Loading...
08/14/2001 - City Council Special~~~ MEMO .` city of eagan TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCILMEMBERS FROM: CITY ADMII~TISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: AUGUST 10, 2001 SUBJECT: SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING/TUESDAY, AUGUST 14, 2001 A Special City Council meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, August 14 to review a number of items that require policy clarification or direction by the City Council. III. DAHLINE PROPERTY /WETLAND CEDAR GROVE TIF DISTRICT Mayor Awada has asked that a request by Doris Dahline who resides at 3830 Alder Lane to appear before the City Council at the workshop to discuss the present and future status of a wetland that is adjacent to her property and is included in the Cedar Grove TIF District. Assistant City Administrator Verbrugge has already provided assurance to Ms. Dahline that there is no road extension or improvement planned that would encroach upon the wetland area. Ms. Dateline will appear before the City Council and present her comments about this item. She has provided staff with several graphic depictions of the wetland and will provide accompanying text at the meeting. The maps are attached on pages S through ~. Doris Dateline appeared at the August 7 City Council meeting under Visitors to be Heard and read a letter to the City Council that raised a number of issues ab ut the proposed Cedar Grove Redevelopment. For a copy of the letter, refer to pages ~ through ~. Also attached is a memo from Assistant City Administrator Verbrugge responding to Ms. Dateline's comments, many of which were responded to during the Visitors segment. If the City Council would like any additional information on any point, please notify the office of the City Administrator. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To provide direction regarding the Doris Dateline comments about the wetland area adjacent to her property and included in the Cedar Grove Redevelopment Area. IV. JIM OBERG/SOUTHEAST INDUSTRIAL City Councilmembers Carlson and Fields requested that Jim Oberg be placed on the agenda in regard to the Southeast Industrial Development adjacent to Biscayne Avenue. There is no background information for this item. Councilmembers Carlson and Fields will provide information at the meeting on Tuesday. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To provide any additional direction regazding the Southeast Development as deemed necessary. V. 2002 GENERAL FUND BUDGET UPDATE The City Administrator is nearing completion of the draft 2002 General Fund Operating Budget. The City Administrator would like to discuss with the City Council a timeline for the budget review, share some observations regarding the preliminary budget, impacts of the recent legislation on HACA, local government aid, the school property tax shift, levy limits and other factors that will impact the 2002 General Fund Budget. Staff will also discuss a process for Truth in Taxation notices, a suggested City Budget Hearing and other public policy issues that will be before the City Council this fall as the General Operating Budget receives further review. There are no handouts for this item. The draft preliminary 2002 General Fund Operating Budget will be distributed in approximately ten days to two weeks for Council review. A one page timeline with points for consideration will be distributed for Council review at the meeting on Tuesday. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To provide various policy direction to the City Administrator regarding further development of the 2002 General Fund Operating Budget and certification of the payable 2002 property tax levy. VI. REVIEW CEDAR GROVE REDEVELOPMENT A. MVTA TEA-21 GRANT Minnesota V alley Transit Authority is in the process of preparing an application for federal funding to include project costs related to the proposed pazk-and-ride and transit station in the Cedar Grove Redevelopment Area. The application must be submitted by the end of August 2001 to be included in the next cycle of funding. The MVTA Board approved the inclusion of the Cedaz Grove project in the application at a meeting on Wednesday, August 8. For projects involving multiple jurisdictions, such as the Cedar Grove project, it is important to have all of the parties in support of the applying agency. MVTA has asked that the City of Eagan provide a letter of support to be included in the packet. Staff will present a draft for review and discussion at the special meeting. B. REDEVELOPMENT POLICY As the Cedar Grove Redevelopment continues to progress, land use issues aze increasingly likely to arise. The City Council may want to consider options for minimizing incompatible uses in an area that could redevelop in the near future. Attached on pages [~ through is a document entitled ~~ . ~~ Redevelopment Project Elements and Policies previously reviewed by the City Council. Also attached on pages through is a memorandum from Assistant City Administrator Verbrugge regarding several options available o the City Council. VII. COMMUNITY CENTER TIMELINE Staff has held meetings with the Community Center architects and construction manager regarding the status of the Community Center/Central Park improvements. An update on the plans and specifications will be given at the meeting on Tuesday. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: VIII. IMAGING CONCEPT FOR BAND SHELL The Eagan Rotary Club, a partner in the construction of a band shell for Central Park, unanimously approved a general image/concept for a band shell at their Wednesday, August 8 meeting. Members of the Band Shell Committee will be present to present the project to the City Council for consideration at the meeting on Tuesday. If the City Council finds the proposed band shell concept to be acceptable, the project will move to the next step, which is design and development. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To provide direction to the Eagan Rotary Club regarding the proposed band shell for Central Park. IX. CLARIFICATION OF MASSAGE THERAPY ORDINANCE The Massage Therapy Ordinance Amendment was considered and approved by the City Council at the July 17 meeting. In preparing to issue these off-sites permits, there is additional clarification needed on certain aspects of the ordinance. The issues to be clarified are: • Issuing temporary permits for homes • Temporary off-site permits • Fees for permits Director of Administrative Services VanOverbeke will meet with staff members to discuss the ordinance in further detail. At the Tuesday meeting, Mr. VanOverbeke will brief the Council regarding the outcome of the staff meeting and the staff's recommendation for the changes to the ordinance. A copy of the ordinance is attached on pagesp~~ through0~. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To provide direction regarding l .) Can a temporary permit be issued from a home, 2.) Further clarification on temporary off-site permits, and 3.) Should there be a fee for the permits, and if so, what amount? 3 X. REVIEW OF SIGN ORDINANCE The sign sub-committee of the City Council that includes City Councilmembers Carlson and Tilley met on Friday, July 27 to discuss changes to the Sign Ordinance. The City Attorney's Office was directed to prepare a revised ordinance and have staff email it to the sub-committee for review. The draft was emailed on August 2"d. Staff was also directed to place the item on the Special City Council meetin agenda for August 14~' for consideration by the City Council. Enclosed on page~'~ through ~~___ is a copy of an email from Attorney Bob Bauer explaining his changes to the previous draft and a copy the revised draft ordinance. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To provide direction to staff regarding the sign ordinance. XI. OTHER BUSINESS A. POLICY RE: COUNCIL AGENDA CLARIFICATION Although not on the formal agenda, if it is the desire of the Council, the only item for other business is to review the policy regarding council agenda clarification. Currently an item is placed on a regular agenda if it is deemed an "action" item; in other words, the item requires an official vote by the City Council. All other items that are informational in nature appear in the City Administrator's Informative memo unless the Mayor or two members of the City Council request that a certain item appear on the City Council agenda. It has been the practice that any items involving special recognitions or presentations are presented to the City Council for consent to be scheduled on a regular City Council agenda. The Special City Council meetings and work sessions are typically items that relate to Council policies or goals that were directed by the City Council to be discussed at a Special City Council meeting. The items placed on Special City Council agendas generally correspond with the timeline that was approved for each of the goals or objectives in the City's overall work program. Again, the Mayor or two members of the City Council can place an item on a Special City Council meeting agenda under the current policy. /s/ Thomas L. Hedges _ City Administrator 9 ~, prr.r.aw~LVn. ~~ _.._ L_ ~~ ra.~rorrr.L.ro. Lr~roryra..~. ro a.rrCrrYw~ rrrrrrro~•ra OLL IrOOT~A,1r4 6rYOr~ YL W W O~wrt~ Orr. i. rttiti \ •t•~ • qL~ ~r/•~~LrA~• rr.ra.r.L.... ir~.+r~•~ar•~ iw. r.rr.rrrrrr • rr+r. rw~ _i rrrr rn~ rr.r~. r.r~LSs OrYOrr MCDV•~wr~4 ~•r~ r.~w.. ~r~•^~FLrL/I~rrO rr.rLnsmr. LEGEND Q DNR Protected Waters National Wetland Inventory Contours SILVER BELL INTERCHANGE Eagan, MN ~ 2:10 '.f00 750 Fast u u. i :~ - ~, _ 'e r ~ : - - '; ~ ',ice ; ~~ - ~ .. w, :fi _ - =i _ _ _. s s ,r .,.rte- - ~ ~`= .p ~._- ~~~ .~~; , ~'' - . , i/ _`. .; v ,~ ,~ - _ may. r,7; W ' - ,Y' _-~- _ ~ ..-`X:. - _. c ~~ ,' _ s 1 T ~~ -\ ~ .~. , .~ ~ • ~y `•' - .i i ' + ~,' ~.~e.~ - - 'y` ~; ... ~ ;.. f / i- J '4 I _~. ~r.- .~` r ~ -~~ 1[L{rm~.~~ ' ~ R Syr- ,~`+ :i.•: q .~; .. i •_~ _ - ~' , F~ i ~... 4R".. '. i ~` ' # . .. rs~" ~ `• .. ~' ' st, s Ti~• i%•> ~'; .1:5/ _ i .~ •~ -: - - F i ~~ ; Village Plaza Plan I reviewed the Village Plaza plan of November 1999 again and then contacted some of the members of the task force. Stephen Wallick was good enough to give me a copy of a July 31 memo from Jamie Verbrugge. Most of my comments will reference Question #4. First however, a statement from the Cedar/13 Redevelopment Study Area. Paragraph #1 describes the North-East quadrant of Sectionl9 and the South-East quadrant of Section 18. No mention of Section 20.(1130 acre site. ~c ~ ~ ~ ~ 4) The question (#4) put to Jamie was: Why was the Cedaz Grove redevelopment area expanded from the original Task Force report? ~~ .~ ~ dvvus. i Three azeas were included: t * Section 19 Area -Between Gold Trail & Rahn Road NE corner of NE quadrant of Sec 19 (written in study azea) A possible location for senior housing site. Question: It has aType/Class 3, RND protected wetland. Who would have looked into this BEFORE it was sited "As a possible site"? * Sec 18 Area - North of Kenebec & Silver Bell SE corner of the SE quadrant of Sec 18.Only for the intersection. (written in study area) Logical explanation. * Sec 20 Area - Langhoven Addition NW corner of the NW quadrant of Sec 20 (Not in the study area) JAMIE'S PAINTED PICTURE and DORIS' CRITIQUE 1. This azea identified as "Could provide Gateway feature". TOLD #3 & #4, 6/18,01 Ehlers report. Question: Why now Sec 20? When the Gateway feature was in Sec 19. The NE corner/Tire Center was a prime location because it is on a hill and highly visible. This is still noted on the 6/18/01 Ehlers report with United. Even the Shelter group/hotel suggest `attractive amenities' for the West end. 2. Road intersection requires the acquisition of four homes. Question: FOUR (?) homes - is news to all us resident's. 3. "That leaves only 2single-family homes and three duplexes that would remain as an island amidst all of the new traffic and potential new development". Question: Why is 3820 -Alder lane not included in this statement? Why is it not mentioned that the three duplexes aze Affordable Housing units. ~Iq/ v _~~ We (Langhoven), have been an island ever since the Ballentrae apartments on one side and the light industry on the other have been here ..... a very long time. AND we tike it that way!!. There is never mention that to extend Alder Lane aType/Class 5 wetland needs to be addressed. (I understand it would cost $1ML to fill it in, also that TOLD, a developer interested in this area, has LOW financial feasibility). I read about Rosemount's retail. It stated, the retail lot sizes left are SMALL and aze averaging 6 or 7 acres. Without the extension of Alder Lane, there is only about three acres of land left in Langhoven. The extension takes one to Gold Trail, but for what purpose? Also, that lots #7 and #8 (the three duplexes) aze nbt included in the 2/2/01 Feasibility Study and Report, but aze included in the proposed TIF district? Its been said the Intersection district is a HIGH DEMAND area because of the intersection -Why then is the Silver Bell Center (6/18/01- Ehlers report) 1. Not feasible as a stand alone project 2. No real change from existing use 3. City assistance may not be necessary or wise (prudent) 4. Proposal is an upgrade to existing. (could occur now or later). 9 ROAD Questions -Quotes -Comments QUESTIONS: Matt Hanson or Bruce Westby. 1). What is the cost of project AFTER acquisitions and right-of--ways? 2). What are anticipated traffic levels for 2020? 3).Why are Lots #7 and #8 (the three duplexes) not included in the 2/2/01 Feasibility Study and Report as Affected Properties and therefore are not listed as a Proposed Assessment? ? QUOTE: Ted Gledhill,"But, I would advise people not to place so much emphasis on a particular drawing that shows a road that is drawn a certain way or connecting to another. I say, "REALLY" QUOTE: Tom Colbert 1)."This proposal (the now approved intersection) is about the most we can squeeze out of this azea in terms of operational ei~ciency." 2!16/01. 2)."If the estimated traffic to be generated from the redevelopment would exceed the capacity of the area, the City has three choices: 1.Alter redevelopment plans to change generated traffic levels. 2. Design altered to scattered traffic levels through different times of day. 3. Live with the situation". ~~ COMMENT #1 May 29, I requested from Russ Matthys the newest Feasibility Study, mine was from the 2/2/01 study. I was intending to show my neighbor, Tong Lor Vang where the "new" alignment for Beau D'Rue was. His AC wern out and he wasn't sur about spending the $1,000 if were to lose his house. I told him I was at a council meeting (or workshop), I believe Jan16, where Russ and Tom Colbert agreed that the Beau D'Rue alignment could be moved to the west. This subject came up at the meeting because we talking about Julie's tuck-under garage. They agreed THIS alignment would have no impact on these properties. So Tong would better understand what was going on (no one had talked to him up to this point - 6 months), I called Russ for the latest revision of the road alignment. Russ remembered the meeting. His response, "We didn't vote on it". I said," How can you have a plan for a for a major intersection and you don't know how Beau D'Rue is going to connect to it?" He said,"Council had not given him directive yet". Question: Who directs who? Here we have a Director and a City Engineer representing the Department of Public Works and they get their directive from the council? Don't they bring recommendations to the council for a vote? Question: Was this discussed ID i oi_ o realignment ever brought to Council for a vote? I ask this now, again because of Jamie's reference (number 2 above) [Road intersection REQUIRES the acquisition of four homes]. Who's homes? COMMENT #2 Last week while in my car, I waited at the corner of Silver Bell and Beau D'Rue while an ' 18 wheeler' made the turn coming out of McDonalds. If you put the proposed divider in front of McDonalds - No way ,can that kind of delivery take place. Is Tom Butler OK with this? I'm sure everyone knows, that the road coming out of Silver Bell Center and interficing with McGee's Is-an Accident-Waiting-to-Happen. I try to avoid going into the area because of it. I buy my gas and liquor elsewhere .... And I live across the street! COMMENT #3 When you take two gas stations out of the Cedarvale area, you have but one left in the whole redevelopment area, McGee's. Peggy said, `fihat will be good for McGee's". That is no doubt true, but what with the HUMONGOUS increase in vehicles the total redevelopment azea will bring, is having but one wise? I think you also need to factor in the the impact from the Blue Cross expansion. AND just a reminder: 12/6104 -The Sun Current quoted Jamie as saying, "The traffic feasibility study is the linchpin of what way the plan will go" ALSO - It was said the intersection would go in regazdless of what evolved in the Cedarvale aera. SEVERAL FRONTS I'm trying to stay away from, 'He said -she said' But To Council from Tom Hedges -September 26,2000, Special Council Meeting Agenda. The communication plan stresses the importance of communicating to the community the NEED, the PURPOSE, the PLAN, PUBLIC PARTICIPATION and the BENEFITS to the community. I have trouble with all these points. I would like to see lists to support NEED - PURPOSE and BENEFITS. How can we participate when you are sending all but a very few of us away? Plans are changed without notification. 1."Remove All' written over the three homes on Silver Bell, including the Hue house -Marie didn't know about that. 2. Office/Retail written over my property (November Open house) and I'm not even a part of the redevelopment study! On 9/26/20 the focus was still on the (235 acres -the number changes) of the Cedarvale Mall area - I didn't know about that. 3."The removal often homes" -Saint Paul Pioneer Press -Who's homes? 4. "Road intersection requires the acquisition of four homes", Jamie July 31,2001 memo -Who's homes? Julie? Tong? We usually find something out after the fact. 1. When did you change the boundaries from Cedarvale Mall and business district to the Redevelopment district outlined as a TIF district? 2. The City sent out solicitations to nearly 40 prospective developers in March (actually talked to Ryan and TOLD in February), but June 18, Jim Prosser led us to believe developers were eager to come to them Questions to answer. 1. Ridley -What is the Comp Plan for my area, plus/zoning? 2. The task force focus was on Cedarvale Mall and business district to restore health and vitality to that community and adjacent properties. 3. When the council adopted the "Concept Refinements " of November -Why did the City deviate from the original Task Force recommendations? 4. Why did you change the Task Force concept and analysis recommendations so drastically? S.Why are you looking to extend Alder Lane to Gold Trail? 6.Why fill a wetland to put a road through it -that basically, goes nowhere? ~~ There is confusion 1. City says the redevelopment is compatible with adjacent residential neighborhoods. Which residential neighborhoods? 2. City of Eagan View of Mission states it provides protection of property, 3. Why did Cedarvale become Cedaz Grove? The Grove has been known as the residential area. If anything, why not incorporate something about Nicols if there must be a name change? Miscellaneous Comments The City continues to say -CONCEPT, but the train is already on the track. Each item you approve, is laying track, each home or property you acquirer is putting a train on that track. Which "yes" vote starts the train that destroys my home of 41 years -the home I love. 1. The intersection has not proven its value, yet the success of the redevelopment is based on access to the area. ~ 2. The tax burden will fall to fixed income seniors. The county is akeady getting a taste of the "age-wave" in some azeas. Senior population will triple to 75,640 by 2025. The 85+ population will rise dramatically - I'll be 96.. 3. The Bond approval is already a hardship. 4. Now that transit is a part of the equation -Transportation Hub, is there an added tax levy and additional tax burden? 5. Regional Transit Property Tax (RTB) can levy property taxes for operating transit AND a debt Service levy to provide payment on Transit Bond issues by the Metropolitan Council. They can levy each year an amount up to 2 mills times the assessed value. 6. With the new TIF laws, will your focus go back to the North-East and South-East quadrants where the Task Force had their primary focus in the original plan? ~.J ;~..~t~.?-~-~ ,~- MEMO ' City of Eagan TO: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES FROM: ASSISTANT CITY ADMINISTRATOR VERBRUGGE DATE: AUGUST 9, 2001 SUBJECT: DORIS DAHLINE COMMENTS TO CITY COUNCIL Ms. Doris Dateline, 3830 Alder Lane, has raised a number of issues recently related to the Cedaz Grove Redevelopment Area. Many of the concerns have been included in the six-page memo, titled Village Plaza Plan, that Ms. Dateline submitted to the City Council during Visitors To Be Heard at the August 7, 2001 City Council meeting. The memo references a memo (e-mail) sent by me to Mr. Stephen Wallick on July 31, 2001. That e-mail is attached. For the benefit of the City Council, responses to Ms. Dateline's concerns are below. (A number of these comments were also made during the City Council meeting.) REDEVELOPMENT AREA BOUNDARIES Regarding the issue of the 1999 Cedar Avenue/Highway 13 Redevelopment Study Area being expanded, there have been a number of evolutions to the redevelopment area since the study was commenced. The original study area included areas on the west side of Highway 77 and the Wuthering Heights neighborhood. The west side of the area was removed during the task force review process when it became apparent that a connection for bus or light-rail could not reasonably be made to the other areas. The Wuthering Heights neighborhood was removed during the task force process at the request of the neighborhood. Following completion of the task force process, the City began a concept refinement period during which the Village Plaza concept vision was shazed with a number of developers to review the mazket and financial feasibility of the redevelopment vision. As a result of this refinement process, an open house was held in October 2000 to show a revised redevelopment area that included the Langhoven Addition, where Ms. Dateline resides, and the vacant properties north of Kennebec and Silver Bell. Ms. Dateline attended that open house and asked why the refinements included her home. The process was explained to her at that time. Ms. Dateline also addressed the Council regarding her concerns at the February 2001 meeting prior to the Council's action to adopt the refinements. Following the June proposal review by the EDA, staff was directed to include the area south of Beau d' Rue between Rahn and Gold Trail in the proposed TIF district as a potential site for a senior housing project with the Dakota County CDA. ~~ ~ Pr r~ The TIF district that was adopted by the EDA on August 7 and that will be the subject of a public hearing and Council consideration on August 21 is reflective of these changes. PROTECTED WETLAND Ms. Dahline's property is next to a wetland. She has raised concern that the City has not considered the presence of the wetland and has plans for a road coruiecting Alder Lane to Gold Trail. There exists no City plan to extend Alder Lane through to Gold Trail. There also is no active proposal being reviewed by the City for redevelopment in the Road Intersection District. During the June 18 EDA/EDC joint meeting to review development programs submitted, all proposals for the area were rejected. The programs submitted did not include detailed site planning. The focus of program review was on proposed uses, square footage, projected values, development costs and need for assistance. It is premature to evaluate the impacts of development for this specific issue when no programs are being considered and no detailed site plans have been submitted. PROJECT 800 (Silver Be1UBeau d' Rue intersection realignment) The City Council approved Project 800 to include acquisition of four residential properties and two commercial properties. Two of the homes are on Beau d' Rue and two are on Silver Bell Road. The Silver Bell homes have been acquired through quick take condemnation. The final alignment of the road is still being drafted and will be the subject of final design approval by the City Council. Assistant City Administrator 2 ~~ Jamie Verbrugge From: Jamie Verbrugge Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2001 4:29 PM To: Stephen Wallick (E-mail) Subject: Responses to your questions Steve, Below is a response to the questions I received from you today: Q1: Were any of the original Cedarvale Task Force members notified of the results of the discussions between the City and potential developers? Can fhe Task Force members be kept informed in the future? A1: When the Task Force completed its work in December 1999 there were was no direction by the City Council to continue the Task Force in planning activities related to the redevelopment. However, we did tell members that they would be kept apprised of activity as warranted. Task Force members were included in the notification mailing in advance of the June 18 EDA/EDC meeting and we have made efforts to provide notice along with the businesses and residents whenever a meeting has been noticed to impacted properties. There was not a follow up communication regarding the direction received at the June 18 meeting. However, the task force members will be included in future newsletter communications regarding the project, one of which I expect to come out in late August or early September (your questions by the way are great as a place for us to start for newsletter material!). Q2: Where is the money coming from to finance the Cedar Grove redevelopment? Whaf affect will the proposed reduction of State TIF funding have on the Cedar Grove redevelopment? is there a deadline for submitting TIF proposals to be eligible for the current State funding rate that is driving the Cedar Grove schedule? Can you provide a summary of proposed development finance sources for the Cedar Grove redevelopment and what percentage they would each contribute? A2: Financing for each of the projects has yet to be identified. By creating a Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment District, the City is establishing the mechanism by which the City may partner with potential developers. Each project agreement will be constructed based on the demonstrated needs of the developer; i.e., they must show that but for the assistance of tax increment the project would not go forward. The amount of increment to be used on a particular project is typically based on that "but for' test. As for how the tax reform passed by the Legislature will affect the availability of TIF, there will be a definite reduction in the amount of money available because the general levy funding of school districts has been taken off the local rolls and assumed by the State. That means that, for the most part, the City and County share of property taxes is what remains for TIF generating purposes. The deadline by which a project could have been considered a "pipeline" project is August 1, 2001. That means that development agreements had to be executed by that date to be eligible for funding under the previous system. The timing of the Cedar Grove redevelopment was obviously not conducive to meet this deadline. That is not necessarily a bad thing. Q3: What other incentives are driving the increased developer interest for our redevelopment area? A3: No incentives have been discussed with developers other than the understanding that this will be a TIF district. It has been made very clear to all developers that this is a comprehensive redevelopment and that their projects will be considered for financial partnering only on the merits of need. Some projects will require little assistance and may contribute a lot, while others may require more substantial assistance and contribute little. It depends on the project and project area. , ~~ i nr ~ r~ Q4: Why was the Cedar Grove redevelopment area expanded from the original Task Force report? Why are the liquor store on the comer of Rahn and Beau d' Rue and the Highlands Development not included in the total redevelopment master plan? That is the only land excluded from the area yet it is fronting the main circulation routes and intersection in the development. A4: Three areas were included in the redevelopment area after the Task Force report was submitted. • The area south of Beau d' Rue between Gold Trail and Rahn Road was added for the express purpose of reviewing it as a possible location for a senior housing site. • The Langhoven addition, that's the single-family residential area between Gold Trail and Silver Bell Road south of Beau d' Rue, was added for a couple reasons. During the concept refinement stage, developers identified that area as a gateway area (being the primary access point from Highway 13) that would be potentially very attractive for commerciallretail or multi-family housing uses. Also, the road intersection project at Silver Bell Road and Beau d' Rue requires the acquisition of as many as four homes, meaning that only 2single-family homes and three duplexes would remain as an island amidst all of the new traffic and potential new development. • The vacant commercial properties north of Kennebec and Silver Bell (owned by Freightmasters and others) were included because of the potential tie-in of that area to other areas in the North District. The vacant property is likely to develop soon and by including it in the redevelopment area, we were able to solicit development programs specific to that area. It is preferable from a planning standpoint to have some involvement in the uses that may result for that property because of its proximity to the rest of the redevelopment area. As far as the Highlands, that area was not excluded from the redevelopment area for any specific reason. It was never really considered for inclusion. Because of the apartments, acquisition and relocation would be extremely costly and would probably scuttle for financial reasons any development proposal for such a relatively small project area. Q5: Whaf are the phasing priorities for the Cedar Grove redevelopment? A5: There are no phasing priorities. For the purposes of the original Village Plaza concept, phasing was included because of the recognition that a project area of that size was not likely to develop all at once or the market was immediately ready for certain uses. The phasing was looked at simply as a way to put order to the extended nature of the project time table approaching 5-10 years. We will be proceeding with development proposals based on developer readiness as well as market and financial feasibility. Q6: Can the road and intersection improvemenfs start before the TIF districts are approved? What is the latest schedule for the road improvements? Has the road improvement design changed after discussions with developers? !f so, how and why? !s the road improvement design taking info account any of the pedestrian and landscaping design features of the initial Task Force master plan? A6: Project 800, realignment of the Silver Bell-Beau d' Rue-Highway 13 intersection, has been approved by the City Council. The necessary acquisition of property has begun and initial site prep work is expected to begin Late this year. The actual construction of the intersection will occur in 2002. The improvement to Beau d' Rue from Nicols to Silver Bell Road is probably going to occur in 2002, as well. The other roadway improvements, such as the possible realignment of Cedarvate Boulevard, will most likely be tied directly to future development. Cedarvale Blvd was the only road realignment (aside from the SB-BdR-13 intersection) envisioned in the Village Plaza concept. Other issues, such as pedestrian patterns and landscaping, will be looked at as development plans are reviewed. Q7.~ Is the original traffic study going to be amended to address the additional proposed commercial and housing development? 1~ A7: An updated traffic study is being performed as part of the Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) process currently under way. Traffic figures have been derived based on the maximum development densities received during the program solicitation process for each of the districts in the redevelopment area. Q8: What are the plans for the other arterial roads feeding info the Cedar Grove area, i. e., Nicols, Rahn, Gold Trail, Silver Bell? When will Rahn and Diffley become a signalized intersection? What are the plans to connect the bike paths to the Cedar Grove area? How are pedestrian amenities being addressed with the proposed increase in housing for the area? A13: The road issues are best directed to the Engineering division. I don't know if these roads are classified as arterials or collectors. Same with the Rahn/Diffley intersection. The bike paths and ped paths for the development will be part of development plans, but for more extensive plans it would be appropriate to ask what plans the Parks & Recreation Commission has. I will try to track these answers down in the next couple weeks. Q9: What is Dakota County HRA's plans for senior and affordable housing? Are they looking to finance one or the other or both in Cedar Grove? A9: Dakota County HRA (now the CDA -Community Development Agency) is looking at possible sites for senior housing in the redevelopment district. I don't believe they have any plans to propose an affordable housing plan for the area. Q 10: How is the City's storm wafer management plan affected by the redevelopment proposals discussed to date? What are the City's long term goals for storm water design in the area? A10: We will be looking at the storm water system as part of the AUAR study. Storm water plans for the area will most likely be tied to development plans. I hope this answers your questions, Steve. Let me know if I can be of further assistance. Thanks, Jamie Verbrugge Assistant City Administrator i~ FREERS & ASSOCIATES INC Redevelopment Project Elements and Policies Successful redevelopment requires three basic elements; a clear goal, a market for the redevelopment concept and financial resources to pay for the redevelopment and an effective communications and public input strategy with .the community. Most redevelopment projects that falter are the result of failure to develop a primary redevelopment goal. As a result the redevelopment effort is forced to achieve multiple (and sometimes conflicting) goals. Removal of a blighted area, development of a "gateway", new housing options, and development of neighborhood retail are all examples of potential redevelopment goals. The key is to select one primary goal. That is the goal that will be used to measure whether a proposed development is appropriate for the community. Secondary goals can be identified with the understanding that achieving these subsidiary goals is not a prerequisite to project approval. Once the redevelopment goals have been identified a planning process that includes analysis of the mazket and financial feasibility is essential. Development of a concept plan that is not marketable to the development community or cannot be financed, even with public assistance, is politically risky. Once the community has been engaged in a planning process there is an understandable expectation that the development will occur. Inviting developers to participate and comment during the planning process helps increase the likelihood of a successful redevelopment and also serves to market the project to potential developers. In a similar manner inclusion of a financial advisor during the planning process will clarify the financial feasibility of the project. Project revenues may include land sale proceeds and public assistance (including grants, TIF and tax abatements). It is important to note that this approach accommodates a situation where the development authority has identified a goal that is not currently marketable. For example a city may determine that it wants to have a signature office building as a gateway to the community. If the market feasibility indicates that there is not a market for this type of space, the city may decide to delay development until the market is ready. Likewise, if a project is market- feasible but not financially feasible, the city may decide to augment normal funding to achieve the desired goal. Developing the informed consent of the community for redevelopment is extremely important to a city's ability to complete any redevelopment. To develop informed consent, the city needs to design a communications and public input strategy that enables the community to understand and accept the redevelopment. This involves communicating regulazly and frequently utilizing a variety of tools that have been crafted to forecast issues, acknowledge controversy and honestly address issues and concerns. The strategy involves the development and implementation of a communications plan and design of planning process, which provides the appropriate level of community input at critical points. In cases where referendum is a part of the redevelopment process, it involves an even more complex and skilled handling of communications issues to aggressively and impartially inform the public. 19 Redevelopment Project Framework Redevelopment projects basically occur within five phases. These phases often overlap. The time frame for each phase may vary significantly from project to project. It is essential to recognize that redevelopment programs are inherently controversial because they involve change. Redevelopment is also disruptive to those within and adjacent to the project area. While efforts are made to m;n;m;~e this impact some level of disruption is unavoidable. An effective communications strategy that focuses on forecasting issues, reiterating key massages and addressing concerns plays a major role in the redevelopment process. The phases of redevelopment include: Phase I -- Need Identification The city identifies an area or azeas in need of redevelopment. In this phase, the public has little or no awareness of the potential redevelopment project and may or may not agree with the need for redevelopment or what role the city should play. A communications plan should be developed at this phase because it will assist the city's policymakers with identifying and agreeing on the one goal of the redevelopment and the key messages of the redevelopment. Also, communications tools need to be developed immediately which will enable the city to forecast key messages about the need, and the primary purpose for the redevelopment, whether that is blight removal, improved tax base, enhanced "gateway" image of a community or something else. It is important to settle on one prime goal for the redevelopment. While there can be secondary goals, settling on a primary goal will help to avoid measuring the redevelopment's success using different yardsticks. That primary goal will need to be reiterated and underscored throughout the project. A decision is made in this phase to proceed with a redevelopment concept. Phase 2 -- Concept Development This phase encompasses the planning process, beginning with the design of a redevelopment concept. A group is identified to assist with concept development, and broad-based community input is received. Consistent and frequent communications utilizing a variety of tools enable the city to inform and educate the public and offer opportunities for feedback, in addition to publicizing open houses. The city should continue to forecast the need and purpose for the redevelopment and the planning process. The redevelopment process identifies desired outcomes, potential redevelopment uses and design ideas, and designates the redevelopment azea. Phase 3 -- Concept Refinement In this phase the concept is tested for market and fmancial feasibility with the help of developers and market specialists. The redevelopment concept is then refined, based on the fmancial and market analysis. A critical public participation issue in this phase is the need to involve the community in the refinements of that concept. At this phase there may be some growing awareness of the potential redevelopment project in the community. Communications efforts must increase knowledge about the project, especially as it relates to the need, the purpose, the plans, the process and public participation. This phase is often combined with concept development. Phase 3 -- Developer Selection At this phase the city contacts qualified developers and discusses the redevelopment concept and program, identifying developers for a qualification process. Developers' experience and fmancial capabilities are assessed. One or more developers are selected for further analysis of the redevelopment feasibility. The city reviews general plans, including uses, design concepts, densities and financial feasibly with developers. Phase 4 -- Development Agreement Most of the planning is completed and a developer has been selected, but the project is still months from construction. Apre-development agreement is negotiated with one or more developers, providing a period of exclusive rights for development. In that agreement, the developer refines plans and assesses market feasibility. In the development agreement, the developer secures a lease commitment and financing for the project. The developer also completes land use and other regulatory reviews. Finally, the development agreement occurs when the developer removes development agreement contingencies and initiates land acquisition and building design. At this phase, communicating the vision for the redevelopment is critical and helps the community focus on future benefits. The vision is especially critical where communities may initially be uncomfortable with a type of redevelopment, such as multi-family housing, in part because of an inaccurate and negative perception. Phase 5 -- Construction All development agreements are final, acquisition has begun and even some initial demolition of existing properties has occurred. ao -n~~ Recommended Redevelopment Policies 1. A primary redevelopment objective should be identified by the City Council. This will provide the framework for evaluating redevelopment proposals. The Council may select several secondary objectives however it is understood that these secondary objectives are not required for project approval. 2. A communications plan should be prepared and approved the City Council for each redevelopment project. The plan should include a variety of methods used to provide information to the public, target audiences, forecasting key issues and decision points, methods to receive feedback, key messages and time frames. Because the plan identifies key concerns/issues for the community and the primary purpose of the redevelopment it u important to develop it very early in the process. The plan must be implemented to ensure frequent and consistent communications that inform, forecast, acknowledge controversy, address issues and communicate the vision. 3. Developer selection should be competitive whenever possible. Competitive selection will increase the available options and provide greater assurance that the City is providing the right level of assistance. 4. Developer selection should be based on the following factors: • Proposal ability to achieve the primary objective identified by the City Council. • Financial feasibility. • Demonstrated ability to achieve design guidelines. • Demonstrated ability of developer to access required project equity and financing. • Developer experience with similar projects. • Developer ability to demonstrate design and process flexibility. • Developer experience with incorporating existing businesses into new project. • Developer experience with acquiring property without condemnation. • Developer experience with communicating with public. 5. The redevelopment process should follow the "Redevelopment Process Framework" as reasonably possible. This process has been designed to increase the potential for successful redevelopment. 6. Eminent domain will not be authorized to assist a developer in property acquisition except where an independent third party certifies that best faith efforts have been unsuccessful in attempts to acquire property required for development. Use of alternative dispute resolution helps avoid the perception that the city and/or the developer will take advantage of existing property owners. 7. The CityBDA/HRA should consider purchasing property within the redevelopment area when the following conditions are met: • Acquisition costs aze reasonably close to estimated market value. • It is possible that the property would be acquired and developed for a use inconsistent with development goals or design guidelines without the assistance of the City/EDA/HRA. • A method to finance the acquisition and holding cost can be identified. • The parcel is key to achieving redevelopment objectives of the City. 8. Developers entering into preliminary development and final development agreements will be required to deposit funds to defray development review costs. This would include legal, finance, planning and communication costs. 9. Public assistance in the form of tax increment, grants, reduced fees or other means of assistance will comply with the City's Business Subsidy Policy. In addition an independent "rate of return" analysis will be prepared prior to granting any assistance. N:\General\Project Management\dev.process.policies.2.doc ~~ i'~j ' city of eagan MEMO TO: City Administrator Hedges FROM: Assistant City Administrator Verbrugge DATE: July 27, 2001 SUBJECT: Cedar Grove Redevelopment As you are awaze, the City Council will be considering creation of a Tax Increment Financing Redevelopment District for the Cedar Grove Redevelopment Area on August 21. And, as we discussed, the City Council has on the August 14 Special Workshop agenda to consider redevelopment policies for Cedar Grove. The City is moving toward a final redevelopment agreement with Delta Homes in the Cedar Grove South District, and will soon be negotiating preliminary redevelopment agreements with Ryan Companies in Cedar Grove North and Shelter Corporation in Cedar Grove West. We expect to see a revised proposal from TOLD Development at the end of August for Cedar Grove Central, as well as revised proposals from Ryan and United Properties for redevelopment of the northeast quadrant of the Highway 77113 interchange. The redevelopment process has been widely publicized and very open. The process has been two and a half years in the making, going back to the Cedar/13 Redevelopment Study Task Force. Project 800 is moving forward, homes and businesses are being acquired by the City, and environmental studies have begun. All of the above-mentioned activities are important to consider because, despite the tremendous momentum this project has developed, there are still property owners within the redevelopment district that are interested in making renovations or improvements that are inconsistent with the redevelopment land use goals for the azea adopted in February 2001. In an effort to preserve the integrity of the redevelopment process, there are several actions the City Council may consider to minimize adverse development during the period in which redevelopment agreements are being negotiated and formalized. Interim Ordinance An interim ordinance, or moratorium, was placed on the Cedar/13 Redevelopment Study Area in 1999. The purpose of that moratorium was to study redevelopment opportunities for the area. Based on discussion with City Attorney Dougherty, the City could enact a moratorium for an initial 18 months (with an additional 12 month extension allowable by Statute, if deemed necessary) in the Cedar Grove Redevelopment Area, or parts thereof. The purpose of this as moratorium would be to study redevelopment proposals received by the City for their impacts on land uses, traffic and transportation, water quality, air quality, etc. The moratorium could prevent existing property owners from improving their properties for the time in which the moratorium is effective. This would have the effect of ensuring that inappropriate and incompatible development does not occur within the redevelopment area during the study period. The certainty of an unchanging landscape is also likely to appeal to potential developers interested in the azea beyond the next year or two, thereby encouraging them to submit additional proposals for consideration. The moratorium would most likely come with some controversy. The sentiment among the businesses in the redevelopment azea now seems to be generally accepting of the City's redevelopment goals, despite its potential adverse affect on those very businesses. A moratorium may cause some concern that the City's intent is to artificially devalue properties prior to potential acquisition and relocation proceedings. Some property owners may suggest that a moratorium is an unreasonable and unnecessary intervention on their business if they are in an azea that does not currently have a development program under consideration. It is likely that the ownership interest in the Cedarvale Mall would be most vocal in opposing the moratorium. The largest parcel in the redevelopment area, Cedarvale Mall is currently the subject of a purchase agreement. Comprehensive Guide Amendment City Attorney Dougherty has suggested that the Concept Refinements, or Redevelopment Land Use Goals, adopted by the City Council in February 2001 could be amended into the Comprehensive Guide for the Cedar Grove Area. By this action, most properties in the redevelopment area would be designated non-conforming uses. Future development, conditional use permits, and variance requests would need to be consistent with the adopted land use goals in the Comprehensive Guide in order to be approved. As I understand, the City Council would need to direct the staff to prepare the amendment and then schedule a public hearing to adopt the changes. Condemnation The fact that Cedarvale Mall is the subject of a purchase agreement has potential negative consequences for the redevelopment of the azea. One consideration to mitigate this possibility is to initiate a condemnation proceeding. This action poses substantial risk to the City financially and politically in the neaz term, however there is a cleaz long-term benefit. The City has previously reviewed the rent rolls and financial statements of the mall when considering acquisition in January 2001. It was highly questionable whether a sale at the asking price could cash flow based on the information presented. The figure the City would have offered was substantially less than the asking price. In a condemnation proceeding, the final number may not be known for some time and may exceed the ability of the City to maintain the property as a revenue neutral acquisition until such time as it is possibly redeveloped. Additionally, the condemnation awazd may exceed the value that could be realized from redevelopment. Normally, it would be advisable to delay any attempts to purchase property until a development agreement has been reached or, if at all possible, for the developer to undertake the acquisition. Without a development agreement there is significant risk to the City that the acquisition cost will not be fully repaid. It is also possible that the City would be challenged on its public purpose need for the condemnation proceeding by either the buyer or seller, or both. Summary None of these issues are cleaz-cut or slam-dunks. It may be best to move forwazd on all fronts at once if the interest of the City Council is to make an unswerving commitment to the redevelopment. The Comp Guide amendment would likely create the most anxiety among the majority of property owners, the moratorium might create the most questions, and condemnation would certainly cause the most public relations -bad or good. Your advice and direction on these matters would be greatly appreciated as we continue our efforts to promote the successful development of the Cedar Grove Redevelopment Area. ssistant City Administra or Copy: City Attorney Dougherty Senior Planner Ridley James Prosser, Ehlers & Associates a~ ¶~~ ORDINANCE NO. 2ND SERIES AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EAGAN, NIINNESOTA, AMENDING EAGAN CITY CODE CHAPTER SIX ENTITLED "OTHER BUSINESS REGULATION AND LICENSING" BY AMENDING SECTION 6.39, SUBD. 4(A) .REGARDING MASSAGE THERAPY ESTABLISHMENT AND BY ADDING SUBD. 6 REGARDING TEMPORARY OFF-SITE PERMIT; AND BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE EAGAN CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 6.99. The City Council of the City of Eagan does ordain: Section 1. Eagan City Code Chapter Six is hereby amended by changing Section 6.39, Subd. 4(A), to read as follows: A. License required. It is unlawful for any person to operate a massage therapy establishment without a license therefore from the city. It is unlawful for any person to practice therapeutic massage therapy in any place except upon a licensed premises-, unless a temporary off-site permit is issued in accordance with the provisions of this Section. Section 2. Eagan City Code Chapter Six is hereby amended by changing Section 6.39, by adding Subd. 6 to Section 6.39 to read as follows: Subd. 6. Temporary off-site permit. A. Notwithstanding_the~rovision regulating..a massage therapy establishment license hereunder, a massage therapist licensed by the City mawprovide massage therapy on premises other than the licensed premises upon the issuance of a temporary off-site pernut by the City Council. An application for a temporary off-site permit, which shall be on a form provided by the City, shall be completed with all information requested thereon and submitted to the City. B. A temnorarYoff-sitepermit shall be subject to the following requirements: 1. The off-site massage therapy shall be conducted onl a~ t the premises under the permit. 2. The permit shall be effective for a period not to exceed seven (7) days. 3. No more than vermits shall be issued to the same applicant within a 12- monthperiod. 4. The permit shall be subject to all provisions of this Section governing licensed massa eg therapy establishments and licensed massage therapists, as 5. The permit may be issued only for special, short-term promotional or contract events or services. Section 3. 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" aze hereby adopted in their entirety by reference as though repeated verbatim. Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect upon its adoption and publication according to law. ATTEST: CITY OF EAGAN City Council By: Mira McGarvey Its: Deputy Clerk Date Ordinance Adopted: Date Ordinance Published in the Legal Newspaper: By: Patricia E. Awada Its: Mayor a~ ,; . ~, ., c;napter 4.ZU, ~ut;d. 1(C) - t/agan City Code Gene VanOverbeke Page 1 of 1 From: Bauer, Robert [BauerR@SeversonSheldon.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 10:24 AM To: 'gvanoverbeke@cityofeagan.com' Cc: Dougherty, Mike; 'thedges@cityofeagan.com' Subject: Chapter 4.20, Subd. 1(C) -Eagan City Code Gene, Enclosed with this a-mail is an attachment containing the proposed changes to Chapter 4.20 corresponding to signs. The Ordinance has been rewritten to incorporate the following: A. Definition of "right of way;" B. Definition of "governmental sign;" C. Prohibition against placement of signs within a public right of way; D. Prohibition against placements of signs upon any public property; and E. Requirement of placement of any sign upon any private property. It is my hope that I incorporated the incorporated changes that were discussed at our prior meeting. If additional changes are requested, please let me know. «Ordinance Chapter 4.20 subd. 1(c).doc» Robert B. Bauer Severson, Sheldon, Dougherty & Molenda, P.A. 7300 West 147th Street Apple Valley, Minnesota 55124 (952)432-3136 (952) 432-3780 Facsimile bauerr@seversonsheldon.com www. seversonsheldon.com ................................~.t........,t.............«................«................. This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by a-mail at bauerr@seversonsheldon.com or by telephone at 952/432-3136 and delete the message and any attachments from your system. 8/1/01 ~~ ORDINANCE NO. 2ND SERIES AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EAGAN, MINNESOTA, AMENDING EAGAN CITY CODE CHAPTER FOUR ENTITLED "CONSTRUCTION LICENSING, PERMITS AND REGULATION" BY AMENDING SECTION 4.20, SUBD. 1(c) AND 3 REGARDING SIGN REGULATIONS AND BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE EAGAN CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 4.99. T1~e City Council of the City of Eagan does ordain: Section 1. Eagan City Code Chapter Four is hereby amended by adding the following definition to Section 4.20, Subd.l(C}, to read as follows: * * s 9. Governmental sign means any sign placed, erected or maintained by a governmental entity or agency for identification of or directions to a public facility or street or for traffic control. 10. Public right of way or public rights of way means the surface, air space above the surface and the area below the surface of any public street, highway, lane, path, alley, sidewalk, trail, avenue, boulevard, drive, court, concourse, bridge, tunnel, park, parkway, skyway, waterway, dock, bulkhead, wharf, pier, easement or similar property or waters within the City owned by or under control of the City, or dedicated or otherwise conveyed to the Citv for general public use. Section 2. Eagan City Code Chapter Four is hereby amended by changing Section 4.20, Subd. 3, to read as follows: Subd. 3 General sign standards. * s C. Placement within public right-of--way. No sign other than governmental signs, shall be located within any public right-of--way, except e~ residential name signs which are attached to mailboxes, np 'vate lampposts, or the like. H. Location on public property. No sign, other than govenunental signs, shall be placed upon any public property. No sign, other than governmental signs, shall be affixed to any utility pole. ~b I. Location on private property. No sign shall be erected, placed or located upon private property without the permission of the propery owner or the lessee. Section 3. Eagan City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation"' and Section 4.99, entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety by reference as though repeated verbatim. Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect upon its adoption and publication according to law. ATTEST: CITY OF EAGAN City Council By: Mira McGarvey Its: Deputy Clerk Date Ordinance Adopted: Date Ordinance Published in the Legal Newspaper: By: Patricia E. Awada Its: Mayor ~9