Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
03/06/2001 - City Council Regular
AGENDA EAGAN CITY COUNCIL - REGULAR MEETING EAGAN MUNICIPAL CENTER BUILDING MARCH 6, 2001 6:30 P.M. 1. ROLL CALL & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE II. ADOPT AGENDA & APPROVAL OF MINUTES 111. VISITORS TO BE HEARD (10 MINUTE TOTAL TIME LIMIT) IV. RECOGNITIONS & PRESENTATIONS P '4 A. Maya Babu - Prudential Spirit of Community Award V. COMMENTS BY CITY COUNCIL, CITY ADMINISTRATOR & DEPARTMENT HEADS VI. STORM UPDATE VII. CENTRAL PARK UPDATE / COMMUNITY CENTER PROJECT VIII. CONSENT AGENDA 5OV A. PERSONNEL ITEMS 8 B. APPROVE Resolution Scheduling Public Hearing to Consider Issuance of Tax Exempt Bonds for the Financing of Not for Profit Schools Including Faithful Shepherd P l PROCLAMATION - Burnsville/Eagan Community Television Volunteer Appreciation Day t, D. APPROVE - 2001 Licenses J E.' PROJECT 751, Receive Feasibility Report, Schedule Public Hearing (South Dodd Rd. - Streets and Utilities) F. PROJECT 780, Receive Final Assessment Roll, Authorize Public Hearing (Galaxie Ave - Street I Overlay) PG. PROJECT 782, Receive Final Assessment Roll, Authorize Public Hearing (Old Sibley Memorial Highway - Street Overlay) H. PROJECT 787, Receive Final Assessment Roll, Authorize Public Hearing (Chapel Hill Church - Utilities) I. PROJECT 789, Receive Final Assessment Roll, Authorize Public Hearing (Lone Oak Circle - Street Overlay) tlab J. PROJECT 750R, Receive Feasibility Report, Authorize Public Hearing (TH 55 & Blue Water r Road - Access Modifications & Frontage Road) l a K. RECEIVE Petition / Order Public Hearing - Easement Vacation (Lot 5, Block 9, Bridle Ridge I51 Addition) fa31-. RECEIVE Petition / Order Public Hearing - Easement Vacation (Lot 1, Block 1 & Lot 2, Block 2, Blue Ridge 2°d Addition) a to M. APPROVE Completion of Schwanz Lake Clean Water Partnership Project Final Report N. APPROVE Submittal of DNR Outdoor Recreation Grant Application and Authorize Signature O. SCHEDULE Public Hearing Regarding DNR Outdoor Recreation Grant Application °p 33P. APPROVE Data Practices Policy SEQ. APPROVE Official Name Change for Cedarvale Area to Cedar Grove IX. 6:45 - PUBLIC HEARINGS i S A. VARIANCE - Gardner and Karen Miller. A variance request of five feet to the required 30 foot building setback on Lot 8, Block 4, Cedar Grove #1, located at 4190 Diamond Drive in the SE !/a of Section 19. 6o B. VARIANCE - Dale and Carole Heebl. A variance request of ten feet to the required thirty foot building setback from public right-of-way on Lot 4, Block 2, Wedgewood First Addition, located at 939 Waterford Drive E. in the SE 1/4 of Section 26. ~C. PROJECT 799 - Eagandale Center Industrial Park (Street Overlay) /QJ D. PROJECT 802 - Pilot Knob Road / Duckwood Drive (Intersection Improvements) X. OLD BUSINESS P i33 A. CONSIDERATION OF REZONING AND PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION - Manley Land Company, allowing for a rezoning of approximately 10.7 acres from A (Agriculture) R-1 (Single Family) and a Preliminary Subdivision (Perron Acres) to create 23 lots, located o the east side of Dodd Road and north of Welland Court in the SE 1/4 of Section 24. f q B. REZONING, VARIANCE & PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION - Basic Builders, Inc. A Rezoning of 12.5 acres from A (Agriculture) to R-1 (Single Family) and a Preliminary Subdivision (Finch Place) to create 23 lots and a Variance to exceed the maximum cul-de-sac length of 500', located at 4790 South Robert Trail, on the north side of Red Pine Lane in the SE ~j '/a of Section 36. 919? C. REVIEW Development Conditions - Orchard Heights 2 Addition (Inver Grove Heights). 01 D. REVISION to City Council meeting procedures and meeting schedule. ~a03E. AMENDMENT to the Eagan City Code Chapter 11, Section 11.20 Regarding Riding Stables, M C! Boarding Stables, Auction Facilities or Sales Barns, Commercial Feedlots or Kennels. pans F. AMENDMENT to the Eagan City Code Chapter 10, Section 10.12 Regarding Regulation of Domestic Rabbits. G. AMENDMENT to the Eagan City Code Chapter 6, Section 6.38 Regarding Regulations of Kennels. 09 H. APPROVE Central Park Master Plan. XI. NEW BUSINESS n a I DA. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - AT&T Wireless Services. A Conditional Use Permit to allow IYF~ a wireless telecommunications service facility (a 150' monopole) and a 12'x28' equipment building on Lot 2, Block 1, Sibley Terminal Industrial Park, located at 3195 Terminal Drive in the SE 1/4 of Section 8. h'D2,313 . REZONING -RHB, Inc. A Rezoning of approximately 2.2 acres from R-1 (Single Family ) to R-3 (Townhouse), located west of Johnny Cake Ridge Road, on the southwest side of Woodgate Lane, adjacent to the south side of the Highline Trail in the SE 1/4 of Section 29. XII. LEGISLATIVEANTERGOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS UPDATE XIII. AD111INISTRATIVE AGENDA XIV. VISITORS TO BE HEARD (for those persons not on agenda) XV. ADJOURNMENT XVI. EXECUTIVE SESSION The City of Eagan is committed to the policy that all persons have equal access to its programs, services, activities. facilities and employment without regard to race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, disability, age, marital status, sexual orientation, or status with regard to public assistance. Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities will be provided upon advance notice of at least 96 hours. If a notice of less than 96 hours is received, the City of Eagan will attempt to provide such aid. MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE EAGAN CITY COUNCIL Eagan, Minnesota February 20, 2001 A regular meeting of the Eagan Cite Council AN-as held on Tuesdas. Februan- 20. 2001 at 6. t) p.m. at the Eagan Municipal Center. Present were Mayor Av ada and Councilmembers Bakken. Carlson. Fields and TilleN Also present were City Administrator Tom Hedges. Senior Planner Mike Ridley. Director of Public Works Tom Colbert, and Cit} Auorne} Mike Doughem.. Mayor AN ada announced the foilowirikcfishges'to*t -:e greiid3' Item G under the Consent Agenda regarding sc}tj`duling a public hearing to consider issuance of tax exempt bonds for the financing of not-for-profit schools will be continued to the March 6. 2001 meeting at the request of Faithful Shepherd Church. Item A under Old Business regarding a rezotling and prelitninar-, subdivision (Thomas Woods) AN ill be continued to the March 20. 2001 Council meeting at tuest oflre developer. Item E under Old Business regarding an ordimt1ce regutg} campaign signs will be continued to a future Council meeting. Item A under NeNA Business regarding a varWjS *::aii3 im4aij'511 k~ ision (Finch Place) \\ill be continued to the 'March 6. 2001 Council meeting at the request of the de~eloper~ Item B under NexA Business regarding an amendment to the Eagan Cin Code 10.10 regarding dangerous «eapons and articles will be continued to a Cin- Council work session. Councilmember Tiller moved. Councilmember Car JsErb; ::S;~nded a motion to approN e the agenda as amended. AA es: 5 Nay : 0 MINUTES OF THE FEti AR); 6, 2001 R.-GULAR COUNCIL MEETING Councilmember Bakken moved. Councilmem~ %-.ti }~s:secpndcd a motion to approve the minutes of the February 6. 2001 Regular Cin Council meetiti'ga5;p 2med. Aye: 5 Nay : 0 VISITORS TO BE HEARD Benita Atkins, spoke on behalf of the Duckwood Trails Tenants Association. She stated that DuckNN ood Trails is a 162 unit apartment building located,.3f•3375 Lexington A%enue South. of which 33 units are Section 8. She explained that the tenants association N5M: f• 9AMd pfWr4lt i i%vas received that the building owners would not be reneging the Section 8 contract in t31!?iiilding:cBi::Atkins requested that the Council support their efforts to keep their homes classified Section 8. fti `Council R 'im ited to attend a meeting to be held with the oNcners of the building on Februan. 26, 2001. Laurie Keister and Ethel Rasmuii:isQ:egtsfF1i Siort of the Council. Chris Leonard. with Homelife explained she had assisted in organizing the tenant association. She gas e examples of other cite councils that had supported residents in similar situations regarding Section 8 b} attendinv, meetings with the apartment owners. adopting a resolution of support. and encouraging the landlords to continue accepting Section 8 contracts. Councilmember Bakken asked i 'j#i potential to world. yj the Federal Government had been investigated Ms. Leonard stated that the•fenants are in contacftk~h Minnesota Housing Finance AgencN and ma" meet nest week to discuss the Federal asSi ance. Eagan City Council Meeting Minutes February 20, 2001 Page 2 Councilmember Carlson stated that she had previoush received a letter from the Duckwood Trails Tenants Association that it was being considered to change the units from Section 8 to vouchers, Ms. Leonard stated that 33 units at Duckwood Trails are Se(Kib;~ 8 units and if the owner chooses to get out of the Section 8 contract, residents w• uld get vouchers, hoa evet.~re are man landlords that will not accept vouchers and the vacancv rate is very low. The vouchers also do not give the security to the tenants that the Section 8 contract gig es. Councilmember Tiller stated she ha&Sif ik&4~Kg:o1~. ~uckwood Trials Tenants Association and was impressed with the sense of community a*t the tenants. She further stated that she had been corking NN ith Senator Wiener in an effort to organize the te}.. and schedule a meeting with the landlord of the building. Mavor A«-ada stated she will attend the meeting on Februarn- 26 with the owner of the propem. and adoption of a resolution supporting the efforts of the tenants will be scheduled for a future City Council meeting Bea Blomquist representing the Eag*::Historical Society expressed concern over the lack of designated space in the future Community Center for f . litorical S4Wt}. She stated that the Communir Center should be for everyone she is opposed to the Historical $i et1 tak-mg1pace elsewhere. Rav Wade. 1283 Amber Drive. Secrgial,.pf 1he,. Fagan Historical Society discussed the responsibility of the Historical Society and their needs. He stj; J}srttsti iiYeKeople to come into the current space at City Hall. Ted Wachter. 4540 Blackhawk Road. stated he feels it.is imperative that records and other historical items be stored appropriateh. He discussed potential storage problems not only for the Historical Society- but other Cin depanments. Mayor ANvada explained designated space for•.•i~:3jFi81''Society is being considered at the Fire Administration building. She stated there ~~otl3G~bo#itp~tspaco:~nd more security in the Fire Administration Building than could be provided at the Conirlitit *C', enter or ity Hall. Mr. Wachter stated he felt moving historical }i n:-Cjty- Hall to another location could be detrimental to the items. He also pointed out that historical items need fo'•bk;Sjl;rt3 in a climate controlled area. He further stated he would like to see an proposals for space be brought to th'd 'storical Committee as a whole before an final decision is made. Archie Paulsen. Secure Mini Storage, 3735 Sibley Memorial Highway discussed damage to his properv, caused by the July 2000 Super Storm. He stated that 75% of tenants had losses due to the storm. He stated he fell the flooding in his area resulted from probleW:i~, :Av drajpag y~~$kem and that his insurance company is refusing to pay for any damages on the pro#ieit}'~ f#et'XLfin f}1eat he had ask the Cit} for assistance but no one had been out to his property. Publics Directblbert stated he had no knowledge of any problems on the mini-storage site. He asked Mr. Paulsgp. to submit aTetter to the City documenting what the problems on his property are and he will have a staff membi~ - estigaacjP;~-:' Tem Wilkin. 10167 Alpine WaN' i'eyiieSfe*'t)'tli *MW. # } buncil withdraw their approval of the Broadmoor development in Inver Grove Heights due to too many changes being made in the plan as well as drastic changes in the ISD 196 busing rules. Micky Westerman discussed the ISD 19¢.Jxysj* •~5Sues and endorsed the idea of having a park located in the outlot by the large pond. Councilmember Fields stated thai." n-as aware that study had been conducted in the area on a day there was no school. iii Eagan City Council Meeting Minutes February 20, 2001 Page 3 Councilmember Carlson stated that the Council needs clear direction from the Cite AtiorneN- as to what can be done when changes are made to development plans in adjacent Cities after approval as been given b} Eagan. City Administrator Hedges stated that the issue can be researched and information provided to the Council. Council directed staff to provide legal k4ction and write a letter to Inver Grove Heights. Cit} Administrator Hedges discussed;*Ivit efforts are being made to obtain State and Federal Assistance. He stated that letters and been mailed and calls # ve been made to the legislators and that North State Advisers have been employed for assistance in obtainirig federal and State funding. Mayor Awada thanked the Legislative Delegates for their help CONSENT AGENDA A. Personnel Items Item 1. It was recommended to aPPt;6. ik the hir2lz~•bf Christopher Colbert and Nata4ie RaV as part-time an seasonal winter recreation leaders. Item 2. It was recommended to apprAye t4. WPiig*of Jessica Pollman as a part-time seasonal preschool instructor/recreation leader. Item It was recommended to approv~e'tN~ 4liririg'oftelttri ~3lesen-Bloom as a part-time seasonal preschool program assistant. Item 4. It teas recommended to approve the hiring of Jeff Vai O~ erbeke as a seasonal street maintenance worker. Item 5. It was recommended to approve the hiring of Lindsay Marko, Danelle Larson. Kern Johnson. Kristi Nlillmann. Megan Kissell. Kelsey Campion. SharRic;K-0unleavey. Megan Lostetter. Elizabeth Luke. Alex Dauphin and Kelsey Biagi as part-tin e.6e3Wt)'j:Wd ..*Ms for Cascade Bay. Item 6. It was recommended to apa:jiitg'of ndon Weninger as a part-time seasonal guest services worker for Cascade Bay. Item 7. It was recommended to apprcxe2ladriDg of~'lisa Swenson as a part-time seasonal concessions shift leader for Cascade BaN. Item 8. It was recommended to approve the hiring o#`~~egatf:Lindwall. Jennifer Lopac. Amanda Kuntz. Allison Rusk. Candice Counright and Matt Horvath as 15 r' me seasonal concessions workers for Cascade BaN. Item 9. It was recommended to approve the hiring of Robyn Chapman as a IT Technician. Item 10. It was recommended to accept the letter of resignation from Doug Reid. Chief Building Official. who is retiring. Item 11. It was recommended to appcb* : pe;chanpe,:j{i: t}s for the Clerical Technician III position at Central Services Maintenance cutc~c1' birckt~;$ctfifirlette to Clerical Technician IV as a result of a Time Spent Profile review. B. 2001 License Renewals. It was n2 tunende4N*itpprove license renewals for the year 2001 for New Frontier Lawn Care and The Trerli{}tili;: C. Show License for 4"' of Juhv Carnival and Waive Fees It was recommended to approve a license for Raleigh Seelig for a Shows License for 4 h of July Carnival and waive fees. D. Reapproval of Final Plat (Oakbrooke 2 d A4:WiWR),~ - Joseph J. Christensen. It was recommended to reapprove a Final Plat (Oakbrooke 1?a:AQij}t of ' ere exception into a 1.5 acre lot and 3.5 acre outlot located south of Deen ood• yi}:2''and west'dPt t envood School located in the southwest of Section 21. • Eagan City Council Meeting Nfinutes February 20, 2001 Page 4 E. Final Plat (Royal Oaks 3`d Addition 1 - Bn•ce Thorpe. It was recommended to approve a Final Plat (RoN al Oaks 3`d Addition) consisting of three lots for propem- located east of Wescott Hills Drive and south of Yankee Doodle Road in the NE '/'4 of Section 14. F. Roval Oaks (Lot 24. Block 1.) Verdant•I&IIS (Lot 7. Block 1) Easement Vacation. It was recommended to receive the petition to vacate public d'"."" ge and utility easement and schedule a public hearing to be held on March 20, 2001. G. (Item Continued to .Varch 6, 2001 i s( cikcdaif ~ti T orids for The Financing of Not-For-Profit Schools Including Faithful Shepherd;.;:;:; Councilmember Bakken moved, CouiiCKmember Tilled seconded a motion to approve the balance of the Consent Agenda. Ave: 5 Na} : 0 PUBLIC HEARINGS PROJECT 798, CANTERBURY FOREf`)F~VEDGlj.M-OOD 1ST ADDITION STREET RECLAMATION Cit< Administrator Hedges introduCttl this itenxarding street reclamation for Canterbury Forest and Wedge%Nood 151 Addition and authorization to:prepare th-'detailed final plans and specifications. Cit} Engineer Russ Matth s gave a staff report. Mayor ANvada opened the public hearing. John Pearson. 1006 Wedge%Nood Lane questioned the required specifications when the street was original IN, constructed and if the street had been constructed to those specifications. Cite Engineer Matthvs explained that the street had been constructed by the developer and-va weaker than it should have been. Public Works Director Colbert stated that archived records cpuld•13,etO46j;~6yf:to see if the Cit} had accepted the street with less than required specifications. Mr. P~pisb7t L t;Skoe lout accessibility to his property during construction. Cit,, Engineer Matthvs state4-'. i &ccess to each'opem would be maintained during construction. Dan Squires. 101.3 Wedgewood Lane e p'ftkst ppn over paying assessments if there were problems with the original construction. He also requested'4l}it fiaptersection of Wilderness and Lexington be il~ evaluated as \\ell as a stop sign on Wilderness Run and the area '~7ailc:t: Tom Solosk-. 1011 Wedgewood Lane stated he does not feel the road needs repair. as there is ven little traffic and the road is not deteriorating. He stated it is a waste of money when the street had not been built to standards originall}. Public Works Director Colbert expl*ii~cl:ilie:iUe- -N:Z'fitM.Wer software program that helps determine the need for timely maintenance. He stated tl ::V the resiV f iig project is not completed as scheduled, deterioration will occur quickly and a full replacement;; i*f have to b~''~one. He also explained that a stop sign at Wilderness Run and the park would have to be appro} the Cii2t . Mayor Awada stated she agrees that a stop sign is needed and asked Mr. Colbert to contact g;fotR tR.lheir plans for the intersection. There being no further public comment Mayor Awada closed the public hearing. Councilmember Carlson moved. Councilmember Tilley_ seconded a motion to approve Project 798. Canterbun Forrest & Wedgeiyood 1S' Addition. Nav: 0 Mayor Awada moved. Councilm,,tii .nirey s*(?6i i :~.lnotion to direct staff to provide previous meeting minutes and other records re ar ` the proposed sto on Wilderness Run. Ave: 5 NaN 0 iii Eagan City Council Meeting Minutes Februarv 20, 2001 Page 5 PROJECT 797, LERTENDRE ADDITIONS STREET OVERLA V Cit}- Administrator Hedges introduced this item regarding the street overlaN for Letendre 1 s' K 2`'d Additions and authorization for preparation of detailed final plans and specifications. City Engineer Matth~ s ga\ e a staff report. Mayor Awada opened the public hearf Al Hefner_ owner of Vallee kidge Tong he had no objection to the project. There being no further public commg#L-- Klan or Awada closed the public hearing and turned discussion back to the Council. Councilmember Carlson moved. Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to approve Project 797 (Letendre V & Additions - Street Overlay) and authorize the preparation of detailed final plans and specifications. A-ve: 5 Nav 0 Mayor Awada called for a 5 minute 6*1 at 8:3 0-in . OLD BtrgiNESS CONDITIONAL ONSTRUCTION Cin Administrator Hedges introduced this item regarding a Conditional Use Permit to allow impervious surface coverage of greater than 25 percent within a Shoreland -Overlay District upon properrlocated north of Town Centre Drive and west of Lexington Avenue. He stated that this item was continued from the February 6. 2001 Cit} Council meeting to allow the applicant time to address an.:ogf-street parking deficit. Senior Planner Ridley provided an update stating that in response to the.li;'d:i~€8the applicant has do«nsized the building from 20.860 square feet to 18.990 square feet,.tket*n::SAp&.- ji ..the City-s off-street parking requirements. Councilmember Bakken moved. Couagib*01 ~cr TilWseconded a motion to approve a Conditional Use Permit to allow impern ious surface coverage of gfeaiei L~i3r ; 25.,wreent within a Shoreland & erlav District upon propem located north of ToNNn Centre Drive and Nest of'L' e i} q t enue in the NE 'i4 of Section 15 subject to the follo\\ ing conditions: Aye: 5 Nay. 0 1. The subject propem shall be platted into a lot and block. 2. The Conditional Use Permit shall be recorded with Dakota Counts within 60 days Final Plat approi al. 1 To satisA- off=street parking ~Roj :;equiremeAt$ wt less than 3,000 square feet of the building shall be devoted to storage:; 11. The City shall model indiip ied pho; Aoi*3 loads to O'Learv Lake. If this anali sis indicates increased (untreated) phosphorus loaPtb O'Lear% Lake. the development shall be subject to a water quality cash dedic i~h to mitilit for that increased phosphorus load. 5. The City shall approve yy::mine fQ4t wide parking stalls upon the site COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN City Administrator Hedges introduced this item. He explained that the Draft Comprehensive Plan NN as submitted to the Metropolitan Council in Se 1CS t~ie7 9 :at'r ;-ter much review and discussion. the full Metropolitan Council completed its revivw;4 0n s MiMYWon December 13. 2000, He further explained . that the Draft Plan submitted in Septemb i ~~§9 used data curfi j} bs of August 1999 in regard to housing unit counts. N*acant/underutilized land, etc. As•.pan of the final revie~s=bf the Draft Plan and to provide clarification. staff updated the numbers to be current as October 2000. As s;ic an addendum was prepared to be adopted Eagan City Council Meeting Minutes February 20, 2001 Page 6 with the Plan. Senior Planner RidleN discussed Special Area 45, and that a small area would be added as requested bv the Council at the Special Citn Council meeting. He stated the map will be updated. Councilmember Bakken suggested that since the special areas N ere to be revie-v ed. it may be appropriate to review other areas of the City also. He statue that Section 36, in particular, contained a variety of land uses that map or may not be appropriate in the long terak!:& further stated that the area appears underserved in regard to neighborhood business uses. He recommendet Y' a:t Section 36 be reviewed and that staff prepare a long range plan for that area. The Council agreed. :f• Mavor Awada also directed staff to 19tok•as~area areas for poienfial golf course uses. David Rugg. 736 Caribou Lane disciisscti businesses that had been proposed in the Section 36 area in the past. Councilmember Carlson moved. Councilmember TilleN seconded a motion to adopt the Comprehensi\ e Guide Plan and Addendum. Ave 5 Nay : 0.; ; GREATERi DARV REDEVELOPMENT Cite Administrator Hedges introduce~'this item -%rding concept refinements and area delineation for the Greater Cedarvale Area redevelopment #}e; Oat t3tat;d sg Vim; yid been held at a prior special Cit. Council meeting. He «ent on to state that adoption aFYft6r~ti :e ip t it ,Oe4 bDundaries and redevelopment land use concepts will allo« staff to immediately begin the process of market redevelopment opportunities to qualified developers and soliciting development programs. He further stated that a name change from Cedars ale to Cedar Groh e had been suggested. Assistant City Administrator Verbnugge requested that tbejRgtion incorporate changes to the redevelopment area definition including several vacant. pa~ts;~iok~1};df Silver Bell Road and Kennebec DriN e. and parcels on the south side of Beau d' Rue Driir,.betitie?:fiolt ;l at7 and Rahn Road that are being considered as a possible location for a new senior housing ! ftlo ptrierit Councilmember Bakken moved. CounCiii Std? .r 1e3;,seconded a motion to appro\ e concept refinements and area delineation for Greater Cedar Grove Area redel% eliaipt - e: 5 Nay : 0 NEW BUSINESS AMENDMENT TO EAGAN CITY CODE 10.11 REGARDING ANIMAL REGULATIONS City Administrator Hedges introducec}.tbi~;;tem regar4Wg•tihe addition of horses and ferrets to the City Code prohibiting them from running at lard} ititori~ig itiladment if necessan. Police Chief Therkelson discussed recent problems and the need fqt i~code aftytciis~'ient. ~C* % Mavor Awada moved, Council mi er Bakkq**conded a motion to approve the addition of horses and ferrets to the City- Code prohibiting them i;:f:~arge,~li authorizing impoundment if necessan . X X. Ave: 5 Nay : 0 SCHEDULE PUBLIC HEARING FOR MODIFICATION OF DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR NE EAGAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 2 AND TIT PLAN FOR TIF DISTRICT NO. 3 Cit` Administrator Hedges introduces t i$.' stt 'gap,, that in 1996 the Cit} Council created a Redevelopment Tai Increment Finance Dint C3t+~9ted'tt'isl;}jo- tJnheast Eagan Development District No. 2. RevieNN b} Ehlers and Associates has ide Bird a number of it 4hat need to be modified to be certain that the documentation and implementation of the, TIT district meets the'%,,Mndards of the Office of the State Auditor. CitN Administrator Hedges stated that this is ad also been discusit t a Cit} Council work session. Eagan City Council Meeting Minutes February 20, 2001 Page 7 Councilmember Bakken moved. Councilmember TilleN seconded a motion to schedule a public hearing before the Eagan Economic Development Authority to make modifications to the development program for Northeast Eagan Development District No. 2 and to the Tax Increment Financing Plan for TIF District No. 3 on April 17, 2001. Ave: 5 Nay-: 0 LEGISLATIVE / INTMGOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS UPDATE • CONSIDER POSITION RIrd RDING METROPOLITAN LAND USE ACT City Administrator Hedges discusse~;fi $ j t oil File 46 that removes anN ~ eto poker b~ - the Metropolitan Council regarding Compreh ve Guide Mii amendments. He stated the Metropolitan Land Use Act will be heard before a committee on nesday. February 21. Councilmember Bakken stated, in his opinion. House File 46 does not go far enough but the conditions it would bring about would be preferable to -hat exists now. He stated his position is that he would like to see more. but House File 46 would be an acceptable alternative to nothing. Councilmember Bakken moved. Cry i&ilmembP.C-.arlson seconded a motion that the Cit} of Eagan supports House File 46 as a first step. Aye: ~3ay: 0 (k- cilmember Tilley was out of the room) .ADJOLMENT The meeting adjourned at 9:20 p.mf'sitto'Zin-':E.fi i e;. ~S . to consider maintenance collective bargaining and pending or threatened litigation regarding the proposed Wenzel development and Douglas Haskin vs. the Cin of Eaean. NIBM Date Deputy City Clerk If vou need these minutes in an alternatiN e formShchas large:y lint. Braille. audio tape, etc.. please contact the Cit} of Eagan. 3830 Pilot Knob Road. Eagan. MN 1}6$1.4600. (TDD phone: (651) 454-8535). The City of Eagan is committed to the policy that all persons liit'e40al access to its programs, services. activities. facilities and employment without regard to race. color. creed. religion. national origin, sex, disability, age. sexual orientation. marital status or status with regard to public assistance. ill i-~ MEMO city of eagan MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: MARCH 2, 2001 SUBJECT: AGENDA INFORMATION FOR MARCH 6, 2001 CITY COUNCIL MEETING ADOPT AGENDA/APPROVE MINUTES After approval is given to the March 6, 2001 City Council agenda and the minutes of the February 20, 2001 regular City Council meeting, the following items are in order for consideration. Agenda Information Memo March 6, 2001 IV. RECOGNITIONS AND PRESENTATIONS FACTS: • Maya Babu of Eagan has been chosen as one of Minnesota's top student volunteers in the sixth annual Pruduential Spirit of Community Awards. • The Prudential Spirit of Community Award recognizes young volunteers in communities across the nation who work in established groups and/or seek new and unique ways to help others on their own. ATTACHMENTS: • Copy of certificate to be presented is attached as page .3 • Letter from Chairman and CEO of Prudential is attached as page. a y O ~ O ~ ~ N 'd O ~ p v~ A... M---I ~ O ~ ~ . N U U ~ U Ct ct ct p o ct ~ o o O ~ U U . r. U U U ~ U N 3 IiL PR'fDL\TI ;L `PI RIT 01 CO',I\IUTl % i February 6. 2001 The Honorable Patricia Awada City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Rd Eagan. MN 55122-1897 Dear Mayor A,,vada: Your community is being honored today. Maya Babu of Eagan has been chosen as one of your states top Minnesota student volunteers in the sixth annual Prudential Spirit of Community Awards. a national program recognizing young people for outstanding community service. Maya will receive an engraved bronze Distinguished Finalist medallion from Prudential at a local ceremony. A copy of the news release announcing this prestigious honor is enclosed. Students like Maya represent the best of Americas youth. and are role models to their peers and their communities. The Prudential Insurance Company of America and the National Association of Secondary School Principals are committed to bringing them well-deserved recognition through this a\yards program. We hope you will take advantage of this opportunity to extend your congratulations and encouragement. You also may want to consider inviting your honoree to talk about volunteering and the importance of community service at a city council meeting. proclaiming a special day of recognition. or issuing an official statement of commendation. Suggested language is included. You can contact your honoree at: 3923 Denmark Avenue Eagan. MN 55123-1474 651-452-3679 If you would like additional information. please call (973)802-4568 or write to spirit a prudential.com. Congratulations to you and your community on having such an outstanding young role model. We hope you will join us in recognizing this achievement. Sincerely. Arthur F. Ryan Gerald N. Tirozzi Chairman and CEO. Prudential Executive Director. NASSP Agenda Information Memo March 6. 2001 Eagan Cite Council Meeting CONSENT AGENDA The following items referred to as consent items require one (1) motion by the City Council. If the City Council wishes to discuss an of the items in further detail. those items should be removed from the Consent Agenda and placed under Old or New Business unless the discussion required is brief. A. PERSONNEL ITEINIS Item 1. Part-time Seasonal Winter Recreation Leaders-- ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of Jeff Bredemus, Jeanne Stafford. Alexander Lano. Diane Kline and And% Bjorge as part-time seasonal \\inter recreation leaders. Item 2. Part-time Seasonal Skate Guard/Civic Arena-- ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of Brandon Barnes as a part-time seasonal skate guard at the Civic Arena. Item 3. Part-time Seasonal Skating Instructor/Civic Arena-- ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of Lisa `'anderyeer as a part-time seasonal skating instructor at the Civic Arena. Item 4. Part-time Seasonal Lifeguards/Cascade Bay— ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of Brad Roe, Brian Boufford, Ryan Palacio, Mindy Picka, Lauren Delman. Sara Towle, Andrew Eelkema, Keri Ragsdale. Allison Bulger, Grant Mestnik, Brenna Beers. Kari Maland and Angela Kroll as part-time seasonal lifeguards for Cascade Bay. Item 5. Part-time Seasonal Lifeguard Instructors/Cascade Bay— ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of Kristi Guenther, Karen Hendrickson and Molly To"vle as part-time seasonal lifeguard instructors for Cascade Bay. s Agenda Information Memo March 6. 2001 Eagan City Council Meeting Item 6. Part-time Seasonal Guest Services Workers/Cascade BaN-- ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of Ashley Kjos, Benjamin Elton, Amber Stevenson and Timothy Oberle as part-time seasonal guest services workers for Cascade Bay. Item 7. Part-time Seasonal Guest Services Team Leader/Cascade Ba%--- ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of Rvan Vanderlugt as a part-time seasonal guest services team leader for Cascade Bav. Item 8. Part-time Seasonal Operations & Maintenance Workers/Cascade Ba-*-- ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of Justin Page. Glenn Smith. Sean Cosgrove and Michael Peterson as part- time seasonal operations & maintenance workers for Cascade Bay. Item 9. Part-time Seasonal Operations & Maintenance Shift Leader/Cascade Bay--- ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of Ryan Sisson as a part-time seasonal operations & maintenance shift leader for Cascade Bay. Item 10. Part-time Seasonal Concessions Workers/Cascade Bay ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of Nate Starkson, Sarah Roth, Alyssa Erdman and Dale Skoastad as part- time seasonal concessions workers for Cascade Bay. Item 11. Part-time Seasonal Concessions Team Leader/Cascade Bay— ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of Michael Mason as a part-time seasonal concessions team leader for Cascade Bav. 6 Agenda Information Memo March 6. 2001 Eagan Cite Council Meeting Item 12. Resignation/Utility Billing Clerk-- ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To accept the letter of resignation from Diane Downs. Utility Billing Clerk, who is retiring. Item 13. Part-time Clerical Technician III/Community Development— ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of Jenny Bur\N ell as a part-time Clerical Tech III in Community Development. Item 14. Administrative Intern-- ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of Dianne Lord as an Administrative Intern, effective in June 2001. Item 15. Range Adjustment/Engineering Technicians— ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the compensation range adjustment for the position of Engineering Technician from Range H to Range I. Item 16. Step Adjustment/CitY Engineer-- ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the compensation step adjustment for the City Engineer from Step 3 to Step 6 of exempt Range N. Agenda Information Memo March 6. 2001 Eagan Cite Council Meeting B. APPROVE RESOLUTIONS SCHEDULING PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ISSUANCE OF TAX EXEMPT BONDS FOR THE FINANCING OF NOT-FOR-PROFIT SCHOOLS INCLUDING FAITHFUL SHEPHERD ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the resolution calling for a public hearing on the issuance of revenue bonds to finance a commercial facilities development project (Catholic Finance Corporation Project). FACTS: • The Cite of Eagan. as atax-exempt governing bode. has the authority to issue revenue bonds tax-free for various uses within the Cite. • The Catholic Finance Corporation Project and the Faithful Shepherd School have requested that the City of Eagan issue tax-exempt conduit bonds and loan the funds to CFC for repayment of the construction financing of the nest K-8 school completed in Fall 2000. • The action is not to authorize the financing at this time, but to schedule a public hearing for April 3. 2001 for consideration of this proposal. Additional information "ill be provided prior to the public hearing regarding the proposal. ATTACHNIENTS: • Resolution attached on pages through • Public Hearing Notice attached on page iu CIT) OF EAG.A_N RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE ISSUANCE OF R.EVENLE BONDS TO FINANCE A CONINIERCI.3L. FACILITIES DEVELOPNIENT PROJECT (CATHOLIC FI1:k1CE CORPORaT]ON PROJECT) (A) WHEPEAS. Minnesota Statutes. Sections 469.152 to 469.165 (the "Act") confers upon cities, the power to issue revenue bonds to finance commercial and industrial developments w]thin the boundaries of the Cite: and (B) WHEREAS, the Cite Council of the Cite of Eagan, Minnesota (the "Cite" i. has received from Catholic Finance Corporation, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation (the "Company"). a proposal that the Cite undertake a program. to assist in financing a Project described on the attached Notice of Public Hearing. through the issuance of revenue bonds or obligations (in one or n;o-1 senes)(the "Bonds") pursuant to this Act. and (C WHEREAS. in connection with consideration, of the request of the Compan , it is necessan for the Cite to hold a public hearing on the proposal purua:a the.-'%ct. NO% . THEREFORE. BE IT RES01-VED b,, the Cite Council, of the Cit% of Ea_an. Nilmnesota. as follo%k s _ 1 A public hearing on the proposa'. of the Company v,111 be held a. the tin;, an,d place set fon^. in the Notice of Public Heannz hereto attached 2. The genera', nature of the proposal. and an estimate of the principal. amount of Bonds to be issued to finance the proposal are described in the attach;-C' forrn of'\otice of Public Hear11710. A draft copy of proposed forms of all attachments and exhibits ill be o- file in the office of the Administrator on or before the date the Notice o Public Hearing is published. 4. The Administrator is hereby authorized to cause notice of the hearing to be gig en one publication in the official ne« spaper of the Cite not less than. 15 days prior to the date fixed for the hearing. substantially in the form of the attached Notice of Public Hearing. CITE' OF EAGAN CITE' COL7\CIL B,,. 9 Its Mavor Attest: Its Clerk Motion made b\: Seconded by: Those in favor: Those asainst: Dated: CERTIFICATION 1. Mira McGarr e\. Deputy Clerk of the City of Eagan, Dakota Count\. Minnesota. do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution \N as duly passed and adopted by the Cite Council of the Cite of Eagan. Dakota Count. Minnesota. in a regular meeting thereof assembled this 6`h da% of March. 2001. Mira \IcGar\e\. Deput} City Clerk /D NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING ON A PROPOSAL FOR A COMMERCIAL FACILITIES DEVELOPMENT PROJECT Notice is hereby given that the City Council of the City of Eagan, Minnesota (the "City"), will meet at the City Hall in the City at 30.p.m. on Tuesday, April 4 2001, to consider the proposal of Catholic Finance Corporation, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation (the "Company"), that the City assist in financing through a joint powers agreement with the Cities of Coon Rapids and St. Paul the non-religious portions of (1) the acquisition of land and construction of an approximately 90,000 sq. ft. school for grades Kindergarten through 8th grade located at 3355 Columbia Drive in the City, and the acquisition and installation of equipment therein; (2) the expansion and equipping of The Church of Epiphany School for grades Kindergarten through eighth located at 1900 - 111 th Avenue N. 7W in Coon Rapids, Minnesota and the refinancing of certain existing debt related to the school; and (3) the expansion and equipping of The Church of St. Pascal Baylon School for grades Kindergarten through 8th grade located at 1757 Conway Street in St. Paul, Minnesota by the issuance of commercial development revenue bonds. The maximum aggregate estimated principal amount of bonds or other obligations to be issued to finance these projects is $10,500,000. The bonds or other obligations if and when issued will not constitute a charge, lien or encumbrance upon any property of the City and such bonds or obligations will not be a charge against the City's general credit or taxing powers but will be payable from sums to be paid by the Company pursuant to a revenue agreement. A draft copy of the proposed application to the Commissioner of the Department of Trade and Economic Development, State of Minnesota, for approval of the projects, together with all attachments and exhibits thereto, is available for public inspection from 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, at the City Hall in the City. At the time and place fixed for the Public Hearing, the City Council of the City will give all persons who appear at the hearing an opportunity to express their views with respect to the proposal. In addition, interested persons may file written comments respecting the proposal with the Administrator at or prior to said public hearing. Dated this 6th day of March, 2001. (BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL) By /s/ Thomas Hedges Administrator 12537611 Agenda Information Memo March 6, ?001 Eagan Cite Council Meeting C. PROCLAMATIONBUR-NSN'ILLE/EAGAN CONINIUNITY TELEVISION VOLUNTEER APPRECIATION DAY ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To proclaim Friday, March 16. 2001 as Bumsville/Eagan Community Television Volunteer Appreciation Day. FACTS: • From January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2000. 304 citizens volunteer approximately 7.000 hours of their time and enemy to provide community tele\ision programming to the communities of Burnsville and Eagan. • The Cities of Burnsville and Eagan gill demonstrate their appreciation by honoring the year 2000 community television volunteers with the Bumsville/Eagan Community Television Volunteer Appreciation Event on March 16, 2001. ATTACHMENTS: • Attached on page 12 is a cope of the proclamation for Bumsville/Eagan Communit\ Television Volunteer Appreciation Day. in PROCLAINIATION BURNSVILLE/EAGAN COMMUNITY TELEVISION VOLUNTEER APPRECIATION DAY WHEREAS, from January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2000, 304 citizens volunteered approximately seven thousand hours of their time and energy to provide community television programming to the communities of Burnsville and Eagan, resulting in 342 hours of original programming and 272 ne"y productions, and WHEREAS. these programs provide the opportunity for the citizens of Burnsville and Eagan to yie\\ programs for and about their communities, which otherwise would not be provided. and WHEREAS. the Burnsyille'Eagan Community Television volunteer producers and their crews have established Burnsville/ Eagan Community Television as a premier community television institution, hayinp- received over 20 state and national awards. and WHEREAS. these volunteers receive no compensation for their time. energy and production skills. other than the occasional thank you by appreciative viewers and citizens, and WHEREAS. the Burnsville/Eagan Telecommunications Commission, in cooperation with Burnsyille:'Eagan Community Television and the cities of Burnsville and Eagan. have decided to demonstrate their appreciation by honoring all the 2000 community television volunteers, with the Burnsville/Eagan Community Television Volunteer Appreciation Event on March 16. 2001. ?SOW THEREFORE, I, Pat Awada. Mayor of the City of Eagan. on behalf of the City Council. do hereby proclaim Friday, March 16, 2001 as BURNSVILLE/EAGAN COMMUNITY TELEVISION VOLUNTEER APPRECIATION DAY in Eagan, Minnesota. Proclaimed this 6th day of March, 2001. Patricia Awada. Mayor 13 agenda Information Memo March 6, ?001 D. 2001 LICENSES ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve an Amusement Device License for Reza] Cinemas Eagan 16 and renex a Commercial Fertilizer License for TruGreen Lawricare FACTS: • Staff has revievred the applications and deem them acceptable. ATTACHMENTS: • Copy of amusement Device application is attached without page number. Agenda Information Memo March 6. 2001 E. PROJECT 751, DODD ROAD - CLIFF RD TO BUTWIN ROAD STREET & UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Receive the draft feasibility report for Project 751 (Dodd Road. Cliff Road to Butwin Road - Street, Utility & Trail Improvements) and schedule a public hearing to be held on April 3, 2001. FACTS: • On October 6. 1998, the City Council authorized the preparation of a Feasibility Report to identify the proposed scope, cost estimate. financing and schedule for potential street and utiht% improvements on this street segment. • On June 29, 1999, the City Council received an update from staff regarding the two neighborhood meetings held with the property- owners and the proposed traffic calming options. Based upon comments from the property owners, the City Council delayed the proposed improvements until 2002. • On May 16. 2000, the City Council adopted the Public 'Works Department's 5-Year Capitol Improvement Program (2001-2005) including the upgrade of Dodd Road and the construction of sanitary sewer. water main, and storm sewer for 2001. • On June 5. 2000. the City Council authorized the preparation of a feasibilit\ report considering the urban upgrade of Dodd Road between Cliff Road and Butwin Road. the border of the City of Rosemount. including sanitary sewer. water main. storm sewer and off- street bituminous trails. • A draft feasibility report has been completed consisting of an urban street upgrade with off- street trails and utility improvements and is being presented to the City Council for their information and consideration of scheduling a public hearing to formally- present and discuss the merits of this project. • An informational neighborhood meeting will be held to review- the feasibility report details with the property owners in the adjacent area prior to the Public Hearing to further consider and discuss the proposed improvements. ATTACHMENTS: • Draft Feasibility Report, attached without page numbers. /'50 Agenda Information Memo March 6. 2001 Eagan City Council Meeting F. PROJECT 780, GALAXIE AVENUE FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Receive the Final Assessment Roll for Project 780 (Galaxie Avenue - Street Overlay) and schedule a public hearing to be held on April 3. 2001. FACTS: • Project 780 provided for the bituminous overlay of Galaxie Avenue from the Apple Vallev border to Berkshire Drive. • This project, constructed under Contract 00-03. has been completed. all costs tabulated and the final assessment roll prepared. • This roll is now being presented to the Council for their consideration of scheduling a public hearing to formally present the final costs to be levied against the benefited properties. • An informational neighborhood meeting will be scheduled prior to the Final Assessment Hearing to present the final information to the affected property owners and address any concerns. • The Final assessments are approximately 9% under the estimate contained in the Feasibility Report presented at the public hearing held on June 5, 2000. /6 Agenda Information Memo March 6. 2001 Eagan City Council Meeting G,PROJECT 782, OLD SIBLEY MEMORIAL HIGHWAY FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Receive the Final Assessment Roll for Project 782 (Old Sibley Memorial Highway - Street Overlay) and schedule a public hearing to be held on April 3, 2001. FACTS: • Project 782 provided for the bituminous overlay of Old Sibley Memorial Highwa% from Old Sibley Highway to Sibley Court. • This project, constructed under Contract 00-03. has been completed. all costs tabulated and the final assessment roll prepared. • This roll is now being presented to the Council for their consideration of scheduling a public hearing to formally present the final costs to be levied against the benefited properties. • An informational neighborhood meeting will be scheduled prior to the Final Assessment Hearing to present the final information to the affected property owners and address any concerns. • The Final assessments are approximately 37% under the estimate contained in the Feasibility Report presented at the public hearing held on June 5, 2000. The reduction in the Final assessments is due in part to the reduced limits of the project approved by the City Council at the public hearing. 19 Agenda Information Memo March 6, 2001 Eagan City Council Meeting H. PROJECT 787, CHAPEL HILL CHURCH UTILITY EXTENSIONS FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Receive the Final Assessment Roll for Project 787 (Chapel Hill Church - Utility Extensions) and schedule a public hearing to be held on April 3, 2001. FACTS: • Project 787 provided for the extension of public sanitary sewer and water main from the Fairway Hills 4'h Addition (Cypress Point) to the north edge of Chapel Hill l" Addition. • This project, constructed under Contract 00-08. has been completed. all costs tabulated and the final assessment roll prepared. • This roll is now being presented to the Council for their consideration of scheduling a public hearing to formall} present the final costs to be levied against the benefited properties. • An informational neighborhood meeting will be scheduled prior to the Final Assessment Hearing to present the final information to the affected property owners and address anv concerns. • The Final assessments are approximately 20% over the estimate contained in the Feasibility Report presented at the public hearing held on March 6. 2000. Most of the additional costs were directly related to additional work that was originally the responsibility of Chapel Hill Baptist Church. Since the work was added to the contract. the assessments were accordingly added to the Church's assessment. The assessment for utility services to the two residential properties was capped at the feasibility report amounts. The Church has waived their rights to object to the special assessment. /8' Agenda Information Memo March 6. 2001 Eagan Cite Council Meeting 1. PROJECT 789, LONE OAK CIRCLE FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Receive the Final Assessment Roll for Project 789 (Lone Oak Circle- Street Overlay) and schedule a public hearing to be held on April 3. 2001. FACTS: • Pro . iect 789 provided for the bituminous overlay of a portion of Lone Oak Circle north of Lone Oak Road. • This project, constructed under Contract 00-03, has been completed. all costs tabulated and the final assessment roll prepared. • This roll is now being presented to the Council for their consideration of scheduling a public hearing to formally present the final costs to be levied against the benefited properties. • An informational neighborhood meeting will be scheduled prior to the Final Assessment Hearing to present the final information to the affected property owners and address anv concerns. • The Final assessments are approximately 8% over the estimate contained in the Feasibility Report presented at the public hearing held on June 5. 2000. Agenda Information Memo March 6. 2001 J. PROJECT 750R, TH 55 & BLUE WATER ROAD ACCESS MODIFICATIONS & STREET IMPROVEMENTS ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Schedule a public hearing for Project 750R (TH 55 !Blue Water Road - Access Modifications and Street Improvements) to be held on April 3, 2001. FACTS: • On September 14, 1998, the City Council directed staff to prepare a feasibility report considering the installation of a new traffic control signal at the intersection of TH 55 and Blue Water Road, along with the modification of various accesses and the construction of a frontage road on the south side of TH 55 in response to an Access Management Study for State Highway 55 jointly performed by MnDOT and the City of Eagan (Project 739). • On October 20, 1998, the City Council approved a resolution authorizing staff to submit an application for MnDOT funding participation for Project 750 through the Local Initiative Agreements Program Funding has been approved in the amount of $410,400 for the 2001 fiscal vear (July 1, 2000, to June 30, 2001) for the signalization and access modifications. The cost for the frontage road would be the full responsibility of the City. • On March 6, 2000. a Public Hearing for Project 750 was held to formally present and discuss the report with the public. The City Council continued the hearing until May 16 to allov\ staff time to obtain preliminary appraisals. On May 16, the project was cancelled due to the lack of appraisal information and a specific date for another continuance. • On August 15, after receiving the appraisal information, the City Council scheduled a new Public Hearing for September 19. During a meeting with the affected property owners on August 17, objections were repeated to staff regarding the extent of the proposed frontage road and related assessments. Subsequently, a meeting was held with MnDOT and City representatives on August 29, in which it was determined that a major portion of the proposed frontage road was not necessary for service nor eligible for MnDOT funding. • On September 5, the City Council canceled Project 750 and the Public Hearing scheduled for September 19 and authorized the preparation of a revised feasibility report for Project 750R. • On October 17, a revised draft feasibility report consisting of new frontage road sections and associated access modifications for Highway 55 was presented to the City Council for their information and a public hearing was scheduled to discuss the merits of this project. • On November 21, the City Council continued the Public Hearing for Project 750R indefinitely. Staff was directed to exhibit a benefit from the proposed improvements for Dart Transit to acquire their support of the improvements before the continuation of the Public Hearing. • Notices will be published in the legal papers and sent to all potentially affected and/or interested property owners for comment prior to the scheduled public hearing. aQ Agenda Information Memo March 6. 2001 K. BRIDLE RIDGE IsT ADDITION (LOT 5, BLOCK 9) EASEMENT VACATION ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Receive the petition to vacate public drainage and utility easements and schedule a public hearing to be held on April 3, 2001. FACTS: • On February 20. 2001. Cite staff met with Dino Xykis. 714 Bridle Ridge Road. requesting the vacation of portions of the existing public drainage and utility easements on Lot 5, Block 9. Bridle Ridge 1" Addition, southeast of the intersection of Elrene Road and Wescott Road. • Mr. Xykis incurred damage to a significant amount of retaining walls as a result of the Jule 2000 storm. In preparation for the replacement of the existing retaining walls, it became evident that one of the walls was actually constructed within the City's Bridle Ridge Park. Mr. Xykis brought this information to City staff s attention immediately and requested assistance from staff to correct this error. • The easements were originally dedicated as standard side and rear lot easements as part of the Bridle Ridge 1 u Addition. • The purpose of the request is to allow Mr. Xykis to remove the existing retaining wall on City property and construct a new wall completely upon his property. Due to the severe topography of the parcel. it will be cost prohibitive (in excess of $100.000) for the wall to be constructed outside of the existing drainage and utility easements. The vacation of the portions of the easements would allow the construction of the retaining wall within 5 feet of the property lines. • The request would vacate the portion of the existing easements on Lot 5 needed for the placement of the retaining wall on said property. The easement portions are not necessan* for public easement purposes. • Notices will be published in the legal papers and sent to all potentially affected and;or interested parties for comment prior to the scheduled public hearing. ATTACHMENTS: • Legal Description. graphic, page. a~ W _ Z c \ EXIS?ING Jan ? r gg~ HORSE co wo ` c ~3 ^ Q rn o J \ c, Q S02-43'21 "E i~ < 128.00 - Li L-, ~z~ O ' W 37 5 6 00 z pp N O NDO /rY^// / N~V tOmV r / Q w0 X / O °,l o` ~l aQ w / w Z o> v o \ om Z _ - N U 00 VI z \ \ \ lF \ J g z 3 'I O ~ L-D z U W co (.O \ Q 0 L Z X. O \ o ~o r= ip o 0 "Com < 0 Z, LO L.J O L YO G O O z 0= r^ \ L^~ °o c zc Z `LJ \ a L-;< Z U c o a °y ll<~~~t Ww ~j O L O c p Z \ Q L W M o c c° W U N m 7 O~ j z ~ O \ ~ J N Ssy \ u Q W . y " ~ O > p t it E X w,~ dao u ou °a h o W lz \ E cZ ° oy ~Wm CL oa \ y N 'Q T. C O° Z < Q Z \ N W J Z r 0 p0 O- 4D UO< aN \ < a V O` 2 w O Zt CL ~o ~o mCL 0 .0 a', z le O no ~ h O W ~c } O p O 7 C .t.W ZZ J O V N J o ; O z am O C v<i a s 3.0fti tON ~I C M O Cc' LU V W W- O Z_ \ o z > ` O c O O" ~ 0 S OF O W O V I w ° N U .0.. m OO a 0U qJ O N C N -..s a 3< N W \ J O o E m oa o L, < w z II11 doo ~ zz '0 Ciu°i CCU a o h' c O z OZ 1EN u p u " ° o c v E z > r c _ N Or N~ W W S 1~ T Vi p COY L . . 7r W ~ {n F W O d ) _ (.,J ;`o s, t c o p F W wa W r Z P 3 _ E O v u °og c ` c onL V W < N m vi o ` ° ♦ 2 O m y~ tr L61 L) 6 O L_ V a W< O a W w O CL 0 J C ° _O r 8 L C O O o°c W = CL <~o <ri mc~ W=U h Agenda Information Memo March 6. 2001 L. BLUE RIDGE 2ND ADDITION (LOT 1, BLOCK 1 & LOT 2, BLOCK 2) EASEMENT VACATION ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Receive the petition to vacate public drainage and utilit\ easements and schedule a public hearing to be held on April 3, 2001. FACTS: • On February 21, 2001, City staff was contacted by Joan Kuschke, representing CSM Properties. Inc., requesting the vacation of two existing drainage and utility easements on Lot 1, Block 1 and Lot 2. Block 2. Blue Ridge 2"d Addition, southwest of the intersection of Lone Oak Parkway and Lone Oak Drive in the northeast corner of Eagan. • The easements were originally dedicated to the City as part of the Blue Ridge and Lone Oak plats for drainage and utility purposes. One of the easements accommodates an existing storm sewer pipe and the other was originally platted as adjacent side lot easements. • The purpose of the request is to allow the replatting and development of the undeveloped portion of Lot 2. Block 2. The existing storm sewer is to be relocated and have a ne-,N easement provided as part of the new plat to allow the construction of a building. While the original side lot easements are no longer appropriate since the property has been replatted. • The request would vacate the existing drainage and utility easements in their entirety to avoid unnecessary underlying easements. The new easement for the relocated storm sewer would be dedicated as part of the plat. • Notices will be published in the legal papers and sent to all potentially affected and or interested utilities for comment prior to the scheduled public hearing. ATTACHMENTS: • Legal Descriptions .'Graphics. page C< Y and Z S-. a3 = I ■ ms r. ~1 k L.L 'il ,i it J ~ ~n~ t• ~ - I- A# t 1S (i:l 1 't 1 / f 1 / I / -----------1, I I li / I~ IJJ ~ 1 I II n 44. aa~; / yj a - W..,- NO-WITE t ' t rip . r ALTA/ASCU LAND TITLE SURVEY B RuV \ t MR "rnr nT•)nT)T7T7TTVQ TAT(" -.1 - - ~ 0 MOST N'LY CORNER CF \ P / OU,:OT F, LONE OAK OAK WEST LINE OF ti - ' OvTLCT F. LONE OAK ' S89"8'03"W LOT 1 Q 37. G0 SE CORNER OF ~.C OUTLO7 A. BLUE RIDGE BLOCK 1 / \ t~ SRI . PARTIALLY VACATED PER DOC. N 875789 - \ \ 20 DRAINAGE k UTILITY EASEMENT OCR ,70.C 1 \ PER PLAT OF LONE CAK i 518', C•131.52 i C.8r9.-S70.48M E V _ G;26.58'09 1 R~ 282.OC MOST N'.'r, NW CORNER OF LOT 2. BLOCK n. BL,;E r RIDGE SECOND AODN. VIA TER S N4424a 4 LOT 2 i BLOCK 2 I L L I - - Z PARTIALLY VACATED PER DOC. / 875789 20' DRAINAGE k UTILITY EASEMENT PER PLAT OF LONE OAK i I DRAINAGE k UTILITY EASEMENC ' i PER PLAT OF BLUE RIDGE S89-24'44"W AREA I - I hereby Ce•:•:y that th.s survey as prepared by me. Or under my d1reat svoerrvon, ana that . am a duly Regstered Land Surveyor R I F 7e• the :aws V t A State at Minnesota. -----7----- 1 e Rey. No i'vC" 100 FEE Cat Agenda Information Memo March 6, 2001 Eagan City Council Meeting M. APPROVE COMPLETION OF SCHWANZ LAKE CLEAN WATER PARTNERSHIP PROJECT FINAL REPORT ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Adopt Advisory Parks Commission recommendation to accept the Schwanz Lake Clean Water Partnership Project final report and officially authorize completion of the grant project. Acknowledge that water quality challenges of Schwan Lake remain and that priority management of the lake needs to continue indefinitely into the future. FACTS: • In 1994. the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency awarded the City of Eagan a Clean Water Partnership Grant of $93,974 to implement a $178,500 project on Schwan Lake. The purpose of the project was to improve lake water quality through a collection of best management practices and capital improvement projects. The effective time span of the 3- year project extended from May 1994 to December 1997. • Schwanz Lake, an 11.6-acre waterbody, is an important local and regional water resource. serving the public as a popular recreational amenity and as a component of the Eagan stormwater drainage system. It is one of only six Class-I (Direct Contact) waterbodies, according to the Eagan water quality management plan. However, the lake fell short of the water quality management criteria of that class when the plan was completed in 1990. • A diagnostic/feasibility study in 1992 found Schwanz Lake to be among the most degraded in Minnesota's Central Hardwoods Ecoregion, in standard water quality terms. The study concluded additions of phosphorus and suspended solids to be predominantly from the direct drainage of the lake and recreational suitability to be limited by excessive algal blooms. A long-term management objective to reduce lake phosphorus concentrations was established. The study concluded that meeting this goal would restore Schwanz Lake to a condition with partially supported swimming, improved aesthetics and fishing opportunities, and reduced severe algal blooms. • Subsequent to the diagnostic/feasibility study, an evaluation of about 20 alternatives was conducted. The approved implementation plan of the project included six main elements: 1) public information and education, 2) street sweeping, 3) basin improvements, 4) creation of a sedimentation basin, 5) Hay Lake inlet extension, and 6) water quality monitoring. • During the period summarized by the 99-page final report, an alum treatment, aquatic plant harvesting, fish stocking, the installation of a fishing pier, and a study of herbicidal control of curlyleaf pondweed also were implemented on Schwanz Lake. ~6 • Studv results indicate that the effective watershed of Schwanz Lake increased about 82 percent from 1992 to 1997. primarily due to additional single-family residences and associated impervious streets, driveways, etc.. Almost 225 percent more stormwater ponding area and 186 percent more stormwater ponding volume than was minimally needed were created during this expansion. Despite the significant increase in watershed area, phosphorus entering the lake increased only slightly, while phosphorus measured in the lake decreased slightly. Essentially, lake water quality improved as precipitation decreased during the 1991- 1998 period. Curlyleaf pondweed, an exotic macrophyte. crowded out three native species of aquatic plants. Although water quality improvements generally were positive, indications are that more needs to be done in the watershed to achieve the ultimate water quality goals for the lake. Public education in the watershed was considerably effective between 1994 and 1997. Significantly more respondents knew pertinent information and reported following suggestions for reducing nonpoint source pollution. However, hardly any respondents indicated they had changed specific lawn care practices to reduce pollution further. • Specific recommendations of the final report include: 1. High priority should be placed on constructing additional ponding areas or implementing other stormwater treatment techniques in the direct drainage. particularly in areas where no such treatment exists. Additional treatment capacit• would have the highest cost-benefit ratio in reducing external phosphorus loads to the lake. A feasibility study to determine the best way to treat stormwater in the direct drainage and a bypass of the non-direct watershed should be considered. 2. Additional strategies to reduce internal phosphorus loading and to improve water quality should be explored and tested. Pending positive results from the Corps of Engineers study, serious consideration should be given to incorporating herbicide treatments into Eagan's comprehensive lake management strategy to control curlyleaf pondweed in Schwanz Lake. 3. Due to the lack of evidence of its positive water quality benefits, further evaluation of the Hay Lake pipe extension should be conducted to determine an optimal management strategy. If possible. flows to Schwanz Lake from Hay Lake should be diverted after large rainfall events. 4. Public education activities primarily within the direct drainage, but also within the entire watershed. should continue via assistance from volunteers and other methods. Regardless of its relative success, a watershed public education program needs increased emphases on changing lawn care practices. 5. The City should continue to manage Schwanz Lake as a bass-panfish lake, to aerate in the winter as necessary, and to promote catch-and-release fishing. Consideration should be given to providing canoes at the access. This would support and further develop two of the lake's targeted recreational uses: canoeing and fishing. 102 • At its February 15. 2001 meeting. the Advisory Parks Commission unanimously approved a recommendation to City- Council to 1) accept the Schwanz Lake Clean Water Partnership Project final report and 2) officially authorize completion of the grant project. The Commission also recommends the City Council to acknowledge that water quality challenges of Schwanz Lake remain and that priority management of the lake needs to continue indefinitely into the future. Agenda Information Memo March 6, 2001 Eagan City Council Meeting N. APPROVAL TO SUBMIT DNR OUTDOOR RECREATION GRANT APPLICATION AND AUTHORIZE SIGNATURE ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To authorize staff to submit an application to the Department of Natural Resources. Outdoor Recreation Grant Program for the funding of trail segments in Central Park and the Mayor to sign the required resolution. FACTS: • The Outdoor Recreation Grant Program is intended to fund the development of outdoor recreational facilities including internal park trails. • Several segments of trail and a foot bridge shown in the Central Park master plan will not be completed in the first phase of development without supplementary funding. • Grant awards are typically 50% of the total eligible project cost. The remaining 50% "local share" can consist of cash or in-kind labor and materials (est. Total Cost = $90,000) • The estimated City cash contribution of $45,000 would be allocated from Referendum funds. • Awards are typically made in the early summer. The funds must be spent within three years. • The program is very competitive. The submission of a proposal does not commit the City to accept a grant award. ATTACHMENTS: Site map, page 3o Resolution, page ~9 c n iiii < it El P2I 9OQ>f 101?d ~ f 9 c -02, O f E o H n~ 4a egg g i ;9 4 ~ ~ .y NNN"' 'J CVO- 3 v - F iy g J ;d / i cp /10 Itz Ill ITEM 7 - LOCAL GOVERNMENT RESOLUTION BE IT RESOLVED that !~I ~ act as legal sponsor for the (Applicant) project contained in the Outdoor Recreation Grant Program Application to be submitted on Z~ MA l ZOLIA and that VIR, dF '44kWiQ P-EGJs hearby authorized (Day. Month. Year) (Title of Authorized Official to appl to the Department of Natural Resources for funding of this project on behalf of aF E~41114i.1 (Applicant) BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that U has the legal authority (Applicant) to apply for financial assistance, and the institutional, managerial, and financial capability to ensure adequate construction, operation, maintenance and replacement of the proposed project for its design life. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that GIT`E c~ slit has not incurred (Applicant) any costs described on Item 4 and has not entered into any written agreements to purchase property described on Item 3. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that UrX 404' has not violated any (Applicant) Federal, State, or Local laws pertaining to fraud, bribery, graft, kickbacks, collusion, conflict of interest or other unlawful or corrupt practice. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that upon approval of its application by the state, rA lz( dF' may enter into an agreement with the State of Minnesota I (APPLcanU for the above-referenced project, and that G~1T_ V_AZOOIJ certifies that it will (Applicant) comply with all applicable laws and regulations as stated in the grant agreement. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that V%V, &2q-- 14WN J fftv-. is hearby (Tide of Authorized OfAciaj) authorized to execute such agreements as are necessary to implement the project on behalf of the applicant. I CERTIFY THAT the above resolution was adopted by the !~JA 6dWK1I~► (City Council, County Board, etc.) of r-A&-A+'Lon 4, mom' 21i?I (Applicant) (Date) SIGNED: WITNESSED: (Signature) (Signature) 4:71 ~ RK (Title) (Date) (Title) (Date) 3/ Agenda Information Memo March 6. 2001 Eagan City Council Meeting 0. SET DATE OF DNR OUTDOOR RECREATION GRANT APPLICATION PUBLIC HEARING ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To set Monday. March 19'h, 2001, 7:30 p.m. for the public hearing required for the submission of an Outdoor Recreation Grant proposal. Said hearing to be held at the regular meeting of the Park Advisory Commission. FACTS: • Staff has proposed to make application to the Department of Natural Resources. Outdoor Recreation Grant Program for funds to supplement the development of trail segments and a bridge in Central Park. in accordance with the master plan. • All applicants are required to hold a public hearing prior to submission of a grant application and to provide the minutes with the application. ATTACHMENTS: None 3~ Agenda Information Memo March 6. 2001 Eagan City Council Meeting P. APPROVE DATA PRACTICES POLICE' ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the City of Eagan's policies and procedures regarding public access to government data and rights of subject of data and to approve the appointment of Deputy Clerk Mira McGarvey as the responsible authority for the purposes of meeting all requirements of Minnesota Statutes. Section 13.02 through 13.87. FACTS: • Recent chances in State la%N require the City of Eagan to prepare procedures for public access to governmental data received or maintained by the City. • The City Attorney has drafted policies and procedures for the City of Eagan regarding public access to government data and the rights of subjects of the data. • The proposed policy is based on a model procedure prepared by the Department of Administration, as well as policies and procedures used in several suburban communities. • Any provision in the policy which states that the City must do something or must not do something is a condition imposed by Statute. • It is also necessary at this time to appoint a responsible authority. ATTACHMENTS: • Attached on page say- is a cope of a memo from the City Attorney to the Cite Administrator regarding the policies and procedures. • Attached on pages 31 through L71 00' is a copy of the draft policies and procedures. • Attached on page At is a copy of a resolution of appointment of the responsible authority. ,33 SEVERSO\. SHELDON. DOUGHERTY & MOLE\-DA. P.A. TO: Tom Hedges. Cite Administrator FROM: Michael G. Doughertm, Cite Attorne\ DATE: March 1. 2001 RE: Government Data Policies and Procedures Our File '\o. 206-185 16 Recent changes in state la%% require the Cite of Eagan to prepare procedures for public access to eoN enimental data receiN ed or maintained b\ the Cite. Additional]%. the legislation and data practice rules require the Cite to appoint or desiortation a Data Practices Compliance Officer. to ans%t er questions concerning access to data or other data practices problems. and a Responsible Authorit%. a person char~_es~%N ith administering the requirements for collection, storage. use and dissemination of data on individuals. As %ou ma% recall, the council recent]% appointed Mira NleGane,. the City's Depute Clerk. as the Data Practices Compliance Officer. Enclosed for Council re\ ie%\ and adoption is a draft of the Policies and Procedures to be used b% the Cit% in re%ieNNing requests for access to go%ernment data. The proposed police is based or, a model procedure prepared b% the Depanment of Administration. as well as policies and procedures used in sex eral suburban communities. In re% ie%N in2 the proposed Policies and Procedures. it should be kept in mind that an- pro% ision Mhich states that th; Cit% n;ust do somethim~ or must not do something. is a condition imposed by statute. Also. -,,,e ha% e prepared a Resolution to appoint Mira McGarr c as the Responsible Authorit\. a position she may concurrentl, hold under the statute. If %ou have any questions, please do not hesitate to be in contact Nvith me. MGD J It cc: Holl,, Duff}. Depute Clerk Mira McGan-ev, Depute Clerk CITY OF EAGAN POLICIES AND PROCEDURES REGARDING PUBLIC ACCESS TO GOVERNMENT DATA A\-D RIGHTS OF SUBJECT OF DATA 1. rNTRODUCTIO\ This police is adopted to comply with the requirements of the Minnesota Data Practices Act (The "Act"). Minnesota Statute 133.01. et seq. II. RESPONSIBLE AUTHORITY The Cite Council has appointed Mira McGanee as the person who is the Responsible Authorit., for compliance v.ith the Act. The Responsible .-%uthorite mae designate any person as her Designee to be in charge of individual files or s\stems containing government data and to recei% e and comp], with requests for goy ernment data. III. ACCESS TO PUBLIC DATA All information maintained b\ the Cite is public unless there is a specific statuton designation ~ehich gig es it a different classification A. Individuals entitled to access. Am person has the right to inspect and cope public data. The requesting person also has the right to have an explanation of the meaning of the data. The requesting person need not state his or her name or give a reason for the request. Ho\\ e%er. the Cite ma\ ask for clarifying information to facilitate access to data. B. Form of request. The request for public data must be made in «riting. A request for information relatin_t to litigation should be made through the Cite Attorne". C. Time limits. Requests for public data xeill be received and processed durinL normal business hours of the Cite. If requests cannot be processed or copies cannot be made immediately at the time of request, it must be supplied as soon as is reasonable possible. D. Fees. Fees may be charged only if the requesting pan asks for a cope or electronic transmittal of the data. If significant time is required, the fee will include the actual cost of searching for, retrieving. and copying or electronically transmitting the data. The fee may not include time necessan, to separate public from non-public data. The Responsible Authority may also charge an additional fee if the data has commercial value and is a substantial and discrete portion of or an entire formula, compilation, program, process or system developed with a significant expenditure of public funds. This additional fee must relate to the actual development cost of the information. <3 In char~nng a reasonable fee for pro%iding copies of public data. the Responsible .Authot,, shall detennine the amount of such fees b% taking into account the follo~~ factors: 1. The cost of materials: The cost of labor; 3. Ane standard copying charges established by the Cite: 4. Any special costs necessan to produce copies from machine based record keeping s}stems, includine but not limited to computers and microfilm; systems: and 5. Mailing costs. IV. ACCESS TO DATA ON TN-DI%'IDt'AI.S Information about individual people is classified b, ]a\\ as public. private or confidential Information to be incorporated on forms used to collect private and confidewI2 information is also attached at Exhibit "A". A. India ]duals entitled to access. 1. P:cbhc information about an individual ma% be shoen or given to an%one. P7_iI Llrc information about an indi\ idual ma% be 21% ell to: • The individual. subject of the data. but on]e once even six months. unless dispute has arisen or additional date has been collected; • A person %t ho has been 21\ en access b, the express ritten consent of the individual data subject. The data consent must be on the form attached as Exhibit "B or a form reasonable similar; • A person who is authorized access be Federal. State. or local la%\ or coon order. • People about whom the individual %%as advised at the time the data collected. The identity of those people must be made a pan of the Tcnn r, ifarfting. and • Individuals %vithin the Cite. members of the cite council. and outside aUents (such as attorneys) whose work assignments or responsibilities reasonabl\ require access. 3. Confidential information may not be eiyen to the individual subject of the data. but may be shown or eiyen to: • A person who is authorized access be Federal, State. or local laN\ or coup order • Individuals within the Cite. members of cite council. and outside agents (such at attorneys) %ehose N~ork assignments or responsibilities reasonable require access 2 34 B. Form of request. Any individual may request. in Nviiting. whether the Cite has stored data about a person and Nyhether that data is classified as public. private or confidential. An information disclosure request. attached hereto as Exhibit "C". must be completed to document who requests and who receives this information. The Responsible Authority or Designee must complete the relevant portions of the form. The Responsible Authority or Designee may waive the release of this form if there is other documentation of the requesting party's identity, the infot~rtation requested, and the City's response. A request related to litigation should be made through the Cite Attorney. C. Identification of requesting party. The Responsible Authority or Designee must verify the identity of the requesting part as the person entitled to access. This can bl done through the personal knowledge.. presentation of written identification, comparison of the data subject's signature on a consent form with the person's signature in Cit% records. or other reasonable means. D. Time limits. Requests N, ill be received and processed during normal business hours. The response must be immediate. if possible. or ithin ten (10) NN orking days if an immediate response is not possible. E. Fees. Fees may be charged in the same manner as for public information. F. Summan data. Summa ` data is statistical records and reports derived from data on individuals but which does not identify an individual by name or reveal any other private or confidential data. Summan data is public. The Responsible Authority or Des] (~T ne: will prepare summary data upon request. if the request is in 'writing and the requesting panty pads for the cost of preparation. The Responsible Authority or Designee ili attempt to notify the requestor of the anticipated time schedule to respond to a request for summan data. Summan data may be prepared b\ "blacking out" personal identifiers, cuttim: out portions of the records that contain personal identifiers. programming computers to delete personal identifiers. or other reasonable means of removing personal identifiers from summary data. The Responsible Authority may ask an outside authority or agent to prepare the summarn data if. (a) the specific purpose is given in u-riting (b) the authority or agent agrees not to disclose the private or confidential data. and (c) the Responsible Authority determines that access by the authority or agent does not compromise the prix-acy of the private or confidential data. The Responsible Authority may use the form attached as Exhibit "D- G. Juvenile records. The following applies to private (not confidential) data abo~:: individuals under the age of eighteen (18). 1. Parental access. In addition to the individuals listed above «ho may ha% access to pnN ate date. a parent ma\ have access to pri% ate information about a jug enile subject. "Parent" means the parent or legal guardian of a Juvenile data subject. or individual acting as a parent or legal guardian in the absence of a parent or legal guardian. The parent is presumed to ha- e this right unless the Responsible Authorit} or Designee has been given eviIdence that there is a stag laxk. court order. or other legall-v binding document «vhich prohibits this right. 2. Notice to Lug enile. Before requesting private data from Juveniles. cit% personnel must notify the juvenile that the juvenile ma, request that the Juvenile*s information not be given to their parent(s). This notice shall be in the form attached as Exhibit "E". Denial of parental access. The Responsible Authorl'tN or Designee may den., parental access to pri% ate data when the Juvenile requests this denial and the Responsible Authority or Designee determines that withholding the data v, ould be in the best interest of the JuN enile. The request from the JuN enile must be in wnting stating the reasons for the request. In determining the best interest of the juN enile. the Responsible Authority or Designee x ill consider: • Whether the ju\ enile is of sufficient age and maturit- to explain the reasons and understand the consequences. • Whether denying access may protect the juN enile from ph% sical or emotional harm. • Whether there is reasonable grounds to support the ju\ enile's reasons. and • Whether the data concerns medical. dental or other health ser\ ices pro\ ided under Minnesota Statutes Sections x;144.341 to 144.34-. If so, the data ma\ be released onl\ if failure to inform the parent \\ould seriously jeopardize the health of the minor. The Responsible Authorit\ or Designee ma\ also deny parental access vt ithout a request from the Juvenile under Minnesota Statutes § 144.33 . V. DENIAL OF ACCESS If the Responsible Authority or Designee determines that the requested data is not accessible to the requesting party, the Responsible Authonty or Designee must inform the requesting party orally at the time of the request or in wasting as soon after that as possible. The Responsible Authorit\ or Designee must place an oral denial in Nkritinh: upon request. This must also include the specific authority for the denial. 4 39 VI. COLLECTION OF DATA ON INDIVIDLALS The collection and storage of information about individuals ,vill be limited to that necessan for the administration and management of programs specifically authorized b_, the state legislature, city council, or federal government. When an individual is asked to supply private or confidential information about himself or herself to Cite personnel, the City employee requesting the information must give the individual a Tennessen warnine. This warning must contain the following: • The purpose and intended use of the requested data: • Whether the individual may refuse or is legally required to supple the requested data: • Any known consequences from supplying or refusing to suppl" the information: and • The identit, of other persons or entities authorized bs state or federal la"\ to receive the data. A Tbmessen x\ arningT is not required when an individual is requested to suppl., investigative data to a law enforcement officer. A Tennessen \N arning ma\ be on a separate form or may be incorporated into the forn, hich requests the private or confidential data. VII. CHALLENGE TO DATA .-kCCL7RACY An individual \tho is subject of public or private data may contest the accurac" or completeness of that data maintained bs the Cite. The individual must notif% the Responsible Authority in Nvriting describing the nature of the contest. Within 30 da" s. the Responsible Authority or Designee must respond and either (a) correct the data found to be inaccurate or incomplete and attempt to notify past recipients of the inaccurate or incomplete date, including recipients named by the individual. or (b) notify the individual that the Authority believes the data to be correct. An individual who is dissatisfied with the Responsible Authority's action may appeal to the Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Administrations. using the contested case procedures under Minnesota Statutes. The Responsible Authority xvill correct am data if so ordered bs the Commissioner. 3~ VIII. ACCL-RAC)'OF DATA A. Accurac,, and currenc\ of data. 1. Penodically all employees will be requested to provide updated persor:a' information to their appropriate supervisor which is necessar for tax. insurance. emergence notifications. and other personnel purposes. 2. Department heads should periodically re\ ie\\ forms used to collect data or, individuals to delete items that are not necessarn and to clan'f items that ma% be ambieuous. All collected data is subject to disposal in accordance v~ith the Cit\'s records retention schedule. B. Data safe2uards_ I . Pri\ ate and confidential information ill be stored in files or database hick are not readil\ accessible to unauthorized indIN iduals will be secured durin • hours Mien the offices are closed. 2. Pri\ ate and confidential data N~ iil be kept on],, in City offices. except her: necessar for Cite business. Onl% emploN ees vNhose job responsibilities require them to hay e access %vill be allowed access to files and records that contain priNate and confident;, information. These emplo%ees will be instructed to: • Not discuss. disclose or other\ Ise release pri% ate or confidential data amone \~hose job responsibilities do not require access to the data. • 'got leave prix ate or confidential data where non-authorized individuals ma\ see it: and • Shred private or confidential data before discarding. 4. 'When a contract with an outside party requires access to private or confidential information, the contracting party will be required to use and disseminate the information consistent with the Act. The City may include in a Nvritten contract the lanauaee contained in Exhibit "F". 6 ~O u EXHIBIT A DATA PR_-kCTICES ADVISORY (Tennessen Waming) Some or all of the information that you are asked to provide on the attached form is classified b,, state la« as either prig ate or confidential. Pni ate data is information which generally cannot be given to the public, but can be giN en to the individual subject of the data. Confidential data is information %N hich generall% cannot be gig en to either the public or the individual subject of the data. Our purpose and intended use of this information is: You ❑ are ❑ are not legall\ required to proN ide this infornation. If %ou refuse to supple the information. the follo~\ ing may happen: Other persons or entities v,-ho are authorized b% 1a\\ to recei%e this information are EXHIBIT B CONSENT TO RELEASE PRIVATE DATA I• authorize the Cite of Ea=zan Cit,") to releas: (print name) the following private data about me: to the follm\ ing person or people: The person or people recei~ ing the p,-I% ate data ma' use it onl- for the follov, in= purposf 0,,- purpo.-,". This authorization is dated and expires on I agree to 21'%e up and %,,ai, e all claims that I might ha\ e against the Cite. its agent, and emplo, ees for releasing data pursuant to this request. X Si;nature Identified bv: 0 Witness X O Identification: Driver's License. State ID. Passport. other. O Comparison %Nith signature on file O Other: Responsible .Authorit,, Designee: EXHIBIT C Cite of Eagan REQUEST FOR IN'TORMATION Minnesota Government Data Practices Act A. Completed by Requester REQUESTER NAME (LAST, FIRST_M.): DATE OF REQUEST: STREET ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER: CITY. STATE, ZIP: SIGNATURE: DESCRJPTIO\ OF INFORMATION REQUESTED: i B. Completed by Department DEPARTMENT NAME HANDLED BY. INFORMATION CLASSIFIED AS: ACTION: ❑ PUBLIC ❑ \ON-PUBLIC ❑ APPROVED ❑ PRIVATE ❑ PROTECTED NO\-PUBLIC ❑ APPROVED IN PART (Explain belo%\ ) ❑ CONFIDENTIAL ❑ DENIED (Explain belo\\ ) REMARKS OR BASIS FOR DENIAL INCLUDING STATUTE SECTION: PHOTOCOPYING CHARGES: IDENTITY VERIFIED FOR PRIVATE INFORMATION ❑ NONE ❑ IDENTIFICATION. DRIVERS LICENSE. STATE ID. Etc ❑ Pages x = ❑ COMPARISON WITH SIGNATURE ON FILE ❑ Special Rate: (attach explanation) ❑ PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE ❑ OTHER: AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE: ~3 EXHIBIT D GOVERNMENT DATA ACCESS .-5~N_D NON-DISCLOSURE AGREEME-N-T 1. AL-THORIZ.ATIO\. Cite of Eagan rCite") hereby authorizLs ("authorized Part,") access to the following goN crnunc data: 2. PURPOSE. Access to this government data is limited to the objective of creatin summan data for the following purposes: COST. (Check: which applies): ❑ The authorized Pam is the person who request the summar\ data and agrees to bear th-e Cit,,'s costs associated ith the preparation of the data which has been determined to be S ❑ The Authorized Pam has been requested b\ the City to prepare summary data and i'.'. be paid in accordance ith the attached E\hibit A. 4. SECURITY. The authorized Pam agrees that it and an% emplo%ees or agents under its control must protect the pri" ac\ interests of indIN idual data subjects in accordance N\ ith the tern=s of this a_reernent. The .authorized Pam agrees to remo\ e all unique personal identifiers v hich could be used to identify am' individual from data classified b\ state or federal law as not public which is obtained from Cite records and incorporated into reports. summaries. compilations. articles. or any document series of documents. Data contained in files, records, microfilm, or other storage media maintained by the CM are the City's property and are not to leave the City's custody. The Authorized Part- agrees not to ma} .e reproductions of any data or remove any data from the site %vhere it is provided. if the data can in am' xN av identifv an individual. No data xvhich is not public and which is irrelevant to the purpose stated above i11 ever be disclosed or communicated to anvone by anv means. The Authorized Pam x arrants that the follo~N ing named indiN idual(s) » ill be the only person s to participate in the collection of the data described abo% e: l 5. LIABILITY FOR DISCLOSURE: The Authorized Party is liable for any unla%\ ful use or disclosure of government data collected. used and maintained in the exercise of this Agreement and classified as not public under state or federal la« . The Authorized Par-,% understands that it may be subject to civil or criminal penalties under those la%N s. The Authorized Pam' agrees to defend, indenutiA,. and hold the City, its officers and employ ees harmless from am liability, claims, damages. costs. judgments, or expenses. includin - reasonable attorneys' fees, resulting directly or indirectly from an act or omission of the Authorized Parry. its agents. employees or assignees under this agreement and against all loss b,, reason of the Authorized Pam's failure to full% perform in an) respect all obligations under this Agreement. 6. ENSURa\CE. In order to protect itself as N ell as the Cite. the Authorized Pane agrees at all times during the term of the Agreement to maintain insurance covering the Authorized Pam 's actin hies under this Agreement. The insurance will cover 51.000.000 per claimant for person,:) in and or damages and S1.000.000 per occurrence. The policy must co\ er the indemnification obligation specified aboN e. ACCESS PERIOD. The .-kuthorized PartN may ha% e access to the information describe) abo,, ; from to S. SLRVEY RESULTS. (Check- %k hich applies): ❑ If the Authorized Pane is the requester. a copy of all reports. summaries. compilations. articles. publications or any document or series of documents which are created from the information provided under this Agreement must be made available to the Cite in its entiretN. ❑ If the Authorized Pane is a contractor of the Cite. all copies of reports. summanes. compilations. articles. publications or any document or series of documents which are created from the information provided under this Agreement must be provided to the Cite. The Authorized Pam may retina one copy for its open records but may not disclose it ithout Cite permission. except in defense of claims brought against it. AUTHORIZED PARTY: Be: Date: Title (if applicable): CITYOF EAGA\: Be: Date: Its: Responsible Authority Designee EXHIBIT E NOTICE TO PERSONS L-NDER AGE OF I S Some of the information you are asked to provide is classified as pri% ate under state la%\. YOU ha% e the right to request that some of the information not be gi, en to one or both of % ou- parents legal guardians. Please complete the form belov% if you ',ti ish to hax e infommation «ithheld. Your request does not automaticall% mean that the information will be withheld. State la.~ requires the Cite to determine if honoring the request NNould be in your best interest. The Cit% i~ required to consider: • Whether you are sufficient age and matunt~ to explain the reasons and understand t}.e consequences. • Wheiher dening access may protect %ou from physical or emotional harm. • Whether there is reasonable grounds to support your reasons. and • Whetlmer the data concerns medical, dental. or other health sen ices proN ided and : Minnesota Statutes Sections 144.341 to 144. ,4,. If so. the data ma" be released orm:,, if failure to inform the parent %~ould senousk jeopardize -our health. NOTICE GIVEN TO: Date: BY (title) Request to Withhold Information I requesi that the follo%\ in« information: Date of birth: Be withheld from: For these reasons: Date: Print Name: Signature: ~-b EAG.-V POLICE DEPARTMENT 3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD EAGA1. NIFN~NESOTA 55122 REQUEST FOR CONTIDENTIALITY The identity of a victim and or witness to a crime may be xithheld from the public IF the victim kvitness specifically requests that his identity not be revealed. AND the agency reasonably determines that revealing the identity of the victim witness N~ould threaten the personal safety of property of the individual. Date: 'game: tFull name - first. middle. last - no initials please) Ea_an Police Case Number (if known): Date of Incident: 1. hereb% request m} name in re`aards to the abo%e listed report be held as confidential b,, the Eagan Police Department. This request is made as 1 belieN e the release of m% name ~rould affect: M% personal safet, The safer of m\ propert% The reasons for this belief on my part are as follows. DEPARTMENT USE ONLY: Request re,,-ie\,.ed by: Request approved or denied. Person notified EXHIBIT F SAMPLE CONTRACT PROVISIONS Data Practices Compliance. Contractor a ill ha- e access to data collected or maintained b\ tl;c Cite to the extent necessary to perform Contractor's obligations under this contract. Contractor agrees to maintain all data obtained from the Cite in the same manner, and under the same classification. as the Cite is required under the Minnesota Goy eminent Data Practices Act. Minnesota Statutes Chapter 13. Contractor x ill not release or disclose the contents of the da classified as not public to any person except upon written approval by the Cit.. Contractor agrees to defend and indemnify the Cite from any claim. liability. damage or loss asserted against the City as a result of Contractor's failure to compl\ with the requirements of the Act or this pro, ision. Upon termination of this contract. Contractor agrees to return all data to the City . as requested by the Cit.. APPOINTMENT OF RESPONSIBLE AUTHORITY STATE OF MINNESOTA CITE' OF EAGAN WHEREAS. Minnesota Statutes. Section 13.02. Subdivision 16, as amended. requires that the Cite of Eagan appoint one person as the Responsible Authority to administer the requirements for collection. storage, use and dissemination of data on individuals. «ithin the CiL% and, VVHEREAS, the Eagan City Council shares concern expressed by the legislature on the responsible use of all City data and wish to satisfy this concern by immediateIN appointing an administratively qualified Responsible Authority. as required under the statute. BE IT RESOLVED. the Cit% Council of Eagan appoints MIRA MCGARVEY. as the Responsible Authority for the purposes of meeting all requirements of Minnesota Statutes Section 13.02 through 13.8-. as amended. and with rules as lav' fully promulgated b" the Commissioner of Administration as published in the State Register on Januar\ 4. 1999. ADOPTED BY EAGA\ CITY COUNCIL ON (date) ATTESTED TO BY: Patricia E. ANN ada. Mai or Mira McGarr e-. Depute Clerk Agenda Information Memo March 6. 2001 Eagan City Council Meeting Q. APPROVE OFFICIAL NAME CHANGE OF CEDARVALE AREA TO CEDAR GROVE ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To officially rename the Cedan'ale redevelopment study area to Cedar Grove Redevelopment Area. FACTS: • The City Council adopted redevelopment area boundaries and concept land uses for the greater Cedan,ale area at its meeting on Febru rv 20, 2001. During the discussion for those items, the City Council indicated an interest to change the name of the redevelopment area. • The naming of the Cedar Grove Redevelopment .Area will help to establish an identit% that ties into the long-established residential area of the same name. • To avoid confusion with the Cedar Grove residential neighborhood. the various sub- areas of redevelopment have been renamed as the 'north District. Central District. etc. ATTACHMENTS: • A copy of the final Cedar Grove Rede% elopment area is included in the packet on page. S`- LF UJ O v d U O > Q J L .>i., W } 1 V LL2 j Tit s \t, 4XiN E 4 ,•a .J Y -`mow (4 ` 11 Qty 1 s,~ Yf la. - c ~s Agenda Information Memo March 6, 2001, Eagan City Council IX. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. VARIANCE - GARDNER AND KAREN MILLER (4190 DIAMOND DRIVE) ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve a 5-foot Variance to the required 30-foot setback from a public right-of-way for a front porch addition at 4190 Diamond Drive, legally described as Lot 8, Block 4, Cedar Grove First Addition. FACTS: • City Code Section 11.20 Subd. 6A requires a 30-foot front yard setback along a public right-of-way. • The subject property is currently setback the minimum 30 feet from a public right-of- way. • The applicants are proposing to construct a 5' X 20' porch (excluding steps) onto the front entrance of their home, thus requiring a 5-foot variance. ATTACHMENTS: Staff Report, pages`/ 1 -3 through. ~a d2 ~u PLANNING REPORT CITY OF EAGAN REPORT DATE: February 5, 2001 CASE: 19-VA-01-02-01 APPLICANT: Gardner & Karen Miller HEARING DATE: March 6, 2001 PROPERTY OWNER: Gardner/Karen Miller APPLICATION DATE: Feb. 2, 01 REQUEST: Variance PREPARED BY: Tanda Gretz LOCATION: 4190 Diamond Drive COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: D-I, Single-Family Residential (0-3 units/acre) ZONING: R-1, Single-Family Residential SUMMARY OF REQUEST Gardner and Karen Miller are requesting a 5-foot Variance to the required 30-foot setback from a public right-of-way for property at 4190 Diamond Drive, legally described as Lot 8, Block 4, Cedar Grove First Addition in the SE'/4 of Section 19. AUTHORITY FOR REVIEW City Code Chapter 11, Section 11.40, Subdivision 3C states that the Council may grant a variance and impose conditions and safeguards only if: 1. The Council shall determine that the special conditions applying to the structures or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property and do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located, and that the granting of the application is necessary for the applicant. 2. The granting of the proposed variance will not be contrary to the intent of this Chapter and the Comprehensive Guide Plan. 3. That granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty. Planning Report - Miller Variance March 6, 2001 Paget CODE REQUIREMENTS The City Code Section 11.20, subd. 6A, requires a minimum building setback of 30-feet from the property line abutting a City street right-of-way. BACKGROUNWHISTORY Cedar Grove First Addition was platted in June 1959. Typical lots in this development are non- conforming in size, with most under 10,000 sq. ft. Similar porch additions have been completed in the surrounding neighborhoods (4196 Diamond Drive, 1785 Carnelian). EXISTING CONDITIONS The subject lot is zoned Single-Family Residential, and currently meets all setback requirements. Cedar Pond Park is located immediately east of the property, with similar single-family homes to the north and south. Cedar School is west of the property, across Diamond Drive. The house is a rambler-style, with an attached garage. The house is set 30 feet back from the street right-of- way, the minimum distance required by City Code. In 1997 the neighboring home at 4196 Diamond Drive was granted a 5-foot variance for the construction of a porch addition similar in size to the proposed addition for 4190 Diamond Drive. EVALUATION OF REQUEST The applicants are proposing to construct a 5' X 20' front porch onto the front entrance of their house. Since the house in set back only 30 feet from the public right-of-way, a variance is required for any addition to the front of the house. The proposed addition would project 5 feet into the 30-foot building setback required by City Code, excluding steps. The addition would be similar in size to the approved porch addition of the neighboring house at 4196 Diamond Drive, differing only in roof style. Additional planned improvements to the property include reshingling the house and garage roofs, a new front door, and repair of the concrete garage floor and apron. s-y Planning Report - Miller Variance March 6, 2001 Page3 APPLICANT'S ESTIMATE OF HARDSHIP The applicant's have lived at the property since 1960, and the proposed addition is part of their retirement plans. The applicant's state a porch "will look appropriate to the site and improve the attractiveness of our neighborhood." SUMMARY/CONCLUSION The applicants are requesting a 5-foot Variance to the required 30-foot setback from a public right-of-way. The Variance would allow the construction of a 5' X 20' porch onto the front entrance to their house, which is set back the minimum 30 feet from the public right-of-way. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED To approve a 5-foot Variance to the required 30 foot building setback along a public right-of-way for the construction of a porch addition at Lot 8, Block 4, Cedar Grove First Addition. 1. If within one year after approval, the variance shall not have been completed or utilized, it shall become null and void unless a petition for extension has been granted by the council. Such extension shall be requested in writing at least 30 days before expiration and shall state facts showing a good faith attempt to complete or utilize the use permitted in the variance. 2-1-01 Attachment to Development Application ATTACHMENT 1 at 4190 Diamond Drive WHAT WE WANT TO DO In the spring of 2001, we will both be retired. We have decided to continue in our home where we have lived since 1960. We would like to improve the attractivness and livability of our house. Our house is sited facing Diamond Drive set 30 feet back from the city right-of-way, which we understand is the minimum setback allowed. We would like to add a porch to the front entrance, 5 by 20 feet. This requires a variance of 5 feet into our frontyard, plus the steps. Located on the east side of Diamond Drive, the second house north of Diffley Road in Cedar Grove 1, we are in an area zoned Single- family Dwellings. To the west across Diamond Drive is Cedar School and playground zoned Public Facilties; to the east, abutting our lot, is Cedar Pond Park also zoned Public Facilities. On either side, north and south at 4184 and 4196 Diamond Drive, are single- dwelling homes originally the same size as ours. The roof of the porch will be a shed type, constucted of trusses extending about seven feet beyond the house. Included in the request for Building Permit will be complete reshingling of the house and garage, a new front door and repair of the concrete garage floor and apron. We feel this porch will look appropriate to the site and improve the attractivness of our neighborhood. We would like to complete this work during the spring of 2001, starting soon after granting of the variance and a building permit. Karen and Gardner Miller 6-16 Eagan Boundary Location Map Pa el Areaerline Building Footprint • ` .00, , ■ ♦ • e ow 1= asses ® ■ assesses i w*e i • s s = t ♦ a s r +d' 4?' ® j o ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ d v o ~ i ■r rr `er y ■ ®wb% fodw aQ a Subject Site c • 4b, • j ~i 111 re ~4 Y ■ ■ e ® eP - - a^ e R m as or e. ■ > e4 l/ Is I `f f 4Va / v ® 4 f s o v m 6 p .er t tt A l ~ ~ A •Q a 3 L y SR e b @ of ps aee~ a m . asr 7 bit E bb ft., e fe ■ Jj _ ■ ~ .rA yq'wO ✓ e o - t t* j •w• d 1000 0 1000 2000 Feet Development/Developer. Gardner and Karen Mille Application: Variance Case No.: 19-VA-01-02-01 Map Prepared using ERSI ArcView 3.1. Parcel bass map data provided N by Dakota County Land Survey Department and is current as of November 2000. City of Eagan THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY H E M I N N E S 0 T A The City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this Information and are S Gornmunlry Dev.lopn..nt Department not responsible for errors or omissions. --ATT VN M-F N T 120 I LJ > d-5 ~ ,rte a o z I 0.0 a_ ~ 30` SE'TaAcl.~ ~ d ~ ET - cr- c d` i 7 5 ' I ~O ~ cV O I L c. ~ N O Q v r 4 ~ W a = ~ q ~ Z`u d O MI I ~ ~ c < I ~ I I l i l a I I I I l I' I I i w I l I I ! ~ o I~ I I 1 I LL I I I I I ~ II' I; I I I ~ ~ I I~ i! I I al+r I J- ItI I t ' I i I I 11 ~ ~ I I i l ~ I I J 4 W f! I~ I i I I I i I - I I q i I Agenda Information Memo March 6, 2001, Eagan City Council B. VARIANCE TO SETBACK FROM PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY (LOT 4, BLOCK 2, WEDGWOOD FIRST ADDITION) - DALE AND CAROLE HEEBL ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve a Variance of ten feet to the required thirty-foot setback from a public right-of-way for a garage addition at 939 Waterford Drive East, legally described as Lot 4, Block 2, Wedgwood First Addition, located in the SE'/4 of Section 26. FACTS: • The Heebl's are proposing to construct a third stall addition to their garage at 939 Waterford Drive East. The existing garage is set back 30 feet from the front lot line at its closest point (the northeast corner). • The proposed addition would extend to the north, and is 16 feet wide by 34 feet deep. The resulting setback would be 20 feet at the closest point from the new addition to the public right-of-way. • The Heebl's have stated that the garage addition is needed to provide enclosed storage space for vehicles, recreational and other equipment, and tools. Additionally, the Heebl's plan other improvements which include new siding, a new roof, new gutters and a porch. • The stated hardship is the configuration of the lot and the existing placement of the home. Because of the curve in the street and the orientation of the house on the lot, the northern corner of the proposed garage addition would encroach into the required 30-foot setback. • The proposed garage addition satisfies all other setbacks and zoning requirements. The total garage area including the proposed addition is 981 square feet. Building coverage on the 15,202 square foot lot, after the garage addition and other improvements the Heebl's have planned, would be 18.5%. • The applicants have provided several letters from neighbors in support of their proposal. ATTACHMENTS: Planning Report, pages ~ through ~D PLANNING REPORT CITY OF EAGAN REPORT DATE: February 27, 2001 CASE: 26-VA-02-02-01 APPLICANT: Dale & Carole Heebl HEARING DATE: March 6, 2001 PROPERTY OWNER: Dale & Carole Heebl APPLICATION DATE: February 3, 2001 REQUEST: Variance PREPARED BY: Pamela Dudziak LOCATION: 939 Waterford Drive East COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: LD, Low Density Residential ZONING: PD, Planned Development SUMMARY OF REQUEST Dale and Carole Heebl are requesting a 10-foot Variance to the required 30-foot setback from a public right-of-way for property at 939 Waterford Drive East, legally described as Lot 4, Block 2, Wedgwood First Addition, in the SE '/4 of Section 26. AUTHORITY FOR REVIEW City Code Chapter 11, Section 11.40, Subdivision 3C states that the Council may grant a variance and impose conditions and safeguards only if: 1. The Council shall determine that the special conditions applying to the structures or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property and do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located, and that the granting of the application is necessary for the applicant. 2. The granting of the proposed variance will not be contrary to the intent of this Chapter and the Comprehensive Guide Plan. 3. That granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty. 6/ CODE REQUIREMENTS The City Code requires a minimum building setback of 30-feet from the property line abutting a public right-of-way. Garages and accessory structures are limited to a maximum area of 1,100 total square feet, and total building to lot area ratio is restricted to a maximum of 20%. BACKGROUND/HISTORY Wedgwood First Addition is part of the Lexington South Planned Development. The R-1 zoning district standards were applied to this single-family development. The property was platted in 1981, and the house constructed in 1985. EXISTING CONDITIONS The lot is 15,202 square feet in area, and is located on the inside of the curve on Waterford Drive East. The house faces east and is situated with the front toward the center of the curve. The attached two-stall garage is on the north side of the house. EVALUATION OF REQUEST The Heebl's are proposing to construct a third-stall garage addition on the north side of their house. The addition also includes a new laundry room. The applicant has indicated that other improvements are proposed to the home which include a new roof, new siding, new gutters, and the addition of a porch. The northeast corner of the proposed addition would encroach about 10 feet into the required 30- foot front yard setback. This lot is similar to a corner lot in that about half of the perimeter of this lot abuts a public street, and therefore, the 30-foot setback requirement applies over a larger portion of the lot. Unlike a corner lot, however, this street frontage is curved. Because of the curve in the street and the orientation of the house on the lot, the proposed garage addition would encroach into the required 30-foot setback. With the proposed addition, the total garage area will be 981 square feet. The proposed additions to the home - the garage and laundry room on the north side of the home as well as the porch addition will result in 18.5% total building coverage on the lot. APPLICANT'S ESTIMATE OF HARDSHIP The stated hardship is the configuration of the lot and the amount of street frontage. The lot is located inside the curve in Waterford Drive East, with about half of the perimeter of the lot abutting a public street. The narrative states that the home was originally designed to include a third garage stall, but cost considerations at the time of initial construction required that the garage be scaled back to two stalls. iu The applicants' narrative indicates that the garage addition is needed to provide enclosed storage space for vehicles, recreational and other equipment and tools. The narrative also details other improvements the applicants intend to make and their anticipated time frame for those improvements. SUMMARY/CONCLUSION In summary, the applicant is requesting a 10-foot setback Variance to construct an addition to the existing attached two-stall garage. At its closest point (the northeast corner), the existing garage is set back the minimum required 30 feet from the Waterford Drive East right-of-way. The proposed addition would have a resulting setback of 20 feet from the right-of-xvay. The proposed addition satisfies all other zoning requirements. The applicant also submitted several letters of support from neighbors and copies are included in the exhibits with this report. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED To recommend approval of a 10-foot Variance to the required 30-foot setback from a public right-of-way for property at 939 Waterford Drive East, legally described as Lot 4, Block 2, Wedgwood First Addition, in the SE '/4 of Section 26. If approved the following conditions should apply: I . If within one year after approval, the variance shall not have been completed or utilized, it shall become null and void unless a petition for extension has been granted by the council. Such extension shall be requested in writing at least 30 days before expiration and shall state facts showing a good faith attempt to complete or utilize the use permitted in the variance. 2. The applicant shall obtain a building permit prior to beginning construction. 3. The proposed addition shall be constructed using materials to match the existing structure. 6.3 Eagan Boundary Location Map - Street Centerline Parcel Area Building Footprint x 0d °3 a®~ .m t e. a to ` ~ VG t t~ ; ♦ as F4 t er ~ R D O f a Dom` 3 OF e y r + e' + s $ s a a a D-® s it er s a e e d t 1` B a p; +e ♦ e IF C' t c' ' a W tee rea t as ' - L a €a s e~ c • e .e a e 3 a ea L Q92 ~ ® aar P a taa e P ~ L « ® ! c d•& D Mob edise Sub ect Site ~ ea f~ 9 8 a tr i a* t 4 • a t a s a$ a ~s c a* ~ ~'Z tat ° ~ ~ to r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ A i A ® 4 ~s i y t or e T 01 .gd d~ ~J ~ ~rca a ~ g g ae R ~ as ~ e g Q~® ~ D~ • `a.a . 61 a 1000 0 1000 2000 Feet Development/Developer. Dale and Carole Neebl Application: Variance Case No.: 29-VA-02-02-01 C6-v) Map Prepared using ERSI Arc View 0.1. Parcel base map data provided N by Dakota County Land Survey Department and is current as of November 2000. *City of Eagan THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY N E M I N N E S 0 T A The City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this information and are Community Development Department not responsible for errors or omissions. S Current Zoning and Comprehensive Guide Plan Dale & Carole Heebl Land Use Map Case No. 26-vA-02-02-01 Zoning Map P P P P Of P # O P Location Current Zoning: s' PD P Planned Development P R-1 A A R-1 O R1 A A G.a.a.N, M A R- R- R1 Rr NO ' C.l.N.N. NO P 600 0 600 1200 Feet Comprehensive Guide Plan Land Use Map P # 0.i Location r Current Land Use Designation: P P LD Low Density Residential (0-4 units/acre) 0.I I 0 c.6.a.N. y 0. P 600 0 600 1200 F- N Parcel base map Information provided by Dakota County Land Survey Department 8/11/00. Zoning Information maintained by City Staff. City of Eagan E THIS MAP Is INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY Community Development Department The City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this information. s SIGMA SURVEYING House Cerfificcfe For: SERVICES 3909 Sibley Memca Highway GELHAR HOMES Eagan Minnesota 55122 Phone (612) 452 3077 lop, (G ^ o00 - - S 890570011E 102.32 g~\4b kn 0..,. oqa R U, E~mr In va.~l Arch o f \ ^ ' o ~\n P%p tea` O 0►aD S oa At OA/ O o 01 r 0 1o'r p' j "'S c 22 0 ` W L S' :6 * pl 0 7 Q s o. o s~ o. a ♦ oz 0 ♦ ~ O 0 / o• 41"x.07 co Z x• A IT, ale ` N 89°57'00"W 73.06 - • T A) ~E conc..r. Curb" z 1 WATERFORD " 1 MN. Zn~. YOt.ir PROPOSED TOP of BLOCK ELEV. =92,1_0 SCALE: 1" = 30 PROPOSED GARAGE FLOOR ETEV. PROPOSED BASEMENT FLOOR E1,FV.=913.0 ® Denotes Iron Monument Foun(~ Q Denotes Wood Hub Set NOTE: Verify all Floor Heights with x9130 Denotes Existing Spot Elevation Final Bldg. Plans . * BF,FORE CONS'T'RUCTION * - Denotes Surface Drainage Direct i - -Property Description- Lot 4, flock 2, WEDG110OD 1'IRST ADDT.TION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Da::ota ('ounty, Minn^sct / 'r 3 ~j6 9 SITE PLAN aa ~ j !III! ~ illllls'I,i' I~ ! * I! 1' 1 1 I ~ i r I 1 \JyLL~ ; ~'.I N I ~ I dl I !I J ~ I I I 4 l ! III - - I I( ! I I I I I I l i l~ ~ { i! i t I I ! I ~ i i t i I 71 f.~ x to ~yII N 'I1!I it i!II'j II II ~ W ~ I I I I ' j~ LL) - ii ~ !lil~~ III I,I LI I i IIIIIII' ;I it I I _ I ~ II I I I 1!! I'll l) I ~li jl ! it Ii' I'III ICI` I IIII, I'! ii 'I; III i ~I~ ~ !i I ~ 1'I~illll~lllD Fie... yErrR1' a t TJ ►~IIC fl A5r,4"T, q.WinkLF5 12 l i l t Ord I~ I b ~-0 Itol-O ~I Ex►sr. 4x4 p~,ab: P'E~, SET' ut- tlzi~~'4i~6 ` ~Piee2-6EU Zo" P--T. ` 'MJJ vale- P.T10b. _ I.2rRo` , MALL: 70 _-20. Wlr4. ~Z"-- :f-- 1~N►aG ExI~T.. dt4tS W vam OE,.dAW KO+rE. M mw l-. esTs a 2 lot.JlRts - W R I mss" eta I cleaoC ~ ~ L5T• t (G Ecs E N ~ J O 0 N~ taL. _t le].1rk x R I To C+17CY s A=r" l-Ia N I &i@ sib cxr. 41eL1_~ (Z)- I v'-o I 81-2 '1 to V 2p 5 cRS.g" FUU.. "T 6,IC IV"x 8"_ SoN G._ FN-TH, iI,4_-x_lL.. _ 4 Mi1- r-L-r . 2x4 purs,Ol d k IRS-Fffiie't~. Y1i"sk. UL-- _N F I c*avn ~En m o o~ i I NFLU cc N ~1 ..E1y P'T SIZG - -4- JI 7C Coy FUI-I- rA?. px.tr, I - .~o. FT4 I I I II 'Ift nP 14&I.L. 30-IL FcF6 ecQ- ~~c~ .escerar~rl FN t~TM I Lit- Gar F:J~ t)5? 411 ~~.1sUl. ~TI1bTF.II .so. f:hLT X.w-6. iii n a on -77. 1~=op 6~ 2-o Ico -o'~ ~-o f C4-J 5 J 3 MuLL~ T7P ' '-eAQLT Lip, I Lly r• SclescRS 'YLYfjL~S~ 1241 0_~ Pe~o~.E • 4'/zil2 oec 'LI I - ~ X _ u~ Full ExlaT c.arh.-L.escy.,,C~ - I I~o~ el :1T nlL I~~ ~Mcf! BkIST W"k=l t+- 4mtB&-rn P►sr PA& . Is~STw- NW vel. 3' ~y! o dl ill a $IaG,. ~TYO.j - 41 bes~le. . i Kfbo Fiwt, m~ 16f l I C W uL , GW 14 P.P~.~ L~r~ A{Jllfa mm w 31e~N✓ I .PrI ~ q XIS I a _ I I " i a ~ a• cxisr ; . ~e. ~I~~Y 17 I V2 "&TW ~D 14G;4 _ 2s I 0 I IEx15!• Wew _ j al/z C.uJ~ . F~a~b: I) 2 t Q ~ Wcrm= 7~L W1 y'P -P ~ FI6604 1-IEU caJyT, 6WeU1J N,r, a yH/~b°e FIRE cede A-rF e 5F{tive~ ~~iS - Wr~L/e'rK• caMMd.l 7 } 4°s-cic, - I I I I ctr1~E• L I P Ex 19T 14 -+~-I 00 I I ~ I 2 - I I'/ ' M WMI I I _N ~ITIaJ Ft~a•~ t-i~+~ _ - CONTRACTOR VERIFY ALL DIM LUMBER ~„„a„FafORE STARTING_CONSTRU 942 Waterford Dr. E Eagan, MN 55123 January 30, 2001 To Whom it may concern. Dale and Carole Heebl have discussed their plans to put an addition to their garage at 939 Waterford Dr. E. In this discussion, they shared with me the proposed drawings as wall as the size,staked outline and location of the structure. I am aware that the project is planned to take place from April through July, 2001. 1 fully approve of the enhancements the project will add to the neighborhood I am in support of this project Sincerely, David F. Matschina 651-454-3798 I have discussed project of building a 3rd stall garage of bale and Carole Heebl. • I have seen the proposed drawings. • I have seen the staked outline of the size and location of the new garage. • I have seen aware of the building time-line. • I approve of the enhancements the project will add to the neighborhood. I am support of the project, John Helland 943 Waterford Drive East Eagan, MN 55123 ~j Donald E. and E. Kathleen Holmes 936 Waterford Dr. E. Eagan, MN 55123 January 30, 2001 Carole and Dale Heebl came to our home on Sunday, January 28th, 2001 to discuss their plans for adding another bay to their garage. They showed us the drawings, including the exact size and loction of the new structure. They shared the time line for putting the new garage up. We discussed how the change would assist them and enhance the neighborhood. We are in complete agreement with the Heebls regarding this project and we support their request for a zoning variance without reservation. Sincerely, 4 Donald E. Holmes E. Kathleen Holmes .lanuary 30. 2001 Re: Application for Variance Lot 4. Block 2. Wedgewood First Addition To Whom It May Concern: I am writing in support of the proposed addition and improvements Dale and Carole Heeble are applying for a variance in order to complete. Dale and Carole discussed the pro~iect with my husband and I and we have seen the drawingsiplans. I have seen the staked outline of the size and location of the proposed addition. I am also aware of the time-line. I believe their proposed new construction and improvements to their existing home will only add to the neighborhood. Therefore. my husband and I both fully support Dale and Carole Heehle's proposal. Sincerely, A - ~ / 16u ?CL Kelli Rangel 940 Waterlord Drivc East Eagan, MN 55123 (612) 994-4559 January 31, 2001 Mark Marthaler and Delores Strand 929 Waterford Drive East Eagan, MN 55123 Dear City of Eagan, We are writing this letter in support of the building project proposed by Carole and Dale Heebl. We have discussed this project with Carole and Dale. We have seen the staked outline of the size and location of the nenv garage and have seen the proposed drawings. We are aware of the building time-line and approve of the enhancements. The value of the neighborhood will be increased by these improvements. We are in complete support of this project. Sincerely, / Mark Marthaler Delores Strand February 1, 2001 To Whom it May Concern: We have been neighbors for quite some time and Kathy has lived in the neighborhood since the Heebls moved here in 1985. We have discussed this project with Carole and Dale and have seen the proposed drawings. We have seen the staked outline of the size and location of the new garage. We are aware of the building time-line. We approve of the enhancements the projects will add to the neighborhood. We are in support of the project. Kathy Paul and Pat Haupt 930 Waterford Drive East Eagan, Minnesota 55123 651-452-8372 Januan, 29. 2001 TO City of Lawn FROM Tern & Jane Buufford SIIBJFCT. Addition of a 3rd Stall Garage - 939 Waterford Dr F.. We have reviewed the project plans and seen the staked outline for the additional 3rd stall garage onto the home of Dale & Carole Heeble We have no concerns or reservations with his plans as proposed Overall we see this as a positive addition to his home and an imesiment in hoth his hone and the neighborhood We appime and support the project xN ith the proposed, approximate time (lames set by Dale Zr~ Tom & Jane Bouflord Q34 Waterford Dr F. Faun. N1N 55123 January 30, 2001 Dale Heebl 939 Waterford Dr. E. Eagan, MN 55123 Dear Dale: This is my letter of support for your building project and my acknowledgement that: 1. I have discussed this project with Carole and Dale. 2. 1 have seen the proposed drawings. 3. 1 have seen the staked outline of the size and location of the new garage. 4. 1 am aware of the building time-line. 5. 1 approve of the enhancements the project will add to the neighborhood. 6. 1 am in support of the project. Ste n Anderson/Sandra Abraham 931 Waterford Drive E. Eagan, MN 55123 LARRY & KATHY JANSEN ^v o1~f~G;d Eagan MN 55123` Horn, phone 551-452-111/1 January 31, 2001 This is to acknowledge that we were notified by: Dale E. and Carole J. Heebl 939 Waterford Dr. E. Eagan, MN 55123 651-454-9242 This is a letter of support for their upcoming project and we: 1. Discussed the project with Dale and Carole 2. Saw the proposed drawings 3. Saw the staked outline of the size and location of the new garage 4 Are aware of the building time-line 5. Approve of the enhancements the project will add to the neighborhood 6. Are supportive of the project r "1 -7 Larrv . Jans n Kathleen A. Jansen Dale and Carole Heebl 939 Walerford Drive East Eagan, MN 551'_3 Re: Building of 3"1 stall garage We have discussed this pro i ject with Carole and Dale. We have seen the proposed drawings We have seen the staked outline of the size and location of the new garage We are aware of the building Ume-line We approve of the enhancements the project Nvill add to the neighborhood We are in support of the project. Paul and Carol Zenner 927 Waterford Drive East Eagan. MN 55123 Date: Date Kuai Leong and Henry Wong 932 Waterford Drive E. Eagan, MN 55123 January 30. 2001 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN Re: Neighborhood Letter of Support Dear Sir/Madam: We are writing to support Dale and Carole Heebl's application for a hardship variance to carry out their proposed home improvement plans. We believe that such home improvement will add significant aesthetic value to the entire neighborhood. Dale and Carole Heebl have given us ample opportunities to review their enhancement plans and to evaluate the impact of such plans on our neighborhood. Before forming our opinion, we have: 1. discussed with Dale and Carole Heebl regarding their home improvement project, including, without limitation to, the addition of a new garage; 2. reviewed the proposed drawings; 3. analyzed the staked outline of the size and location the new garage: and 4. examined the timeline of the proposed project. Based on our review, we are in approval of the enhancements and benefits the project will bring to the neighborhood. The proposed improvement will no doubt beautify and enhance the overall appearance of the neighborhood. As a result, we strongly support the proposed home improvement plans. We urge the city to issue Dale and Carole Heebl a variance as soon as possible to enable them to carry out their plans. Thank you very much for your attention to this letter. r Sincerely, i _ C Ku i Leong and Henry Wong ~6 Hardship Variance for the Building of a 3rd Stall Garage. Dale E. and Carole J. Heebl 939 Waterford Dr. E. Eagan MN 55123 (651) 454-9242 e-mail: brulebuddiesciaol.com Hardship Criteria • Our house sits on the inside curve of Waterford Dr. E. This lot configuration causes the street to wrap around two-thirds of our property. • Our home was originally designed to include a 3rd stall garage. but our limited budget at the time removed the garage from the plans. The house was to be located on the site specifically for the addition of a 3~d stall garage. • We did pay to have the electrical service panel moved from the front (east) outside corner of the garage to the back (north-west) interior wall. This was done by the recommendation of our builder (for the accommodation of the future 3rd stall garage). • There is plenty of room for the garage to fit into the north side of the property line. The new garage would be 21' from the north property line. • The area of concern is the setback from the curb. Our existing garage corner is 36 feet from our property line (46' from the curb, at the closest point). The new garage would bring the closest point of the garage to 25' from our property line (35' from the curb). I have shaded the variance area of concern on the lot survey drawing. Household Space Needs • Our household consists of two adults and a teenager (my son is 14 N7s old). My son will start driving next year and my wife and I will be buying a third car within the year. We would to prefer to store the car in a garage instead of the driveway. • Our builder talked us into having a basement only 2113 the size of our main floor area. This is creating a lot of storage concerns with Holiday decorations, school files and records (my wife and I are both teachers), recreational equipment (skies, hunting, fishing and boating ('47 Evinrude 7-horsepower and '52 Johnson 10-horsepower engines), camping, hiking, three golf club bags, and old family furniture. In the winter months we store our four bikes in the basement as well. • The existing double garage space is filled the maximum. We have a'97 Ford F-150 and a '87 Honda Accord parked in the garage presently. Other items that take-up room in our garage would be a 4'x8' folding trailer, radial-arm and table saw and stand, two work benches, a lawn mower, 17' canoe, and snow blower. • During the summer months we store our snow blower at our neighbors shed for lack of garage space (when the bikes are brought up from the basement). • The new garage edition will contain an 8'x10' laundry room. The present laundry room will become a mudroom and storage space for coats. gloves, and headwear. • Within the new garage would be a woodshop for my tools and saws. Enhancement to the neighborhood If the garage would be built. the following would also occur: • The current asphalt driveway would be replaced with a reinforced cement driveway. • 3-season porch (20'x 14') would be added over our existing deck. • The old Masonite siding would be replaced with maintance-free vinyl siding on the new and excisting buildings. • Maintance-free sofits would be installed on the new and excisting buildings. • All windows on the new and excisting building would be installed/replaced with new maintance-free exteriors. • Seamless gutters would be installed on the new and excisting buildings. • A new roof would be installed over the existing structure. • Landscaping around the new garage would be a mixture of perennial flowers and shrubs. Time Frame April: • Footings and foundation • Garage floor • Framing of garage Mav: • Framing of 3-season porch • New roof over new garage. porch, and existing home • Window and exterior door installations • Maintance-free exteriors June: • Heating/cooling duct work • Electrical • Insulation • Finish interior walls and trim • Lighting • Floorings Julv: • Landscaping Agenda Information Memo March 6, 2001 Eagan City Council Meeting C. PROJECT 799, EAGANDALE CENTER INDUSTRIAL PARK/ EAGANDALE OFFICE PARK STREET OVERLAY ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve Project 799 (Eagandale Center Industrial Park/ Eagandale Office Park - Street Overlay) and authorize the preparation of detailed final plans and specifications. FACTS: • Since 1990, the City has been implementing a comprehensive Pavement Management Program that provides timely pavement rehabilitation to streets significantly extending their overall life expectancy. During these past 11 years, approximately 42 miles of street within the City have been rehabilitated. • The resurfacing of the streets within the Eagandale Center Industrial Park and Eagandale Office Park Additions have been programmed for 2001 in the City's 5-year Capital Improvement Program (2001-2005). • On June 5, 2000, the City Council directed staff to prepare a feasibility report identifying the scope, cost, financing and schedule of street rehabilitation for the streets of the Eagandale Center Industrial Park and Eagandale Office Park Additions. • The streets within the project area include Eagandale Boulevard, Eagandale Court, West Service Road, Center Court, Eagan Industrial Road, Trapp Road, Corporate Center Drive and Corporate Center Curve. • On February 6, 2001, the feasibility report for Project 799 was presented to the City Council and a Public Hearing was scheduled for March 6 to formally present and discuss the report with the affected property owners. • An informational neighborhood meeting was held on February 20 in the Community Room for the adjacent property owners to discuss the proposed improvements. 3 persons representing 3 properties attended the informational meeting. • All notices have been published in the legal newspaper and sent to all affected property owners informing them of the public hearing. ATTACHMENTS: • Feasibility Report, pages-F-0through~ , • Neighborhood Meeting Minutes, pages%ohrough~Q~j/, City of Eagan Report for Eagandale Center Industrial Park/Eagandale Office Park Street Improvements City Project No. 799 Eagan, Minnesota February 2001 F16 A city of eagan February 26, 2001 Mai „r Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Eagan PAUL RAKKE\ 3830 Pilot Knob Road PEG(, S0N Eagan, M-N 5512) cl~DEE FIELDS Re: Eagandale Center Industrial Park/ Eagandale Office Park Street Improvements ~1F~ rlLi> Cite Project No. 799 C.xrnei! .~iembrrs Dear Mayor and City Council: i Ht.t ; ?EDGE-~ Attached is our report for the Eagandale Center Industrial Park! Eagandale Office Park Street Improvements, City Project No. 799. The report presents and discusses the proposed improvements c-;n >dr: ;n;,rran r and includes a cost estimate, preliminary assessment roll and schedule. We would be pleased to meet with the City Council at your convenience to review and discuss the contents of this report. Municipal Center: Sincerely, ?S ;o Pilot Ivtob Road Phony 6:;L0S1 -4600 John P. Gorder Assistant City Engineer Fax 651.651.-161 r I hereby certify that this report «as prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Maintenance Facilirv: Professional 350l C.oachrn.ut Point Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. Fagan, MN 5S122 Phone: 651.681-4300 ~LvL►~ ( i John P. Gorder Fax: 61.08 L=4360 TDD: 6~1.45 .8535 Date: 2-2L -c ( Reg. No. 22813 Reviewed By: wwwcityofeagan.com Dept. of Public rks Date: Z - Z-7 - O 1 Reviewed By: THE, I he ,.rmf ,l of zr, ngrli cc Dept. Date: a ~ ut d ~ru« rh i n, a u a,mmunin TABLE OF CONTENTS Letter of Transmittal/Certification Table of Contents Introduction' History I Scope ....................................................................................................................................2 Feasibility and Recommendations .......................................................................................2 Street Evaluation ..................................................................................................................2 Proposed Improvements .......................................................................................................3 Easements/Permits ...............................................................................................................4 Cost Estimate .......................................................................................................................=I Assessments .........................................................................................................................5 Commercial1ndustrial Properties ..............................................................................5 Assessment Financing Options ............................................................................................6 Revenue Source ...................................................................................................................6 Project Schedule ...................................................................................................................7 U LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Preliminary Cost Estimate Appendix B Preliminary Assessment Roll Appendix C Figures - 1 Location Map 2 Street Improvement, Assessment Area Map 3 Typical Section - Mill and Overlay 4 Detail Plate - Commercial & Industrial Concrete Entrances 5 Storm Sewer Improvements - Eagan Industrial Road ?13 February 2001 Street Improvement Report Eagandale Industrial Park and Eagandale Office Park (Eagandale Boulevard, Eagandale Court, Trapp Road, Eagan Industrial Road, West Service Road, Center Court, Corporate Center Curve and Corporate Center Drive) Eagan, MN Introduction/ History, As a part of Eagan's continuing Pavement Management Program, (P-%IP), the City evaluates streets within the community throughout their life cycle and implements appropriate maintenance strategies. In 1989, a Pavement Management System (PMS) was developed that allowed the City to evaluate the condition of the existing pavement surface for all the streets on a routine basis and schedule timely maintenance. A Five-Year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for street rehabilitation is developed each year from this information. The Eagandale Industrial Park and Eagandale Office Park areas have been identified for street resurfacing improvements in 2001. Figure 1, located in the back of this report, illustrates the project location in north-central Eagan. The streets within the project area consist of approximately 4.1 miles of 41 to 48-foot wide commercial industrial roadways constructed between 1968 and 1985. The streets in the Eagandale Center Industrial Park area were also overlayed once before in 1987 Based on the data and engineering strategies available at this time, the City's Pavement Management Program incorporates local and ongoing maintenance strategies with seal coating occurring as needed at 4-6 years, again at 12-14 years, with a bituminous overlay at approximately 20 years. Timely maintenance work, such as bituminous milling and patching, crack sealing and seal coating have occurred at appropriate intervals during the life of the pavement. The City of Eagan's maintenance records indicate that the streets were last seal coated in 1990 and 1996. The streets within Eagandale Industrial Center and Eagandale Office Park are proposed to be overlayed at this time due to advanced structural cracking, likely due to heavy truck traffic. The bituminous overlay will increase the structural integrity of the project roads, effectively increasing„ the load carrying capacity and prolonging the pavement life. 1 Scope This project provides for resurfacing (edge mill and overlay) of approximately 4.1 miles of roads within Eagandale Industrial Park and Eagandale Office Park. Figure 2 illustrates the project area. Also included are the replacement of damaged curb and gutter, and adjustment/replacement of manhole/gate valve castings, as well as the removal and replacement of all existing bituminous commercial entrances with concrete aprons per current City standards. A catch basin extension on Eagan Industrial Road is also proposed with this project. Feasibilitv and Recommendations This project is necessary to prevent further decay of the pavement section, create a safer driving surface, increase rideability and add structural strength. This project is cost effective in that the proposed improvement (resurfacing) is considerably less expensive than complete reconstruction of these streets. This project is feasible from an engineering standpoint in that this type of improvement has been used successfully to extend the life expectancy of streets. This project is in accordance with the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan (2001 - 2005) for the City of Eagan and the schedule as outlined in the Pavement Management Program. It is recommended that the project be carried out as one contract. Street Evaluation These sections of roadway were analyzed by City staff comparing actual traffic loads to the designed traffic loads (estimated at original construction and in 1987) on Eagandale Blvd. and Corporate Center Drive. This analysis determined that the existing pavement structure is not sufficient to handle the amount and type of heavy truck traffic currently traveling in this area. This is also evidenced by the relatively severe structural cracking along Eagandale Blvd. and Corporate Center Drive, as well as the other streets in the area. The City of Eagan's Pavement :Management System is a tool that allows the City to evaluate the condition of the existing street surface to help schedule timely maintenance and improvements. The Pavement Condition Index (PCI) ranks the surface condition for each street. The general categories that define PCI rankings are as follows: PCT Recommended Improvement to Pavement 56- 100 Routine Maintenance/Crack Seal/Seal Coat 36- 55 Patch/Repair and/or Overlay 0-35 Reconstruct The 2000 PCI ranking for the roadways included in this project have a weighted average pavement condition rating of 56, which is in the ranking of the "Routine Maintenance/Crack Seal/Seal Coat" category, very near the "Patch/ Repair and/or Overlay" ranking. The PCI rating alone does not necessarily warrant an overlay, but because the streets are carrying traffic loads in excess of their design load capacity, an overlay is needed to increase the structural stability. Proposed Improvements Street - The proposed street improvements are shown on Figure 3. An eight-foot width of existing bituminous surface will be milled adjacent to the existing curb and gutter to accommodate a 2-inch bituminous overlay over the existing street section. A large portion of Center Court is in such condition that the existing pavement will need to be removed and replaced prior to the overlay. The overlay, combined with the existing street section, will provide a street section consistent with current City standards for a commercial/ industrial street. The combination of repair, patching, and overlay will not eliminate cracking due to the temperature extremes experienced in Minnesota. Bituminous overlays will show some continued frost movements and reflective cracking consistent with the underlying pavement. Routine maintenance will still need to continue under the City's Pavement Management Program. Curb & Gutter - Damaged curb and gutter will be replaced if severely cracked, spalled or settled. It is estimated that approximately 121Y0 (1 mile) of the existing concrete curb and will have to be replaced. Driveway Replacement - The existing bituminous driveway entrances throughout the project area are proposed to be replaced. The entrances will be reconstructed with 7-thick concrete entrance aprons in accordance with Eagan Standard Detail 440, as shown on Figure 4. This driveway entrance replacement provides entrances of adequate strength and width and is consistent with similar past projects in commercial/ industrial areas throughout the City. Storm Sewer - A small storm sewer extension, with catch basins, will be constructed along the east side of the spur railroad tracks on Eagan Industrial Road, as shown on Figure 5. Snow and ice melt has created icing problems on the east side of the tracks when it re-freezes. This proposed storm sewer will capture runoff before it flows to the railroad right-of-way. Utility Improvements - The City Public Works Department has also inspected the utility infrastructure (sanitary sewer, water main, and storm sewer) in the project area and determined the system is in good working order and that no major repairs are necessary. Proposed improvements to the sanitary sewer system include replacement of existing manhole castings 3 within the bituminous pavement with castings in accordance with current City standards. All adjacent properties have fully developed. Therefore no utility service extensions are proposed under this project. Easement/Permits All work will be in the public right-of-way. No additional easements will be necessary. It is anticipated that no permits will be required for the resurfacing project. Cost Estimate Detailed cost estimates are located in Appendix A. The estimates are based on anticipated 2001 construction costs and include a 5% contingency and indirect costs of 30%, which include legal, administration, engineering, and bond interest. A summary of the costs is as follows: • Edge Mill and Overlay ............................................5681,100 • Repair Existing Concrete Curb & Gutter ................5142,650 • Driveway Entrance Replacement .....................5443,620 • Storm Sewer - Eagan Industrial Road ...................58,980 • Utility Improvements - MH Castings .......................553,920 Total .........$1,330,270 Q4 U Assessments Assessments are proposed to be levied against the benefited properties for the total improvement with costs allocated in accordance with the City of Eagan's Special Assessment Policy for a mill and overlay improvement for Commercial/ Industrial streets. A preliminary assessment roll is included in Appendix B. For this type of improvement, the City's Assessment Policy is as follows: Assessed Ratio City Mill and Overlay • Commercial,' Industrial 100% 0% Repair Existing Concrete Curb and Gutter 0% 100% Driveway Replacement 100% 0°,% Storm Sewer 0% 100% Utility Improvements 00 /,0 1000/0 Commercial/Industrial Properties Commercial;'Industrial properties having access and frontage adjacent streets within the project area are proposed to be assessed based on the amount of area (acres) for each property. The assessment policy states that 100% of the mill and overlay costs are assessable for commercial/industrial properties. The estimated assessment per acre for the bituminous overlay calculated as follows: 1) [5681,100 (Mill and Overlay Cost) x 100%]= 5681,100 2) Rate = 5681,100 / 337.74 acres= $2,017/ acre Also, all adjacent properties with driveways not to current City standards are proposed to be assessed the total cost of driveway entrance replacement improvements on area of driveway installed. The total driveway improvement assessment per lot is calculated based on the individual requirements needed to replace existing bituminous entrances with concrete entrances in accordance with current City standards. The average cost of driveways replacement is approximately $8,500. 5 Assessment Financing Options The property owner will have the option at the time of the assessment hearing to pay the full assessment or include the assessment in with their property tax statement. If the assessment is included with the property tax statement, the assessment will be spread over fifteen years with the interest rate determined by the results of the bond sale used to finance the improvements. The following payment schedule will result based on an estimated 7% interest rate for the assessed amounts for the bituminous overlay: Typical Lot = S7,400 + 8,500 (Average Driveway Replacement Cost) = $15,900 Principal Interest Cost Per Year Per Year Per Year First Year S I,060 S I,113 $2,173 Fifteenth Year S1,060 S74 S I,134 Revenue Source A summary of revenue sources is listed below: Project Property City Cost Assessment Contribution Mill and Overlay 5681,100 5681,100 -50- Repair Ex. C&G 142,650 -0- 142,650 Driveway Replacement 443,620 443,620 -0- Storm Sewer- Eagan Ind. 8,980 -0- 8,980 Utility Improvements 53,920 -0- 53,920 Total $1,330,270 $1,124,720 $205,550 The City's Major Street and Utility Funds will finance the estimated project deficit of $205,550 (15.5%). 6 39 Project Schedule Present Draft Feasibility Report to City Council/ Order Public Hearing February 6, 2001 Neighborhood Meeting .................................................February 20, 2001 Public Hearing March 6, 2001 Approve Plans and Specifications March 20, 2001 Award Contract April, 2001 Project Completion August, 2001 Final Cost Report September, 2001 Final Assessment Hearing ...................................................................October, 2001 First Payment Due with Property Tax Statement May, 2002 7 /61 n Appendix A Preliminary Cost Estimate Eagandale Center Industrial Park/ Eagandale Office Park Street Overlay City Project No. 799 L Bituminous Street Overlay Est. Unit Est. Item Unit Qty. Price I Cost Mobilization L. S. 1 55,000 55,000 Mill Bituminous Pavement S.Y. 43,000 S LOO 543,000 Remove Bituminous Pavement S. Y. 2,300 S2.00 S4.600 Type 31 Bituminous Base Course Ton 360 529.00 S10.440 Type 31 Bituminous Binder Course Ton 220 529.00 56,380 Type 41 Wear Course Mixture Ton 13,000 S30.00 ! S390,0001, Bituminous Material for Tack Coat Gal. 6,000 S1.50 59,000 j Pavement Markings L.S. 1 S15,000 S15,000 Adjust Valve Box Each 12 5150.00 S1,800 Adjust Frame & Ring Casting ( Manhole Each i 35 5250.00 58,750 Traffic Control ! L. S. 1 S5.000.00 ! 55,000 Subtotal , $498,970 5'110 Contingencies 524.950 Subtotal $523,920 30° o Indirect Costs S157,180 TOTAL 5681,100 ; H. Repair Existing Concrete Curb & Gutter Est. Unit Est. Item Unit Qtv. , Price Cost Remove Concrete Curb and Gutter L. F. 5,200 54.00 520,800 Adjust Catch Basin Each 72 $150.00 10,800 B618 Concrete Curb and Gutter L.F. 5,200 S12.00 562,400 Sod w/To soil S. Y. 2,100 55.00 510,500 Subtotal $104,500 + 5% Contingencies 55,230 Subtotal $109,730 + 30% Indirect Costs I 532,920 Total $142,650 91 III. Driveway Entrance Replacement Est. Unit Est. Item j Unit Qty. Price Cost Drivewav Entrance Replacement S. Y. 5,000 565.00 5325,000 Subtotal $325,000 + 5% Contingencies $16,250 Subtotal $241,250 + 30% Indirect Costs S103,370 Total $443,620 IV. Storm Sewer - Ea;an Industrial Road Est. Unit j Est. j Item Unit Qty. Price j Cost Connect to Existing Manhole Each j 1 I 5700.00 5700 1 12" RCP Storm Sewer L.F. j 70 535.00 S2,450 Construct Catch Basin w/ Casting I Each 2 ! S1,200 1 S2,400 Remove Bituminous Pavement ! S. Y. j 100 53.00 S300 Type 31 Bituminous Base Pavement Ton 15 529.00 5440 Type 31 Bituminous Binder Pavement Ton 10 529.00 $290 Subtotal $6,580 T 5% Contingencies I S330 Subtotal j $6,910 + 30% Indirect Costs , 52,070 Total $8,980 V. Utility Improvements - R&R Manhole Castings Est. Unit Est. Item Unit Qt Price Cost Remove & Replace Catch Basin w/ casting Each 11 52,000 522,000 Remove & Replace Manhole Castings Each j 50 $350.00 $17,500 Subtotal $39,500: + 5% Contingencies S1,980 Subtotal $41,4801 + 30% Indirect Costs S 12,440 Total $53,920 Total Project Cost = 51,330,270 Appendix B Preliminary Assessment Roll Eagandale Center Industrial Park/ Eagandale Office Park Street Overlay City Project No. 799 Area Street Driveway Total Parcel P.I.N. (Acres) Assmt.* Assmt.** Assessment Eagandale Boulevard (W. Side, Lone Oak Rd to Corporate Center Dr. 1313 LONE OAK RD 10-22500-191-04 12.32 S25,255 S18,180 543,435 2955 EAGANDALE 10-22500-171-04 3.00 56,150 S6,150 BLVD 2919 EAGANDALE 10-11440-010-01 3.23 S6,620 j $6,620 BLVD 2861 EAGANDALE 10-22506-041-01 3.83 S7,850 8.880 S16,730 BLVD 2855 EAGAtiDALE 10-22506-040-01 3.02 S6,190 8,525 S14,715 BLVD j 2839 EAGANDALE 10-22506-010-01 2.09 54,285 8,525 S12,810 BLVD TRACT A 10-90470-010-00 0.14 5285 5285 Eagandale Court i 1325 EAGANDALE 10-22506-031-01 5.84 511,970 9,735 521,705 CT 1335 EAGANDALE 10-22500-062-04 3.42 $7,010 S7,010 CT Subtotals 36.89 $75,615 $53,845 $129,460 * Street Assessment Rate = 52,017/ Acre Driveway Assessment Rate = S89- Square Yard Area Street Driveway Total Parcel P.1.N. (Acres) Assmt.* Assmt.** Assessment i Corporate Center Drive 1 ` (S. Side, from Eagandale I Dr. to Pilot Knob Rd.) 1284 CORPORATE CNTR 10-22506-020-01 6.80 S13,940 58,880 522,820 DR 1300 CORPORATE CNTR 10-2253 1-040-02 j 5.82 S11,930 S11.930 CURVE 1365 CORPORATE CNTR 10-22531-010-01 6.77 S13,880 S 13,880 CURVE 1400 CORPORATE CNTR 10-22531-010-02 2.41 S4,940 54,940 CURVE Subtotals ! 21.8 $44,690 $8,880 $53,570 Area Street Driveway Total Parcel P.I.N. (Acres) I Assmt* Assmt.** i Assessment j Corporate Center Drive (N. Side, from Pilot Knob Rd. to Eagandale Dr.) 2700 PILOT KNOB RD 10-22533-010-01 i 5.07 S10395 S10,395 1375 CORPORATE CENTER 1 10-22533-020-01 i 1.67 S3,425 53,425 I DR I 1305 CORPORATE CNTR DR 10-22532-010-01 10.95 522,450 58.880 S31.330 11303 CORPORATE CNTR 10-22532-030-01 7.61 S15,600 S 15,600 CURVE j 1301 CORPORATE CNTR DR ' 10-22530-010-03 4.67 S9,575 I 59,055 S18,630 1285 CORPORATE CNTR DR 10-22530-030-03 5.61 S11.500 i 512,790 S24,290 1279 CORPORATE CNTR DR 10-22500-142-03 1.56 53,200 58,015 S11,215 1275 CORPORATE CNTR DR 10-22500-141-03 1.56 S3,200 S8,015 S11,215 Subtotal 38.7 $79,345 $46,755 $126,100 Area Street Driveway Total Parcel P.I.N. (Acres) Assmt.* Assmt.** Assessment Eagandale Boulevard (W. Side, Corporate Center Dr. to TH 55) 2815 EAGANDALE BLVD 10-22500-111-03 2.07 54,345 58,305 512,550 2797 EAGANDALE BLVD 10-22500-090-03 1.03 52,110 52,110 2797 EAGANDALE BLVD 10-22500-080-03 1.03 52,110 52,110 2797 EAGANDALE BLVD 10-22500-070-03 1.03 52,110 $2,110 i 2797 EAGANDALE BLVD 10-22500-060-03 1.03 52,110 52,110 2777 EAGANDALE BLVD 10-22500-050-03 1.03 52.110 52,110 1 1230 EAGAN IND RD I 10-22500-040-03 1.03 52,110 1 58,305 S 10.415 1230 EAGAN IND RD ! 10-22500-030-03 1.03 52.110 S2.I 10 i 1230 EAGAN IND RD 10-22500-010-03 1.75 53,590 1 53,590 1200 TRAPP RD 10-22500-030-02 1.53 53,135 53,135 1200 TRAPP RD 10-22500-020-02 0.99 52,030 52,030 1200 TRAPP RD 10-22500-010-02 1.18 S2,420 58,015 510,435 I 1181 TRAPP RD 10-22500-051-08 8.83 S18,100 S18,100 Subtotals 23.56 $48,290 $24,625 $72,915 Acres Street Driveway Total Parcel P.I.N. (Acres) Assmt.* Assmt.** Assessment Eagandale Boulevard (E. Side, Lone Oak Road to TH 55) ! 2940 EAGANDALE BLVD 10-22500-080-05 2.13 54,365 S4,365 2940 EAGANDALE BLVD 10-22500-070-05 2.40 54,920 S4.920 2948 EAGANDALE BLVD 10-22500-060-05 2.20 S4,510 513,470 517,980 2948 EAGANDALE BLVD 10-22500-050-05 1.74 S3,565 S25,995 S29,560 2864 EAGANDALE BLVD 10-22500-040-05 2.25 S4,610 S4,610 2864 EAGANDALE BLVD 10-22500-030-05 5.00 S M250 S13,165 S23,415 2864 EAGANDALE BLVD 10-22500-020-05 5.00 S10,250 S10,250 2782 EAGANDALE BLVD 10-22500-010-05 10.00 S20,500 531,435 551,935 2750 EAGANDALE BLVD 10-22500-143-07 31.95 565,500 522,065 587,565 j Subtotals 62.67 $128,470 $106,130 $234,600 Acres Street Driveway Total Parcel P.I.N. (Acres) Assmt.* Assmt.** Assessment 1 Corporate Center Curve 1380 CORPORATE CNTR 10-72531-020-02 5.92 S12,135 58,525 S20,660 CURVE 1340 CORPORATE CNTR 10-22531-030-02 5.58 S11,440 511,440 CURVE Subtotals 11.50 $23,575 L $8,525 $32,100 * Street Assessment Rate = S2,017/ Acre 'driveway Assessment Rate = S89/ Square Yard ?6-- Acres Street Drivewav Total i Parcel P.I.N. (Acres) Assmt.* Assmt.** Assessment I I I I Trapp Road 1301 TRAPP RD 10-22532-020-01 4.67 S9,570 59,570 1279 TRAPP RD 10-22410-010-01 6.45 $13,220 , ~ S13,220 1255 TRAPP RD 10-22500-140-01 2.10 $4,305 $8,015 512,320 1245 TRAPP RD 10-22511-021-01 11.85 524,290 524,290 . 1200 TRAPP RD 10-22500-360-02 1.00 52,050 52,050 1200 TRAPP RD 10-22500-350-02 1.00 $2,050 52,050 1230 TRAPP RD 10-22500-341-02 2.00 $4,100 54,100 1240 TRAPP RD 10-22500-320-02 1.00 52,050 58,165 510,215 1240 TRAPP RD 10-22500-310-02 1.00 52,050 56,875 58,925 1256 TRAPP RD 10-22500-300-02 1.00 52,050 S2,050 1256 TRAPP RD 10-22500-290-02 1.00 52,050 514,035 516,085 1256 TRAPP RD 10-22500-280-02 1.00 52,050 I 52,050 1256 TRAPP RD 10-22500-270-02 1.00 52,050 52.050 1286 TRAPP RD 10-22530-010-01 2.30 54.715 515,335 520,050 1299 EAGAN IND. 10-22500-133-02 0.11 5230 S230 RD Subtotals 37.48 576,825 I $52,425 f $129,250 Acres I Street Driveway Total Parcel P.I.N. (Acres) Assmt.* Assmt.** Eagan Industrial Road j (Trapp Road to Eagandale j Bled.) 1299 EAGAN IND RD 10-22500-132-02 1.50 S3,075 S3,075 { 1283 EAGAN IND RD 10-22500-110-02 , 1.00 52,050 S7,870 S9,920 j 1273 EAGAN IND RD 10-22500-100-02 1.00 52,050 57,585 59,635 1263 EAGAN IND RD 10-22500-090-02 1.00 52,050 58,165 S10,215 1253 EAGAN IND RD 10-22500-080-02 1.01 52,070 57,450 59,520 1243 EAGAN IND RD 10-22500-070-02 1.00 52,050 S7,450 S9,500 I 1243 EAGAN IND RD 10-22500-060-02 1.00 52,050 58,165 S 10,215 1243 EAGAN IND RD. 10-22500-050-02 1,00 52,050 58,015 S 10,065 1243 EAGAN IND RD. 10-22500-042-02 0.47 $965 S965 j 1200 TRAPP RD. 10-22500-041-02 0.53 51,085 58,015 59,100 1230 EAGAN IND RD. 10-22500-020-03 1.37 $2,810 S8,165 i S10,975 1270 EAGAN IND BLVD 10-22530-020-03 4.96 S10,170 S8,760 528.930 Subtotals 15.84 $32,475 $89,640 $122,115 * Street Assessment Rate = S2,017/ 'Acre Driveway Assessment Rate = S89/ Square Yard 6 ! Acres Street Driveway Total Parcel P.I.N. (Acres) Assmt.* Assmt.** Assessment 1 Eagan Industrial Road (Eagandale Blvd. to W. Service Road) 1175 EAGAN IND RD 10-22500-141-07 3.40 $6,970 59,300 516,270 I 1 190 EAGAN INDST RD 10-22507-022-01 6.67 S13,670 S 13,670 1170 EAGAN IND BLVD 10-22500-150-05 4.79 $9,820 S9,820 Subtotals 14.86 $30,460 $9,300 $39,760 Acres Street Driveway Total Parcel P.I.N. (.acres) Assmt.* Assmt.** Assessment i Center Court 2941 CENTER CT 10-22500-110-05 1.80 53,690 53.690 2963 CENTER CT 10-22500-100-05 1.75 53,590 S3,590 2983 CENTER CT 10-22500-090-05 1.73 53,550 S3,550 2978 CENTER CT 10-22500-050-06 1.90 53.890 S3.890 2956 CENTER CT 10-22500-040-06 2.98 56,110 S6,110 Subtotals 10.16 $20,830 520,830 Acres Street I Driveway j Total j Parcel P.I V. (Acres) Assmt* Assmt.** Assessment j West Service Road 2935 SERVICE RD W 10-22500-121-05 1.13 S2,320 S14,170 I 516,490 I ! 2922 SERVICE RD W j 10-72500-031-06 5.67 511,620 S11.620 2864 EAGANDALE B 10-22507-021-01 7.33 S15,030 S15.030 2925 SERVICE RD W 10-22507-030-01 5.15 S10,560 S10,560 2919 SERVICE RD W 10-22507-040-01 3.22 56,600 S6,600 j 2905 SERVICE RD W 10-22500-201-05 4.00 S8,200 515,030 S21,230 2871 SERVICE RD W 10-22500-230-05 6.18 S12,670 S12,670 1 2845 SERVICE RD W 10-22500-171-07 4.09 58,380 58,380 2805 SERVICE RD W 10-22500-151-07 3.24 56,640 56,640 2757 SERVICE RD W 10-22490-010-01 3.74 S7,540 57,540 2757 SERVICE RD W 10-22490-020-01 3.95 S8,100 S8,100 2737 SERVICE Rl' W 10-00300-020-03 2.97 S6,090 S14,040 520,130 2737 SERVICE RD W 10-00300-010-03 1.85 S3,730 S3,730 2727 SERVICE RD W 10-39950-010-01 11.76 524,110 S24,110 Subtotal 64.28 $43,240 $163,560 Project Total 337.74 $681,100 $443,620 51,124,720 * Street Assessment Rate = 52,01 T' Acre Driveway Assessment Rate = S89' Square Yard 9 Q PROJECT LOCATION I5E MEMD 0 TA HEIGHTS D 1 INTERSTATE 494 494 V/ y IV y rR~ , D m wY z z ~0 J~ ^ LONE OAK ROAD Q O Uj. r Z / 01 LIJ YANKEE DOODLE ROAD I L~ YANKEE DOODLE ,ROAD LSD a 0\DD 4~-f 7 a~ ■ 0 D o~, . I WESCOTT ROAD g o C m o Y DEERWOOD DR. . cPEAsOurzac 799 F 909 Dec :9, 22CC Eagandale Industrial Park / Eagandale Office Park Fig. City of Eagan Location Map - City Proj. No. 799 11 I i I L MENDOTA HEIGHTS 'A \ 494. INTERSTATE \ oOOO EAGAN COMMERCE ADD. "4GANDAC E ozI-D 0000 °S1 vNer 3 I 2 vwl7 p9p1t,CN 1 I II 1 CENTER D p 2 3 ' RK 3RD TRAPP ARK 12 I \ ..0001 OFf,cC pa Tp_ p ROAD 3 + ` OPT C A 1 z EPGPN l Fpol` 27 2e 29 30 31 32 333. 35 36T 2 5I USTRIAL "<f I 1 2 _ CENER 1 4rI~Cn 2 3 3 - DAL o.:_ez O' 6 1 °qK ~lti l3 2 11 E 10 9 8 7 c s 3 /N P~Ol CORPORATE +oa CENT EAGAN INDUSTRIAL 7 ER 143-07 AY t , ROAD z 7 CORPORATE 3 3 - EAGANDALE OFFICE + P 10 _ PARK 3 010-03 02o-OJ CENTER 3 CURVE 6 It DALE OFFICE PARK 214D ADDITION 3 EAGAND 1 2 O i ' I 7 ~ 7 2 EAGAN 1 e r~`_ IST ASE + 3 3 9 5 C ADDI> cti TER Q~T 1 EAGM+DALE 111- l0 13 OFFICE II co I AVALON AVE PARK 2-0 z 41 51-05 --7 O ; I C9 13 lli-07 I z t / 9 2 41 IA ~~Q 16 I ~ ~ 2~ 022-01 17 J 040-01 2 2 F I ' S 15 % 230-05 27 w ~9< J 3 5 22 4 041-01 21 U R.L.S. n0. a cc 5 zo k/ 1'` QP 201-05 o?oP~ 3 19 `off 1 EPGCT ~~o A WEST Pr Po 4z LLJ 062-04 44, 1 5 12 SERVICE A Q - - 06 1 4 166 - 031- o 3 2 Q$~~ / ~ 171-0A W 6 w I ~ - oPO / C7 a Ld / ZI 6' XI 7 J I 19l A l8 Q lC - 7 ly] 19 LONE OAK ROAD n-1-II Street Improvements ent Area r,V.) I EAGAND INDUSTRIAL PARK Fig. \At STREET IMPROVEMENTS 2 City of Eagan LOCATION MAP - PROJECT # 799 60' ROW 41'-48' WIDE (F-F) EX. 8618 CURB 1 ~/2' -2" BITUMINOUS WEAR COURSE 21/2"-4" BITUMINOUS BASE COURSE 31/2'-12" AGGREGATE BASE Existing Typical Section 60' ROW i 41'-48' WIDE (F-F) I EDGE MILL (jO' wide Typ. 2" TYPE 41 BITUMINOUS WEAR COURSE OVERLAY REPLACE EX. 8618 CURB & GUTTER AS NECESSARY ,BITUMINOUS TACK COAT EX. 11/2' -2" BITUMINOUS WEAR COURSE EX. 21/2•- 4" BASE COURSE EX. 31/2'-12" AGGREGATE BASE Bituminous Street Overlay Proposed Typical Section G: FecsibiltyReports200l/799/Fig3 Dec. 19, 2000 Eagandale Industrial Park / Fig. Eagandale Office Park City of Eagan Typical Sections - City Proj. No. 799 3 EGRESS ROADWAY DWY WIDTH RADIUS DWY WIDTH RADIUS LANE WIDTH(F-F) LIGHT TRUCK SEMI TRUCK 12' 36' 28' 20' 34' 25' 12' 44' 28' 20' 32' 25' 12' 44' 30' 30' 12' 48' 30' 30' 34' 35' 12' 52' 28' 25' 34' 30' 26' 30' 32' 35' 22' 36' 38' 20' 44' 25' 22' 44' 38' 20' 42' 25' 40' 30' 22' 48' 40' 30' 44' 35' 22' 52' 38' 25' 44' 30' 36' 30' 42' 35' d • o d d • NOTE: NOTE: SEE ABC`✓E CHART 7" MINIMUM THICKNESS FOR REQUIRED RADIUS REQUIRED ON ENTiRE APRON. & ENTRANCE WIDTHS. SECTION A-A No Sccle MAXIMUM 8' BETWEEN JOINTS 1 A d RAD.-B6 Curb ° 4 9 ° d ° 8, 12'- 6 u d Max. ° d ° s • ° °d a • d ° d ° CONTRACTION JOINT A EXPANSION JOINT 1. WHERE NEW DRIVEWAYS ARE TO BE ADDED 3. CONTRACTION JOINT PATTERN TO BE ACROSS EXISTING C&G, REMOVE EXISTING DETERMINED BY ENGINEER. C&G AND REPOUR INTEGRAL WITH THE CONCRETE ENTRANCE. 4. REQUIRED MIX DESIGNATION = 3A32 2. CONCRETE APRON TO BE REQUIRED FOR ALL ENTRANCES. PLAN G:Feasabihty2001 /799/Fig4 NC SCALE PUBLIC STANDARD WORKS Eagandale Industrial Park / PLATE Fig. DEPARTMENT Eagandale Office Park City of Eagan Driveway Entrances - City Proj. No. 799 440 4 O \ /o f/. \ \9 ~o., Lot 13 o~ l / Lot 7 O Construct 12" RCP storm sewer \ L- 12-la-00 EAGAN CENTER IND. PARK / EAGANDALE OFFICE PARK Fig. STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS - EAGAN INDUSTRIAL ROAD City of Eagan CITY PROJ. No. 799 5 /D CITY PROJECT NO 799 INFORMATIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING EAGANDALE CENTER INDUSTRIAL PARK/ EAGANDALE OFFICE PARK ADDITIONS STREET IMPROVEMENTS TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 2001 3:00 P.M. COMMUNITY ROOM Attendance: John Gorder, Assistant City Engineer; Arnie Erhart, Superintendent of Streets. 3 people representing 3 properties (see attached sign-in sheet). A. Welcome and Introduction • Gorder and Erhart welcomed the people attending. B. Presentation of Project Details • Gorder provided a project presentation, including details such as construction, costs, schedule and assessments. • Erhart presented a brief overview on the City Pavement Management System and the rationale for the project. C. Questions/Comments 1. Are the driveway removal and replacement costs going to be spread out on all the properties in the project? The costs associated with the upgrade of blacktop driveways to concrete driveways is proposed to be assessed to the each individual properties where the replacement will occur, not spread out on all the properties. 2. Can you do something about enlarging the curves (radii) at the street intersections to accommodate the turning movements of the large trucks? It is dependent upon how much right-of-way we have to work with to expand the radii. It makes sense, if possible, given the large amount of truck traffic in the area. Staff will look at the possibility prior to the public hearing. 3. Why aren't the assessments based on front footage rather than acreage? The area basis for assessments seemed to be the most fair based on area due to a number of relatively large parcels with small frontages and relatively small parcels with large front footage. 4. Isn't Trapp Point a City street and should it be included in the project? No. Trapp Point is a private street. It .vas considered by the City for public maintenance in November, 1995. Certain conditions needed to be met (within one year of consideration) in order for the City to assume maintenance on Trapp Point. A number of the conditions were not met within the one-year time frame, and therefore, the City did not transfer Trapp Point from a private street to a public one. The meeting adjourned at 3:30 p.m. s /O3 INFORMATIONAL MEETING EAGANDALE CENTER INDUSTRIAL PARK STREET OVERLAY TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 2001, 3:00 P.M. NAME ADDRESS 1. _ 2`7 N,~DA&-Z 3.f1 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. G: FORMS/SIGN-1 N. Sheet /cog y Agenda Information Memo March 6, 2001 D. PROJECT 802, PILOT KNOB ROAD/DUCKWOOD DRIVE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve Project 802 (Pilot Knob Road/Duckwood Drive - Intersection Improvements), including the Dakota County Highway Department recommendation, and authorize the preparation of detailed final plans and specifications and the acquisition of right-of-way and easements through quick-take Eminent Domain, if necessary. FACTS: • A Central Area Traffic Study was completed in 1994, which outlined proposed street improvements for Yankee Doodle Road, Pilot Knob Road, and included the "Ring Road" concept. The first phase of the proposed improvements were completed in 1996 under Project 695, Yankee Doodle Road, Federal Drive to O'Leary Lane. • In January 1996, the City submitted an application to MnDOT and the Metropolitan Council for Hazard Elimination Safety (HES) Program funding. The application was successful and funding was approved for fiscal year 2001. In order to use the allotted funds, MnDOT must formally approve final plans and specifications by September 30, 2001. • The improvements proposed as part of Project 802 are necessary to increase the capacity on Pilot Knob Road (County Road 31) and to improve the intersection level of service, as described in the traffic study for this area. The improvements also include the installation of a traffic signal at the intersection of Town Centre Drive and Duckwood Drive. • On June 5, 2000, the City Council authorized the preparation of a feasibility report identifying the scope, cost, financing and schedule of the proposed street improvements at the intersection of Pilot Knob Road and Duckwood Drive, including utility improvements and traffic signal improvements. • On February 6, 2001, the feasibility report for Project 802 was presented to the City Council and a Public Hearing was scheduled for March 6 to formally present and discuss the report. • An informational open house was held on February 22 in the Community Room for the adjacent property owners and business representatives to discuss the proposed improvements. 2 persons representing 2 properties attended the informational meeting. • All notices have been published in the legal newspaper and sent to all affected property owners informing them of this public hearing. ISSUES: • The Dakota County Highway Department has reviewed the proposed improvements and has recommended revising the right-turn lane configuration for westbound Duckwood Drive to northbound Pilot Knob Road for accident reduction purposes. Staff did not receive their comments in time to incorporate them into the feasibility report being presented at the public hearing, but can revise the report to have this work included at the City Council's direction. ATTACHMENTS: • Feasibility Report, pages /M through _13 • Dakota County Highway Department Exhibit, page 1131. • Open House Attendance Sheet, page 3a . /&57 city of pagan FEASIBILITY STUDY AND REPORT FOR PILOT KNOB ROAD (COUNTY ROAD 31) AND DUCKWOOD DRIVE CITY PROJECT NO. 802 DAKOTA COUNTY PROJECT NO. 31-44 EAGAN, MINNESOTA FEBRUARY 2001 REVIEWED BY: I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed City of Eagan Professional Engineer under the laws of the Department of Public Works State of Minnesota. REVIEWED BY: Matthew D. Hansen City of Eagan Date: Reg No. 21364 Finance Department SRF No. 0003841 01K ON SULTING GROUP, I NC. One Carlson Parkway, Suite 150, Minneapolis, MN 55447-4443 • (612) 475-0010 A CONSULTING GROUP, I NC. Transportation • Civil • Structural • Environmental • Planning • Traffic • Landscape Architecture • Parking SRF No. 0003841 February 22, 2001 Honorable Mayor and City Council CITY OF EAGAN 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Dear Mayor and Members of the Council: SUBJECT: PILOT KNOB ROAD AND DUCKWOOD DRIVE PROPOSED STREET IMPROVEMENTS CITY OF EAGAti PROJECT NO. 802 Enclosed, please find the Feasibility Study Report for Street Improvements for Pilot Knob Road and Duckwood Drive. The project proposed herein is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plans, and is feasible from an engineering standpoint. We would be pleased to meet with the City Council, staff and other interested parties to review any aspect of this report. Sincerely, SRF CONSULTING GROUP, INC. Matthew D. Hansen, P.E. Senior Associate James R. Dvorak, P.E. Vice President MDH/JRD/bls Enclosure One Carlson Park-vvati, North, Suite 150, Minneapolis, MN 55447-4443 Telephone (763) 475-0010 ■ Fax (763) 475-2429 ■ http://,~v~,,-~%,.srfconsultin';.com An E:71t71 Oypor;uni`a En1~i~~u~r /O PILOT KNOB ROAD AND DUCKWOOD DRIVE STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS EAGAN, MINNESOTA CITY PROJECT NO. 802 TABLE OF CONTENTS Paee No. Letter of Transmittal Table of Contents 1. Introduction I II. Summary and Recommendations 3 III. Project Description 4 A. Existing Conditions 4 B. Proposed Improvements 4 IV. Right-of-Way and Easements 7 Table 1 - Estimated Right-of-Way 7 V. Permits and Approvals 8 VI. Estimated Costs 9 Table 2 - Estimated Costs 9 VII. Affected Properties 10 VIII. Assessments 11 IX. Revenue Sources 12 Table 3 - Revenue Sources 12 X. Project Schedule 13 APPENDIX ■ Preliminary Engineers Cost Estimate ■ Figure 1 - Project Location Map ■ Figure 2 - Proposed Street Improvements ■ Figure 3 - Proposed Intersection Lane Usage ■ Figure 4 - Proposed Typical Street Section ■ Figure 5 - Proposed Utility Improvements ■ Figure 6 - Parcel Map ■ Figure 7 - Parcel Map (Duckwood Alternate) ■ Signal Warrant Analysis Memo /08' I. INTRODUCTION A Feasibility Study has been authorized by the Eagan City Council to consider proposed roadway improvements at the intersection of Pilot Knob Road (County Road 31) with Duck"vood Drive. The intersection is located south of Interstate 35E and one-half mile north of City Hail in the central area of Eagan (see Figure 1). This project is a continuation of improvements outlined in the previously completed area-'vide traffic study (Yankee Doodle Road/Pilot Knob Road/Ring Road Study). The first phase of the project was completed in 1996 under City Project No. 695 (Yankee Doodle Road, Federal Drive to O'Leary Lane). In January of 1996, the City of Eagan submitted an application to Mn/DOT and the Metropolitan Council for Hazard Elimination Safety (HES) Program funding. Notice was given to the City that the application was approved and fiscal year 2001 was identified as the program year. In order to capture the HES funds, the project must be approved by September 30, 2001. Project approval consists of completion of the plans and specifications and formal approval by signature by the Mn/DOT. The proposed improvements are necessary to increase the capacity on Pilot Knob Road and to improve the intersection level of service as described in the traffic study for this project area. The City has also studied the traffic operations at the intersection of Duckwood Drive and Town Centre Drive and concluded that a new traffic signal is warranted at this location. It is proposed to include this improvement with Project 802. This report identifies the street improvements necessary to improve current and projected traffic operations and safety in the project area. This report also estimates preliminary construction costs, as well as costs for the acquisition of right-of-way from adjacent properties. 1 /~9 It should be noted that funding under the HES Program comes from federal funds. Costs eligible for federal funding are construction costs up to 80 percent of the project capped at $400,000. The remaining 20 percent of the construction cost and all right-of-way acquisition and engineering fees, etc., are the responsibility of the proposing agency, the City of Eagan. 2 //C-) II. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS City Project No. 802, as outlined herein, is feasible from an engineering standpoint. The proposed roadway improvements are consistent with recommendations as outlined in the previously mentioned traffic study. The improvements are consistent with current City standards. The estimated cost of City Project No. 802 is $994,550 (see Preliminary Engineer's Cost Estimate in the Appendix). The following recommendations are presented for the Council's consideration: ■ It is recommended that the City Council receive the Feasibility Study and schedule a public hearing for the proposed project to consider proceeding with the project. The project is necessary due to increasing levels of traffic congestion and projections of future increased traffic volumes. The project is cost effective in that it will improve roadway capacity at the intersection and reduce travel time for the public. • It is recommended that the City of Eagan review this report with the Dakota County Highway Department to initiate discussions of cost sharing for that portion of the project not covered by HES funding. ■ It is recommended that the City of Eagan prepare a Project Memorandum Re-Evaluation for the project area updating the Project Memorandum previously completed under City Project No. 695. This document is necessary for project approval by Mn/DOT. ■ It is recommended that, if approved, the City of Eagan begin the right-of-way and easement acquisition process. Mn/DOT requires a Right-of-Way Certificate No. I for project approval. 3 III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION A. EXISTING CONDITIONS Pilot Knob Road (County Road 31) is a four-lane divided urban roadway in this area with left- and right-turn lanes at the northbound approach and dual left-turn lanes and a right-turn lane at the southbound approach to Duckwood Drive (see Figure 3). At Crestridge Lane, Pilot Knob Road consists of left-turn lanes at both the north and south approaches. Traffic control consists of a signalized intersection at Duckwood Drive and two-way stop control for the cross street at Crestridge Lane. The posted speed limit of Pilot Knob Road through the project area is 45 mph. Duckwood Drive is a four-lane undivided urban roadway without designated turn lanes at Pilot Knob Road and has a posted speed limit of 35 mph. The intersection of Duckwood Drive and Town Centre Drive is currently regulated by stop sign control on the north and south approaches. During peak hours, users experience significant delays at this location. There are eight-foot wide bituminous trails on both sides of Pilot Knob Road. The signal system and crosswalk markings at the intersection of Pilot Knob Road with Duckwood Drive provide the opportunity for pedestrians to cross each leg of the intersection. There are sanitary sewer, storm sewer and water main lines and structures located throughout the project area. Additionally, private utility lines are located adjacent to the widening portions of the project. 4 B. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS Under City Project No. 802, it is proposed to provide for three (3) southbound through lanes on Pilot Knob Road from the Interstate 35E exit ramp to Crestridge Lane (see Figures 2 and 4). The third through lane on the bridge is proposed to be created by eliminating the existing shoulder and re-striping the bridge segment. At the Duckwood Drive intersection, there will be three (3) southbound through lanes, with one right-turn lane and two left-turn lanes (see Figure 3). South of Duckwood Drive, the right most thru lane on Pilot Knob Road will become a right turn only lane at Crestridge Lane. The widening will impact a length of approximately 1,100 feet of the existing bituminous trail east of Pilot Knob Road. Additional permanent right-of-way will be required from four properties to accommodate the Pilot Knob Road widening and trail relocation. The east leg of Duckwood Drive at Pilot Knob Road is proposed to be widened to accommodate an additional left-turn lane on the westbound approach and a raised concrete median to safely channelize traffic by providing protected left-turn lanes (see Figures 3 and 4). The widening will impact approximately 500 feet of Duckwood Drive and increase the width at the intersection from 52 feet to 74 feet. Additional permanent right-of-way will be required from two properties to accommodate the Duckwood Drive widening. Because of the heavy traffic volume observed at the Duckwood Drive/Town Centre Drive intersection, City staff collected traffic count data to be used in a signal warrant analysis. The traffic data was analyzed by SRF and it was concluded that a new traffic signal is warranted at the intersection. (See Appendix for Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis memo.) In addition to the roadway geometric revisions, some minor storm sewer, sanitary sewer and water main modifications will be necessary (see Figure 5). The signal system at the intersection of Pilot Knob Road with Duckwood Drive is proposed to be revised to accommodate the intersection modifications and to agree with the ultimate future conditions of the intersection. 5 / /3 The estimated cost for roadway improvements, including the new signal at Town Centre Drive- Duckwood Drive, revisions to the Pilot Knob Road/Duckwood Drive signal, utility revisions, and right-of-way acquisition is $994,550 It is proposed to construct the signal at the Town Centre Drive/Duck~v0od Drive intersection and maintain the existing roadway lane configuration consisting of two lanes of approach on each public street and one approach lane on the private drive to the south. However, consideration should be given to widening Duckwood Drive to accommodate five lanes including opposing left turn lanes on Duckwood Drive. The proposed left turn lanes would provide improved traffic operations and increase the intersection capacity. They would also provide an additional factor of safety by separating the left turning traffic from the thru traffic. This additional widening of Duckwood Drive can be considered as an alternate to the base improvements proposed under Project No. 802. One additional parcel will be impacted and approximately 5,400 sq. ft. of additional permanent right-of-way will have to be acquired to accommodate the widening. The estimated cost for the Duckwood Drive five-lane alternate, including right-of-way acquisition, is $61,300. 6 IV. RIGHT-OF-WAY AND EASEMENTS In order to construct the base improvements identified in Project No. 802, permanent right-of- way and temporary construction easements will be required from six (6) properties in the project area. If the city chooses to proceed with the five-lane alternate for Duckwood Drive, additional right-of-way would be required from one additional parcel. Approximate right-of-way needs are summarized in Table 1 and shown in Figure 6. During final design, any temporary easements required to complete the project will be identified and obtained. TABLE 1 ESTIMATED RIGHT-OF-WAY CITY PROJECT NO. 802 PILOT KNOB ROAD AND DUCKWOOD DRIVE PERMANENT DUCKWOOD DRIVE PARCEL RIGHT-OF-WAY AREA (ft2) FIVE-LANE ALTERNATE (ft) A 971 971 B 1,469 1,469 C 1,236 1,236 D 2,678 2,678 F 4,059 4,059 G 4,714 7,650 I 0 2,456 7 / /J V. PERMITS AND APPROVALS Permits and approvals for the improvements proposed under City Project No. 802 will be required from the following agencies: ■ Dakota County Highway Department ■ Mn/DOT (permit to work within right-of-way) 8 /46 VI. ESTIMATED COSTS The estimated cost of City Project No. 802 is summarized in Table 2. The total project cost is based on preliminary construction costs (including 10 percent for contingencies), plus an additional 30 percent for legal, administration, engineering design and inspection, contract administration and capitalized interest. A detailed estimate of preliminary construction costs is included in the Appendix. TABLE 2 ESTIMATED COSTS CITY PROJECT NO. 802 PILOT KNOB ROAD AND DtiCKWOOD DRIVE IMPROVEMENT COST Streets $ 491,080 Traffic Signals $ 443,300 Right-of-Way / Easements $ 60,170 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 994,550 DUCKWOOD DRIVE FIVE-LANE ALTER-NATE IMPROVEMENT COST Streets $ 541,580 Traffic Signals $ 443,300 Right-of-Way / Easements $ 70,970 TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $1,055,850 9 VII. AFFECTED PROPERTIES The properties in the area that are affected by the proposed improvements and require notification of the public hearing are listed as follows (see Figure 6 for parcel identification). PARCEL PROPERTY PROPERTY DESCRIPTION ADDRESS IDENTIFICATION A 10-58725-010-01 Lot 1, Block 1, Precision Tune Addition 3565 Pilot Knob Road B 10-28990-010-01 Lot 1, Block 1, George W. Giles Addition 3575 Pilot Knob Road C 10-21850-010-01 Lot 1, Block 1, Duckwood Crossings 3615 Pilot Knob Road D 10-21850-020-01 Lot 2, Block 1, Duckwood Crossings 3625 Pilot Knob Road E 10-26500-020-01 Lot 2, Block 1, First Minnehaha Addition 3629 Krestwood Lane F 10-26500-010-01 Lot 1, Block 1, First Minnehaha Addition 3595 Krestwood Lane G 10-22415-010-01 Lot 1, Block 1, Eagan Convenience Center 1380 Duckwood Drive H 10-77030-010-01 Lot 1, Block 1, Town Centre 70 1379, 1389 and 1399 6th Addition Town Centre Drive MI 10-27700-010-01 Lot 1, Block 1, Franks Nursery & Crafts 1360 Duckwood Drive Addition (')Parcel is impacted only by Duckwood Drive five-lane alternate. 10 VIII. ASSESSMENTS Costs associated with City Project No. 802 are not proposed to be assessed to adjacent properties. 11 IX. REVENUE SOURCES Revenue to cover the cost of City Project No 802 is expected from a combination of Hazard Elimination Safety (HES) Program funds, City funds and County funds, as follows: ■ HES funds 5400,000 ■ City funds 5483,305 ■ County funds S111.244 • TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $994,550 According to the Hazard Elimination Safety Program, funding has been set aside to cover up to 80 percent of the construction costs associated with the Pilot Knob Road and Duckwood Drive improvements. The City's Major Street Fund and Dakota County are proposed to finance the estimated project cost deficit of 5594,550. TABLE 3 REVENUE SOURCES CITY PROJECT No. 802 Project Cost HES Funds Balance Split City Funds County Funds Pilot Knob Road Streets 5268,375 $140,000 S128,375 (A) 557,769 $70,606 Signal (PKR) S107,250 $60,000 $47,250 (B) $23,625 $23,625 R/VV and easements 530,932 530,932 (A) $13,919 $17,013 Subtotal $406,557 $200,000 595,313 5111,244 Duckwood Drive Streets $222,708 S 130,000 $92,708 (C) 592,708 $0 Signal (PKR) 5107,250 $70,000 537,250 (C) $37,250 $0 Signal (TCD) $228,800 5228,800 (C) $228,800 $0 R/W and easements 529,234 $29,234 (C) $29,234 50 Subtotal $587,992 $200,000 5387,992 50 Total 5994,549 $400,000 5483,305 $111,244 (A) 55% County, 45% City (B) 50% County, 50% City (C) 100% City 12 X. PROJECT SCHEDULE The proposed schedule for City Project No. 802 is as follows; Present Feasibility Study Report to the City Council February 6, 2001 Public Informational Meeting February 22, 2001 Hold Public Hearing. City Council authorize preparation March 6, 2001 of plans and specifications and right-of-way acquisition. Approve Plans and Specifications (City) May 2001 Right-of-way acquisition complete July 2001 Approve plans and specifications (Mn/DOT) August 2001 Advertise for Bids August 2001 Open Bids September 2001 Award Contract September 2001 Begin construction September 2001 Final construction complete June 2002 13 42 APPENDIX ■ Preliminary Engineer's Cost Estimate ■ Figure 1 - Project Location Map ■ Figure 2 - Proposed Street Improvements ■ Figure 3 - Proposed Intersection Lane Usage ■ Figure 4 - Proposed Typical Street Sections ■ Figure 5 - Proposed Utility Improvements ■ Figure 6 - Parcel Map ■ Figure 7 - Parcel Map (Duckwood Drive Alternate) ■ Signal Warrant Analysis Memo I W N z 4`m C7 'J~ °Moo O 000000 O O OOOOONO0 0C, OO0 0 ppO ~n'N NPR Z o 0.0 m O O N r^ 0 0 00 O N P P'r c0 `n u1 C a a O O NjO m ~,.IN O 010 $ O O O O N O N M ^ N N O O O O O O P m M N C 10 F- Z w H O O O N I ~IN_N S- O m 0 Q7 M O O O O O O f'7 W N N O N N M O Q P W P Q O N _ O C) U7 } O N W N r N N 01 M N M. N N m M r ltY Wr NMN Q1 w wNNN ~wwww ~N ~N' Iw www 10 ~QU F-a y~www w wwwwww w w wwwwwwwwwwww wwwe»w ww wlw wlw' m a O z a ~ p ~ O y I F r ^I W W 0 w z LL V af' ot°no^~MO0OO NO ~7-o- NMCrMOO~OO"''°p OONNPIo goo~t°n ~rnl p U Q - N W Q7 M N N Q tNf1 C 71 N N r m N N 'Z Y NO Nh 0 1l - ~ > O w Q Z 0 Z a F- o 0 0 0 0 0 0 °~P P m m w 0 JZ 00 o00w00 0 0 0 two 00 00 0 Q,~ QPm o o' 0 0 0 0 w 0 0 o o 0 o N 0 0 0 00 o N r m o, m 'W ¢ a7 400 o mNq,arnNM0N M cc) W N rl~ o~lo.N 000 m o mto p F- 0 N t0 NI tD ,ri r° P< O m P N N P'M. N N;r Q m D7 of co r a m OF Q Nw w w w w w w yi w w w w w w w w~'wl w w w w, w w nw;n w Iq 64 6% w w w O W Y I F O wF 0 00 O tOD ° a Z 0 N ON 0 0 0 o° t00 O O N I N M O O~O0 N Mi0 O P O or l O O ~ N -f 1 C1 ~ t0 N N m ~ N m ~ ION Z 0 1 O 0 0 0 O N O O N W M M W P 0 J Z O N N ° 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0 r N O O O O O O n W P W O N Q~ O r gNOON O N 0100 ° O O 00 N NN O~ 0000 00 W Q) m r N ui M O O OO r m N O m m O m W O M N N N T° ~ O M O O W CD O m° t0 r N ~ N CJ m N Q) ~'P m Q P 0) M 'p n P W P N N C, N N Q N f7 N W t0 W WCN C w w w N N N W C O N w w w w w w w w w w wl w w w w w w w w N w w w ^ Q w w w w w w w w w w wlww w w I~ awe c Q F" N ON O N 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z 0 '.O 8,0000 N° 'N O ° O: N N O N N r ~ N N O N N O O O M M M M O N P O M N z O C') P O Ll N~ 0 N W N0 O M P m'p O m W Q p O W ° O O O O O O°° O p 0 0 0 0 0 ° 0 0 0 0 O H O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O0 0 O O V p N° O N O ;O O O O O 'W O O O ° O O N N 0 0 0 0°° 0 0°° O 0 0 O O O O O $ 0 0 0 0 0 0 Z R' O N N M O O t0 m O O N O O N O O N O O N fV O.~ N,N N:0 O .p P v "do" N Oa v°, a'wu'viw "'win Nw ww wwwPw ~wNwwsswww ON ~ Mww wv, w w w w 69 69 o o Y > ~Hh-0 r-c00 Z f-~~oOO~Or - - o rr to LL LL T SL z z z LL S S S S S V) 0 T S LL LL LL U LL 2 SAS W > U U > J U U U U U. U U'U LL LL J p~)- z a Zp a¢ z> >»D O O Op z U U ¢ U ¢ a O z z 0 0 0¢ a¢ z z aO d O J J m U W W J U U W W W W W W (n J J(n U U J j W W 'W J .J C7 N V, J J I a m U I , ~C) W O X Z > 0 a O V O m~ O a F W a w 0 W N W w W LL U U 0 Crw L Ncr mm,a XO p w Z F 0 a V Q J p (n 0 v ~ j W'U a a m c > 0J p o <Xy W ?,N2x~- < x C) U-1 O-x wwzzpw a}~X z 'O~w >cn >p m I mZ 0o ~ W P.-m0 Un F- 2 W m0J O OJw~x00 cnF-W c7a m - w x» v -z r H¢ z x m K- U w Z'CD a _ H y u cn Z-. Z W lL - 0 J U a W O N - S N w m x w U W W W z J O U LL U W p N U zLL ZO>O aLL".Jw _Z WU' W U w d J J z ^ ^LLO cn W p x 0 w U Y O M V O 0 m¢ O H U` S Y 0 U> LL w w w w w 0 0 z 0 m U z z U W w,a 0 N U CC W> cn a 2 J O O Z W Y a U' C7 U' a - w 2 2 p O H F Y 0 Z U O a W OW ¢ a: f- a~i~ WI O0< x C70U x~uJ maC~x? a a JZJ > a a zzWa -mz U V EZ It W i >gtnZ 01-5¢ mZW¢~3000ma-L 0 ncnv) 00cr cn m0 W 0 Z ? U-2Za~a_mUa >Lu ZZ~'H-> ~J0 V)NW ~_O ' O ~ _ N d Z V- U Q UIz m m W w m W w W y F 0 V M a aD W-Z W Z r W w W w Z U U r Wa W U m U N H U: anw pzO 3~n~=xlawa0nu>`n~nxnz~00 WI aZZ~~~~W V Orr O w~aw LE E=) uz a_ omm=oa z z> z tY O a r rUV mU VC~wmr~ aOwaa WV Om ZmmwwW rf -z -r~ a r JU.) O m J C O w¢ W 2C7a5o]mOg(~ H H ~ V Ua2ZZ W JUU Jp ¢U, a~ W a d a a a m V 0 wwwww 0 r U Z a p a J O o w W- J O z w w w o a a C? ~J O W Q P M- Z_ J W H Z O V U J- Y d z H Z F U Z ~Y J J Z U U W l O W O O O O O> w w w w w V 0 0 a Z cn O r- U U c~ 0!,O ¢ LL y w w w m'O J J Z O a Q ? z U) J I 0 Z Z U ©z z Z z'U ¢ m- J J a 0 m z co X ~ > U - m ~i~ J J O W Im 0_ U-- 1 ? 0 W~IW W W w¢ O w C9 ;n 0 ¢w Z O O w, 0 0 0 0, qy a a a_ - O 7 m 0 70 O w w Q n ~j J 2~mctt~ nO narr~m~¢Om_OOm NOOOC~r_z ~LLaaa'vvILL LL n nO n Z_aF f- O o U Q p O M, O) O N M m O_ Q N N N N N N N M r M M N N N N M M N z z Z N N N ON t~ N N NN N N R U tOD t00 tOD N tp (°O m N N N N l m m m m tD tD W m m N N N ON U O J ~PPPP ceui~ri~ooorrivaQtntamto rM V V V PPPUi~-i~A w U>~ w NOOI~00000~PPPN D10000000NMMMMMNmWtG tDmWmWmr _ - ~ ~ ~ N M M M M N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N I I U U N N N N N N N N h' N N N NIN N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N ''N N N N p t I ~ . co = U /V" V T2TN ' =SKYLINE O1P t~• y LINE RD. V eOAK KEEE _T. Opp TEPHANIE SKY WEST TR. LA. A RANP EAGAN 26 RD. u 26, °I P > ~a4' oo~" m aD. c ~ ~ L¢ May s ~ )o, P Qti ; < 127N o Op" Lcke w OQ' c4' a'l R23W o Z v; c 2 C MGGA0.'t J uo C 4 3 QSO Y LL, a Z t0 C,.UB•VLEw 2 o¢ 3 9:C C7, SJ, a db i DR MEADCW VIEW qF~ CEDAR; = RD. TOWER- VIEW R;.u r RC. u UM 7-- vz~ 4(FOJROga u R PROJECT M. °y a J RAY P~` LOCATION R o o~.~ 43 v' o a 113r SITE Lr SN DWF LAKE CP.. 35E LE7EST. ErN0000 4 t c O ¢ OQ a ¢ > Z 3~ MaRi"E ° J W Q ❑ < 3E. wCOD'VIEw w, a P° ° -27h R,'Tw 3 0 ° u u 39. WOODViEW E. Q u a' W~ u o ? ~ of FIVER o NCFWEST C". N ~ e 15.ia z ^ °o s ONa ENTJRY PT, ¢ 2 L J YANKEE o o DOODLE 28 RD. dNK=_' DOOCLE RD. W, • 7N d °s c ~ANOEq Alst~ Si,Z OEN_ER DR, d T2 c-C W Za x V DR. ~V Ne W 0 C9 9,R 3, O B~9 ¢U < = W'dSP, c kN CENTER DR.' COL; VIE 5 P 171~6 v, GREENWOOD V'EIGHT~ DR. ~o > eo i CT. S• ; TAMAR4C WAi O'Leary 3E.MERCaNSE= C'. v 40. BLACK•iAWK RIDGE WAY PL = i ROYd_ OAP o 3'. K('T;wA KE G:R. BL AOKHAwK R[D"E ! Abe WALKV u < NORW IT Jd" W a C OAK C g pDCKWp og o DUCKWDOD O W 6 9" o > PL VIOLET A. °u e s o0 o t, s J (Fl. 5~ m a P4 K ° (7 w 3 1, K 37. GRv RC, -AC IF a u w n ~C 52. i " DUCKWCOD CR. ;RESTRIDGE o LA. O 'C AVE. n w C ¢ TAti4 F c ST. FRAN' RESTRIDGE L cT NGE ° S ~~e`uE 4 m yuMM N ti y N N u Ct. G :'G 3[5C. . c d^ c~F in C.p N 6d FL[C KER = 0.0N f `r• MONTEREv LA. C c: C3 0 2 B;RCHPCND m C n r'A k a0 u n~ r ~ PL C . ; Fd',_C Oh c J OVE 9SH aJF a NOL O u u a OL S74G i NC: o CC`EPCS C v V, ter' n~ ? I0 4. P~. O~• o u OZ o Y ; z z P~ c~ 5 RD. Fish o_ Y T. iMEiEP"a JF, s c P~,FP Hew K NlL ENGLER 'v/~ DENMARK 00 r` ; 4 U `2 ePc co • 4~ ; c a `x 9 4G 41A AC B Ail C,.~Lake Ct• E. f-luriey ; ?O o L _ R ocE ci. 35E 3 ; ? ~~~pP~ N MAaK Lake ° a3 8 1 a 43. GREYRDCVO 1-4 DR. 0~PQ K J q1~E ~O O ; AESO D Za• w'ESCOi7 R7. m a u 1. V4 C'~4 35 a Cfyy a WESCOTT RJ.~ BR:AR CRKJ R 1 PaLf$40 Q OGf PL .C WAG h'Q1 Q' V u a `A, WESTBLR i 9. 7,CGJNiRY CREEK WAY l O PD• DEER CU71F ? R. al Ci;. E• LCCES'ONE CiR, ,r C W':N'DCREST AVE. ~0J OQ IO..;P CO BLnckha;,ik Lake vim' ~A' PL. PKWH x ROCKY u P~Pe'F CFES'VIEw kESrBGR~ CRa 4NE AVE, 11A WK Li.p DAVEN PORT CIR, q K3NE5 °CUT TERS LA, LA. z 04, L4• k~VOLL YQ' A 12. u+ !1. ?a pAl.ONjP L. ¢ C ~f M(CH s ¢ l SR. ti0 paP ALO"SA 9'~CC LLE OP. McCarthy WES TBURYm a` MONTI CELLO AVE. P` PADDOCK CT• tR, SESNO~ ff DEERaIDGE CT' Lake (1 V' SARTELL Zo AVE. R F,P ¢ v POP Cla• \\\\v ; R. pe~tV. y'*A O DR, / m e c' W OF.F'PWOO d ~e p4O QB. SKYLARK LA, O O C O 2 r 2 lE:. EAGAN DEEPwOCDDll Cr,a "'q ~ GS ~ m aCnn _ _ M E 00 i~PATt' v TO . ¢ a J C Wt4RK J m P0. CITY OF EAGAN C.P. NO. 802 FIGURE PILOT KNOB ROAD AND Consulting Group, Inc. DUCKWOOD DRIVE PROJECT LOCATION MAP REVISE STRIPPING TO 3 THRU LANES OVER BRIDGE I I III / j / I I I III / I ~ I III I I I III / / /cr .1~ c IN REMOVE RAMP FUTURE I I I II /fr - - - - z r w ~I r 0 200 rll i I I~~ I Z PROPOSED Q ~I III ' c) ' SIGNALC ~Qlt` i i III 1 ~ • III f CO lj III ! \ III +i: Oil ZII IfII YI, I(I~ l 111 /REVISED TRAFFIC SIGNALI X11 III: i~ / I 01 III ~%~~J -X~~ i 11 IT • ! iii I0I I II III I J! I! LEGEND i 'cwa I Ali II } O D I 11 III lO~ EXISTING ROADWAY +IIII 3 I I' PROPOSED ROADWAY I I I II II L I c~ I I II II ; cr- PROPOSED TRAIL/MEDIAN { II III, I Y 1 i II IIII =====FUTURE IMPROVEMENTS I I I I I III I I I I I IIII I LI III: CRESTRIDGE LN. I:I1 II ~ II I I~I II III II CITY OF EAGAN C.P. NO. 802 FIGURE PILOT KNOB ROAD AND 2 DRIVE DUCKWOOD Consulting Group, Inc PROPOSED STREET IMPROVEMENTS CO 0 Y F-- 0 d 11LL tt 46 DUCKWOOD DR. o f I EXISTING [ ° CONDITIONS I 3 w I ! Y p 100' I l TRAFFIC SIGNAL - - 1! t t DUCKWOOD DR.r o 'I l 1 l t t r o ` UNDITIONSI ROPOSED °O z V L I LA F- W O I Y CITY OF EAGAN C.P. NO. 802 FIGURE PILOT KNOB ROAD AND 3 DUCKWOOD DRIVE Consulug Group, Inc PROPOSED INTERSECTION LANE USAGE W Z) Wt 3 W oc Y DC~l 3 ~ oIII - / rI~ / c J / FJ o ( D C3 of ? z Z N W° c~ - - 3 ° ~1i _-----o °W OI x ~ U v; N i' Zy dS N I O Q U WO I W U Z O C U 7 O O I I W Z o J Z LLJ ° v x~ w z J Z Z Z cc I,- W. O Z z I X j < , m O O O V1 CV y_ O + W° - W Q Q in ~ N z O LU U QJ j J N i C,OQ U Q LL z m O cn a- x ui CL ' o+~+I O } z ~I I r ° ~ O cv ONI ~ ° N z N!~ 0 0 U Z U V) ~ c-t - - -T-- - Z j N, ~ :I-- ~ , O D z ° X + W Q1 n.. I ~ U Z C~ O 3 ~ c7 ~ I V ~ d 0_ Z U 3 u J ~11 z LL z x C W o LLJ Q N w o~ J e E U m .5 e` c :J r ~~I ! z wI 0 2C0' v I jz e ~.1 Z DUCKWOOD DR., I I i j ;RELOCATE I o i HYDRANT ` lZ, o I LEGEND v -I-EXISTING WATER MAIN -1-PROPOSED WATER MAIN o ~ I RELOCATE ->-EXISTING SANITARY SEWER I N I HYDRANT LJ EXISTING STORM SEWER ` (..U ` -~74 PROPOSED STORM SEWER i II i j I I \ e I I ~ l .gyp... CRESTRIDGE LN. I ~o f-~ i • CITY OF EAGAN C.P. NO. 802 FIGURE PILOT KNOB ROAD AND 5 Consulting Group, Inc DUCKWOOD DRIVE PROPOSED UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS g 0 LLI ~ZI Wf 0 200' U IZ~ 3 ' A H (010-01) (010-01) lz_ B (010-01) ~ DUCK WOOD DR. j I i .s.. (010-01) C I (010-01) I I F 1 (010-01) I Z o z JI w ICI o . I ° I. N (020-01) E 1 w, ! w , I (020-01) cs, iii I ICI, U I .I I LEGEND I ]PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY I -••._i 0 PROPOSED TEMPORARY CRE S T R I D G E L N. EASEMENT .l CITY OF EAGAN C.P. NO. 802 FIGURE PILOT KNOB ROAD AND 6 DUCKWOOD DRIVE Consulting Group, Inc PARCEL MAP /~q w ' LEGEND i cr J PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-NAY I © PROPOSED TEMPORARY W EASEMENT 0 200' U j jz H \ (010-01) (010-01) j` (010-01) DUCKWOOD DR. o 13 (010-OU c a. (010-01) 3 1 F I (010-01) 1 i - O ~ I: J i W s ~ O I O ' O I O (020-01) I E I . (020-01) a I. Iwl K- IY~ ICI ~ ~ CRESTRIDGE LN. .l CITY OF EAGAN C.P. NO. 802 FIGURE PILOT KNOB ROAD AND 7 Consulting Group. Inc. DUCKWOOD DRIVE PARCEL MAP (DUCKWOOD DR. ALTERNATE) 1.30 II \ i yam/' ~ ~ ~►I ~i f IN ~ 3I OPEN HOUSE PILOT KNOB ROAD (YANKEE DOODLE RD TO CRESTRIDGE LN) INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 22, 2001, 3:30 P.M. - 5:30 P.M. NAME ADDRESS 1. S 2 i 2. ` 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. G:FORMS/S IGN-1 N.Sheet Agenda Information Memo March 6, 2001 Eagan City Council Meeting X. OLD BUSINESS A. REZONING & PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION (PERRON ACRES) MANLEY LAND COMPANY ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: ➢ To approve a Rezoning of approximately 10.7 acres from A (Agricultural) to R-1 (Single Family) located east of Dodd Road and south of Coventry Parkway in the southeast 1/4 of Section 24. ➢ To approve a Preliminary Subdivision (Perron Acres), with a variance to allow two lots less than 85 feet in width, on property located east of Dodd Road and south of Coventry Parkway in the southeast 1/4 of Section 24 subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. FACTS: At its regular meeting of October 17, 2000, the City Council denied the Rezoning and Preliminary Subdivision. ➢ The motion to approve the rezoning request failed because a need for lot sizes less than five acres in size (as required in the A, Agricultural zoning district) was not demonstrated. ➢ The preliminary subdivision request was denied because lots within the subdivision failed to meet minimum area requirements of the A, Agricultural zoning district. ➢ At its regular meeting of February 6, 2001, the City Council approved the applicant's request to reconsider the rezoning and preliminary subdivision application at their March 6, 2001 meeting. ISSUES: ➢ In response to concerns cited at the public hearing and City Council meeting, the applicant has made a number of changes to the previously submitted subdivision plan. These changes are summarized below and referenced in the attached applicant correspondence. Like the previous proposal however, a total of 23 lots have been proposed. /33 ➢ The two lots previously proposed on Welland Court have been combined into a single 26,033 square foot lot. ➢ Lot widths have been increased from just over 85 feet to just over 90 feet. ➢ An additional cul-de-sac has been provided in the north-central area of the property. The cul-de-sac has been found to comply with the maximum 500 foot cul-de-sac length requirement of the City Code. ➢ A trail connection between the subdivision's westerly cul-de-sac and Dodd Road has been proposed. ATTACHMENTS: (4) February 6, 2001 City Council Meeting Minutes, pages l3Sthm . Previously submitted Preliminary Subdivision Plan, page 134. Revised Preliminary Subdivision Plan, page, W Kevin Manley correspondance, pages / through/YD. 13Y Eagan City Council Meeting Minutes February 6, 2001 Page 9 OLD BUSINESS RATIFY 2001 CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND OBJECTIVES City Administrator Hedges commended the Council on behalf of City staff for their work on the Strategic Plan and Goals. He also commended Administrative Specialist Hertel and Assistant City Administrator Verbrugge for their assistance. Councilmember Bakken moved, Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to ratify the 2001 City Council Goals and Objectives. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 RECONSIDERATION OF REZONING AND PRELIMINRAY SUBDIVISION MANLEY LAND COMPANY City Administrator Hedges introduced this item regarding the reconsideration of allowing for a rezoning of approximately 10.7 acres from A (Agriculture) R-1 (Single Family) and a Preliminary Subdivision (Perron Acres) to create 23 lots, located on the east side of Dodd Road and north of Welland Court in the SE of Section 24. Mayor Awada moved, Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to reconsider the rezoning and preliminary subdivision for Manley Land Company. Mayor Awada explained to Mr. Manley that she feels there are problems with the plat and suggested he work with staff regarding the variances. Mr. Manley asked the Council's opinion regarding the existing farm house on the cul-de-sac and the proposed lot sizes. Mayor Awada suggested larger lot sizes. Daryl Peterson expressed concerns over the reconsideration of the subdivision. He stated he felt the Council should hold off on further review. Jodi Severson expressed concern over the lot sizes. She asked the Council not to reconsider the proposed subdivision until changes are made. Two residents spoke regarding their concerns over traffic and safety issues. Public Works Director Colbert addressed the access issues. George Weslund, 636 Welland Court, requested that trail access be considered for Welland Court. He also stated he is supportive of the proposed subdivision. Mayor Awada stated she felt the rezoning request was previously improperly denied and is supportive of the reconsideration. She further stated that official notification would have to be made before the Council can review the proposal. Councilmember Bakken stated he supports the reconsideration but recommends that the applicant work with staff regarding the trail access and variances. A vote was taken on the motion. Aye: 4 Nay: 1 Councilmember Carlson opposed. f. 2i'.: A'4. 1--o" t-w-.~0. J W o Y r 01 e; V p O u ~O P N W u Z _ < n1 O = 0 to d. a' i,~. '1 - x m c. O m C.O = r T= O O P Z 4 a ! 1 N- , P~ V J y N rv O O J O P, y ~m h 4 J ! Z Z J 3G M ~ <V1J -h- O WJTT< ~'C°<PN-OPO'npP JUa<.. _ C n N O [ • - • - wD ~Z-OC W 2C ^ N - < J¢ > ~N W Vf W S Sj y < ; P~ w_~ GN-„1 n • • a r 3 3 Sat O W< 7~- Y O C O <a:/f p-'60 . W US O j 33S J OC-lm-.O.•'~O-f I~tV Gw W WM1WWw W S Z <S -C p _ C LCO, r) t O ^ mm a Vi V ~O < y - C fL y~_•ie'4 F O7 W 3 < W Z ZC W C7 P JNi1 0. {71 Z O NJ< a Q 3 SL.S1A 8• b V J a ^ YLZ3 C m C 9~fvr a G h < L Z 00 0 \ / y I V / I 111 ¢ 11 - 1~ I 1•^~ ••t[:~pq 1 O: \ Z o? A o l z, 15 < ~r PREVIOUS PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAN /36 II c y O v Y V C ~Nili NSA Ti Cc O O'.'l. « Y law WLi rr Co OW OOH Y c O p O N 00000 h w < --W WW AyCC Ow'e 3:E Z.L. Aop Nh Y0 } t' U •Y wwwW 03 0~ 0EZ "o o. O W W:, b ..Iola nnV Cc) i co SOO cO ea .~°.Y Ve a^°oc < 1Q } ~f~ 10 O N,n J Z ZZZ f 4`.:..:. H OO tD h WY Y Y V OYN CO 58 O1 Lr'o~ o CN r Q JOF t a CL J..t N0 ^N V WUmmQ On OIL NN ~dOI N D o O c- JZT<~ z w8 W O O n « aW Y IA W F- F O L Q V y w _C p 1' a mJ r ZNU1 Q L...^ c_O nv 7 oOQ' x T<J < N Or ^ 1- O VI N C E C G A O O O Z w 2 1 I W of uj of ~'•j~~ Joo z o~oo nom.. E_ o3orn ri Z <c»w0 n Li; w t < 00 r J N Z Jw Q.Q. OZ O O O O -'NI W O O O ON 2QK K } , k. 3 < J Q. Y W N V I n Z Z Y T< ; C V o D N 0 m n G W J J J w H U p~ A l 0 <mW z J0 cc ,7c ~Z ZKT J O ~L L0~1~ ~ O Yn O Y nN c W W W W W W < F~ O 3<> O yaW/ ZZ0 WO V ]mn•y=-"m"~V C n ~a; aaaZ I~ r z 0 VI J< Q K Z 3 W K V1 0 0 O VI O h 01 0 0 5 v am O co of O p u aD N r Q J Q D Z n L 2 O co \ W KLW 1lC.Mos - W z / a o lr m e ' T / $ W \ - • N < / l i LN A - 7 ' 3nr S32 Z ~11 / `L 96 W p ¢ai C i / tp$ ~i W / a3 n \ a o ,n f= 22 / ' b U ebe Fit r W) \ W _ol \ ry /sp o 0 o my ~ ~ m it c'mn O 3 Y c 'O !~i.l: j REVISED PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAN Ml\la,N L E Y Dear Mayor Awada I want to thank you for your support on the items I have brought before you in the past and I am working hard on Perron Acres to get it the way you would like. We both have the same goal to improve the City of Eagan and give the people that live here a place to move up into. Although the city says they don't take into consideration any monetary ramification obviously I need to and I also think that you do because you own your own business and know that if you don't, your business will not be around long. The houses we build in Eagan average around 3000 sq. ft. so I wouldn't call them monster houses but probably larger than average for new houses. I don't want houses stacked on top of each other or perceived to look like that. We do however, need a minimum number of lots to make the development work. The minimum requirement is 12,000 sq. ft. and 85' at the setback. `ghat we are working to get done is 90' average frontage and around 17,000 sq. ft. for the lot. That is 30% larger than the minimum sq. ft and 6% more on the width. If you look at the new drawing, which I have already shown Bob Kirmis the average width will probably be closer to around a 100' average, but I don't have the final drawings vet. As far as the trail we have always said we are putting in a trail connection between the cul-de-sac and the trail the city is running along Dodd so that should not be an issue. We did turn the lot on the small cul-de- sac into one lot and we are leaving the farmhouse intact. If you look at it and think it needs some remodeling on the outside I would consider doing that, the garage is almost new and the house doesn't look bad. I would prefer that we have two lots even if you had to make a stipulation that the houses be no larger than 2000 sq. ft. But I do want to make sure that we have no variances and have worked with the city council and the city so there will be no problems going through this time. We are paying Mr. Perron a premium for his land; it took me over 6 months to work it out and most of the compromising came from my side. We had figured two lots on that cul-de-sac to get to a point where we felt we could go forward. Two lots at $75,000 each or leave the existing house which is worth about $150,000. If we put one lot in there it would probably Jar 10778 Alison Way - Inver Grove Heights. (X 55077, - Busmess -351, --4_54-4933 - Mobile 312-275-8722 11 n, NLEY be worth $80,000 but fall far short of the $1-50,000 mark the other two alternatives that we need to make the development work. We are builders number one, and make very little money off the land but we need the land or we have nowhere to build and we do make money off building the houses. We are able to come in and buy pieces that developers could never buy because we are willing to pay more so we have a place to build, but we cut out their profit and give it to the person we are buying from in this case Leonard Perron. If you have any questions please feel free to give me a call on my cell phone or at the office. Bob Kirmis thought it was better to write you a letter I wanted to set up a time to talk. The next issue I have which will be coming up at the next city council meeting is Thomas Woods. That easily passed the planning commission and would probably pass the City Council because we have no variances and very little opposition yet from the neighbors. However, there is one stipulation in this proposal that I cannot do and since I have no control I need an alternative to what is being asked from me. The stipulation that Dodd Rd be improved for my subdivision to be approved. I have gathered together four pieces of property two I have paid for and I am paying around $9,000 per month in interest and two I have not paid for yet, and I will be paying around an additional $4000 per month in interest. The last two make the development a much nicer piece and make the road line up better but I don't have to have them to keep this development. Contrary to the neighbors belief I do not have an endless amount of money and if I was paying $13,000 per month in interest and the Dodd Rd improvement didn't get approved for two years all the profit from my business would be going to pay for this and I'm not willing to do that. I am willing to sign a petition on behalf of my four pieces of property saying I want Dodd Rd improved. I am willing to pay my share to have Dodd Rd. improved and I am even willing to pay an additional 10,000-20,000 toward the Dodd Rd improvements as long as my project is ready to go first thing this spring as soon as we can go. Timing is very important and I hope that this issue can be resolved. I still have a chance to drop the last two pieces of property if you cannot change that stipulation however I prefer that the subdivision is kept as is, the 13~ 10778 Alison `Jay • Inver Grove Heic;rf.; ^afJ 5~G .s n~ss ;1-454-4933 • Mobile 612-275-8722 M /\IalN L E Y city also prefers it is kept as is but if it drags on a long time I cannot afford it so I need to know as quickly as you can tell me. I know you are very busy and I appreciate your time to read this letter. I'm not sure why anyone would want to be Mayor or a City Council Member, the pay is bad and there are always people blaming you for something and it looks like to do a good job you guys need to spend a lot of time at it. All I can say I'm glad its you and not me. Good Luck and Thank you. Kevin D. Manley Mobile 612-275-8722 Office 651-454-4933 Sent to all City Council Members TO 10778 Alison Way • Inver Grove He ants. MN 55077 • Business 65 1 -454-4933 • Nlo-cAe J 12-275 ~'22 11 Agenda Information Memo March 6, 2001 Eagan City Council B. REZONING, VARIANCE AND PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION (FINCH PLACE) - BASIC BUILDERS, INC. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve a Rezoning from an A, Agriculture to an R-1, Single-Family Residential zoning designation, of 12.59 acres of land located north of Red Pine Lane and east of Hwy. 3 in the E/2 of Section 36. To approve a Preliminary Subdivision (Finch Place), with a Variance for a cul-de-sac in excess of 500' in length, to create 22 single-family lots on 12.59 acres of land located north of Red Pine Lane and east of Hwy. 3 in the E'/2 of Section 36, subject to the conditions in the APC minutes, as amended in the staff memo dated March 2, 2001. To approve a ten-foot front setback Variance for Lot 4, Block 2, to allow a 20-foot front yard setback from a public street. FACTS: • The site is located north of Red Pine Lane and east of Hwy. 3. The site is bounded to the west by the railroad and Hwy. 3, to the north and east by single-family development, and limited industrial development to the south across Red Pine Lane. • The property contains a single family home and several outbuildings, and a large wetland. The existing buildings are proposed to be removed with this development. • The proposed rezoning from A to R-1 is consistent with the Comprehensive Guide Plan land use designation of LD, Low Density Residential (0-4 units per acre). • Access to the site consists of two public cul-de-sacs from Red Pine Lane. A private street street is proposed to extend north from the end of the northerly public cul-de-sac. • The developer has made some modifications to the plans in response to the issues raised by the Advisory Planning Commission and Advisory Parks and Recreation Commission. The overall site design has remained essentially the same. • Modifications to the plans include narrower rights-of-way and private street, reduced structure setbacks along the private street, improved tree preservation, improved wetland buffer protection, and new locations and configuration of storm water ponds. • A more detailed evaluation of the revised development plans as compared to the initial submittal and relative to City Code requirements is provided in a separate staff memo. Modifications and additions to the conditions of approval are also included in that memo. ISSUES: • Overall, the revised plans are an improvement over the initial plan submittal. While grading and construction activity impacts on Lots 4-9, Block 2, around the wetland have been reduced, staff remains concerned about restoration in the impacted areas and maintenance of the undisturbed wetland buffer during construction. /ell • The plans shoe- a 20-foot front yard setback for Lot 4, Block 2, which constitutes a ten-foot front yard setback Variance. The initial application included a request for a 5-foot setback Variance on what was Lot 5, Block 2, on the initial plans. The requested 10-foot Variance helps to minimize grading toward the wetland to accommodate the structure on Lot 4, Block 2. • The revised Tree Preservation Plan, as reviewed by the City Forester, shows 50 Category B Trees. Correspondence received from the applicant on March 2, 2001, indicates they are proposing 16 Category A trees for mitigation and request consideration of practical difficulties on the site. This correspondence was submitted too late for staff to reconcile the difference in mitigation plans and include such evaluation in the Council packet. • The need for a sidewalk to provide safe pedestrian access along Red Pine Lane is a new addition to the conditions of approval that was not a result of any revisions that the developer made to the plans. ATTACHMENTS: / Staff Memo dated March 2, 2001, pages ~ through ~b Revised development plans, pagesIY7_ through I!a January 23, 2001 APC Minutes, pages through Planning Report, pages/ SFizough Correspondence from BBI dated February 27, 2001, pages Mthrough-/'?S Correspondence from Debbie Finch dated March 2001, pages through ~r MEMO city of eagan To: City Administrator, Mayor and City Council Through: Mike Ridley, Senior Planner From: Pam Dudziak, Planner Date: March 2, 2001 Re: Finch Place (Basic Builders, Inc.) The Council continued this item from the February 20, 2001 Council meeting, at the developer's request. At that time the developer was in the process of modifying the development plans in response to issues that had been raised during reviews by the Advisory Planning Commission and Advisory Parks and Recreation Commission. Those modifications are now completed and this memo is prepared as an addendum to the Planning Report to evaluate the changes and their impacts as compared to the initial submittal and City Code requirements. • The overall site design has remained essentially the same. Access to the site consists of two public cul-de-sacs from Red Pine Lane. A private street is proposed to extend north from the end of the northerly cul-de-sac. • The number of lots has been reduced from 23 to 22, a density of 2.45 units per acres compared to 2.56 in the initial proposal. Lot 5, Block 2 from the initial submittal was eliminated, reducing the number and increasing the size of lots around the wetland. • The width of public rights-of-way has been reduced from 60 to 50 feet, and the width of the private street has been reduced to 20 feet. • The storm water ponds have been reconfigured. New storm water ponds were added at the southwest corner of the site, and at the southwest corner of the wetland (between Lots 4 and 5, Block 2). The storm water pond that was located at the north end of the site (near Lot 10, now Lot 9, Block 2) has been eliminated. • Lot lines were reconfigured, particularly around the wetland and all of the lots now satisfy the 12,000 square foot minimum size, excluding the lot area within the wetland. Access The 50-foot wide right-of-way for the public cul-de-sacs and 20-foot wide private street satisfy minimum Code requirements for the number of lots those streets serve. Engineering staff has indicated a need for safe pedestrian access particularly because of the site's proximity to Red Pine School. For this reason, a sidewalk should be constructed on the south edge of the development along Red Pine Lane. Arl-3 (;rte The narrower width on the public right-of-way and the private street minimize the area of the site impacted by grading, reducing grading encroachments into the 30-foot wetland buffer area and reducing tree removal. TI IIiti The initial plans showed the storm sewer pipe and easement west of the wetland being relocated. With the revised plans, the reconfiguration of lot lines around the wetland has eliminated the need to relocate the pipe and easement. Therefore, condition of approval 48 should be deleted. Draina e The original plans showed one storm water pond located north of Lots 4 and 5, Block 1, and a smaller pond at the north end of the site, on Lot 10, Block 2. The revised plans now show a smaller pond north of Lot 4, Block 1. An additional pond has been added in the southwest corner of the site (Lot 2, Block 1) and between Lots 4 and 5, Block 2. The small storm water pond at the north end of the site (now Lot 9, Block 2) has been eliminated. Wetlands/Water Quality The developer has taken positive steps to reduce the encroachment and disturbance to the 30-foot buffer area of DNR Public Water Wetland #19-307 (City Pond LP-27) by reconfiguring the sizes and positions of lots and structures within Block 2 around the wetland. In the revised plans, the units west of the wetland were able to be located further from the wetland because of the reduced width of the private street and by reducing the front setback of those structures from 25 to 20 feet (the minimum required by City Code). Also, one lot was eliminated at the southwest corner of the wetland (original Lot 5, Block 2) and the unit on Lot 4, Block 2 was repositioned. However, some disturbance of the 30-foot buffer remains in the revised proposal, associated with grading for Lot 4, Block 2, and the storm water pond located between Lots 4 and 5, Block 2. Due to the proximity of the proposed storm water pond to the ordinary high water mark of the protected wetland, this proposal will need to be reviewed by the Minnesota DNR Division of Waters staff before final approval. Appropriate wetland seeding and perhaps planting is needed around this storm water pond to reestablish wetland vegetation in the disturbed area. Although there are fewer concerns as compared to the original proposal, Water Resources staff still has some concerns about potential impacts to the wetland associated with grading for Lots 4- 8, Block 2. Staff is concerned that the grading on Lots 5-8, Block 2 may not be able to be contained only to the immediate rear of each of the four walkout units, as proposed on the grading plan. Tree Preservation The tree inventory was reevaluated and resulted in a reduction of existing significant trees from 427 to 415. The revised development plans will result in the removal of 43.4% of total significant trees on the site, as compared to 63.2% removal in the initial plan. Allowable tree removal for is set at 40%, therefore, tree mitigation is required. ~~y The required tree mitigation calculates to forty-eight (48) Category B trees. The applicant has submitted a tree mitigation plan that shows the installation of fifty (50) Category B trees, Overall, the revised plan is an improvement, however, the City Forestry staff has also expressed concern about the developer's and contractors' ability to construct houses and perform necessary grading in Lots 5-9, Block 2 without encroaching into the tree protection zones on those lots, (tree protection fence must remain in place throughout all construction), and preserving and/or re-establishing a natural buffer around the existing wetland, particularly on Lots 4 and 5, Block 2. The developer should establish a permanent conservation easement extending from the edge of tree preservation limits to the water on Lots 2 - 9, Block 2. The graded area around the new storm pond on Lots 4-5, Block 2 should be replanted with buffer vegetation out to a distance of thirty feet from the proposed normal water level (925 feet). This plant material should consist of appropriate trees, shrubs, and grasses. A restoration plan should be submitted for staff review and approval prior to final subdivision approval. The applicant should consider different species of mitigation trees as suggested by the City Forester: Bur Oak or Swamp White Oak rather than Red Oak, and Freeman Maple or any species of Ash in place of Sugar Maple. In conversations with staff, the developer has agreed to establish a perpetual conservation easement on each of the seven lots adjacent to the wetland. Condition-, of Annroval n If the Council approves the Preliminary Subdivision, the following changes to the conditions of approval should be made: Delete condition #8 regarding relocating the storm sewer pipe and easement. Modify condition #18 to regarding tree mitigation to read 50 Category B trees rather than 113 Category B trees. Add new conditions as follows: a. The developer shall be responsible for constructing a concrete sidewalk on the south edge of the development along Red Pine Lane. b. The final grading plan shall be show the correct NWL and HWL of the storm water pond (the elevations appear to be transposed on the preliminary grading plan), c. Prior to final subdivision approval, the plans must be reviewed and approved by Minnesota DNR Division of Waters staff. d. The developer shall establish a permanent conservation easement around the existing wetland, from the edge of the water to the tree preservation limits on Lots 2-9, Block 2, and in any case extending not less than 30 feet from the edge of the wetland. The easement documents shall be submitted to the City Attorney for review and approval prior to final subdivision approval. e. The graded area around the new storm pond on Lots 4-5, Block 2 shall be replanted with buffer vegetation to a distance of thirty feet from the proposed normal water level (925 feet). The plant materials shall consist of appropriate trees, shrubs, and grasses, in addition to the restoration of the 30-foot wetland buffer area to native wetland vegetation. The restoration and buffer planting plan shall be submitted for staff review and approval prior to final subdivision approval. / 1/5~ f. The Final Tree Mitigation Plan shall be revised to utilize different species of trees that would be better suited to the site conditions as suggested by the City Forester: Bur Oak or Swamp White Oak rather than Red Oak, and Freeman Maple or any species of Ash in place of Sugar Maple. 1 L Rif ~II IIIi4EjI I siIL a t Cj~i~~f Q~Qi t e i a f ra 111 of F[! f [[tEf {t ~t / iryj~~~it 14 ~ 4~~Fkl~f tElf ttE~p~E`~ r a :tii~.Y~ftt3 ~~1F Fa~~ tat} ~a i~Fsra~. i 14 ti, lit Fill, a t f H XF1 a` a 1.1 at }i ItIF lt~ [g tt "[t Y ~t~ tatt y j o ` g [ [aa t La M. Lit r E i N ~j j~ y QYV r// ■ d r w f ~ ~a • R ^ N ~ Oy NJU'O / fr~~' 1 ta[t Z t U, 0 ~ N JJ N N rtP ~ ~ ~ rO / pa ~ X11 . C 1 6 W ~ ~ ~ 1 N i r ^ 4.1 a ' ~o I I1 ~1..-a ' ` J fir' f - ~ ~ ~ ! as i' 1 I C LL w IC ~ m / ~ • 1~ Y o ~ 6. 1 ~ - old O ~ 1 y ' - / a r k a~ o / yr ! S j QQ' W 14 i 14 fc ! 0 cl r ice. -uw .If Jf. G / ~ s ~L~ PRELIM. PLAT (REVISED) a 1i I a ~ 0 / a o / rl~--- ~ a~ s ~I uI ~ " SITE PLAN (REVISED) c ~•se ,,G~ j ` A"A E3 goo L~6 6b - Oab - l T' / j a' 0y/ z a P - / V i/ PP ~e,° ~ e a R e i t / O`er ~o r •1b~~ ~ „ l ~ a. =r ~ ' l f / `n ! x Tx Lr) ' 6 y Q `fit t I c: / i ° r 4 L t LI) a Ee ~ ~ ~~g34 s ~ ~ ~ T"•- w~J W13SIA38) S2111 LU-1 m F - A rfQ+J 1-927.6 e w Iv e e / ~ - JI R t°x`0.a~ j f Y 'f]+'~ / j Z I V W .926 k31 / •~.~-9iL3 /j R-93L3 ' ~ •21.0 ~ F ~ ~ b931.3 / ~ 7 i r / = a i + a j Sdie -927.83 / R.9J8 )7 III i-9?Z U 1.0.11 Z e d tp~ 00 Q fi Ua (L L: CL cn N N o ~ f' / p 3 Y°' r F ff :2: i j .I~. i u~ Vii. • \ ~ : ~~tJf y t 5 M ~ ~ , ~ . z= m m ~RttEEEEiEEE3tJPl~tEt.~[fElE1tREUit1tE1,RIW#EEWtliilltlttiEiEiEF,IERHtEiit~tttntt,.t>•~'Ca~~,.""~.'RS:tEEBEitlt ~ ;n;c~;~Kw`K~``•+;K ,KauacaauaKK;K;t;;;ia;::~:ca+K~K+KK1aa~a+K++K; ~asKKrl ~~.4';aaou~~~:cKKKtc:;t:-sKV~:;:;;~aw; MRMKMNti,uR ,ER~R,nrR,nnRRR,t,~,R,+ +,Ri ,{-tRR ,R 1'+N E 1 RR,R+ u ~Pl t t tt Iltlf fntt~tattf ttataan~tEattm Itt~tttAt AEI INt ilium c QED EEN.EEEEEEftffEftJ~tEtt fBiI~EEEEAfRREittRCdNI~EEffi'AS4E1lRER!!~R!! v, l(AKR[iiiRWiVKKLK;iGitKiKK;15ii;iti\35KW~;Kf~ttll!RKfii[K(,ii!(fKt!W~!iKt;Sia+aKGVNGNhIf{KNKi~N~?NiiKKKKi/gI; Z C ~ l i 1 t Z +1 isii~~ElIti~tl,«"`,n,',,'`"'i«$P, ~"~,`t9fiimum „ t~ttii"`i~~ Z ,i n+ How i + W41=1 l! m r R*"!BtnRt ENEEIEEBt~EEt "MR4411AMa 44ow MM -qV4qvpvK%% 6, tlSiIIwlII~~~II(it~aA~ II:{iBi 1i~TK T M,,,tt„tu i IMIR111up, ~t t[ttmmtt ilNllii3q#ii m m m iiiiiii!lutg i rstMtttututrtJatmutMnffMtttttMMnMMUHM13 a , F /,5TREE INVENTORY (REVISED) •AIU~C/1M+rG pu~6/OPf oP f`w D.C I i' y J \ 5. ROBERT MML (TM S) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Il I LD `+~pP c `A t ~l ~r 6f p~• J'~ E. gan Addison Plannin" ~ unm,s610m Nhnutes lanu,in' 23, _001 REZONING, VARIANCE & PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION - BASIC BUILDERS, INC. Chair Hevl opened the next public hearing of the evening regarding a Rezoning of 12.3 acres from A (Agriculture) to R-I (Single Family) and a Preliminary Subdivision (Finch Place) to create 23 lots and a Variance to exceed the maximum cul-de-sac length of 500 feet, located at -1790 South Robert Trail, on the north side of Red Pine Lane in the SE of Section 36. Planner Dudziak introduced this item. She highlighted the information presented in the City staff's planning report dated January 18, 2001. She noted the background and history, the existing conditions, and the surrounding uses of the subject property. Ed McMenomy, Basic Builders, discussed the proposed subdivision. He addressed the minimum 12,000 square foot lot requirement and stated that an error had been made on two of the lots, making them less that the required square footage. He stated that other lot lines will be adjusted to bring the two nonconforming lots into conformance. He also addressed the wetland area stating that he would be willing to comply with item 13b of the planning report: 13b. The developer shall reestablish disturbed buffer areas into native wetland ve°etation and institute wetland buffer protection zones as covenants or deed restrictions with lots adjacent to the wetland. The plan for restoration of the disturbed buffer areas shall be submitted at the time of final subdivision approval for review and approval by City staff. Mr. Llctilenomv went on to discuss tree mitigation. He stated that manv trees damaged by several storms had been tagged by their forester who did not realize that the treesy would not be considered significant trees. He stated that many of the trees will be replaced with better quality trees. He addressed the roadway easement stating that their attorney is working on the title issue and that the project cannot move forward until that matter is taken care of. Wayne Tauer, Pioneer Engineering, discussed the discrepancy in the lot sizes. He stated that all lots except Lots 4 and have 12,000 square feet. He stated that a variation of Lot 3 would take care of Lot 4 and Lot 6 can be adjusted to give Lot 3 the required 12,000 square feet. He also discussed the hardship regarding tree mitigation and the wetland buffer. Chair Heyl opened the floor for public comment. Seven residents expressed their concerns regarding the cul-de-sac length, the private road instead of public road, possible decrease in property values, potential problems from runoff, wetlands being disturbed, safety issues in regard to the pond and railroad tracks. Eagan d1 I-S On Planning Commission Minutes lanuan 23,2oOl 1"I"e to Evelyn Nelson, fee owner of the property the easement is on, expressed concern that she would have no legal access from her property. Deb and Gene Finch, owners of the subject property, requested that the project be approved and discussed the location and removal of box elder trees, stating another tree count should be done. There being no further comment, Chair Heyl closed the public hearing and turned the discussion back to the Commission. Chair Heyl asked City Engineer Matthys to discuss drainage and the holding pond. Mr. Matthys discussed the impact on the pond and surrounding trees, stating that storm water management indicates a hundred year storm would not impact the homes in the area. He stated the pond would be built to Eagan design standards. Planner Dudziak explained the ordinance definition of damaged trees and stated the Citv Forrester had taken the damaged trees into account. Planner Dudziak also discussed the easement that will have to be vacated and the proposed private street. Commissioner Nosbush asked about the width of street required for emergency vehicle access. Planner Dudziak stated a 20' street is adequate for emergency vehicles. Commissioner Steininger stated he felt the City should only sell a portion of the property. retain control of the pond, a recount of the trees should be done, and the legal access for the adjoining property owner should be reviewed. Commissioner Hutrsko agreed that the City should retain a portion of the land due to there being no park land in the area. Member Hunter discussed the tree preservation ordinance, stating that it applies beautifully in this area. He suggested that the item be tabled and the developer eliminate lots 7-10. He stated he is not in favor of the long cul-de-sac. City Attorney Bauer stated that if the lot lines are altered, a new application would need to be submitted. He explained that the Commission must consider the plan that is currently before them. Chair Heyl stated she will vote to denv the rezoning and preliminary subdivision due to her concerns over the trees, the wetland area, lack of a hardship for a variance, and the easements of record that conflict with access to the adjacent property. Mr. McMenomv addressed the easement and the private street, stating that others had been granted in the city. He stated that the project would not be viable without the lots to the north and that he had been encouraged by staff and has a purchase agreement with the City. He further stated he is willing to comply with the tree re-count and that the lot lines Eagan Advisor Planning Commission Minutes Januan 23, 2o0i page 11 have been realigned to take care of the required square footage. He also stated he would work with Ms. Nelson regarding access to her property. Member Nosbush moved. Member Steininger seconded a motion to recommend approval of a Rezoning from A, Agriculture to an R-l, Single-Family Residential zoning designation of 12.59 acres of land located north of Red Pine Lane and east of Hwy. 3 in the E 1%2 of Section 36. Aye: Hunter, Nosbush, Huusko; Nav: Hevl, Steininger, Bendt Member Nosbush moved, Member Steininger seconded a motion to recommend approval of a Preliminary Subdivision (Finch Place), with a Variance for a cul-de-sac in excess of 500' in length, to create 23 single-family lots on 12.59 acres of land located north of Red Pine Lane and east of Hwy. 3 in the E1/2 of Section 36 subject to the following conditions: 1. The developer shall comply with these standards conditions of plat approval as adopted by Council on February 3, 1993: A1, B1, B2, B3, B4, C1, C2, C3, Dl. and E 1. 2. The property shall be platted. 3. The R-1 zoning standards apply to all lots within this development. In addition, all lots shall comply with the City's Shoreland Zoning Ordinance with impervious surface coverage not exceeding 25% of the lot area. 4. A minimum of three (3) feet of elevation difference shall be provided between the high water level of the ponds and the lowest entry elevation of the houses adjacent to ponds without an emergency overflow elevation. A minimum of two (2) feet of elevation difference shall be provided between the emergency overflow elevation of the ponds and the lowest entry elevations of the adjacent houses. The final grading plan shall provide sufficient detail information to demonstrate that these standards are satisfied prior to final subdivision approval. 5. The existing storm sewer pipe outlet shall be relocated to accommodate construction on Lot 9, Block 2. An outlet skimmer, in accordance with City engineering standards, shall be constructed on the new outlet pipe from Pond LP- 27. 6. The private street shall be constructed with concrete curb and gutter. 7. A homeowners association is required for the joint maintenance of the pri vate street. The developer shall submit the association documents to the City Attorney for review and approval prior to final subdivision for this development. g. The existing drainage & utility easement over the existing outlet pipe from Pond LP-27 shall be vacated at time of final subdivision for this development. 15-,5- Eagan .Advisor,. Planning Commission Minutes 1anu.ir•, 23, 200, Par; 12 9. The existing private street easement through the site, commonly known as Farnl Road, shall be terminated to the affected property owners and satisfactory evidence of the same shall be provided to the City Attorney. 10. The developer shall be responsible for obtaining all necessary permits for temporary or permanent construction within the adjacent railroad right-of-Nvay. 11. This development shall meet the City's water quality requirements by creating stormwater treatment capacity through a minimum wet-pond volume of 0.67 acre- feet covering an area of 0.29 acres. The stormwater treatment pond should be constructed according to NURP standards with a maximum depth of six (6) feet, a 10:1 aquatic bench, and an outlet skimmer according to City design standards. 12. The final grading and drainage plan shall be revised to satisfy the minimum pond volume requirement of 0.67 acre-feet. 13. A cash water quality dedication will be required for a portion of the site where the storm%vater runoff is not treated and drains directly to the existing pond. The amount of cash dedication is anticipated to be about S5,240; the exact amount will be determined at the time of final subdivision, and payable prior to release of the plat for recording. 14. Erosion control practices should be properly installed and effectively maintained throughout the development process to prevent and minimize soil loss and negati% e impacts to down-gradient resources and water quality. 15. The developer shall reestablish disturbed buffer areas into native wetland vegetation and institute wetland buffer protection zones as covenants or deed restrictions Nvith lots adjacent to the wetland. The plan for restoration of the disturbed buffer areas shall be submitted at the time of final subdivision approval for review and approval by City Staff. 16. Tree Protective measures (i.e. orange colored silt fence or four-foot polyethylene laminate safety netting) shall be installed at the Drip Line or at the perimeter of the Critical Root Zone, whichever is greater, of significant trees/woodlands to be preserved. Where this is not possible, alternative tree preservation measures acceptable to the City Forester shall be employed. 17. The applicant shall contact the City Forestry Division and schedule a pre- construction site inspection at least five days prior to the issuance of the grading permit to ensure compliance with the approved Tree Preservation Plan and placement of the Tree Protection Fencing. I & The applicant shall submit a revised tree mitigation plan indicating complete mitigation fulfillment through the installation of 113 Category A trees. Eagan Advisor. Pianrunb Commission Minutes I,muarv 23, 2001 Page 13 19. The development shall be subject to a cash park and trail dedication, payable at the time of final plat at the rate then in effect. A vote was taken on the motion. All voted nay. Member Nosbush moved, Member Steininger seconded a motion to recommend approval of a five-foot front yard setback Variance for Lot 5, Block 2, to allow a 25-foot front yard setback from a public street. All voted nay. PLANNING REPORT CITY OF EAGAN REPORT DATE: January 18, 2001 CASE: 36-PS-18-12-00 APPLICANT: Basic Builders, Inc. HEARING DATE: January 23, 2001 PROPERTY OWNER: Eugene & Deborah Finch APPLICATION DATE: (Jan. 3, 2001) City of Eagan REQUEST: Rezoning & Preliminary Subdivision PREPARED BY: Pamela Dudziak LOCATION: 4790 South Robert Trail COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: D-I, Single-Family Residential ZONING: A, Agriculture SUMMARY OF REQUEST Basic Builders, Inc. is requesting approval of a Preliminary Subdivision (Finch Place) to allow the creation of a 23-lot single-family subdivision. The proposed subdivision overlays 12.59 acres of land located north of Red Pine Lane and east of Hwy. 3 in the E '/2 of Section 36. In conjunction with the requested preliminary subdivision, the applicant is also requesting a Rezoning of the property from an A, Agriculture to an R-1, Single-Family Residential zoning designation. The request also includes a Variance to exceed the maximum cul-de-sac length of"500 feet, which is part of the proposed Preliminary Subdivision, and a five-foot front yard setback Variance for construction on Lot 5, Block 2. AUTHORITY FOR REVIEW Rezoning: City Code Chapter 11, Section 11.40, Subdivision 5 states, in part that the Council shall not rezone any land or area in any zoning district or make any other proposed amendment to this chapter without first having referred it to the planning commission for its consideration and recommendation. ~SC~ Planning Report - Basic Builders, Inc. (Finch Place) January 23, 2001 Page 2 Subdivision: City Code Section 13.20, Subdivision 6 states that "In the case of platting, the Planning Commission and the Council shall be guided by criteria, including the following, in approving, denying or establishing conditions related thereto: A. That the proposed subdivision does comply with applicable City Code provisions and the Comprehensive Guide Plan. B. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision complies with applicable plans of Dakota County, State of Minnesota, or the Metropolitan Council. C. That the physical characteristics of the site including, but not limited to, topography, vegetation, susceptibility to erosion and siltation, susceptibility to flooding, water storage and retention are such that the site is suitable for the type of development or use contemplated. D. That the site physically is suitable for the proposed density of development. E. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvement is not likely to cause environmental damage. F. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is not likely to cause health problems. G. That the design of the subdivision or the improvements will not conflict with easements of record or with easements established by judgment of court. H. That completion of the proposed development of the subdivision can be completed in a timely manner so as not to cause an economic burden upon the City for maintenance, repayment of bonds, or similar burden. 1. That the subdivision has been properly planned for possible solar energy system use within the subdivision or as it relates to adjacent property. (Refer to City Handbook on Solar Access). J. That the design of public improvements for the subdivision is compatible and consistent with the platting or approved preliminary plat on adjacent lands. K. That the subdivision is in compliance with those standards set forth in that certain document entitled "City of Eagan Water Quality Management Plan for the Gun Club Lake Watershed Management Organization" which document is properly approved and filed with the office of the City Clerk hereinafter referred to as the "Water Quality Management Plan". Said document and all of the notations, references and other /15-/ Planning Report - Basic Builders, Inc. (Finch Place) January 23, 2001 Page 3 information contained therein shall have the same force and effect as if fully set down herein and is hereby made a part of this Chapter by reference and incorporated herein as fully as if set forth herein at length. It shall be the responsibility of the City Clerk to maintain the Water Quality Management Plan and make the same available to the public." Variance: City Code Chapter 11, Section 11.40, Subdivision 3C states that the Council may grant a variance and impose conditions and safeguards only if: 1. The Council shall determine that the special conditions applying to the structures or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property and do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located, and that the granting of the application is necessary for the applicant. 2. The granting of the proposed variance will not be contrary to the intent of this Chapter and the Comprehensive Guide Plan. 3. That granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty. BACKGROUND/HISTORY The site consists of three parcels, two of which are privately owned, and one that the City acquired in 1995. At the time the City acquired the parcel, it was the City's intention that it would be combined with adjacent property at such time as it developed in the future. For this reason the city property is included with the development plans for the adjacent property. The developer has entered into an agreement with the City to purchase the parcel. EXISTING CONDITIONS The site is wooded and contains a pond in the northwest corner. There is an existing single- family home and a few outbuildings on the site. A significant part of northern portion of the property is covered by drainage easement over the existing pond and storm sewer. A driveway easement crosses the site and has served as access for the existing house as well as the adjacent lots to the east. /60 Plaiuiing Report - Basic Builders, Inc, (Finch Place) January 23, 2001 Page 4 SURROUNDING USES The following existing uses, zoning, and comprehensive guide plan designations surround the subject property: North - Residential (single- fami ly)/Hwy. 3; zoned R-1 (Single Family Residential); guided D-I (Single Family Residential, 0-3 units per acre) South - Vacant and occupied industrial; zoned I-1 (Limited Industrial); guided IND (Limited Industrial) East - Red Pine Elementary School; zoned P (Public); guided PF (Public Facilities) Residential (single-family); zoned A (Agricultural) and R-1; guided D-I West - Railroad/State Hwy. 3; Residential (single-family) across Hwy. 3 EVALUATION OF REOUEST Rezoning: The site is bounded on the west by railroad tracks and State Hwy. 3, industrial property (both vacant and developed sites) to the south, an elementary school to the southeast and single-family homes to the east. The proposed R-1 zoning designation is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Guide Plan which assigns a D-1, Single-Family Residential land use designation to this property, and the City's Draft Comprehensive Guide Plan, which assigns a LD, Low Density residential land use designation. Airport Noise Considerations - The site lies outside of the airport noise exposure zones established by the Metropolitan Council. Preliminary Subdivision: Density - Exempting the proposed public right-of-way and including credit for the existing pond area on the site as allowed by the City Code, the net density of the proposed development is 2.56 units per acre. Shoreland Zoning - The property is located within the Shoreland Overlay District of Fitz Lake, (west of Hwy. 3), which is classified as a General Development lake. The Shoreland Ordinance establishes standards for development which are to be applied in addition to the underlying or base land use zoning, in this case R-1 (Single-Family Residential). In the joint application of both base zoning and Shoreland zoning standards, the most restrictive regulations apply. The Shoreland zoning distinguishes between riparian and non-riparian lots; although several of the proposed lots front on a pond, none of these lots abuts Fitz Lake, the state-protected w'aterbody to which the Shoreland regulations apply, and therefore, the non-riparian Shoreland /6/ Planning Report - Basic Builders, Inc. (Finch Place) January 23, 2001 Page 5 zoning standards apply to all lots within this development. The R-1 and Shoreland zoning standards are summarized in the following table. The governing standard is shown in bold italics. Building Lot Lot Lot Width at Setbacks Height Coverage Size Width Shoreline max.) max. R-1 12,000 s .f. 85' N/A Front 30' 2 Y2 20% bldg. Side: stories coverage 10' house area 5' garage Rear 15' Shoreland Avg. Size 75' N/A Determined by 35' 25% 12,000 s.f. applicable zoning impervious district provisions surface The R-1 standards apply for minimum lot size, width and setbacks because they are more restrictive than the shoreland standards. Maximum building height will be governed by both standards, as will be the maximum allowable building and impervious lot coverage. Lots - Lots range from 12,298 sq. ft. to 84,910 sq. ft. All of the lots appear to satisfy the 85-foot minimum width at the required front building setback line. While it appears that all of the lots satisfy the 12,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size, Lots 3-10, Block 2 extend into the existing pond. Excluding the pond area, several of those lots are smaller in land area than the 12,000 square foot minimum, and two of those are less than 10,000 sq. ft. The size of these eight lots both including and excluding the existing pond/wetland area are as follows: Total Lot Area Area Excluding Compared to Lot # (S q. Ft. Wetland (S q. Ft. 12,000 s.f. min. Lot 3 23,082 17,445 +5,445 Lot 4 18,248 8,587 -3,413 Lot 5 18,824 7,082 -4,918 Lot 6 19,570 18,716 +6,716 Lot 7 15,171 11,353 -647 Lot 8 36,630 10,198 -1,802 Lot 9 31,890 11,824 -176 Lot 10 92,064 45,518 +33,518 Of particular concern are Lots 4, 5 and 8, Block 2, which are significantly smaller in land area than the 12,000 sq. ft. standard. Lots 4 and 5 in particular show a rather shallow lot depth, and as a result, grading of those lots is proposed within the wetland buffer area (i.e. within 30 feet) of the pond. Lots 7-9, Block 2 are also rather shallow in depth, and although a lesser front setback ~ A t/57 Planning Report - Basic Builders, Inc. (Finch Place) January 23, 2001 Page 6 is applied to the building because of the private street, these lots have very little rear yard area between the proposed structures and the drainage easement around the pond. The practical impacts of construction on these lots are discussed in other sections of this report. Setbacks - The R-1 zoning district requires a minimum front yard setback of 30 feet from a public street, and 20 feet from a private cul-de-sac. Minimum required side yard setbacks are ten (10) feet for a house and five (5) feet for a garage; the minimum required rear yard setback is 15 feet. Additionally. structures cannot be placed within any easement area. The required drainage and utility easements covering the pond is one constraint on Lots 4-10, Block 2. The applicant is showing a front yard setback of 25 feet for Lots 6-10, Block 2, which is acceptable for a private dead-end street. A 25-foot front yard setback is also shown for Lot 5, Block 2 because of the pond in the rear yard. However, Lot 5 is on a public street and therefore the required setback is 30 feet. Consequently, the applicant is requesting approval of a five-foot Variance to the required 30-foot front yard setback for Lot 5, Block 2. While the building footprints on the site plan are conceptual, all lots appear to satisfy the minimum 85-foot lot width standard and appear to have sufficient width to accommodate single- family homes within the required side yard setbacks. Of concern, however, is the depth of some of the lots, specifically those around the pond. Lots 6-10 are on a private street and consequently have a lesser front setback requirement. However, these lots and Lots 4-5, Block 2 have little rear yard area because of the pond. Additionally, the grading necessary to accommodate construction on these lots results in removal of trees and encroachment into the wetland buffer area. Grading - A majority of the existing site slopes north toward the existing wetland. A minimum of three feet of elevation difference should be provided between the high water level of ponds (proposed and existing) and the lowest entry elevation of the houses adjacent to ponds without an emergency overflow elevation. A minimum of two feet of elevation difference should be provided between the emergency overflow elevation of the ponds and the lowest entry elevations of the adjacent houses. The final grading plan should provide sufficient detail information to demonstrate that these standards are satisfied prior to final subdivision approval. Storm Drainage - Storm water runoff from the development will drain to two new water quality ponds before draining to the existing wetland along the north edge of the site, Pond LP-27 (as designated in the City Storm Water Management Plan - 1990). To accommodate Lot 9, Block 2, the existing storm sewer pipe outlet will need to be relocated. An outlet skimmer, in accordance with City engineering standards, should be constructed on the new outlet pipe from Pond LP-27. Utilities - The preliminary utility plan is acceptable. Sanitary sewer and water main are available from Red Pine Lane to the south for connection and extension by the development. Streets/ Access/ Circulation - Public street access for Lots 1-13, Block 1, and Lots 1-5, Block 2 is proposed via two cul-de-sacs extending north from Red Pine Lane. Access for Lots 6-10, /6.3 Planning Report - Basic Builders, Inc. (Finch Place) January 23, 2001 Page 7 Block 2 is proposed via a private street extending north from the end of the longer of the two public cul-de-sacs. This private street should be constructed with concrete curb and gutter. A homeowners association will be required for the joint maintenance of the private street. The association documents should be submitted to the City Attorney for review and approval prior to final subdivision. A Variance is included as part of the Preliminary Subdivision proposal for one of the cul-de-sacs to exceed the maximum length of 500 feet for a public cul-de-sac. The public portion of the northerly cul-de-sac is approximately 560 feet in length. Easements/ Permits/ Right-of-Way - The existing drainage & utility easement over the existing outlet pipe to be relocated from Pond LP-27 should be vacated at time of final subdivision for this development. The existing private road easement through the site, commonly known as Farm Road, must be terminated to the affected property owners and satisfactory evidence of the same must be submitted to the City Attorney prior to final subdivision for this development. The developer should be responsible for obtaining all necessary permits for temporary or permanent construction within the adjacent railroad right-of-way. Water Quality- This development site is located in the City's L-watershed, which is in the southeast corner of Eagan and which is most closely associated with Fitz Lake. Fitz Lake is a state-protected waterbody and is classified as Class II-Indirect Contact Recreation by the City's water quality management plan. The development proposes to meet the City's water quality requirement to treat stormwater runoff by directing it to two treatment basins to be constructed on the site. Requirements for volume and area of water quality treatment ponds are based on the impervious proportion of proposed developments (i.e., land covered by buildings, parking lots, driveways, and walks). Of the 12.6 acres of the site, 19 percent is proposed to be impervious. Therefore, a minimum wet-pond volume of 0.67 acre-feet covering an area of 0.29 acres would be needed to treat the stormwater generated by this development. As proposed, the grading plans provide slightly less than the required amount of volume (0.57 acre-feet), therefore, the final grading plans should be revised to satisfy the minimum pond volume requirement of 0.67 acre-feet. A cash dedication for water quality will be required for a portion of the site where the stormwater runoff does not go through either of the proposed treatment ponds, but drains directly to the existing pond. The amount is anticipated to be about $5,240; the exact amount will be determined at the time of final subdivision, and payable prior to release of the plat for recording. Erosion Control - In several areas of this development, the topography of the site requires proper installation and effective maintenance of erosion control practices. Such Erosion control measures shall be properly installed in accordance with City standards and effectively maintained ~~y Planning Report - Basic Builders, Inc. (Finch Place) January 23, 2001 Page 8 throughout the development process to prevent and minimize soil loss and impacts to down- gradient resources and water quality. Wetlands - The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) classifies the 2.5-acre pond located on the subject site as a protected public water wetland. Any proposed activities occurring below the ordinary high water level of the wetland are subject to review, and possibly permit, by the DNR. The waterbody is also classified as Class IV-Wildlife Habitat by the City's water quality management plan. Under the classification system of the Fish and Wildlife Service, the wetland is a Type 4. Type 4 wetlands are inland deep fresh marshes in which the soils are usually covered with six inches to three feet or more of water during the growing season. The wetland falls under state jurisdiction of the Public Waters Permit Program of the DNR and under federal jurisdiction of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act-administered by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Any proposals to drain, fill, or excavate within the boundary of this wetland must meet the provisions of these programs. As presented, this development is not proposed to impact the wetland directly by draining, filling, or excavating. However, any changes to the plans that may result in such activity will be subject to regulatory review and permitting as outlined above. It is the City's policy to require that an undisturbed and unmaintained natural buffer be maintained within 30 feet of any wetland. While no draining, filling or excavation of the wetland itself is proposed, some disturbance to this 30-foot buffer area around the wetland is proposed. To meet its water quality requirement to treat stormwater runoff from the site, disturbance of the 30-foot buffer area of the wetland on Lot 10 is proposed; grading of backyards for seven of the proposed homes also would disturb some of the 30-foot wetland buffer. From a water quality perspective, City staff has concerns about the encroachment and disturbance of the wetland buffer by grading of backyards. With the exception of the proposed stormwater treatment pond, a 30-foot undisturbed buffer should be maintained around the wetland before, during and after construction. If this is not possible and the development plans are approved as presented, the developer should submit a plan to reestablish disturbed buffer areas into native wetland vegetation. In addition, staff suggests that the APC and City Council consider requiring the developer to institute wetland buffer protection zones as covenants or deed restrictions with those lots adjacent to the wetland. Tree Preservation - A tree inventory submitted with this application indicates that there are four- hundred twenty-seven (427) significant trees on site. The majority are boxelder (29%), quaking aspen (28%), and oak (15%), with the balance comprised of ash, cottonwood, black cherry, elm, birch, and willow. The trees range in diameter from six to 28 inches, with one willow measuring 84 inches. Planning Report - Basic Builders, Inc. (Finch Place) January 23, 2001 Page 9 The development, as proposed, will result in the removal of two-hundred seventy (270) significant trees, which is 63.2% of the total. According to the City of Eagan Tree Preservation Ordinance, allowable tree removal for this type of development proposal (single-phase, multiple- lot, single-family residential) is set at 40% of the total significant trees, which translates to 171 trees in this case. With removal greater than the allowable amount, tree mitigation will be required for the proposed development. The required tree mitigation calculates to 113 Category A trees, or 226 Category B trees, or 452 Category C trees, or an equivalent combination thereof. The applicant has submitted a Tree Mitigation Plan that shows the installation of 112 Category A trees. A revised Tree Mitigation Plan will need to be submitted that shows complete mitigation of 113 Category A trees. The Tree Mitigation Plan utilizes 5 species of overstory deciduous trees and two species of conifers. Tree placement is spread throughout the site, with concentrations along Red Pine Lane and adjacent to the railroad right-of-way in Block 1. Other areas of planting concentration are between Lots 6, 7 and 8, Block 1, and Lots 4, 5 and 6, Block 2. According to the City of Eagan Tree Preservation Ordinance, the City may permit removal of significant vegetation in excess of allowable limits "when practical difficulties or practical hardships" exist. While the applicant has provided a tree mitigation plan that shows tree replacement in an amount consistent with ordinance requirements, the applicant has not provided information to demonstrate that a practical difficulty or hardship exists that justifies an exception from strict compliance with ordinance requirements for allowable removal. The Advisory Parks and Recreation Commission recommended denial of the proposed development in part because of insufficient basis for the excess tree removal, and in part because of proposed grading encroachments within the 30-foot wetland buffer area. The Advisory Planning Commission and City Council will need to determine whether an exception to exceed the allowable tree removal limit of 40% is acceptable. If not, the developer should revise the plans so that tree removal does not exceed the allowable 40%. If so, then the development will be subject to tree replacement requirements as outlined above. The proposed conditions of preliminary subdivision approval present alternative conditions numbers 15a and 15b for the APC's consideration on this matter. Parks and Recreation - A cash dedication for parks and trails will be required prior to recording of the final plat at the rate then in effect. SUMMARY/CONCLUSION Basic Builders, Inc. is requesting approval of a Preliminary Subdivision (Finch Place) to allow the creation of a 23-lot single-family subdivision. The proposed subdivision overlays 12.59 acres located north of Red Pine Lane and east of Hwy. 3 in the E '/2 of Section 36. In conjunction with the requested preliminary subdivision, the applicant is also requesting a Rezoning of the property from an A, Agriculture to an R-1, Single-Family Residential zoning designation. The request /6~ Planning Report - Basic Builders, Inc. (Finch Place) January 23, 2001 Page 10 also includes Variances to exceed the maximum cul-de-sac length of 500 feet, and to allow a 25- foot front yard setback from a public street for Lot 5, Block 2. With a net density of 2.56 units per acre, the proposed single-family development is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan. However, staff has some concerns about the proposed development's impact on the natural resources of the site. While the ordinance accounts for some credit for greater density with the presence of natural ponding areas on a development site, performance standards for preservation still apply. Staff has outlined concerns about the proposed removal of significant trees in excess of allowable limits and grading within the 30-foot wetland buffer area for seven of the eight lots around the pond. Coincident with the issues of preservation are the three lots in Block 2 that contain significantly less than 12,000 square feet in land area, and the limited building and yard space those lots afford. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED A. To recommend approval of a Rezoning from an A, Agriculture to an R-1, Single-Family Residential zoning designation, of 12.59 acres of land located north of Red Pine Lane and east of Hwy. 3 in the E'/2 of Section 36. B. To recommend approval of a Preliminary Subdivision (Finch Place), with a Variance for a cul-de-sac in excess of 500' in length, to create 23 single-family lots on 12.59 acres of land located north of Red Pine Lane and east of Hwy. 3 in the E%z of Section 36. If approved, the following conditions should apply: 1. The developer shall comply with these standards conditions of plat approval as adopted by Council on February 3, 1993: Al, B1, B2, B3, B4, Cl, C2, C3, D1, and E1 2. The property shall be platted. 3. The R-1 zoning standards apply to all lots within this development. ,In addition, all lots shall comply with the City's Shoreland Zoning Ordinance with impervious surface coverage not exceeding 25% of the lot area. Grading 4. A minimum of three (3) feet of elevation difference shall be provided between the high water level of the ponds and the lowest entry elevation of the houses adjacent to ponds without an emergency overflow elevation. A minimum of two (2) feet of elevation difference shall be provided between the emergency overflow elevation of the ponds and the lowest entry elevations of the adjacent houses. The final grading plan shall provide sufficient detail information to demonstrate that these standards are satisfied prior to final subdivision approval. /6~ Planning Report - Basic Builders, Inc. (Finch Place) January 23, 2001 Page 11 Stone Drainage 5. The existing storm sewer pipe outlet shall be relocated to accommodate construction on Lot 9, Block 2. An outlet skimmer, in accordance with City engineering standards, shall be constructed on the new outlet pipe from Pond LP-27. Streets/Access/Circulation 6. The private street shall be constructed with concrete curb and gutter. 7. A homeowners association is required for the joint maintenance of the private street. The developer shall submit the association documents to the City Attorney for revieW and approval prior to final subdivision for this development. Easements/Permits Rights-of-Wav 8. The existing drainage & utility easement over the existing outlet pipe from Pond LP-27 shall be vacated at time of final subdivision for this development. 9. The existing private street easement through the site, commonly known as Farm Road, shall be terminated to the affected property owners and satisfactory evidence of the same shall be provided to the City Attorney. 10. The developer shall be responsible for obtaining all necessary permits for temporary or permanent construction within the adjacent railroad right-of-way. Water Quality 11. This development shall meet the City's water quality requirements by creating stormwater treatment capacity through a minimum wet-pond volume of 0:67 acre-feet covering an area of 0.29 acres. The stormwater treatment pond should be constructed according to NURP standards with a maximum depth of six (6) feet, a 10:1 aquatic bench, and an outlet skimmer according to City design standards. 12. The final grading and drainage plan shall be revised to satisfy the minimum pond volume requirement of 0.67 acre-feet. 13. A cash water quality dedication will be required for a portion of the site where the stormwater runoff is not treated and drains directly to the existing pond. The amount of cash dedication is anticipated to be about $5,240; the exact amount will be determined at the time of final subdivision, and payable prior to release of the plat for recording. Planning Report - Basic Builders, Inc. (Finch Place) January 23, 2001 Page 12 Erosion Control 14. Erosion control practices should be properly installed and effectively maintained throughout the development process to prevent and minimize soil loss and negative impacts to down-gradient resources and water quality. Wetlands 15a. With the exception of the area adjacent to the constructed stormwater treatment pond, a minimum 30-foot wide buffer of natural, undisturbed vegetation adjacent to the boundary of the wetland shall be maintained before, during, and after construction. OR 15b. The developer shall reestablish disturbed buffer areas into native wetland vegetation and institute wetland buffer protection zones as covenants or deed restrictions with lots adjacent to the wetland. The plan for restoration of the disturbed buffer areas shall be submitted at the time of final subdivision approval for review and approval by City Staff. Tree Preservation 16. Tree Protective measures (i.e. orange colored silt fence or four-foot polyethylene laminate safety netting) shall be installed at the Drip Line or at the perimeter of the Critical Root Zone, whichever is greater, of significant trees/woodlands to be preserved. Where this is not possible, alternative tree preservation measures acceptable to the City Forester shall be employed. 17. The applicant shall contact the City Forestry Division and schedule a pre-construction site inspection at least five days prior to the issuance of the grading permit to ensure compliance with the approved Tree Preservation Plan and placement of the Tree Protection Fencing. 18. The applicant shall submit a revised tree mitigation plan indicating complete mitigation fulfillment through the installation of 113 Category A trees. Parks and Recreation 19. The development shall be subject to a cash park and trail dedication, payable at the time of final plat at the rate then in effect. C. To recommend approval of a five-foot front yard setback Variance for Lot 5, Block 2, to allow a 25-foot front yard setback from a public street. STANDARD CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL A. Financial Obligations 1. This development shall accept its additional financial obligations as defined in the staffs report in accordance with the final plat dimensions and the rates in effect at the time of final plat approval. B. Easements and Rights-of-Way 1. This development shall dedicate 10-foot drainage and utility easements centered over all lot lines and, in addition, where necessary to accommodate existing or proposed utilities for drainage ways within the plat. The development shall dedicate easements of sufficient width and location as determined necessary by engineering standards. 2. This development shall dedicate, provide, or financially guarantee the acquisition costs of drainage, ponding, and utility easements in addition to public street rights-of-way as required by the alignment, depth, and storage capacity of all required public utilities and streets located beyond the boundaries of this plat as necessary to service or accommodate this development. 3. This development shall dedicate all public right-of-way and temporary slope easements for ultimate development of adjacent roadways as required by the appropriate jurisdictional agency. 4. This development shall dedicate adequate drainage and ponding easements to incorporate the required high water elevation plus three (3) feet as necessitated by storm water storage volume requirements. C. Plans and Specifications 1. All public and private streets, drainage systems and utilities necessary to provide service to this development shall be designed and certified by a registered professional engineer in accordance with City adopted codes, engineering standards, guidelines and policies prior to application for final plat approval. 2. A detailed grading, drainage, erosion, and sediment control plan must be prepared in accordance with current City standards prior to final plat approval. 3. This development shall ensure that all dead-end public streets shall have a cul-de-sac constructed in accordance with City engineering standards. / ~D 4. A separate detailed landscape plan shall be submitted overlaid on the proposed grading and utility plan. The financial guarantee for such plan shall be included in the Development Contract and shall not be released until one year after the date of City certified compliance. D. Public Improvements 1. If any improvements are to be installed under a City contract, the appropriate project must be approved by Council action prior to final plat approval. E. Permits 1. This development shall be responsible for the acquisition of all regulatory agency permits required by the affected agency prior to final plat approval. F. Parks and Trails Dedication 1. This development shall fulfill its park and trail dedication requirements as recommended by the Advisory Parks, Recreation and Natural Resource Commission and approved by Council action. G. Water Quality Dedication 1. This development shall be responsible for providing a cash dedication, ponding, or a combination thereof in accordance with the criteria identified in the City's Water Quality Management Plan, as recommended by the Advisory Parks, Recreation and Natural Resource Commission and approved by Council action. H. Other 1. All subdivision, zoning and other ordinances affecting this development shall be adhered to, unless specifically granted a variance by Council action. Advisory Planning Commission City Council Approved: August 25, 1987 September 15, 1987 Revised: July 10. 1990 Revised: February 2, 1993 LTS45 STANDARD.CON 191 FINANCIAL OBLIGATION Finch Place There are pay-off balances of special assessments totaling $0 on the parcels proposed for platting. The pay-off balance will be allocated to the lots created by the plat. At this time, there are pending assessments in the amount of $94,000 on the parcel proposed for platting. This pending assessment is related to the settlement of an assessment agreement. The terms -of the agreement call for these assessments to be activated at $94,000 upon subdivision of the property or at the amount equal to connection charges at time of subdivision. The connection charge amount is computed below. This estimated financial obligation is subject to change based upon the areas, dimensions and land uses contained in the final plat. Based upon the study of the financial obligations collected in the past and the uses proposed for the property, the following charges are proposed. The charges are computed using the City's existing fee schedule and for the connection and availability of the City's utility system. The charges will be computed using the rates in effect at time of connection or subdivision. IMPROVEMENT USE RATE QUANTITY AMOUNT Water & Sanitary Sewer Trunk S.F. $1,865/Lot 17 Lots $31,705 Utility Lateral S.F. $70.90/F.F. 905.77 F.F. 64,219 Storm Sewer Trunk S.F. $.088/Sq. Ft. 270,072 Sq. Ft. 23,766 TOTAL $119,690 Eagan Boundary Location Map Street Cet.rlln. Parcel Area Building Footprint a 'Ab r LK S 11 • •s~a .0 1 ♦ ~ ~t'~f ap~ 1 4 S ; 1A y ~ r fo 1. t i I tREW IC Subject Site s t q - i ~ 1000 0 1000 2000 Feet Development/Developer. Finch Place Application: Rezoning and Preliminary Subdivision Case No.: 36-IM-D-12-00 and 36-PS-18-12-00 Ptepaed using ER9 kzM@w 11. Pacts Ines rr■p dola provided N Carty laid Su 4ey Depamset and is wrart as of Nmwrbw 2DX THIS MAP 13 INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY 15 E *City of Eagan M I N N E S O T A The City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this Information and are S C.-"y 0...1.1,-1 D.~.rrnf.nt not responsible for errors or omissions. Current Zoning and Comprehensive Guide Plan Finch Place Land Use Map Case No. 36-RZ-13-12-00 and 36-PS-18-12-00 Zoning Map a` C o Location A R- -1 Current Zoning: , 1 A A A C Agriculture R-1 ggt GB PF A 8 '-1 R-1 GB eoe • eoo tzoo F..t A Comprehensive Guide Plan II L e Land Use Map o Location D-1I ►I Current Land Use Designation: D-I Single Family Residential (0-3 units/acre) D-I s n g PF IND IND see a see +t•• rwt I I P. .l ku. m. „e.no„ P ky D.kot. county lane avrey Depmt-m W lloo. N Momutlen ma~ntalned h city awr. City of Eagan N' E 2 , THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY Community Development Department The City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantaa the accuracy of this Information. 5 1 r : .pM c r ~ ;.p- ~ `[}L~~Ftrjr[#E~l Eft{j'j'[~~rii r IL ~;J ~iE~~x i~;r' ~;~i~l'~~"ri~`~I }~1F~~FFjI1 / 1~<<<<~}~~ ill ti 111111,11 'Llf ii ri i . Il i i g V s S' ~ O~ N q !R' W i sk / _ H 1 i R% 14 11 41- rn ' OC9 ~ +R v / 2J y 4pOY q wt y.f~ f {~pJ O y J - / '-a % ~ r Y / ~ $ F\ v r, +cF y>, ~,~.y~ E X C E P T 1 o N a a PRELIM. PLAT III I it . i i I V j T ; 1 % i 10 / s'D - - 0 / ~J - - - - j K ,1 SITE PLAN MIX 27 ■ /r -mss ~ i. ~ i ~.I, / • / .~I r~ ~i -Y - / Gyp ci, > oS. _ lid; .0 i r t w 1 I ~ ~ In ~ ?tt 'R flit o~ E~~~ ~ e i a a~ e a a.~ CC ~ r I W 1 I r ~ 1 i 0 W • !n r NVId,A.LIII,Lfl 0 " I 93 9.9 \ 1 21W 1.9•5.C • \ / 8.951 / R 07 1-931-5 = R. 7. x: 0 0 R 9 / ` W O C , ■ Z 9210 < 1 / ~ R-917.5 / -934.5 • / R.937.5 OY 23 0.937.4 / Z SERER / ` 1.925.19 / d R.9Y -923A / 9.937.5 V r 1.97rS.o 1.9253 .22- R- O (V / 9.93].0 a t / o~R a~ 1-92•.0 , ; / co 0 .92/s Q a = .92 y~ o • o 9t.9a! lid Ln D / Ln / J E. m l r cn3 it u .7d. / 0 ♦ G 1'11 ♦ tIZ / W 1 1~ 4 S RpBERi TRNL (TN 3j % ~r'^ `\\O. YT's _ \ '\•~,a" ' s~4~~•~9'~ ~~Q~ k¢~' % 00. ,so "o fL~'C S A w~ ,J ~Y t e r NN t P sA i m 612 666 865! FROM CZAJA Oci,eda Co PHONE NO. : 612 686 8651 Jan. 17 2001 02:5-,PM Pc Tim and Allyson Czaja 4709 Stratford Lane Eagan, MN 55123 January 16, 2001 Community Development Department RE: FINCH PLACE CASE-9. 36-PS-18-12 C/O Pam Duziak 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, NvN 55122 To Whore It May Concern: We would like to express our opposition to the private drive and lots 6 through 10 of the proposed finch Place. We are concerned that the development of this area will affect many of the beautiful trees, wildlife, and the sound buffer between our neighborhood and trunk highway 3/railroad traffic. In other words, these lots will seriously affect most of the reasons we decided to build on this lot in Eagan. It appears that these five lots are forced into a small area and are eery close to the railroad that has recently had heavier (three to four trains per day) use. We are not opposed to the single family residential rezoning for the other lots of the Finch Place development, and certainly would encourage this zoning designation over multi-family zoning. Thmik you for your consideration of our concerns. Sincerely, Tim and Allyson Czaja January 17, 2001 Community Development Department City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Attn: Pam Dudziak RE: Development Name of Finch Place Case #36-PS-18-12-00 Dear Pam: I am writing requarding the request of rezoning the above 12.6 acres from agriculture to single family, a preliminary subdivision to create 23 lots, and a variance to exceed the maximum cul-de- sac length of 500 feet. I will not be able to attend the public hearing on January 23, 2001, since I will be out of town with other neighbors on a school function, so I am sending a letter to be distributed at the meeting. I, along with my neighbors, have lived in Weston Hills Second Addition for seven years. When we built these homes the development was marketed as "accentuated by ponded wild life preserves and backing up to open land views". We purchased Lot 8, Block 1, since the lot was part of a "Wildlife Preserve and Pond". We paid premium price for this lot and have loved it ever since we moved in. There are currently about seven homes that border the pond. The Location Map provided with the Public Hearing Notice does not reflect the pond within the subject site area, but with the preliminary subdivision, there will be eight additional homes bordering the pond. My greatest concern is the significant tree loss. I am not totally against the proposed subdivision, but I am against the private drive easement off the cul-de-sac, allowing for five additional homes (lots 6-10 on the attached site plan) to be placed along the westerly side of the pond, running along Highway 3 and the railroad track. If these homes and the private drive easement are allowed, there will be significant tree loss, which right now is our sound buffer for the nice of the trains on the railroad track and the vehicles on Highway 3. These woods are also full of wildlife, our wildlife preserve area. I met with you, Pam, last week and reviewed the plans on this preliminary subdivision. You were the one that indicated that there would be significant tree loss. You stated that a normal development is allowed a 40% significant tree loss, but this developement has over a 60% significant tree loss! (To be exact, it's over 63%!) You did state that the builder/developer, Basic Builders, Inc., will be responsible for replacing the difference. According to the plan there are 427 total number of significant trees, allowing 171 of these (40%) to be removed, but there are 270 actual significant trees to be removed, thus a total number of 99 trees that need to be "mitigated". The plan states mitigated, not replaced. According to the dictionary, mitigated means "to cause to become less harsh or hostile". So does this actually mean replacement? I spoke to the developer/builder, Ed McMenomy of Basic Builders, Inc. last week. He stated that this is his first development in Eagan, so he said he'd follow Eagan code as to the replacement of new trees, probably with a 2" diameter, by 8'-10' tall, the "normal" new construction size tree. I'm sure that 100% of these 99 trees that are being removed are currently bigger than that size,since they've had years of growth. I've been informed that every new development is to have a city park area. The three neighborhoods in this area, Weston Hills, Pines Edge, and Pine Tree are currently lacking a city park area. The developer needs to leave the area of Lots 6-10 along the westerly side of the pond as natural "city park" land. The developer should not be allowed to buy this back from the city for further development. I am not asking for playground equipment, or anything, just leave the natual habitat of the current land for the wildlife. Lots #6-10 that are proposed along the private drive easement are very close to the railroad track and highway, causing a safety issue for any future homeowners. Also, have you taken into consideration the flooding issue, as what happened this past July 2000? Our portion of land next to the pond was under water after the water rose considerably. At least this was temporary, and the water has since gone back down to "normal", but with the location of the proposed homes next to the pond, this could definitely cause a flooding problem for the lots bordering close to the pond. I am hoping that you will take these issues into consideration when you make your decision on the preliminary subdivision request from Basic Builders, Inc. and not allow the private drive easement for access to Lots 6-10. The remainder of the proposed homes could possibly be approved as shown on the site plan, but not all 23 homes. S' UI ~ a Denis e Sc4751 Bristol Blvd Eagan, MN 55123 /e.3 /I. or Basic Builders, Inc. 14450 South Robert Trail • Rosemcunt. MN 55068 612 423-31 14 • Fax 312; 423-7202 February 27, 2001 Mayor Patricia E. Awada, City Council Members: Paul Bakken, Peggy A. Carlson, Meg Tilley and Cyndee Fields City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 RE: Finch Place - Preliminary Subdivision Approval Dear Mayor and City Council Members: I am the Vice-President and Director of Development of Basic Builders, Inc., the applicant for Finch Place Preliminary Subdivision Approval. This letter is intended to address issues raised by the Advisory Planning Commission (APC) at its regular meeting on January 23, 2001, comments received at the public hearing on January 23, 2001, and concerns raised in the planning report by city staff dated January 18, 2001. On February 12, 2001, we met with city staff (planning, engineering, forestry, and water resources personnel) to address issues which had been raised. We have revised our plat to accommodate most, if not all, of staff's concerns. We respectfully request you consider the following when considering our Preliminary Subdivision application at the March 6, 2001 City Council meeting. The Finch Place Preliminary Subdivision application encompasses three (3) parcels of land, two of which are owned by Eugene and Deborah Finch, totalling approximately 7.5 acres. The third parcel is owned by the City of Eagan and consists of approximately 5 acres, 3.3 acres of which is comprised of wetlands and drainage and utility easements in favor of the City of Eagan. All parcels are designated for D-I, Single Family Residential uses under the City of Eagan's Comprehensive Guide Plan. The refusal of the APC to approve the rezoning of the parcels for single family residential uses is contrary to Eagan's Comprehensive Guide Plan. The Finch Place Subdivision, which complies with all of the City of Eagan's residential ordinances except for two small variances, was also denied largely, I believe, for land use reasons. /8 February 27, 2001 Page Two The history of this subdivision application is significant. Before the Finch's agreed to sell their property, they and their attorney, John Bannigan, met with Eagan City staff to ascertain the City's interest and willingness to sell its property for a joint residential development with the Finch property. City staff represented that the Eagan parcel would be available for development with the Finch parcel and recommended that the purchaser of the Finch parcel contact the City directly to negotiate terms and conditions for the purchase of the Eagan parcel. In October 2000, we signed a purchase agreement with the Finch's for their property contingent upon negotiating an agreement with the City of Eagan for the Eagan parcel. I immediately began negotiations with Tom Colbert, Director of Public Works, and City Attorney, Robert B. Bauer, for the purchase of the Eagan parcel. Mr. Colbert indicated that when the City initially purchased the Eagan parcel its intentions were to keep the necessary easements and combine the remaining land with the Finch parcel to form one contiguous residential development as contemplated in Eagan's Comprehensive Guide Plan. After several draft purchase agreements, the City and Basic Builders agreed on the terms of a purchase agreement subject to approval by the City Council. On November 21, 2000 the City Council approved the purchase agreement. Subsequent to your approval of the purchase agreement, we employed Pioneer Engineering to prepare a preliminary subdivision design for the Finch and Eagan parcels and filed a residential development application with the City of Eagan. At the public hearing held by the APC on January 23, 2001, only seven property owners expressed concerns about our proposed subdivision. A map identifying the location of the property owned by those expressing concerns and their property's relation to our subdivision is attached hereto. No abutting landowners home is located within one-hundred yards of a home in Finch Place. Their articulated concerns related primarily to tree, wildlife, and privacy issues. Notwithstanding the undisturbed buffer area provided for in our plat, several local residents preferred to keep the whole area proposed for Lots 7-10, Block 2 (Lots 5-9, Block 2 in our revised plat), as an undisturbed buffer area for their homes. Several even suggested it be kept as a park. I was surprised and disturbed that some of the planning commissioners endorsed the position that Lots 5-9, Block 2, should remain undeveloped and used for park purposes. Despite our willingness to address all of city staff's concerns, the fact that the property is guided for single family residential uses, and the fact that our subdivision meets all applicable city ordinances (except the two variances requested), our preliminary subdivision approval request was denied. 11-5000*, February 27, 2001 Page Three We believe our development will enhance the Red Pine Lane corridor and be an asset to the City of Eagan and the community at large. Basic Builders, Inc. intends not only to develop the property, but also to build the homes located in the development, as we did in our Hawkin's Pond Subdivision (sixty-eight homes) located in Rosemount. As are the abutting neighbors who testified at the public hearing, we are concerned with the overall environment, aesthetics, appearance, and liveability of our Finch Place development. We believe we have addressed all of city staff's concerns with our proposed development. Attached hereto is a memorandum addressing in detail specific issues raised at the planning commission meeting. These issues have virtually all been resolved through the revision of our plat. If you have any questions or concerns with respect to our development, please do not hesitate to contact me. It is our desire to address and respond to any issues you may have. We thank you for your review and consideration of our preliminary subdivision approval request. We look forward to working with the City of Eagan to make Finch Place a first-class development and a reality. Respectfully Submitted, Ed McMenomy 9 Vice-President, Basic Builders, Inc. SPECIFIC ISSUE MEMORANDUM LOT SIZE AND SETBACK: Staff noted two issues with respect to lot design. First, two lots did not satisfy the 12,000 square foot lot size ordinance requirement. All lots in our revised plat now meet- -size/area ordinance requirements. Second, staff noted that several of the lots have small rearyard areas. The lots with small rearyard areas all abut upon wetland areas, a characteristic which is viewed by many potential residents in today's market as a very desirable amenity, preferred to large, open rearyards. These few lots, with wetlands comprising part of the backyards, are certainly more attractive and desirable than lots approved in the Oak Bluff Subdivision (small rearyards directly abutting Diffley Road) and Southern Lakes West Subdivision (small rearyards directly abutting railroad right -of -way). Nevertheless, to address staff's concerns, in our revised plat, we increased the rear yard area for Lots 5-9, Block 2 by: 1) decreasing our front yard setback from 25 feet to 20 feet for Lots 5-9, Block 2; 2) decreasing the width of the private street from 24 feet to 20 feet; and 3) eliminating one lot from our plat. These adjustments meet the R-1 zoning requirements for setbacks and private street width. WETLANDS: With respect to wetland issues, we are most certainly willing to comply with Item 15b of staff's recommended conditions for preliminary plat approval which reads: "The developer shall re- establish disturbed buffer area into native wetland vegetation and institute wetland buffer protection zones as covenants or deed restrictions with lots adjacent to the wetland." In addition, by eliminating one lot and implementing the reduced setback and road width on the private street in our revised plat, we were able to significantly reduce any encroachment into the 30-foot wetland buffer area. Furthermore, we purposefully left the north end of Lot 9 Block 2, undisturbed in an effort to mitigate the area we need to impact in the 30 foot wetland buffer area. TREE PRESERVATION: With our revised plat and our new tree inventory, we are able to significantly reduce our development's impact on existing trees. Our initial plat resulted in the removal of 270 significant trees, which was 63.201 of the trees on the site. Our revised plat results in the removal of 182 trees, which is 420 of the trees on the site. Our tree mitigation plan provides for planting 16 new "Category All trees. The following practical difficulties and hardships exist on the site, which warrant favorable consideration of our tree mitigation plan: 1) When Eagan built Red Pine Lane it completed a major excavation that left the new road approximately 14 feet /9? belcw the original topography of the property (See Memorandum Exhibit A). This causes extensive grading on cur site in order to match the grade of Red Pine Lane, which in turn causes the removal of several trees. 2) Similar grading issues exist along the railroad right-o-- way, necessitating the removal of additional trees. Eagan experienced this same difficulty when it installed its drainage and utility easements along the railroad right-of-way (See Memorandum Exhibit B). 3) The majority of trees to be removed by our development consist of boxelder trees that are growing up around outbuildings, the horse corral, and in the ditches of the private roadway easement (See Memorandum Exhibit C). Furthermore, several boxelder trees were knocked down as a result of the straigtline wind storm two years ago (See Memorandum Exhibit D). Our tree mitigation and development plan has the following benefits. First and most importantly, and although the city tree ordinance categorizes boxelder trees as significant, our tree mitigation and development plan provides for the replacement of the removed boxelder trees with 16 "Category All trees, generally recognized as a much higher quality tree than a boxelder. Secondly, in order to mitigate for tree loss and provide a large buffer for property owners to the north, our development plan purposely leaves undisturbed, wooded land area on the north end of Lot 9, Block 2. VARIANCES. We are requesting variances (i) to exceed the maximum cul-de-sac length of 500 feet by 30 feet and (ii) to allow a 25 foot front yard setback instead of a 30 foot front yard setback from a public street for Lot 4, Block 2. No access is available from State Highway #3 because of the railroad to the west and Weston Hills Subdivision to the north. Therefore, the only access to this site is from Red Pine Lane, necessitating the small 30 foot cul-de-sac variance. Cul-de-sac length variances of much greater lengths have been approved in the past for other developments within the city, including Cherrywood Knoll, Majestic Oaks, and Weston Hills Subdivisions. The 5 foot variance for front yard setback for Lot 4, Block 2, allows us to minimize grading and tree loss on this lot and to address the wetland issue discussed in "Lot Size and Setback" above. This variance will still provide for sufficient depth for vehicle parking on the driveway. Nine variances of equal or greater deviation from setback requirements were approved for similar reasons (grading and tree preservation) in the Cherrywood Knoll Subdivision. / 04 'vtao identifyinq the location of the property owned by those expressinq concerns and their oronerty's relation to our subdivision. WESTON HILLS i i ; i , 473 1r 15101, i / 4745 - 4751 4757 4709 \ \ 713 a- POND - - - - - - / F- - j - a. 5 543 ~ I a / Red Pine Lane El El / I 1 I i J I I EXHIBIT "A" e ~I 4 r~ L . Mos. f~li h N MEM, ~O EXHIBIT "A" rrL..~v J si 1 / 9/ EXHIBIT "B" f c _ a i n~ . 1• h'42 ~ a 44- 1 p'er' - i~ _ ! LIHIHX3 EXHIBIT "C" s. t r 4 ~j t 1 j l _ i 4. I 1 EXHIBIT "D" i ROW, N March 1, 2001 Eagan City Council, Eagan City Hall 3830 Pilot Knob Road, Eagan, MN 55122 Dear Mayor and Council Members, I am writing to you to provide you with more information about the Finch Place Development that will be brought before the council next Tuesday as well as provide you with some of the history with this piece of property. The City of Eagan became involved with this parcel of land in spring 1994 through a condemnation process. Approximately 2 acres was taken from us to build Redpine Lane, the necessary access to Redpine School. Although we were not in favor of the eminent domain action I believe my husband and I worked in good faith with the city as best we could. We allowed the city early access to the land so the school and road project could be completed on time. Many meetings took place at this time with Tom Colbert, Peg Reichert, Stan Sutter, Annette Marguerite, Mr. Bauer and of course our lawyer, Mr. Bannigan. There were many things that had to be worked out between the two parties. Money and assessments, of course, were issues which forced us into a long court trial. This was an extremely difficult and stressful time for our entire family. The final assessments were graciously postponed or delayed by the city council until the time the land would be divided up for development. The city had made a commitment to develop the city owned 5 acre parcel north of the Finch property at the same time development was to take place on this property. The time has come for this development. We have had many offers from various developers but decided to work with Basic Builders Inc. We have seen their quality developments elsewhere and we appreciate the positive and sincere manner in which they work. I am convinced they will build a superior development that fits well with the existing community and meets all city requirements. 1946 There was some opposition for this development expressed at the City Planning Meeting on January 23 from some of the residents around the pond. Although I'm sure they were very sincere with their statements, there were no complaints that were justified. They would all love to see the city property left as is. Who wouldn't enjoy a private wooded park unavailable to others, at city expense. I had similar feelings when the Weston Hills Project began. Ultimately the land owner has the right to develop and the Council has the responsibility to insure they do a quality job. We have come full circle and are at the place where we are ready to move on and let the land be developed according to Eagan's Comprehensive Guide Plan. I would request that you carefully consider and approve the Finch Place Development Proposal. If you have any other questions or concerns about the project or any of the history between the City Council and the Finches please call me as I would love to talk with you about it. Thank you for your time and consideration. I'll see you at the meeting! Sincerely, Debbie Finch 4790 So. Robert Trail Eagan, MN 55123 day phone 952-885-7800 home phone 651-681-1505 cell phone 651-246-1666 Agenda Information Memo March 6, 2001 Eagan City Council Meeting C. ORCHARD HEIGHTS 2,D ADDITION (INVER GROVE HEIGHTS) REVIEW DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve development plans for Orchard Heights 2nd Addition (Inver Grove Heights) under terms of the Joint Powers Agreement. FACTS: • Orchard Heights 2nd Addition is a development proposal within Inver Grove Heights incorporating 19 acres of property adjacent to the Eagan/ Inver Grove Heights border, between Highway 55 and 77`n Street. Orchard Heights 2nd Addition received preliminary subdivision approval from the Inver Grove Heights City Council in October, 2000. During the processing of the proposal by Inver Grove Heights. residents in Eagan were notified and provided an opportunity to comment. One letter of objection was submitted from an Eagan resident. • Article 13.1 "Development Plans" of the Joint Powers Agreement entered into by the cities of Eagan and Inver Grove Heights in 1997 states that the extension of sanitary sewer and water services to Inver Grove Heights under the JPA is conditioned upon Eagan's approval of development plans for the property. • On November 6, 2000, the Eagan City Council reviewed the Orchard Heights 2nd Addition development plans in accordance with the terms of the Joint Powers Agreement (JPA). Under this review authority, the Eagan City Council indicated concern over the storm drainage from the site and the relatively small lot sizes proposed with the development. • The developer has submitted revised development plans and information to Eagan City staff that address the concerns raised by the City Council. The revised plans indicate storm water ponding to control runoff from the development to less than pre- development rates. Also. the developer has indicated that previously submitted (with the November 6, 2000 review) information regarding the size of the adjacent existing lots within Eagan along Black Oak Drive was incomplete. The developer has further calculated that the adjacent average lot size within Eagan is 13,676 square feet while the average size of the lots proposed with the Orchard Heights 2"d Addition is 19.021 square feet. • Eagan Engineering staff has reviewed the revised preliminary plans for this proposal and find them to be consistent with Eagan's current Comprehensive Utility Plans as well as the intent of the Joint Powers Agreement. ATTACHMENTS- • Location Map, page • Orchard Heights 2"d Add. Development Plans, page ~QQ HE U) L CIO ~ i ' > NO SCALE W 2 2-28-01 Chapel Ln. Gti ~y ss >>t Street Cu c Cu 2' Q Yankee Doodle Road Orchard Heights 2nd Add. City of Eagan Location Map 1~9 B L O C K 1 I I'L 3 2~J , Z~71J I i i r \ 10 / I 15 i I 3 O ~ 11 L__ _ I I ~ - C7 0I 1 2 N 0 1 12 I mI m ji I L~ 8 } J r I '3 i m i 1 i S I 6 I IE h El - -i I I -1 \ti ~ , m 1 s I ZSvo 3 L-L El r~ I ,o ~ Z~ 3 I I X11 ~ 1 'mss El 13-7003 I I 2 I ,.,~~1~ ( s I 1 ~ I y 2,q I I i 6q I B L O C K 4 I I I NORTH I I ~ r X00 Agenda Information Memo March 6, 2001 Eagan City Council Meeting D. REVISION OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING PROCEDURES AND MEETING SCHEDULE ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To change the City Council meeting procedures by removing Visitors To Be Heard on the early part of a Council Agenda to be replaced by an open community forum from 6:00 to 6:30 p.m. in the Community Room preceding each regular Council meeting; and To move Comments by Council, Legislative/Intergovernmental Update, Storm Update and Central Park Update to the Administrative Agenda, Approval of Minutes to the Consent Agenda; and To alter the City Council meeting schedule, effective April 1, 2001, to discontinue all Special City Council meetings preceding regular City Council meetings and to direct the scheduling of a Special City Council meeting on the second Tuesday of each month unless otherwise directed by Council action. FACTS: • Since the Organizational meeting held on January 16, 2001, the City Council has determined that changes should be made to the regular City Council Agenda to change Visitors To Be Heard at the beginning of the meeting to an open forum from 6:00 to 6:30 p.m. This will better accommodate the needs of the public by providing a half an hour instead of ten minutes and provide more respect to those persons attending the regular City Council meeting who have items scheduled on the official agenda. • Moving Comments by the Council, Administrator and Departments, Storm Update, and Central Park Update/Community Center Project to the end of the agenda under Administrative will also provide more respect for those persons scheduled as part of the regular City Council Agenda under Public Hearings, Old Business and New Business. • The City Council has practiced holding Special City Council meetings prior to the regular City Council meetings each month from 4:30 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. Due to the new incorporation of an open forum and difficulty in adjusting work schedules to arrive at 4:30 p.m., it has been suggested that the City Council designate the second Tuesday of each month as a Special City Council meeting to be held in the Community Room to replace the two Special City Council meetings that have been held on the first and third Tuesdays of each month. This meeting will begin at 5:00 p.m. and will be tape-delay broadcast on cable television. Q01 • The City Councils intention for these changes is to provide 1.) more opportunities for the public to have an open forum with the City Council to share non-City Council action items. 2.) provide more respect to those citizens who are scheduled for the regular City Council agenda. and 3.) to provide a more effective schedule for processing Special City Council items by designating the second Tuesday of each month. • The Open Forum and Visitors To Be Heard changes will be effective on April 1, 2001. ATTACHMENTS None. a~~ Agenda Information Memo March 6, 2001 Eagan City Council Meeting X. Old Business E. AMENDMENT TO EAGAN CITY CODE CHAPTER 11, SECTION 11.20 REGARDING RIDING STABLES, BOARDING STABLES, AUCTION FACILITIES OR SALES BARNS, COMMERCIAL FEEDLOTS OR KENNELS ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve ordinance amendments which will enable the keeping of rabbits as pets in Eagan. FACTS: • At the October 17, 2000 meeting of the City Council, the Council directed staff to provide an ordinance amendment to allow the keeping of domestic rabbits in Eagan. The proposed action accomplishes this as follows: • Ordinance 10.12 (public protection) is amended to include rabbits in the definition of animals. • A new Subdivision 2 (a) is added to Ordinance 10.12 requiring a kennel license for any person who wishes to keep 4 or more adult dogs, cats, ferrets, or rabbits, or combination thereof. • Ordinance 6.38 (licensing) is amended to include ferrets and rabbits in the definition of "kennel". Subdivisions 3 & 4 create exceptions to the license requirement and provide for denial of kennel licenses where such operation is not permitted or allowed under the zoning chapter of the city code. • Ordinance 11.20 (land use & zoning) Subd 3(B)(2) is amended to include all kennels in conditional uses in agricultural districts. The proposed action, if approved will allow the keeping of up to three domestic rabbits for noncommercial use and create kennel license procedures for the keeping of four or more adult rabbits. ATTACHMENTS: • Resolution (or memo, etc.) attached on pages 126 v~ c (of ORDINANCE NO. 2ND SERIES AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EAGAN, MINNESOTA, AMENDING EAGAN CITY CODE CHAPTER 11 ENTITLED " LAND USE REGULATIONS (ZONING)" BY AMENDING SECTION 11.20, SUBD. 3(B)(2); AND BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE EAGAN CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99. The City Council of the City of Eagan does ordain: Section 1. Eagan City Code Chapter 11 is hereby amended by changing Section 11.20, subd. 3 (B)(2), to read as follows: 2. Riding stables, boarding stables, auction facilities or sales barns, commercial feedlots or deg kennels subject to the requirements of section 6.38 of the City Code. Section 2. Eagan City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including 'Penalty for Violation"' and Section 11.99, entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety by reference as though repeated verbatim. Section 3. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect upon its adoption and publication according to law. ATTEST: CITY OF EAGAN City Council By: Holly N. Duffy By: Patricia E. Awada Its: Deputy Clerk Its: Mayor Date Ordinance Adopted: Date Ordinance Published in the Legal Newspaper: Date of Advisory Planning Commission Hearing: Agenda Information Memo March 6, 2001 Eagan City Council Meeting X. Old Business F. AMENDMENT TO EAGAN CITY CODE CHAPTER 10, SECTION 10.12 REGARDING REGULATION OF DOMESTIC RABITTS ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve ordinance amendments which will enable the keeping of rabbits as pets in Eagan. FACTS: • At the October 17, 2000 meeting of the City Council, the Council directed staff to provide an ordinance amendment to allow the keeping of domestic rabbits in Eagan. The proposed action accomplishes this as follows- • Ordinance 10.12 (public protection) is amended to include rabbits in the definition of animals. • A new Subdivision 2 (a) is added to Ordinance 10.12 requiring a kennel license for any person who wishes to keep 4 or more adult dogs, cats, ferrets, or rabbits, or combination thereof. • Ordinance 6.38 (licensing) is amended to include ferrets and rabbits in the definition of "kennel". Subdivisions 3 & 4 create exceptions to the license requirement and provide for denial of kennel licenses where such operation is not permitted or allowed under the zoning chapter of the city code. • Ordinance 11.20 (land use & zoning) Subd 3(13)(2) is amended to include all kennels in conditional uses in agricultural districts. The proposed action, if approved will allow the keeping of up to three domestic rabbits for noncommercial use and create kennel license procedures for the keeping of four or more adult rabbits. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution (or memo, etc.) attached on pages p'?0(, thratr6fi . Anemia ao~ ORDINANCE NO. 2ND SERIES AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EAGAN, MINNESOTA, AMENDING EAGAN CITY CODE CHAPTER 10 ENTITLED "PUBLIC PROTECTION, CRIMES AND OFFENSES" BY AMENDING SECTION 10. 12, REGARDING REGULATION OF HARBORING RABBITS, AND BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE EAGAN CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 10.99 The City Council of the City of Eagan does ordain: Section 1. Eagan City Code Chapter 10 is hereby amended by changing 10. 12, subd. I and adding subd. 2a to read as follows: Subd 1. Definitions. As used in this section, the following definitions shall apply: A. Fare Animals means cattle, horses, mules, sheep, goats, swine, ponies, ducks. geese. turkeys, chickens, guinea hens and honey bees. B. Animals include farm animals and all other animals, reptiles, and feathered birds or fowl, except dogs, cats, ferrets, gerbils, hamsters, rabbits, and caged household birds. Subd. 2 (a). Kennels. It is unlawful for any person to keep or harbor a total of four or more dogs, cats, ferrets, or rabbits, or a combination thereof, over six months of age, without first obtaining a kennel license from the City as regulated in Chapter 6 of this Code. Section 2. Eagan City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including 'Penalty for Violation"' and Section 10.99, entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety by reference as though repeated verbatim. Section 3. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect upon its adoption and publication according to law. ATTEST: CITY OF EAGAN City Council By: Holly N. Duffy By: Patricia E. Awada Its: Deputy Clerk Its: Mayor Date Ordinance Adopted: Date Ordinance Published in the Legal Newspaper: ~ od Information Memo March 6, 2001 Eagan City Council Meeting X. Old Business G. AMENDMENT TO THE EAGAN CITY CODE CHAPTER 6, SECTION 6.38 REGARDING REGULATIONS OF KENNELS ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve ordinance amendments which will enable the keeping of rabbits as pets in Eagan. FACTS: • At the October 17, 2000 meeting of the City Council, the Council directed staff to provide an ordinance amendment to allow the keeping of domestic rabbits in Eagan. The proposed action accomplishes this as follows- • Ordinance 10.12 (public protection) is amended to include rabbits in the definition of aninials. • A new Subdivision 2 (a) is added to Ordinance 10.12 requiring a kennel license for any person who wishes to keep 4 or more adult dogs, cats, ferrets, or rabbits, or combination thereof. • Ordinance 638 (licensing) is amended to include ferrets and rabbits in the definition of "kennel'. Subdivisions 3 & 4 create exceptions to the license requirement and provide for denial of kennel licenses where such operation is not permitted or allowed under the zoning chapter of the city code. • Ordinance 11.20 (land use & zoning) Subd 3(B)(2) is amended to include all kennels in conditional uses in agricultural districts. The proposed action, if approved will allow the keeping of up to three domestic rabbits for noncommercial use and create kennel license procedures for the keeping of four or more adult rabbits. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution (or memo, etc.) attached on pagesdo-e-4i"M tf C:?~ a9 ORDINANCE NO. 2ND SERIES AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EAGAN, MINNESOTA, AMENDING EAGAN CITY CODE CHAPTER 6 ENTITLED "OTHER BUSINESS REGULATION AND LICENSING" BY AMENDING SECTION 6.38 REGARDING REGULATION OF KENNELS, AND BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE EAGAN CITY CODE CHAPTER I AND SECTION 6.99. The City Council of the City of Eagan does ordain: Section 1. Eagan City Code Chapter 6 is hereby amended by changing Section 6.38 to read as follows: Subd I. Defined. For the purpose of this section, the term "kennel" means any place, building. tract of land, abode or vehicle, wherein or whereon a total of four or more dogs, Of cats, ferrets, or rabbits or combination thereof, over six months of age, are kept, kept for sale, or boarded. Subd 2. License required It is unlawful for any person to operate or maintain a kennel without license therefor from the City. Subd. 3. Exception. Hospitals and clinics operated by licensed veterinarians exclusively for the care and treatment of animals are exempt from the provisions of this section. Subd. 4. Zoning. No license shall be issued to a person or operation of a kennel in a zoning district where such operation is not permitted or otherwise allowed under the zoning chapter of the City Code. Section 2. Eagan City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation"' and Section 6.99, entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety by reference as though repeated verbatim. Section 3. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect upon its adoption and publication according to law. ATTEST: CITY OF EAGAN City Council By: Holly N. Duffy By: Patricia E. Awada Its: Deputy Clerk Its: Mayor Date Ordinance Adopted: Date Ordinance Published in the Legal Newspaper: ao~ Agenda Information Memo March 6, 2001 Eagan City Council Meeting H. APPROVE "MASTER PLAN" AND TO INITIATE THE DESIGN DEVELOPMENT PHASE FOR CENTRAL PARK. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approval of the Site Master Plan by Damon Farber Associates, and approval to initiate the design development phase for Central Park. FACTS: • The City Council established two Focus Groups to provide program input to the park planning firm of Damon Farber and Associates. • Several Focus Group meetings and Site Design team meetings have led to the program refinement and preliminary concepts for the Central Park. • The Focus groups met on March 1 to review and provide comment on the latest plan. • The June 2000 Park bond referendum provided $3.5million for site development, park development and infrastructure needs. • A preliminary budget has been prepared that is currently estimated at $3.5 million. This budget includes contingence and design fees. • The Master Plan includes additional enhancement's that have gone beyond the original program designation. Those elements are reflected in future phases of the park plan. Other issues • The park was also to be the site for a future municipal well location for the north well field. To avoid future disruption to the park, the construction of the well has been advanced as is now proposed to be included in the master planning and construction program. The well house structure has been included with an appropriate fund transfer from the utility fund made. The well drilling and its related costs will be under a separate contract. Engineering will be seeking formal approval of this later. • If the master plan is approved, the Council will be also authorizing the Design Development phase to begin. CQ Agenda Information Memo March 6, 2001, Eagan City Council XI. NEW BUSINESS A. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - AT&T WIRELESS SERVICES ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve a Conditional Use Permit to allow construction of a 150-foot monopole telecommunications tower on property located at 3195 Terminal Drive, legally described as Lot 2, Block 1, Sibley Terminal Industrial Park, in the NE '/4 of Section 8, subject to the conditions in the APC minutes. FACTS: • AT&T indicates that their service lacks coverage in the vicinity of Hwy. 13 and Yankee Doodle Road. AT&T has provided documentation that they were unable to identify a suitable existing tower or building for collocation. • The site is located west of Hwy. 13 and north of Terminal Drive and contains an existing 8,000 square foot building in the northwest portion of the property. The site is located xvithin an industrial area and is surrounded by other industrial developments and property. The nearest residential developments are east of Hwy. 13. • The monopole is proposed to be located in the rear yard behind the existing building. • As required by city ordinance, the proposed tower would provide collocation potential for two other users. • The equipment shelter is proposed to be 11.5' by 28', and satisfies required structure setbacks for the I-1 zoning district. • New landscaping is proposed along the west and north lot lines near the lease area. • Details relative to other requirements of the City Code are discussed in the attached Planning Report. • The Advisory Planning Commission held a public hearing on February 27, 2001, and recommended approval of the Conditional Use Permit, subject to the conditions listed in the APC minutes. ATTACHMENTS: ^ February 27, 2001 APC Minutes, pa esiJ through aI o~ Staff report, pageQ3 through a~~ Eagan Advisory Planning Commission DRAFT February 27, 2001 Page 2 PUBLIC HEARINGS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - AT&T Chair Heyl opened the first public hearing of the evening regarding a conditional use permit to allow a wireless telecommunications service facility (a 150' monopole) and a 12'x28' equipment building on Lot 2, Block 1, Sibley Terminal Industrial Park, located at 3195 Terminal Drive in the SE 1/4 of Section 8. Planner Dudziak introduced this item and highlighted the information presented in the City staff s planning report dated February 20, 2001. She noted the background, history and the existing conditions. There being no public comment, Chair Heyl closed the public hearing and turned the discussion back to the Commission. Chair Heyl stated that the tower is proposed for a good location. Member Steininger moved, Member Kaess seconded a motion to recommend approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow AT&T a 150-foot monopole telecommunications tower on property located at 3195 Terminal Drive in the NE 1/4 of Section 8 subject to the following conditions: 1. This Conditional Use Permit shall be recorded at Dakota County within 60 days of approval by the City Council. 2. As required by City Code, the 150-foot antenna tower shall accommodate the applicant's antennae and at least two additional comparable antennae for other communication providers; accept antennae mounted at varying heights; and allow the future rearrangement of antennae upon the tower. Documentation of this shall be provided at the time of application for building permit. 3. The applicant shall provide the City documentation from a registered structural engineer confirming the structural integrity of the proposed monopole. The documentation shall be submitted with the building permit application. 4. The tower and accessory equipment building shall comply with the general standards outlined in City Code Section 11. 10, Subdivision 31, F. 5. The equipment building shall be constructed of decorative concrete panels or concrete block, which has been scored at least twice, and painted to match the existing building. 6. The monopole tower shall be painted light blue or gray. 0// Eagan Advisory Planning Commission DRAFT February 27, 2001 Page 3 7. For security purposes, the climbing pegs shall be removed for the first 12 to 14 feet at the base of the tower. 8. The access drive and parking area adjacent to the lease area shall be surfaced with bituminous or concrete. A vote was taken on the motion. All voted in favor. PLANNING REPORT CITY OF EAGAN REPORT DATE: February 20, 2001 CASE: 08-CU-01-01-01 APPLICANT: AT&T HEARING DATE: February27, 2001 PROPERTY OWNER: Terminal Drive, LLC APPLICATION DATE: January 31, 2001 REQUEST: Conditional Use Permit PREPARED BY: Pamela Dudziak LOCATION: 3195 Terminal Drive COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: IND, Limited Industrial ZONING: I-1, Limited Industrial SUMMARY OF REQUEST AT&T is requesting a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow a 150-foot monopole telecommunications tower on property located at 3195 Terminal Drive in the NE I/4 of Section 8. AUTHORITY FOR REVIEW City Code Chapter 11, Section 11.40, Subdivisions 4C and 4D provide the following. Subdivision 4C states that the Planning Commission shall recommend a conditional use permit and the Council shall issue such conditional use permits only if it finds that such use at the proposed location: A. Will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, or general welfare of the neighborhood or the City. B. Will be harmonious with the general and applicable specific objectives of the Comprehensive Plan and City Code provisions. C. Will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so as to be compatible in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area, nor substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. 013 Planning Report - AT&T February 27, 2001 Page 2 D. Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems and schools. E. Will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be hazardous or detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. F. Will have vehicular ingress and egress to the property which does not create traffic congestion or interfere with traffic on surrounding public streets. G. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature of major importance. Subdivision 4D, Conditions, states that in reviewing applications of conditional use permits, the Planning Commission and the Council may attach whatever reasonable conditions they deem necessary to mitigate anticipated adverse impacts associated with these uses, to protect the value of other property within the district, and to achieve the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. In all cases in which conditional uses are granted, the Council shall require such evidence and guarantees as it may deem necessary as proof that the conditions stipulated in connection therewith are being and will be complied with. EXISTING CONDITIONS The site is located west of Hwy. 13 and north of Terminal Drive. The property contains an existing 8,000 square foot building in the northwest portion of the site, which was constructed in 1990. Parking areas are located to the south and east of the building. The eastern portion of the site is open. SURROUNDING USES The following existing uses, zoning, and comprehensive guide plan designations surround the subject property: North - Warehouse; zoned I-1 (Limited Industrial); guided IND (Limited Industrial) South- Vacant industrial; zoned 1-1, guided IND East - Lull International; zoned 1-1, guided IND West - Vacant; zoned I-1; guided IND EVALUATION OF REQUEST Compatibility with Surrounding -The site is located within an industrial area and surrounded by other industrial developments and property. The nearest residential developments are east of Hwy. 13. The applicant's photo simulations show the property with the tower as viewed from Hwy. 13 and from Terminal Drive. any Planning Report - AT&T February 27, 2001 Page 3 Code Requirements - City Code Chapter 11, Section 11. 10, Subd. 31 sets forth the regulations for the installation of antennae and constriction of towers. Subdivision 31-F contains general standards applying to all towers and antennae regarding illumination, signage, security, screening, location and color, design, and building permit requirements as follows: (1) Location and color shall be in a manner to minimize off-site visibility to the greatest possible extent; (2) Compliance with all applicable provisions of the City Code, including provisions of the state building code therein adopted, in addition to the requirements set out in this subdivision; (3) No signs, other than for public safety warnings or equipment information, shall be affixed to any portion: thereof,• (4) No artificial illumination, except when required by law or by a governmental agency to protect the public's health and safety, shall be utilized; (5) The placement of transmitting, receiving and switching equipment shall be integrated within the site, be location within an existing structure whenever possible; any new accessory equipment structure shall be attached to the principal building, if possible, and constructed of materials and of a color scheme compatible with the principal structure and/or surrounding area or within: an equipment encasement not exceeding 10 feet (w) x 10 feet (1) x S feet (h) in size. (6) Accessory equipment or buildings shall be screened by suitable landscaping, as set forth in this chapter, except where a design of non-vegetative screening better reflects and compliments the architectural character of the surrounding neighborhood. (7) Building permits shall be required for the installation of building mounted satellite dishes in excess of five feet in diameter, towers, and wind energy conversion systems; (8) Structural design, mounting and installation of a tower, antenna or satellite dish which requires a building permit shall be verified and approved by a qualified licensed engineer; and (9) Towers, and any equipment attached thereto, shall be unclimbable by design for the first 12 feet or completely surrounded by a six-foot high security fence with a lockable gate. The proposed tower must comply with these general standards. The tower should be painted light blue or gray to minimize the contrast in colors and off-site visibility. No signs and no additional lighting is proposed. A new equipment building is proposed, and will be constructed of concrete, painted to match the existing building. The lease area is screened from the public right-of-way by the existing building and the applicant proposes to install landscape screening along the side and rear lot lines. A building permit will be required prior to construction of the tower and equipment shelter. The applicant proposes to have removable climbing pegs in the first 12 to 14 feet at the base of the tower. Additionally, City Code Chapter 11, Subdivision 31-D (2) states that freestanding towers and antennae in non-residential use districts shall be permitted pursuant to a conditional use permit 0? /'S Planning Report - AT&T February 27, 2001 Page 4 approved by the City Council in Limited Industrial zoning districts. Such freestanding towers and antennae shall be subject to the following requirements. An assessment of this proposal relative to these provisions follows each item. a) The combined height of any freestanding tower and antennae or satellite dishes mounted thereto shall not exceed: (ii) 150 feet, measured from ground elevation of the tower to the highest point of the tower-antenna/satellite dish combination, provided the tower is designed to: (A) Accommodate the applicant's antennae and at least two additional comparable antennae for other communication providers; (B) Accept antennae mounted at varying heights; and (C) Allow the future rearrangement of antennae upon the tower. The proposed tower is 150 feet in height. The submitted narrative states that the tower will be "designed and constructed to accommodate two additional providers and structurally sufficient to locate equipment at various heights on the structure." b) All setback requirements for any accessory equipment building or structure shall be met as set forth in this chapter, provided the minimum setback distance of the tower from any property line of a parcel or lot within a residential use district shall be equal to two times the height of the tower or 300 feet, whichever is greater. The nearest residential property and structures are more than 300 feet from the proposed tower and accessory equipment building. c) The tower shall be located in the rear yard. The proposed tower is located in the rear yard north of the existing building. d) The tower shall be self-supporting through the use of a design that uses an open frame or monopole configuration. The applicant's proposal is for a self-supporting monopole. e) Permanent platforms or structures, exclusive of the tower or antennae, that increase off-site visibility are prohibited. The plans do not show any extraneous platforms or structures associated with the tower. f) Existing vegetation on the site shall be preserved to the greatest possible extent practical. The tower is proposed to be located in the rear yard, north of the existing building. There is no landscaping or other significant vegetation that will be affected in that area. g) Accessory equipment associated with freestanding towers and antennae shall be located within an equipment building constructed of materials and color compatible with principal building and surrounding area or within an equipment encasement not exceeding 10 feet (w) x 10 feet (1) x 5 feet (h) in size. AT&T proposes to construct an 11.5 foot by 28 foot building. The plans state that the equipment building is to be Planning Report - AT&T February 27, 2001 Page 5 constructed of concrete and painted to match the existing building. The City Code allows new buildings in industrial districts to be constructed of "precast concrete provided the surfaces [has] been into`-ally treated with an applied decorative material or texture." Smooth, painted or decorative concrete block, is also an acceptable material, "provided the block is scored at least twice." h) The applicant shall provide a color manipulated "as built "photograph of the tower as proposed for the location. The applicant has provided photo simulations showing two views of the property, both with and without the tower. i) No new tower shall be permitted unless the city council finds that the equipment planned for the proposed tower cannot be accommodated at any preferred collocation site. The city council may find that a preferred collocation site cannot accommodate that planned equipment for the following reasons: (i) The planned equipment would exceed the structural capacity of the preferred collocation site, and the preferred collocation site cannot be reinforced, modified, or replaced to accommodate the planned equipment or its equivalent at a reasonable cost, as certified by a qualified radio frequency engineer; (ii) The planned equipment would interfere significantly with the usability of existing or approved equipment at the preferred collocation: site, and the interference cannot be prevented at a reasonable cost, as certified by a qualified radio frequency engineer; (iii) A preferred collocation site cannot accommodate the planned equipment at a height necessary to fitnction reasonably, as certified by a qualified radio frequency engineer, or (iv) The applicant, after a good faith effort, is unable to lease, purchase or otherwise obtain space for the planned equipment at a preferred collocation site. AT&T finds it necessary to construct a new tower. The applicant has provided supporting documentation about other location options in this area. A letter from Joe Beck, Senior RF Design Engineer for AT&T describes an existing tower in the area (at 3659 Kennebec Drive), and states that the tower is outside the search area and too low to effectively meet AT&T's needs within their search area Supporting documentation from Mike Fogdt of Bechtel Telecommunications regarding two possible rooftop locations (Transport America and Blue Cross/Blue Shield) is also provided and indicates that AT&T was unable to obtain a lease agreement for the Transport America building, and that logistical considerations pertaining to the Blue Cross/Blue Shield building led to that site being ruled out as well. Site Plan - The site plan shows a 19.5-foot by 50-foot lease area off the northwest corner of the existing building. The tower and equipment shelter will be located within the lease area. The equipment shelter satisfies the minimum setback of 20 feet from the side and rear property lines. a/? Planning Report - AT&T February 27, 2001 Page 6 The tower is set back 28 feet from the existing building, and 30 feet from the nearest property line. Landscaping - The applicant proposes to plant a row of arbor vitae along the side and rear lot lines to screen the lease area. Grading/Storm Drainage - Grading is limited to an area approximately 20 feet by 50 feet that contains the tower and equipment shelter. Access/Street Desi.en - Access to the lease area will be provided via easement oN cr the existing driveway and parking lot east of the building. The easement includes space for parking service vehicles adjacent to the lease area. The access easement runs along the north end of the building from the parking lot to the lease area. The access drive from the parking lot to the lease area, and the parking area adjacent to the lease area should be surfaced with bituminous. SUMMARY/CONCLUSION AT&T is requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit to construct a 150-foot monopole communications antennae tower on property located at 3195 Terminal Drive. AT&T indicates that their service lacks coverage in the vicinity of Hwy. 13 and Yankee Doodle Road, that they were unable to identify a suitable existing tower or building for collocation, and that this new tower is necessary to meet their technical performance needs and provide the necessary coverage in this area. As required by city ordinance, the proposed tower would provide collocation potential for two other users. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED To recommend approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to allow a 150-foot monopole telecommunications tower for property located at 3195 Terminal Drive in the NE '/4 of Section S. If approved, the following conditions should apply: 1. This Conditional Use Permit shall be recorded at Dakota County within 60 days of approval by the City Council. 2. As required by City Code, the 150-foot antenna tower shall accommodate the applicant's antennae and at least two additional comparable antennae for other communication providers; accept antennae mounted at varying heights; and allow the future rearrangement of antennae upon the tower. Documentation of this shall be provided at the time of application for building permit. 3. The applicant shall provide the City documentation from a registered structural engineer confirming the structural integrity of the proposed monopole. The documentation shall be submitted with the building permit application. C~ Planning Report - AT&T February-'17, 2001 Page 7 4. The tower and accessory equipment building shall comply with the general standards outlined in City Code Section 11. 10, Subdivision 31, F. 5. The equipment building shall be constructed of decorative concrete panels or concrete block, which has been scored at least twice, and painted to match the existing building. 6. The monopole tower shall be painted light blue or gray. 7. For security purposes, the climbing pegs shall be removed for the first 12 to 14 feet at the base of the tower. 8. The access drive and parking area adjacent to the lease area shall be surfaced with bituminous or concrete. a~9 FINANCIAL OBLIGATION - 08-CU-01-11-01 Part Lot 2, Block 1, Sibley Terminal Industrial Park There are pay-off balances of special assessments totaling $275 on the parcel for which the conditional use permit is requested. At this time, there are no pending assessments on the parcel for which the conditional use permit is requested. Based upon the study of the financial obligations collected in the past and the uses proposed for the property, the following charges are proposed. The charges are computed using the City's existing fee schedule and for the connection and availability of the City's utility system. The approval of the conditional use permit is not contingent upon the payment of these Connection/Availability Charges. The charges become due and payable with connection to the City's Utilities. The charges will be computed using the rates in effect at time of connection or subdivision. IMPROVEMENT USE RATE QUANTITY AMOUNT None TOTAL U - Eagan Boundary Street Centerline Location Map Parcel Area ® Building Footprint / f = t.a-"aA if ~ 31! I 0. to. ,a Ale t c v t` a{ ♦ w t we er as to~; icy Sub ect Site h a' E8 IVA i rose ® amo, N sit ,t t IAN am ON ! ! c ow a ®Itl ° 94~ . f to 0 1 a ~ a ~ ~ ■ O sM e r --7 4r w , ~ ~ ttt~ E"~ ~ j// ~ ti f ♦ ~ sr . tie A -A 1000 0 1000 2000 Feet Development/Developer. AT&T Wireless Services Application: Conditional Use Permi Case No.: 08-CU-01-01-01 e/2 Map Prepared usino ERSI ArcVlew 3.1. Parcel base map data provided N by Dakota County (.and Survey Departnunt and Is current as of Nwember 2000. City of Eagan THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY w E M ; tv r; _ _ _ The City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this Information and are S Community Development Department not responsible for errors or omissions. Current Zoning and Comprehensive Guide Plan AT&T Land Use Map Case No. 08-CU-01-01-01 Zoning Map FP I., O o R.2 p~ID r~• r R , O 1 , ~W G~ Current Zoning: ! Ri I~~ R4 Limited Industrial Location RI A R-4 R•4 f R'2 p MID A RJ A L3 PD F, R-4 000 0 000 1200 F..t 0•.. ` Comprehensive Guide Plan 04 P IND Land Use Map D. O 14 D•1 • D 41 ES t IND Current Land Use Designation: D- IND IND Limited Industrial Location IND 11 J fr D4I 4 IND MID r 0.1 8 NR L3 row,+.. w n ".w Na s Ra i~ {00 0 aa0 1200 F.., Parcel bas* map Inforrratlon akota County Land 3um*y Department W, V00. Zoning Information maintained by Clry Staff. City of Eagan w Community Development Department ~I THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY S The City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this Information. ~ji{io~lt~$ 1 ei 3E ~ ?t I < 4 , Rill b l~lr J f1 A iit if; i tJ r~ _ Ai- W L lit a fI]~}~~ galJ~j~ 14-1 apt is jei i fJil i 112 1=1 Ills, tf j a ~ i iJal~~ ~ a! [iall; t 'Iii ~i alt~ltt~ {oaf at ~t Ml i 19 L; # I t~ : Nlre. x J. 1~1~ #F ~J 8a , I ca yy ! ~ it = I ~3 51 s- n's 'ra~l~4 a ~ ~ \ \ R a ~a } A R It a, \ J M, i a Q ~ u Sam^i 4 W O Yf _ 3! J ~ ~ yY Y S ~ < ~ R a + ! y- G ••O 6 W ~ 0 ,.N. r4 ~ 4 i - SITE PLAN 3, o ~ I ~ 1 y WN < 4.6 t g a A sip{ w 7W b d0l .0-1+~ 6 SM11LM' A OWN u Yp =J L 9i91a I¢ ~s Y clu Il~p o bg !°1 - o .gym j r io= fflag pp I< S OiW MA d01.0-111 • QH n >y W SWAN IM A L"3H dLL •f1AiYw -0- OS l W u Y 2 a°~ y ELEVATIONS P• b. a.tin M + Mm ~ < YlrM. -0••• y4. l.M~ A b M rtl MI Cdr 1 ti rf r Orq ~I.d1. r I.1y A Y.M.i •0 u Y.~•) ! dMi •t Te 6.r• wy ' v I C I Q I IO , I ~ ~ ~aaf +m a ~ 13 g ; f I r r S ~ Te~; S~i gisl e a ~ t! s b 2 I .Ij~ II ~ ar x z N R i b wpp ~Y n `~<f < p~z e z L l co WG:N i nT o o I i G c ~ ~w w~ a ` g ~a s. ^R ITE PLAN DETAIL .n w wr .x ♦ ~ 4. V -.W. .r r. on... as • Ms aw^ a arnr,\w o.g w...r A+war w of M wV I.YI .r~rlr w.iw ~ s.w Y r M/w v WL 9u07 ~ 4wM W u uua r w0.w M Po !rs w SITE ACQUISITION 9915 Briar Road, #610 Bloomington, NLN 5543- CONSULTANTS Phone: (612) 802-0452 L-mail: amydresch@siteacquisiaon.com Client satis`~ction through excellence. January- 29, 2001 NIs. Pam Dudziak VIA HAND DELIVERY Planner Citv of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122-1897 Re: 3195 Terminal Drive, Case No. 08-CU-01-01-01 AT&T Site #TNII-111/Yankee Doodle Dear Ms. Dudziak, 1 am in receipt of your letter dated January 26, 2001 requesting additional information in order to complete the CUP application. Enclosed with this letter please find two sets of full size plans that are to scale. The Site Plan has been revised to include the exterior building materials to be used on the proposed equipment shelter, and the property and setback lines have been more clearly identified on the Site Plan portion of the drawings. Landscaping has been added to the North and West in order to screen the equipment shelter. As shown on the drawings, AT&T will be routing their cable runs under ground from the equipment building to the base of the tower. The equipment building is connected to the central office where it is monitored to alert personnel of equipment malfunction or breach of security. The climbing pegs will be removed from the base of the tower for the first 12 to 14 feet. It is AT&T's belief that these precautions will make the site secure and eliminate any opportunity of the tower being climbed. Regarding other collocation opportunities. enclosed with this package is a letter from Joe Beck, AT&T RF Manager, explaining why the tower located at 3659 Kennebeck Drive does not meet the required coverage objectives for this search area. As was mentioned in the narrative submitted with the CUP application, two other collocation opportunities were also evaluated. The first is the BlueCross BlueShield building located at 3535 Blue Cross Road, and the second is the Transport America building located at 1715 Yankee Doodle Drive. Attached is an activity lo, for each location detailing the activities of these sites and why they were eventually ruled out as viable locations. Should you have any questions regarding any of the information included in this letter, please contact me at (612) 802-0452. incereiv, i Amy- D sch Enclosure G RcCEIVED JAN 3 1 OVERVIEW OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION AT&T Wireless Services of Minnesota, Inc. (AT&T) seeks a conditional Use Permit and any other necessary approvals to construct a wireless telecommunication service facility ("WTSF") at 3195 Terminal Drive, Eagan, MN 55122 (the "Property"). AT&T and its affiliates have acquired licenses from the Federal Communications Commission ("FCC") to provide Personal Communications Services ("PCS") throughout the United States. These licenses include Minneapolis\St. Paul and the surrounding metropolitan area. After a thorough and detailed search, the proposed Property was selected based on its satisfying RF criteria (including antenna height) and AT&T's review of local land uses and site availability. Specifically, proximity to the business communities and major roadways were relevant siting criteria. Several different locations were evaluated as a potential WTSF site. An approximately 120' tower located at 3659 Kennebec Drive, owned and operated by American Tower Corporation was considered. Unfortunately, the tower is located over a mile outside the Search area and does not have an adequate mounting height available to provide the necessary coverage objectives. The Blue CrossBlue Shield and Transport America buildings located at the intersection of Yankee Doodle and Hwy. 13 were also evaluated. The owner of the Transport America building was unwilling to enter into a lease agreement with AT&T. A suitable location for AT&T's equipment shelter and environmental concerns prevented AT&T from being able to move forward with the Blue Cross/Blue Shield building as a viable candidate. AT&T is not aware of any other available site locations. The Property is zoned I-1, Limited Industrial. Pursuant to the Eagan Telecommunications Ordinance. AT&T has made application for a Conditional Use Permit in 7 order to construct and maintain a wireless facility, including constructing a 150' monopole along with a radio equipment shelter having dimensions of 11 %5" x 28' and designed to blend in with the existing building located at the site. AT&T's facility will be located in the rear yard of the property and shielded by the primary building located on the Property. The WTSF will be contained within a leased area having dimensions of 19.50' x 50'. The tower will be designed and constructed to accommodate two additional providers and structurally sufficient to locate equipment at various heights on the structure. The facility is not staffed and entirely self-monitored. The only utilities necessary for this WTSF are telephone and electricity both of which are readily available. Upon completion, this facility will require only infrequent site visits (approximately one time a month). Access will be provided to the WTSF via the existing entryways to the property at 3195 Terminal Drive. Hence the facility will not have any material impact on either traffic or storm water control. The site is entirely self-monitored and connects directly to a central office where sophisticated computers alert personnel to equipment malfunction or breach of security. AT&T has worked closely with the owner of the property to insure little or no impact on the immediate vicinity. The proposed WTSF will not have an adverse effect on the surrounding properties or development of the immediate vicinity. The proposed facilities will be designed and constructed to meet applicable governmental and industry safety standards. Specifically, AT&T will comply with all FCC and FAA rules regarding construction requirements, technical standards, interference protection, power and height limitations, and radio frequency standards. Any and all RF emissions are subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the FCC. Wireless telephone technology provides many benefits to the communities it serves. These a~~ .rvices ':-,Jude, but are not limited to, the following: • 911 program allowing motorists to summon aid and report dangerous situations; • Support for emergency services by providing wireless communications to paramedics, firefighters. and law enforcement agencies; • A back-up system to the land-line system in the event of a natural or man-made disaster; Communication capabilities in remote areas, enhancing the safety of travelers by allowing immediate access to emergency assistance; and • Support for the busy lives of people in the area reducing stress and increasing productivity. AT&T is under rigid time constraints, and consistent with applicable law, we respectfully request this application be processed as expeditiously as possible. Please note that AT&T expressly reserves all of its rights and claims. including, without limitation, those available to it under Federal Law. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, no waiver, admission or agreement shall be inferred herefrom and no filing of any application for any permit (including, without limitation, any building permit or other permit), license or approval or any other action heretofore or hereafter taken by or on behalf of AT&T shall be construed as a waiver or limitation of any right or claim of AT&T. AT&T looks forward to working with the City- of Eagan and the Advisory Planning Commission. The addition of this site will ensure uninterrupted superior digital PCS service to The Eagan Community as well as greater competition in the marketplace. ATST Cellular Division AT&T Wireless Services 2515 24th Avenue South Minneapolis, '.1N 55406 January 31, 2001 612 721-1660 =AX 6,12 721-4770 Ms. Pam Dudziak Planner City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122-1897 Re: 3195 Terminal Drive, Case No. 08-CU-01-01-01 AT&T Site #MI-111\Yankee Doodle Dear Ms. Dudziak, I have evaluated the ATC tower located at 3659 Kennebeck Drive. There are several problems with that tower, including its location and height. We have programmed our "Yankee Doodle" site to address coverage and capacity problems at and surrounding the intersection of Highway 13 and Yankee Doodle. The ATC tower is located to far to the West to cover the intersection and address the issues, which we are seeking to resolve. The second problem is that the ATC tower does not provide enough height to get signal over the trees and buildings to the desired area so that adequate signal can be delivered. We have located on a number of ATC sites and have had no problem working out arrangements with them when the sites met our needs. However, in this case their site is simply too low and too far away from the area where we need to improve coverage and capacity. If you have any other questions or concerns, please don't hesitate to give me a call. I can be reached at (61`2) 844-6774 or via e-mail atjoe.beck@attws.com. Sincerely, Joe Beck Senior RF Design Engineer AT&T Wireless Services a30 : - Recyced Pa / per AT&T WIRELESS ATTWS CLIENT DISCUSSION SUMMARY #MI-111B\Yankee Doodle SITE INFORMATION Site Specialist: Lloyd Brown Site Candidate No.: MI-111 Site Candidate Name: Yankee Doodle Site Acquisition Manager: Mike Fogdt, Bechtel Telecommunications Search Area Received: June 20, 2000 Site Candidate Report Submitted: July 12, 2000 Candidate: Blue Cross Blue Shield Type: Tenant Improvement (Rooftop Collocation) Latitude: 44°-49'-49" Longitude: 93°-I F-36" Elevation: 850' Lessor's Name: B1ueCross B1ueShield of Minnesota Site Address: 3535 BlueCross Road Eagan, NEN 55122 Contact Name: Ed Ronning Contact Phone: 4(651) 662-6444 Site Candidate Summary: This is a multi-story building with one section around 48' and another portion approximately 72' located at the intersection of Yankee Doodle and Hwy. 13. RF has rejected the shorter portion but is evaluating the taller portion. There are asbestos and architectural concerns. DATE DISCUSSION 6/20/00 Issued Search Ring from AT&T 6/26/00 Drove search ring for viable candidates 7/12/00 Submitted RF Approval Request Form to Joe Beck for approval 7/18/00 RF said that taller building might work. Wants to schedule site walk. 7i27/00 Site Walked. Ulteig and Bechtel in attendance. 8/10/00 It is determined that rooftop and cable chases contain asbestos. Only solution is to run cable up the side of the building. Will discuss with Ed. 8/15/00 BCBS will not entertain running coax up side of building. Cannot agree upon exterior shelter location. 9/22/00 Site Dead AT&T WIRELESS ATTWS CLIENT DISCUSSION SUMMARY #M1-111\Yankee Doodle SITE INFORMATION Site Specialist: Lloyd Brown Site Candidate No.: MI-111 Site Candidate Name: Yankee Doodle Site Acquisition Manager: Mike Fogdt, Bechtel Telecommunications Search Area Received: June 20, 2000 Site Candidate Report Submitted: July 12, 2000 Candidate: Transport America Type: Tenant Improvement (Rooftop Collocation) Latitude: 44°-50'-04" Longitude: 93°-11'-25" Elevation: 845' Lessor's Name: Transport Corporation of America, Inc. Site Address: 1715 Yankee Doodle Road Eagan, MN 55121-1618 Contact Name: Tim Whitney Contact Phone: #(651) 686-2500, ext. 3272 Site Candidate Summary: This is an approximately 50' building at the intersection of Yankee Doodle and Hwy. 13. Landlord has been uncooperative and is not interested leasing space for AT&T*s equipment. DATE DISCUSSION 6/20/00 Issued Search Ring from AT&T 6/26/00 Drove search ring for viable candidates; stopped in office and was given name and business card of Tim Whitney as person to contact. 6/27/00 Left message for Mr. Whitley to call me regarding AT&T collocating on roof. 6/30./00 Left another message for Mr. Whitley 7/10/00 LM again 7/15/00 Dropped off proposal letter to Mr. Whitley's office. 7/20/00 Spoke with receptionist and she said that he is out of town on business. 8/10/00 Stopped by Mr. Whitley's office and he said that they are definitely not interested at this time in leasing space to AT&T for their radio equipment. Site Dead 7 J1 12, Agenda Information Memo March 6, 2001, Eagan City Council B. REZONING - RHB, INC. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve a Rezoning that would establish an R-3, Residential Townhome, zoning designation upon approximately 2.2 acres of land located west of Woodgate Lane between Woodgate Court and Drake Drive, in the SE'/4 of Section 29. FACTS: • The site is vacant and unplatted. It consists of a single parcel that is physically separated by City parkland, which contains the Highline trail and Xcel Energy (formerly NSP) power transmission lines. The applicant is proposing to rezone only the southerly portion of the site (2.2 acres) to R-3, Residential Townhouse. • Adjacent developments to the south and west consist of four-unit townhomes. To the east, the property is developed in single-family uses. • The property will need to be subdivided and platted prior to development. • The application was submitted under the D-H (Mixed Residential, 0-6 units/acre) land use designation. On February 20, 2001, the City Council officially adopted the new ComprelhensiN C Guide Plan, which assigned a land use designation of LD (Low Density Residential, 0-4 units/acre) to this property. • The proposed R-3 zoning is considered consistent with both the D-H land use designation and the LD land use designation, provided the resulting development falls within the density limits established in the Comp Plan. • The Advisory Planning Commission commented on the density of development and indicated that if the applicant wishes to develop the site at a density exceeding four units per acre (maximum of the LD land use designation), an application for a Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment would be considered in conjunction with the preliminary subdivision and development plans. • The Advisory Planning Commission held a public hearing on February 27, 2001. The APC recommended approval of the Rezoning. ATTACHMENTS: February 27, 2001, APC Minutes, page three Staff Report, pagesthrough a 32 Eagan Advisory Planning Commission February 27, 2001 Page 6 REZONING - RHB, INC. Chair Heyl opened the next public hearing of the evening regarding a Rezoning of approximately 2.2 acres from R-1 (Single Family) to R-3 (Townhouse), located west of Johnny Cake Road, on the southwest side of Woodgate Lane, adjacent to the south side of the Highline Trail in the SE '/4 of Section 29. Planner Dudziak introduced this item and highlighted the information presented in the City staff s report dated February 21, 2001. She noted the background and history, the existing conditions, and the surrounding uses of the subject property. Wayne Tauer, representative of RHB, stated that there will be two single family homes directly impacted by the development. Mr. Tauer described the position of the existing trees, the majority of which are soft wood. He further stated that R-3 zoning for this land is the best use for the property. Virginia Klinger, 4391 N Woodgate Lane, stated her concern with the previous flooding situation and her fear of additional flooding with the new development. She further explained her concern with the traffic levels and the speeds of the traffic. There being no further public comment, Chair Heyl closed the public hearing and turned the discussion back to the Commission. She stated that the rezoning of this property is sensible. Assistant City Engineer Gorder stated that the property is one that will be looked at for flood improvements. Member Nosbush questioned the applicant's plans for the remaining acreage. Wayne Tauer stated that RHB would like to donate the land to park land. Member Hunter moved, Member Nosbush seconded a motion to approve the request of a Rezoning that will establish an R-3, Residential Townhomes, zoning designation upon approximately 2.2 acres of land located west of Woodgate Lane between Woodgate Court and Drake Drive, in the SE '/4 of Section 29. A vote was taken on the motion. All voted in favor. y PLANNING REPORT CITY OF EAGAN REPORT DATE: February 21, 2001 CASE: 29-RZ-14-12-00 APPLICANT: RHB, Inc. (Richard Braun) HEARING DATE: January 23, 2001 PROPERTY OWNER: EHW Partnership APPLICATION DATE: (Dec. 20, 2000) REQUEST: Rezoning PREPARED BY: Pamela Dudziak LOCATION: West of Woodgate Lane between Woodgate Court and Drake Drive (PID No. 10-02900-019-75) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: D-II, Mixed Residential (0-6 units per acre) ZONING: R-1, Single-Family Residential SUMMARY OF REQUEST RHB, Inc. is requesting approval of a Rezoning that would establish an R-3, Residential Townhome, zoning designation upon approximately 2.2 acres of land located west of Woodgate Lane between Woodgate Court and Drake Drive, in the SE'/4 of Section 29. AUTHORITY FOR REVIEW City Code Chapter 11, Section 11.40, Subdivision 5 states in part, that the City Council shall not rezone any land or area in any zoning district or make any other proposed amendment to this chapter without first having referred it to the planning commission for its consideration and recommendation. BACKGROUND/HISTORY The site is vacant and unplatted. It consists of a single parcel that is physically separated by City parkland, which contains the Highline trail and Xcel Energy (formerly NSP) power transmission lines. Both portions of the property are currently zoned R-1, Single-Family Residential, and together the site is 2.49 acres in size. However, the applicant is proposing to rezone only the southerly portion of the site (2.2 acres) to R-3, Residential Townhouse, and maintain the R-1 zoning designation on the northerly portion of the site. Early zoning maps from the late 1960s show the property with a multiple residential zoning designation. At that time, much of the surrounding area also was zoned for multiple residential uses, however, the surrounding area has developed with single-family and low to medium density 03-5- Planning Report - RHB, Inc. Januan 23, 2001 Page 2 townlomes rather than the high density multiple residential development that was anticipated in the late 1960s, In the late 1970s, the power line easement, which runs east-west across the northern portion of the parcel, was given a Public zoning designation. The balance of the property retained the multiple residential zoning designation until the late 1980s when the property was assigned a Planned Development/R-1 Single-Family zoning designation. With the City's adoption of the most recent zoning map in May 2000, the PD designation was dropped and both the north and south portions of the property were assigned the R-1, Single-Family, zoning designation. EXISTING CONDITIONS The site is vacant and heavily wooded, with significant topography. SURROUNDING USES The following existing uses, zoning, and comprehensive guide plan designations surround the subject property: North - Public/Residential; zoned P and R-1 (Single-Family Residential); guided D-E Mixed Residential (0-6 units/acre) South - Residential (four-unit townhomes); zoned PD; guided D-II East - Residential (single-family homes); zoned PD (Planned Development); guided D-II West - Residential (four-unit townhomes); zoned R-1; guided D-II EVALUATION OF REQUEST Description of Proposal - The applicant is proposing to rezone the southerly portion (2.2 acres) of this parcel from an R-1, Single-Family to an R-3, Residential Townhouse designation. Compatibility with Surrounding` Area - Adjacent developments to the south and west consist of four-unit townhomes. To the east, the property is developed in single-family uses. The single- family and townhome developments that surround the proposed rezoning site are separated from each other by a public street, Woodgate Lane. The portion of the site proposed for rezoning is adjacent to townhomes on the south and west, and across Woodgate Lane from the single-family homes. Single-family uses to the north are separated from the proposed rezoning site by the park property. Also, the portion of the parcel located north of the park property (approximately 12,565 sq. ft.) is proposed to retain the current R-1 zoning designation. Airport Noise Considerations - The site lies outside of the airport noise exposure zones established by the Metropolitan Council. Planning Report - RHB, Inc. January 23, 2001 Page 3 Development Plans - Specif:: development plans are not necessary for a rezoning. However, an evaluation of the suitability of the site for uses allowed by the requested zoning designation is considered appropriate. Subdivision and Platting - The property will need to be subdivided and platted prior to development. Land Use - Development of the property must be consistent with the City's Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan. The application was submitted under the D-II (Mixed Residential, 0-6 units/acre) land use designation. Since then, on February 20, 2001, the City Council has officially adopted the Draft Comp Plan, which received initial City approval in September 1999. The neN~ ia„u use designation is LD (Low Density Residential, 0-4 units/acre). The proposed R-3 zoning designation is considered compatible with both the D-II and LD land use designations. Although the proposed R-3 zoning standards (based on the 6000 s.f, per unit minimum lot size), could result in a development density of 7.26 units per acre, the maximum density of development would be restricted to the amount specified by the land use designation assigned to the property in the Comp Plan. It is staff's understanding that, if the proposed rezoning to R-3 is approved, the developer intends to proceed with a townhome development not exceeding a density of six units per acre. While such a development would be consistent with the D-II land use designation under which this application was submitted, it would exceed the maximum four units per acre density of the newly adopted LD land use designation. Because the land use designation has changed while this application was pending, if the APC and City Council approve the requested rezoning to R-3, staff requests confirmation of the appropriate land use designation for this property. To allow development that is consistent with the D-II land use designation, the APC and Council may direct that the land use designation under the new Comp Plan correspondingly be changed to MD, Medium Density Residential 4-12 units per acre, which is the land use designation applied to the existing townhomes to the south and west of this site. Alternatively, the APC and Council may affirm the newly adopted LD land use designation, thereby limiting development of this site to four units per acre maximum density. Topography - The site is heavily wooded with relatively large variations in topography. A majority of the site is 10 to 16 feet above Woodgate Lane to the east and the existing townhouse units to the west, and will need to be substantially lowered to accommodate any proposed development. Utilities - Sanitary sewer and water main are available within Woodgate Lane to the east to accommodate the proposed land use development. a,3 ~ Planning Report - RHB, Inc. January 23, 2001 Page 4 Access - Public street access is available from Woodgate Lane to the east. As mentioned previously, the site will need to be lowered substantially to provide driveway ac"ss onto Woodgate Lane in accordance with City standards. Tree Preservation - The site is wooded with a variety of deciduous trees and it appears that many are oaks. The treed areas are concentrated along the south and north boundaries of the rezoning site. The applicant should note that property will be subject to the City of Eagan's Tree Preservation Ordinance at the time of development. Removal of significant vegetation should conform to the limits allowed by the ordinance, or if that is not possible, excess removal should be mitigated by on-site reforestation in accordance with the specifications in the ordinance. Wetlands/Water Quality - Because this site is relatively small, on-site water quality treatment of stormwater is not practical. Therefore, in accordance with City policies, a cash dedication for water quality would be required at the time of development. There are no jurisdictional wetlands associated with this site. Parks and Recreation - Park dedication requirements have been fulfilled previously through a land dedication about 20 years ago. Trails dedication will be required upon development and is anticipated to be in the form of a cash dedication. SUMMARY/CONCLUSION RHB, Inc. is requesting a rezoning from R-1 to R-3 of approximately 2.2 acres located west of Woodgate Lane between Woodgate Court and Drake Drive in the SE '/4 of Section 29. A townhome development would compatible with surrounding uses, which include four-unit townhomes on adjoining property to the south and west. Provided the density of actual development is within the limits established by the Comprehensive Guide Plan, the proposed R-3 zoning designation would allow the site to be developed with townhomes. The proposed R-3 zoning designation is considered consistent with the D-II land use designation. Additionally, the recently adopted LD land use designation includes the R-3 zoning district as one of the zoning districts considered compatible with that land use designation. If the APC and City Council approve the requested rezoning to R-3, staff is requesting confirmation of the appropriate land use designation for development of this site. Development of the property will be subject to City ordinance requirements with regard to iteills such as tree preservation, grading, landscaping, etc. These aspects of the development will be evaluated for compliance at the time of application for subdivision or development of the property. p~~U Planning Report - RHB, Inc. January 23, 2001 Page 5 ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED To recommend approval of a Rezoning to R-3, Residential Townhouse, of approximately 2.2 acres of land located west of Woodgate Lane between Woodgate Court and Drake Drive, in the SE '/4 of Section 29. Ragan Boundary Location Map Street Centerline Parcel Area i Building Footprint ,p 1 i ----Itnrrsr.am~- Kst 164 a . • r ~ i i at / 1b a . • f r.e. GUY wit ! J ! • O • ! 7 A • A` E3 rP FD®® i s► i laws x aft AV g ~ 14*1 i ' a& • r w.u.R`y / YW4..n. • ® :~•fi, ; + " Sub ect Site r * +a ! Rs 9k • s 1 fs' P 4F e74 qxV rse ~r~-r-r~~ ~ .<~1~ a •R ~I ,La® ~Au® • ~0 ~ • 1 i c....,. 1000 0 1000 2000 Feet Development/Developer.. RHB, Inc. Application: Rezoning Case No.: 29-RZ-1412-00 ~O P~n~pa+red ER9 ArcVfew 1,. Pa cel trro rtq~ deh provided h Oep•trrss and is clrrarK as d Noverrber 2000 W+ E *City of Eagan / THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY M I N N E S O T A The City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this information and are S Community D-v.lopment Dep.rtm-nt not responsible for errors or omissions. II Current Zoning and Comprehensive Guide Plan RHI3, Inc. Land Use Map Case No. 29-RZ-1412-00 Zoning Map AF t" / Current Zoning: ~ R- PF ~ R-1 P Single Family Residential R-1 e, D D see a see t:w Feet P Comprehensive Guide Plan Land Use Map rye 0 PF O 3 Current Land Use Designation: P D-u D-11 Mixed Residential (0.6 units/acre) e D see a sea 12" rest pareN enep IMOnnatbn j d Oy Dekota Gaunq lane 3urny D.par4nenl ell7ieo. a Info.matlew n alnts!"d by City staff. *city of Eagan Z u E THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY Community Development Department The City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this Information. S To: The City of Eagan My request to rezone said property is as follows, according to the city comprehensive guide plan the existing designation is D-II. My proposed zoning is LD (low density). The current zoning according to the city-zoning map dated May 2, 2000 shows R-1 zoning. This property has had a number of different zonings since the 1970's, ranging from R-6 to the city of Eagan's interpretation of the existing zoning of R-1. My proposed zoning of R-3 is natural fit....... similar zoning borders the subject property and across the street, separated by Woodgate Lane, are single-family homes. The subjects north property line abuts the Highline trail system. I would like to develop 14 multi and single level townhome units that would have 1,300- 1,600 square feet of finished area, ranging in price anywhere from $170,000- $200,000. The timing would be late spring, early summer 2001 for the installation of the utilities and street improvements. The surrounding zoning and land uses are single family and townhomes. The impact on the surrounding property would be minimal. The price range and styling, I feel, would enhance the existing older quad homes and compliment the single family homes across the street. The subject property has adequate city services. The pond just to the southwest, according to city staff, would handle storm water run off. My understanding is that the current owner has satisfied the park dedication. As mentioned earlier, my proposed zoning is similar to the same number of units per acre of the surrounding land uses. I would also like you to know that I'm not requesting rezoning of the parcel, created by the Highline trail, to the north, which abuts the trail. I would be looking for a variance of front footage to allow me to construct a single-family residence. Thank You, Richard Braun 651-649-7288 3. 952 897 5301 02.18.01 FRI 09:00 FAX 952 897 5301 MILLIH.Av & ROBERTSON Z001 02!16/01 Community Development Department 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Nf 55122 Dear City of Eagan: We strongly object to the rezoning of approximately 2.2 acres from R-1 (Single Family) to R-3 (Tow-nllouse) located on Woodgate Lane. There are deer on this land throughout the year and we feel it would be to the best interest of the people who live around this land not to develop it and spoil our quiet neighborhood and our wonderful Axildlife view. Thank you for giving us a chance to express our concerns. Sincerely, 6p?~Cgms rsen Patsy en 4454 Woodgate Court Eagan, NL-1 55122 a V3 4. CITY OF EASAN AMUSEMENT DEVICES 3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD APP ATiON FOR LICENSE RENEWAL EAOAN, MN 83112 1. Name ofApplicant Te-Ff T ~toh2 First Middle Last Rea. Addres: Street city state" Zi 2. Business Addreaa x•132 Cmatrt-u1 p lad t -)r, ytoxy~flt 31 8 Street City X65 State Zip 8. Home Phone Buair*w Phone g~z- I I Z 3 4. Date of Birth Place of Birth / 6. Type of License: Individual Partnership Corporation 8. If Partnership or Corporation list :tame, title, home addrua and p Wore, date of birth, plaos of birth, of each partner, officer and director. Ple4U See ahavA. (6 2055 C(~{£Ruac~ 7. Licensed Establishment, &Jdl ~iAW45 F4342 Name E 55122 btii-`152 3z9' ity Sta2& Zip 6. Dewription of Business: wt., ._a/! e_ w+"✓L „fx(;6 hr 9. Name and Address of er of premises where device is to be operated_ R C~Ha~gS ~h - ~~3z co~„,~<<~L br. K~o rl~e, r, jt 10. Name and Address a owner of device(s)- DAA DY ftG cm k~IT 5 15yy5 5ah Fen„ando R55?m Blvd. Sut+e 2ou. M155iow WIN CA , IV6 11. Have you aver boon d or convicted of airy crime or misdemeanor, other than a traffic offense: Yss No 12. For Amusement Device License (Continue list on separate shoot if n nsary): f Dgt;d2tioa Name ManufactgM ✓E£ RTiOCNEb FOR OFFICE USE ONLY: Reoeip Amount Pd. Date Reed: ii