jedlicki in the amount of $264,188.50 and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. �/3 � PROJECT F EAGAN T NO. 86- USTRIAL P, NO. 458 ICE ROAD N0. 471 T ADDITI01 D. 442-R '.MPROVEMEN .NNESOTA Our File No. 49370 BID TIME: 10:30 A.M., C.D.S.T_ BID DATE: Thursday Mav 1 1986 TOTAL BASE BID $264,188.50 ® Project 458 BID 212,094.50 -ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE 263,040.00 FEASIBILITY REPORT ESTIMATE 314,570.00 Under Engineer's Estimate -19.4% Under Feasibility Report Est. -32.6% 4792d 279,267.45 292,071.75 292,407.00 294,237.00 303,023.15 309,295.65 315,675.00 '117.745 48 324,044.75 341,243.15 342,368.48 369,454.40 Project 471 Project 442R CONTRACTORS - No Addendum 1. F.F. Jedlicki 5% United Pacific 31,679.00 2. Danner Trucking 5% Aetna -32.9% 3. Northdale Construction 5% Transamerica • 4, Rice Lake Contracting 5% Wausau 5. Crossings, Inc. 5% United St, Fidelity 6. Arcon Construction 5% Wausau 7• L & G Rehbein 5% United Fire 8. Nodland Associates 5% United Fire 9. Orfei & Sons 5% Capital 10. Barbarossa & Sons 5% St. Paul Fire 11. Encon Utilities 5% Capital No Addendum 12. J.P. Norex 5% Reliance No Addendum 13. Ceca Utilities 5% United St. Fidelity Our File No. 49370 BID TIME: 10:30 A.M., C.D.S.T_ BID DATE: Thursday Mav 1 1986 TOTAL BASE BID $264,188.50 ® Project 458 BID 212,094.50 -ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE 263,040.00 FEASIBILITY REPORT ESTIMATE 314,570.00 Under Engineer's Estimate -19.4% Under Feasibility Report Est. -32.6% 4792d 279,267.45 292,071.75 292,407.00 294,237.00 303,023.15 309,295.65 315,675.00 '117.745 48 324,044.75 341,243.15 342,368.48 369,454.40 Project 471 Project 442R 28,754.00 23,340.00 34,560.00 34,800.00 31,679.00 33,800.00 -16.8% -32.9% - 9.2% -30.9% Agenda Information Memo July 1, 1986, City Council Meeting Page Twenty -Seven PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT CONTRACTS CONT''D. Item 2. Contract 86-8, Receive Bids/Award Contract (Sealcoating)- At 10:30 a.m. on Friday, June 27, formal bids were received for the 1986 sealcoating_ program. Enclosed on page 114 is a bid tabulation showing the relationship -0f the low bid to the 1986 budget. All bids will be checked for accuracy .on their extensions and additions and a formal recommendation will be made at the July 1 meeting. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the bids for ® Contract 86-8 (1986 Sealcoating) , award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. • CITY OF EAGAN CONTRACT 86-08 1966 SEALCOAT Bid Opening: 10:30 a.m. CDST Bid Date: June 27, 1986 FIRM BID ALLIED BLACKTOP CO. $69,775.58 BUFFALO BITUMINOUS INC. $73,833.36 BITUMINOUS ROADWAYS $88,630.00 HI -WAY SURFACING CO. No Bid ENGINEER'S EST. $112,700 BUDGET (Gen Fund -$61,000) $122,000 (Maj St Fund -$61,000) 0 Agenda Information July 1, 1986, City Page Twenty -Eight Memo Council Meeting PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT CONTRACTS CONT'D. Item 3. Contract 86-11, Receive Bids/Award Contract (Williams & LaRue, Wyndham Corporate Center - Utilities) --At 10:30 a.m. on Friday, June 27, formal bids were received for the installation of sanitary sewer to service the Williams and LaRue Addition and the Wyndham Corporate Center along with other minor miscel- laneous improvements. Enclosed on page //;T is a copy of the bid tabulation showing the relationship of the low bidder to the estimate contained in the feasibility report for each, of the respective projects combined under this City contract. All easements have been acquired to allow the progression of this improvement. All bids will be checked for accuracy on extensions and additions and a formal recommendation will be presented by the Public Works Director at the July 1 meeting. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: Receive the bids for Contract 86-11 (Williams and LaRue, Wyndham Corporate Center -Utilities), award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. 117 Our File No. 49375 crrx cuNTRACT No. 86-11 WILLIAMS 6 LARUE 2nd ADDIT PROJECT No. 450 WYNDNAM CORPORATE CENTEE PROJECT No. 464 1TILITY 6 s,rRFFT Tmuunvcuc BID TIME: 10:30 A.M. C.D.S.T BID DATE: Friday, June 27 1986 CONTRACTORS TOTAL BASE BID I. S.P. Norex $172,387.20 2. Northdale Construction 191,757.00 3. Burschville Construction 199,479.00 4. 0 & P Contracting 202,937.95 5. Brown Cris 210,457.20 6. S.J. Louis Constr. 227,348.60 7. Ceca Utilities 244,462.60 PROJ. 450 PROJ. 464 Base Bid $91,547.05 $80,840.15 Engineers Est. 84,000 81,000 Feasibility Rept. Est. 84,050 83,600 over Engineer Est. +9% —0.2% over/under Feasibility Rept. Est. +9% —3.3% ire ADMINISTRATIVE AGENDA REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING EAGAN, MINNESOTA JULY 1, 1986 CITY ATTORNEY 1. YD Associates Assessment Appeal - Coachman Road/Project #348 2. O'Neil Lawsuit Update CITY ADMINISTRATOR 1. E.A.W. - Bur Oak Hills 2. Change Order #1, Contract 86-1 3. Athletic Site/Land Purchase Update 4. Resolution in Support of Northwest Orient & Republik Airlines 5. Comparable Worth Update & Review DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS 1. Contract 85-21, Approve Plans/Authorize Advertisement for Bids (Maintenance Facility Expansion) 2. Contract 86-13, Approve Cost Participation - Williams Brothers Pipeline (Wescott Road) /3� MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCILMEMBERS FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: JUNE 20, 1986 SUBJECT: ADMINISTRATIVE AGENDA CITY ATTORNEY Item 1.. YD Associates. -Assessment Appeal - Coachman Road/Project #348 --City Attorney Hauge has, requested that the YD Associates assessment appeal proposed settlement be placed on the agenda for review and consideration by the City Council. Please refer to pages-Athrough1<Z1 for a copy of a letter from Paul explain- ing the issue and request for settlement. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the YD Associates assessment appeal for Coachman Road, Project #348. Item 2. Robert O'Neil vs City of Eagan --Enclosed on page is a copy of a memo that was prepared by the City Attorney regarding the Robert O'Neil vs City of Eagan lawsuit. Paul will provide any further update regarding the status of this lawsuit. CITY ADMINISTRATOR Item 1. E.A.W. for Bur Oak Hills --The City Planner is requesting authorization to provide a negative declaration for the Bur ' Oak Hills development. Attached on page �1is a copy of a memo from the City Planner regarding this matter. Mayor Blomquist stated that John Tapper, representing Gopher Smelting, had con- tacted her during the past few days and asked that the Bur Oak Hills development be zoned industrial instead of residential. His request for the City's zoning that property .industrial relates to Gopher Smelting's plans for future expansion. If the Bur Oak Hills area were zoned industrial, there would be less objection for Gopher Smelting's expansion plans. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the E.A.W. for Bur Oak Hills as presented. Item 2. Change Order #1, Contract 86 -1 --The Director of Parks & Recreation is requesting authorization for the Change Order in the amount of $2,666.39 to Contract 86-1. For a review of the three (3) items that total the amount of the Change Order at Quarry Hill Park, refer to the attachment on page as prepared by the Director of Parks & Recreation. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny Change Order #1 for Contract 86-1 in the amount of $2,666.39. 13� ADMINISTRATIVE AGENDA PAGE TWO Item 3. Athletic Sites/Land Purchase Update --During the past year and one-half, the Director of Parks & Recreation and parks and recreation advisory commission has been reviewing options for the acquisition and development of a second athletic complex. Numerous options and locations have been given consideration,. The Commission has now narrowed their recommendation and the Director of Parks & Reoreation would like an opportunity to discuss their recommendation with the City Council. Due to other activi- ties occurring during the normal time for Department Head Business and given the nature of the recommendation, the Director of Parks & Recreation has asked to appear later on the City Council agenda. For information regarding the Commission's recommendation, refer to pages through Z�Z q The Director of Parks & Recre- ation will be prepared to make a presentation or answer questions whichever is desired by the City Council. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To provide direction to Parks & Recreation Director and Advisory Commission regarding further negotiations and a purchase agreement for acquisition of certain sites to be used as an athletic field complex in the future. Item 4. Resolution in Support of Northwest Orient/Republic Airlines --As a part of the informative memo, referenced as page 119, the paragraph suggested that future consideration of a resolution in the support of the Northwest Orient/Republic Airlines merger be given consideration on a future agenda. The airport advisory committee did act in support of this resolution, a copy is attached on pages through /s/ , at their meeting on June 26. Since a decision is anticipated by the end of July and the Minnesota Senators are asking for letters of support, the item was placed on the Administrative Agenda for consideration. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the resolution in support of the Northwest Orient/Republic Airlines. Item 5. Comparable Worth Update and Review --A comparable worth report was distributed with the June 17, 1986, City Council packet. The City Administrator would like an opportunity to answer any questions the report may have raised in the minds of the City Council and further, receive direction regarding the Personnel Committee's involvement with review and future consideration of the comparable worth results. Personnel Committee Chairman Tom Egan and the City Administrator will comment on a process that can be effective as the City Council further reviews and considers the adoption of a plan for paying all. employees a comparable salary for a position of comparable value. /3 ADMINISTRATIVE AGENDA PAGE THREE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS 1. Contract 85-21, Approve Plans/Authorize Advertisement for Bids (Maintenance Facility Expansion) --At the June 3 meeting, the Council approved the revised concept design for the remodeling and expansion of the maintenance facility under Contract 85-21. Enclosed on pagesthrough are copies of the final layout configuration and site plan which will be discussed in further detail at the.- Council meeting. Also, the architect will have a revised cost estimate based on these final plans which will be discussed at the time of plan review. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the plans for Contract 85-21 (Maintenance Facility Expansion) and authorize the advertisement for a bid opening to be held at 2.00 p.m. July 29, 1986. 2. Contract 86-13, Approve Cost Participation - Williams Brothers Pipeline (Wescott Road) --On June 17, the Council awarded the contract for the upgrading of Wescott Road from Lexington Avenue to one-half mile east. As a part of this road improvement, it will be necessary to relocate certain sections of the existing Williams Brothers Pipeline that are located outside of the old right-of-way limits. As a condition of allowing City work within their exclusive easements within recent dedicated public right-of- way, Williams Brothers requires City cost participation of approxi- mately $17,00'0 to relocate their existing facilities' to match the new grade and profile elevations. Williams Brothers will adjust the pipeline located within the old right-of-way by mainte- nance personnel of the Williams Brothers Pipeline subject to execution of this cost participation agreement. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the cost partici- pation agreement with Williams Brothers Pipeline for Contract 86-13 (Wescott Road) and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. /s/ Thomas L. Hedges City Administrator 13� HAUGE, EIDE & HELLER, P. A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW WATER -VIEW -OFFICE TOWER. SUITE 303 1200 YANKEE DOODLE ROAD EAGAN. MINNESOTA 55123 PAUL H. HAUGE KEVIN W. EIDE DAVID G. KELLER LORI M. BELLIN MICHAELJ. MAYER June 20, 1986 Thomas Hedges Eagan City Administrator 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55121 RE: YD Associates Assessment Appeal - Coachman Road - Project #348 Dear Tom: Issue: AREA CODE 612 TELEPHONE 456-9000 454-4224 On Thursday, June 19, 1986, Rich Hefti and I appeared in the Dakota County District Court on the assessment appeal brought by YD Associates consisting of Bill Muske and Vance Grannis as owners of the approximately 5 acre commercial parcel at the northeast corner of Coachman Road and Yankee Doodle Road. Project #348 is the project for the upgrading of Coachman Road accomplished in 1985 with the assessment hearing held in September of 1985. You may recall that the owners did not submit written objections at the time of the hearing and claimed that they did not receive written notice of the hearing, although the City records and Affidavit of Mailing indicates that Notices were sent for the two parcels involved. Appraisal and Assessment: Bill Cushman, an appraiser for Dakota County for the Yankee Doodle Road upgrading for the mile lying adjacent to the YD Associates property, was asked about a month ago to do an appraisal for the City for the purpose of the assessment appeal. The following includes the information relating to the assessments levied and the Cushman appraisal: PARCEL NO. 010-01 Triangular parcel 25,960 sq. ft. 011-52 Approximately 4 acres AMOUNT ASSESSED $11,775.67 $ 9,386.97 $21,162.64 l�z0 CUSHMAN APPRAISAL BENEFIT' $ 5,600.00 $ 9,386.97 $14,986.97 Thomas Hedges June 20, 1986 Page 2 Request for. Settlement: Prior to the Court trial on June 19, the property owners suggested that the compromise settlement would be as follows: Parcel 010-01 $ 5,600.00 Parcel 011=52 $ 4,458.00 The basis for the proposed settlement on parcel 011-52 is at the same percentage rate as on 010-01 and would again be reduced by an additional $4,928.00. In any event, the trial was held and Rich Hefti and I agreed that we would forward the request to the City Council and also ask that the property owners request permission to compromise based upon the total amount of the. Cushman appraisal of benefit, and each party react prior to the time that Judge Pav-lak renders his decision. I would appreciate if you would place this item on the Council Agenda for the July 1 meeting for consideration by the'City Council at that time. truly yours, GE, EIDEL�P.A. i" Paul H. Hauge PHH:ras Enclosure HAUGE', EIDE & HELLER, P. A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW WATER VIEW OFFICE TOWER, SUITE 303 1200 YANKEE DOODLE ROAD EAGAN, MINNESOTA, 55123 PAUL H. HAUGE 'iKEVIN W. EIDE DAVID G. KELLER LORI M. BELLIN MICHAEL J. MAYER Mr-. Thomas Hedges Eagan City Administrator 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 June 19, 1986 RE: Robert O'Neil vs. City of Eagan (Civil Action) Dear Tom: AREA CODE 812 TELEPHONE 456.9000 4544224' At the City Council meeting on June 17, 1986, the Council adopted a resolution to proceed with the Comprehensive Guide Planning, including commercial property, within the City. It is understood that the Council will be proceeding at a joint meeting of the Planning Commission on June 26, 1986, and that the planning staff will have material prepared at that time. I have talked with Chris Dietzen and Dave Sellergren of the Larkin, Hoffman office and eachhas�suggested that the Zouncil proceed with the Comp Guide review. Neither had any particular suggestions on the method of the Planning Commission and Council handling the commercial comprehensive plan revisions, but they indicated that the City should feel no pressure because of the outstanding lawsuit in proceeding or making their decision. If there are any other,comments or suggestions, I will certainly be in touch with you. PHH:ras Very truly yours, Zuau E & KELLER, P.A. i ge MEMO TO: THOMAS L HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM:, DALE C RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER DATE: JUNE 26, 1986 SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET FOR BUR OAK HILLS The environmental assessment review for Bur Oak Hills has been completed, and the 30=day review process ended on June 19, 1986. The resulting comments of this review process indicate additional review is not necessary or that a negative declaration be made for the Bur Oak Hills development, contingent on one finding by the Metropolitan Council. It was noted in the review process that the Bur Oak Hills development is in noise zone 4, according to the Airport Chapter of the development framework. Single family residential homes are provisional as long as certain criteria are adhered to. Staff has met with the Metropolitan Council and have resolved the issues of this EAW if the builder agrees to provide an interior noise level of the residential unit at a 45 decibel level. Marketing of the Bur Oak Hills Addition should indicate that there is a potential impact of noise from the airport and it is in noise zone 4, where the noise level is 65-70 dBA. With the developer adding these two conditions to the development, the EAW process is complete. City P1 nner DCR/jj lil3 CHANGE ORDER #1: CONTRACT 86 - 1 J.'. - Contract 86 - 1, 'Parks Construction Change Order #1 consists of three items, all of which are at Quarry Hill Park., The total amount of all three items amounts to $2,666.39. Item "A" is for an increase in sanitary sewer of 135 ft., 6" P.V.C., Bend and Riser; Item "B" is removal and salvage of cyclone fence, aggregate excavation and grading around well house; Item "C" is to raise an air. -relief manhole for the 12" water main which is within the park. Change Order Summary: "A" $1,591..75 "B" 500.00 "C" 574.64 Total: $2,666.39 FOR COUNCIL ACTION: To approve change order #1 for Contract 86 - 1 in the amount of $2,666.39. Original contract Change Order $313,753.81 2,666.39 Revised Contract $316,420.20 1�41 MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL TOM HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: KEN ORAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION DATE: JUNE 24, 1986 HE: ATHLETIC SITE/LAND PURCHASES - PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Parks System Plan completed in 1982 - 83, identified athletic needs for the City for the year 1990 and beyond. Facility planning efforts were based on a projected population of 37,500 for 1890, and 50,000 people for the year 2,000. Based on the athletic standards established and projected population, it was estimated that the City would require an additional fifty acres of usable athletic field space to meet 1990. (37,500 population) needs. A total of ninety acres was estimated to meet the year 2,000 (50,000 population) needs. However, it was then assumed that some of the athletic space needs could be shifted to neighborhood parks. While it was recognized that this was not desirable, the athletic space needs could be reduced to approximately thirty and fifty acres respectively. It was also assumed that the City would develop an aggressive approach to the development of neighborhood parks and the utilization of athletic facility developments for league play, by use from adults. Recognition of the need for athletic space of 30 acres by 1990 - 37,500 population, the Commission and Citizen Task Force recommended $450,000 be included in the Parks Bond Referendum for acquisition purposes. For the better part of a year and a half, the Advisory Parks and Recreation Commission has .spent many, many hours reviewing several site alternatives, possible designs, acquisition costs and projected costs for development. As the City Council 3s aware, the Commission previously recommended, and the Council has authorized the purchase of a 15 -acre parcel from the Ohmann Estate. Mrs. Lehmann, the property owner, continues to indicate her willingness to sell to the City, although no purchase agreement has been signed by the owner. Recent contact indicates that the estate is soon to be settled, and hopes of preceeding with the acquisition continues. With the proposed Fairway Hills Plat, the Commission has recommended that the proposed plan provide for a combination neighborhood park/soccer athletic field. / V5 Attached to this memorandum is the design schematic for this park. In making the recommendation of this site plan, the Commission has also reviewed the remaining deficiencies to meet the rapidly growing population needs. Based on the studies done by the Commission, they are recommending the City acquire the following parcels to meet the City's needs for athletic field space for both the immediate future and beyond. COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION 1. Fifteen (15) acre Ohmann parcel, to be developed as three soccer fields (youth) and neighborhood playground concept. (This will require a trade of five acres with Derrick Land Company as part of Fairway Hills Plat). 2. Acquisition of no less than seven (7) and no more than ten (1'0) acres of property adjacent to existing Northview athletic fields. This would provide for two (7 acres) or three (10 acres) softball fields., an expanded parking lot, and secondary access road, to the park. This acquisition would be contingent upon successful relocation of the Free Associations of Luthern Congregation's three acre parcel. (This three acres is part of the proposed acquisition with the remainder to be purchased from Jim Curry.) See Attachment B. for site plan. 3. That the Barr parcel, located on Highway #3, also be purchased for a ('future) athletic site. This is a forty-three acre parcel,, and is, currently being listed for sale. SUMMATION Commission is recommending the combined efforts to acquire the Ohmann and Northview, parcel. This should provide for three soccer and three softball fields; which would meet current need's. Also, acquire the Barr parcel for "future athletic site needs" beyond the 37,500 population threshold. COST The Commission's proposal for immediate acquisition of the Ohmann and Northview parcel would provide for approximately 25 acres with an expenditure of $375,000. The inclusion of the Barr parcel for future development is $225,000, or approximately $600,000 in total. All three parcels combined would provide .approximately sixty-eight (68) .gross acres, with -approximately - fifty-five (55) net, usable acres. All three acquisitions would meet both the immediate and future needs as identified in the Park Systems Plan. Funding for the $600,000. acquisition will be provided by the Parks Bond Fund of $450,000. and the remainder -from the Parks Site Fund. /9/1 FOR COUNCIL ACTION Staff is presenting the Commission's recommendations to the City Council for approval, in order that negotiations and a purchase agreement can be prepared for the acquisition of each site. Staff will provide additional information relative to each of the parcels, as well as additional explanation regarding current and future City needs. KV/bls 107 I OF wo-.I!l M, �8 0 Is j CITY OF RAGAN RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF THE WEST ORIENT AND REPUBLIC AIRLINES WHEREAS',, Northwest Orient and Repubic Airlines have proposed a merger of their companies and operations "and said merger is currently under review by various federal agencies; and WHEREAS, Northwest Orient Airlines is a new and welcome member of the Eagan business community; and WHEREAS, many businesses and residents of Eagan derive specific and direct benefit from the.operation of the airport and the merging airlines; and WHEREAS, the City of Eagan experiences a unique relationship with the Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport, being situated at the end of its principal arrival and departure runways; and WHEREAS, under the Preferential Runway System (PRS) of the airport, a majority of aircraft operations will continue to overfly a portion of the City; and WHEREAS, aircraft noise continues to be a serious issue affecting a significant portion of the City's residents; and WHEREAS, Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport serves as a hub for each of the merging airlines and that their hubbing operations represent well over half of all operations at the airport; and WHEREAS, the consolidation of duplicate operations with the same destination or origination point will reduce the number of a=ircraft operations at the airport; and WHEREAS, a reduction of the number of aircraft operations will have a direct, obvious and positive impact on the noise environment of the City; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Eagan supports the merger of Northwest Orient and Republic Airlines as a means of improving the efficiency and noise compatibility of the Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport's operations; and 1 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City supports those efforts which will bring about said merger in a timely manner and urges those agencies which are or will be reviewing the merger to facilitate its approval.and completion in the near future. MOTION MADE BY: SECONDED BY: THOSE IN FAVOR: THOSE OPPOSED: DATED: CITY OF EAGAN CITY COUNCIL By: Attest: Its Clerk CERTIFICATION I, E.J. VanOverbeke, Clerk of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota,, do hereby ce'rti.f'y that the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted by the City Council of the. City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, in a regular meeting thereof assembled this . day of , 1986. E.J. VanOverbeke, City Clerk City of Eagan �'5'/ 4*a� ............. ..... .... ... . .......... .- i VE111e S'17 -e- 124 7 T AM ALTEWATET x x Ll Nt oVF1 fiPAp OR. ON OV"A4'. •VK Roog PRWN VDG= n I w�x DwR ri I, II LJ ONR O I 9 I -1-4-,I—E%LSTIHG �•-J-: HCIST I I Trv. I u K H 1 Ki PtrvoeK _. _ _ VEH[CLE Na ProNG REPAIR LAD ,Fn -j BAY II I, II f II II I 11 Ll . 0 1/2 3410• I - O / \ r-1 FLOOR HOIST CUT tHTO 1 TO M. T Te 176 1 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE L REPAIR 128 o I LI O x I LJ LJ � ' W O I 9 I -1-4-,I—E%LSTIHG �•-J-: HCIST I I Trv. I u K H 1 Ki PtrvoeK _. _ _ VEH[CLE Na ProNG REPAIR LAD ,Fn -j BAY II _ II f II II I 1/2 3410• I ST.,O1 CHEW 36,000 HYDRAULIC FLOOR HOIST CUT tHTO 1 - X N d�I r�+C rvTwc mm rxna -LSr. EN�x2 -- VCff/CL �/�(PT /s y %DCPA-i/Z Ll 4D/v`LlNl,STIZA-F-/ . ON C�sr '--L002) 1 Ir+ ra �, fSTIBILILE im STAT IOL 14 Ill uu GENERI 1054P., OFF1C1 UTILITIESTREET 1 O 109 n' Y.y \ "STRECTA:UPERVISOR Ill. Q V PARKS SUPERvIro" — OF L PARM O A� 4 PLAN HALL F, 0-2 • .ele immimin RR O Ir 1'-1' 1R L11'IC Y'y� va va 20'--0' SCO VEHICLE MAIN L REPAI FIE —CONC. APRON — 50'-0' t Vn�c,s� �� oc�mrC� Bins, h �C( VENDIJd WST6AIRxirLHE I eon �% DN I z I I we 1 - a•e Ire I ' i VENDIJd WST6AIRxirLHE I eon �% DN I z I I we 1 F-1 AGENDA REGULAR MEETING EAGAN CITY COUNCIL EAGAN, MINNESOTA CITY HALL JULY 1, 1986 6:30 P.M. I. 6:30 - ROLL CALL & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE II. 6:32 - ADOPT AGENDA & APPROVAL OF MINUTES III. 6:35 - RETIREMENT/RECOGNITION OF EAGAN VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTERS BOB I GILES, JERRY ADAM,AND FIRE CHIEF BOB CHILDERS IV. 6:40 - RECEIVE BIDS/AWARD BOND SALE FOR $4,650,000 G.O. IMPROVEMENT BONDS, $3,000,000 MUNICIPAL STATE AID BONDS AND $700,000 TAX INCREMENT FINANCING BONDS FOR 1986 T. z III. 6:45 - DEPARTMENT HEAD BUSINESS IV. ,6}:55 - CONSENT AGENDA �15 A. Contractor Licenses p /0 B. Personnel Items C. Approve Final Plat, Town Center 70 -4th Addition I� /3 D. Project 478, Receive Report/Order Public Hearing, Windtree 7th Addition p14 E. Approve Grading Permit #EX -025-086, Overhill Farm 2nd Addition Ip./r� F. Public Improvement Final Acceptance, Blackhawk Oaks and Sunset / Addition p -1q G. Approve Grading Permit #EX 34-096, Fairway Hills Addition I !� H. Approve Grading Permit #EX 12-076, Burr Oaks Addition Ap./$ I. Approve Final Plat, Eagandale Lemay Lake 2nd Addition f,/7 J. Vacate Drainage and Utility Easement, Receive Petition/Order / Public Hearing, Eagandale Center Industrial Park #6 F./7 K. Vacate Ponding Easement, Receive Petition/Order Public Hearing, Lemay Lake Hills V. 7:00 - PUBLIC HEARINGS p•/V A. Public Hearing for Project 458, Eagandale Center Industrial Park / - Storm Sewer -Z� B. Final Assessment Hearing for Project 458, Eagandale Center / Industrial Park - Storm Sewer -Zq C. Final Assessment Hearing for Project 471, West Service Road - / Storm Sewer P.3r D. Public Hearing to Consider a Change in Inducement Resolution to Increase the Amount of Multifamily Housing Revenue Bonds from $10,000,000 to $11,875,000 for Thomas Lake Apartments (Dominium Group) VI, OLD BUSINESS P,39 A. Sign Policy Agreement for Town Centre 70 & 100_(Federal Land / Company) F -V9 B. Conditional Use Permit (Franchise Associates) To Allow a Drive - Through Arby's Restaurant and a 20' Pylon Sign Located on Lot 2, Block 1, Town Centre 70 3rd kddition, NW 1/4 of Sec. 15 / (Continued from the April 15, 1986, City Council Meeting) C. Review and Consideration of Temporary Advertising Sign Regulations (Continued from the June 17, 1986, City Council Meeting) VII. NEN BUSINESS P.66 A. Blue Bell Ice Cream Request to Allow On -Street Ice Cream Truck Sales p1 3 B. Variance (Richard Bakken) To Exceed 20% Building Lot Coverage on Lot 12, Block 1, Cinnamon Ridge, Located at Slater Road & Cinnamon Ridge Trail, SW 1/4 of Section 30 p.6 C. Variance (Frederick Dean) 12' Variance from the 40' Setback / Requirement Along Public Street, Lot 22, Block 2, Safari Estates First Addition, Located At Galaxie Avenue and Safari Trail, SW 1/4 of Section 32 2- D. Waiver of Plat (RMC Development Corp.) to Split Existing Duplex Lot, Lot 6, Block 1, Sun -Cliff First Addition, Located SW of Deer Hills Trail Abutting Sunrise Road, NW 1/4 of Sec.29 y.9Y E. Waiver of Plat (Sons Construction Company) to Split Existing / Duplex Lot, Lot 9, Block 1, Oakwood Heights 2nd Addition, .Located at Lynx Court and Cougar Drive, SW 1/4 of Section 25 P q� F. Preliminary Plat for Town Centre 100 Second Addition (Federal Land Company Consisting of 2 Lots for an Office & Bank and 1 Outlot on Approximately 4.9 Acres on Outlot A of Town Centre 100 First Addition, Located at Yankee Doodle Road and Denmark Avenue, Part of NW 1/4 of Section 15 �•//� G. Municipal Fee Policy VIII. ADDITIONAL ITEMS P,A A. Public Improvement Contracts p./1,31. Contract 86-10, Award Contract (Eagandale Center Industrial I Park - Storm Sewer //J 2. Contract 86-8, Receive Bids/Award Contract (Sealcoating) P /173. Contract 86-11, Receive Bids/Award Contract (Williams & LaRue, Wyndham Corporate Center - Utilities) IR. VISITORS TO BE HEARD (for those persons not on the agenda) X_ ADJOURNMENT MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCILMEMBERS FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: JUNE 26, 1986 SUBJECT: AGENDA INFORMATION ADOPT AGENDA/AP ROVE -MINUTES After approval is given to the July 1, 1986, agenda and regular City Council meeting minutes for the &une 17 meeting, the following items are in order for consideration: After twenty-three years as volunteer firefighters, Bob Childers ® and Jerry Adam are retiring. These two individuals were charter members of the first Eagan Fire Department. Bob Giles is also retiring from the volunteer Fire Department after 22 years. Chief Childers'last general meeting was held on June 23, at which time he and Jerry Adam': both received a standing ovation by their fellow firefighters for their years of public service and dedica- tion_ A plaque will be presented to Bob Childersin special recogni- tion, not only as a volunteer firefighter, but also as the Fire Chief. Framed certificates will be .g-iven to Jerry Adam and Bob Giles. All members of the volunteer Fire Department have been invited to attend the meeting for special recognition. ACTION TO BE. CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To accept the resignation of Bob Childers as the Eagan Fire Chief. At the June 3,, 1986 City Council meeting, a bond sale was set for the July 1, 1986 City Council meeting, at which time bids were to be received for three (3) separate public bond issues. The first issue is a $4,650,000 G.O. Improvement Bond which includes several public improvements of which the improvements and debt incurred for the payment of bond will be paid by special assess- ments, a $3,000,000 Municipal State Aid bond that will be used for various street improvements and the debt incurred will be paid through the annual receipt of future Municipal State Aid funding and a Tax Increment Bond in the amount of $700,000 to be used for various public improvements for the new Sperry sales and marketing facility and that debt will be paid utilizing 50% of the new tax increment. Bids will be received at noon on July 1 and tallied by the City's fiscal consultant, Miller and Schroeder Municipals Inc. The results of the bid each sale will be made available at the City Council meeting. Mr. Ernie Clark representing Miller and Schroeder Municipals Inc., will be present to review the bids. The Director of Finance and City Administrator will also participate Agenda Information Memo July 1,, 1986, City Council Meeting Page Two RECEIVE BIDS/AWARD BOND SALE CONT'D. in the bid opening and a review of the bids during Tuesday after- noon. Enclosed in each packet is a copy -of the bond perspectus that was prepared by Miller and Schroeder Municipals Inc., and mailed out to, perspective bond buyers for all three (3) issues. If, any member of the City Council would like additional information on any of the bonds that are being given consideration on Tuesday, feel free to contact the City Administrator's office,. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: 1) To most favorable bid for the $4,650,000 G.O. 2') To approve or deny the most favorable Municipal State Aid bond and 3) To approve able bid for the $700,000 Tax Increment used for the new Sperry facility. approve or deny the Improvement Bond sale, bid for the $3,000,000 - or deny the most favor - Financing bond to be 0 40 6. Agenda Information Memo July 1, 1986, City Council Meeting Page Three DEPARTMENT HEAD BUSINESS A. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT I. Stop Sign Petition '- Jade Lane a d Carnelian Lane --On June 3, the petition enclosed on pages 7d and 15 was received by staff requesting the installation of -a stop sign on Carnelian Lane at its intersection with Jade Lane. Enclosed on page 4 is a map showing the relationship of the requested stop sign to the existing stop signs at Nicols Road and Flint Drive and also shows the location of the 22 properties represented by the 24 signatures on the petition. In response to this petition, the letter enclosed on page � was sent to all signatories informing them of the staff's reOZ_ mendation and when this item would be formally considered by Council action. The existing stop sign on Carnelian at Flint Drive was installed as a result of a petition discussed in approximately 1980. At that time, there was concern expressed that with Carnelian being a neighborhood collector between Rahn Road and Nicols Road, the installation of excessive stop signs would be. detrimental to good traffic flow through the community. Therefore, based on previous discussion and present standards regarding the warrants necessary for the installation of a stop sign, staff cannot recom- mend concurrence with this petition request. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve/deny the installa- tion of a stop sign on Carnelian Lane at the intersection with Jade Lane. 0 r(CI UME J OILY 986 Date Received To Council 7�_/e_� 6 Approved PENTION STOP SIGN Ir Go%,v.t/L OF cY';4 D1T- 1- J �1 c l-lj L yel�YIv R/f IIAIv s/61vs o v [..l. I/we, the undersigned hereby petition the City Council of the City of Eagan to install stop signs on at the intersection with I/we,'request this installation for the following reasons: 1. �R� e�� iea �lu� C �o��nnC� Ce{i�D�gzr�1 Lr� N i� �L �y�gSl� InJ �G+rS 2. SChr"L hxS Ick-uP Aab (ZmLrasT- o -P Cycl�,zrrl/ 3. �ULiNl7 rr�T�rZSt✓CTiU,t� Al CRL'Nrz�i/jN L -N ffrt/D �/�D� Lti/. 4. �tSTgNC �Fr T� r� f �N STo� S'tG,JU �T Q/Tj`/�S�Cj�d,v o C4R1Ur3l1AtlJ Lnl. rL,nJT LM To I/we request that the City Council take this petition request under consideration at its earliest opportunity and that we be informed as to when it is scheduled so that we may appear in person if we so choose. NAME (Please print and initial) ADDRESS 2./C, �l rr7 /'J(/Jc'C?%,%� ✓�/�i' CL?✓�k'/�C.�1 ti3 «ro J<' C C oLJ d8 CC clue a�i3,�' CavhPliGh LGtan 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. S. 9. 10. h. 12. 2 ` X11/, t'-� �DQic55 O 9 /e'a •2y[e �ts�._ L /i/v e C6 3 Z©lff C CCL<Zl'CQv L�tIL� C(3__.�30 or lfG v G�3 �6v ®r I� 421 cJti v�cv� 0? 8n�� c.� `c � CG3 (S Va nt- qS — �b 117 _ 120-70 -2& 5 a-7 : o c / TL � �' C2C,c'�u�v ��� v2 l I � �•���°.,-.— e ��s 2 �z S 7 ^�•.,,.c, C 6 3 o s v 9 .51 j C je LU E TOI too _ O .SSr a .,. ; N• ,�.- tug 19 . .ae 4(1 ., ..t) 7 ! n t to J 23 a 2. ' ,L" 7 •••n1lyi / 6 `� B �/l. .1 �\ = Qii1\\ ♦f -�! i al • � j 3 • B • 9 11.E "'+a .p � /O �� - �i/ .a 4) 3 Z Z < w - Q . , ! 9. ss� /SAPPHIRE LANE S CNws,w, /• r 9 3q f a / , ,. - .�� a to -, • ( q A. eine'. Q 3 17 , . � q Y �� % _uui f t Tf (� /s • r , ko ✓. „•. G Z9 Q 3` �`jsY. .t ♦ c y 28 it of 3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD, PO. BOX 21199 EAGAN. MINNESOTA 55121 PHONE: (612) 454-8100 June 17, 1986 Re: Stop Sign Petition - Jade Lane & Carnelian Lane Dear Petitioner: BEA BLOMQUIST Mwor THOMAS EGAN JAMES A. SMITH MC ELLISON THEODORE WACHTER Coun l Members THOMAS HEDGES CIN A minislmlor EUGENE VAN OVERBEKE CIN Cleik Recently, the City received a petition with your -signature requesting the installation of a stop sign at the intersection of Jade Lane and Carnelian. This letter is to inform you that this petition will be presented to the Council at their regular meeting of July 1, 1986, at 6:30 p.m., for formal consideration. The City has adopted standard conditions and warrants which must be met before the installation of stop signs can be recommended. These conditions and warrants incorporate many of the criteria contained in the Uniform Traffic Control Devices, published by the Department of Transportation. Our Engineering Division has reviewed this intersection and has been unable to identify any of the specific conditions or warrants that would justify the installation of a stop sign. While the City recognizes the concerns listed under the reasons for signing the petition, in order to maintain uniformity necessary to ensure compliance with all traffic regulations, the staff cannot recommend approval when your request is considered at the July 1 meeting. In relationship to the "Children Playing" sign as requested, the City installs these signs only at designated playground, school, etc., locations where the congregation of children for extended periods of time are expected. To place these type of warning signs at every school bus stop location, or randomly through residential areas, would cause confusion to the travelling public and tend to de -emphasis the importance of these signs at their proper locations as mentioned previously. I regret that the staff cannot support your request as submitted. However, this letter is meant to provide you information regarding the background for staff's recommendations and to inform you that the Council will consider this item at the July 1 Council meeting. Sincerel ��/ Tilomas A. Colbert, P.E. Director of Public Works TAC/ jj THE LONE OAK TREE...THE SYMBOL OF S RENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY Agenda Information Memo July 1, 1986, City Council Meeting Page Four CONSENT•AGEND There are eleven (11) •,items on the agenda referred to as Consent Items requiring one (1) motion by the City Council. I£ 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 discussion required is brief. CONTRACTOR LICENSES A. Contractor Licenses --Attached on page� is a list of contractors who are renewing or who have been s lected 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 approvalfor a contractor license. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the list of contractor licenses as presented. L RACTORS' LICENSE JULY 1, 1986 GENERAL CONTRACTORS 1. ADVANCE DEVELOPERS INC 2. ALM BUILDERS INC 3. ANTCO CONSTRUCTION CO 4. BUTLER HOUSING CORP 5. CONSTRUCTION SPECIALISTS 6. GOODWIN BUILDERS INC ® 7. HAGMAN CONSTRUCTION INC 8. RIVERVIEW CONSTRUCTION INC 9. R.J. RYAN HOMEOWNER 1. BORDSEN, LES • 1. 3-D HEATING CO 2. J.K. HEATING CO PLUMBING 1. °nN'S PLBG & HTG 2. WESTONKA PLBG Agenda Information Memo July 1, 1986, City Council Meeting Page Five PERSONNEL ITEMS B. PERSONNEL ITEMS: There is one (1) item to be considered under Personnel: Item 1, Clerk -Typist (Pool) --The City -received a letter -of resigna- tion from Helga Brock, a part-time clerk typist in the typing pool. The resignation was effective June 25. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To accept the resignation of Helga Brock and to authorize the advertisement for a replacement for her position, part-time clerk typist in the typing pool • (Administration). • /0 Agenda Information Memo July 1, 1986, City Council Meeting Page Six APPROVE FINAL PLAT, TOWN CENTRE 70 -4TH ADDITION C. Approve Final Plat, Town Centre70 - 4th Addition --We have received an application for final plat approval for the above - referenced subdivision located between Town Centre 70 Drive and Yankee Doodle Road, west of Denmark Avenue as shown by the final plat enclosed' on page 11�1. All -conditions and requirements of preliminary plat approval granted by Council action on February 5, 1985 as it pertains to this development have been complied with. All final plat .application materials have been submitted, reviewed by staff and found to be in order for favorable Council action. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: for Town Centre 70 4th Addition and Clerk to execute all related documents. To approve the final plat authorize the Mayor and City TOWN CENTRE TO FOURTH ADDITION Nbr[.. Irs �•a n[. M w.. • � 1 Mean lew oan! IwM. 1 roa nnwin w M 4rM•• ,Cr ••card• F [ lnewrn. a lln o 1V•p [tTf•[ n rWRr i...iwp. �. eel• rl.[. bon•,• ••• nllln • •Irwn IAun w� `,.r rna In aau . '.a4anlM m[ uw.. 1 �Iw• u`i.:: uuwwu. �N)oeM mf•tMlvYaa•• R .' W eerlggM1 II LOT I T L '.' T OUTLOT A A BLOCK I IHIRE! •.. m .. +[en •m[m un .e..n Yn. ^w..ne....[nr..r[. wn..a nn�� .. rn e[ tM I IIwIM encrlp•e ^.aeaar rltuVM Int el 4•eY. [Y[• 1 elrip ,. Tfll [inc[ n f.id [blflfT. •eaerwana [e [M rwee0•e •1•[ Wlnl. 4 =a n [Y Mvn rn n•nN •N en *""[ • an'[ r 1 Im•„ LLOI[IP w• Manta aY n wenn •aV rin [er n•en ne ua llla� .ummn unl�. In �Itw•p •M:•el ••le .M•c•1 YM [e—n Vnw .•1 s •Ir1•. 1[ nM aYn nw la • pme Y. Y rmm .. Celan •n1 V[a loot, felon. mann tlr � n el ♦ n� [mrML YF [T•.,I n b p }n (e[•nln In•arr•na n ec sltlwe Yal•n n 1r• _ [Umf Cal :. • w 4 wl. , ^ la. •rurenrFi. w �iTTelnl�drral YN [usn,. 4�•wa r•I a� nn Mllc n..111�pn• r me nrr. ur.e 1 r.. one . vnnM t . e.•nler n uN. n.e n Ion mor IDrYC1 h u.. V .[ . wr a [ a •n u.[..aw .. n w u. Olt .a ulna rl...ae b u ..ie. eeWre.r. LM• . . w.LnreW n u. rl•[. a u.[ Wa• n. r ..lira• e�`weuwn nn..•. ao r e.nu.�tl van.. nn •• wa, rt�n b wl.rrtbn re. re..nln r.n..pr. c..al nc.a. n• Mal•btl�arb r ul• by 1 n N Jw•. [. •s.4n. rpbvnleT— a.n r•eun tunas. 4�.aa.. � , alr•t en aM e v el 1,_. WS1,. berell el 4,•4n. Illnw•o `•Wro••e llrl• nlr [In tvJSit e• Jfaw, wia.1!(^ b 4•a. •Y un• a b 0•pan 111.IY•• er VwAnn 1•I), nY eln 4. 4•• Twp Yn � 4n n rn•r r•en, o • ew [. er.•[er I�n[�nmp uu W un• ur W r n re, a utl br•lu n au• ma [ )rrwp.w •mmb w.n r.n rnie anv�a. _ u_ b"6IGre un• en •tl n.w.[•r none a,l. _ en pr u_ snllf Wl NI• In[ae•n! .. IIIM In 4 1ll.a n W bw,[ MY. rn maY• en el � e1 � • n .•If •aaa•M n el � wp e RHAV LVIDS VEYM I Agenda Information Memo July 1,.1986, City Council Meeting Page Seven PROJECT 478, RECEIVE REPORT/ORDER PUBLIC HEARING D. Project 478, Receive Report/Order Public Hearing (Windtree 7th Addition) --In response to a petition received from the develop- ers of the Windtree 7th Addition, the Council authorized the preparation of a feasibility report—to discuss the installation of streets and utilities. This report has now been completed and is being presented to the Council in consideration of scheduling a public hearing for formal discussion. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the feasibility report for Project 478, Windtree 7th Addition (Streets and • Utilities') and schedule the public hearing to be held August 5, 1986. • /3 Agenda Information Memo July 1, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Eight GRADING PERMIT #EX-25-086/OVERHILL _FARM 2ND ADDITION E. Approve Grading Permit #EX -25-086, Overhill Farm 2nd Addi- tion --Staff has received an application for a grading/excavation permit for the proposed Overhill Farm 2nd Addition. All applica- tion materials- have been submitted, reviewed by Staff and found to be in order for favorable, Council action. This grading plan conforms with the proposed final plat which is anticipated to be processed for formal Council approval in the near future. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve Grading Permit #EX -25-086, Overhill Farm 2nd Addition. Is PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS/PROJECTS 84-R AND 83-N F. Public Improvement Final Acceptance, Blackhawk Oaks (84-R) and Sunset Addition (83 -N) --The installation of public streets and utilities performed privately by the developer under Projects 84-R (Blackhawk Oaks) and 83-N (Sunset Addition) have been completed, inspected by representatives of the Public Works Department and found to be in compliance with City approved plans, specifications and the related subdivision development agreements. Based on the results of these reviews and inspections, it is recommended that these public improvements (sanitary sewer, water, storm sewer, streets and related appurtenances) be accepted for perpetual mainte- nance and that the related financial escrows be reduced accordingly. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the installation • of public improvements for Projects 84-R (Blackhawk Oaks) and 83-N (Sunset Addition), accept for perpetual maintenance and authorize the reduction of the related financial security. GRADING PERMIT #EX-34-096/FAIRWAY HILLS ADDITION G. Approve Grading Permit #EX -34-096, Fairway Hills Addition --We have received an application for a grading/excavation permit for the proposed Fairway Hills Addition located southeast of Cliff and Pilot Knob Roads. All application materials have been submitted, reviewed by Staff and found to be in order for favorable Council action. This grading plan conforms with the approved preliminary plat and final plat which is proposed to be processed in the near future. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: #EX -34-096, Fairway Hills Addition. T To approve Grading Permit Agenda Information Memo July 1, 1986, City Council.Meeting Pace Nine GRADING PERMIT #EX-12-076/BURR _OAKS ADDITION H. Approve Grading Permit #EX -12-076, Burr Oaks Addition --We have received an application for a grading permit for the Burr Oaks Addition located south and east of Burr Oak Park. Now that the 'required review process for the Epvironmental Assessment Work- sheet (EAW) has been completed, there are no restrictions against processing this grading permit for approval. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve Grading Permit #EX -12-076, Burr Oaks Addition. • APPROVE FINAL PLAT, EAGANDALE LEMAY LAKE 2ND ADDITION • I. Approve Final Plat, Eagandale Lemay Lake 2nd Addition --We have received an application of .final plat approval for the Eagandale Lemay Lake 2nd Addition, located southwest of Lone Oak Road and I -35E.. It will incorporate the proposed Residence Inn complex. Enclosed on pages/4�" /4)q are copies of the final plat which conforms with the preliminary plat approved by Council action on May 6, 1986. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve the final plat for the Eagandale Lemay Lake 2nd Addition and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. /5" EAGANDALE LEMAY LAKE 2ND ADDITION F� a. !• 4 I - .P e e VICINRY MGP iLC q. TV. (a,IFS.Z] o. b 4LLI fT Lr J TL r• •— 1., tiundr land F►ur eving Inc. - _ - SHEET 2 OF 2 SHEETS ,•mob x f1 � �a4 �. �•„ � F � sd a��i.�. r��. is ' .-.....-..... .... .. A: , ,., m TL r• •— 1., tiundr land F►ur eving Inc. - _ - SHEET 2 OF 2 SHEETS .L LI .-.....-..... .... .. TL r• •— 1., tiundr land F►ur eving Inc. - _ - SHEET 2 OF 2 SHEETS • 'NlE�Sl4le-. Agenda Information Memo July 1, 1986, City Council Meeting Page Ten VACATE UTILITY EASEMENT, RECEIVE PETITION ORDER PUBLIC HEARING EAGANDALE CENTER INDUSTRIAL PARK #6 J. Vacate Drainage and Utility Easement, Receive Petition/Order Public Hearing (Eagandale Center Industrial Park #6) --We have received a petition to vacate a drainage and utility easement -over portions- of Lot 4, Block l of- Eagandale Center- Industrial Park #6. It would be appropriate for the Council to schedule a public hearing so that 'the staff can notify all potentially affected utilities and to receive their comments at the time of the public hearing. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the petition rto vacate drainage and utility easement (Lot 4, Block 1, Eagandale Center Industrial Park #6) and schedule the public hearing to be held August 5, 1986. K. Vacate Ponding Easement, Receive Petition/Order Public Hearing (Lemay Lake Hills Addition) --The staff has received a petition requesting the vacation of a ponding easement dedicated over portions of the Lemay Lake.Hills Addition. At the June 17 Council meeting, the Council formally took action to release any interests or rights to this ponding easement, due to the fact that comparable ponding easements have been dedicated as a part of the final plat for the Lemay Lake Hills Addition. However, in order to • clear title to the new platted properties, it is necessary to proceed with a formal vacation process. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the petition to vacate a ponding easement (Lemay Lake Hills Addition.) and schedule the public hearing to be held August '5, 1986. /7 Agenda Information July 1, 1986, City Page Eleven Memo Council Meeting PUBLIC HEARING, PROJECT 458 EAGANDALE CENTER INDUSTRIAL PARK_- STORM SEWER A. Public Hearing for Project 458, Eagandale Center Industrial Park - Storm Sewer --As a result of an evaluation performed by staff over the limited storm sewer capacity in the southern portion of the Eagandale Center Industrial Park, the Council- authorized the preparation of a feasibility report which was completed and presented to the Council on December 7, 1985 with the public hearing being scheduled for January 21. However, the formal notification for that public hearing was inadvertently omitted from that process. Subsequently, when this was discovered around June 1, the Council scheduled a new public hearing for July 1 • to discuss the merits of this proposed improvement. Enclosed on pages �� through 2 S is a copy of the feasibility report for the Council's information and review during this public hearing process. It should be noted that as a result of previous public hearing approval, detailed plans and specifications have already been prepared. As a result of the further detail study, the final proposed alignment of the storm sewer changed slightly from what is being proposed in the feasibility report. This will be explained in greater detail at the public hearing. Also, a neighborhood meeting was held on Tuesday, June 24 at City Hall with all affected property owners to explain the need and details of this particular storm sewer improvement. Based on this two hour neighborhood meeting, it is anticipated that the staff's presentation during this public hearing will be limited • subject to questions or concerns from the Council or audience. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing and approve/deny Project 458, Eagandale Center Industrial Park (Storm Sewer) and if approved, authorize the preparation of detailed plans and specifications. M REPORT ON EAGANDALE INDUSTRIAL PARK • STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT No. 458 FOR EAGAN, MINNESOTA ® 1985 FILE No. 49370 /� /3a�tedfi�aa, /Cades:e, fYw&,Zlliz % TY/// dda,c4a&d, JOta. eo.�ull:+iq `nyirerad SG Pain, i &mte"la /9 Ba.telu", o(alesce, 4 2335 W. i....aL ✓ 4k.aay 36 &. pa.r, JNi.. oza 55113 612-636-4600 October 31, 1985 Honorable Mayor and Council City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Re: Eagandale Industrial Park Storm Sewer Improvements Project 458 Our File No. 49370 Dear Mayor and Council: n 711/ Joto. Glmn R. Cuak, P.E. Keirh A. Gordnn, P. E T Orro O Bnn.noa. P. E. Thamm E. Nuy., P F. q L O Raberr IV, Fuser. P.E. Rlrhard IV. Porn,. P.E. t�4AH lunOh C. Anderlik. P.E. Robes G. Srhunirhr, P.E. B,udlmd A. Lrmberk, P.E. Marvin L. Sorvala. P E. Ruhmd E. 7urn.. P.E. DunalJ C, B.q.,dl, PF Jain. C. Olson, PE. Jerry A. BuurJon. P.E Alark A. Homan, PE. Trd K. Field. P.E. hllrharl T. Ruurmann. P. F. _ Rabe,, R. PJrJ/ed,. P.E. David O. Lorkoru. P.E. Charles A. F.'riakrmi r Leo ,N, Pawehky Harlan N. 04on Enclosed is our report for Eagandale Industrial Park Storm Sewer, Project 458. This report covers storm sewer improvements and includes a preliminary assessment roll. We would be pleased tomeetwith the Council 'and other interested parties at a mutually convenient time to discuss any aspect of this report. Yours very truly, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK 6 ASSOCIATES, INC. Thomas E. Angus TEA: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 o Minnesota. Mark A. Hanson • // e: October. 31, 1985 Reg. No. 14260 Approved by:('/V Department of PubVc Works Date:_ IIS/%JSP 1716d M n U SCOPE: This project provides for the construction of storm sewer to serve the Eagandale Industrial Park area. The area is located generally north of Lone Oak Road and west of I -35E. This project is a continuation of the 54" storm sewer constructed as part of LeMay Lake 1st Addition, Project No. 424. This storm sewer is required to provide the proper storm sewer capacity to serve the Eagandale Industrical Park area based on its planned development density. FEASIBILITY AND RECOMMENDATION: This project is feasible from an engineering standpoint and is in accordance with the Comprehensive Storm Sewer Plan for the City of Eagan. The project as outlined can best be carried out as one • contract. DISCUSSION: The storm sewer that is proposed provides, for the extension of storm sewer north from the existing 54" storm sewer at the northwest corner of Lone Oak Road and Eagandale Boulevard. The extenions as proposed would consist 'of two 48" RCP storm sewers. One would extend easterly along Lone Oak Road and northerly along Center Court to the low area located at Center Court and West Service Road. The other would extend northerly along Eagandale Boulevard to the intersection of Eagandale • Boulevard and West Service Road. The upper 500 feet along Center Court to the intersection of Center Curve and West Service Road would consist of a 42" RCP storm sewer. Presently a 48" RCP storm sewer serves this area. This sewer was sized based on design standards at that time. However, since that time rainfall in— tensities have increased nearly 28% resulting in higher intensities used for storm sewer design. The density of development has also increased nearly 30% resulting in greater runoff from what was originally anticipated. The capacity of the existing 48" storm sewer is 90 cfs. Based on present development, this capacity has almost been reached. In order to allow the Page 1. 1716d 2/ continued development of the vacant land within the drainage area, as indi— cated on Figure 3, it is necessary to construct the proposed storm sewer at this time. Storm water ponding could alleviate this problem but is not desired by the developers. Also, the areas to be served are self contained watersheds with no outlets by overland drainage. For this reason, additional storm sewer must be provided to adequately protect facilities in the low areas. In order to convey the amount of storm water drainage from the existing low area, along Eagandale Boulevard, an existing catch basin manhole will be - rebuilt and a catch basin will be added. The rebuilt catch basin manhole will be a high capacity inlet structure which will increase the amount of water en— tering the storm sewer during a storm. EASEMENTS: The proposed construction will require acquisition of easements yr from all construction areas. The estimated. -amount of permanent easement re— quired from each parcel is listed below. Parcel EAGANDALE CENTER INDUSTRIAL PARK Block 4 Lot 15 Lot 16 Lot 17 Lot 18 Lot 19 Block 5 Lot 8 Lot 9 Block 6 Lot 3 Lot 4 Lot 5 Page 2. 1716d ZY Permanent Easement (Acs.) 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.15 0.14 0.30 0.25 0.13 0.12 0.05 • AREAS TO BE INCLUDED: The areas to be included for construction and assess- ment purposes are listed below. No construction will occur outside of those areas proposed to be assessed. Construction Area Assessment Area EAGANDALE CENTER INDUSTRIAL PARK EAGANDALE CENTER INDUSTRIAL PARK Block 4 Block 4 Lots 14-19 — Lots 1-7, 14-19 Block 5 Block 5 Lots 4, 5, 8, 9 Lots 2-14, 16-20 ® Block 6 Block 6 Lots 3, 4, 5 Lots 1-5 COST ESTIMATE: A detailed cost estimate is presented in Appendix A at the back of this report. The total estimated project cost is $408,940 which in- cludes contingencies and related overhead. .Costs for easement acquisition are not included in this amount. Overhead costs are estimated at 30% and include legal, engineering, administration, and bond interest. ASSESSMENTS: Assessments are proposed to be levied against the benefited properties. A preliminary assessment roll is included at the back of this re- port in Appendix B. All costs including overhead will be revised based on final costs. The total project cost is proposed to be assessed on an area basis to the benefited property. Therefore, all uphill areas with storm water drainage flowing into the proposed storm sewer are to be assessed at an estimted rate of $0.092 per square foot. REVENUE SOURCES: All project costs will be assessed, therefore, revenue will be entirely from assessments. Page 3. 1716d 7-3 PROJECT SCHEDULE Present Feasibility Report Public Hearing Approve Plans and Specifications open Bids and Award Contract Construction Completion Final Assessment Hearing First Payment Due with Real Estate Taxes Page 4. 1716d Z (/.H November 19, 1985 December 17, 1985 Spring, 1986 Spring, 1986 Fall, 1986 Fall, 1986 Spring, 1987 U • C APPENDIX A PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE EAGANDALE CENTER INDUSTRIAL PARK PROJECT NO. 458 STORM SEWER 400 Sq.yds. Remove bituminous surfacing @ $1.00/sq.yd. $ 400 160 Lin.ft-. Remove B618 curb & gutter-.@ $2.00/lin.ft. 320 250 Lin.ft. 48" RCP Storm sewer, 0'-10' dp. @ $60.00/lin.ft. 15,000 650 Lin.ft. 48" RCP Storm sewer, 10'-20' dp. @ $75.00/lin.ft. 48,750 1,200 Lin.ft. 48" RCP Storm sewer, 20'-30' dp. @ $110.00/lin.ft. 132,000 200 Lin.ft. 48" RCP Storm sewer, 30'-35' dp. @ $120.00/lin.ft. 24,000 300 Lin.ft. 42" RCP Storm sewer, 0'-10' dp. @ $45.00/lin.ft. 13,500 200 Lin.ft. 42" RCP Storm sewer, 10'-20' dp. @ $55.00/lin.ft. 11,000 50 Lin.ft. 21" RCP Storm sewer, 0'-10' dp. @ $24.00/lin.ft. 1,200 50 Lin.ft. 15" RCP Storm sewer, 0'-10' dp. @ $20.00/lin.ft. 1,000 8 Each MR 6' dia. w/cstg. @ $2,300.00/each 18,400 1 Each Reconstruct ex. CBMH as MH @ $1,000.00/each 1,000 1 Each 12' Low Pt. CB @ $3,000.00/each 3,000 1 Each 4' Low Pt. CB @ $1,500.00/each 1,500 2 Each Cut -in to existing CBMH @ $750.00/each 1,500 2 Each Cut -in to existing MH @ $750.00/each 1,500 500 Cu.yds. Rock stabilization below pipe @ $10.00/cu.yd. 5,000 400 Sq.yds. Bituminous street patching @ $15.00/sq.yd. 6,000 160 Lin.ft. B618 Conc. curb & gutter @ $7.00/lin.ft. 1,120 7 Acres Seed w/fertilizer & mulch @ $1,500.00/Ac. 10,500 2,900 Lin.ft. Mechanical trench compaction @ $1.00/lin.ft. 2,900 Sub -total $299,590 +5% Contingencies 14,980 $314,570 +30% Legal, Engrng., Admin. & Bond Interest 94,370 TOTAL STORM SEWER ............................... $408,940 1716d 76 Page 5. v6 Agenda Information Memo July 1,.198,6, City Council Meeting Page Twelve FINAI EAGANDALE B. Final Assessment Hearing for Project 458, Eagandale Center Industrial Park - Storm Sewer --As a result of the initial public hearing held on January 21 discussed previously, the Council directed "staff to prepare a final assessment roll oased on -competative bids so that a final assessment hearing could be held before a formal awardof contract. Because of the previous errors and omissions in the required public hearing notification process, the final assessment hearing originally scheduled for June 17 could not proceed. Subsequently, a new final assessment hearing ® was scheduled for July 1. As a result of the neighborhood, meeting held on June 24, as dis- cussed under the previous public hearing, all affected property owners collectively agreed to a modification to the original final assessment roll proposed by staff. This modification results in the remaining undeveloped property uniformally absorbing 75% of the proposed assessments against the existing developed property within the drainage district. Although this method is. not in concurrence with standard assessment policies or procedures, as long as it has been agreed to by 100% of the affected property owners, staff strongly recommends that this modified assessment roll be formally adopted. Enclosed on pagesthrough � nfo nis a summary sheet of the final assessment iation and a map showing the distribution • of the different assessment rates. The Public Works Director will be available to discuss in further detail this final assessment roll at the public hearing. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing and adopt the modified final assessment roll for Project 458, Eagandale Center Industrial Park (Storm Sewer) and authorize its certification to Dakota County. 74 t" Y FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING PROJECT NO: 458 SUBDIVISION/AREA: Ea¢andale Industrial Park FINAL ASSESSMEENT HEARING: July 1, 1986 IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED: F. R. = Feasibility Report FINAL F.R. WATER RATES RATES DArea OLaterals Is Service F1 Lat. Benefit/Trunk STORM ri Area Undeveloped $0.076/S.F. XO Laterals Developed $0.015/S.F. $0.092/S.F. NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: 37 NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: 10 years RATE OF INTEREST: A-ni FINAL SANITARY RATES Area Laterals Service Lat. Benefit/Trunk STREETS Gravel Base ❑ Surfacing Res. Equiv. TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $273.488.81 CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 86-10 PUBLIC HEARING DATE:_ January 21, 1986 and July 1 1986 Z� F. R. RATES ,t+ LONE 0" ROAD y EIC�NO�LE 'T IY Ot0•M ADOI TICK CCCLLLLLILd LATERAL ASSESSMENT AREA EAGANDALE INDUSTRIAL PARK LATERAL ASSESSMENT AREA PROJECT No. 458 EAGAN, MINNESOTA • e BONESTRO,O, ROSENE, ANDERLIK ✓S ASSOCIATES, INC. Consulting Engineers St. Paul, Minn. Date: Nov. I, 1985 Comm. 49370 FIG. No. 2 Agenda Information July 1., 1986, City Page Thirteen Memo Council Meeting FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING, PROJECT 471 WEST SERVICE ROAD - STORM -SEWER C. Final Assessment Hearing for Project 471., West Service Road - Storm Sewer --Subsequent to the original public hearing for instal- lation of storm sewer within Eagandale Center Industrial Park, additional development proposed along the West Service Road required an extension of the storm sewer being proposed under Project 458. That public hearing was properly noticed, discussed and approved on April 15, 1986. Because of the similarity and location of these two projects (458 and 471), they were both combined under the same contract for bidding purposes. Therefore, if ® the public hearing and final assessment hearing for Project 458 is approved without conditions, it is appropriate and timely to schedule the final assessment hearing for Project 471 as well. Enclosed on page 3) is a summary sheet showing the proposed final assessments based on competative bids received and the relationship to the estimate of the feasibility report presented at the public hearing on April 15. It is not anticipated that there will be any objections submitted, due to the waiver that was signed by the affected property owners when the original petition was submitted requesting this storm sewer extension project. The Public Works Director will be able to address any concerns from the Council or audience as they may arise. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To close the public hearing and adopt the final assessment roll for Project 471, West Service Road (Storm Sewer) and authorize the certification to the County. m FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING PROJECT NO: 471 SUBDIVISION/AREA: West Service Road - FINAL ASSESSMEENT HEARING: July 1, 1986 STORM Area QX Laterals $0.03987/S.F.$0.044/S STREETS ❑ Gravel Base Surfacing F1Res. Equiv. NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: 7 NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: 10 RATE OF INTEREST: 8.0% TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $36,696.73 CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 86-10 PUBLIC HEARING DATE: April 15, 1986 FwNO IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED: - - F. R. = Feasibility Report — - FINAL F.R. FINAL F.R. WATER RATES RATES SANITARY RATES RATES Area Area •D Lateralsn- Laterals Service Service E) Lat. Benefit/Trunk Lat. Benefit/Trunk STORM Area QX Laterals $0.03987/S.F.$0.044/S STREETS ❑ Gravel Base Surfacing F1Res. Equiv. NUMBER OF PARCELS AFFECTED: 7 NUMBER OF YEARS ASSESSED: 10 RATE OF INTEREST: 8.0% TOTAL AMOUNT ASSESSED: $36,696.73 CONSTRUCTED UNDER THE FOLLOWING CONTRACTS: 86-10 PUBLIC HEARING DATE: April 15, 1986 FwNO • 0 Agenda Information Memo July 1, 1986., City Council Meeting Page Fourteen INDUCEMENT RESOLUTION CHANGE THOMAS LAKE APARTMENT PROJECT D. Public Hearing to Consider a Change in Inducement Resolution to Increase the Amount of Multfamily Housing Revenue Bonds from $10,000,000 to $11,875,000 for Thomas Lake Apartments --At the June 17, 1986- City Council meeting,- authorization was given to schedule a public hearing to consider a change in the inducement resolution of the Thomas Lake multifamily housing project that was approved in 1985. The original amount approved for multifamily housing bonds was $10,00.0,000 and the developer is requesting that the amount be increased to $11,875,000 due to additional! capitalized interest requirements and also for amenities the developer is proposing with the project. The City made a commit- ment to the neighborhood adjacent to the Thomas Lake project who requested notification of any future changes relative to the project. � The City Administrator sent a letter, enclosed on pages .iv through _a5__ to Lynn Trok who acted as a -neighborhood spokesperson for the Thomas Lake project. Action by the City Council to increase the amount of original inducement resolution will require an amended program for the construction of a multifamily housing developm�,9nt. For a copy of the amended programs, refer to pages �3 , through 3:;V. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or amended housing program proposed by the Dominium Group to the inducement amount for the Thomas Lake multifamily project to $11,875,00.0. 3/ deny the increase housing a- �a '• lit 3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD. P.O. BOX 21199 EAGAN, MINNESOTA 55121 PHONE; (612) 454-8100 June 24, 1986 LYNN TROK _ 4235 LODGEPOLE DR EAGAN MN 55122 Re: Thomas Lake Apartment Prolect Dear Lynn: BEA BLOMQUIST Mww THOMAS EGAN JAMES A, SMITH _ MC ELLISON THEODORE WACHTER Council Members THOMAS HEDGES City Adminisvbia EUGENE VAN OVERBEKE City Cleik During the City Council deliberations for the Thomas Lake Apartment project you assumed the role as the neighborhood contact person for public hearings, informational meetings, and correspondence from the City. Therefore, I felt you may be interested in a request that was made by the Dominium Group, representing the Thomas Lake Apartment project, to increase their multifamily finan- cing amount from $10,000,000 to $11,875,000. At the July 1 City Council meeting the change in amount for the inducement resolution will be given consideration. Any time a multifamily bond amount is changed, particularly by increasing the amount, a new public hearing is required. The reasons stated in the Dominium letter for increasing the amount are 1) the developer has been severely restricted in his ability to secure the types of sources of financing commitments that they earlier contemplated using because of the proposed changes being made by the Senate and Congress to current tax laws. The financing commitment that Dominium was able to secure requires that they incorporate within the project longer periods of capital- ized interest, therefore increasing the total cost of the develop- ment. Secondly, they are proposing significant improvements to the project in terms of amenities that will be provided to the project causing the necessity for additional project financing. To quote their letter, "we have spent considerable time in exploring ways to preserve larger areas of natural vegetation by utilizing greater amounts of retaining walls than we had initially proposed. The community facility has been greatly upgraded in terms of recrea- tional amenities and size. Lastly, we have made significant improvements to the unit interiors by providing such extra amen- ities as European cabinets, microwaves, wood trim and panelled doors to mention a few items." 52, THE LONE OAK TREE.. THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY LETTER TO LYNN TROK JUNE 24, 1986 PAGE TWO As you recall, the final plat, multifamily housing revenue bond financing and other actions pertaining to the Thomas Lake project have previously been approved by the City Council. This action is a procedural request by the developer to change the amount for the reasons stated. As a matter of communications, I wanted to notify you of the action so that if you noticed the item on the agenda published in the newspaper, you would be aware of action being considered by the City Council. If you or any of your neighbors have any questions- regarding action to be considered for, the Thomas Lake project this coming Tuesday, please feel free to contact me at any time. Sincerely, Thomas L. Hedger City Administrator TLH/kf 33 E • 1! 1 AMENDED PROGRAM FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A MULTIFAMILY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C (the "Act"), the City of Eagan (the "City") has been authorized to develop and administer programs of multifamily housing developments under the circumstances and within the limitations set forth in the Act. Minnesota Statutes, Section 462C.07 provides that such programs for multifamily housing developments may be financed by revenue bonds issued by the City or by a housing and redevelopment authority authorized to act on behalf of the City. _ The City has received a proposal from Jack Safar, David Brierton and Dominium Group that, pursuant to the authority found in the Act, the City approve a program providing for the acquisition of land and construction of approximately 228 units of residential rental housing ("Housing Units") by a Minnesota limited partnership to be formed in which Jack Safar, David Brierton and Dominium Group ® will be general partners (the "Developer"), located in an area in the City bounded by the High Line Trail on the North, Thomas Lake Road on the West, Thomas Lake on the South and Thomas Lake Park on the East (the "Project"). The acquisition of land and construction of the Project is to be funded through the issuance of up to $11,875,000 in revenue bonds issued either by the City or by The Dakota County Housing and Redevelopment Authority (the "Authority") on behalf of the City (the "Bonds"). Following construction of the Project, the Developer will own and operate the Project as a multifamily residential rental project. Twenty percent (20%) (or such greater number required by applicable federal laws, either pending or enacted) of the units in the Project will be occupied by tenants whose incomes are not greater than eighty percent (80%) (or such lower percent required by applicable federal laws, either pending or enacted) of the area median income, adjusted for family size. It is estimated that initial rents for the Housing Units will range from $515 per month to $670 per month. The anticipated date of initial occupancy is June 1, 1987. • The City, in establishing this multifamily housing program (the "Program"), has considered the information contained in the City's 462C Housing Plan (the "Housing Plan"). The Project will be constructed and financed pursuant to Subdivisions 1 and 2 of Section 462C.05 of the Act. The Project is intended to meet the needs of low and moderate income by providing safe and sanitary rental housing at affordable rents by providing below-market rate financing for the Project. The occupancy requirements set forth in this Program will be enforceable by the City through a regulatory agreement between the City and the Developer. Section A. Definitions. The following terms used in this Program shall have the following meanings, respectively: (1) "Act" shall mean Minnesota Statutes, Section 462C.01, et seq., as currently in effect and as the same may be from time to time amended. (2) "Adjusted Gross Income" shall mean gross family income less $750 for each adult and less $500 for each other dependent in the family. 3V (3) "Authority" shall mean The Dakota County Housing and Redevelopment Authority.' (4) 'Bonds" shall mean the revenue bonds to be issued either by the City or by the Authority, on behalf of the City, to finance the Program. (5) "City" shall mean the City of Eagan, State of Minnesota. (6) "Developer" shall mean a Minnesota limited partnership to be formed in which Jack Safar, David Brierton and Dominium Group will be general partners. (7) "Housing Plan" shall mean the City of Eagan 462C Housing Plan, as amended, setting forth certain information required by the Act. (8) "Housing Unit" shall mean any one of the apartment units located in the Project, occupied by one person or family, and containing complete living facilities. (9) "Issuer" shall mean the City unless the City by resolution designates the Authority as the issuer of the Bonds. (10) "Land" shall mean the real property upon which the Project is situated. (11) "Program" shall mean the program for the financing of the Project pursuant to the Act. (12) "Project" shall mean the residential rental housing development consisting of approximately 228 market rate Housing Units to be constructed by the Developer on the Land. Section B. Program For Financing the Project. It is proposed that the City establish this Program to provide financing for acquisition and construction of the Project at a cost and upon such other terms and conditions as are set forth herein and as may be agreed upon in writing between the Issuer, the initial purchaser of the Bonds and the Developer. To do this, the City expects the Issuer to issue the Bonds as soon as the terms of the Bonds have been agreed upon by the Issuer, the Developer and the initial purchaser of the Bonds. The proceeds of the Bonds will be loaned to the Developer for construction and financing of the Project, the funding of any appropriate reserves and for paying the costs of issuing the Bonds. It is expected that a trustee will be appointed by the Issuer to monitor the construction of the Project in accordance with the Plan and Program and the payments of principal and interest on the Bonds. The cost of any additional security devices for the Bonds will be borne by the Developer and payable in addition to the principal and interest on the Bonds. It is contemplated that the Bonds shall contain a maturity of approximately thirty (30) years and will be priced to the market at the time of issuance. The City will hire no additional staff for the administration of the Program. Insofar as the Issuer will be contracting with underwriters, legal counsel, bond counsel, the trustee, and others, all of whom will be reimbursed from bond 35 • E proceeds and revenues generated by the Program, no administrative costs will be paid from the Issuer's budget with respect to this Program. The Bonds will not be general obligation bonds of the Issuer, but are to be paid only from properties pledged to the payment thereof, which may include additional security such as additional collateral, insurance or a letter of credit. Section C. Local Contributions To The Program. It is not contemplated that the City or the Authority will provide other financial incentives to the Developer in conjunction with the Project. Section D. Standards and Requirements Relating to the Financing of the Project Pursuant to the Program. The following standards and requirements shall apply with respect to the operation of the Project by the Developer pursuant to this Program: (1) Substantially all of the proceeds of the sale of the Bonds will be used to provide funds for the acquisition and construction of the Project and to provide for appropriate reserves. The funds will be made available to ® the Developer pursuant to the terms of the Bond offering, which may include certain covenants to be entered into between the Issuer and the Developer. (2) The Developer or subsequent owner of the Project, will not arbitrarily reject an application from a proposed tenant because of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, or status with regard to public assistance or disability. (3) No Housing Unit may be in violation of applicable zoning ordinances or other applicable land use regulations, including any urban renewal plan or development district plan, and including the state building code as set forth under Minnesota Statutes, Section 16.83, et seq. (4) Pursuant to Section 462C.05, Subdivision 2 of the Act, at least twenty percent (20%) of the Housing Units will be held for occupancy by ® families or individuals with Adjusted Gross Income not in excess of eighty percent (80%) of the median family income as estimated by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development for the Minneapolis - St. Paul metropolitan statistical area. (5) Pursuant to Section 462C.05, Subdivision 2 of the Act, the Project shall be designed to be affordable by persons and families with Adjusted Gross Income not in excess of the greater of (a) 110 percent of the median family income as estimated by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development for the Minneapolis -St. Paul standard metropolitan area or (b) 100 percent of the income limits established by the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency for the City and by other persons and families to the extent determined to be necessary by the Issuer in furtherance of the policy of economic integration. Subsection E. Evidence of Compliance. The Issuer may require from the Developer or such other person deemed necessary at or before the issuance of the Bonds, evidence satisfactory to the Issuer of the ability and intention of the Developer to complete the Project, and evidence satisfactory to the Issuer of g� 3 compliance with the standards and requirements for the making of the financing established by the Issuer, as set forth herein; and in connection therewith, the Issuer or its representatives may inspect the relevant books and records of the Developer in order to confirm such ability, intention and compliance. In addition, the Issuer may periodically require certification from either the Developer or such other person deemed necessary concerning compliance with various aspects of the Program. Subsection F. Issuance of Bonds. To finance the Program authorized by this Section, either the City or the Authority, on behalf of the City,may by resolution authorize, issue and sell its Revenue Bonds in an aggregate principal amount up to $11,875,000. The Bonds shall be issued pursuant to Section 462C.07, Subdivision 1 of the Act, and shall be payable primarily from the revenues of the Program authorized by this Section. The proceeds of the Bonds are presently expected to be applied to the Project Costs, including land acquisition, construction costs, capitalized interest and costs of issuance (including underwriter's discount). The Bonds are expected to be issued in July or August of 1986. Subsection G. Severability. The provisions of this Program are severable and if any of its provisions, sentences, clauses or paragraphs shall be held unconstitutional, contrary to statute, exceeding the authority of the City or otherwise illegal or inoperative by any court of competent jurisdiction, the decision of such court shall not affect or impair any of the remaining provisions. Subsection H. Amendment. The City shall not amend this Program while Bonds authorized hereby are outstanding, to the detriment of the holders of such Bonds. Subsection I. State Ceiling. No portion of the state ceiling for qualified mortgage bonds allocated pursuant to Section 103A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended, and Section 462C.09, Subd. 2a, of Minnesota Statutes will be needed for this Program. The City will apply to the Minnesota Department of Energy and Economic Development for a portion of the State ceiling imposed by H.R. 3838, adopted by the United States House of Representatives on December 17, 1985, or any other applicable volume limitation act enacted into law. Received by the Metropolitan Council this 13th day of June, 1986, by: Title: 3, 4 • Agenda Information Memo July 1, 1986, City Council Meeting Page Fifteen SIGN POLICY AGREEMENT/TOWN CENTRE 70 & 100 ADDITIONS A. Sign Policy Agreement for Town Centre 70 & 100--A public hearing was first scheduled at the May 27 meeting and then continued until the June 24 APC meeting to consider a pylon sign layout for the Town Centre 70 and 100 Additions. At the May 27 APC meeting, the sign layout was continued requesting that legal counsel prepare a sign agreement. between the City of Eagan and Federal Land Company. A pylon sign agreement was prepared and with minor modification, the APC is recommending said agreement to the City Council for approval.'/ copy of the revised agreement is enclosed on pages.39 through y 1. Since the exhibit attached to the sign policy agreement is difficult to read, the Planning Department has prepared a drawing for City Council review which is attached on page. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the sign policy agreement for Town Centre 70 & 100 Additions with or without modification. f� • 4 HAUGE, EIDE & HEI.LEit, P.A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW WATER VIEW OFFICE TOWER, SUITE 303 1200 YANKEE DOODLE ROAD EAGAN, MINNESOTA 55123 PAUL H. HAUGE KEVIN W. EIDE DAVID G. KELLER June 26, 1986 LORI M. BELLIN _ MICHAEL J. MAYER Mr. Dale Runkle -- _ City Planner __ I- _ 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota 55123 �• RE: Town Centre—Eagan, Pylon Sign Agreement Dear Dale: AREA CODE 612 TELEPHONE 456-9000 454-4224 Attached hereto please find a proposed final draft of the Town Centre—Eagan Pylon Sign Agremeent, redrafted pursuant to Advisory Planning Commission directions and further negotiation with the owners' representative. The following changes are noted: 1. A legal description (Exhibit "B") is now included. 2. Paragraph 1. provides that the original Exhibit "A" (location map) is on file with the City (reduction were not legible to the APC members). 3. Paragraph 2. now clearly indicates that all signs are still subject to the conditional use process except as to location. This should assure the Council and APC that pylon signs not in compliance with this agreement and/or City Code will not be erected. 4. Paragraph 4. now provides for written notice to future buyers as per APC directive. 5. The last sentence of Paragraph 5. was deleted as unnecessary in light of Paragraph 2. and due to the valid concern that potential buyers may refuse to purchase where some previous buyer has violated the agreement. 6. An APC member recommended that Paragraph 7. provide for mandatory recording rather than allowable (shall vs, may). The owner has requested that the word "may" be left in (as in the City's standard development contract) as any recording presents a reasonable risk of creating a cloud on title. 7. Paragraph 10. was added at the request of the owners to prevent any unfair prejudice to them in relation.to other developments should the sign ordinance requirements become less restrictive. 8. Exhibit "A" indicates that Town Centre 70 signs may be located on Town Centre Drive (assuming no additional variance situations are created). 39 Mr. Dale Runkle June 26, 1986 Page Two 9. Exhibit "A" also indicates that all undesignated pylon signs in Town Centre 100 (eight undesignated) will comply -with ordinance spacing requirements except as illustraped. DGK:cjb M Very yttruly /fyours, David G. Keller Assistant City Attorney • CITY OF EAGAN TOWN CENTRE-EAGAN PYLON SIGN AGREEMENT This Agreement, made and entered into this day of 1986 by and between the City of Eagan, a municipality oftheState of Minnesota, hereinafter called "City" and the Owners id ptified herein as .Federal Land Company, Eagan Tower Office Building Partnership, and Eagan Heights Commercial Park, whose addresses are, 3460 Washington Drive, Eagan, Minnesota 55122. • WHEREAS, the Owner or Owners have applied to the City for approval of various pylon and/or business signs pursuant to City Code Section 4.20; and WHEREAS, such signs are needed for businesses located within retail and office buildings located in Town Centre -Eagan, which real property is legally described on Exhibit "B" attached hereto; and WHEREAS, in certain situations variances are necessary due to thelot configurations of certain proposed commercial developments; and WHEREAS, the City of Eagan desires to prevent the overabundance of commercial pylon signs affecting the visibility and aesthetics of the area; • and WHEREAS, the City has requested an overall plan indicating the location of all pylon signs within Town Centre -Eagan in order to more appropriately address requests for individual pylon signs and avoid a multiplicity of hearings. M1 NOW THEREFORE, the City and Owner or Owners agree as follows: 1. All pylon signs on business premises shall be located as indicated on Exhibit "A" attached hereto with variances to the requirements of Eagan City Code Section 4.20 only in accord with said exhibit, an original of which is on file with the City. 2. The normal public hearing process —for a conditional use_ permit (Code Section 11.40, Subd. 4.B.) fora pylon sign (Code Section 4.20, Subd. 1.C.6.) shall be required for each sign except as to location, provided the proposed location complies with that Agreement. 3. All signs shall be erected, except that the locations shown on Exhibit "A" shall be allowed, in compliance with all of the applicable City Code provisions.. 4. The Owners shall provide written notice to potential buyers of the contents of this Agreement to avoid any unnecessary requests for pylon signs. 5. The terms of this Agreement shall be legally enforceable by either party in a court of competent jurisdiction and each of the parties retains the right to assert any legal, equitable, or administrative right of action or defense which may be available by law in order to implement or enforce the terms of this Agreement. 6. If any portion, section, sub -section, sentence, clause, paragraph or phrase of this Sign Agreement is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Agreement. 7. This Agreement may/shall be recorded with the Dakota County Recorder and the Owner (Owners) shall provide and execute any and all documents 2 necessary to implement the r.ecording of this Agreement. 8. The parties mutually recognize and agree that all terms and conditions of this recordable agreement shall run with the land herein described and shall be binding upon the heirs, successors, administrators and assigns of the owners referenced in this Agreement. 9. The undersigned owners include all the persons., firms or corporations that hold an interest in this Town Centre -Eagan and the undersigned officials are authorized to sign this Agreement and to bind the respective parties. 10. The City, by this Agreement, has granted the Owners certain variances ® with respect to the location of pylon signs within Town Centre -Eagan in exchange for a limitation on the number of pylon signs which can be erected in • Town Centre -Eagan. Therefore, should the provision in the Eagan City Code Section 4.20 which states that "no pylon sign may be located within 300 feet of any other pylon sign, measured on the same side of the street" be repealed, be declared invalid, or otherwise have no further force or effect, then this Agreement shall be null and void and no longer binding on the parties or their heirs, successor, assigns, or administrators. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands and seals. CITY OF EAGAN FEDERAL LAND COMPANY (Date: ) By: By: / Its Mayor - Date Its: Attest: Its Clerk By: / Date Its Signed Agreement Approved as to Form: Eagan City Attorney (Date: ) THIS INSTRUMENT DRAFTED BY: Hauge, Eide 5 Keller, P. A. Attorneys for the City of Eagan 1200 Yankee Dood Road Water View Office Tower, Suite 303 Eagan, MN 55123 (612) 456-9000 EAGAN TOWER OFFICE BUILDING PARTNERSHIP By: / Date Its: And: / Date Its: 40 EAGAN HEIGHTS COMMERCIAL PARK By: / Date Its: And: / Its: Date 41 • STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss. COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) On this day of , 19 ., before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared BEATTA BLOMQUIST and E. J. 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) STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss. COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) On this day of , 19 , before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared to me personally known to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that _he executed the same as h_ free act and deed. (S E A L) STATE OF MINNESOTA) • ) ss. COUNTY OF ) On this day of , 19 , before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared and to me personally known, who, being each by me duly sworn to be partners of the Partnership named in the foregoing instrument, and that the seal affixed to said instrument is the seal of said partnership and that said instrument was signed and sealed on behalf of said Partnership by said and and they acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deed of the Partnership. (S E A L) 7� 5 STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss. COUNTY OF ) On this day of , 19.. , before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared and to me personally known, who, being each by me duly sworn to be partners of the Partnership named in the foregoing instrument, and that the seal affixed to said instrument is the seal of said partnership and that said instrument was signed and sealed on behalf of said Partnership by said and and they acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deed of the Partnership. (S EA L) • STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss. COUNTY OF ) On this day of , 19before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared and to me personally known, who, being each by me duly sworn to be partners of the Partnership named in the foregoing instrument, and that the seal affixed to said instrument is the seal of said partnership and that said instrument was signed and sealed on behalf of said Partnership by said and and they acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deed of the Partnership. (S EA L) is V� - YGufD MEnYGIw 0 I i TOWN CE EAGAN .e...n� CONCEPT RAN - .a.wnm..nwa.w.r ELLNYL 4eD CONLANY _ .aiv: F0161ASFY, FAANG EWO(SON, FFLNIECTS NL' .' p!' MME EN(iNF£WNG CCf.V1N1 HC. • urruen nrtnsernw� I i TOWN CE EAGAN .e...n� CONCEPT RAN - .a.wnm..nwa.w.r ELLNYL 4eD CONLANY _ .aiv: F0161ASFY, FAANG EWO(SON, FFLNIECTS NL' .' p!' MME EN(iNF£WNG CCf.V1N1 HC. • Agenda Information Memo July 1, 1986, City Council Meeting Page Sixteen DRIVE-THROUGH & PYLON SIGN FOR ARBY'S RESTAURANT B. Conditional Use Permit to Allow :A Drive -Through Arby's Restaurant and a 20' Pylon Sign --At the April 15, 1986, City Council meeting a conditional use permit to allow a drive-through Arby's restaurant and -a 20' pylon sign as requested by Franchise Associates., Inc., was given consideration. It was reported at that meeting that the APC is recommending approval of the conditional use permit for, the drive-through and a denial of the conditional use permit for the pylon sign per their action of March 25. It was at the April 15 meeting that the City Council raised a concern about the number of signs and location of signage for the Town Centre 70 and 100 Additions and asked that a special study and report be prepared that provides a master 'plan layout of all future signs. The Arby's restaurant and pylon sign is included in the sign policy agreement as one of the sign locations which was identified under Item A., Old Business. Therefore, action is no longer required for the 20' pylon sign if the sign policy agreement is approved with or without modification. For information that was prepared by the Planning Department concerning the Conditional Use Permit for a drive-through Arby's restaurant, please refer to the Planning9 Report, a copy is attached and referenced as pages�through STi Also a copy of the Planning Commission minutes for the March 25 meeting are enclosed on page 53 for your review. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny a condi- tional use permit for a drive-through Arby's restaurant. FA CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCE APPLICANT: FRANCHISE ASSOCIATION - ARBY'S LOCATION: LOT 2, BLOCK 1,_ TOWN CTR 70 3RD ADDN EXISTING ZONING: CSC COMMUNITY SHOPPING CTR DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: MARCH 25, 1986 DATE OF REPORT: MARCH 17, 1986 REPORTED BY: JIM STURM APPLICATION: An application has been submitted requesting a ® conditional use permit to allow a drive-through facility and pylon sign for an Arby's Restaurant on Lot 2, Block 1, of the proposed Town Centre 70 3rd Addition. The variance is required since there will not be 300' between this pylon sign and the Burger King sign to the east. COMMENTS: Federal Land Company is in the process of final platting this lot, the Burger King site abutting to the east and the outlot to the west. This site will become Lot 2, Block 1, Town Centre 70 3rd Addition. Access for .Arby's will be provided by a 19' one-way loop drive with one entry -one exit. As with the Burger King Restaurant, the entry drive has been extended to 90' before the parking stalls begin. This will provide stacking for two cars should someone be exiting from the first two parking stalls. The 'rive -through facility will be on the west side of the building. The exit drive is 20' wide and will allow vehicular movement past cars waiting in line for the drive-through. Stacking for eight cars has been provided. City Code requires one parking stall per three seats based- upon the capacity of the restaurant. This 90 seat facility will require 30 stalls, and 98, 10' x 20' stalls are proposed. The trash area will be enclosed near the back of the building. A landscape plan has been submitted and approved by City staff. SIGNS: The proposed pylon sign will contain 110' of signage and Federal Land Company has set a 20' maximum height restriction on signage in the area. Code will require that this sign be kept 10' within the property line. The proposed location is on the northeast portion of the site. The distance to the Burger King sign will be approximately 160'. A .variance application has been submitted. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT/VARIANCE - FRANCHISE ASSN. - ARBY'S MARCH 25, 1986 PAGE 2 An additional double-faced ground sign is shown 6' from the front property line. This sign will have to be moved to the north 4' to meet code compliance. The sign will contain 40' of signage area and measure 4' x 10' on a 2' berm. If approved, this conditional use permit and variance shall be subject to the following conditions: 1) No building permit be issued until the lots are final platted. • YNJY�� DocD�E �G [•vG�rTd Lo. ✓;C zgj � ' I :•Prosy �" \I �U Y� - �',kwy•• � d �eu-u�v Y acv_-{ ,`- •,�e-�, ��I , r•a:�:. f=E`il yJCLP 1 Al 1 1 � tl 81NCH �I CHANGE COPY LETTERS •51GN AREA 9-0 SQ• FE= --r A PRELIMINARY Y� ' A EAUA RESTAURANT_ .... y am= 1...1..::.��::1=::n '1 RUST ARCNITECTB � FAOAN, MINNESOTA _ �s uin n�-nn APC Minutes March 25, 1986 ARBY'S - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT & VARIANCE - TOWN CENTRE 70 Chair McCrea convened the public hearing on the application of Franchise Associates/Arby's for a conditional use permit to allow a drive-through facility and pylon sign for Arby's Restaurant for Lot 2, Block 1, proposed Town Centre 70 3rd Addition on Yankee Doodfe""Road, and variance for pylon sign distance from the Burger King sign on the east. Dale Runkle discussed the application with the Planning Commission members and stated that the City Council has requested a master sign plan be prepared for review and approval by the Council. He also indicated that a proposed plan has been submitted by Federal Land Company and noted the fact that 300 foot spacing would not be possible between the Arby's ana_Burger King signs. Doug Kennedy, the Vice President of Franchise Associates, the Arby's franchisee in the twin cities area, was present and stated that the applicant would agree to move the sign to the northwest corner of the lot, which would ® make it 295 feet from the Burger King sign. Charles Bartholai of Federal Land Company was also present and noted that Federal Land has provided a tentative model sign proposal for the Town Centre area with the important elements being aesthetics and making sure that the signs do not interfere with the residential area. He recommended a total of 28 pylon signs with a maximum of 12 signs in the Town Centre 100 area and 16 signs in the Town Centre 70 area. In addition, the proposal would have three C_ additional limitations including one sign per lot, no sign in excess of 20 feet in height and that all signs be at least 200 feet distant from one another. There were no objections from the public. The proposed Kentucky Fried Chicken sign would be in excess of 300 feet of the proposed Arby's sign. Member Wilkins recommended that the entire planned development sign issue be reviewed separately and that the Commission deal only with the Arby's • application at the current meeting. In addition, a small four foot monument sign will be requested and there was a. question as to whether such a sign would be allowed under the Ordinance. Harrison moved to recommend approval of the conditional use permit application for the arive-through facility, subject to no building permit being issued until the lot has received final plat approval. Voracek seconded the motion and all voted in favor. Harrison then moved, Voracek seconded the motion to recommend denial of the conditional use permit and the variance for the pylon sign under the City Code noting that it does not conform with the distancd provisions and in addition, there appeaYs to be a proliferation of signs in the general area which is counter to the intent of the Eagan Sign Ordinance. All members voted in favor. Agenda Information Memo July 1, 1986, City Council Meeting Page Seventeen TEMPORARY ADVERTISING SIGN REGULATIONS C. Review and Consideration of Temporary Advertising Sign Regula- tions --At the June 17, 1986, City Council meeting., further consider- ation and review of temporary advertising sign regulations was continued due to the length of the agenda. By way of background, at the January 7, 1986, City Council meeting, the City staff was directed to prepare a policy considera- tion for the location of temporary advertising signs at the intersections of City collector and/or County roads. The policy was presented at the April 1, 1986, City Council meeting for review and consideration. For a copy of a memo of direction by •the City Administrator and the study completed by the Sign Inspec- tor and Chief Building Inspector, refer to pages through Following review and consideration of the temporary advertising sign policy, Councilmember Ellison suggested "that one sign be permitted at each intersection which would include several devel- opers and one standard with each developer potentially being able to place a sign on more than one standard. After discussion, Smith moved, Wachter seconded, the motion to continue consideration of the policy with the request that staff review the proposal and prepare and submit guidelines regarding locations, sizes, cost-, color priorities and users to the City Council for later consider- ation. All voted yea." Following the motion, specific direction was given to the City Administrator which is outlined in the attached memo enclosed on pages through to the Chief Building Inspector. Mr. Borgschatz, the City"s Sign Inspector, has reviewed the April 4 memo and for a copy of his findings,. refer to pages through The cost projected for a steel sign seems high; however, individual signs that are being purchased and placed by developers through -out the community at various intersections are expensive and may be similar in cost for one reader board'. The cost for a developer advertising on a reader board for a period of two (2) years may be less expensive than constructing their own free-standing sign.. There are many considerations, such as 1) the City monitoring, the program as outlined by our Sign Inspector, or 2) a revision to the ordinance allowing various sign companies to bid on the reader board and manage same for the City of Eagan per Eagan specifica- tions and location. In other words, a developer would contact the sign company directly and buy time on the reader board at the quote presented to the City. 3) Developers may be restricted with the information that can be placed on a reader board due to the size of advertising space, i.e., eliminating use of their logo and other marketing information. 4) Steel signs are certainly more expensive than wood signs but require much less maintenance. The City could erect the reader board signs during winter months, 5V Agenda Information Memo July 1, 1986, City Council Meeting Page Eighteen therefore providing both the management and construction/instal- lation service. Reader boards at stategic locations throughout the City would eliminate numerous temporary advertising signs that are being placed by developers and builders. Additional philosophy should be considered regarding 1) the amount of regulatory control the City desires to place on builders and developers advertising their businesses within the City. 2) If additional regulatory control is desired, whether the City or private sector should manage the installation of the signs. Because of the investments, certain developers and builders have made in temporary advertising signs, • any change in policy might require either a sunset or grandfather provision to slowly eliminate those signs that are currently in existence while freezing any replacement of new temporary adver- tising signs. Since the June 17 meeting the City Administrator received notice of a publication that is available from ICMA regarding temporary advertising signs. Apparently a study has been made nationwide of alternatives that cities have adopted to control and regulate temporary advertising signs within their communities. The City Administrator has sent for a copy of the document; however, to date the booklet has not arrived. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To discuss and provide additional direction as to whether the City wishes to amend its sign ordinance by regulating the use of reader boards for any and all temporary advertising signs throughout the City. • ,5�� C Agenda Information Memo April 1, 1986, City Council Meeting Page Twenty -Seven REVIEW CURRENT POLICY/TEMPORARY ADVERTISING SIGNS B. Review of Current Policy for Temporary Advertising- Signs --The City staff was directed, at a recent City Council meeting, to inventory all temporary advertising signs on major collector roads throughout the city. Further action taken at the January 7, 1986, City Council meeting directed the City staff to prepare options for revisions to the sign ordinance and sign policy concerning advertis- ing directional signs. Procedure requiring acceptable .maintenance conditions has been established by the Protective Inspections Department along with an inventory that was completed and copied to each member of the City Council during early March. There are many regulatory alternatives to review, however, the three (3) options listed in the Chief Building Official's Report were as follows: Option 1. Leave the City Code 4.20 subdivision 1C9 and allow the City Council to grant special permits using the criteria of City 4.20 subdivisions 2 & 3 which establish setbacks and standards. Option 2: Limit temporary signs to a one-year maximum time span, limited to Eagan developments only, area limitation of 24 sq.feet, limit top edge of sign at 9 feet above street lev=1. limit bottom edge of sign to 6 feet above s`re:-t level, a limit of two (2) signs per intersection corner, and a minimum of 50 feet separation between signs. Option 3: An immediate moratorium on all temporary advertising signs and phase out existing signs as permits expire. Enclosed on page is a copy of the sign survey of 31 inter- sections in Eagan. If any member of the City Council has misplaced the specific sign locations, an additional copy can be made avail- able. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or suggest a regulatory change for the control and issuance of temporary adver- tising signs. MEMO TO: BUILDING INSPECTOR PETERSON FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES c� DATE: JANUARY 10, 1986 SUBJECT: NEW POLICY FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION AND LOCATION OF TEMPORARY ADVERTISING SIGNS In official action that was taken by the Eagan City Council at their regular meeting held on Tuesday, January 7, 1986, staff was directed to prepare a policy consideration for the location of temporary advertising signs at the intersections of City collector and/or County roads. The City Council -commends your department on the excellent work that Elmer Borgschatz and you have performed in tightening up and carrying out regulatory provisions set for the location of signs throughout the City. In a discussion at the meeting, it is the desire of the City Council to develop additional policy that will further tighten up the location of temporary advertising signs throughout the City. First, the City Council would like an inventory of signs that are located on major City collector roads such as Blackhawk and all County roads throughout the City. This inventory or list of existing signs would include the duration (what amount of time is remaining of the two-year, temporary status) and the quality of the existing sign. Secondly, the City Council is asking that the policy for consider- ation include several of the following points: 1) temporary advertising signs must be placed in a specific location not to block any sight distance or view for the motorist; 2) consider- ation should be given to the adoption of criteria that would establish a distance between temporary advertising signs (much the same as general advertising) for aesthetic purposes; 3) a require- ment would exist that all adjacent property owners must be notified and provide consent for the placement of a temporary advertising sign; 4) the size and type of structure for a temporary advertising sign should again be reviewed; 5) consideration should be given to criteria that would establish a maintenance provision allowing City staff to require certain on-going maintenance of a temporary advertising sign; and 6) other conditions that might be suitable for a new temporary sign policy. The City Council would like the inventory completed and a policy to review by the first meeting in March. With the amount of growth that is occurring, we anticipate the request for many more temporary advertising signs; therefore, there is some urgency in preparing a new policy for City Council consideration. City Administrator TLH/kf 5, • • Cliff Rd & Nicols - SIGN SURVEY OF THIRTY ONE INTERSECTIONS IN EAGAN Hwy 149 -& Lone Oak Rd -- No sign Cliff Rd & Cinamin Ridge - Hwy 149 -& Yankee Doodle - 1 sign ( 3 sised, in sw corner Dodd Rd -& Diffley - 2 " ( SW corner ) Hwgr 3 -& Diffley - 1 " ( SW corner, Homeowners Produce for sale) no permit Cliff Rd-& Hwy 3 - 1 " ( SW corner ) Cliff Rd & Dodd Rd - 2 " ( 1 in NW, 1 in NE corner) Cliff Rd & Lexington - 2 " ( NE corner ) Cliff Rd & Pilot Knob - 3 " ( NW corner ) Cliff Rd & Thomas Lake - 3 ", ( 1 in NE , 2 in NW corner ) Cliff Rd & Safari B H - 2 " ( 1 in NE , 1 in S.E corner ) Cliff Rd & Johnny Cake - 1 " ( SE corner ) Cliff Rd & Galaxie - 1 " ( BE corner ) Cliff Rd & Rahn Rd - 3 " ( 3 in NE corner ) Cliff Rd & Nicols - 2 Cliff Rd & Slater - 1 " Cliff Rd & Cinamin Ridge - 0 " Cedar Ridge & Shale - 0 " Blackhawk & Hwy 30 - 3 Diffley & Thomas Lake - 2 " Diffley & Pilot Knob - 5 " Beerwood & Pilot Knob - 3 Diffley & Lexington - 7 Diffley & Trenton - 4 Wescott & Lexington - 2 Yamkee Doodle * Lex, - 5 " Yankee Doodle &Pilot Snob- 0 Yankee Doodle & Hwy 13 - 0 " Four Oaks & Hwy 13 - 1 Lone Oak & Hwy 13 - 0 " 1 BP in i3 corner, 1 BP in SE Corner ) 1 in SW corner Service station sign pending) no sign ) no sign ) 3 in SW corner) 1 in NW , 1 in NE corner ) 2 in NW, 3 in NE corner ) 1 in NE corner , � 2 in 9E corner Should be remov 1 in NE corner , 6 in SE corner ) 1 in SE corner, on Right/a/way & 3 signs in SW cor 2 in NW corner ) 1 NW, 1 SW, 3 BE & 1 in NE corner ) 2 pylon signs , Hotel and Super America ) sign NE corner) Lone Oak & Pilot Knob - 1 " ( Blackhawk Glen - No permit ) Lone Oak & Lexington - 3 " ( 2 in SE , 1 in NE corner ) Summary 1 intersection, 7 signs 2 It 5 II 1 n 4 n 6 3 7 2 g u 1 n 6 " 0 Total 31 intersections 61 signs MEMO TO: CHIEF BUILDING INSPECTOR PETERSON FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: APRIL 4, 1986 SUBJECT: CITY COUNCIL PROPOSAL TO CONSIDER CITY -OWNED/ STANDARDIZED TEMPORARY ADVERTISING SIGNS In official action that was taken by the City Council at their April 1, 1986, meeting, a concept was given consideration whereby the City would construct and install uniform, temporary advertising signs throughout approved locations within the City. These signs would be designed to accommodate several identification signs that would meet a specific specification and design standard. Please make reference to the example that was prepared by City Council - member Ellison and is attached for your reference. The City Council is concerned about the number of temporary advertising signs that are located at busy intersections throughout the community. I would like you to give consideration to this new concept that was proposed by the City Council and determine the feasibility of the project. Please take into consideration the following: 1. Locations: It would be necessary to determine the loca- tions that are suitable for installing a City -owned stan- dardized sign. 2. Size: Please prepare a set of specifications that would standardize the sign and each reader board/identification sign. 3. Cost: Please estimate the cost for construction and installation of these signs. Also determine which each of the individual reader board/identifications would cost to construct and, further, what. is fair in terms of rental charges by the City. 4. Priority: Please determine a method in which the reader board/identification signs would be rented considering priority of space on the City sign and, further, the duration of time that those identification signs would be allowed. 5. Number of Signs: Please determine how many signs could be placed on one of the overall signs and, further, whether more than one size of sign should be given consideration. Please see #2 above. 6. Locations: Currently, a development is allowed two (2) temporary advertising signs in addition to any signs that are allowed on the subject development parcel. It would be necessary to determine the procedure for allowing a location and consideration for the two additional signs a developer might request. 7. Other Criteria: Please give consideration to any other criteria that might be appropriate in considering this project. �9 It appears that the City Council would like to proceed with this concept for controlling and providing a beautification to temporary \'- advertising signs throughout the community. It would be necessary to provide some type of transition such as, requiring developers to remove their temporary advertising signs and possibly provide 'a free or reduced rent for, the first year to off -set expenses that they have incurred in the construction of their temporary adver- tising sign. Again,please give this priority consideration. If you need further assistance due to your departmental schedule, please con- tact my office and I will provide some administrative assistance either through our new intern or one -of my Administrative Assis- tants. , GV 40 City Administrator cc: Honorable Mayor & City Councilmembers TLH/kf • brvg`' W, W�,Ae +Rjef,r J 4 SA F/1 R OHMS H LL i OPPERS �> O, , t homFS+�r, 7 C-�. MEMO TO: CITY ADMINISTRATOR, TOM HEDGES CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL, DALE PETERSON FROM: ELMER A BORGSCHATZ DATE: JUNE 12, 1986 HE: CITY COUNCIL PROPOSAL TO CONSIDER CITY OWNED/STANDARDIZED TEMPORARY ADVERTISING SIGNS In reference to memo dated April 4, 1986 we have gathered some information that may be helpful to study a program which could be considered to eliminate a problem relative to a reader board identification. I have been very much impressed by the concept, however there may be some pitfalls as we will allude to when we refer to the seven points set forth in your letter. • 1. LOCATIONS - I would estimate that six reader boards are needed to cover the present activity in the City. The developments are spread into most areas of the City, however it may be difficult to lease six prime spots as the use of right-of-ways would not be advisable. 2. SIZE - The attached sign detail by a reputable advertising company in Eagan meets the recommendation of the Council, however the all -steel sign cost estimate also attached seems high. 3. COSTS - In accordance with estimates we have for an all steel constructed sign with steel posts, removable (12" x 72" adv. panels) which would include reflectorized panels would cost approximately $5,250 per unit. The land use cost is estimated at $600 per unit. $100 maintenance cost annually may be low. Assuming a ten-year life expectancy of the all -steel sign, the following calculations indicate the projected income necessary to provide the ® service: To meet the annual costs which would be change of script: 3 @ $1,143, depreciation of $525, interest of $525, lease of site - $600 and $100 for maintenance for a total of $2,893. A monthly rental fee of $33 per panel would be necessary. 4. PRIORITY - It is suggested that the reader board be leased to the applicants who have shown the greatest activity in number of units processed in the preceding six months. 5. NUMBER OF SIGNS - We believe that signs should be uniform for aesthetic values. At the moment, it would seem difficult to locate more than six signs in strategic locations within the City. Six signs filled would allow for 48 users and not knowing -the acceptance by the industry, the outlay of approximately $36,000 looks large. 6. LOCATION - It is our contention that location could be found for six good spots. I believe Council and management could be a better judge of the temporary advertising needs, hopefully the reader board would eliminate part of the problem. 6 7. OTHER CRITERIA - Space on the reader board on an annual basis, if renewals are wanted, arrangements and fees should be made 30 days before expiration. Vacancies do not destroy the effect of the board. EH/js ,63 Ll — — — — --- 1111r-171111r-7.-.---------c- FABRICATOR S Si E SIGNERS.. -r? - .21 �o June 6, 1986 Mr. Elmer ©orgschatz City of Eagan ® 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 5$122 q MO. 945 PIERCE BUTLER ROUTE • 488-6711 • SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA 5511 RE: Twin post directional signs Dear Elmer: To furnish and install a 161 tall twin post structure with eight double faced directional panels,as shown on Drawing #86-R-193, our price to you is $4,737.00. For optional reflective copy, add $512.00. The following is a cost breakdown for your review: Furnished Installed Total • Poles 700.00 1300.00 2000.00 Reflective 1211 x 7211 D/F panels 291.00 90.00 381.00 Non -reflective 1211 x 7211 DIF panels 227.00 90.00 317.00 Sincerely, LAWRENCE SIGNS, INC. Mike Gifford MG:ds 6� '— -inn VIEW O ,V AHG Lq, Nbf! D L��& C TOS as counn �[FFUGioptLED AuV AA'Yo+/L WHIIG ON, b�rJ1E _KRS_PF ML VIEW Of le14 – I�EC\42 i Agenda Information Memo July 1, 1986, City Council Meeting Page Nineteen BLUE BELL ICE CREAM REQUEST A. Blue Bell Ice Cream Request to Allow On -Street Ice Cream Truck Sales --During the summer of 1984, the City experienced a growing number of vendors selling such items as shrimp_, paintings and flowers at various intersections throughout the community. The City Council determined that these sales presented a safety problem for the distractions caused to motorists who would stop and purchase these items. There was also an issue raised about the liability of allowing ice cream trucks to solicit and sell ® ice cream and beverages on City streets throughout the community. At the July 2, 1984 City Council meeting, the City Clerk's office was given a direction that no one be allowed to solicit within the City either on a door to door basis or by parking in a specific location. This also included the ice cream vehicles which stopped their solicitation late in 1984. Non profit groups such as boy scout and girl scout groups were given an exception and have been allowed through the City Clerk's office to solicit donations door to door. Late this spring the Blue Bell Ice Cream Company presented a petition and request for reconsideration by the City Council to allow on -street sales of beverages and ice cream food items throughout the community. Blue Bell has addressed the liability issue by providing the City with a copy of a letter from Mid Continent Agencies Inc., that they presently have an adequate liability insurance and further, the safety practice and record of Blue Bell Ice Cream Company. Enclosed is a copy of that letter from the insurance company, a copy of a petition that was presented by the Blue Bell Company and some other related documents, referenced on pages through _ 'Z for consideration by the City Council. A representative of Blue Bell Ice Cream will be present, requesting that the City Council allow a solicitor's license for on -street sale of beverages and ice cream related goods throughout the community. Also enclosed as a part of the aforementioned documents are copies of ordinances and other pertinent information supplied by Blue Bell for City Council review. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny granting of a solicitation license to the Blue Bell Ice Cream Company to allow the sale of soft drink beverages and ice cream related foods. M 111DBell T 71 3218 Snelling Avr. Miuucapulis, MN 55.106 fi 12 724-5205 April 5, 1986 Police Chief Bertha 3830 Pilot knob Road = Eagan, MN. 55121 Dear Chief Bertha, For the past seven years the Blue Hell Ice Cream truck has been a summer companion to thousands of Eagan residents young and old alike. I am writing this letter in the hope that I can convince the council to allow us to operate in Eagan once again. Late last summer I received a letter from the City explaining that Eagan City Code, sec. 9.15 -Prohibiting ® parking for the purpose of advertising or selling merchandise, was going to be strictly enforced. We complied with the request and did not operate after receiving the letter. We did however receive numerous calls (not just from children) inquiring as to the whereabouts of the "ice cream man". The point in the letter requesting we cease operation mentioned a safety hazard. We consider ourselves a very safety conscious company and train our drivers extensively with both written and slide safety programs. In support of our safety record I would like to present certain facts= We Have operated in Eagan from approximately May 1st through September 1st each year. The truck works an average of six days per week and sells an average of 200 ice cream bars per day. That means over our seven years of operation we have • sold about 150,000 ice cream bars. In all this time and with all those sales we have never had a single accident take place. I feel this is an excellent record and if we are allowed to operate again our commitment to safety will remain just as strong. I am enclosing a letter from our insurance carrier explaining our limits of liability and our safety record. I am also enclosing the results of a recent Saturday afternoon survey we tool: in Eagan asking people if they wanted to have the ice cream truck back: in their neighborhoods. I am happy to report that at least 9B% of the People we asked said they saw no reason we should not be allowed to operate. In recent years the cities of Richfield, St. Louis Park, Mound and Fridley have altered their ordinances to allow ice cream trucks. I am enclosing a copy of a letter from the city manager of Richfield explaining his experience with Blue Bell. (The letter was originally written to the city of St. Cloud in support of our application to vend there.) I am also enclosing copies of the altered ordinances from these cities in the hope they can be used as a model in Eagan. The Blue Bell truck has also provided a welcome summer job, usually for an Eagan college student. In conclusion, we are asking that the council consider a way for the "ice cream man/women" to be able to come back to Eagan. We feel our record shows that we have been a responsible and safety conscious company. We also feel we have provided_a desired service in a fun and positive manner. I would be happy to work with the city to develop a ordinance that would allow our operation. Thank you for your consideration of this proposal. Sincerely; Glenn Baron Blue Bell Ice Cream Inc. 7 E • • • MID-CONTINENT AGENCIES, INC. 7154 SHADY OAK RD. EDEN PRAIRIE. MN 55344 PHONE: 612-941-0990 Apcil 16, 1986 Dear Members: Blue Bell Ice Cream is insured with WesLern National Mutual Insurance Cunlpany. The Company is au A raLed Company as listed in A. M. Best, the leading source of insurance company rating material. The attached Cer'LificaLe of Insurance shows Blue Bell Ice Cream's cauceen for the general public in the event of an accident. Please note that for a loss, the limit of liability is 95D0,000 aggregate for bath general liability and auLomobile liability, with a $1,000,000 umbrella. Blue Bell ice Cream has put togeLiler a Safety Progralrl for its vendors. Safety is of keynote concern to Blue Bell Ice Cream and of great concern to WesLern NaLional Insurance Company, as Lhey stand behind Blue Bell Claims. The following is a listing of the procedures by these two companies to insure a low incidence of accidents. 1. Driver VLL-if iCatlOrl A. Motor vehicle records are run oil all drivers and reviewed with each driver be'for'e l:hey are allowed to drive. B. Ally prior accidenL is reviewed wiLh each driver before they are allowed to drive. c. A safetyManual has been developed and is constantly L+eir:g updated to inform the vendors of proper' safe Ly procedures. 3. Safe Ly films, posters and SLuffers are used all an ooguing basis to keep safety a Lop priori Ly a all Limes. These items are supplied by Lhe Insurance company and the NaLiurial Safely Cuuucii. The experience thaL we have had with Blue Bell Ice Cream has been Llial the management is very concerned about loss conte'ul anti safely. We believe Blue Be L1 Ice Cream to be an excellent insured and a communiLy—nlirided company. SirI cer'el;i, William K. Velin Mid—ConLiri�iiL Agencies, Inc.9 WI(V%j j �/ 1� ill 4f�e� INC. 3218 Snelling Ave. Minneapolis, MN 55406 612-729-5205 REQUEST FOR EXAMINATION We the undersigned of EAGAN, Mn., voice our concerti over the disappearance of the familiar neighborhood ice cream truck. Over the past years Blue Bell Ice Cream. Inc. has provided our neighborhoods with safe, clean, and courteous service. We would be interested in the City Hall of Eagan reexamining the possibility of having a Blue Bell Ice Cream truck return to our neighborhood this summer. NAME 1. F.-VIT"YTOR TEL. Ll U, e(i l ?o J/5 Z" Jy�J tl, ,�-1 ,De /s- 2 - s� CL 42 C- LQ U I'ILJ X06 20. ts - pull pdl j� "realm, .�j INC. :1218 Snelling Ave. Minneapolis. MN 554061 812.729.5120.5 NAME: ADDRESS l TEL. /C I �+�r\ v -1 (','Y`t.J f,•..-\ I i[" .,:/J `� � 22.`95(GVm. terra P/ /� _97 L 7 (��,,za. 23. - �� 1,. Y ( 111 :' ti Y' 16 .31 i 111 (,'; 5 24. �:� � _y�� It;.:`( ��. < <i' �� �� I`t`s Z.'1�.Y� ..uk�. y►j�� -- `j'7(:Jr-> r 26. • 27- 28. 7•2s. i l4) 29. Les�r_ ,,t• '/S - 0 c o s 30, r.&ra�4.,�t. 3�5 E�1.,�.�y`�,,!n�� . -/syc3 31 • Gco �iLC►� n. 3-0 4-.D-. %t�t,�F (�iYL Aj 5 33. 3z(, 7b�-� '•�' JL 34. LE�c•.�r.�C�l� �L(,� < L/ S- z - 5.3E•.3 • 35. C,.Lid u� f�i- C'vr�ca.— '3 � 7 I C/ S-d ' !r 3 • - 7 - 36 l� lr't�l¢1 %1t7%A��-.. �2��j Ll L59 -7 :� �!�: 37- C� � 3i 38. f ;L-19 ',tc eJ it A -�/cc cu ry,,:ta t !) .3: 2 `1 / i 39. � Uli �-Y 7/4a 4o. ✓ �/� - r 41.vo 3.44 1+3- 44. ./, 45.V<. C�'cn>�tilrn 46.Yy�vz<•% NAME: 47 - 50 -..,TC 51. �21 52. 53. 54. 55 56. jq'VYA 57. 58. ,JVrr„rl 59. 6o. 61. 11416" 411111 INC. 3218 Snelling Ave. Minneapolis, MN 55406 612.729-5205 ADDRESS - 3Q 3 C/q ke Rid 5,9 0 I f 11 11 3z 71- 62. !f- Z7 Y - c 'Z, 63 T) k 64 65 L l.fb�t C�4�C1�� ,3.x'7/ �L�.�/ic.. /�12 66,J7OUL-C -5,2&ct \1,,411ri- Idl (cr, TEL. 0 3 TQ 67. fT) C1 C9 I F('-o,c h,) i 31-ju)-7 Vk-L. uu.,ALL ic, -01- qc 68.3L 51t 51 Lt 69.. 70.. 71. Z 10 72. L'TT ♦ 1 1 P11416j, p 1pe r.Iream, P INC. 3218 Snelling Ave. Minneapolis, MN 55406 612-729-5205 NAPM: tri ADDRESS: TEL. 74.' 75. 7 (. , �/S77 �'/ OA 79. 80. 81. 82. 83 �M 3� � a-. ,�l�e2 - � �,•t S�sf _ Cd` 3 �. 84. 1,700 vAA� Ko-4EiI? '?71-147 91y6 85.• ISL 8 .. 87. -77 88. J AA01. 00),� (,, ks k•J / • 89. c Ccs 9o. 91 r 93• 94. Kr�tE /�PCc�Ji�/c�ae.vl 95 96 • 97 `,1 I1 r� I, 98. V j 1 100. R,*t , 1 7 v v 1700 h-, m /700 l'ZC''t at�c VaiG� d 14q cuiz- OAKS/700 ysz- 35�� 671 VTV-9q&O 1�5�z �-ayao 'If sy-y» P � ,ua al lGalt1roam, ii INC. :3218 Snelling Ave. Minneapolis. MN 55406 612 729-5205 NAME: •' ADDRESS: 101. 102. 103. �w <� w1 �2,u _ 3 k 104. *1'-o C- luv I 1 1_) 106. ��•����%'�,� ��.:.1�, ��_ , „ -, lz _,�9 I.rC> 107. ° : •�!�% 108. 109 110. 112. ,/ 113 . C7l ,cc:. _> 114. 4- n. 115. ;^--c L' 116. %�l� l`� �.L/700 118. 119. 120. 121. 122. 123. 124. 125. 126. 127. TEL. 7//0 t/Su _ gsSG 506 � r j Cx Q, ., R n r# 3Ts 4' 'Lt °toy :j l VAj 23 OKAY, SFETLE. ICE - TRY TO FLIP E .REAM ME! � TRUCK - f J The Far Side/By Gary Larson Wf�ERE!! r r , I '1 �i ".Suri.srfed nota that I'm alt our of chocolate liulgc?' tennis the Menace/BY H. Ketcham "Shouldn't you be headln' south for the wlnter9" fi lu UT � �REAM I- rra3aue+ s � 'C J C Wf�ERE!! r r , I '1 �i ".Suri.srfed nota that I'm alt our of chocolate liulgc?' tennis the Menace/BY H. Ketcham "Shouldn't you be headln' south for the wlnter9" fi lu � r s � C ° e saving is perking space fog'+he Ice-cream n Dy YO Minneapolis Tribune Mmmmm! Ice cream heaven on wheels By Ruth Hammond Staff Writer Two trucks [he( come into nor neighbor. hood ring bells to announce their arrival. One is the garbage truck, the other is the Blae Bell Ice cream truck. No one goes running out to greet the garbage truck. The Ice cream truck Is another story. Droves of children appear as If from thin al r. A few grown-ups also approach the truck, though not at quite the same veloc- By, when the Blue Bell truck rolls around, vc"those who resist temptation cannot help hot get nostalgic for the Ice cream peddlers of their childhood. In my home- townwe hod two kinds of Ice cream peddie rs: the Sammy bar boys and Inc Mr. Snftee Duck drivers. The Sammy -bar boys rode a big tricycle with a freezer In the front. They trundled as fast as their Ices could pednl down our brick mein street or Wong the Memorial Day parade route. Sammy ban had vanilla Ice cream on the Inside, chocolate casting on the outside. and i think they cost a nickel or, at most, a dime. The chocolate coating would fragment when you bit Into It and you had to be very careful to cutch any loose blls In your paper wrapping, to be rescued later through deft work of the tongue. Dropping part of vour Sammy bar acro the pavement — from which you v'id hardly lick it up if your mo:1er -ire watching—a;, one of me Seem G rent Trnacdics of :11ldhmW. z:yaturaay September 12, 1901 1B. IJ 11 0 5984 Norlhwoal Publications * 0 Steve Massey State launches plan to polish its image _ Page 6 L J Lynda McDonnell Section Content legislation could hurt Minnesota Page 2 i •;• Partners stock their ice cream trucks --with frozen assets Buzz Magnuson/ Stall Photogrnphor Steve Bohrer dispenses treats to young customers. Twin Cities indicators umo TWIN CITIES UNEMPLOYMENT �,.rcr u.en. ,.nr O.y urn, .,i fca.omic 9.c�ir In thou 1983 9e no .— _ 76.1 _ 57 70 53 By Judith Willie Basineas Weiler tern Baron was a history major at the University of Wisconsin, worrying about his mounting college debts, when the hoopla surrounding the U.S. Bicentennial suggested a money -making scheme. "I purchased a mobile ice cream vending truck and worked out an arrangement with the City of Madison to vend at all the Bicentennial events there that year,".recalls Baron, 30. "It just seemed like a good idea to put myself through college." The business was so successful that it grew to four trucks the second year and 10 the third. Managing it took up more and more time, eventually propelling Baron out of college after his third year and into the ice cream business full time. Now he and a partner, Steve Craver, Small business also 30, own Blue Bell Ice Cream Co., whose 35 trucks roam the streets of Minneapolis, St. Paul, and most Twin Cities suburbs from May through September. Blue Bell also maintains its original Madison business, which Baron considers saturated at 10 trucks, and a year-old pushcart operation that sells ice cream in the downtowns df Minneapolis and St. Paul. While independent ice cream trucks pop up now and then around the area, Blue Bell, with annual sales around $200,000, is the only sizable company in the business. The short season here helps keep competition down, but small, locally owned operations are typical of the $100 million mobile ice cream industry, according to At Reynolds, manager of market development for the Good Humor Corp., Fairfield, N. J. .a. FREIGHT CAR LOADINGS 198 _ _ _ —A 1--_4 - 57. "There are some economic reasons for that," says Reynolds, whose company sells frozen novelty products to distributors like Blue Bell. "It's kind of a tough business. The owner has to be an entrepreneur and keep his hands right on things. If you have five different locations you are trying to run, you have to entrust it to managers, and there is always a little problem there." Reynolds, who started his career peddling ice cream from a Coad Humor pushcart in the Bronx in 1946, is a kind of unofficial historian of lie induslry because of his long involvement. The 19205 were the years when things really got going, he says. "Good Humor got started in 1920 on a cold January night in Youngstown, Ohio. Harry Burl was a quality ice cream maker and confectioner there, and he was experimenting with a block of Please see Ice cream/ 11 Indicators hint at `growth By Lynda McDonnell recession CU ®O M 04 Ln LO cn ■ tttttttte O mc .0 ■ ttt� Qi L c CU ®O February 13, 1986 Mr. Elmer Malinen — City Administrator City of St. Cloud City Hall St. Cloud, MN 56301 Dear Mr. Malinen: It is my understanding that the City of St. Cloud may be considering changes to your ordinances or adopting a new ordinance that would permit companies that wish to sell ice cream products or similar products from vehicles in residential neighborhoods as well as other areas of the community. Two years ago, the writer worked with Blue Bell Ice Cream, Inc. to seek amendments to our city ordinances that would permit ice cream vendors and similar vendors to drive their vehicles throughout our residential, . commercial and industrial neighborhoods using the usual sound mechanisms that are attached to those trucks to let persons know of their approach in the various neighbor- hoods. After two years of experience permitting this type of operation, I can report that we are very pleased with the results. Blue Bell Ice Cream, Inc. of Minneapolis has been selling their.ice cream products from their trucks throughout our community and I am not aware of one complaint. Blue Bell has cooperated with our volunteer organizations which from time to time sell products in our parks to help raise monies for our sports by either providing a truck to loan to the volunteer organization or to ask their regular drivers not to take their vehicles near those parks where fund raising activities are occurring. Blue Bell Ice Cream has also cooperated with the city by not selling on July 4 when we hold our community celebration and have our various civic organi- zations selling ice cream products and other food products on that day. �9 telephone: 669-7521 (612) an equal opportunity employer tr. O Q ■ tttttttte O UO February 13, 1986 Mr. Elmer Malinen — City Administrator City of St. Cloud City Hall St. Cloud, MN 56301 Dear Mr. Malinen: It is my understanding that the City of St. Cloud may be considering changes to your ordinances or adopting a new ordinance that would permit companies that wish to sell ice cream products or similar products from vehicles in residential neighborhoods as well as other areas of the community. Two years ago, the writer worked with Blue Bell Ice Cream, Inc. to seek amendments to our city ordinances that would permit ice cream vendors and similar vendors to drive their vehicles throughout our residential, . commercial and industrial neighborhoods using the usual sound mechanisms that are attached to those trucks to let persons know of their approach in the various neighbor- hoods. After two years of experience permitting this type of operation, I can report that we are very pleased with the results. Blue Bell Ice Cream, Inc. of Minneapolis has been selling their.ice cream products from their trucks throughout our community and I am not aware of one complaint. Blue Bell has cooperated with our volunteer organizations which from time to time sell products in our parks to help raise monies for our sports by either providing a truck to loan to the volunteer organization or to ask their regular drivers not to take their vehicles near those parks where fund raising activities are occurring. Blue Bell Ice Cream has also cooperated with the city by not selling on July 4 when we hold our community celebration and have our various civic organi- zations selling ice cream products and other food products on that day. �9 telephone: 669-7521 (612) an equal opportunity employer From our experience here in Richfield, the writer can recommend the ordinances that we have adopted two years 6rgc to any community. As I say, we have had the best of cooperation from the vendor and no complaints from our residents or businesses. If you would like to discuss this in any further detail, please feel free to write or call.on me. Si cerely y , ohn G. Ca twrig t City Manage JGC/eja is cc: Glenn Baron Blue Bell Ice Cream, Inc. 3218 Snelling Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55406 MFA APRIL 16, 1984 8c ORDINANCE NO. 16 -94 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LOUIS PARK MUNICIPAL CODE RELATED TO NOISE: AMENDING SECTION 11-511(3); ADDING SECTION 11-513.101, "EXCEPTION FOR FOOD/BEVERAGE_VEHICLES" THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN: Section 1. The St. Louis Park Municipal -Code, Section 11-511,- "Declaration of Nuisance; Actions Prohibited,''Subsection 3, is hereby amended to read: (3) Except as permitted by Section 11-513.101, no person may call attention to his business or his goods or attract the attention of the public to any building, structure, vehicle or any other area by creating noise • pollution, including but not limited to: Crying out, sounding a horn, ringing a bell, or issuing music or sound broadcasts through any radio receiving set, musical instrument, phonograph, stereo, loudspeaker, sound amplifier or other machine or device for the production or repro- duction of sound. In addition, no person shall create noise pollution through the use of any such sound production or reproduction devices in any activities or proceedings of his business, including, but not limited to, the use of loudspeakers for communications. Section 2. The St. Louis Park Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding Section 11-513.101 to read: C ction 11-513.1OL Exception for Food/Beverage Vehicles. Notwithstanding y other provision to the contrary, food/beverage vehicles may sound a nually operated bell between noon and 9 p.m. daily which produces a ise level measured at a distance of 50 feet from the source no greater an the following: -,idential/business/industrial zoning districts 65 decibels. Sec. 3. Penalty Clause. Persons violating the provisions of this ordinance shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. Sec. 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect 15 days after its publication. Adopted by the City Council April 16, 1984. Attest: City Clerk Reviewed for administration: Mayor Approved as to form and legality: City Manager 9/ City Attorney AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER VI, SECTION 6.14 OF THE ORDINANCE CODE ENTITLED "SOUND TRUCKS" City of Richfield Does Ordain: Chapter VI, Section 6.14 of the Ordinance Code of the City of Richfield entitled "Sound Trucks" is hereby amended in the following respects: = I. By amending Subdivision 1 thereof to read as follows: Subdivision 1. Definitions. _"Broadcasting vehicle" is any vehicle, motor propelled or otherwise, on which'is attached: (1) any device for amplifying and broadcasting through one or more loud speakers speech or music, whether produced from records, radio reception or vocally through microphone, and which projects sound from such vehicle with a total speaker volume of more than one watt; or (2) any unamplified projection of sound for the purpose of attracting attention to a commercial enterprise whether or not conducted in or on such vehicle. II. By amending paragraphs 3 and 4 of Subdivision 6 thereof to read as follows: {3}--Breadeastsng-7eh#eles-shall-flet-breadeest whsle -en -the -streets -and -alleys --,n- res #dentia} areas-ef-the-eity-. 44}(3) No broadcasting vehicle shall be operated • t on stree:Fs—aiid alle sin--re.E clan* al areas of e city, excep y special permission of the \ j council. In granting such permission, the council may place conditions and restrictions on the activity which relates to the time, location and manner of broadcasting. Pa sed—by-"tiie City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this day of , 1984. John N. Hamilton, Mayor ATTEST: Sylvia K. Bergh, City Clerk p v Agenda Information Memo July 1, 1985, City Council Meeting Page Twenty VARIANCE/RICHARD BAKKEN B. Variance (Richard Bakken) to Exceed 208 Building Lot Coverage -- An application for a variance was submitted by Richard Bakken of 4528 Cinnamon Ridge Trail for the purpose of building an addi- tion onto his existing duplex home that will exceed the 208 lot coverage permitted by City Code. - For additional -information on this item, refer to the Planning Department report found on pages through. For additional information regarding staff processing of the variance, refer to a memo and attachment prepared by Jim Sturm • Planner 1 found on pages g% through 'V'T . ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON TTHIS ITEM: To approve or deny the variance to exceed 20% building lot coverage of Lot 12, Block 1 for Richard Bakken. g3 CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: VARIANCE APPLICANT.: RICHARD BAKKEN LOCATION: SW;, SEC. 30 = EXISTING ZONING: R-2 WITHIN P.D. (CINNAMON RIDGE) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: JULY 1, 1986 DATE OF REPORT: JUNE 25, 1986 REPORTED BY: JIM STURM APPLICATION: An application has been submitted by Richard Bakken of ® 4528 Cinnamon Ridge Trail requesting a variance to build an addition onto his existing duplex home that will exceed the 20% lot coverage permitted by City Code. COMMENTS: This duplex lot has been separated by the Waiver of Plat process. The proposed 24' x 38' 1 -story addition would connect dwelling unit 'B' to a detached garage built in 1983. This struc- ture has been designed to accomodate a second story in the future. The lot coverage would be 2496 s.f. or 280 of � of the duplex lot. The submitted site plan shows the proposed addition 5'-6' from the property line, matching that of the detached garage. There is no significant vegetation to be concerned with. A letter from the applicant has been attached for your review. If approved, this variance shall be subject to all applicable ordinances. JS/jj 13 B n.le t.:q ; u rte q TRAIL I 551047'381✓. 118.00 —— ` 30 •`0'45V1,' 938.7 V76 45 Lk ve, :� Ir iI.Ui531 455$] 45L4 45� �� ,j 51 W L� 73 i I , o- • q TRAIL I 551047'381✓. 118.00 —— ` 30 938.7 Lk ve, 5.•6 I i N N I " -! n]0. U • :.�... B3 II/IIN •� LCI m \UNI\ UW -T „I. I^m, - 'Sr�l ID i.ke ;, GAIL Ido a1. \\AR \a j0 :.: 934.6 as$. — — — -- — ... 118.00 $51°47'35' '. Op$" CINNAMON RIDGE TRAIL "'^� e°+ . June 19, 1986 To: City Council Members of Eagan. I Richard Bakken am appling for a building -variance, because of the building code for 20% lot coverage. My building will not exceed property line set backs. The reason for the variance is for more living space. I like the neighborhood and location. I talked to a real estate service, about selling my home and purchasing a larger home, but I paid 65,000, for my home, and I was told that with the apartment project in the neighborhood I could only get about 60,000. for my home. The cost of a larger home would cost over 100,000. Their for I would like to add living space to my home. None of my neighbor object to my building plans. Please give this application for a variance your upmost concern. b10 MEMO TO: THOMAS L HEDGES, r CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: JIM STURM, PLANNER I DATE: JUNE 25, 1986 SUBJECT: RICHARD BAKKEN VARIANCE On June 9, 1986, Mr. Richard Bakken submitted plans to the City's Inspection Department requesting a building permit for a 24' x 38' addition to a duplex home in the Cinnamon Ridge 1st Addition. Upon review of these plans, it was noticed that the lot coverage would exceed the 20% maximum allowed in an R-2 district (28% proposed). The applicant was told there were two options: 1) reduce the size of the addition to meet Code requirements or 2) apply for a variance. After numerous calls to all departments, a meeting with re- presentatives from Inspections, Planning and Administration was scheduled for Friday, June 13, to explain the options and clear up any past misunderstandings. Mr. Bakken walked out of that meeting after three minutes, before those issues could be discussed. A letter was drafted immediately by the Inspection/Planning Depart- ments to explain the variance option (see attached). Staff did not endorse the variance at any point through this period, but the applicant insisted on pursuing this alternative. JS/jj M I M 3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD. P.O. BOX 21199 EAGAN, MINNESOTA 55121 PHONE- (612) 454-8100 June 13, 1986 MR DICK BAAKEN .4528 CINNAMON RIDGE.TR, EAGAN, MN 55122 Dear Mr. Baaken: BEA BLOMQUIST Moya THOMAS EGAN JAMES A SMITH JERRY THOMAS THEODORE WACHTER CWM1I MBmbBls THOMAS HEDGES City Adminstrolor EUGENE VAN OVERBEKE City Cleu We apologize for any inconvenience to you in your effort to expand the above referenced dwelling unit. It is unfortunate that your 2:30 P.M. meeting with City staff on June 13, 1986 ended so abruptly. We are sure that if the discussion could have lasted longer, many of your concerns/questions would have been resolved. The City Code is designed to protect the health, welfare and property values of all individuals in Eagan. All residential districts have limits to the amount of building coverage allowed per lot. The expansion you have proposed exceeds the allowable 20% maximum coverage in R-2 (duplex) districts. If you wish to proceed with your original plan, you must demonstrate your hardship to the City Council through the variance process. The variance application can be obtained through the City Planning Department. The application will then be processed and placed on the next available City Council meeting. Council meetings are scheduled on the first and third Tuesday of each month and the application complete with a $50 non-refundable fee must be received before the Tuesday preceding the Council meeting. Included in the application requirements are an abstractor's certificate of all the names and addresses of property owners within 200' of your property, an exhibit (site plan), 8 1/2" x 11", detailing your expansion proposal and having the application signed by a Notary Public. We hope this letter clarifies your proposed building expansion variance option. Sincerely, CS'V� Chief Building Official DP/js CC: Tom Hedges, City Administrator p THE LONE OAK TREE... THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY Agenda Information Memo July 1, 1986, City Council Meeting Page Twenty -One VARIANCE/FREDERICK DEAN C. Variance (Frederick Dean) for a 12' Variance from the 40' Setback Requirement Along Public Street, Lot 22, Block 2, Safari Estates First Addition, Located At Galaxie Avenue and Safari Trail, SW 1/4 of Section 32 --An application was submitted by Frederick Dean, requesting an 11'+ se-tback variance along Galaxie Avenue on Lot 22, Block 2 of the Safari Estates First Addition. For additional information 'on this item, refer to the Planning Department report, a copy is enclosed on pages L%D through • ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the variance as presented by Frederick Dean for a setback along Galaxie Avenue. E CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: VARIANCE APPLICANT: FREDRICK DEAN LOCATION: LOT 22, BLOCK -21 SAFARI ESTATES EXISTING ZONING: R-1 (SINGLE FAMILY) 1ST ADDITION DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: JULY 1, 1986 DATE OF REPORT: JULY 25, 1986 REPORTED BY: JIM STURM APPLICATION: An application has been submitted requesting an 11'+ setback variance along Galaxie Avenue on Lot 22, Block 2, of the Safari Estates 1st Addition. COMMENTS: The house has been placed on the lot so that the garage side will act as a buffer to Galaxie Avenue. This street has an 80' right-of-way and, therefore, the setback is 40' from the property line. The driveway is connected to Safari .Trail. If the house was shifted so that the garage side was closer to Lot 21, a variance would still be necessary. There are three -car garages throughout this subdivision, and the lot directly across the street, Lot 1, Block 1, received a similar variance in October 1985. If approved, this variance shall be subject to all applicable Code requirements. • JS/jj Is Pv.4I1 V nAwt. SAFARI ESTATES I1 LA SURVEY FOR: MADERA HOMES AV E.Ota��aee GALAXIE N 14°48 14 E 19 125. 3o.05 j 51 -- 110 O M — Z .ov N W N I 1 m L I 1 N N L --r — --38.0-- 30.001 N N 18'00'06''E' �/ 12 9.00 % • Agenda Information July 1, 1986, City Page Twenty -Two Memo Council Meeting WAIVER OF PLAT/RMC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION D. Waiver of Plat to Split Existing Duplex Lot, Lot 6, Block 1, Sun Cliff First Addition --An application for a waiver of plat was submittedby RMC Development Corporation in order 'to split an existing duplex lot in the Sun Cliff First Addition, referenced as Lot 6, Block 1. For additional -information on this item, refer to the Planning Department report found on page 4415 ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the waiver of plat as presented. VA • CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: WAIVER OF PLAT APPLICANT: R.M.C. DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LOCATION: LOT 6, BLOCK"1, SUN CLIFF 1ST ADDITION EXISTING ZONING: P.D. 79-1 (EAGAN HILLS WEST) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: JULY 1, 1986 DATE OF REPORT: 'JUNE 23, 1986 REPORTED BY: JIM STURM APPLICATION: An application has been submitted by R.M.C. Develop- ment Corporation requesting a Waiver of Platin order to split an existing duplex lot in the Sun Cliff lst Addition. Lot 6, Block 1 has frontage on Sunrise Road and is serviced by separate utilities. One side of the duplex will have a front setback of 27.20' which is permitted in the Sun Cliff Development Contract Conditions. All other setbacks meet the Development Contract Conditions and Code requirements. If approved, this Waiver of Plat shall be subject to all applicable Code requirements. SUN CLIFF ADDMONS City of Eagan .wuc[ ocv[wrur nc 93 " 42.eo " 57.00 N 39.45'z I"E SUNRISE 65'!/" W O� L9.o2 � I I I e •gene. J z I_! 7 r NV es I I'JN C _ _ISII 410 O I 25.26-0 _ a•3'2 R•!!2.. ]7 RORD Agenda Information Memo July 1, 1986, City Council Meeting Page Twenty -Three WAIVER OF PLAT/SONS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY E. Waiver of Plat (Sons Construction Company) to Split Existing Duplex Lot in Oakwood Heights 2nd Addition --An application was submitted by Sons Construction Company requesting a waiver of plat in order to split a twin home for individual ownership, referenced as- Lot 9, Block 1 of Oakwood Heights 2nd Addition. For additional information 'and a location of the waiver of plat, refer to the Planning Department report found on page QS . ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the ® waiver of plat for Sons Construction Company to split an existing duplex lot. • CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: WAIVER OF PLAT APPLICANT: SONS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LOCATION: LOT 9, BLOCK 1, OAKWOOD HEIGHTS 2ND ADDN. EXISTING ZONING: R-2 WITHIN LEXINGTON S P.D. DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: JULY 1, 1986 DATE OF REPORT: •.JUNE 25, -1986 REPORTED BY: JIM STURM APPLICATION SUMMARY: An application has been submitted by Sons ® Construction Company requesting a Waiver of Plat in order to split a twinhome for individual ownership. This lot, on the corner of Lynx Court and Cougar Drive, has separate utilities. All setbacks meet Code requirements. If approved, this Waiver. of Plat shall be subject to all applicable Ordinances. JS/jj OAKWOOD HEIGHTS 2ND ADDITION S W! COUGAR DRIVE U-7 I L Agenda Information Memo July 1, 1986, City Council Meeting Page Twenty -Four PRELIMINARY PLAT/TOWN CENTRE -100 SECOND ADDITION F. Preliminary Plat for Town Centre 100 Second Addition Consisting of 2 Lots for an Office and Bank and 1 Outlot on Approximately 4.9 Acres on Outlot A of Town Centre 100 First Addition --A public hearing was held by the Advisory Planning Commission at their May 27 meeting and due to a continuance, again at the June 24 meeting, to consider a preliminary plat entitled Town Centre 100 Second Addition. The Advisory Planning Commission is repoln- mending approval of the preliminary plat. Enclosed on page through Q is a copy of the updatedplanning report by he Planning De artment and the original Planning and Engineering report concerning the proposed preliminary plat. For additional information and action that was taken by the Advisory Planning Commission, refer to page(s) ld - Q ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To approve or deny the preliminary plat for Town Centre 100 Second Addition. 9x CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY PLAT - TOWN CENTRE 100 SECOND ADDITION APPLICANT: FEDERAL LAND CO LOCATION: M, SECTION 15 EXISTING ZONING: P.D. (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: DATE OF REPORT: REPORTED -BY: JUNE 24, 1986 : JUNE 18, 1986 PLANNING (JIM STURM) APPLICATION SUMMARY: At. the May 27 Planning Commission meeting, this Preliminary Plat application was continued to allow the applicant and their design team more time to detail the building structure and site plan layout on Lot 2. There was a concern • of the building/site size relationship and the amount of parking to meet Code requirements. A new site plan has been submitted along with a building. perspective that better illustrates the proposed finished product. LOT 1: Lot 1 will also be platted at this time. Signal Hills Bank will be building their headquarters here beginning later this year or early next year. They will be scheduled for the Advisory Planning Commission 8 City Council for site plan review - for the drive-thru facility and proposed signage. Enclosed are "preliminary only." drawings for your review. The architectural styling has been approved by the bank and the overall site layout will change in detailing only. LOT 2: The basic layout has not changed but an addition 15'. have. been added to the width of the lot. The 2 story bank building • will contain approximately. 13,300 S.F. and !have its main access at the SE corner.. Code required one parking stall for each 150 S.F. of .net leasable office space. At- the 80o ratio, .86 stalls would be required; 67 are shown. All building and parking setbacks meet Code requirements. A preliminary landscape plan has been submitted. The proposed trash enclosure is shown 20' from. the Town Centre Drive property line and will need year=round screening if kept in this location. Staff recommends -that this trash enclosure be incorporated into the building itself for both convenience and aesthetic reasons. Berming will be necessary along Town Centre Drive as will a 5' Sidewalk on Lots 1 8 2 and the Outlot. CONDITIONS; 1. The developer shall be responsible for a 6' sidewalk along Town Centre Drive. 2. A detailed landscape plan shall be submitted, bonded and not released until after a full year from the time of installation. 3. All standard plat conditions shall be adhered to. 9� � -w R Lim W. 0 0 I I zd� 114'.1 1 z - "". I TOWN LE TRE FRof;. fwPI EAGhN; MNCOAD NAT�ck ARCHITECTS INC. H -el H r IIG• NATWICK ARC i^ � r• �:'�wt,1�, � Ail la+ s�¢'�j•i"�7�9. r., 4„ - � ( / 5^' ./ .4,+JiF4 i �Yi fj � v4 :i+ y ie � +. r :l• -r, ,ty�$ y S�''�� i -�, y,".� Samara+:- SY:. r'- :✓1'� .. .�1;� d �t a- v v"`.__ �k'7fU ��u-[. t' i ��"p E::�G. �.. � •$: ...A1.1u l n.. �.. ( H + ., dt �•✓,. 17�CL �%" � .�C_..-•T r : l�M1T�.:+i C�.�1. �: 4 :.v : 7�!�§f. ��7 i+1 � ��. �i:� '.t. Mat 4 L" G e•p� ;�Y f, I "`°,'C"y2L � r rl(�y.+ I �� r.y LI Y ri'["'.(� aI" A:f"�•i/ �•�(C [/i•J r CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY PLAT - TOWN CENTRE 100 2ND ADDN. APPLICANT: FEDERAL LAND COMPANY LOCATION: N', SECTION 15 EXISTING ZONING: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (COMMERCIAL SHOPPING CTR) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING:. MAY 27, 1986 DATE OF REPORT: -MAY 22,, 1986 REPORTED BY: PLANNING & ENGINEERING APPLICATION: An application has been submitted by Federal Land ® Company requesting- Preliminary Plat approval for Town Centre 100 2nd Addn. The site consists of 2 lots and an outlot totaling 4.94 acres. Lot 1 contains 2.25 acres and a bank is being proposed on this site. Lot 2, 1.0 acre, will be an office building and reviewed in detail later in this report. The outlot -will con- sist of 1.69 acres and no specific use has been designated at this time. This area is.zoned CSC within the Planned Development. The site is surrounded by roads on all four sides: Yankee Doodle Road to the north, Town Centre Dr. to the south and east, and Denmark Avenue to the west. The area is quite flat and there is no significant vegetation to be concerned with. Lot 2 A two-story brick office building containing 14,400 sq. ft. ® is being proposed on this lot. Access is from a single 24' drive from Town Centre Dr. This entry drive narrows to 20' along the western edge of the building and should be enlarged to 24' to permit safe 2 -way vehicular movement. Also, staff is recommending the elimination of several parking stalls to allow for safe 'backing out' situations. (See site plan.) City Code requires 1 stall per 150 sq. ft. of net leasable floor area in office buildings. With an 80% 'net' ratio, 77 -stalls are required. 69 were shown on the submitted site plan before the staff recommendation. The building coverage is 17%; 30% is allowed in CSC districts. All building and parking setbacks meet Code requirements. GRADING/DRAINAGE: Town Centre 100 Addition addressed the grading and drainage concerns for this parcel, Outlot A. Staff will review the site plan -with more specific grading and drainage plans over Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, of the 2nd Addn. during the building permit review process. UTILITIES: The City installed sanitary sewer and water main within Denmark Ave., Town Centre Dr., and Town Centre Dr. West last summer under City Contract 85-8. _ STREETS: The City also constructed Town Centre Dr. and Town Centre Dr. West under City Contract 85-8 last summer. The completion of this contract is scheduled for this summer. The City constructed Denmark Avenue under City Contract 85-9, also last summer. The final wear course is scheduled to be installed on Denmark Ave. this summer. Denmark Ave. is a 52' wide City collector street. Town Centre Dr. and Town Centre Dr. West are 48' wide City commercial streets capable of handling 4 lanes of traffic. Yankee Doodle Road borders this development along the north and is under the jurisdiction of Dakota County Highway Department. The County will maintain a controlled access along this area between Denmark Ave. and Town Centre Dr. West. - Staff recommends one access maximum on Denmark Ave. This access must line up directly across from the previously approved Burger King access. Along Town Centre Dr., staff recommends that Lot 1, Block 2, have a maximum of 2 driveway accesses onto Town Centre Dr. and Lot 2 have one access onto Town Centre Dr. The setback for a driveway from Denmark Ave. must be a minimum of 100' from the east concrete curb and gutter on Denmark Ave. to the curb return radius on Town Centre Dr. 11 The Town Centre 100 Addition development dedicated all the necessary public right-of-way and easements with the exception of O the drainage and utility easements along the interior lot lines. ASSESSMENTS: City assessment records indicate area related assessments have been levied over Town Centre 100 Addition at the appropriate rates. /Or that all trunk. Outlot A of the E CONDITIONS: 1. Lot 1, Block 1, shall have a maximum of 1 driveway along Denmark Ave. in line with the previously approved Burger King driveway and a maximum of 2 driveway accesses along Town Centre Dr. with the appropriate setbacks and separations, and Lot 2, Block 1, be allowed 1 access driveway onto Town Centre Dr. with the appropriate separation. _ 2. All standard plat conditions shall be adhered to. 3. A detailed grading and erosion control plan be submitted for approval by staff. 4. A detailed landscape plan and financial guarantee shall be submitted and not released until 1 year after completion. The landscape plan shall be submitted on an approved grading plan at the time of final plat. 102,-- • r, �Q/ ® EXHIBIT "B" i / )'Auxjg DOODLE COAD (CDLWrr FOLD HC 21)-- v ouuuou ,1 O .rjLA0OLlU42Q yipcn auooLr>au�2-CAC UQER. Pwrra rflur rc 4o ra a y wil It 1.CSc USES / • • 2 _Lc 6_C._v E Ea // ` j.OENE RAL BUSINESS / �onanvarvoav\C fuu=auvu�ovvvo�ql p.LiMITED SI SIHF6S a Y.Yti O, •�{�. T•r . R 4.•-•w. WYi wmmn®nrf7.l',aw smm�ae0mms J c � � •'~• ....... T. LiM/TED BUS,NESB oil / // •a / � e�^ JM tO to m In 1Y•2792! m 2* Ci n\4a12� a 2znnn _. PROPOSED SKEPCH PLAN EAGAN HEIGHTS COMMERCIAL PARK _ • A PLANNED UNIT.DEVELOPMENT -�.�.. BY THE. FEDERAL_.LAND_COMPANY_-•_ -. LOCATEA W c _GAOANr.M.tNNEBOTA_..—__ / ■ ■ �p 1 Ills S. 0\ IS 4rec USES Q Jim, "`• . rt IBI In a 10!1 qs Te r_ouww L I� 0 0 amts P�aem 4'% � ..' L 1. - / 11nnrmr•anoa"mum now ►ammm®rrd _ _ .. N.1.1'....r• w � W(LI uat Y• .. •-•u-.. rw A � •0 Y.Yti O, •�{�. T•r . R 4.•-•w. WYi wmmn®nrf7.l',aw smm�ae0mms J c � � •'~• ....... T. LiM/TED BUS,NESB oil / // •a / � e�^ JM tO to m In 1Y•2792! m 2* Ci n\4a12� a 2znnn _. PROPOSED SKEPCH PLAN EAGAN HEIGHTS COMMERCIAL PARK _ • A PLANNED UNIT.DEVELOPMENT -�.�.. BY THE. FEDERAL_.LAND_COMPANY_-•_ -. LOCATEA W c _GAOANr.M.tNNEBOTA_..—__ / ■ ■ �p 1 Ills S. 0\ IS 4rec USES Q Jim, "`• . rt IBI In a 10!1 qs Te r_ouww L I� 0 0 amts P�aem 4'% � ..' L 1. - / 11nnrmr•anoa"mum now ►ammm®rrd _ _ .. N.1.1'....r• w � W(LI uat Y• .. •-•u-.. rw _ DAKOTA COUNTY ROAD NO. 28 _ YANKEE DOODLE ROAD IIII , • T 0 W N I E II T R E I� ti 1 � 2 I, OUTLOT I0 !I T l Q BLOCK II II I - I I lil I r - 3 O r I TOWN 'j CENTRE DRIVE 1 mu.l...l rw .I \T mrr 1...N YOAIr • N 1 r•e se.Y w rm .rns _. - . �•. 1. Y .r1Y.Y 1. 1. rr. 1l rr ...IYr. W rlllir r.rer rwYle r..nrr..ai.eY. 7 .1 aUr I .... rrb..r 1. W rW Y wr �� le rrb .ewr� iiJJ w 1. 1 MAY 1.n. LSA • '; 1 M ...I.r l 41.100 w. w. 11 Mi. •.1 .. .au • n.r. w.n. ., 4iln. � � M.0 Mlaa Fill roue A � �• �'���, 110dRAA UIdw1 eY. r0e Or14 e1Y1i rY1.0/Ir '..'a( J/2 _-� �/�•-j� Ir.OY� . 7 rrlrrr • YANKEE DOODLE RD. _ LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT L BLOC[ 1 TOWN CLYTIIL 100 SECOND 000 SITE DATA BUILDING 0119 OO 1 00 o011F100 OOOCLO LO TOTAL 00. TLOT 00 OVILI00 10,000 OYILOIOO COYOOAO■ 11�. SCALE; 1- 30' 1, 1 a WEST --- -- -- EEO, • �m APC Minutes June 24, 1986 3. Paragraph 6 be revised to indicate that the agreement "shall" be recorded. . 4. Clarification that there will be no deviations from the locations indicated on the exhibit or exhibits. 5. The exhibit or exhibits shall be of sufficient size to clearly indicate the exact location of signs including distances from lot lines and right-of-ways. 6. The agreement shall indicate that -the original full-size layout plan be on record and on file with the City. All voted yea. Dale Runkle then indicated to the Planning Commission that a ® representative of Arby's, Mr. Doug Kennedy, was present requesting verification as to the location of the pylon sign on the Arby's lot. Voracek moved, Wilkins seconded the motion to recommend approval of the Arby's pylon sign as described in the Town Centre Eagan Pylon Sign Agreement, assuming that when completed, the exhibits accurately depict the location of said sign in accordance with previous requests. All voted in favor. TOWN CENTRE 100 SECOND ADDITION - FEDERAL LAND CO. - PRELIMINARY PLAT Chairman Harrison next convened the public hearing regarding Town Centre 100 Second Addition's request for preliminary plat consisting of two lots for an office and bank, with one outlot for future commercial development, resulting from a replat of Outlot A, Town Centre 100 First Addition, located in part of the northwest quarter of Section 15, in the southeast quadrant of Yankee Doodle Road and Denmark Avenue. ® City Planner Runkle introduced the proposal indicating that the lot for the proposed office did now include a site plan showing 67 parking spaces, only four short of the required number. Reduction was requested by staff for additional green space and ease of turn -around. He also indicated that at this time it was proposed that a second lot for the Signal Hills Bank be proposed for preliminary plat, although it was not necessary for the bank to go forward at this time. However, he advised the Planning Commission that the plans were basically complete and complied with staff recommendations. In addition, the proposal would be back before the Commission and City Council for the required conditional use permit for a drive -up facility. Mr. Charles Bartholdi appeared on behalf of Federal Land Company and explained Federal Land's role as owner of Outlot A, Town Centre 100 2nd Addition, being divided into three parcels for the Signal Hills Bank facility on the west end, an office building in the middle, and proposed restaurant site on the east end. He also indicated that the middle lot had been widened 15 feet to accommodate more green space, parking and traffic flow. Mr. John Natwick, architect for the proposed builder of the office building, was present to address questions and indicated the location of the entrances and designs in relation to Yankee Doodle Road. Mr. Dave Anderson was present on behalf of Signal Hills Bank. It was indicated that in addition to the �d g 2 APC Minutes June 24, 1986 preliminary plat, a variance from the parking requirements would be necessary. Mulrooney moved, Voracek seconded the motion to recommend approval of Town Centre 100 Second Addition, consisting of Lots 1 and 2, and Outlot A for future commercial development, subject to the following conditions: 1. Lot 1, Block 1, shall have a maximum . of l driveway along Denmark Avenue in line with the previously approved Burger King driveway and a maximum of 2 driveway accesses along Town Centre Dr, with the appropriate setbacks and separations, and Lot 2, Block 1, be allowed 1 access driveway onto Town Centre Drive with the appropriate separation. 2. All standard plat conditions shall be adhered to. 3. A detailed grading and erosion control plan shall be submitted for approval by staff. 4. A detailed landscape plan and financial guarantee shall be submitted • and not released until one year after completion. The landscape plan shall be submitted on an approved grading plan at the time of final plat. 5. The developer shall be responsible for a 6 foot sidewalk along Town Centre Drive. 6. The trash container shall be incorporated into the building for the convenience of the occupants, and aesthetics of the site. All voted yes. Mulrooney moved, Hall seconded the motion to recommend approval of the variance for a reduction of 4 parking spaces based on staff recommendations regarding green space. All voted yea. OVERBILL PROPERTIES, INC. - REZONING 49 The public hearing was then convened regarding the request of Overhill Properties, Inc. for rezoning from R-2 to R-1 for Lots 1, 2, 5, 6, and 7 of Block 2, Overhill Farms 1st Addition, located in part of the southwest quarter of Section 25, in the northeast quadrant of Dodd and Cliff Roads, by Chairman Harrison. City Planner Runkle introduced the request and indicated the staff's recommendation that two duplex lots remain to the west of the existing duplex lots for continuity and flow. Mr. Dave Dehler appeared indicating that Lot 1 was perhaps too small for a twin home. The Commission discussed the Comprehensive Guide which indicated that the property was designated R -II. Hall moved, Mulrooney seconded the motion to recommend approval of the rezoning of Lots 5, 6, and 7 with Lots 1 and 2 remaining as duplex lots, pursuant to staff recommendation, and due to the size of Lot 2 and the triple frontage of Lot 1. Mulrooney and Hall voted in favor; Voracek, Wilkins and Harrison voted against. Wilkins then moved to rezone Lots 1, 2, 5, 6, and 7, Block 2 to R-1 Single Family, Harrison seconded the motion. Harrison, Voracek and Wilkins voted in favor; Hall and Mulrooney voted against. /0/ 3 Agenda Information Memo July 1, 1986, City Council Meeting Page Twenty -Five MUNICIPAL FEE POLICY G. Municipal Fee Policy --During 1985, Administrative Assistant Hohenstein made great strides in developing a master policy for the purpose of consolidating certain fees and licenses throughout the City. Action was taken by the City Council as a result of that study to update many of the fees that were inappropriate for certain licenses and permits,. A Municipal Fee Policy was prepared by Administrative 'Assistant Hohenstein and was reviewed by all department heads that will provide a uniform structure for all fees comprised within a single comprehensive document. It is also the intent of the City Administrator that all fees be evaluated as a part of the budget process to more closely forecast ope,rat,ing revenues. For a copy of the Municipal Fee Policy, refer to pages 4// through //7,- for your review. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To Municipal Fee Policy as presented.. • approve or deny the MUNICIPAL FEE POLICY I. PURPOSE The purpose of the policy is to provide a uniform structure for municipal fees comprised within a single comprehensive document. The fee schedule document_ will be reviewed with a consideration for amendment on a regular basis. All amendments shall incorporate the entire remainder of the schedule such that it can be updated only as a whole. In this way,the City may maintain and update its fee schedule in a timely and consistent manner. II. POLICY It is the policy of the City of Eagan to maintain a comprehensive and current schedule of all municipal fees. ® The fee schedule will be reviewed and updated as a part of the annual budget preparation process. This will facilitate the regular consideration of fee levels relative to City costs and comparative fee levels. The City will be better able to guage the propriety of its fees and to anticipate its revenues. III. PROCEDURE Policy implementation shall be accomplished as follows: A. Objectives 1. To maintain a current comprehensive fee schedule for City Hall and public use. 2. To maintain continuity between departments' fees through comprehensive review. 3. To streamline the fee amendment process by establishing a uniform procedure and specific deadline ® for recommended changes. B. Fees Included All fees charged by the City, including but not limited to those for licenses, permits, goods, and services of the City, are covered by this policy. C. Effective Data The comprehensive municipal fee schedule is in effect as of January 1, 1986. A copy of the current schedule is attached. Any amendments to the schedule must replace the document in its entirety. Amendments will take effect on January 1 of the year following their approval. D. Amendment Procedures The comprehensive fee schedule will be reviewed each August as a part of the Annual Municipal Budget preparation. All changes or additions anticipated for the following year must be recommended at that time. The only exceptions to this deadline are the water and sewer rates which are determined upon approval of the utility budget. These fees must be presented for Council approval in or before December of each year to be included in the following year's schedule. Failure MUNICIPAL FEE POLICY PAGE 2 to submit and effect recommended changes on these deadlines will result in their continuation until the next budget review of schedule amendments. E. Resolution to Amend With the exception of liquor related fees, which are defined within the City Code, all fees listed in the Comprehensive Fee Schedule are amendable through a resolution of the City Council. Itis the policy of the City of Eagan to include the entire fee schedule with approved changes in each resolution to amend. In this way, the fee schedule is reauthorized in its entirety, thereby eliminating a proliferation of resolutions covering the schedule's discrete elements. The City may prepare such amendments only as necessary to correspond with the deadlines above. IV. RESPONSIBILITY The City Clerk/Finance Director, or designee, shall be responsible for the .coordination of the comprehensive fee schedule and its amendment. As with other budget expenditures and revenues, all fee recommendations shall channel through this office. V. AUTHORITY This policy has been authorized by the City Administrator upon review by the management staff. APPROVED DATE 11 Agenda Information Memo July 1, 1986, City Council Meeting Page Twenty -Six PUBLIC 'IMPROVEMENT CONTRACTS Item 1. Contract 86-10, Award Contract (Eagandale Center- Industrial Park - Storm Sewer) --On May 6, 1985, the Council received the bids for the installation of storm sewer to service the southern portion of Eagandale Center Industrial Park. However, the contract documents provided that the contract -.would not be awarded until such time that the Council could complete the final assessment hearing process. The final assessment hearing for both projects incorporated by this public improvement contract are being addressed earlier on this agenda. If the public hearing and two final assessment hearings are all completed and subsequently approved by Council action, it would then be appropriate to proceed with • the official award of contract to allow construction to begin. Enclosed on pageis a copy of the bids received showing a comparison of th low bidder to the estimates contained in the feasibility report presented at the respective public hearings for each project. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: Award Contract 86-10 (Eagandale Industrial Park/[Vest Service Road - Storm Sewer) to F.F. Jedlicki in the amount of $264,188.50 and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. �/3 � PROJECT F EAGAN T NO. 86- USTRIAL P, NO. 458 ICE ROAD N0. 471 T ADDITI01 D. 442-R '.MPROVEMEN .NNESOTA Our File No. 49370 BID TIME: 10:30 A.M., C.D.S.T_ BID DATE: Thursday Mav 1 1986 TOTAL BASE BID $264,188.50 ® Project 458 BID 212,094.50 -ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE 263,040.00 FEASIBILITY REPORT ESTIMATE 314,570.00 Under Engineer's Estimate -19.4% Under Feasibility Report Est. -32.6% 4792d 279,267.45 292,071.75 292,407.00 294,237.00 303,023.15 309,295.65 315,675.00 '117.745 48 324,044.75 341,243.15 342,368.48 369,454.40 Project 471 Project 442R CONTRACTORS - No Addendum 1. F.F. Jedlicki 5% United Pacific 31,679.00 2. Danner Trucking 5% Aetna -32.9% 3. Northdale Construction 5% Transamerica • 4, Rice Lake Contracting 5% Wausau 5. Crossings, Inc. 5% United St, Fidelity 6. Arcon Construction 5% Wausau 7• L & G Rehbein 5% United Fire 8. Nodland Associates 5% United Fire 9. Orfei & Sons 5% Capital 10. Barbarossa & Sons 5% St. Paul Fire 11. Encon Utilities 5% Capital No Addendum 12. J.P. Norex 5% Reliance No Addendum 13. Ceca Utilities 5% United St. Fidelity Our File No. 49370 BID TIME: 10:30 A.M., C.D.S.T_ BID DATE: Thursday Mav 1 1986 TOTAL BASE BID $264,188.50 ® Project 458 BID 212,094.50 -ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE 263,040.00 FEASIBILITY REPORT ESTIMATE 314,570.00 Under Engineer's Estimate -19.4% Under Feasibility Report Est. -32.6% 4792d 279,267.45 292,071.75 292,407.00 294,237.00 303,023.15 309,295.65 315,675.00 '117.745 48 324,044.75 341,243.15 342,368.48 369,454.40 Project 471 Project 442R 28,754.00 23,340.00 34,560.00 34,800.00 31,679.00 33,800.00 -16.8% -32.9% - 9.2% -30.9% Agenda Information Memo July 1, 1986, City Council Meeting Page Twenty -Seven PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT CONTRACTS CONT''D. Item 2. Contract 86-8, Receive Bids/Award Contract (Sealcoating)- At 10:30 a.m. on Friday, June 27, formal bids were received for the 1986 sealcoating_ program. Enclosed on page 114 is a bid tabulation showing the relationship -0f the low bid to the 1986 budget. All bids will be checked for accuracy .on their extensions and additions and a formal recommendation will be made at the July 1 meeting. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: To receive the bids for ® Contract 86-8 (1986 Sealcoating) , award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. • CITY OF EAGAN CONTRACT 86-08 1966 SEALCOAT Bid Opening: 10:30 a.m. CDST Bid Date: June 27, 1986 FIRM BID ALLIED BLACKTOP CO. $69,775.58 BUFFALO BITUMINOUS INC. $73,833.36 BITUMINOUS ROADWAYS $88,630.00 HI -WAY SURFACING CO. No Bid ENGINEER'S EST. $112,700 BUDGET (Gen Fund -$61,000) $122,000 (Maj St Fund -$61,000) 0 Agenda Information July 1, 1986, City Page Twenty -Eight Memo Council Meeting PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT CONTRACTS CONT'D. Item 3. Contract 86-11, Receive Bids/Award Contract (Williams & LaRue, Wyndham Corporate Center - Utilities) --At 10:30 a.m. on Friday, June 27, formal bids were received for the installation of sanitary sewer to service the Williams and LaRue Addition and the Wyndham Corporate Center along with other minor miscel- laneous improvements. Enclosed on page //;T is a copy of the bid tabulation showing the relationship of the low bidder to the estimate contained in the feasibility report for each, of the respective projects combined under this City contract. All easements have been acquired to allow the progression of this improvement. All bids will be checked for accuracy on extensions and additions and a formal recommendation will be presented by the Public Works Director at the July 1 meeting. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED ON THIS ITEM: Receive the bids for Contract 86-11 (Williams and LaRue, Wyndham Corporate Center -Utilities), award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. 117 Our File No. 49375 crrx cuNTRACT No. 86-11 WILLIAMS 6 LARUE 2nd ADDIT PROJECT No. 450 WYNDNAM CORPORATE CENTEE PROJECT No. 464 1TILITY 6 s,rRFFT Tmuunvcuc BID TIME: 10:30 A.M. C.D.S.T BID DATE: Friday, June 27 1986 CONTRACTORS TOTAL BASE BID I. S.P. Norex $172,387.20 2. Northdale Construction 191,757.00 3. Burschville Construction 199,479.00 4. 0 & P Contracting 202,937.95 5. Brown Cris 210,457.20 6. S.J. Louis Constr. 227,348.60 7. Ceca Utilities 244,462.60 PROJ. 450 PROJ. 464 Base Bid $91,547.05 $80,840.15 Engineers Est. 84,000 81,000 Feasibility Rept. Est. 84,050 83,600 over Engineer Est. +9% —0.2% over/under Feasibility Rept. Est. +9% —3.3% ire