03/04/2002 - City Council Regular
AGENDA
EAGAN CITY COUNCIL - REGULAR MEETING
EAGAN MUNICIPAL CENTER BUILDING
MARCH 4, 2002
6:30 P.M.
1. ROLL CALL & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
IL ADOPT AGENDA
III. RECOGNITIONS & PRESENTATIONS
IV. CONSENT AGENDA
,p a A. APPROVE MINUTES
OV B. PERSONNEL
ITEMS
P/0 C. RATIFY Check Register for February 21, 2002 and February 28, 2002
It D. APPROVE from Lawful Gambling Exempt Permit application
rlz E. APPROVE Premise Permit Renewal Applications
~13 F. AUTHORIZE the City Attorney's Office to prepare an ordinance amendment to Chapter 6
entitled "Other Business Regulation and Licensing" to clarify administrative fines and penalties
for tobacco sale violations.
G. AUTHORIZE the City Attorney's Office to prepare an ordinance amendment to Chapter 5
/ entitled "Beer, Wine and Liquor Licensing and Regulation" to clarify the hearing process and
penalty provisions and to change the civil penalties for violations in the sale of alcoholic
beverages.
dH. APPROVE Final Subdivision - Bergin Addition, Thomas R. Bergin
171. CONTRACT 02-02. Receive Bids/Award Contract (Cedar Cliff/Mari Acres/River Hills
9`s/Post/Rustic Hills and Oster Additions - Street Improvements.
p l q J. CONTRACT 02-03. Receive Bids/Award Contract (Ches Mar / Ches Mar E. / Oak Chase
6`s/Parkcliff and Woodgate Additions - Street Improvements.
K. RECEIVE Amended Feasibility Report and Schedule Public Hearing for Project 800R, Cedar
v Grove Access Reconfiguration (Street & Utility Improvements)
L. APPROVE plans and authorize ad bids, Contract 02-10 (Dodd Road, Diffley Road to Wescott
Road - Street and Utility Improvements).
~a3 M. AMEND Pending Assessment Roll for 3790 and 3800 Dodd Road (Project 862, Dodd Road -
Camberwell to Wescott Road).
V,?YN. APPROVE easement agreement for Project 751R, Reinke property (Dodd Road - Street and
Utility Improvements).
RECEIVE petition and order public hearing for vacation of easement (Oakbrooke 5a' Additi
on)
a~ P. CANCEL pending assessments for Project 736, Grand Oak Business Park (AUAR Traffic
Study).
g Q. APPROVE contract with Doris Dahline.
t~/3 R. APPROVE Final Cedar Grove TIF Findings and Certification.
y S. RECEIVE Bids and award contract - Project 838 (River Hills 9"' - Flood Mitigation)
S T. APPROVE change orders for Community Room project.
/ U. AUTHORIZE Advertisement for bids for portable and mobile radios.
sAPPROVE 2002 Tree Contractor License Renewal.
. z W. APPROVE Storm Sewer Trunk Oversize Reimbursement - Duke Realty - Lunar Point Addition
X. APPROVE No-Parking Resolution for Beau D'Rue Drive - Project 759R (Street and Utility
~60 Improvements).
Y. APPROVE Tree Contractor License Renewal.
V. 6:30 - PUBLIC HEARINGS
f~ 4cZ A. PROJECT 858, Sibley Terminal Industrial Park (Storm Sewer Improvements)
F61B- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - STUART WEIERKE. A Conditional Use Permit to allow
more than two detached accessory buildings and to allow the total floor area of all accessory
structures to exceed 1100 square feet and a permit to move a garage from 4665 Dodd Road,
located on the West side of Dodd Road, South of Cliff Road in the NW of Section 26.
VI. OLD BUSINESS
VD g a A. PROJECT 847, Fairway Hills/Parkview Golf Course Storm Mitigation Improvement
VII. NEW BUSINESS
96 A. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - LESLIE J. RACINE JR. A Conditional Use Permit to allow
the floor area of all accessory buildings to exceed 1100 square feet on Lot 32, Block 4, Oslund
Timberline Addition, located at 3038 Cherry-wood Court in the NE '/a of Section 9.
VIII. LEGISLATIVE/INTERGOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS UPDATE
IX. ADNIINISTRATIVE AGENDA
A. Comments by City Council, City Administrator, and Department Heads
X. ADJOURNMENT
XI. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
~~ab A. Approval of minutes.
„ IaG~ B. Approve scope of services contract for Cedar Grove design standards, DSU, Inc.
XII. VISITORS TO BE HEARD (for those persons not on agenda)
XIII. 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.
MEMO
city of eagan
MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES
DATE: FEBRUARY 15, 2002
SUBJECT: AGENDA INFORMATION FOR MARCH 4, 2002 CITY COUNCIL MEETING
ADOPT AGENDA
After approval is given to the March 4, 2002 City Council agenda, the following items are in
order for consideration.
Agenda Information Memo
March 4, 2002 Eagan City 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 any 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. APPROVE MINUTES
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
To approve the minutes of the February 19, 2002 regular City Council meeting as presented or
modified.
ATTACHMENTS:
• Minutes of the February 19, 2002 regular City Council meeting are enclosed on pages
through.
MINUTES OI; VREGULAR MEETM OF THE
EARN CITY COUNCM.;.:
Elie#M MINNESQ-JP
A regular meeting of the Eagan City Council was held on Tuesday, February 19, 2002 at 6:30 p.m.
at the Eagan Municipal Center. Present vet;M 4r Awada and Councilmembers Bakken, Carlson, Fields
and Tilley. Also present were City A
dm~s`s~ • fi•A~29. T:"•' r Planner Mike Ridley, Director of
' .$?~i•
Public Works Tom Colbert, City Attorney Iv1i"ke'Iloiify'itiftl'gfgfn to the City Administrator Dianne
Lord. i;
A .
Councilmember T illey moved, Ctili~ilmembedfl seconded, a motion to adopt the agenda.
Aye: 5 Nay:0
CONSENT AGENDA
A. Minutes. It was recommended to approve the minutes of the February 5, 2002 regular City Council
meeting; and the minutes of the Fef# z.~002 special City Council meeting.
B. Personnellcems.
] . It was recommended to accept the letterofiti+ 3j 4 I tfrom Police Officer Karlen Long.
2. It was recommended to approve a c;ipensation rateypgnease of 3.3% for seasonal engineering
aide/intern effective January 1, 20d:-
C. Ratify Check Register. It was recomt~pc~k b~;f~}i~~t2ie check registers dated February 2-8, 2002 and
February 9-15, 2002 as presented.
D. Tobacco License Application. It Was recommended to approve a tobacco license for Oriental Foods,
3904 Beau D'Rue Drive.
E. Exemption from Lawful Gambling License. It was recommended to approve an application for
exemption from lawful gambling rzcense for the National Wild Turkey Federation for a raffle to be
held at 2280 Cliff Road on March 14, 2002.
F. MRAC. It was recommended to ¢cct~g3SSlf:O'tb4,8detropolitan Regional Arts Council Grant
for Caponi Art Camp.
G. Consumption and Display Permit. It was recgq Wended to approve a Consumption and Display (Set
Up) Permit application for Parkview Golf ClAItcated at MI0 Cliff Road.
H. Remodel Project. It was recommended to ape a contg of with Siewert Cabinet and Fixture
Manufacturing, Inc. and Sieco Construction, Q:* for the ipdeling of the receptionist workstation
and to authorize a funding source for the project.
1. Extension of PreliminaKy Subdivision. It was recommended to approve an extension of the
Preliminary Subdivision - Blue Ridge Fourth Addition located at 2945 Lone Oak Drive in the SW '/4
of Section 1.
J. Contract 02-01. It was recommended to receive bids for Contract 02-01 (Beacon Hill/Brittany/Johnny
Cake Ridge Additions/Covington Lane- Street Overla and the contract to Northwest Asphalt,
Inc., for the base bid in the amount of $485,543, and au a the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all
related documents. r,.••
K. Project 790R. It was recommez31$#dt*aft feasibility report for Project 790R
(Central Parkway - Street an Utility Improvemenfs'~anZr §trhedule a public hearing to be held on March
19, 2002.
L. Street Sweeping Policy. It was recommended to apprAfifie Street Sweeping Policy for the City of
Eagan and authorize its implementation.
M. Railroad Crossing Gates and Signal. It was recommended to approve MnDOT agreement #77142
(Railroad Crossing Signals - Nicols Road and Union Pacific Railway) and related resolution, and
authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents.
2
Eagan City Council Meeting Min
u8
February 19, 2002
Page 2
N. Contract 01-04. Citywide Trail Imnror~ts. It was recended to approve the plans and
specifications for Contract 02-04 (CityvvpcpXetitpts) and authorize the advertisement for a
bid opening to be held at 10:30 a.m. on Th'dfs 3d:~d; 2002.
0. Contract 02-11. It was recommended to approve t)ie plans and specifications for Contract 02-11 (Dodd
Road, Cliff Road to Butwin Road - Street and Utility . Improvements) and authorize the advertisement
for a bid opening to be held at 10:30 a.m. on Thursday, March 14, 2002.
P. Purchase Agreement. It was recommended to approve a purchase agreement for 3816 Beau D Rue
Drive.
Q. Removing Tax Parcels from TIF Dis~ttC~•_' _ : ~Atts: 0 jmmended to adopt a resolution ,
approving the elimination of parcels from Tax meat Fit}ing District No. 3 within Development
District No. 2 of the City of Eagan. f,:;%
R. Approve 2001 General Fund Budget Adiustq-:,It was r tmended to approve the 2001 General
L TTn~
Fund Budget adjustments. -24 .
S. Premise Permit Renewals. It was root i i ii$ed to*ks iie'1!'iemise Permit Renewals for Exemption
from Lawful Gambling License for the Knights of Columbus at Starks Saloon and Coopers Restaurant.
T. Contribution. It was recommended to approve a $1000 contribution to the Minnesota Water Quality
Partnership in support of the City of Shorewood's lobbying efforts for State legislation that restrict the
use of phosphorus fertilizer.
Councihnember Bakken nmov8 gq*lmember Tilley seconded a motion to approve the consent
agenda. Aye: 5 Nay: 0
PU3 IC
CONSIDER ADOPTION 4}lk9f~bIFICATION FOR NORTHEAST EAGAN
DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO:' 2 •(BETWEEN BLUE GENTIAN ROAD AND HWY 149 ON
EITHER SIDE OF HWY 55); ESTABLISHMENT OF TAX INCREMENT FINANCING
DISTRICT NO. 2-4 (A REDEVELOPMENT TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT)
WITHIN NORTHEAST EAGAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 2; AND ADOPTION OF THE
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN (THE "PLAN") THEREFORE
City Administrator Hedges iitt:tlidi)ifl}gajFtitg by noting that the redevelopment of
Highway 55 and 149 was a goal set forth by the C;;;Council fQ;.the 2001-2002 terms. He stated that the
Advisory Planning Commission and Economic D opment ority both reviewed the draft
redevelopment plans, and passed resolutions supgr i ng the P..%%.
Mr. Hedges also added that property owners, Dakotabtmty, and ISD #197 were provided
required notification of the proposed TIF District. Dakota County submitted road impact comments
regarding proposed upgrades to Lexington Avenue. On February 12, 2002, the Dakota County Commission
took board action to recommend the City-not create the district.
Sid Inman and Rebecca Kurtz of Ehlers and Assoc*
were present, as was Greg Miller of
McGough Development. Miller provided a brief presentatiotj$Wting that nine of the fourteen land interests
(parcels 1,2,3,4,5,6,16,14,13) have 1.wA:BGgQitcd:;~tgei ip-4g ming property owners have been notified.
Miller asked the Council for the opp~;k~$Qietions with the property owners.
An unidentified Eagan resident questioned whetht*Mler is the type of developer Eagan wants,
and noted Miller used strong-arm tactics to negotiate with pfo rty owners.
Marv Glavin, an Eagan resident, offered his concerns over the City using condemnation in the
future. He does not want the City involved in purchasing land and does not want the land being undersold.
Mayor Awada stated that the City does not usually use condemnation in TIF proceedings, and that at the
purpose of the public hearing was to establish the TIF district only.
V
Eagan City Council Meeting Minutes:;
February 19, 2002 • •
Page 3
Marilyn Sanford, whose home is pr;its>gs 3fed that she wants to be removed from
the Tff district. She noted that under Tff requiflysytigs need to be blighted or substandard, and
the houses on Blue Gentian are not substandard. She voiced her concern over what happened in Richfield
with their TIF district and stated that she does not want the City to use condemnation.
Ray Sanford, 1020 Blue Gentian,.sAtt;dthat there is no blight in the neighborhood. He stated that
the •legal use of TIF is to provide housingib~b-'tsr of which is being done. He
presented statements from State Supreme ~oirit'~3fi`e~$afdQig••fequirements and noted that the homes
ill the district are not structurally substandard. ,
Pat Pavliv, 950 Blue Gentian Road, askq*k; ~k removaK*bm the TIF district.
Sid Inman of Ehlers and Assoc&Wsfaied thaf'040-i he property meets the substandard
requirements.
City Attorney Dougherty noted that the argument for the State Supreme Court case in Richfield
regarding their use of TIF has not been heard yet. The first lawsuit was in regard to condemnation
proceedings, not TIF.
A business owner at 1027 Blue ;Ki;vuiced his concern that property owners are being
offered different prices for their land. He state that• .vr, e8tened by the real e$tate agent with
condemnation. He recommended that a unifoft cost be used fg~~tirchasing the properties.
There being no further public cQ a i.: closed the public hearing and turned
discussion back to the Council.
Councilmember Carlson moved, Councilmember Fields seconded a motion to approve a
resolution adopting a modification for the Northeast Eagan Development District No. 2. Aye: 5 Nay: 0
Councilmember Carlson moved, Councilmember Fields seconded a motion to establish TIF
District No. 4 within the NE Eagan Ditdlpotif kij. Aye: 5 Nay: 0
Councilmember Carlson moved, CouncilmWber Fie~c}s,seconded a motion to adopt the Tff plans
as specified by the consultants. Aye: 5 Nay::,i;:;;
Bakken recognized that the Council is cloWMIsscente ql citizen concerns, and they will be heard
at the proper time. Councilmember Carlson asked that the proo'i[;ty owners be noticed of all proceedings
involving the TIF District. Staff noted the request.
NEW BUSINESS
ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - CHAPTER 5, SECT 5.51 OF THE EAGAN CITY CODE
ENTITLED BEER, WINE AN;P 4 ~;.iC •4~,1i(,•AND REGULATION REGARDING
SPORTS OR CONT~?IC•;.,.IQUOR LICENSE FEE.
City Administrator Hedges introduced the item byxgg that on January 22, 2002, the City
Council directed the City Attorney's office to prepare an or"ce amendment to Chapter 5 of the City
Code regarding beer, wine, and liquor licensing to provide for an annual sports or convention facilities
liquor license and related fee. The amendment is being requested in preparation of the RFP process
associated with obtaining a liquor vendor at the Eagan Community Center. Hedges added that Chapter 5,
Section 5,51 identifies the fee for the daily sports or convention facility license fee, which is $50. The
ordinance amendment proposed includes a provision for an annual license and related annual fee. Staff
Eagan City Council Meeting Minu;
February 19, 2002
Page 4
proposed an annual license fee of $600 fot•:Fpuvention fac}Fttense. This fee is in addition to the fee
required to obtain an on-sale liquor license.
Councilmember Carlson moved, Councilmember Bakken seconded a motion to adopt an
ordinance amendment to Chapter 5, Section 5.5 1, entitled Beer, Wine, and Liquor Licensing and
Regulation regarding the daily sports or convention facilities liquor license fee. Aye: 5 Nay: 0
ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - C:'a•. 'S2, OF THE EAGAN CITY CODE
ENTITLED BEER, WINE AND LIQI)t)R.,It'M*'t f,'f'i :i *OUEGULATION REGARDING THE
NUMBER OF ON-SALE LIQUOR LICENS&-iVAIL0~lE TO BE ISSUED IN THE CITY.
City Administrator Hedges introduced tb>ki. 6 by stati#• Pat on January 22, 2002, the City'
Council directed the City Attorney's offtogagiai'e'a1R:o d~tjie amendment to Chapter 5, Section 5.52
of the City Code regarding the number Aftiii=safe liquoY3COi'9vailable to be issued in the City of Eagan.
Mayor Awada noted that correspondence from Al Baker was received in which he asked that the item be
continued due to the fact that he could not be present to offer his argument against the amendment. The
Council discussed the purpose of the amendment and noted that the new liquor licenses are predominately
for new hotels, and it is their desire to maintain a free market system where liquor licenses do not become a
commodity in and of themselves. The Cpuucil recognized Mr. Baker's letter, and respects his position;
however, the Council believed the item-., 1t,0:AWsekeeping issue and needed to proceed forward.
Councilmember Carlson moved, Counciseconded, a motion to adopt an ordinance
amendment to Chapter 5, Section 5.52, of thof gan Citycb e,.gotitled Beer, Wine, and Liquor Licensing
and Regulation regarding the number of on-sift liquor;3R?pad5 fiilable to be issued in the City of Eagan.
Aye. 5 Nay:0
PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION =.NORTHWOOD EQUITY, LLC. - A PRELIMINARY
SUBDIVISION (NORTHWOODS BUSINESS PARK 3RD ADDITION) OF 17.7 ACRES TO
CREATE TWO COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL LOTS, LOCATED ON NORTHWOOD CIRCLE
ET THE SE % OF SECTION 10.
Senior Planner Ridley descri ;f I# 1 1, i3sJo.W as the third phase in the Northwood
Business Park development. The devtferpoi:sisaw:fbied with construction of the third phase,
and further subdivision of the 17.7-acre parcel is ro4gired to cIG3te a separate lot for the third building. The
Planning Commission recommended approval, stet to the LWitions in the APC minutes, at the January
29, 2002 APC mt;eting.
The developer, Jay Hill, was present and concurred "staff s comments.
Councilmember Bakken moved, Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to approve a
preliminary subdivision to create two lots on approximately 17.7 acres located north of Northwood
Parkway and west of Lexington Avenue in the SE of Section 10, subject to the conditions listed in the
APC minutes. Aye: 5 Nay: 0
{
City Administrator Hedges state-Mt so'iiie Clty'staff and the Mayor have received
voicemails from Kevin Von Feldt regarding legal action th*t.W;plans to take against the City. The
voicemails were shared with the City Council and audience;:;
City Attorney Dougherty noted Von Feldt threatened litigation and advised the Council that at this
time, Von Feldt has not submitted an application to the City, and therefore there is on action to consider.
Dougherty advised the Council not to be in contact with Mr. Von Feldt, and advised staff not to discuss Mr.
6
Eagan City Council Meeting Minute
February 19, 2002 •
Page 5
Von Feldt's claims or proposed lawsuit. Sta41 .Gc ncil Ip ".*'City Attorney's statements under
advisement.
The City Council asked that a letter be sent to Mr. Von Feldt from the City Attorney's office
stating that no application has been submitted to the City at this time, and like any developer, he has the
right to submit a development application at any time. Mayor Awada noted that the Council has not offered
support to Mr. Von Veldt's proposed pro'' e.w)W p>tiao,gers have stated. Additionally, the
Council also asked that a statement be in~l } e ;itii -*t Mr. Von Feldt not be in contact
with any members of the Council from this point fold. The ditgcil requested a copy of the completed '
fetter. f
The City Council meeting adjourned at 7:4piii:''•'
Date Deputy City Clerk
If you need these minutes in an alternafQrft;arge print, Braille, audio tape, etc., please contact
the City of Eagan, 3830 Pilot Knob Rci tig"an, MN 55122, (651) 681-4600, (TDD phone: (651) 454-
8535).
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, sexual orientation, m41!s1Gf stattlS.or st944 with regard to public assistance.
Agenda Information Memo
March 4, 2002 Eagan City Council Meeting
B. PERSONNEL ITEMS
Item 1. Utility Maintenance Workers--
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
To approve the hiring of Kirk Portello and Paul Wegner as Utility Maintenance Workers.
Item 2. Part-time Seasonal Lifeguards/Cascade Bay
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
To approve the hiring of Chris Ahrens, Brenna Beers, Megan Bergen, Kelsey Biagi, Jennifer
Bolint, Lisa Bordsen, Brian Boufford, Jamie Boufford, Mike Brumbaugh, Kelsey Campion,
Nikke Christle, Kelsey Crunstedt, Ashley Crunstedt, Alex Dauphin, Lauren Deiman, Shannon
Dunleavy, Nathan Dunn, Shannon Einhorn, Jenny Geiser, Matt Gilbert, Paige Gilgan, Chririle
Goodman, Brandon Halverson, Danielle Hassett, Karen Hendrickson, Laura Hogenson, Caren
Honigsfeld, Sarah Jacobson, Bryce Johnson, Kerry Johnson, Nick Johnson, Jeni Kilby, Megan
Kissel, Angela Knoll, Meridyth Lewis, Megan Lostetter, Elizabeth Luke, Ali Lund, Tammy
Macht, Kari Maland, Julie Mattson, Ann McGrath, Kelly McGrath, Grant Mestnik, Kristi
Millmann, Jessica Ofstedahl, Ryan Palacio, Jackie Peters, Mindy Picka, Keri Ragsdale, Thom
Rehwaldt, Angie Rodgers, Brad Roe, Lauren Rouchard, Marni Rutman, Eric Sidler, Matt Spun,
Allison Tierney, Molly Towle, Sara Towle, Christin Weggemann and Jenny Woelfel as part-time
seasonal lifeguards for Cascade Bay.
Item 3. Part-time Seasonal Pool Attendants/Cascade Bay
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
To approve the hiring of Kali Bavender, Abby Broderdorf, Nicole Cantin, Kelly Colbert, Ben
Huonder, Neal Johnson, Jessica Lewis, Amy Osborne, Nate Starkson and Megan Sutliff as part-
time seasonal pool attendants for Cascade Bay.
Item 4. Part-time Seasonal Guest Relations Workers/Cascade Bay
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
To approve the hiring of Brandon Burger, Rachel Carlin, Candice Courtright, Meghan Eilers,
Metra Farrari, Matt Howard, Mike Kantor, Joe Kirschbaum, Amanda Kuntz, Steve Lay, Cassy
Lenz, Jamie Lewis, Jennifer Lopac, Breanna Mason, Michael Mason, Brent Reykdal, Elisa
Swenson, Erinn Swinton, Lindsey Taylor and Tom Wollan as part-time seasonal guest relations
workers for Cascade Bay.
0
Agenda Information Memo
March 4, 2002 Eagan City Council Meeting
Item 5. Part-time Seasonal Maintenance Workers/Cascade Bay
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
To approve the hiring of Luke Duenow, John Lostetter, Ryan Sisson and Landon Weninger as
part-time seasonal maintenance workers for Cascade Bay.
Agenda Information Memo
March 4, 2002 Eagan City Council Meeting
C. RATIFY CHECK REGISTERS
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To ratify the check registers dated February 19-22, 2002
and February 25-March 1, 2002 as presented.
ATTACHMENTS:
Check registers dated February 19-22, 2002 and February 25-March 1, 2002 are enclosed
without page number.
Agenda Memo
March 4, 2002
CONSENT AGENDA:
D. LAWFUL GAMBLING EXEMPT PERMIT
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
Approve Lawful Gambling Exempt Permit for East Metro Chapter, Turn in Poachers,
Inc. for a raffle to be held December 12, 2002 at 2995 Highway 13.
FACTS:
• City Staff has reviewed the application and deem it acceptable
ATTACHMENTS:
• The application is attached without page number
Agenda Memo
March 4, 2002
CONSENT AGENDA:
E. PREMISE PERMIT RENEWAL APPLICATION
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
Approve Premise Permit renewal for Eagan Lions Club for pulltab operation located at
Cedarvale Lanes, 3883 Beau D'Rue Drive.
FACTS:
• City Staff has reviewed the renewal application and deem it acceptable
Agenda Information Memo
March 4, 2002, Eagan City Council
F. AUTHORIZE THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO
PREPARE AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO
CHAPTER 6 ENTITLED "OTHER BUSINESS
REGULATION AND LICENSING" TO CLARIFY
ADMINISTRATIVE FINES AND PENALTIES FOR
TOBACCO SALES VIOLATIONS
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
To authorize the City Attorney's Office to prepare an ordinance amendment to Chapter 6
entitled "Other Business Licensing" to clarify administrative fines and penalties for
tobacco sales violations.
FACTS:
• As the administration of the administrative fines resulting from violations to the
City Code covering the sale of tobacco products has continued to evolve, staff has
become aware of two areas in the City Code that cause confusion with the
interpretation of the Code. The first item is determining when a suspension of the
license should to be imposed and the second item is determining if individuals
who sell tobacco products and violate the Code should be charged criminally or
charged an administrative fee.
• Representatives of the City Clerk's Office, the Police Department and the City
Attorney's Office have met to discuss potential changes that would provide for
more efficient enforcement of the Code and more clear statements regarding
penalty provisions. A relatively simple ordinance amendment will provide the
necessary clarity.
/.3
Agenda Information Memo
March 4, 2002, Eagan City Council
G. AUTHORIZE THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO
PREPARE AN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO
CHAPTER 5 ENTITLED "BEER, WINE AND LIQUOR
LICENSING AND REGULATION" TO CLARIFY THE
HEARING PROCESS AND TO CHANGE CIVIL
PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS IN THE SALE OF
ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
To authorize the City Attorney's Office to prepare an ordinance amendment to Chapter 5
entitled "Beer, Wine and Liquor Licensing and Regulation" to clarify the hearing process
and to change civil penalties for violations in the sale of alcoholic beverages.
FACTS:
• The City has recently assumed responsibility from the State for conducting
administrative hearings and imposing penalties resulting from violations covering
the sale of alcoholic beverages. As the implementation of these Code changes has
evolved, staff has become aware of areas that cause confusion in the interpretation
of the Code primarily in the relationship between hearings and penalties, the role
of the administrative hearing officer and who is to determine penalties.
• After conducting research with other communities and comparing it to the State's
former penalties, staff also has determined that the penalties currently in the Code
are too low and should be increased to more accurately reflect the implications of
the violations.
• Representatives of the City Clerk's Office, the Police Department and the City
Attorney's Office have met to discuss potential changes that would provide for
more efficient enforcement of the Code and more clear statements regarding
penalty provisions. A relatively simple ordinance amendment will provide the
necessary clarity.
Agenda Information Memo
March 4, 2002, Eagan City Council Meeting
H. FINAL SUBDIVISION (BERGIN ADDITION) THOMAS R. BERGIN, SR.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
To approve a Final Subdivision to create two (2) lots for single family dwellings and one (1)
outlot (Bergin Addition) on a five (5) acre parcel located on Deerwood Drive in the SW '/4 of
Sec. 22.
FACTS:
• On November 20, 2001, the City Council approved the Preliminary Subdivision and
Variance with six conditions.
• A single family dwelling with a detached accessory structure is present on Lot 1. Lot 2 is
to be utilized for a future single family dwelling and Outlot A was platted to be purchased
by the City for park purposes.
• The City Council authorized the preparation of a purchase agreement on July 5, 2001, to
obtain a portion of the Bergin property for park purposes. The sale of the outlot will be
completed upon recording of the plat.
• All necessary documents are expected to be executed prior to the City Council meeting.
ATTACHMENT (1):
Final plat, page
_ r
5 I e F_ £ 5 i ~ Q N
Rk-
° e c_ s °I 2 W
E M1 L,E F nl z~£ c .I 7 I ~ - N
6 e E e_ I o
_ iE a °•s. ~ °9 °I ~ ~ 3 a 1 ~
t c z 4° aj 2.e . of 9 ` a. > w _ x E ~c E r el Ir
0> li` O iS 37 ~ c U
ig ` ~E •o we cu ox c~ c w w ` w < cIU ` ` ' I,
L S ( 5 ~ x x ~ L i i~ F i Y ~ Y a m
u 3
Q 6 I g ,<e 6 ~ n 9. wYrii I L
Q I S;gam ~ I t.wrr ~ Ilgam~7
~ i i:ju 6E F•I~ry
ic>s S3 Ol-j nc.t€ j = ~I s = `I`Slxr
ti I .6'. m6
i - ° ~ (Ieoa I wnI Jecd) JL I
W v r. v •tz 'zc ~s Je ~,c lw S - r
9/l 35 .N J° 1/t 'M •Y. J° .YI N.3
I DO"099 M..D/.9D.DON
IGTOr
I ~ 3
~ I g5 ~o
` RI s
=c
zA S3d7
I I ` ~ p\ m206 '
~ w
s". A C i I •g j \f# A
g°° 0 ow
h L----- I x C i.
---'---------------------J
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
i '7 I 4 8
of ~ ~O '-t
0C^. L-------------- ILSW ----------J.K CS-.• 6ZTZZ~ :`Z
ST ~ ~ o ~ S. c
- / O E c
iZ -V ,4r '1 'n '~•5 Jo r/~ 35 °`b P.
O
- o 1/I "M WJ Jo Mwl ME 3 •Vl Jo .YI P..
/6
Agenda Information Memo
March 4, 2002 Eagan City Council Meeting
1. CONTRACT 02-02 CEDAR CLIFF/ MARI ACRES/ RIVER HILLS 9T"
POST/ RUSTIC HILLS/ OSTER ADDITIONS
STREET IMPROVEMENTS
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To receive the bids for Contract 02-02 (Cedar Cliff/
Mari Acres/ River Hills V/ Post/ Rustic Hills/ Oster Additions - Street Improvements),
award the contract to Ace Blacktop, Inc., for the base bid in the amount of $440,391.25
and the alternate bid amount of $12,350.00, and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to
execute all related documents.
FACTS:
• The bituminous overlay of the streets in the Cedar Cliff/ Mari Acres/ Rustic Hills and
Oster Additions neighborhoods and the bituminous resurfacing of the streets in the
River Hills 90' and Post Additions neighborhoods are programmed for 2002 in the
City's 5-Year Capital Improvement Program (2002-2006).
• On December 11, 2001, the City Council authorized the street improvements for the
River Hills 9' Addition (Project 794).
• On December 18, the City Council authorized the street improvements the Post/
Rustic Hills/ Oster Additions (Project 852) and the street improvements for the Cedar
Cliff/ Mari Acres Additions (Project 796).
• These projects have been combined under one contract (Contract 02-02), to increase
economies of scale.
• On February 5, 2002, the Council approved the plans and authorized the
advertisement for solicitation of competitive bids for Contract 02-02.
• At 10:30 a.m. on February 28, formal bids were received for this project. A copy of
the bid tabulation is enclosed.
• All bids have been reviewed for compliance with the bid specifications and accuracy
on unit price extensions and summations. The low base bid and the alternate bid from
Ace Blacktop, Inc. has been reviewed by the Engineering Division and found to be in
order for favorable Council action.
• The alternate bid incorporates the removal of sediment from Pond AP-9 that resulted
from the July 2000 Super Storm. FEMA has provided funding for the work activity
associated with the alternate bid.
ATTACHMENTS:
• Bid Summary, page.
BID SUMMARY
Reclamation / Mill and Overlay
Street Improvements
River Hills 91h - City Project No. 794
Cedar Cliff / Mari Acres - City Project No. 796
Post / Rustic Hills / Oster - City Project No. 852
City Contract No. 02-02
Bid Date: Thursday, February 28, 2002
Bid Time: 10:30 a.m.
Alternate Bid Item
Contractors Total Base Bid for Pond Excavation
1) Ace Blacktop $ 440,391.25 $ 12,350.00
2) Valley Paving $ 464,978.00* $ 16,000.00
3) Northwest Asphalt, Inc. $ 484,471.75 $ 24,500.00
4) Bituminous Roadways, Inc. $ 497,549.75 $ 19,750.00
5) McNamara Contracting, Inc. $ 505,913.00 $ 14,250.00
6) Hardrives, Inc. $ 506,462.00 $ 14,145.00
* Notes corrected figure.
Reclamation / Mill and Overlay
Street Improvements
City Contract No. 02-02
River Hills 91h Cedar Cliff Post
City Project No. 794 City Project No. 796 City Project No. 852
Low Bid $ 157,182.75 $ 216,883.50 $ 66,325.00
Feasibility Report Estimate $ 190,000.00 $ 245,000.00 $ 70,000.00
Percent Under Estimate -17% -11.5% -5%
Engineer's Estimate $ 207,000.00 $ 225,418.00 $ 77,290.00
Percent Under Estimate -24% -4% -14%
Alternate Bid Item
Low Bid $ 12,350.00
Feasibility Report Estimate N/A**
Percent Under Estimate N/A**
Engineer's Estimate $ 10,000.00
Percent Over Estimate 23.5%
NOTE: The Alternate Bid Item for the pond excavation was not included in the Feasibility Report,
but was added to the project during design as an item included with the FEMA funding of July 2000
Super Storm related maintenance/restoration work.
/O C:IW/NDOWSITEMP1022802•Bid Resulisl.doc
Agenda Information Memo
March 4, 2002 Eagan City Council Meeting
J. CONTRACT 02-03, CHES MAR/ CHES MAR EAST/ OAK CHASE 6T"
PARKCLIFF/ WOODGATE ADDITIONS
STREET OVERLAY
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To receive the bids for Contract 02-03 (Ches Mar/
Ches Mar East/ Parkcliff/ Woodgate Additions - Street Overlay), award the contract to
McNamara Contracting, Inc., for the base bid in the amount of $409,788.50, and
authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents.
FACTS:
• The bituminous overlay of the streets in the Ches Mar/ Ches Mar East/ Parkcliff/
Woodgate Additions neighborhoods are programmed for 2002 in the City's 5-Year
Capital Improvement Program (2002-2006).
• On November 20, 2001, the City Council authorized the street improvements for the
Ches Mar Addition (Project 856), the Parkcliff Additions (Project 854) and the
Wodgate Addition (Project 853).
• On December 11, 2001, the City Council authorized the street improvements for the
Ches Mar East Additions (Project 855).
• These projects have been combined under one contract (Contract 02-03), to increase
economies of scale.
• On February 5, 2002, the Council approved the plans and authorized the
advertisement for solicitation of competitive bids for Contract 02-03.
• At 11:00 a.m. on February 28, formal bids were received for this project. A copy of
the bid tabulation is enclosed.
• All bids have been reviewed for compliance with the bid specifications and accuracy
on unit price extensions and summations. The low bid from McNamara Contracting,
Inc. has been reviewed by the Engineering Division and found to be in order for
favorable Council action.
ATTACHMENTS:
• Bid Summary, page.
BID SUMMARY
Woodgate 1st Addition - City Project No. 853
Parkcliff 1st -3d Additions - City Project No. 854
Oak Chase 6th/ Ches Mar East - City Project No. 855
Ches Mar 1st - 5* Additions - City Project No. 856
Street Improvements
City Contract No. 02-03
Bid Date: Thursday, February 28, 2002
Bid Time: 11:00 a.m.
Contractors Total Base Bid
1) McNamara Contracting, Inc. $ 409,788.50
2) Ace Blacktop $ 411,790.00
3) Northwest Asphalt, Inc. $ 426,130.00
4) Valley Paving, Inc $ 428,201.64
5) Bituminous Roadways, Inc $ 454,772.50
6) Hardrives, Inc. $ 480,328.00
Low Bid Feasibility % Under Engineers % Under
Report Est. Estimate
853
Wood ate Addition $66,707.50 $ 75,120 -11.1% $ 73,900 -9.7%
854
Parkcliff Addition $89,327.50 $114,360 -21.9% $ 96,710 -7.6%
855
Oakchase/
Ches Mar East $128,670 $148,180 -13.2% $140,050 -8.1%
856
Ches Mar
I"-5`h Additions $125,083.50 $147,580 -15.2% $140,600 -11.0%
G:/!G/MISC/02/02-03 Bid Rec 3-04-02 Agenda
0U
Agenda Information Memo
March 4, 2002
K. PROJECT 800R, CEDAR GROVE ACCESS MODIFICATIONS
STREET INTERSECTION RECONFIGURATION
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To receive the revised draft feasibility report for Project
80OR (Cedar Grove Access Reconfiguration - Street Intersection Reconfiguration) and schedule
a public hearing to be held on April 2, 2002.
FACTS:
• On February 6, 2001, the City Council approved Project 800 and authorized the preparation
of plans and specifications for the reconfiguration of Silver Bell Road, from TH 13 to Beau
D'Rue Drive.
• Project 800 included the combining of the Silver Bell Road intersections of Cedarvale
Boulevard and Beau D'Rue Drive and the installation of a traffic signal at this new
intersection, as well as upgrades to both legs of Silver Bell at the intersection with TH 13.
• The reconfiguration of Silver Bell Road, Cedarvale Boulevard, and Beau D'Rue Drive
required the acquisition of property for permanent and temporary easements from adjacent
parcels, as well as the removal of existing structures.
• Since the project was approved, a streetscape plan has been initiated for the Cedar Grove
Redevelopment Area, including the intersection of Silver Bell Road, Cedarvale Boulevard,
and Beau D'Rue Drive.
• Due to the revisions of the project scope due to the new streetscape plan, it was necessary to
amend the feasibility report to address changes to the project scope, schedule, cost estimates
and associated special assessments.
• A revised draft feasibility report has been completed 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 amended project.
• An informational neighborhood meeting will be scheduled to review the revised feasibility
report details with the property owners in the adjacent area prior to the Public Hearing.
ATTACHMENTS:
• Draft Feasibility Report, attached without page numbers.
ai
Agenda Information Memo
March 4, 2002
L. CONTRACT 02-10 DODD ROAD - DIFFLEY ROAD TO WESCOTT ROAD
STREET & UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve the plans and specifications for Contract 02-10
(Dodd Road, Diffley Road to Wescott Road - Street and Utility Improvements) and authorize the
advertisement for a bid opening to be held at 10:30 a.m. on Thursday, March 28, 2002.
FACTS:
• Contract 02-10 provides for the urban upgrade of Dodd Road, between Diffley Road and
Wescott Road, including storm sewer and an off-street bituminous trail as outlined and
discussed in the feasibility reports for Projects 850 and 862.
• On October 16, 2001, the City Council held a Public Hearing for Project 850 and on January
22, 2002, the City Council held a Public Hearing for Project 862. After the staff presentation
at each of the hearings, property owners adjacent to the proposed improvements presented
concerns regarding the proposed width of the improvements included in the feasibility
reports for Dodd Road as well as support for the construction of the urban upgrade. The City
Council considered said concerns and responded to the associated questions. Deleting the
left turn lanes at the intersection of Elrene Road/Coventry Parkway, the Council accordingly
approved the remainder of the projects as proposed in the feasibility reports and authorized
the preparation of detailed plans and specifications under one contract.
• The plans and specifications have been completed and are being presented to the City
Council for their approval and authorization of the advertisement for bids.
a~-
Agenda Information Memo
March 4, 2002 Eagan City Council Meeting
M. PROJECT 862, DODD ROAD (REVISE PENDING ASSESSMENT)
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Revise the Pending Assessment Roll for Project 862
(Dodd Rd. - Camberwell to Wescott Rd. street upgrade) for 3790 & 3800 Dodd Rd.
FACTS:
• Project 862 provides for the urban upgrade of Dodd Rd. from Camberwell Dr. to
Wescott Rd. Part of the cost of this public improvement is proposed to be financed
through special assessments against qualifying adjacent properties based on their
frontage and land use classification.
• The property located at 3790 Dodd Rd. is currently occupied as a single-family
residence and 3800 is undeveloped/vacant. While both properties are currently zoned
I-1 (Light Industrial), their current Land Use Guide is LD (Low Density Residential)
which limits their development options.
• The pending assessment roll prepared and presented under this feasibility report
incorrectly calculated the pending assessments for both parcels based on their zoning
designation of (I-1) instead of their Land Use (LD) which takes precedence in terms
of determining the highest and best use. The previous industrial use of the property as
a business operation is no longer in effect. After this clarification was established, it
was determined that the pending assessment roll should be revised accordingly.
c~3
Agenda Information Memo
March 4, 2002
N. PROJECT 751R, DODD ROAD, CLIFF ROAD TO BUTWIN ROAD
STREET & UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve an Easement Agreement for Project 751R (Dodd
Road, Cliff Road to Butwin Road - Street, Utility and Trail Improvements) with the owners of
Parcel 10-03600-040-27 (4732 Dodd Road) and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute
all related documents.
FACTS:
• Project 751R provides for the urban upgrade of Dodd Road, between Cliff Road and Butwin
Road, including sanitary sewer, water main, storm sewer and off-street bituminous trails, and
a street connection between Dodd Road and TH 3 along Carol Street as outlined and
discussed in the feasibility report.
• On February 5, 2002, the City Council approved Project 751R, including the acquisition of
all necessary easements.
• The upgrade of Dodd Road required the acquisition of numerous permanent and temporary
easements from the adjacent properties.
• Cost estimates were obtained for all required easements. The estimated value of the
easement for said property is $2,168.40. Staff has suggested an offer in this amount to the
property owners. The property owners have consented to this offer.
• An agreement between the City of Eagan and the owners of Parcel 10-03600-040-27 has
been prepared providing for the payment of the acquisition of all necessary easements.
• Engineering staff and the City Attorney's office have reviewed this agreement and found it to
be in order for favorable Council action.
ISSUES:
• If the City Council would desire to discuss this item, it would be appropriate to withhold
discussion until the Executive Session.
a
Agenda Information Memo
March 4, 2002
O. OAKBROOKE 5th ADDITION (LOTS 1 &2, BLOCK 3)
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Receive the petition to vacate public drainage and utility
easements and schedule a public hearing to be held on April 2, 2002.
FACTS:
• On February 15, 2002, City staff received a petition from Jeff Lindgren of Hedlund
Engineering representing the property owner, Pulte Homes, requesting the vacation of all of
the existing drainage and utility easements on Lots 1 and 2, Block 3, Oakbrooke 5th Addition.
• The easements were originally dedicated to the City as part of the Oakbrooke 5th Addition for
drainage and utility purposes. The easements requested for vacation are standard plat
easement dedications necessary to accommodate site drainage and possible future utility
uses.
• The purpose of the request is to allow Hedlund Engineering to re-plat the two lots in question
in order to adjust the shared lot line. Due to a construction staking error, a home under
construction on Lot 2 is being built approximately two feet from the existing southerly lot
line. The new lot line location will give the home a setback of 7.5 feet, meeting the
requirements of the approved planned development.
• City staff have been consulted, and determined that the adjustment of the lot lines and
continued home construction will not adversely affect the site drainage and current utilities.
• Notices will be published in the legal papers and sent to all potentially affected or interested
utilities for comment prior to the scheduled public hearing.
ATTACHMENTS:
• Easement Vacation Exhibit, page.
• Request Letter & Legal Description, page.
wool
MAT
• ~ - we i~/6 / / ~ a~\ of W ~
.v• ~ a / /.7 ti/~ ~'t. 111 Y~ 11! y ~ ~i i ;
Z lie
00 v
/ 4y, T. vt•*z. / ,yv a 3 R. ° 1' wrxxo'c __J
+Y,T ~'r \ X03.,,/ _ fl \ty ''4--
/ iw
~ i t`+$ 612\ ~ m / ~ IS: .
ta\U w ~fi>fi ~Ff<'~1•,_/ bb4.~ / k~`ti, r~/~` ,~.or.~'• ~fy^; ~.+.~~'•~!'1~ AE
/ o$ \ / / S° i i n ~ F \44./ / .K}•.+:• Yf re L '1 ul„ .
k •6 ~ ~ ~ ,v Ffi \ , F \ ♦ a~ `'u';;•. ~ y ~ }~l wss•s•_m'c - 1. ~ ,J, s
'a. .axY~s _y..° / /c F``'a3\°+ \"i c~>3 ~~k .:rx 7 r• g w~
ia,¢
r._' \ \\ai<: .f// rti1,.\,~ 9F~~?\,. +~ti~ ~ - rl l~Yfs ; s
00
\e .)obi/ / / ~ \ ,-•Ft y: •
/ ~ a \~"ate// o4H// crw•`~ t~' 6. / /••7~_rvsr s~.:(~' r.,%,'
„`,y'r >ew ~ ~i • ~\y r//F-xY /i°+•,~NZa!~. + ~ 9 V~
~ ~eL v r F4i / 4 ~m ~:sa-_P _•'1 ~--F~.i~~~'I \8 •%i:+.
/ /i/F/`` to o•s~:i'~r j TERRACE? 1 1'S p; •A+~
/ 'lct='+ f
sY•ii.7! DIY I 's
fn
_ sN-4 +o b 1 g.~ 1 tj: a a1 a O
r, t1 IIe "~sw, ( r ejP k~1 CIS ~s
IS ~1 p 1Y m 1 I O
-tf
T----wsir»•ir'--l t i --__af*xoa~rT~ Y
sY ! 3
• ~Y g t-i r---------- z, b k----Srao»q
8t f _ ~r Ir; ~i f "l' - a• ,w 1 ti.. x _ I 1 -
¢ I 11 IY i =~1 n.ssler a 1 !b '1
ilt
r1 - sr----is•-ira- ---1 I? _e -wrmnz rk
- s~r~ 48 8 1 p IY ~ n lye W ! ~ ay 1F.,i ~4:h 'i°7
~~a 4~~~ I 1 Q L_-- 1 1 f_~vmxt 3y~v`Y,~< ~e ~ ~D
Al r ' 1 S
t: tilt', ('-----~•s•yHy `a'„ ~'~.J 1x.yys+rrl ~ sz•ts•ntT-___-, n`
i8 os ~S$~e .u•xe'ze'•:sz>° ' A' s: s•x•x°ac
nY8 YS 1 'w..' le+ w..uti OUTLOT A
~a _~ti9 j _ 11; (i uM "u•xe°zuw
1
IfEDLUND
Planning Engineering Surveying
February 12, 2002
Re: Replat and Easement vacation for Lots 1 and
2, Block 3, Oakbrooke 5th Addition
Dear Mayor and City Council Members,
This request is for the vacation of the drainage and utility easements dedicated on Lots 1 and
2, Block 3, Oakbrooke 5th Addition in order to facilitate a lot line adjustment betweenthe two
lots. Concurrent with this request to vacate the easements we have submitted an application
to replat the two lots in order to adjust the lot line. The lot line requires adjustment due to the
home under construction on Lot 2 being built approximately two feet from the existing
southerly lot line. The new lot line location will give the home a setback of 7.5 feet meeting
the requirements of the approved planned development.
The owner of the two lots, Pulte Homes of Minnesota, has a closing scheduled for March 26,
2002 and would like to request the replat of the two lots be approved at the meeting on
March 4 or March 19, prior to the closing. The easement vacation most likely would be
approved at the council meeting on April 2, 2002 after the required 30 day waiting period.
Staff has indicated that the council normally approves requests of this type at the same
meeting but due to the circumstances of rising interest rates andthe fact that the buyer of Lot
2 may lose their rate lock I would ask the council to consider approving the requests at
separate meetings. New easements will be dedicated in the replat similar to those being
vacated.
Thank you for your consideration of this request.
Sincerely,
4~
effrey D. Lindgren, PLS.
VP
2005 Pin Oak Drive • Eagan, Minnesota 55122 • Telephone (651) 405-6600 • Fax (651) 405-6606
Agenda Information Memo
March 4, 2002 Eagan City Council Meeting
P. PROJECT 736, GRAND OAK BUSINESS PARK (AUAR ASSESSMENTS)
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Cancel the pending assessments for Project 736
(Grand Oak Business Park - AUAR Study).
FACTS:
• Project 736 provided for the city's preparation of an Alternative Urban Areawide
Review (AUAR) environmental study to evaluate the impacts of the Grand Oak
Business Park being developed in the area bounded by Hwy 55, 149 & 494. This
study identified the mitigative improvements necessary to allow the full development
of this area as proposed.
• The original feasibility report presented a proposal to finance the cost of the report
preparation ($72,000) as a special assessment to the developing properties within the
designated boundary. AUAR studies do not qualify as an assessable improvement
under Minnesota Statutes 429 - Special Assessments.
• The costs for this study were then added to the estimated costs of the identified
mitigative improvements, which are being recovered through the terms of the
development agreements. Therefore, it is no longer appropriate to continue to carry
these pending assessments on the books and they should be formally cancelled by
Council action.
Agenda Information Memo
March 4, 2002 Eagan City Council Meeting
Q. APPROVE CONTRACT WITH DORIS DAHLINE
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
To approve a Right of First Refusal and Option Agreement with Doris Dahline, 3830
Alder Lane.
FACTS:
• The property at 3830 Alder Lane is located within the Cedar Grove Tax Increment
Financing (TIF) Redevelopment District.
• At its October 2, 2001 meeting, the City Council directed the City Attorney to
negotiate an agreement with Doris Dahline, property owner of 3830 Alder Lane,
which would allow Ms. Dahline to remain in her residence until such time as she
chose.
• The agreement provides the City a Right of First Refusal to purchase the property at a
price to be determined by a mutually selected appraiser at the time the property owner
notifies the City of intent to sell. The City may not begin condemnation proceedings
against the property owner during the term of this agreement.
• One provision of the agreement requested by Ms. Dahline, section 16, is a provision
that the City also will not take any action that would cause the reduction or draining
of the delineated wetland on an adjacent property that is also included within the TIF
district. The majority of the wetland is on property not included in the TIF district
and, therefore, not subject to the agreement. However, it is important for the City
Council to understand that the agreement does place a restriction on an adjacent
property, not party to the agreement, in terms of the City's ability or that property
owner's ability to make improvements that would require wetland mitigation and
replacement. It is Ms. Dahline's understanding that this provision of her initial offer
was understood by the City Council when direction was given to the City Attorney.
ATTACHMENT:
• A signed copy of the agreement is attached on pages through
aq
RIGHT OF FIRST REFUSAL
AND
OPTION AGREEMENT
THIS OPTION AGREEMENT ("Option") made and entered into this day of
, 2002 by and between DORIS R. DAHLINE, as Trustee of the Doris
R. Dahline Trust Agreement, ("SELLER") and the CITY OF EAGAN, a Minnesota municipal
corporation, ("BUYER").
WITNESSETH:
That in consideration of One and No/100 Dollars ($1.00) and the mutual covenants and
agreements herein contained and other good and valuable consideration in hand paid by the
BUYER to the SELLER as more fully set forth below, the receipt and sufficiency of which is
hereby acknowledged by the SELLER, it is hereby agreed as follows:
1. Property Optioned. The SELLER hereby grants to the BUYER the exclusive
right and option (the "Option"), to be exercised on or before the end of the Option Term (as
defined in paragraph 3 herein), to purchase the property as described in the attached Exhibit "A"
(hereinafter the "Optioned Property").
2. Option Payment. SELLER hereby acknowledges the receipt of the sum of One
and no/100 Dollar ($1.00) as the "Option Payment."
30
3. Option Term. BUYER shall have the right to exercise this Option within 180
days after the occurrence of any of the following events: (1) the death of SELLER, (2) upon
notification from SELLER that SELLER no longer desires to reside at the Optioned Property, (3)
if SELLER ceases to use the Optioned Property as her primary residence, or (4) if Seller attempts
to sell or transfer the Optioned Property. Time is of the essence. The beginning of the 180 day
period shall be stayed until Buyer knows or should have known of the occurrence of one of these
events.
4. Condemnation. BUYER agrees that it will not begin condemnation proceedings
on the Optioned Property prior to the occurrence of an event that initiates the Option Term.
BUYER may begin condemnation proceedings at any time after the Option Term begins.
Notwithstanding anything contained herein to the contrary, BUYER may, however,
negotiate a direct purchase with SELLER prior to the start of the Option Term.
5. Exercise of Option. The Option shall be deemed fully exercised if written notice
of election to purchase ("Notice of Election") as set forth in Exhibit "B" is given by the BUYER
to the SELLER by depositing the Notice of Election in the United Stated mail, addressed to the
SELLER at the address set forth in paragraph 19 herein, with postage prepaid, or by personal
delivery of the notice to the SELLER or SELLER's Estate at the address set forth in paragraph 19
herein, at any time during the Option Term. In the event that the Buyer does not exercise this
Option within the Option Term, Seller may retain, sell, lease or otherwise dispose of her interest
in the Optioned Property.
6. Purchase Price. The purchase price shall be negotiated between the Buyer and
Seller. If Buyer and Seller cannot agree, the price shall be established by an appraiser selected
by agreement between Seller and Buyer. If Seller and Buyer cannot agree on an appraiser, then
2
31
each shall select an appraiser, and those two appraisers shall select a third appraiser who shall
actually perform the appraisal. The cost of this process shall be divided equally between Buyer
and Seller. The Purchase Price shall be determined as of the date BUYER sends the Notice of
Election to SELLER. The Optioned Property, including both the land and building, shall be
appraised for use as a single family residence.
7. Relocation of the House. If SELLER determines that she wants to keep the house
located on the property, then SELLER shall have the right to relocate the house and yard plants,
provided SELLER notifies BUYER, within 60 days following BUYER's Notice of Election
hereunder, of her intent to relocate the house. SELLER shall also be responsible for relocating
the house, at SELLER's sole cost and expense, by July 1 of the year following BUYER's Notice
of Election under this Option. If SELLER elects to relocate the house, the purchase price to be
paid by BUYER shall be reduced by $1,000.00.
8. Date of Closing; Place of Closing. In the event that the Option is properly
exercised by BUYER, closing shall occur within ninety (90) days thereafter or within 20 days
after SELLER removes the residence from the Optioned Property if SELLER chooses to relocate
the residence (or later if by mutual agreement of BUYER and SELLER) ("Closing") thereafter at
the office of BUYER's attorney or BUYER's title insurer. Time being of the essence.
9. Real Estate Taxes and Assessments. SELLER shall be responsible for all taxes
and special assessments attributable to the property during the term of this Option Agreement.
Upon the exercise of the Option, the real estate taxes and special assessments shall be allocated
for payment at Closing as follows:
(a) The payment of all types of real estate taxes for all years prior to the year of
Closing shall be SELLER's responsibility. Real estate taxes due and payable in
the year of Closing shall be prorated between SELLER and BUYER on a calendar
year basis to the actual date of Closing.
3
3c~2,
(b) SELLER shall pay any and all assessments, levied or pending, as of the date of
Closing.
10. Titles and Remedies. SELLER (at its cost) shall furnish to BUYER an Abstract
of Title or Registered Property Abstract to the real property continued to date, to include proper
searches covering bankruptcies, State and Federal judgments and liens, by and no later than
forty-five (45) days after receipt of Notice of Election of Option, after which BUYER shall have
twenty (20) days within which to determine the marketability of the Title thereto and making any
objections, which shall be made in writing and delivered to SELLER within said time period or
said objections shall be deemed waived.
In the event that any written objections are so made, SELLER shall be allowed one
hundred twenty (120) days to make title marketable. If title is not corrected within one hundred
twenty (120) days from the date of written objections, this Agreement shall be null and void, at
the election of BUYER, and neither party shall be liable for damages hereunder to the other.
11. Soil Tests. BUYER may enter upon said property at any time after Notice of
Election for the purpose of making and completing soil tests and other tests in connection with
the proposed development or use of the Optioned Property.
12. SELLER's Representations and Warranties. SELLER represents and warrants to
BUYER that, to the best of SELLER's knowledge, the Optioned Property has not been used for
storage or disposal of any hazardous substance or concentrations of pollutants or contaminants,
as defined in 42 U.S.C. § 6903, 6921 or in the so called "Minnesota Super Fund Act" (Minn.
Stat. Ch. 1158) and that SELLER has no knowledge or belief that any other person has so used
the Optioned Property. SELLER further warrants that there are no encroachments upon the
Optioned Property and there are no unpaid bills for work or materials furnished upon the
4
~13
Optioned Property. These representations and warranties made by SELLER shall continue to the
date of Closing. These representations and warranties made by SELLER shall also survive the
Closing of the transactions contemplated by this Agreement and shall not be merged with the
deed to be delivered at Closing.
13. Obligation of Parties at Closing. The SELLER and BUYER shall do the following
at the closing:
A. SELLER shall:
i. Deliver to BUYER a Warranty Deed conveying marketable title to
the Optioned Property subject to the following exceptions:
(a) building and zoning laws, ordinances, state and federal
regulations; (b) reservations of minerals or mineral rights to the
State of Minnesota, if any; (c) utility and drainage easements of
record, if any; and (d) real estate taxes and special assessments to
be paid by the SELLER pursuant hereto.
ii. Execute and deliver an Affidavit by the SELLER indicating that on
the date of closing that there are no outstanding unsatisfied
judgments, tax liens, or bankruptcies against or involving the
SELLER and that there are no leases or other agreements in force
as to the Optioned Property, and that the SELLER knows of no
unrecorded interests in the Optioned Property of any kind, together
with whatever standard owner's affidavit may be required by the
BUYER;
iii. Provide evidence of payment of all taxes and assessments to be
paid by SELLER pursuant to paragraph 9 herein, or alternatively,
provide funds for the payment of such taxes and/or assessment;
iv. Provide all other documents affecting title to and possession of the
Optioned Property and necessary to transfer or assign the same to
the BUYER free and clear of all liens, charges, and encumbrances
other than the allowable encumbrances.
B. BUYER shall: Pay the purchase price as set forth in paragraph 6 herein.
C. Each party shall execute such other instruments, certificates and affidavits
as the other party's attorney may reasonably request.
5
'3y
14. Possession. SELLER agrees to deliver possession of the Optioned Property to
BUYER on the date of closing in "broom clean" condition.
15. Personal Property Included in Sale. The following items of personal property and
fixtures owned by Seller and located on the Optioned Property at the time of Notice of Election
("Personal Property") shall be included in the sale:
storm windows and inserts, sliding glass doors, screens, awnings, plumbing fixtures,
sump pumps, water heaters, heating systems, heating stoves, fireplace inserts, fireplace
doors and screens, built-in humidifiers, central air conditioning units, built-in electronic
air filters, television antennas, water softeners, built-in dishwashers, garbage disposals,
built-in trash compactors, built-in ovens and cooking stoves, hood-fans, intercoms,
installed carpeting, work benches and security systems.
Prior to vacating the Real Property, Seller may remove the items of Personal Property listed on
Exhibit "C".
SELLER shall provide BUYER with a Bill of Sale for any and all other items of Personal
Property to be transferred to BUYER but not listed above.
16. Wetlands: BUYER agrees that it shall not allow the development or drainage of
the wetland adjacent to the Optioned Property to the extent such wetland is included in the TIF
district established for the redevelopment of the Cedarvale area (i) as set forth on Exhibit "D"
which is attached hereto and incorporated herein; or (ii) as identified, at a later date, on a wetland
delineation to the extent the wetland is adjacent to the Optioned Property is located within the
TIF District identified above. BUYER shall not be required to perform a wetland delineation.
BUYER will take all reasonable steps to protect and preserve the existing wetland as identified
above. BUYER shall not be required to protect or preserve any portion of the wetland which is
not specifically identified and highlighted in Exhibit "D".
6
17. No Merger; Entire Agreement: The terms, covenants and conditions to be
performed, or which may be performed, subsequent to the Date of Closing shall not merge with
any of the documents exchanged at closing.
This Option Agreement contains the entire understanding of the parties hereto with
respect to the purchase of the Optioned Property by the BUYER and supersedes all prior
agreements and understandings between the parties with respect to such purchase.
18. Survival of Representations and Warranties. All representations and warranties
made by the BUYER and SELLER pursuant to this Agreement shall survive the consummation
of the transaction or transactions contemplated by this Agreement and all the representations and
warranties made in any document delivered in connection herewith shall survive the delivery of
the deed and shall not be merged therein, any rule of law to the contrary notwithstanding.
19. Notices. Except as otherwise provided herein, all communications, demands,
notices or objections permitted or required to be given or served under this Option shall be in
writing and shall be deemed to have been duly given or served if delivered in person or deposited
in the United States mail, postage prepaid, or if telegraphed by prepaid telegram and addressed to
a party to this Option to the following address:
To the SELLER: Doris Dahline
3830 Alder Lane
Eagan, Minnesota 55122
To the BUYER: City of Eagan
Assistant City Administrator
3830 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, Minnesota 55122
With a copy to: Michael G. Dougherty, Esq.
Severson, Sheldon, Dougherty & Molenda, P.A.
7300 West 147`h Street
Suite 600
Apple Valley, MN 55124
7
.36
20. Cumulative Rights. Except as may otherwise be provided elsewhere herein, no
right or remedy herein conferred on or reserved to the BUYER or the SELLER is intended to be
exclusive of any other right or remedy provided herein or by law, but such rights and remedies
shall be cumulative and in addition to every other right or remedy given herein or elsewhere or
hereafter existing at law, in equity, or by statute.
21. Reasonable Consent. Whenever the BUYER's or the SELLER's consent shall be
required herein, such approval or consent shall not be arbitrarily or unreasonably conditioned,
delayed, or withheld and shall be deemed to have been given, unless within five (5) days or the
request therefore, the BUYER or the SELLER, as appropriate, notifies the requesting party that
the BUYER or the SELLER, as appropriate its denying such approval or consent, stating in such
notice the reasonable grounds therefore.
22. Brokers' Commission. SELLER and BUYER represent and warrant to each other
that no broker has been hired with regard to this transaction and no commission shall become
due for the sale of the Optioned Property. SELLER and BUYER shall indemnify and hold the
other harmless against and from any and all claims for brokers' fees or commissions claimed as a
result of the sale of the Optioned Property.
23. Binding Effect and Successors in Interest. This Option shall be binding on and
shall inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and to the assigns, executors, personal
representative, heirs and successors of the parties.
24. Amendment, Modification and Waiver. No amendment, modification or waiver
of any condition, provision or term shall be valid or of any effect unless made in writing, signed
by the party or parties to be bound or duly authorized representative, and specifying with
particularity the extent and nature of such amendment, modification or waiver. Any waiver by
8
any party of any default of another party shall not affect or impair any right arising from any
subsequent default.
25. Severable Provision. Each provision, section, sentence, clause, phrase and word
of this Agreement is intended to be severable. If any provision, section, sentence, clause, phrase
or word hereof is illegal or invalid for any reason whatsoever, such illegality or invalidity shall
not affect the validity of the remainder of this Option.
26. Reference to Gender. Where appropriate, the feminine gender may be read as the
masculine gender or the neuter gender, the masculine gender may be read as the feminine gender
or the neuter gender, and the neuter gender may be read as the masculine gender or the feminine
gender.
27. Minnesota Law. This Option shall be construed and enforced in accordance with
the laws of the State of Minnesota.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Option to be executed to be
effective the day and year first set forth above.
SELLER: BUYER:
DORIS DAHLINE CITY OF EAGAN
By: B
Its: Its:
By:
Its:
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
)ss.
COUNTY OF )
9
38"'
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
by Doris R. Dahline as Trustee of the Doris R. Dahline Trust
Agreement.
Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
)ss.
COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
by
Notary Public
THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY:
SEVERSON, SHELDON, DOUGHERTY & MOLENDA, P.A.
7300 West 147th Street, Suite 600
Apple Valley, MN 55124
(952) 432-3136
(SAL: 0206-18035)
10
EXHIBIT "A"
Legal Description
Lot 9, Block 1, Langhoven Addition, County of Dakota, State of Minnesota.
~O
EXHIBIT "B"
NOTICE OF ELECTION
You are hereby notified that the City of Eagan is exercising its option to purchase your
property located at 3830 Alder Lane, Eagan, Minnesota pursuant to the Right of First Refusal
and Option Agreement ("Agreement") dated , 200 between you and the
City of Eagan.
CITY OF EAGAN
By:
Its:
12
Ll /
af0i
s
a~
A ~
E ~
d
p c
Z - rn
v
W dam
ooa
<1Z
ui
M
N
to
N
w
V)
O
3NVI 213aTd c!
CY)
f
w:
N
O
O
N
N
Q
O
~a 3m:j a ne38
Agenda Information Memo
March 4, 2002 Eagan City Council Meeting
R. APPROVE FINAL CEDAR GROVE TIF FINDINGS AND
CERTIFICATION
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
To approve a Resolution verifying the findings for Tax Increment Financing District No.
1, within the Cedar Grove Redevelopment Area.
FACTS:
• The City Council authorized establishment of the Cedar Grove Tax Increment
Financing Redevelopment District on October 2, 2001.
• The City was considering various options regarding lot coverage and the potential
combination of parcels prior to certifying the District with the State of Minnesota.
• The final analyses have been completed. The total area coverage of the 88 parcels in
in the Cedar Grove TIF District is 76.87%. The coverage total exceeds the required
minimum lot coverage of 70% for redevelopment districts. No combination of lots is
proposed for the purpose of certifying the district.
ATTACHMENT:
• The resolution is attached on pages through (V
~3
CITY OF EAGAN
DAKOTA COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
Council member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION VERIFYING THE FINDINGS FOR TAX INCREMENT
FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1, WITHIN THE CEDAR GROVE
REDEVELOPMENT AREA.
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the "Council") of the City of Eagan, Minnesota (the
"City"), as follows:
Section 1. Recitals.
1.01. The Board of Commissioners (the "Board") of the Eagan Economic Development
Authority (the "EDA") has heretofore established the Cedar Grove Redevelopment Area and adopted the
Redevelopment Plan therefor. The City adopted the Redevelopment Plan for the Cedar Grove
Redevelopment Area and established Tax Increment Financing District No. I (the "District") therein and
adopted the Tax Increment Financing Plan therefor (collectively, the "Plans") on October 2, 2001; all
pursuant to and in conformity with applicable law, including Minnesota Statutes, 469.090 through
469.1081 and 469.174 through 469.179, all inclusive, as amended, (the "Act") all as reflected in the Plans.
1.02. The EDA and City have investigated the facts relating to the Plans and have caused the
Plans to be prepared.
1.03. The EDA and City have performed all actions required by law to be performed prior to
the establishment of the District and the adoption and approval of the proposed Plans, including, but not
limited to, notification of Dakota County and Independent School District No. 191 having taxing
jurisdiction over the property to be included in the District, notification of the county commissioner
representing the area of the District, a review of and written comment on the Plans by the City Planning
Commission, and the holding of a public hearing upon published notice as required by law.
1.04. Certain written reports (the "Reports") relating to the Plans and to the activities
contemplated therein have heretofore been prepared by staff and submitted to the Council and/or made a
part of the City files and proceedings on the Plans. The Reports include data, information and/or
substantiation constituting or relating to the bases for the other findings and determinations made in this
resolution. The reports supplement information provided by Short, Elliot Hendrickson, Inc. (SEH) which
was requested by staff in light of the decision of the Minnesota Court of Appeals in Walser Auto Sales,
Inc. v. City of Richfield. The Council hereby confirms, ratifies and adopts the Reports, which are hereby
incorporated into and made as fully a part of this resolution to the same extent as if set forth in full herein.
Section 2. Findings for the Adoption and Approval of the Plans.
2.01. The Council hereby confirms it findings that the Plans, are intended and, in the judgment
of this Council, the effect of such actions will be, to provide an impetus for development in the public
q~
purpose and accomplish certain objectives as specified in the Plans, which are hereby incorporated herein.
Section 3. Findings for the Establishment of Tax Increment Financing District No. 1.
3.01. The Council confirms its findings that the District is in the public interest, serves a public
purpose, and is a "redevelopment district" under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, subd. 10 (a)(1).
3.02. The Council further confirms its findings that the proposed redevelopment would not
occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and that the increased
market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax increment
financing would be less than the increase in the market value estimated to result from the proposed
development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration
of the District permitted by the Tax Increment Financing Plan, that the Plans conform to the general plan
for the development or redevelopment of the City as a whole; and that the Plans will afford maximum
opportunity consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development or redevelopment
of the District by private enterprise.
3.03. The Council further finds, declares and determines that the City made the above findings
stated in this Section and has set forth the reasons and supporting facts for each determination in writing,
attached hereto as Exhibit A.
3.04. The Eagan Economic Development Authority elects to calculate fiscal disparities for the
District in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.177, subdivision 3, clause a, which means the
fiscal disparities contribution would be taken from outside the District.
Section 4. Public Purpose
4.01. The adoption of the Plans conforms in all respects to the requirements of the Act and will
help fulfill a need to redevelop an area of the City which is already built up, and help correct conditions
that allow designation as a redevelopment district under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, including,
but are not limited to, acquiring properties containing structurally substandard buildings or improvements
or hazardous substances, pollution, or contaminants, acquiring adjacent parcels necessary to provide a site
of sufficient size to permit development, demolition and rehabilitation of structures, clearing of the land,
the removal of hazardous substances or remediation necessary to development of the land, and installation
of utilities, roads, sidewalks, and parking facilities for the site.
Section 5. Approval and Adoption of the Plans.
5.01. The Plans, as presented to the Council on October 2, 2001, including without limitation
the findings and statements of objectives contained therein, were approved, ratified, established, and
adopted and shall be placed on file in the office of the City Clerk.
5.02. The staff of the City, the City's advisors and legal counsel are authorized and directed to
proceed with the implementation of the Plans and to negotiate, draft, prepare and present to this Council
for its consideration all further plans, resolutions, documents and contracts necessary for this purpose.
5.03 The Auditor of Dakota County is requested to certify the original net tax capacity of the
District, as described in the Plans, and to certify in each year thereafter the amount by which the original
net tax capacity has increased or decreased; and the Eagan Economic Development Authority is
authorized and directed to forthwith transmit this request to the County Auditor in such form and content
as the Auditor may specify, together with a list of all properties within the District, for which building
permits have been issued during the 18 months immediately preceding October 2, 2001.
5.04. The Assistant City Administrator is further authorized and directed to file a copy of the
Plans with the Commissioner of Revenue.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Council member
, and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof:
and the following voted against the same:
Dated: March 4, 2002
ATTEST:
Mayor
(Seal)
EXHIBIT A
RESOLUTION #
The reasons and facts supporting the findings for the adoption of the Tax Increment Financing Plan for
Tax Increment Financing District No. 1, as required pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175,
Subdivision 3 are verified as follows:
1. Finding that Tax Increment Financing District No. I is a redevelopment district as defined in M.S., Section
469.174, Subd. 10(a) (1).
The District consists of 88 parcels, with plans to redevelop the area for owner occupied and rental housing,
retail and commercial development, and transit features. At least 70 percent of the area in the parcels in the
District are occupied by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots, or other similar structures
and more than 50 percent of the buildings in the District, not including outbuildings, are structurally
substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance (See Appendix F of the TIF Plan, as
revised).
2. Finding that the proposed development, in the opinion of the City Council, would not reasonably be
expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and that the
increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax
increment financing would be less than the increase in the market value estimated to result from the
proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum
duration of Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 permitted by the Plan.
The proposed development, in the opinion of the City, would not reasonably be expected to occur solely
through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future: This finding is supported by the fact
that the redevelopment proposed in this plan meets the City's objectives for redevelopment. Due to the
high cost of redevelopment on the parcels currently occupied by substandard buildings, the limited amount
of commercial/industrial property for expansion adjacent to the existing project, the incompatible land uses
at close proximity, and the cost of financing the proposed improvements, this project is feasible only
through assistance, in part, from tax increment financing. The selected developers will be asked for and
provide a letter and a proforma as justification that the developer would not have gone forward without tax
increment assistance.
The increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax
increment financing would be less than the increase in market value estimated to result from the proposed
development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration
of the TIF District permitted by the Plan: The City supported this finding on the grounds that the cost of
site and public improvements and utilities add to the total redevelopment cost. Historically, site and public
improvements costs in this area have made redevelopment infeasible without tax increment assistance.
Therefore, the City reasonably determines that no other redevelopment of similar scope is anticipated on
this site without substantially similar assistance being provided to the development.
A comparative analysis of estimated market values both with and without establishment of the District and
the use of tax increments has been performed as described above. If all development which is proposed to
be assisted with tax increment were to occur in the District, the total increase in market value would be up
to $210,500,000. The present value of tax increments from the District is estimated to be $15,468,323. It
is the Council's finding that no development with a market value of greater than $166,428,877 would occur
without tax increment assistance in this district within 25 years. This finding is based upon evidence from
I/ ,
general past experience with the high cost of acquisition and public improvements in the general area of the
District (see Cashflow in Appendix D of the TIF Plan).
3. Finding that the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. I conforms to the
general plan for the development or redevelopment of the municipality as a whole.
The Planning Commission reviewed the Plan and found that the Plan conforms to the general development
plan of the City.
4. Finding that the Tax Increment Financing Plan for Tax Increment Financing District No. I will afford
maximum opportunity, consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development or
redevelopment of the Cedar Grove Redevelopment Area by private enterprise.
The project to be assisted by the District will result in increased employment in the City and the State of
Minnesota, the renovation of substandard properties, increased tax base of the State and add a high quality
development to the City.
Through the implementation of the Plan, the EDA or City will increase the availability of safe and decent
life-cycle housing in the City.
Agenda Information Memo
March 4, 2002 Eagan City Council Meeting
S. RECEIVE BIDS AND AWARD CONTRACTS - PROJECT 838 (RIVER
HILLS 9TH AND STRAWBERRY LANE)
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
1) To receive bids for Project 838 (Storm Mitigation -fungal remediation), award the
contract to EnviroBate Metro in the amount of $12, 940 and authorize the Mayor and
City Clerk to execute all related documents.
2) To receive bids for Project 838 (Storm Mitigation - retrofit construction), award the
contract to Conway Construction in the amount of $66,381 and authorize the Mayor and
City Clerk to execute all related documents.
FACTS:
• The City Council authorized the acquisition of three flood-damaged homes on Clark
Street and one home on Strawberry Lane that did not meet the City standards for
freeboard elevations.
• Structural modifications to these homes will be necessary due to the fact that they are
all walk-out basements on properties where grading changes will be made as part of
the flood mitigation project.
• Beyond the structural modifications that are required, these homes require varying
degrees of environmental abatement for mold and other health factors resulting from
the intrusion of water, debris and other solid contaminants.
• Two bids were submitted for the reconstruction. Four bids were received for the
environmental remediation. The chief building official and assistant city
administrator have reviewed the bids and found them in order for favorable Council
action.
ATTACHMENT:
• Construction bid tabulation sheet is attached on page!50
• Environmental bid tabulation sheet is attached on page;.
9
os
W
3 O
o ~
o
a N N
~o
O° 0Mo
W V7 N
Q a W
e 'Ir c N
w N
N 69 F»
z
w
0-0
aH o
00 00
w en 'n
M O
O 00
N M
a e4 es Goll
e4
e
~I
z
W O 00
A aWw 0
Ua
N e4 69 69
a
O
Ey A
F
e rij U
C7 wd X x
H U
z
a O
U
A
O
w o
0
N
N
~ CL Ci. W o
U o
a
3 a~
ai °2
A E=+ U
N
'ent By: Applied Environmental Sciences; 763 545 7883; Feb-18-02 10:12AM; Page 2/4
AnEMS APPLIED ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES, INC.
BID TALLY FORK
PROJECT: Fungal remediation at 2230, 2238 and 2246 Clark Street and 4185 Strawberry
Lanc Eagan, MN 55122
Dale:
Below are the results of the bidding for the fungal remediation of the four homes listed above.
AES recommends that the project be awarded to EnviroBate Metro.
Contractor Base bids 14,3 & 4 Alternates 2 & 3 Gran Total AD inclusive
hou!ft rate
EaviroBate Metro $11,835.00 $1,105.00 S12,W.00 $55.00
Veit Environmental, $10,730.00 $2,400.00 513,130.00 $65.00
Inc.
Steamatic of the Twin $13,361.00 $1,500.00 $14,861.00 $49.50
Cities
Mavo Systems, Inc. $30,305.00 $4,420.00 $34,725.00 $65.00
Let me know if the City of Eagan will use either a purchase order for the project or a contract that
needs to be signed and I will notify the successful bidder. If you have any other questions, please
give me a call at 763-545-5510 (ext. 11).
Sincerely,
evin Cairns, CTH
F02.024.ke-pe Page 1 of 1
5075 Wayzata Blvd L Suite 285 n Minneapolis. MN 55416 c 763-545-5510 o Fax 763-545-7883
S/
Agenda Information Memo
March 4, 2002 Eagan City Council Meeting
T. APPROVE CHANGE ORDERS FOR COMMUNITY ROOM PROJECT
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
To approve change orders received for the Municipal Building Community Room
renovation.
FACTS:
• The City Council awarded the contract for the Community Room renovation to
Construction Results on January 8, 2002.
• The original contract award was in the amount of $82, 690. Since that time, three
construction changes and one material change have been requested in the amount of
$5,174.
• The consulting architect, assistant city administrator, and chief building official have
reviewed the various requested change orders to determine need and appropriateness.
The project costs with change orders are still well within the original projected cost
and budget for the renovation.
ATTACHMENT:
• A copy of the proposed change orders is attached on page
S~
i
2 0 0 0 ED IT I ON
I
AIA DOCUMENT ~ G701-2000
.r n, s
Change Order
(In;truction> cur r,t,•r>c sit~c°!
PROJECT: CHANGE ORDER NUMBER: 01 0V,N n
Community Room Remodel DATE: February 27, 2002 CO1TARCACTOT
City of Eagan ARCHITECT'S PROJECT NUMBER: 00009 F.~CTOR
3830 Pilot Knob Road CONTRACT DATE: Janilary 9, 2002 FIELD ❑
Eagan, NSN 55122 TO CONTRACTOR: CONTRACT FOR: Remodeling of Community Room, OTHER _
(Xarne and address)
Construction Results Corp.
14100 - 23rd Avenue North
Plymouth, MN 55447
THE CONTRACT IS CHANGED AS FOLLOWS:
fb; lude,:'here apalic':!'ri.: ur:lisp tc.: arrana a...hutai!e to pres•iouslr esennidConstructior: Chi:cr DinctiresJ
Proposal Request #1 - Mechanical Ducts Add: $2,802.00
Proposal Request #2 - Fire Taping Wall Add: $1,081.00
Proposal Request #3 - Electrical Data Conduits Add: $ 530.00
Plastic laminate access door upgrade Add: $ 761.00
Total Add: $5,174.00
The original (Cot;trot Suml (n;X~C~}c~sx~:ac,Rt~e3~~~as s 82,690-00
The net change by preN ioush• authorized Change Orders s none
he (Contract Sum) ( OC' 4 3ihL:X~'t`ODd~i ;S prior to this Change Order w--s s 8 2 , 6 90 . OQ
The (Contract Sum) (pSi tu`re?52~ ?t'~~Zr ,'fa L X~till be (increased) (&XxxZ(
LT{t~) b) this Change Order in
the aniount of s 5 r 174 . 00 _
0
The new (Contract Sun)' } 2{;CA'$JCIl{l?Dx~JE including this Chance Order will be s 87,864.0
The Contract Time will be (unchanged) by "'n rD t -0- ) dass.
The date of Substantial Completion as of the date of this Change Order therefore is March 31 , 2002
NOTE: This Change Order does not include c'. ranges in the Contract Sum, Contract Time or Guaranteed Maximum Price which
halve been authorized b Construction, Change Direake for which the cost or time are in dispute as described in Subparagraph
-.;.s of AIA Docununt A ot.
Not valid until signed by the Architect, Contractor and Owner.
CNH Architects Construction Results City of Eagan
ARCHITECT (Typed name) CONTRACTOR tTjpedr.amc) OWNER (n•pcdname)
O~~ Rt7 ~70
tSiina:urci
02000 AIAO
IAJL? tuT~lJ AIA DOCUMENT G701-2000
BY BY BY CHANGE ORDER
2-/27 lv2L
DATE DATE DATE
02000 The American Institute of Architects. Reproduction of the material herein or substantial quotation of its The American Institute
provisions without written permission of the AIA violates the copyright laws of the United States and will subject of Architects
the violator to legal prosecution. 1735 New York Avenue, N.W.
WARNING: Unlicensed photocopying violates U.S. copyright laws and will subject the violator to legal prosecution. p Washington, D.C. 20006-5292
S3z
Agenda Information Memo
March 4, 2000, Eagan City Council Meeting
X AUTHORIZE ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS FOR MOBILE AND
PORTABLE RADIOS.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
To authorize advertisement for bids to supply mobile and portable radios for the
city-wide radio project.
FACTS:
The mobile and portable radio equipment being operated by city departments was
installed in 1988 and 1989. The normal lifespan for mobile and portable radios is 7
years.
Bids for parcels 3 and 4 (mobile and portable radios) of the city-wide radio system
project were not awarded with the balance of the parcels due to insufficient time for
product evaluation.
Public Safety Departments have conducted evaluations of the proposed radios and
are now prepared to request bids for the selected products.
ATTACHMENTS
Sf
i
Agenda Memo
March 4, 2002
CONSENT AGENDA:
V TREE CONTRACTOR LICENSE RENEWAL
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
Approve Tree Contractor License renewal for Outdoor Specialties.
FACTS:
• City Staff has reviewed the renewal application and deem it acceptable
Agenda Information Memo
March 4, 2002 Eagan City Council Meeting
W. DUKE WEEKS - LUNAR POINTE - APPROVE STORM SEWER TRUNK
OVERSIZING AGREEMENT
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve a cost participation agreement for trunk
storm sewer over-sizing on Lot 2, Block 1 Ecolab Addition and approve payment of
$20,944.25 to Duke Realty, LLP.
FACTS:
• Duke Realty has developed an office/ warehouse building on Lot 2, Block 1 Ecolab
Addition (Lunar Pointe) at the southwest intersection of Lone Oak Road and Lunar
Lane.
• As part of that development, Duke Realty is responsible for the construction of
ponding to control storm water runoff to current City standards.
• The City Storm Water Management Plan (1990) identified the need for a pond (Pond
EP-14) on the site to control and release peak storm water runoff at a rate that is more
restrictive than is the current City standard, due to downstream deficiencies in the
existing trunk storm drainage system.
• In lieu of constructing a standard ponding system, Duke Realty proposes to construct
an underground piping detention system that would perform the same function as a
standard storm water detention pond, thereby eliminating the loss of land impact that
a required pond would create.
• The City's cost in the agreement is the portion to oversize the underground piping
detention system to restrict the rate of storm water runoff to a rate consistent with that
identified in the Storm Water Management Plan.
• The City's cost of $20,944.25 will be the responsibility of the City's Storm Water
Trunk Fund.
ATTACHMENTS:
• Cost Participation Agreement, pages5/throughSI.
i
COST PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT
This Cost Participation Agreement "Agreement" is made and entered into this -Z7 day of
trRR~, 2002 by and between the CITY OF EAGAN, (hereinafter referred to as "City") and
MV MINNEAPOLIS LUNAR POINTE I, LLC A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY
COMPANY (hereinafter referred to as "Duke"). City and Duke are collectively referred to as
"Parties."
WHEREAS, Duke is the owner and developer of certain property located within the Ecolab
Addition;
WHEREAS, in connection with its development, Duke is responsible to satisfy certain on-
site ponding requirements;
WHEREAS, Pond EP-14 was designated on the City of Eagan Storm Water Management
Plan (1990) within Lot 2, Ecolab Addition to control storm water runoff;
WHEREAS, Duke is undertaking certain underground drainage facility improvements in
lieu of ponding to allow for storm water drainage of its development;
WHEREAS, the City is desirous of having Duke make additional improvements to
"oversize" drainage facilities to restrict storm water outflow from the property at a lower rate than
the City standard;
WHEREAS, The City is willing to compensate Duke for the additional improvements made
to drainage facilities all upon the terms and conditions contained herein.
NOW, WHEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and other good and
valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Parties
agree as follows:
1. ADDMONAL CONSTRUCTION TO DRAINAGE FAcmrr ES. Duke must provide
the City Engineer with "as-built" construction drawings depicting the
necessary piping and outflow restrictions that have been constructed to
accommodate the oversizing of drainage facilities on Lot 2.
2. PAYMENT BY THE CrrY. Within 15 days of submission of the "as-built"
drawings and approval of the same by the City Engineer, the City shall pay
to Duke the sum of twenty thousand nine hundred forty four dollars and
twenty five cents ($20,944.25) as and for full and final contribution for the
oversizing of the drainage facilities.
CITY OF EAGAN: MV MINNEAPOLIS LUNAR POINTE I, LLC A
DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY
COMPANY
By: Patricia E. Awada By:
Its: Mayor Its: r V
Attest: Maria Karels
Its: City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By: Eagan City Attorney
Date:
APPROVED AS TO CONTENT:
B : Department of Public Works
Date: 2 - 27 - o-z
~V
I
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
) ss.
COUNTY OF DAKOTA )
On this day of , 2001, before me a Notary Public within and for said
County, personally appeared PATRICIA E. AWADA and MARIA KARELS to me personally known,
who being each by me duly sworn, each did say that they are respectively the Mayor and City Clerk of
the City of Eagan, the municipality named in the foregoing instrument, and that the seal affixed on
behalf of said municipality by authority of its City Council and said Mayor and City Clerk
acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deed of said municipality.
Notary Public
STATE OF MINNESOTA)
) ss.
COUNTY OF DAKOTA )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of -C'tiOcuCv-;
2002, by - the S L J of Duke Realty Li d
Partnership, a limited partnership, on behalf of the limited partnership.
KRISTINE D. VITALE
NOTARY PUBUGMINNESOTA
My Cmwh m EW Jeft, s+.2 Notary Public
THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY:
SEVERSON, SHELDON, DOUGHERTY &
MOLENDA, P.A.
7300 West 147th Street, Suite 600
Apple Valley, Minnesota 55124
(952) 432-3136
RBB:Igc (206-18595)
Agenda Information Memo
March 4, 2002
X. BEAU D'RUE DRIVE
NO PARKING
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve a resolution to prohibit parking on Beau D'Rue
Drive between Nicols Road and Silver Bell Road and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to
execute all related documents.
FACTS:
• The City of Eagan has approved the rehabilitation of Beau D'Rue Drive (Project 759R),
including the installation of a center median and designation of one lane of traffic in each
direction, between Nicols Road and Silver Bell Road.
• It is desirable for the City to obtain the use of State Aid funding to reimburse the construction
costs of the proposed street construction.
• The proposed design of the rehabilitation of Beau D'Rue Drive meets the State Aid standards
for a municipal street without on-street parking.
• Minnesota Rules Chapter 8820 (State Aid standards) requires the prohibition of parking on
all State Aid designated roadways where parking lanes are not provided.
i
Agenda Memo
March 4, 2002
CONSENT AGENDA:
Y. TREE CONTRACTOR LICENSE RENEWAL
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
Approve Tree Contractor License renewal for Outdoor Specialties.
FACTS:
• City Staff has reviewed the renewal application and deem it acceptable
Agenda Information Memo
March 4, 2002
PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. PROJECT 858. SIBLEY TERMINAL INDUSTRIAL PARK
STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve Project 858 (Sibley Terminal Industrial Park -
Storm Sewer Improvements), and authorize the preparation of detailed final plans and
specifications and the acquisition of easements through quick-take eminent domain process, if
necessary.
FACTS:
• On September 6, 2001, the City received a petition from Mr. Todd Johnson, a representative
of Global Equity Partners, property owners at 3220 Terminal Drive, requesting the
preparation of a feasibility report for storm sewer improvements in the area of their property
near Highway 13 and Terminal Drive in northwest Eagan.
• On September 17, 2001, the City Council authorized the preparation of a feasibility report
identifying the scope, cost, financing and schedule of storm sewer improvements for the
drainage area near Terminal Drive and Trunk Highway 13.
• On February 5, 2002, the feasibility report for Project 858 was presented to the City Council
and a Public Hearing was scheduled for March 4 to formally present and discuss the report
with affected property owners.
• On February 27, 2002, an informational meeting was held with the petitioner at City Hall to
discuss the proposed improvements.
• All notices have been published in the legal newspaper and sent to all affected property
owners informing them of this public hearing.
ISSUES:
• Although many of the upstream residential properties in this drainage district contribute
runoff proposed to be handled by this drainage improvement, it is questionable as to whether
a special assessment per City Policy could be sustained through proof of added value.
Subsequently, this project is proposed to be assessed entirely to the petitioning property
owner who would receive the most primary and direct benefit.
ATTACHMENTS:
• Feasibility Report, under separate cover. 3
• Petitioner Meeting Minutes, page
v o2
INFORMATIONAL MEETING
PROJECT 858, SIBLEY TERMINAL
STORM WATER IMPROVEMENTS
FEBRUARY 27, 2002, 3:00 P.M.
CONFERENCE ROOM IA & B
Attendance: Russ Matthys, City Engineer; John Gorder, Assistant City Engineer ; Todd
Hubmer, WSB & Associates; Todd Johnson - President, Global Specialty Contractors; Kent
Wood, Pool Construction, Inc.
Consultant Todd Hubmer reviewed the feasibility report with the attendees.
Engineer Matthys discussed the proposed assessments and the unavailability of City storm trunk
funds due to the July 2000 storm mitigation improvements, and the City Special Assessment
Policy as it relates to the residential property upstream. The City would be unable to prove
benefit to those properties as they have already paid for the storm sewer serving their property.
The potential cost participation from MnDOT for their portion of the drainage area tributary to,
the area was discussed. Mr. Johnson indicated that MnDOT staff had previously expressed a
willingness to participate in the cost of a solution.
The public hearing on March 4 was discussed. Mr. Johnson indicated that he will attend the
meeting to voice his opposition to entire assessment being Global Specialty's responsibility.
Potential temporary solutions for routing the storm water across the property to allow expansion
of Global Specialty's operations were discussed.
Meeting adjourned at 4:00 p.m.
63
Agenda Information Memo
March 4, 2002, City Council Meeting
B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND MOVING PERMIT (STUART
WEIERKE)
ACTIONS TO BE CONSIDERED:
To approve a Conditional Use Permit to allow the floor area of all accessory structures
to exceed 1,100 square feet and to allow more than two detached accessory structures on
an unplatted parcel located at 4675 Dodd Road in the NW'/. Section of 36 with the eight
conditions in the attached staff report.
To approve a Moving Permit to relocate a 24 foot by 36 foot detached accessory
structure from 4655 Dodd Road to 4675 Dodd Road located in the NW '/a Section of 36
with the one condition in the attached staff report.
FACTS:
• The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit and Moving Permit to
relocate an 864 square foot accessory structure from 4665 Dodd Road to 4675
Dodd Road.
• The floor area of the two existing accessory structures is 3,336 square feet. Thus,
the total floor area of all accessory use would total 4,200 square feet.
• In July 2000, the City Council approved a zoning ordinance amendment that
limited the total floor area of a detached accessory building and any attached
garage to 1,100 square feet, except with the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit.
• The proposed structure complies with setback, building height, floor area, and lot
coverage requirements of the zoning ordinance.
• The Advisory Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Conditional Use
Permit and recommended denial by a vote of 3 to 2. The majority of the
Commissioners stated that the total square footage of accessory use was excessive
for the single family property.
ISSUE:
• If the Conditional Use Permit and Building Moving Permit are approved for the
864 square foot structure, there will be three accessory structures that total 4,200
square feet, which may be excessive for one single family dwelling.
ATTACHMENTS (2):
Draft APC minutes, pages b-5" to 4
Staff report, pages 6t- to 9L
6~
DRAFT
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EAGAN ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
February 26, 2002
A regular meeting of the Eagan Advisory Planning Commission was held on Tuesday,
February 26, 2002 at 6:30 PM, at the Eagan Municipal Center. Present were Members
Kaess, Bendt, Chair Huusko, Nosbush, Stackhouse (arrived at 7:45pm) and Gladhill.
Also present were Senior Planner Mike Ridley; Planner Cynthia Kirchoff; Assistant
Engineer John Gorder; City Attorney Bob Bauer, and Recording Secretary Camille
Worley.
AGENDA
Member Gladhill moved Member Nosbush seconded a motion to adopt the Agenda.
All voted in favor.
January 29, 2002 ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
Member Bendt stated on page 2 of the minutes, Carol Street is spelled incorrectly as
Carroll Street.
Member Bendt moved, Member Gladhill seconded a motion to approve the January 29,
2002 Advisory Planning Commission meeting minutes.
All voted in favor.
III. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - STUART WEIERKE
A Conditional Use Permit to allow more than two detached accessory buildings
and to allow the total floor area of all accessory structures to exceed 1100 square
feet on the West side of Dodd Road, South of Cliff Road in the NW %4 of Section
26.
Planner Kirchoff introduced this item and highlighted the information presented in
the City Staff Report dated February 21, 2002. She noted the background and
history.
Applicant Stuart Weierke stated the building currently stands on the property next
to his. He stated the building will be destroyed if he is unable to take possession of
it. He explained that he is hoping to sell his excavating business located on Dodd
Road and will need extra storage space.
45-
City of Eagan
Advisory Planning Commission Meeting
February 26, 2002
Page 2
Chair Huusko opened the public hearing. There being no public comment, Chair
Huusko closed the public hearing and turned the discussion to back to the
Commission.
Member Gladhill inquired about the current property owner.
Mr. Weierke stated Manley Construction currently owns the garage.
Member Kaess asked Mr. Weierke if the eight conditions listed by Staff are
acceptable.
Mr. Weierke stated he is in agreement with the conditions.
Member Nosbush stated he is against the proposed garage. He stated the applicant
already has an ample amount of storage. He explained that by allowing Mr.
Weierke the garage, precedence will be set.
Member Kaess stated he is in favor of the proposed garage. He stated the property
is in a low-density area and there are not any opposing neighbors. He further
explained that the building is simply being moved from one property to another.
Member Kaess moved, Member Bendt seconded a motion to approve the
Conditional Use Permit to allow more than two detached accessory buildings and to
allow the total floor area of all accessory structures to exceed 1100 square feet on
the West side of Dodd Road, South of Cliff Road in the NW '/4 of Section 26.
A vote was taken.
Aye: Kaess and Bendt
Nay: Huusko, Gladhill and Nosbush
Motion failed
Member Gladhill stated the approval of the proposed garage will be doing a
disservice to the upcoming residents of this area.
Member Huusko agreed with Member Gladhill and stated there is already an
excessive amount of storage on the property.
Member Bendt stated the surrounding area has many accessory structures and the
proposed garage will not be out of place.
Member Gladhill moved, Member Nosbush seconded a motion to deny the
Conditional Use Permit to allow more than two detached accessory buildings and to
~v
City of Eagan
Advisory Planning Commission Meeting DRAFT
February 26, 2002
Page 3
allow the total floor area of all accessory structures to exceed 1100 square feet on
the West side of Dodd Road, South of Cliff Road in the NW %4 of Section 26.
A vote was taken.
Aye: Huusko, Gladhill and Nosbush
Nay: Kaess and Bendt
Motion carried.
PLANNING REPORT
CITY OF EAGAN
REPORT DATE: February 21, 2002 CASE: 36-CU-01-01-02
APPLICANT: Stuart Weierke HEARING DATE: February 26, 2002
PROPERTY OWNER: Same APPLICATION DATE: January 16, 2002
REQUEST: Conditional Use Permit PREPARED BY: Cynthia R. Kirchoff
LOCATION: 4675 Dodd Road
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: LD, Low Density Residential
ZONING: A, Agriculture
SUMMARY OF REQUEST
Stuart Weierke is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to allow the total floor area of all
accessory structures on the property to exceed 1,100 square feet and to allow more than two
detached accessory structures on a 1.8 acre unplatted parcel located at 4675 Dodd Road in the
NW'/< of Section 36.
Mr. Weierke is also requesting a moving permit. This application will be reviewed by the City
Council in conjunction with the Conditional Use Permit.
AUTHORITY FOR REVIEW
Accessory Structure Standards
City Code Chapter 11, Section 11.10, Subdivision 5C5, states that the total floor area of all
accessory buildings, whether attached or detached, shall not exceed 1,100 square feet, except by
the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit.
City Code Chapter 11, Section 11. 10, Subdivision 5C2, states that no more than two accessory
structures shall be permitted for each single family dwelling, except with a Conditional Use
Permit.
Conditional Use Permit
City Code Chapter 11, Section 11.40, Subdivisions 4C and 4D provide the following.
i
Planning Report -Weierke CUP
February 21, 2002
Page 2
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.
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.
Moving Permit
City Code Chapter 4, Section 4. 10, Subdivision 4D1 requires that the City Council hold a public
hearing when there is a request to move a building to a location within the City.
City Code Chapter 4, Section 4.10 gives the Protective Inspections Division authority to issue
permits to move a building within the City. Section 4. 10, Subdivision 13 states that any permit
under this section shall be denied upon a finding of any one of the following:
,/-~O ?
Planning Report -Weierke CUP
February 21, 2002
Page 3
A. Applicant has not complied with any requirement of this section;
B. Persons or property in the city would be endangered by moving the building, because of
shape, size, route, or for any other reason;
C. The building is in such state of deterioration or disrepair or is otherwise so structurally
unsafe that it would constitute a danger to persons or property in the city;
D. The building is structurally unsafe or unfit for the purpose for which moved, if the
location to which the building is to be moved is in the city;
E. The equipment for moving the building is unsafe and persons and property would be
endangered by its use;
F. The building or its use would not be in compliance with zoning, building codes or other
provisions of the City Code, if the location to which the building is to be moved is in the
city; or
G. If the location to which the building is to be moved is in the city, the building is in
substantial variance with either the established or the expected pattern of building
development within the neighborhood to which the building is to be moved. Comparative
age, bulk, architectural style and quality of construction of both the building to be moved
and the buildings existing in the neighborhood shall be considered in determining
whether a building is in substantial variance. If the building to be moved is more than ten
years older than the oldest building situated on the lands abutting the land to which the
building is to be moved, such fact shall be evidence that the building to be moved is in
substantial variance.
BACKGROUNDMISTORY
The subject property is an unplatted parcel. City records indicate that the single family dwelling
was constructed in 1963. A 560 square foot detached accessory structure was built in 1967 and
in 1974, a 1,232 square foot detached accessory structure was constructed on the site. A 672
square foot addition was constructed to the 1974 building in 1980. (Note: Building permit
records are not consistent with the dimensions shown on the applicant's site plan.)
EXISTING CONDITIONS
There are currently two accessory structures and a single family dwelling on the site. The home
is situated on the high point of the property. The site has numerous significant trees that
delineate the northern and southern property lines.
D
Planning Report -Weierke CUP
February 21, 2002
Page 4
SURROUNDING USES
Except for Lebanon Hills Regional Park to the west, the site is surrounded by property zoned and
guided for single family residential use.
EVALUATION OF REQUEST
Conditional Use Permit
Proposal - The applicant is requesting to move a
24 foot by 36 foot (864 square foot) detached,'
accessory structure (shown in the picture to the
right) from the property to the north, which has Y = _
received Preliminary Subdivision approval
(Nature's Edge), to the subject parcel, zoned A, tom„, _
Agriculture. The floor area of all existing
accessory structures is 3,336 square feet. Should
this Conditional Use Permit be approved, the total
floor area would equal 4,200 square feet and the
number of accessory structures would increase to
three. This is 3,100 square feet more than permitted by the zoning ordinance without a
Conditional Use Permit.
Since the accessory structure is proposed to be moved from the property to the north, a moving
permit will be required. This request will be heard by the City Council in conjunction with the
Conditional Use Permit.
Compatibility with Surrounding Area -
Manley Addition and Nature's Edge
single family subdivisions are located to
the north and south, respectively.
Lebanon Hills Regional Park lies the west
and Dodd Road is on the east.
' The picture to the left, taken from Isabelle
Court (or the southwest), shows one of
the existing accessory structures. The
garage is proposed to be moved to the
right or south of the existing building.
M- Garages are deemed accessory to a single
family dwelling. The zoning ordinance defines a private garage as "an accessory building or
accessory portion of the principal building that is primarily intended for and used to store the
private passenger vehicles and trucks of the family resident upon the premises and in which no
business, service, or industry is carried on." It appears as though detached accessory structures
are common in this vicinity, because the properties are large in area and can accommodate the
91
Planning Report -Weierke CUP
February 21, 2002
Page 5
buildings. However, the character of the area is changing as many of the larger parcels are being
further subdivided for smaller single family residential lots. Thus, the proposal for three
accessory structures that total 4,200 square feet may not be compatible as the adjacent properties
fully develop.
Site Plan - The site plan indicates that the garage is to be located in the rear yard, on the western
portion of the property.
Setbacks: The zoning ordinance requires that accessory structures greater than 150
square feet must maintain 5 foot setbacks from the rear and side property lines. The site
plan indicates that the structure will maintain 10 foot setbacks. This requirement has
been met.
Building Height: Accessory structures are not permitted to exceed 16 feet in height.
Building height is measured to the average height of the highest gable of a pitched roof.
A site inspection revealed that the garage is 14.5 feet in height. This requirement has
been met.
The accessory structure has a second floor with windows and exterior stairs. This second
floor must not be utilized for living space.
Floor Area: The zoning ordinance prohibits an accessory structure from exceeding the
footprint of the single family dwelling. The single family dwelling is 1,352 square feet
and the proposed garage is 864 square feet. This requirement has been met.
Building Coverage: All buildings including accessory structures shall not cover more
than 20 percent of the lot area. The parcel is 1.8 acres or 82,764 square feet. The total
structures would equal 5,552 square feet. Therefore, the building coverage is 7 percent
and this requirement has been met.
Access/Street Design - The garage will gain access via the existing driveway off of Dodd Road.
Tree Preservation - The applicant has indicated that two trees will be removed for the placement
of the accessory structure, however, mitigation will not be required.
Accessory Structure Conditional Use Permit Findings - A conditional use permit may be granted
if the following requirements are met:
1. There is a demonstrated need and potential for continued use of the building or structure
and the purpose stated.
Finding: The applicant's narrative indicates that the additional accessory structure
would be utilized for personal storage. The demonstrated need in most instances is to
prevent items from being stored outdoors. It has been stated by the applicant that had the
property to the north not been developed, the garage would stand for many years.
i
Planning Report -Weierke CUP
February 21, 2002
Page 6
The zoning ordinance does not place a limit on the number of accessory structures, but it
does require a Conditional Use Permit to have more than two for each single family
dwelling. Although the property is zoned A, Agriculture, it is not exempt from the
accessory structure requirements (because the building is not to be utilized for
agricultural purposes) and does to entitle it to have multiple, large accessory structures for
personal storage. Accessory structures that total 4,200 square feet in floor area appear to
be excessive for a typical residential property.
2. In the case of residential uses, no commercial or home occupation activities are
conducted within the accessory building or attached garage.
Finding: The applicant has indicated that the accessory structure will be utilized for
personal storage, not for a commercial operation. This standard is included with the
recommended conditions of approval.
3. The building has an evident re-use or function related to the principal use.
Finding: A garage is utilized for the storage of personal items that are accessory to the
principal use (i.e., a single family dwelling), as defined in the zoning ordinance.
However, 4,200 square feet appears to be excessive for the storage of personal items.
4. The provisions of section 11.40, subd. 4 of this chapter are met.
Finding: The accessory structure use does not appear to be detrimental to the
neighborhood, complies with relevant City Code provisions, and appears to be
compatible in appearance with the character of the vicinity because it is a rural portion of
the City. The use is served by adequate public facilities and will not be hazardous to
adjacent properties. However, the total floor area and number of accessory structures
may not be compatible with the developing nature of this neighborhood.
Existing City Code Violations - An inspection of the site revealed that numerous miscellaneous
items are being stored behind the most westerly garage, adjacent to the Manley Addition
subdivision. It is recommended that items prohibited from being stored outdoors by the City
Code be removed as a condition of this permit.
Moving Permit
Proposal - The applicant is proposing to move an existing 24 foot by 36 foot (864 square feet)
detached garage from 4665 Dodd Road to the subject site. After the Conditional Use Permit is
issued the structure will be in compliance with provisions of the City Code. In its current state,
the building is in structurally sound condition. Further, the building's architectural style is in
keeping with the other buildings of the neighborhood.
~3
Planning Report -Weierke CUP
February 21, 2002
Page 7
As part of the Moving Permit, the applicant will be required to have a certificate of survey of the
property prepared by a licensed surveyor. Further, a footing and foundation permit shall also be
required as a condition of the permit.
SUMMARY/CONCLUSION
The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to allow the floor area of all accessory
structures on the property to exceed 1,100 square feet and to allow more than two detached
accessory buildings for one single family dwelling. The three accessory structures would total
4,200 square feet. In conjunction with the Conditional Use Permit, the applicant is requesting a
Building Moving Permit to allow a 24 foot by 36 foot (864 square feet) detached accessory
structure to be relocated from the property to the north to the subject site.
It does not appear that the proposed use will be detrimental to adjacent structures. The accessory
structure will be served by adequate public facilities and will not be hazardous (involving noise,
smoke, fumes, glare or odors) to adjacent uses. However, 4,200 square feet of accessory
structure/use seems excessive for one single family dwelling. Since the surrounding properties
are being further subdivided and becoming more urban in character, the number and size of all
accessory structures does not appear to be compatible in appearance with the developing
character of the neighborhood.
The acceptability of a Conditional Use Permit to allow all accessory structures to exceed 1,100
square feet and more than two accessory structures for one single family dwelling and a Building
Moving Permit to relocate a 864 square foot detached accessory structure is considered a policy
matter to be determined by the City Council.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED
To recommend approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow the floor area of all accessory
structures to equal 4,200 square feet and to allow three detached accessory structures on property
located at 4675 Dodd Road in the NW 1/4 of Section 36.
If approved, the following conditions shall apply:
1. The Conditional Use Permit shall be recorded at the Dakota County Recorder's Office
within 60 days of approval.
2. Total area of all accessory structures shall not exceed 4,200 square feet.
3. The applicant shall obtain a moving permit prior to relocating the structure.
4. The detached accessory structure shall exhibit the same color as the principal
structure.
7tv
Planning Report -Weierke CUP
February 21, 2002
Page 8
5. No commercial operation or home occupation shall be permitted in any accessory
structure on-the property.
6. Living space shall not be permitted in the accessory structure.
7. The accessory structure shall meet all other zoning ordinance requirements.
8. Items prohibited from being stored outdoors by the City Code shall be removed.
To approve a Building Moving Permit to move a 24 foot by 36 foot (864 square feet) detached
accessory structure from 4665 Dodd Road to 4675 Dodd Road located in the NW 1/4 of Section
25.
If approved, the following conditions shall apply:
1. A certificate of survey shall be submitted with the moving permit application.
2. The applicant shall obtain a footing and foundation permit for the accessory structure.
7Y
FINANCIAL OBLIGATION - 36-CU-01-01-02, Stuart Weierke 10-03600-030-26
There are pay-off balances of special assessments totaling $428 on the parcel for which
the conditional use permit is requested.
At this time, there are pending assessments that total $33,855 on the parcel for which the
conditional use permit is requested. The pending assessments are related to Project
75111, Dodd Road Improvements and include sanitary sewer lateral, sewer and water
services, street and street drainage.
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
Storm sewer trunk SF $.09/Sq.Ft 81,893 Sq. Ft $7,370
TOTAL $7,370
Does the Council desire to condition the approval of the Conditional Use Permit on
acceptance of the assessments from Project 751R?
~v
I
a Eagan Boundary
treet rcelArea ~ine
Location Map ~Pa
Building Footprint
- rtja ?
1 a
° <LLLiY~ i y j y J c ; t, r
r
1 19
• O fi
A a dt a Yb b, a ~ '~1
3 P wpm.. a t~ ~aa a
V O ~ ~ ~7 it ~ ~ ♦ A
Sub ect Site ' 3 3 d 7 3•~•~ t 3
a
- =6 aa~ lY o
a~ cl pd a~ P
' L l 3
a
a
t v'
-0 a
v o t~ p b
7
1000 0 1000 2000 Feet
Develop ment/Developerr. Stuart Weierke
Application: Conditional Use Permit
Case No.: 36-CU-01-01-02
Map Prepared using ERSI ArcView 7.1. Pared bass map data provided N
by Dakota County Land Survey Deparbrnent and is current as of October 2001.
*City of Eagan / THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY u E
M. I N N E S C -141 The City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this Information and are S
Cernmunity Development Dapartrrent not responsible for errors or omisslons.
Current Zoning and Comprehensive Guide Plan Stuart Weierke
Land Use Map Case No. 36-CU-01-01-02
V R 1 -1
Zoning Map
R-1
Current Zoning: A f
• 1
P
A
P
A ~.L
Agriculture
1
P
A
A
.o0
0 a" 1500 Fwt L~.7 r
O
Comprehensive Guide Plan L v
Land Use Map L; L
LD
LD
P
LD '
Current Land Use Designation: P
LD
LD
Low Density Residential
P
D
P LD
LD
LD
Soo 0 000 Foot ®r?~ r°
Parcel bow map information pro.td.dby Dakota County Land aawy D.partened 0*01101. N
Zonkno brIn tt.n nudntakud by City fair.
441;;,~City of Eagan w E
Z• THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY
Community Development Department The City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarant►a they accuracy of this Information. S
D
.3.3 go
i
oIviA5
W00,05,
cxrsr jecs_ 134 U.
~ nos,
^ G p,~rs T,
! V o / / J
J/
j3 L. b 6-~
o . WE
T'
Alo
RELOCATED GARAGE
Y
excsr,b
BLDG, _
Xt' G rz
:33 0
SITE PLA
'LIV. V . ~~l 1./r'L-t/i /L~~'l G.~-~'C~C y~L :~~¢~•_J
~ ~='tom.{~ ..~.~.,-~%o .~t~c,~~-`~-~~ _ ;
Zv ./LG✓~~ ['.tom
42
C
~ T vim- ~ tic «~h
1 A~
l
S
Agenda Information Memo
March 4, 2002 Eagan City Council Meeting
OLD BUSINESS
A. PROJECT 847, FAIRWAY HILLS - STORM MITIGATION IMPROVMENTS
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve/Deny/Continue, with direction, proposed
storm mitigation improvements for Project 847, Fairway Hills/Parkview Golf Course,
and, if approved, authorize the preparation of detailed plans and specifications for bid
solicitation.
FACTS:
• In July 2000, the southern portion of Eagan was hit with an unprecedented rainfall
event that resulted in significant flooding to numerous portions of the community. In
response to this "Superstorm", the Council directed a technical engineering study of
all affected areas to identify recommended mitigation improvements.
• This study classified all affected areas into three major categories:
1) HWL - These were priority areas where impacted structures were situated
below the City designed standard of the calculated High Water Level (HWL)
for the 1% (100 year) storm event.
2) FB - These were the next priority areas where impacted structures were
situated above the designed HWL for the I % storm event, but were still below
the standard Free-Board (FB) elevation (+2' over the HWL). The freeboard
provides for an additional safety "bounce" of low ponded areas above the
calculated HWL.
3) MCS - This last category was for all areas that met all City design standards
for the 1% (100 year) storm event including the freeboard criteria, but were
still flooded due to the unprecedented rainfall occurrence of July 2000.
• Of the 11 areas that were identified in the MCS category, only two have been
approved for additional storm mitigation improvements to date:
1. Pulte's Oakbrooke Addition ($126,000) where the developer agreed to reduce
the remaining build-out density and provide for increased ponding areas.
2. Rocky Lane ($28,700) where the improvement would also keep Deerwood
Drive from flooding, thereby keeping a major cross community collector
roadway open to emergency traffic during future similar events.
• The improvements in the HWL & FB categories were further broken down into Basic
Improvements (necessary to meet City design standards) and Additional
Improvements (necessary to meet the July 2000 flood elevations). In certain project
areas, Additional Improvements were approved in addition to the Basic
Improvements if the extra costs were relatively insignificant to the overall project.
O p~
I
Agenda Information Memo
March 4, 2002 Eagan City Council Meeting
OLD BUSINESS
A. PROJECT 847, FAIRWAY HILLS - STORM MITIGATION IMPROVMENTS
(Cont'd)
• Several homes in the Fairway Hills area adjacent to the Parkview Golf Course were
severely impacted by the July 2000 event. This area has been classified in the Meet
City Standards (MCS) category after related improvements were performed around
1994-95.
• There have been 6 informational neighborhood meetings with either the Council or
staff trying to identify which of the several options prepared would be acceptable for
further consideration. Subsequently, detailed plans for Option "D(modified)"
($132,000) have been prepared incorporating a berm generally located along the rear
yard fence line with a storm sewer pipe draining the ponded water from the Golf
Course side of the berm to the existing storm drain system in Fairway Hills. Option D
(modified) is preferred by a majority of the residents over the minimum design,
Option "C" ($98,000), which would provide for the same level of flood protection for
the July 2000 event. Option C incorporates the same berm, but instead of the storm
sewer pipe, it would install two 10" culverts under the berm allowing continued
overland flow (at a reduced rate but for a longer time frame) across several rear yard
areas where there are no drainage easements.
ISSUES:
• The Fairway Hills area is classified in the MCS category. If a project is approved, it is
recommended that specific justification be stated for comparable application to any
other similar MCS classified area.
• A determination should be made as to whether any portion of an approved option
should be specially assessed, and, if so, identify which properties will benefit by the
value of the proposed assessment.
• To date, the City has obtained all easements at no costs. However, no commercial
property has been involved in a mitigation improvement. A determination should be
made as to whether compensation should be provided to the Golf Course for the
required easements due to its commercial operation.
ATTACHMENTS:
• Option D (modified) plan layout, page
• Correspondence submitted by property owners, pages $ through
F3
4 6 1, (Udd .1J J 'k M
13sbnw 3100 M3)ANdVd/80 SIIIH AYM81VJ S1N3Y13AONdWI 83M3S VINO1S
_ - >?WPBWro a 1N3W3AO8dWI NOIlV01 IW W
ava5od r 1 cols aooz alnr L
j _ SB"°g ` iOS3NNIW 'NVOV3 ' v
ii -
- ° m J O d. O Z 0
=
U 2 1 W
z MEM
w Q Q W J.1 W
Q W v~w~wm ' IRA J(~ uay~lo~Ja}U~ C5,7
C
JJ ,1 °
u XtOO WA.. I I rI $
L U I I1 ' ~W I a
w l\ I m N R
o
~o UZ Gj. II ( -i iE
o V) .j
~I n vS I IZ,
8 viii J,
ocr i e Jv - 1---
0 w _J
g ~ a /I I Im
F m® W ~Wa
I i
a w I I `--L'' "
W l Wa
cn , -
o m~
Ir -
W r `
W N 8
I
o W Z .a 1
{ •oAIa Mn )Jj
W
~x -
to
_Oaod do m Isf
qD'~
0. F
F ' --,----I o
8- I r}- - --t7.- L- -
SW Q I
co
Q0° 1
Z
\ L
O
W
spa
W Z w ' o=~
0 Z m I
19
$
0 U) 0 L,
0 k I JR T 3
U W ' o
z; W m f------
Fo Ana :N II r
W= m 0- I iW
m ®a I I
HISTORY OF FAIRWAY HILLS FLOODING 1987-2001
A HOMEOWNERS PERSPECTIVE
1987-July Superstorm
Drainage and flooding issues regarding the Parkview golf course and the new Fairway Hills
development became evident. These issues progressed to a lawsuit between the golf course
owner and the city as well as other parties.
1990-Jul, SY torm resulting in flooding of yards and homes along Fairway Hills Drive
This storm event dropped -4-6 inches of rain in a relatively short period of time. Water
level reached 4-5 feet high in backyard of 4656 Fairway Hills Drive. Water came through
windows of 4648,4656, and is believed to have entered 4664 although this was not
confirmed because the house was still under construction.
1991- There continued to be water drainage related issues along the backyards of Fairway
Hills Drive. The affected neighbors worked with the city to address 2 issues:
1) The large volume of water coming to the drain located between 4656 and 4648.
2) An overland drainage problem, which blocked water from the property of 4680
from reaching the drain.
A berm was constructed on the golf course to divert a portion of the golf course drainage to
the pond in the park. Regrading of the backyard of 4672 to facilitate the flow of water from
the golf course and the property of 4680 to reach the drain. Regrading was also done
between the properties of 4656 and 4648 for emergency overflow.
1992-There continued to be streams of water flowing through our backyards with most
thunderstorms. On one occasion our children's backyard vinyl pool was lifted up by the
water, flowed downstream and dropped itself over the drain blocking the flow of water.
Within minutes the water was 3-4 feet high in our backyard and up to the windows of our
neighbors house. Fortunately our neighbor witnessed the pool floating to the drain and we
were able to respond quickly. Two men were unable to lift the pool from the drain. They
had to cut it apart with butcher knives while reaching through 34 feet of water in the dark
of night with lightening flashing all around them to save our homes from flooding.
1992-2000- We have witnessed many storms, which produced large streams through our
yards. We watch with great vigilance 24 hours a day for anything including snow banks
which could potentially block the drain knowing that our homes would be in danger.
Because we five by the drain my husband watches the width and depth of the stream during
storms and if it comes close to our windows he feels responsible to go out in major
lightening and thunder to check the patency of the drain. He places his life at risk to do this
but we know that if anything blocks the drain the damage to our homes will be extensive.
I would also like to say that although we now carry flood insurance we have been informed
that if we have one more flood occurrence we will not be eligible for the preferred risk
flood program that now covers our area.
Sue Nesheim
4656 Fairway Hills Drive
O~
July 7-8 Super Storm Fairway Hill Neighborhood Area #8
On the night of July 7-8 our neighborhood experienced significant damage to our homes
due to flooding from excessive run-off from the golf course. Our yards became a pond
with nowhere for the water to go. We had water with depths up to six feet at the drain.
When the water reached a certain height it went thundering out to the front racing down
Camelback and crashing through the wall at Pilot Knob causing massive damage. We
know we contributed to the damage because our neighbor's picnic table was in the bottom
of the pit. We need you to understand this was not water seeping into our basements this
was a raging river. Thankfully, our windows held or we all would have had water on the
first floor of our homes. Our homes and are lives are at great risk every time it rains. It
was like a war zone out there that night. We truly feared for our lives.
Now we would like to share with you our history of negotiating a SOLUTION to this
MASSIVE FLOODING.
August 14, 2000
We sent a letter to the City of Eagan informing them of our devastation due to the
flooding and what action would be taken to remedy the situation. The city agreed this was
a unique situation and assured us investigative steps were being taken by the City. The
engineering firm of Bonestroo Rosene and Anderlink would be analyzing the entire
system. The City would receive a report in 60 days.
October 12, 2000
We had a follow-up phone call with Tom Hedges. We were told the engineering report
would be ready by the end of October and neighborhood meetings would be held.
October 30, 2000
A meeting for all flood victims was held at Christ Luthern Church to discuss the upcoming
engineering report. No solutions at this time.
November 9, 2000
We attended the meeting held at Black Hawk Middle School to recap storm and city
design standards, identify neighborhood groups and assign meeting dates. We were given
a meeting date of November 18, 2000 to be held in Council Chambers to discuss our
flooding issues.
November 18, 2000
i
Fairway Hills impacted neighborhood group meeting held at City Hall to listen to our
concerns. We all attended and voiced our concerns and pleas for help.
November 20, 2000
Fairway Hills Follow-up meeting at Christ Lutheran Church. This is when we were
presented with 3 options. Option 41 being modify existing homes. Option #2 Berm and
Option 43 being Golf Course pond and overflow. We were all in agreement to look at
Option #3 since it would contain the water on the golf course with a pond and Emergency
Overflow Outlet (EOF). This would keep everyone dry including the golf course. At no
time were we under the impression this was not going to be a possibility due to golf
course cooperation. The golf course owner never once attended a meeting or showed any
concern. We assumed he would want to help the city help us. We went home excited
about our solutions to this devastating flooding.
December-March, 2001
We patiently waited for the City to complete neighborhood meetings with other areas
affected in the City.
April 23, 2001
We sent a letter to the City of Eagan asking for help with a temporary solution after
another sleepless night because of heavy rains. We were contacted by Tom Colbert and
were told we could sand bag to protect our property. Without a solution the sandbags
would have to be permanent and 6 feet high through 3 properties.
April 2001
Tom Colbert visited with us in our backyards to discuss temporary solutions to this
constant threat of flooding. He listened to our concerns and informed us the City was still
trying to negotiate a solution for us.
April 3 0, 2001
Our meeting with the City Council to present our options and what the City was going to
do for us. We were there late into the night and made our presentation. Being the unique
situation we are in with no cooperation at that time from the golf course we were sent
back for further analysis. We were also told due to the cost of Option 43, which we all
thought was the best permanent solution it would not happen. We agreed to Option #2,
which was the berm with sewer and were told this would offer us the same protection as
#3. The City told us they would contact us in 6 weeks with an update. They were going
back to the golf course and try to renegotiate a fix. We also talked about Condemnation
if the golf course wasn't willing and they said that takes 2-3 years and they didn't want us
to wait that long. We again patiently waited for 6 weeks.
F 7
May 2001
Peggy Carlson paid a visit to our backyards to survey the drainage issues. She agreed
that this was a unique situation and talked over solutions with us. We pointed out to her
the flow of the water and how dangerously close it comes to our homes, within 5-10 feet.
She would discuss further with Tom Colbert.
June 15, 2001
E-mail was sent to Tom Colbert concerning the six-week time frame. A response was
received within hours. Tom was happy to provide us with an update concerning the
negotiations with the golf course. (SEE ATTACHED) Needless to say we were ecstatic.
Finally, a resolution with the golf course. The golf course agreed to a berm and an
emergency overflow pipe constructed along our rear lot lines to the RAVINE adjacent to
Cliff Rd. A very deep ravine I might add. This alignment would also go through THEIR
(the golf course) woodland area behind 4608-4632 Fairway Hills Dr. This would require
the removal of SOME trees but it WOULD STILL LEAVE A WOODLAND BUFFER.
He also agreed to dedicate the required easements at no cost to the City if we could
schedule the work for the Fall, 2001 to minimize his business operations. We were willing
to do whatever the golf course said. We were proud to call him our neighbor, he did want
to help. Tom Colbert informed us they were in the process of conducting all the necessary
field surveys to determine the best alignment to MIND&ZE TREE LOSS and hydraulic
computations to evaluate the ravine and downstream impacts. Once this was completed
we would hold another neighborhood meeting in approximately 2 weeks.
July 16, 2001
We received and e-mail from Tom Colbert letting us know they have met with the golf
course and have a pretty good position from them as to what option they are willing to
consider to address our concerns and minimize the construction impact to them. We set
up a meeting with the neighbors for July 25 at 5pm at 4664 Fairway Hills Drive.
July 25, 2001 .
Meeting was held at 4664 Fairway Hills Drive with all the neighbors along the golf course.
After all the meetings we've had over the year there were many new faces! Tom Colbert
presented the option for the berm and emergency overflow pipe to run along the rear lot
line. We were told this would require 25 feet of land on the rear lot lines. The golf course
was not willing to give that much. The City has legal rights (drainage easements) along
the rear of all lots adjacent to the golf course. We discovered there are easements ranging
from 15ft.-35ft. Therefore, we felt the City could take up to 35ft. (easements) from
property owners and the golf course would have to give very little.
We also had neighbor opposition to the above option. Their opposition was to trees being
removed ON THE GOLF COURSE. As was mentioned before, there would be a
i
woodland buffer. We feel the only opposition to the trees should come from the TREES
OWNERS, THE GOLF COURSE!! We were then told that due to neighbor opposition
the city wouldn't approve so we were given a NEW SURPRISE OPTION! This option
would involve a berm and some 10-inch PVC pipes. The water would be held back on the
golf course and would flow at a controlled rate through the pipes THROUGH OUR
YARDS and into the sewer drain. How could this possibly solve our flooding? The water
would be flowing through the yards for 12-20 HOURS. OVERLAND DRAINAGE
through our flooded yards is unacceptable. Our yards would be unusable for 12-20
HOURS! We feel the best option for all concerned would be the option with the berm and
emergency overflow pipe. The water is then kept off private property and flows along a
fence line out of harms way, keeping our families and homes safe.
Tom Colbert said he would go back and try to come up with some kind of solution,
renegotiate with the golf course etc. Within, the next couple of week the golf course was
sold and we were back to having NO SOLUTION. As you can imagine we are very
frustrated trying to come to a close on this flooding issue. Let's face it we are never going
to please everyone; this issue should be between the VICTIMS and the GOLF COURSE
and the CITY.
November 4, 2001
Mr. Korman, the new golf course owner held a meeting at the golf course clubhouse to
review options. At this meeting all options were discussed. We the affected homeowners
agreed to any option not involving overland drainage so dangerously close to our homes.
Option 41 we knew would not get approved due to cost and golf course disruption.
Option #2, which we as affected homeowners think, is the best solution was rejected by
unaffected homeowners due to tree loss. Funny thing is they are NOT THEIR TREES,
THEY ARE ON GOLF COURSE PROPERTY. The city also has 35ft easement rights on
the UNAFFECTED PROPERTY OWNERS REAR LOT LINES. Tom Colbert said he
would go back to the City with Option #1, which we as affected homeowners knew would
not go through due to cost and disruption to the golf course. So here we are back to no
solution and no consensus because we keep changing the rules and the players in this
consensus game.
January 31, 2002
Another meeting was held at the golf course clubhouse. We were told after discussions
with the City and the Golf Course owners Option 41 (ponding) was not feasible. We as
the affected homeowners were not surprised. Again, Option #2 (berm and sewer to ravine
on Cliff Rd.) the most responsible of the options was rejected by UNAFFECTED
HOMEOWNERS DUE TO TREE LOSS, AGAIN, THESE ARE TREES ON THE
GOLF COURSE PROPERTY. I'm sure the golf course does not want to lose their trees
but the only opposition should come from the TREES OWNERS, THE GOLF COURSE.
We came up with an Option that would provide a berm and 12 in. sewer pipe to drain the
flow that will be trapped behind the berm on the golf course property. It will be directed
7
to the backyard drain at a controlled rate. This is very important because the reason we
flood is the drain cannot handle all that water. When the street drains are overloaded our
drain stops working and our yards become the pond with nowhere for the water to go.
We the AFFECTED HOMEOWNERS agreed to this Option as long as the water is
contained on the golf course property.
We are pleading with you to give us our lives back. We need closure. We are at risk in
rain and in snow. We are not asking for the perfect solution we are just asking for your
help in keeping the golf course water on the golf course. Four or five homes should not
have to drain 25 acres of water through their back yards, within 10 feet of their homes.
We deserve protection just like our other Eagan neighbors. We know how much water
came crashing in on us that night, the cement wall on Pilot Knob being washed out from
our water. We lived it and we want to make sure we never have to look at 6 ft. of water
in our backyards again. We also have to deal with this in the winter, blowing a path for
the melting snow to pass to the drain. Not to mention, the significant drop in property
value. One neighbor had to sell her home 50,000 below market value. Please, this is no
way to live.
We have nothing but praise for our Mayor and City Council, Tom Colbert and Tom
Hedges. You have been there for us. We know you have been trying to get us a solution
but we need your ACTION TODAY! Please don't make us wait any longer. We just want
to get on with our lives and live in our homes as safe and secure as possible.
Sincerely,
Mike and Debbie Hager Peter and Barb Petrulo
4648 Fairway Hills Dr. 4664 Fairway Hills Dr.
Eagan, MN 55123 Eagan, MN 55123
651-686-0853 651-688-7791
Greg and Sue Nesheim Bruce and Patty Kittilstved
4656 Fairway Hills Dr. 4672 Fairway Hills Dr.
Eagan, MN 55123 Eagan, MN 55123
651-456-0411 651-456-9296
~a
Fairway Hills July 2000 Flood
Fact Sheet
Damage: $180,000 in the five homes (street numbers - 4648, 4656, 4664, 4672,
4688) this amount does not include 8+ homes that were also flooded.
Freguency: Three occurrences - 1987, 1990, 2000 (see pictures).
En>wttonal Inmact: Every time it rains home owners are literally up all night checking their
backyards and the drain with flashlights for any flooding.
After the flood younger kids cried themselves to sleep in fear that they
would be flooded again.
Younger and older kids still have a difficult time falling asleep when it
rains during the evening.
Danaer. Flood water reached 5.5 feet in some backyards, and over 6 feet by the
drain.
If flooding were to happen during the day children could have been hurt
or worse due to the speed of water accumulating in the backyards.
Water flowing between the two homes where the drain was located
reached 3 feet, and the water was flowing with such power that it was
impossible for an adult to go from one yard to the next to check on their
neighbors welt being.
The same water flow mentioned above carried a picnic table two blocks
down stream.
Spring thaw although not yet causing a flood does cause a 6 foot wide
stream in the backyards every year (see pictures).
Water during the height of the storm reached over 2 feet on basement
windows. It was sheer luck the windows did not break and cause greater
damage or personal injury.
Other: Platt drawing shows the drain system was intended to handle only the
backyard water and not the golf course water (see original Platt
drawings). This is also true of the drain pipe size.
5 of 6 neighbors who had the greatest damage to their homes and
highest exposure to personal safety agree option 2 would provide the
safest solution and would coincide with the original water drainage flow.
Families in the Fairway Hills neighborhood should not have an equal say
in the final solution. Those that did not incur any flood damage and
would prefer to preserve their backyard view of the golf course trees
should not have the same weighting as those families who are concerned
about preserving their homes and families safety.
9
Page 1 of 2
The Fam
From: Tom Colbert <TColbert@ci.eagan.mn.us>
To: <orangecrush75@prodigy.net>
Cc: Mira McGarvey <MMcGarvey@ci.eagan.mn.us>; Tom Hedges <THedges@ci.eagan.mn.us>;
Russ Matthys <RMatthys@ci.eagan.mn.us>; John Gorder <JGorder@ci.eagan.mn.us>;
<Mhanson@bonestroo.com>
Sent: Friday, June 15, 2001 9:54 AM
Subject: Fairway Hills Dr. neighborhood
Good Morning Peter,
I'm sorry if I misunderstood the timeframe. I didn't recall the
Council setting a specific time frame for us to bring back your
neighborhood's proposal. I checked the minutes from the April 30 meeting and
couldn't find a time reference either. But then, with so many projects to
keep moving along, I may have very well missed this expectation. If so, I
sincerely apologize to you and your neighbors.
In any event, I'm happy to provide you with an update as to where we
are in our negotiations with the golf course. As a result of our most recent
meeting, they were not in favor of the proposal that would expand the
ponding on their golf course with an emergency overland flow (EOF) route
through the middle of their course. However, they were receptive to the berm
and emergency overflow pipe (EOP) that would be constructed along your rear
lot lines to the ravine adjacent to Cliff Rd. If you recall, this option was
less expensive ($137k vs. $373k) and provided the same level of protection.
They have agreed to have the majority of the construction located on their
property adjacent to the fence line. But this alignment would also go
through their woodland area behind 4:608 -r46.32 l _aipW Hills Dr. TThis will
~,~...,,,,,-~r;F~. ~<c.3rsata..r j .•...:..~~..p,s....--
~equi ee the remoof`some.of the trees:but it<would still~leave.atus2dl4nd
e. so,l ;a~r~e. to;.c edic~ hr required ea enfs' VIn6;Ws0torth-e..C f
if we can schedule this work for the fall to minimize his business
operations. This would fit into the CA ' le. If the Council were to
authorize the construction plans at a July 5 m eting, approve the plans at
the July 17 meeting, a contract could ed at the August 21 meeting
(legal advertising time rgmt) with construction beginning most likely right
after labor day (contract document processing, mobilization, etc).
We are now in the process of performing the necessary field surveys
to determine the best alignment to minimize tree loss and hydraulic
computations to evaluate the ravine and downstream impacts. Once this
information has been completed, we will schedule a meeting with all original
noticed property owners as well as the additional homes to the north. I
expect that we will be able to hold this meeting in the about 2 weeks. We
will send out an update similar to the information in this response to you
and your neighbors early next week.
Thanks for your inquiry as it was very timely. Also, thanks to you
and your neighbors for your continued patience and cooperation. LtTeYL
Tom Colbert, Director of Public Works o M
ro~.. ~i2 ~4Y1 I 10~G
3830 Pilot Knob Rd., Eagan, MN. 55122-1897 ~ 0 ) , 1 0 S TV~p C(~Qp~o,4 1 DQ ( 1
X51 °
4.2.8 Area 8 - Fairway Hills - Twin View Manor
a. Fairway Hills Drive/Parkview Golf Course
Important Elevation Data: Backyard High Water Level (1 % Rainfall) 1024.5
Approximate July 2000 Flood Peak Not Avail.
Lowest Exposed Entry 1027.95
Emergency Overflow 1028.85
Description: Homes on the east side of Fairway Hills, which abut Parkview Golf
Course, appear to have flooded in part because of restricted overland drainage which is
conveyed through backyards to an existing 18" diameter storm sewer shown on Figure
4.21. The 18" storm sewer discharges to a 24" diameter storm sewer in Fairway Hills
Drive. The drainage swale, which is located near homes, has limited slope and will
pond water during intense storm events before draining to the 18" storm sewer. An
emergency overflow (EOF) from the inlet to the 18" line to Fairway Hills Drive does
exist, but the elevation of the EOF is above the lowest exposed entry of adjacent
homes.
The storm sewer analysis shows the HWL for the 1% rainfall for the backyard ponding
areas east of Fairway Hills Drive is just about the same as the rim elevation of the
backyard storm drain over the 18" storm sewer. (The analysis assumes that runoff from
the golf course to the south is diverted away from this drainage, Therefore, the
minimum criteria are x*,t - No -rH & 'I .
Tt-M S 15 (COAL( 11U&- Jt4 6f-+T 11-t US ~ ~eS
Improvement Options: Improvement options to provide protection greater than the W-
rrce400L,
minimum requirement are as follows:
• Raise diversion berm on golf course to prevent overland drainage north to 18" storm
sewer
• Modify the lowest residence(s) to reduce flood risk (eliminate walkouts and place fill
against back of building to raise elevation of lowest entry).
Redirect golf course drainage by constructing berm on common lot line between
•
homes on east side of Fairway Hills Drive and golf course. Storm sewer pipe would
be constructed northerly and convey storm water through golf course to low area
along Cliff Road.
• Improve overland drainage from backyard low point west between homes to
Fairway Hills Drive and from Camelback Drive west to Pilot Knob Road.
Effect: The improvements could be designed to provide a level of protection anywhere
from just meeting the minimum criteria to well above the minimum criteria.
35
`?3
ALTERNATE
SECURE EASEMENT FROM
- PARKMEW GOLF COURSE
TO PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING
1. 2 NEW PONDING AREAS
2. EXPAND EXISTING POND
N _ : 3. STORM SEWER OUTFALL
TO POND BP-34
4. REGRADE EOF
! (1030.0 TO 1026.0)
FAIRWAY o
I TEE BOX o
GREEN O
1 N I I _ ~O
O
1 1 l i O I
N; o_ o_ z o o , o E7';
i8 O -O 1
NJr ' O DRA ' LITY/PON EAS~ T / 11
VPRIOPOSED - ---g.--EOF= - EX O
24 STORM SEWER x. ELEV.=1 EXIISTIN OND O~ I 02
04
oWL=1025.1 15
Ul l i I s- , f 14/ O
C POSED
STORM SEWER Q
os D PONDING t3~ !
< i! 1 1 f
j
~~`1 N iO u6eq }{yrL=1008.3 Ylr. w1be 'N - P- d-t--17. RAINF ALL
NWL=1022.0 f
j \ ~S ~u y vz _v ~t ve►ir-+cir~: ! E-l j HWL=1025.1 1
-r---- i STORAGE=2.76 A.F. ;
FAIRWAY HILLS DRIVE-' l ; JULY 2000 STORM
I r I P j 41; ;1%! ! r! F I HWL=1024.5 HWL=1027.6 i
N.W~990:6~ / ~'C rt RA(NF-LL),~ 11 J
`\\i HWL=1.008:3. , .1 1 zobQ,S 028:9
STOJG=52'. A.F.- C? / /_v
I I / AIN LPL W~ J~
, UtY-2000";STORM-~ , FAIR Y .HILLS DRI
I ! r / i)yWL~1012.4< l " Low~>=N:TRY'HOMES~;
I I r: ~~I !1>HOME "x.1027.9 r I
! ! ! i^r-.`ten J 4 HOMES 1029.1'=1030.0 \ L C
~'1 \ALTERNATE IMPROVEMENT
PONDING/STORM SEWER/EOF ~l
s"le
AREA 8 - FAIRWAY HILLS DRIVE/PARKVIEW GOLF COURSE
EAGAN, MINNESOTA G~
2000 JULY STORM FLOOD ANALYSIS
K:\49\ DECEMBER 2000 COMM. 49-00-109
I
ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMET
- SECURE EASEMENT Mm'
PARKVIEW GOLF COURSE
TO PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING
1. STORM SEWER OUTFALL
I - _ TO POND BP-34
LEGEND
FAIRWAY o t
TEE BOX a
_ GREEN 0
i
1 i
I I' r 'J O O
1~ I
V
I
10
I 1 12/ t
M
O -tiWL=1025.1 15-
~Q gG~/UT1~ Ny/ - J I
Al
I D E~(S>=MENt'
o i , 1e_ 13=
_ Q--160
LA_
,L N I iwL=1008 '
00 C.r PROPOSD- r R~ gED I 1 t~
L) • '~~~_-24 STORM EWER;
-FAIRWAY FRILLS' _RI I nN I .
Pte, D-PP-34 19 ; HWL: 1024. 4
filNi FAIL-4
R 4&INF-ALL}~ f
NWE:=990 6." ci r t S TOR
9
' ~ Q TOR
\ HWL=1008:3'. 200
STO AGE 5.g2-A.F~ n~
' ~t RAINFALL 1
JULY~2000'STORM~ AIRW~Y Y. ILLS DRl 1 U
:\HWL=1'012.4' LOW.EN:TRY"`WOMES
OME'W1027.9--'
4 tIOMES%'O J ONA1-4D30.0 i
77
ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENT
LOW RESIDENCES A LT oZ
MODIFY
Or
Ronestroo
Ij 6
BERM/STORM SEWER TO POND BP-34
Rosene
- r z~ ; ~ Anderlik 8
fs
FIGURE 8.1 " Associates
12SS 1 , i -Lt
Engineers IS, Architects I . ?,S- -IZY1N~'`j-y~V
04/21/2001 12:03:31 PM CDT
K:\49\4900109\Cad\dwg\4900109F-27A.dwg
Agenda Information Memo
March 4, 2002, City Council Meeting
X A . CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (LESLIE RACINE, JR.)
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
To approve a Conditional Use Permit to allow the floor area of all accessory structures
to exceed 1,100 square feet located at 3830 Cherrywood Court (Lot 32, Block 4, Oslund
Timberline Addition) in the NE %4 Section of 9 with the six conditions in the attached
staff report.
FACTS:.
• The applicant is proposing to construct a 1,040 square foot detached accessory
structure behind the existing single family dwelling for personal storage.
• A 484 square foot attached garage and 64 square foot storage shed are present on
the property. Thus, the total floor area of all accessory uses would total 1,588
square feet.
• In July 2000, the City Council approved a zoning ordinance amendment that
limited the total floor area of a detached accessory buildings and any attached
garage to 1,100 square feet, except with the issuance of a Conditional Use Permit.
• The proposed structure complies with setback, building height, floor area, and
building coverage requirements of the zoning ordinance.
• The Advisory Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Conditional Use
Permit and recommended denial by a vote of 4 to 1. The majority of the
Commissioners stated that the proposal would be incompatible with the
neighborhood and may establish a precedent for large detached accessory
structures.
ISSUES:
• Although the propose structure complies with zoning bulk standards (i.e.,
setbacks, building coverage, and height), its compatibility with the character of
the neighborhood is in question because detached accessory over 150 square feet
in area are not common within the vicinity.
• Adjacent property owners expressed concern via written correspondence and
testimony at the APC meeting regarding the size and location of the structure.
ATTACHMENTS (3):
Draft APC minutes, ages to
Staff report, pages to tt/
Letter dated March 1, 2002, from Leslie Racine requesting a continuance until March
19th, page
9~
City of Eagan
Advisory Planning Commission Meeting DRAFT
February 26, 2002
Page 4
B. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - LESLIE J. RACINE JR.
A Conditional Use Permit to allow the floor area of all accessory buildings to
exceed 1100 square feet on Lot 32, Block 4, Oslund Timberline Addition, located at
3038 Cherrywood Court in the NE %4 of Section 9.
Planner Kirchoff introduced this item and highlighted the information presented in
the City Staff Report dated February 21, 2002. She noted the background and
history.
Applicant Leslie Racine Jr. stated his neighbors have not approached him in
opposition, however there was a petition circulated. He discussed the current
conditions of the property and the history of the structures on the property.
6 residents approached the Commission and expressed the following concerns:
➢ Excessive Size of the structure.
➢ Number of complaints generated from the neighborhood.
➢ Concrete slab that is already poured.
➢ Excessive amount of garage to be seen from street.
➢ Items stored behind the hill on the applicant's property.
➢ Decreased property value.
➢ Future use of the building.
Chair Huusko questioned the aesthetics of the building.
Mr. Racine discussed the siding, shingles and stone accents.
Member Kacss questioned the use of the building and the storage inside the
building.
Mr. Racine stated he will store boats, cars, trailers and other items in the garage. He
stated eventually a driveway will be installed.
Member Gladhill questioned the City code that limits outdoor storage of vehicles.
Mr. Ridley stated as long as the vehicles are licensed, operable, and properly stored,
no limit applies.
Member Bendt stated he is against the proposed structure due to the size. He stated
the structure does not blend in with the neighborhood.
Member Gladhill expressed opposition because the building will not fit into the
neighborhood.
City of Eagan DRAFT
Advisory Planning Commission Meeting
February 26, 2002
Page 5
Member Huusko agreed with Member Bendt. He stated the building will be very
visible from the street. He stated he will vote against the proposal.
Member Kaess stated he is in favor of the proposed structure.
Member Kaess moved Member Gladhill seconded a motion to approve the
Conditional Use Permit to allow the floor area of all accessory buildings to exceed
1100 square feet on Lot 32, Block 4, Oslund Timberline Addition, located at 3038
Cherrywood Court in the NE %4 of Section 9.
Member Nosbush stated he will vote against the proposal. He stated he lives in the
neighborhood and the structure will be out of place.
Member Kaess stated he is in favor of the proposed structure.
A vote was taken.
Aye: Kaess
Nay: Bendt, Nosbush, Huusko and Gladhill
Motion failed.
Member Gladhill moved, Member Bendt seconded a motion to deny the
Conditional Use Permit to allow the floor area of all accessory buildings to exceed
1100 square feet on Lot 32, Block 4, Oslund Timberline Addition, located at 3038
Cherrywood Court in the NE 1/4 of Section 9.
A vote was taken.
Aye: Bendt, Nosbush, Huusko and Gladhill
Nay: Kaess
Motion carried.
PLANNING REPORT
CITY OF EAGAN
REPORT DATE: February 21, 2002 CASE: 09-CU-02-01-02
APPLICANT: Leslie Racine, Jr. HEARING DATE: February 26, 2002
PROPERTY OWNER: Same APPLICATION DATE: January 16, 2002
REQUEST: Conditional Use Permit PREPARED BY: Cynthia R. Kirchoff
LOCATION: 3038 Cherrywood Court
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: LD, Low Density
ZONING: R-1, Single Family Residential
SUMMARY OF REQUEST
Leslie Racine, Jr. is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to allow the floor area of all accessory
structures to exceed 1,100 square feet on property located at 3830 Cherrywood Court (Lot 32,
Block 4, Oslund Timberline Addition) in the NE '/o of Section 9.
AUTHORITY FOR REVIEW
According to Section 11. 10, Subdivision 5C5, the total floor area of all accessory buildings,
whether attached or detached, shall not exceed 1,100 square feet, except by the issuance of a
Conditional Use Permit.
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
q9
Planning Report - Racine CUP
February 21, 2002
Page 2
essential character of that area, nor substantially diminish or impair property values within
the neighborhood.
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.
BACKGROUNDMISTORY
The site is part of the Oslund Timberline Addition, which was platted in 1961. The existing
single-family dwelling was constructed in 1967 and the pool in 1968.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
A single family home with attached garage, a small accessory structure, and in ground pool are
present on the property. The site's topography slopes to the north and west.
SURROUNDING USES
The site is surrounded on all sides by developed property zoned and guided for single family
residential use.
/~J
Planning Report - Racine CUP
February 21, 2002
Page 3
EVALUATION OF REQUEST
Proposal - The applicant is requesting to
construct a 26 foot by 40 foot (1,040 square p
foot ) detached accessory structure east and '
north of the existing single family dwelling
with attached garage on property zoned R-
1, Single Family Residential. A 320 square
foot pool house was removed to
accommodate the new accessory structure.
(The picture to the left is looking north.) A
484 square foot attached garage and small,
64 square foot storage shed are also present
on the site. Thus, the total square footage of all accessory structures on site would be 1,588
square feet, which is 488 square feet more than permitted by the zoning ordinance without a
Conditional Use Permit.
Compatibility with Surrounding Area - The proposed use appears to be compatible with the
surrounding area. Single family dwellings with accessory structures (garages) are present on lots
within 350 feet of the site. Garages are deemed accessory to a single family dwelling. The
zoning ordinance defines a private garage as "an accessory building or accessory portion of the
principal building that is primarily intended for and used to store the private passenger vehicles
and trucks of the family resident upon the premises and in which no business, service, or industry
is carried on." It appears as though the majority of accessory uses within 350 feet of the
property are attached to the primary structure or the single family dwelling. The proposed
accessory structure would be unique to the immediate surrounding area.
Site Plan - The site plan indicates that the garage is to be located to the east and north of the
existing house.
Setbacks: Accessory structures greater than 150 square feet shall maintain 5 foot setbacks
from the rear and side property lines. The proposed site plan indicates that the new
structure will be a minimum of 10 feet from the closest interior property line. The rear
property line is not shown on the plans.
Building Height: Accessory structures are not permitted to exceed 16 feet in height. The
application indicates that the garage will measure 22 feet to the top of the roof pitch.
Building height is measured to the average height of the highest gable of a pitched roof.
Based upon the dimensions noted on the front elevation plan, it appears as though the
proposed structure is 16 feet in height.
Floor Area: The zoning ordinance prohibits the accessory structure from exceeding the
footprint of the single family dwelling. The dwelling is 1,248 square feet. The proposed
accessory structure is 1,040 square feet, thus this requirement has been met.
/0/
Planning Report - Racine CUP
February 21, 2002
Page 4
Building Coverage: All buildings including accessory buildings shall not cover more
than 20 percent of the lot area. The lot is 26,964 square feet and total structures are 2,836
square feet. Therefore, the building coverage is 10.6 percent and this requirement has
been met.
General Standards for Accessory Structures - The zoning ordinance requires accessory buildings
150 square feet or greater in size to exhibit exterior finish materials similar and compatible to
those utilized on the principal building and match the principal building in color. Further, they
must be maintained in a manner that is compatible with adjacent uses and must not present a
hazard to public health, safety, and general welfare. The plans do not indicate exterior materials,
however, the finish material requirement is included as a recommended condition of approval.
Access/Street Design - The proposed plan does not indicate how the accessory structure will be
accessed from Cherrywood Court. However, the applicant has stated that the garage will be
accessed via the existing driveway.
Tree Preservation - Although trees are present on the property, none are proposed to be removed
with this application.
Conditional Use Permit Findings for Accessory Buildings and Structures - A conditional use
permit may be granted if the following requirements are met:
1. There is a demonstrated need and potential for continued use of the building or structure
and the purpose stated.
Finding: The applicant has stated that the accessory structure is to be utilized for the
personal storage of pool filtering equipment, seasonal patio furniture, a boat, a
motorcycle, a utility trailer, a snowmobile, and other items. A small woodshop is also
proposed to be located within the structure. The storage items listed are ancillary to the
single family residential use.
2. In the case of residential uses, no commercial or home occupation activities are
conducted within the accessory building or attached garage.
Finding: No commercial or home occupation activities are proposed to be conducted
with the accessory building. However, the applicant has indicated that a portion of the
garage would be dedicated to a woodshop area. The woodshop cannot operate as a
business. This standard is a recommended condition of approval.
3. The building has an evident re-use or function related to the principal use.
Finding: A garage is utilized for the storage of personal items that are accessory to the
principal use (i.e., a single family dwelling), as defined in the zoning ordinance.
/Q~
Planning Report - Racine CUP
February 21, 2002
Page 5
4. The provisions, of section 11.40, subd. 4 of this chapter are met.
Finding: It appears as though the proposed accessory structure as a use will not be
detrimental to the neighborhood or the City. The use is served by adequate public
facilities and services and will not involve hazardous activities. However, the size and
presence of the structure may not be compatible in appearance with the existing character
of the general vicinity.
SUMMARY/CONCLUSION
The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to allow the floor area of all accessory
structures on the property to exceed 1,100 square feet. The three accessory structures will total
1,588 square feet.
It does not appear that the proposed use will be detrimental to adjacent structures. The accessory,
structure will be served by adequate public facilities and will not be hazardous (involving noise,
smoke, fumes, glare or odors) to adjacent uses. However, since the structure is detached from
the dwelling, exceeds 1,000 square feet, and the majority of adjacent properties do not have a
detached accessory use, its compatibility with the character of the neighborhood is in question.
The acceptability of a Conditional Use Permit to allow the total floor area of all accessory
structures to exceed 1,100 square feet is considered a policy matter to be determined by the City
Council.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED
To recommend approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow the floor area of all accessory
structures to equal 1,588 square feet on property located at 3830 Cherrywood Court (Lot 32,
Block 4, Oslund Timberline Addition) in the NE '/4 of Section 9.
If approved, the following conditions shall apply:
1. The Conditional Use Permit shall be recorded at the Dakota County Recorder's Office
within 60 days of approval.
2. Total area of all accessory structures shall not exceed 1,588 square feet.
3. The detached accessory structure shall be constructed of the same exterior materials
and shall exhibit the same color as the principal structure.
4. No commercial operation or home occupation shall be permitted in any accessory
structure on the property.
A~3
Planning Report - Racine CUP
February 21, 2002
Page 6
5. Living space shall not be permitted in the accessory structure.
6. The accessory structure shall meet all other zoning ordinance requirements.
i
FINANCIAL OBLIGATION - 09-CU-02-01-02, Leslie Racine Jr. C-U-P
Lot 32, Block 4, Oslund Timberline Addition
There are pay-off balances of special assessments totaling $1,935 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 $0
Eagan Boundary
Are Centerline
Location Map Street
Parul Area
Building Footprint
a
LL
o r
f J
T a r' jJ
31 3
i oT ~ `1~ ~ J a C
3 ! ~ p=~4z 3 a
r
v Q c as m 9 3 ? ` J
'3 7 . J J
s i g a Q 9 y ~
a
9 Y ~ ~d tsa
-3 a
Subject Site
s ' 3 s
3 r aq r r= 3 ° a 3
ZIP
s a Q
7 r h = a
O P}(
W 1 u
r ~ o
u "1
a
8 _ .a
"aG7 cop [ m`
' o Ica ° r
a
f Ell
1000 0 1000 2000 Feet
Development/Developer: Leslie J. Racine Jr
Application: Conditional Use Per
/ Case No.: 09-CU-02-01-02
Map Prepared using ERSI ArcVisw 2.1. Parcel base map data provided N
by Dakota County Land Survey Depart nent and is current as of October 2001.
City of Eagan THIS MAP 13 INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY µ E
M i tf .N E S 0 A The City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this Information and are
5
t.anmuMty Develop~t DepaArrent not rafpOnslble for eROra or OmlftiOns.
Current Zoning and Comprehensive Guide Plan Leslie Racine
Land Use Map Case No. 09-CU-02-01-02
Zoning Map
R_1 R:
-1
Current Zoning:
R-1 PF
R-1
Single Family Residential
P
11
R9
EB E&
nafT ® PF
e
93
RD
RD
am O Goo 7200 F«t 1-4
Comprehensive Guide Plan /
Land Use Map LD D LD
QP
Current Land Use Designation:
D LD
P
LD
Low Density Residential LD
® ® SA
® 93 SA
HD
GOO 0 two 12 00 Feet
Fa .l base InfoFtn.tl .dby Dakota County Land iw-y D.parbn.rt 0"1101. N
atMY In6rmatlen trolntaMd by City Stag.
City of Eagan Z, E
THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY
Community Development Department rho City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantor the accuracy of this Information. S
v~.,♦~,. t. c. ~ r•c~~ .rjr s r: s• 1 i;". . . 1+ti ~+Lrsr /f.T. 1 jt :.i -1~ 19.
N
_ t
s Qr w.•.'
PROPOSED GARAGE rrr{~= ',r V -7 ' ;-~js`
- _ •1 Y 1 !i7 = is i 1
r ~ • V ~ L : t~ d h. ~ 3C` t r.r~` {tYt ~..'~rJ~+•. r -~'ii i ` ~i 74 t Irr ~{.y.~l t
' •i>a F rY ° v = k rr.t.~ ~+"r:±^.K =y r.' 1 .'.i 'C .ciD }'i". r,V ~yt '~jy3i_
~ j
VSO \f ~ _
1r
• • Ill _ ~ - t ~'as-•
• +It• r ~ bC i~.t, rll! r r• r a= i` s/:•r ♦,~,V-
t 7r r~ 4 ~t 1!F ' t ~Li. i+, l; ~ z f y 'r'•X± ~ ti,'G4 y,
tY 1 t~° jL +'LS' ~i• + ~trt~Y 1ti lytj•^ YI4' S:1 ^)~~i^ CZ ~:tVt .r.
f r! i 1 1., r; n~ •x.il c rw:,y. ~k'~~ 6 tj ti.ti: -~L~r yt a ~+rc •4 ~ e~ s.,~. 4~~>(:'_z
.t ~Q ' ~yyt +~r'Y:'r` .:Y" f e miff Q~f s Ir lr~' yt
♦ . .t ` } r`3 ! ^ ~ti :+a~'i-r .c r Y• ~S ia1.K. 4 r.f' r
V , ,A{ Ti„ ft`':,,~~.t'- r .n T[ f _•L ¢~Q < (j(~ ,y, y .Y ~l v! X71, }
r - (v . is Y.. Jr'' a4~'+~ s ~ ,3 ' 'F ..4. i F:' l 1 ~ Q%V i y,M M T. ` y~ `,~'k~• Y#i~i s '11h 5. d't i.'.) E
'r. ~ 1 ~ z ;x %'itl•: A'- ra .r,. 1i t4• %,t ~ ...i .i. 8.,• i:r :+W .t,iT~:~..
e.
il. :J
13 1v4 A,
. SITE PLAN ~ •
~ i
The Home Depot #2813, 3220 DENMARK .AVE, EAGAN, N1N 551 21 , (651) 452-2323
Tue Jan 15 08:56:30 2002
The materials in this garage will cost $144933.98
This Price does
not include any
File saved as: f:\dn\garages\11507C93.GAR
Drawing: 3-Dimensional View
41
! ► ,1 I ( f
Y. ! ! `~W ter.
! 'j~ J .,R i► ~ l~~l~`i,~liii`i.~`i►~1 `te'a
IL I
vJ ! Ij
GARAGE ELEVATION
The Home Depot #2813, 3220 DENMARK AVE, EAGAN, MN 55121, (651) 452-2323
Tue Jan 15 08:56:30 2002
File saved as: f:\dn\garages\11507C93.GAR
Drawing: Plan View
20,
I
1
.0 0
p.
0
~o0
- ;I
i.
O
C
it ~ ~E:xs-1~
i
I'
j
ii
1
o
'.I 1
M
II
~ I
it
n ow: ^
rrOhT
GARAGE FOOTPRINT
S
The Nome Depot #2813, 3220 DENMARK AVE, EAGAN, MN 55121, (651) 452-2323
Tue Jan 15 08:56:30 2002
File saved as: f:\dn\garages\11507C93.GAR
Front View
3~ 4 " co
n' '16' -
26,
The Home Depot #2813, 3220 DENMARK AVE, EAGAN, MN 55121, (651) 452-2323
Tue Jan 15 08:56:30 2002
File saved as: f:\dn\garages\11507C93.GAR
Back View
o
c ;
i
i i
26'
The Home Depot 112813, 3220 DENMARK AVE, EAGAN, MN 55121, (651) 452-2323
Tue Jan 15 08:56:30 2002
File saved as: f:\dn\garages\115O7C93.GAR
Right View
j
j 31 4
j
-771-1
40
11,3
?I
The Home Depot #2813, 3220 DENMARK AVE, EAGAN, MN 55121, (651) 452-2323
Tue Jan 15 08:56:30 2002
File saved as: f:\dn\garages\115O7C93.GAR
Left View
3'
m m t j r ~3
LL
40
I
BY CERTIFIED MAIL i ~~I[ fig
February 20, 2002 FEB 2 0 2002
Community Development Department By
City of Eagan
3830 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, Minnesota 55122
Attn: Cynthia Kirchoff, Project Planner
RE: Development Name: Leslie J Racine Jr.
Case 09-CU-02-01-02
This letter is in response to your Public Hearing Notice dated
February 12, 2002 advising of the Hearing Date set for February 26
for the subject case, and your request for comments regarding the
petitioner's request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow an
accessory building.
We have the following comments and concerns:
The overall general appearance of the proposed building is
that of a large barn or warehouse, not a detached garage.
The proposed addition doesn't conform with the existing
structures of the neighborhood.
The roof peak of the proposed detached garage rises above the
present garage roof ridge line (appears to be about a 6 foot
or more projection above the top ridge sight line of the
present garage).
The proposed detached garage also projects about 26 feet to
the right from the rear of the present detached garage.
Both the height and width projections are readily apparent
from the cul-de-sac and from the Cherrywood Court street.
The overall size and projection of the proposed structure
adversely affects the aesthetic appearance of this
residential neighborhood.
The size and placement of the proposed structure appears to
be too large for the existing ground area.
The property's front foot lot size is only about 80 feet
across (tip to tip on the cul-de-sac arc), while the rear
property line is about 3.36 feet across. This accentuates the
adverse appearance and projection of the proposed structure.
The proposed structure diminishes the residential character
of the neighboring homes - - it looks more like a barn or a
commercial building rather than a detached garage. It is not
within the scale and appearance of the other houses and
garages in the Timberline area.
Community Development Department
February 20, 2002
Page 2
Driveway access to the proposed structure: presently gravel
or crushed rock; finished should be concrete or blacktop.
Type and appearance of the front garage door to the proposed
structure: residential or commercial? Should be same as
existing attached garage.
We do not object to construction of a building addition that is in
keeping with the size and appearance of other properties on
Cherrywood Court and in the Timberline area. We are, however,
concerned with a structure of a size and appearance that is not in
keeping with the character o.f the neighborhood, and would undoubtedly
depreciate the values of the other properties. We particularly
object to the large size of the proposed building, notably its
22 foot height.
Suggested alternatives to be considered:
1. Extend present 2 car attached garage out at the rear for the
additional storage space needed.
2. Add a 3rd stall to the present 2 car attached garage. Extend
the 3rd stall out at the rear for the additional space.
3. Add a detached garage of similar size to present attached
garage. Detached garage roof should not exceed height of
present attached garage roof.
Whatever type of addition is constructed, the materials and colors
used should be compatiable with the property's present materials and
color. The addition also should be in harmony with the other proper-
ties in Oslund Timberline Addition, notably on Cherrywood Court.
Sincerely,
Larry and Sharon Bruce - 1496 McCarthy Road
Frank and Vicki Cotroneo - 3060 Cherrywood Court
Richard and Wynona Gaworski - 3052 Cherrywood Court
Don and Maureen Giblin - 1498 Red Cedar Road
Greg and Cyndy Hames - 1480 McCarthy Road
Jim and Rita Kordell - 3053 Cherrywood Court
Ramona Peter - 3045 Cherrywood Court
Jerry and Janet Swanson - 1490 McCarthy Road
Dave and Kathy Tregilgas - 3044 Cherrywood Court
cc: Dean Heltemes, President
Timberline Community Association
1529 Red Cedar Road
6
F OM Fit) 02 22' L- 2 .2 -'8 S T. i u3/N0. 3500104321 P 2
February 22, 2002
Community Development Departmegt
City of Eagan Minnesota
3930 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan MN 55122
Attn: Cynthia Kirchoff, Project Planner
Re: Leslie 1 Racine M- Case 9: 09-CU-02-01-02
I'm writing this letter to address concerns and to go on record with objections I have over the
above referenced pending case regarding a request to allow an accessory building in excess of
1100 square feet on Lot 32, Block 4, of the Oslund Timberline Addition. i own a home on lot
41, am well within 350' of the proposed structure and was notified of this case via mail by the
City of Eagan.
I'm concerned with the overall dimensions of the building. The structure as a whole (length,
width, height) is very large. The proposal for the building is a floor plan of 26'X40' with a
total height of 22'. Ten feet of the 22' represents side walls and 12' represents a very steep
pitched roof. The actual square footage is not as big of an issue to me as is the overall height.
The proposed structure would be w the west of my property and with its steep roof effectively
eliminate all afternoon sun my yard receives W, the summer months. The sheer size of this
structure, no matter how tastefully built and finished, would be subject to my objection as I
feel it would not be clean fit architecturally with the surrounding properties.
I would be open to the proposed location and floor plan of 26'X40' if the height was kept to
keeping with the EXACT pitch of the current structures on the property. Something along the
lines of a more common 4112 or 5112 pitch. Not only would this match the building to the
neighborhood better, it would lower rho height of the building considerably. I would find a
total building height of 16' much more acceptable aesthetically than the proposed 22'.
1 appreciate the time you are taking to read and review my concerns. I do believe Mr. Racine
has tbo right to be able to build an accessory building of same typo on his property. Howcver,
I hope the concerns of myself as well as others in the neighborhood are given full
consideration by the city of Fagan before proceeding with the granting of any conditional use
permit that would impact our property and living areas.
el y,
as
3039 Pine Ridge Dr
Eagan MN 55123
651-406-9321
February 25, 2002
Community Development Department
City of Eagan
3830 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, Minnesota 55122
Attn: Cynthia Kirchoff, Project Planner
RE: Development Name: Leslie J. Racine Jr.
Case 09-CU-01-02
This letter is sent to inform you that my wife and I are strongly opposed to approval of
the Racine's "request for the Conditional Use Permit". We would prefer that the
Racine's do not build any accessory building that cannot be hidden by a privacy fence.
However, if they do move ahead with an accessory building it must meet the existing
"Community Development" requirements. That would restrict the Racine's to a total of
1100 square feet of accessory buildings. Considering their existing 22' x 22' garage and
their existing 8' x 8' storage shed they would be limited to an additional 552 square foot
structure (half the size of the proposed structure).
This letter also responds to a letter that I received from the Racine's (copy attached). I
believe the Racine letter was sent to "warm" neighbors to their project. In their letter the
Racine's make several statements that are incorrect.
1. The statement that, "the proposed building would have a positive affect on the
value of neighborhood properties". I respectfully disagree. My property value
will drop if this 26' x 40' x 22' storage building is constructed just 50 feet from
my back property line.
2. The statement that, "in my research I have located 9 other homes within a 1/2 mile
radius to the west, north, and east that have similar combined square footage size
structures used for auxiliary and garage storage". The truth is this! Our
neighborhood (Oslund Timberline Addition) is an upscale neighborhood of about
100 homes bounded by the following streets; Woodlark to the east, Red Cedar to
the south and west, and McCarthy to the north. This is an isolated neighborhood
with Pilot Knob elementary school to the east, Northwest Airlines property to the
south, and wooded areas to the north and west. Within our 100 home
neighborhood only one home does not have an attached garage - his home has an
unattached garage of standard size (22' x 22'). Other than this one 22' x 22'
unattached garage no home in the Timberline neighborhood has an unattached
accessory building larger than a 10' x 10' storage shed. The Racine's have one
of these "smaller" storage sheds. The Racine home is located approximately in
the center of our neighborhood. If Mr. Racine's research had been done correctly,
and he had stayed within our neighborhood (1/4 mile radius), his results would
have been much different. We have no accessory buildings of "similar size" in
our neighborhood - in fact no accessory storage structures greater than 10'x10'
currently exist in the Timberline neighborhood.
EB 2 5 20102
3. To the statement that, "previously, in the same location, was a 16x22 foot pool-
shed", my comment is this. I've lived in my home for 25 years (my backyard
looks into the side of the Racine property) and in all those years I never knew a
pool-shed existed. There was always a privacy fence around the pool - the shed
was not visible.
4. The Eagan "community development" standards require that any accessory
building must match the appearance of the existing home. I'm nervous when I
hear, "the siding will be either vinyl or metal, the same as what we are planning to
reside our home with in the future". Hopefully any structure that gets built will be
compatible with their existing home and be of pleasant appearance.
5. Our neighborhood, the Oslund Timberline Addition, is about 30 years old. This
neighborhood has always had a homeowners association (and still does). The
original Timberline neighborhood by-laws, as drafted by the Timberline
association members, did not allow storage sheds in the neighborhood. While this
policy has not been fully enforced - it does indicate the attitude of the
neighborhood homeowners toward accessory buildings. On my street, Pine
Ridge Drive, there are 14 homes and only two have unattached accessory storage
structures (these are 8'x8' sheds). On Cherrywood Court, the Racine's street,
there are 10 homes and only two (including the Racine's) have unattached
accessory storage structures (these are 8'x8' sheds). As indicated, no large
accessory storage structures currently exit in the Timberline neighborhood and
very few small accessory storage structures (8'x8') exist in our neighborhood. If
the Racine proposed 26' x 40' x 22'storage structure is built (or one even half that
size) the Racine property will be 1 of 100 in the Timberline neighborhood.
An accessory building of the size and height currently proposed by the Racine's is
totally out of context with the Timberline neighborhood - this is a residential
neighborhood. As stated previously, my wife and I are opposed to approval of the
Racine's "request for Conditional Use Permit".
Sincerely. Dean and Arleen VanDeWalker
3045 Pine Ridge Dr.
Eagan, MN 55121
l1-7
footage of the house, attached garage and auxiliary buildings. Patios, decks, driveways,
etc. are not included in the city's requirements.) With the completion of this structure,
we are at 10%. In regards to the height criteria, the structure cannot exceed the highest
point of the house, or 23 feet, whichever is less. The structure conforms to this
requirement and is less than the height of the peak of the home.
One might wonder why such a large pool-house/garage? Currently we are spending over
$2,000 a year for winter storage. We store our boat in Hastings, and rent a garage stall at
Acorn Mini Storage for some of our pool, patio, yard maintenance, woodworking hobby
tools, and motorcycle. In addition we have multiple lawn accessories. Two of our sons
who live with us have vehicles, and one has a snowmobile and a four- wheeler. The
proposed back half of the new garage will have a loft for some of the seasonal storage.
The pool pump, heater etc. has been re-plumbed to be incorporated into the inside of the
new building.
All my life I have been an advocate of being a good steward and taking care of my
vehicles, etc. I want to store these items in this structure to protect and extend their life,
as well as removing them from sight of everyone else. In discussing this with my
immediate neighbors, I have found complete approval of the project. Since we purchased
the home seven years ago, we have done extensive remodeling and updating on the
interior of the house. We resurfaced and plumbed Rooney's original pool, and did major
landscaping improvements in the back yard. Not including our labor, we've invested
more into this house than what we paid for it. Anyone who was familiar with the home
prior to our purchase has said we have given it a total makeover. We say this not to
boast, but to assure you that whatever we do is deemed necessary, and will be good for
the neighborhood.
By allowing us to construct this building we will not only improve the property appeal,
but will enhance the neighborhood by eliminating several vehicles that sit on the
driveway or street during the year. We also have a plan for moving ahead with front yard
landscaping, that like many of you have done, will continue to make our neighborhood a
pleasant one for visitors and residents alike.
If you have any comments or concerns, PLEASE call or stop by our home. Our number
is 651-405-9114. Lee's cell phone is 612-961-4015. As a good neighbor we value each
and everyone's opinion. We would also appreciate any of you who do support the
conditional use permit, as our adjoining neighbors have, to notify the city, or come to the
meeting next Tuesday night.
Sincerely,
7 Qaj,g
Mary and Lee Racine
3038 Cher ywood Ct.
/a~
February 19, 2002
Dear Neighbors,
It has been brought to my attention that the pool-house/garage that I am proposing to
construct is meeting with some concern. Yet I only learned of this situation from a third
party. No one who has a concern has approached me. I would be more than happy to
respectfully listen to anyone's objections. In this letter I will address any questions that I
think you may have. _
Prior to submitting for a variance I had three conversations with the city officials in order
to clarify and submit an application that would be based on the city's acceptable
standards.
Previously, in the same location, was a 16x22 pool-shed that included two separate
changing rooms in addition to the main pump room. This structure was removed because
it was dilapidated, and is to be replaced with the proposed 26x40 pool-house/garage. The
new structure will be framed constructed, with a gable roof. The roof material will match
the existing house and attached garage. The siding will be upgraded from the by gone
days of masonite, and will have either vinyl or metal siding, the same as what we are
planning to reside our home with in the future. In addition there will be a sandstone
wainscoting on the front of the structure, similar to what we will use when we replace our
existing brick on the house. There will also be a double overhead door matching the
custom door we replaced on our attached garage. The windows and shutters on the new
building are planned to match those on the house. On the east rear side will also be a
matching, single overhead door, allowing side access for my boat.
Believe it or not, the quality and esthetics of this new structure are more important to me
than they would be to anyone of you. My background as a real estate appraiser for 25
years has instilled in me the impact of curb appeal, as well as the importance of buildings
being homogenous with the neighborhood. I understand the influence one property has
on another. This proposed building would increase the value of our property, and thus
have an over-all positive affect on the value of the neighborhood.
The building as planned meets all city requirements with exception of overall size.
However, in my research done, prior to applying for the conditional use permit, I have
located 9 other homes within a %i mile radius to the west, north and east, that have
similar, combined square footage size structures used for auxiliary and garage storage.
One of these properties is located within our immediate neighborhood, and none of these
combined structures were found to have been built with the quality material and appeal as
this proposed structure.
The City of Eagan's requirements maintain that an auxiliary structure `s side be set back
to be no closer than 5 feet. This structure's closest point is 10 feet, and fans away from
that point. The auxiliary structure is to oe placed behind the existing home, this would
be. The total area of coverage on the site is not to exceed 20%. (This is combined square
/a~
TO: Community Development Department
City of Eagan
FROM: Concerned Home Owners in Oslund Timberline Addition
RE: Development Name: Leslie J. Racine Jr.
Case 09-CU-02-01-02
Supplemental List of Home Owners
Expressing Comments and Concerns
In Letter Submission Dated February 20, 2002
N e Street Add ss
LIZ) -7c:;?
CA e C •-y u~oo W (~2' 77- F
FEB 2 5 2001
U
/ate qv
2 6 55 • ,
February 20, 2002
Dear Neighbors,
It has been brought to my attention that the pool-house/garage that I am proposing to
construct is meeting with some concern. Yet I only learned of this situation from a third
party. No one who has a concern has approached me. I would be more than happy to
respectfully listen to anyone's objections. In this letter I will address any questions that I
think you may have.
Prior to submitting for a variance I had three conversations with the city officials in order
to clarify and submit an application that would be based on the city's acceptable
standards.
Previously, in the same location, was a 16x22 pool-shed that included two separate
changing rooms in addition to the main pump room. This structure was removed because
it was dilapidated, and is to be replaced with the proposed 26x40 pool-house/garage. The
new structure will be framed constructed, with a gable roof. The roof material will match
the existing house and attached garage. The siding will be upgraded from the by gone
days of masonite, and will have either vinyl or metal siding, the same as what we are
planning to reside our home with in the future. In addition there will be a sandstone
wainscoting on the front of the structure, similar to what we will use when we replace our
existing brick on the house. There will also be a double overhead door matching the
custom door we replaced on our attached garage. The windows and shutters on the new
building are planned to match those on the house. On the east rear side will also be a
matching, single overhead door, allowing side access for my boat.
Believe it or not, the quality and esthetics of this new structure are more important to me
than they would be to any of you. My background as a real estate appraiser for 25 years
has instilled in me the impact of curb appeal, as well as the importance of buildings being
homogenous with the neighborhood. I understand the influence one property has on
another. This proposed building would increase the value of our property, and thus have
an over-all positive affect on the value of the neighborhood.
The building as planned meets all city requirements with exception of overall size.
However, in my research done, prior to applying for the conditional use permit, I have
located 9 other homes within a'/Z mile radius to the west, north and east, that have
similar, combined square footage size structures used for auxiliary and garage storage.
One of these properties is located within our immediate neighborhood, and none of these
combined structures were found to have been built with the quality material and appeal as
this proposed structure.
The City of Eagan's requirements maintain that an auxiliary structure `s side be set back
to be no closer than 5 feet. This structure's closest point is 10 feet, and fans away from
that point. The auxiliary structure is to be placed behind the existing home, this would
be. The total area of coverage on the site is not to exceed 20%. (This is combined square
1d3
footage of the house, attached garage and auxiliary buildings. Patios, decks, driveways,
etc. are not included in the city's requirements.) With the completion of this structure,
we are at 10%. In regards to the height criteria, the structure cannot exceed the highest
point of the house, or 23 feet, whichever is less. The structure conforms to this
requirement and is less than the height of the peak of the home.
One might wonder why such a large pool-house/garage? Currently we are spending over
$2,000 a year for winter storage. We store our boat in Hastings, and rent a garage stall at
Acorn Mini Storage for some of our pool, patio, yard maintenance, woodworking hobby
tools, and motorcycle. In addition we have multiple lawn accessories. Two of our sons
who live with us have vehicles, and one has a snowmobile and a four- wheeler. The
proposed back half of the new garage will have a loft for some of the seasonal storage.
The pool pump, heater etc. has been re-plumbed to be incorporated into the inside of the
new building.
All my life I have been an advocate of being a good steward and taking care of my
vehicles, etc. I want to store these items in this structure to protect and extend their life,
as well as removing them from sight of everyone else. In discussing this with my
immediate neighbors, I have found complete approval of the project. Since we purchased
the home seven years ago, we have done extensive remodeling and updating on the
interior of the house. We resurfaced and plumbed Rooney's original pool, and did major
landscaping improvements in the back yard. Not including our labor, we've invested
more into this house than what we paid for it. Anyone who was familiar with the home
prior to our purchase has said we have given it a total makeover. We say this not to
boast, but to assure you that whatever we do is deemed necessary, and will be good for
the neighborhood.
By allowing us to construct this building we will not only improve the property appeal,
but will enhance the neighborhood by eliminating several vehicles that sit on the
driveway or street during the year. We also have a plan for moving ahead with front yard
landscaping, that like many of you have done, will continue to make our neighborhood a
pleasant one for visitors and residents alike.
If you have any comments or concerns, PLEASE call or stop by our home. Our number
is 651405-9114. Lee's cell phone is 612-961-4015. As a good neighbor we value each
and everyone's opinion. We would also appreciate any of you who do support the
conditional use permit, as our adjoining neighbors have, to notify the city, or come to the
meeting next Tuesday night.
Sincerely,
Lee and Mary Racine
3038 Cherrywood Ct.
i
1
1 •
I
•i
i
I
i ~
~ar6h- 1, 2002
' i
i
I
Ms. 6ndy Kirchoff Planner
P;ann tng Department
City pf Eagan
38301Pilot Knob Road
Fig MIST 55122
RE: Conditional Use Permit
Leslie (Lee) J. Racine,, Jr. '
3038 Cherrywood Court
Eagan, MN 55121
Y
i
1
Bear Ms. Karchoff:
I ,
lri aryl requesting a continuance for the Conditional Use Permit on my property until the City
bur cil meeting on March 19, 2002. I ve been revising the proposed structure and have
d~c ' ed the changes with a few of the n 'ghl*s. The additional time is requested by my
neighbors rs in order to reach others in regaids to these changes and compromises.
lfyo have any further. questions, please feel ftce to contact me.
i
Skn 'rely,
Leslie (Lee) J. Racine, Jr. i
LR:
i i
i i
~ I
i
I
Agenda Information Memo
March 4, 2002 Eagan Economic Development Authority Meeting
A. APPROVE MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 5, 2002 EAGAN
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
To adopt a resolution approving minutes of the February 5, 2002 EDA meeting.
ATTACHMENTS:
• Minutes are attached on page 03
• Resolution is attached on page
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EAGAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Eagan, Minnesota
February 5, 2001
A meeting of the Eagan Economic Development Authority was held on Tuesday, February 5,
2002 at 10:50 p.m. at the Eagan Municipal Center. Present were President Awada and Commissioners
Carlson, Fields, and Bakken. Also present were Executive Director Tom Hedges, Assistant City
Administrator Jamie Verbrugge, Senior Planner Mike Ridley, Director of Public Works Tom Colbert, City
Attorney Mike Dougherty and Administrative Secretary/Deputy Clerk Mira McGarvey.
ADOPT AGENDA
Commissioner Fields moved, Commissioner Bakken seconded a motion to approve the agenda as
presented. Aye: 4 Nay: 0
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Commissioner Fields moved, Commissioner Carlson seconded a motion to approve the minutes of
the December 11, 2001 Economic Development Authority meeting. Aye: 4 Nay: 0
Discussion was held regarding the date of the annual meeting for the EDA which is currently in
April.
Councilmember Bakken moved, Councilmember Carlson seconded a motion to change the annual
meeting of the EDA to the date of the first City Council meeting in January, 2003. Aye: 4 Nay: 0
NEW BUSINESS
CONSIDER RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MODIFICATION TO THE DEVELOPMENT
PROGRAM FOR THE NEORTHEAST EAGAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT NO. 2;
ESTABLISHING A TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO.4 THEREIN; ADOPTING A
TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN THEREFOR.
Councilmember Carlson moved, Councilmember Bakken seconded a motion to approve a
resolution adopting a modification to the development program for the Northeast Eagan Development
District No. 2, establishing a Tax Increment Financing District No. 4 therein; adopting a Tax Increment
Financing Plan therefor. Aye: 4 Nay: 0
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 10:55 p.m.
Date Executive Director
If you need these minutes in an alternative form such as large print, Braille, audio tape, etc., please contact
the City of Eagan, 3830 Pilot Knob Road, Eagan, MN 55122, (651) 681-4600, (TDD phone: (651) 454-
8535).
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, sexual orientation, marital status or status with regard to public assistance.
/d 7
EAGAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
RESOLUTION APPROVING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 5, 2002
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners of the Eagan Economic Development
Authority to approve the minutes of the February 5, 2002 meeting of the Eagan Economic
Development Authority.
Motion by:
Seconded by:
Those in Favor:
Those Against:
Dated:
CERTIFICATION
I, James Verbrugge, Secretary/Assistant Executive Director of the Economic Development Authority
of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was
duly passed and adopted by the Authority in a regular meeting thereof assembled this 4th day of
March, 2002.
James Verbrugge, Secretary
Agenda Information Memo
March 4, 2002 Eagan Economic Development Authority Meeting
B. APPROVE PLANNING & DESIGN CONTRACT WITH DSU, INC.
FOR CEDAR CROVE REDEVELOPMENT AREA - CITY OF
EAGAN
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
Adopt a Resolution to approve Cedar Grove Planning and Design Contract with
Dahlgren, Shardlow and Uban, Inc. (DSU).
FACTS:
➢ The City Council and staff have previously discussed the desire to incorporate
design standards into the Cedar Grove Redevelopment initiative.
➢ The redevelopment area is a component of Special Area #5, which was one of
seven Special Areas created as part of Eagan's Comprehensive Guide Plan 2000.
➢ The contract proposes to assist the City in defining policies, standards, and
guidelines that can be incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan Text
Amendment for that portion of this Special Area.
ISSUES:
➢ Staff would like the City Council to consider/discuss the opportunity for public
participation in this planning effort.
ATTACHMENTS: (1)
DSU Proposal on page 36) through
Resolution on page6 .
CONSULTING PLANNERS D
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS FEB 2 8 2002
By
February 4, 2002
Honorable Mayor and Council
City of Eagan
c/o Michael Ridley, Senior Planner
3830 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, MN 55122-1897
Re: Proposal and Letter of Agreement for Professional Planning Services,
Cedarvale Planning and Design Framework
Dear Mr. Ridley:
We are pleased to offer our professional assistance to the City of Eagan in preparing a
planning and design framework for the Cedarvale area. If the City accepts our proposal
as outlined here, this letter will serve as the letter of agreement between Dahlgren,
Shardlow and Uban, Inc. (DSU), and the City of Eagan (City), related to the employment
of DSU as described below.
Cedarvale Area
The area involved in this planning and design framework is located in the City of Eagan
in the northeast and southeast quadrants of the intersection of Cedar Avenue and
Highway 13, commonly known as the Cedarvale area. The area encompasses
approximately 235 acres and extends about one half mile north and one quarter mile
south of Highway 13, and about three quarters mile east of Cedar Avenue. The area
includes Cedarvale Boulevard and Beau d'Rue Drive on the south, and Silver Bell Road
and Nichols Road on the north.
Objective of Services
The objective of our services will be to assist the City in developing a set of design
performance standards to insure a high level of quality for future development and
redevelopment in the Cedarvale area. These standards will be incorporated into the
City's comprehensive plan for the area and will contain specific policies, standards, and
guidelines relating to elements of the built environment. The implementation of these
standards will be insured through a planned unit development (POD) and/or financial
agreement with developers.
300 FIRST AVENUE NORTH - SUITE 210 - MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55401 - PH: 612.339.3300 - FAX: 612.337.5601 - WWW DSUPL-kN.COM
ST. CLOUD OFFICE: 101 SEVENTH AVENUE SOUTH - SUITE 110 - ST. CLOUD, `IN 56301 - PH: 320.251.3150 - FAX: 320.251.9090
130
City of Eagan Cedarvale - Proposal for Planning Services February 4, 2002 2
Scope of Services
DSU's services will be divided into three phases:
Phase I - Background Research. DSU will research available information related to
the Cedarvale area as background for developing a planning and design framework.
This research will include, but is not limited to, the work of the Cedar/13 Task Force
and their report(s), but may also include base maps, comprehensive plan documents,
zoning maps and ordinances, City Council and Planning Commission minutes,
building plans, plats, reports, and other such information as we believe necessary to
understand the characteristics of the area, the regulations currently affecting it, and
the intent of the Task Force and City decision makers. This work will include an
initial meeting with a committee of the City Council and other meetings and phone
calls with representatives of the City and others as necessary to complete the research.
Phase 2 - Draft Framework. Based on the above research DSU will prepare a draft
summary of policies, standards and guidelines we believe will create the appropriate
planning and design framework for the Cedarvale area. This may include standards
related to the following elements:
1. Development Patterns: the desired identity and character of the area, the
pattern of land uses, and how it integrates with the surrounding area.
2. Street Patterns: external and internal roadway access; sidewalks, bike trails,
transit stops, and other street elements.
3. Building Development: the definition of building mass, placement, height,
materials, and facade elements.
4. Exterior Elements: parking, signage, lighting, screening, and other exterior
elements of the design.
5. Open Space: internal open space and green areas, the network of trails and
sidewalks, and links to other open space.
6. Natural Environment: stormwater, drainage, and other natural systems; water
quality, views to and from development, significant vegetation or wildlife
concerns.
The draft framework will consist of a written report with photos, drawings, and diagrams
to illustrate the planning and design principles involved, which would guide the specific
design of future projects in the Cedarvale area. DSU will review this draft framework in
a meeting with City staff.
Phase 3 - Final Framework. Based on the above review by the City, DSU will prepare a
final planning and design framework manual and review it with the City Council at a
meeting for its adoption.
/3/
City of Eagan Cedarvale - Proposal for Planning Services February 4, 2002 3
Other Consultants
The City will be responsible for retaining other consultants that might be needed to assist
in the projects, such as architects, engineers, attorneys, market researchers, or others as
determined in discussions as the project proceeds. If others are involved, DSU will work
closely with them at the direction of the City.
Meetings
This scope of services includes attendance at three meetings by John Shardlow, the DSU
principal in charge of this project, one in each phase described above. The first of these
will be an initial meeting with a committee of the City Council. The second meeting will
be a working meeting with City staff when the draft document and standards will be
presented and reviewed. The third meeting will be the final presentation to the City
Council.
Cost of Services
The cost of DSU's services will be billed to the City monthly for the work completed
during the previous month on a time-plus materials basis according to the attached
Standard Rate Schedule. We estimate the cost of our services as described in this
agreement to be as follows:
Phase 1 - Background Research: $ 2,500
Phase 2 - Draft Framework: $ 8,500
Phase 3 - Final Framework: $ 3,500
Total: $14,500
No work will be done outside this agreement unless specifically directed by the City.
Any work or meetings requested outside the description in this agreement will be billed
to the City on a time plus materials basis.
Reimbursable Expenses
The City will reimburse DSU for all direct expenses relating to the professional services
described above according to the attached Standard Rate Schedule. These expenses may
include drafting and art supplies, mileage, postage, delivery charges, photography and
reproduction charges, fax, long distance phone, and other typical and normal expenses
associated with this type of planning work. Any unusual or large expenses will be
approved in advance by the City.
Billing
All costs incurred under any of the items covered by this letter of agreement will be
payable to DSU upon receipt of a monthly invoice showing the work completed during
the previous month and the cost of that work, including any expenses. A service charge
of one and one-half percent (1.5%) will be added to each invoice not paid within thirty
(30) days.
/~2
City of Eagan Cedarvale - Proposal for Planning Services February 4, 2002 4
Termination
This agreement may be terminated with thirty (30) days written notice by either the City
or DSU. In the event of termination, the City agrees to pay DSU for the work completed
and expenses incurred to that point.
If this agreement is acceptable, please sign and return one copy of this letter to us. We
look forward to working with you.
Sincerely,
DAHLGREN, SHARDLOW AND UBAN, INC.
2- z(• oz-
hi ip C WAICP,. nne r Date
Jo W. Shardlow, ACP, President Date
q J&Y 2 - Z ,oz
C. John Uban, ASLA, CEO Date
CONDITIONS AGREED TO:
City of Eagan Date
Attachments: Standard Rate Schedule
Billing Policy
/3,3
City of Eagan Cedarvale - Proposal for Planning Services February 4, 2002 5
DAHLGREN, SHARDLOW, AND UBAN, INC.
Standard Rate Schedule
2001
Staff Member Rate
Principal $140.00 to $175.00
GIS Specialist $60.00 to $85.00
GIS Technician $45.00 to $65.00
Senior Planner $55.00 to $110.00
Planner $40.00 to $70.00
Landscape Architect $55.00 to $110.00
CADD Specialist $50.00 to $75.00
Draftsperson/Designer $40.00 to $75.00
Administrative Accountant $40.00 to $65.00
Administrative Assistant $40.00 to $60.00
Outside Consultants Cost Plus 5%
Supplies Cost Plus 15%
Expenses Cost Plus 15%
Mileage $0.345 Per Mile
Travel Time Over 1 Hour 1 /2 Hourly Rate
Expert Testimony Two Times Hourly Rate
(4 hour minimum)
Special Counsel Howard Dahlgren $200.00
Public Presentations 1.5 Times Hourly Rate
Past Due Accounts 1.5% Per Month
/3V
City of Eagan Cedarvale - Proposal for Planning Services February 4, 2002 6
Dahlgren, Shardlow and Uban, Inc.
Billing Policy Statement
We are pleased to have the opportunity to provide services to you. With this
Statement, we hope to avoid confusion or misunderstanding by explaining how and when
we bill for those services.
Usually, we bill for our services in a range of hourly rates. The appropriate rate is
dependent upon a variety of factors, such as the type of work involved, the level of
expertise required, the experience of the individuals involved, and the magnitude of the
project. Our rates are subject to modification from time to time.
We will provide you with a monthly invoice that summarizes the professional
services that we have provided and other charges. Payment is due net 30 days. If
payment is not received during that time, it is our policy that finance charges of 1.5% will
begin to accrue. If you have any questions or concerns about the statement, we encourage
you to contact the Project Manager or the Billing Department (612/339-3300). If you
prefer, you may also contact either C. John Uban or John Shardlow directly.
Reimbursable costs incurred on your behalf will also appear on your monthly
invoice. Reimbursable costs include, but are not limited to, such items as mileage,
parking, long distance telephone charges, messenger services, facsimile charges, copying
charges, airfare, lodging, as well as any authorized outside services. These charges will
appear separately on the invoice and also have the same payment terms as stated above.
If payment is not received within 30 days after you receive your invoice, your
account will be considered delinquent. In the event your account becomes delinquent,
you should contact us without delay and we will make every effort to reach mutually
agreeable payment terms. If, however, we are unable to do so, we reserve the right to
cease working on your project until your account is current, or terminate our agreement.
We will then take such collection steps as we may deem appropriate under the
circumstances.
We are very pleased to be working with you and we appreciate the confidence you have
placed in us. We will make every reasonable effort to achieve successful results for you
and we look forward to a continued good relationship.
/3S-
EAGAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE PLANNING & DESIGN CONTRACT
WITH DSU, INC. FOR CEDAR CROVE REDEVELOPMENT AREA
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners of the Eagan Economic Development
Authority to approve a Planning and Design Contract with Dahlgren, Shardlow & Uban, Inc. for the
purpose of preparing design standards for the Cedar Grove Redevelopment Area.
Motion by:
Seconded by:
Those in Favor:
Those Against:
Dated:
CERTIFICATION
I, Jamie Verbrugge, Secretary/Assistant Executive Director of the Economic Development Authority
of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was
duly passed and adopted by the Authority in a regular meeting thereof assembled this 4`h day of
March, 2002.
James D. Verbrugge, Secretary
1.346
~ V
-
Minnesota Lawful Gambling Page 1 of 2 8/00
For oar Use Only
LG220 - Application for Exempt Permit Fee - $25 Fee Paid
Organization Information Check No.
Organization name Previous lawful gambling exemption number
F-497 Yyt2-r-ko
Str et City State/Zip Code County
(3 o-)L a/ 6 3 F I m el ssi a/ O Ko-rA
Name of chief executive officer (CEO)
First name Last name Daytime phone number of CEO
wx J i-E (,S/ - /o b - 9 / / /
Name of treasurer Daytime phone number of
First name Last name treasurer:
e l`2 W L Lt,,3 63- :r 7- ao7
Type of Nonprofit Organization
Check the box that best describes your organization:
❑ Fraternal ❑ Religious
❑ Veteran ~ther nonprofit organization
Check the box that indicates the type of proof your organization attached to this application:
❑ IRS letter indicating income tax exempt status
❑ Certificate of Good Standing from the Minnesota Secretary of State's Office
® A charter showing you are an affiliate of a parent nonprofit organization
❑ Proof previously submitted and on file with the Gambling Control Board
Gambling Premises Information
Name of premises where gambling activity will be conducted (for raffles, list the site where the drawing will take place)
Tt^P C
Address (do, rnot use PO box) City State/Zip Code County
aigic AH kw 3 Fc, a, M , SS/z/ f~ j4.goTC.-
Date(s) of activity (fo raffles, indicate the date of the drawing)
-0 2.0- ev,,% 8 e9- 11 c-g o0
Check the box or boxes that indicate the type of gambling activity your organization will be conducting:
❑'Bingo ® Raffles ❑-Paddlewheels ❑'Pull-Tabs ❑-Tipboards
('Equipment for these activities must be obtained from a licensed distributor. This form will be made available in Your name and and your organization's the following:
Board members, staff of the
alternative format (i.e. large print, Braille) name and address will be public information Board whose work assignment requires
upon request. The information requested when received by the Board. All the other that they have access to the information;
on this form (and any attachments) will be information that you provide will be private the Minnesota Departmentof Public Safety;
used by the Gambling Control Board data about you until the Board issues your the Minnesota Attorney General; the
(Board) to determine your qualifications to permit. When the Board issues your Minnesota Commissioners of
be involved in lawful gambling activities in permit, all of the information that you have Administration, Finance, and Revenue; the
Minnesota. You have the right to refuse to provided to the Board in the process of Minnesota Legislative Auditor, national and
supply the information requested; however, applying for your permit will become public. international gambling regulatory agencies;
if you refuse to supply this information, the If the Board does not issue you a permit, anyone pursuant to court order; other
Board may not be able to determine your all the information you have provided in the individuals and agencies that are
qualifications and, as a consequence, may process of applying for a permit remains specifically authorized by state or federal
refuse to issue you a permit. If you supply private, with the exception of your name law to have access to the information;
the information requested, the Board will and your organization's name and address individuals and agencies for which law or
be able to process your application. which will remain public. legal order authorizes a new use or sharing
Private data aboutyou are available onlyto of information after this Notice was given;
and anyone with your consent.
Application for Exempt Permit - LG220 Page 2 of 2
8/00
Organization Name -T- T UL h i h PO CLr-Le(L,1 LNG
Local Unit of Government Acknowledgment
If the gambling premises is within city limits, the If the gambling premises is located in a township, both
city must sign this application. the county and township must sign this application.
On behalf of the city, I acknowledge this application. On behalf of the county, I acknowledge this application.
Check the action that Check the action that
the city is taking on this application. the county is taking on this application.
❑ The city approves the application with no ❑ The county approves the application with no
waiting period. waiting period.
❑ The city approves the application with a 30 day ❑ The county approves the application with a 30 day
waiting period, and allows the Board to issue a waiting period, and allows the Board to issue a
permit after 30 days (60 days for a first class permit after 30 days.
city).
The city denies the application. The county denies the application.
.
Print name of city a Print name of county
(Signature of city personn I receiving app ication) (Signature of county personnel receiving application)
Title Title
Date
Date ~ /17 I TOWNSHIP: On behalf of the township, I acknowledge that
the organization is applying for exempted gambling activity
within the township limits. [A township has no statutory
authority to approve or deny an application (Minn. Stat. sec.
349.213, subd. 2).]
Print name of township
(Signature of township official acknowledging application)
Title
Date
Chief Executive Officer's Signature
The information provided in this application is complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge.
Chief executive officer's signature
Name (please print) M t 'C- 14 A. E i ~4- ~'~~a1l=E Date d / 13 /02-
Mail Application and Attachments
At least 45 days prior to your scheduled activity date send:
• the completed application, If your application has not
• a copy of your proof of nonprofit status, and been acknowledged by the
• a $25 application fee (make check payable to "State of Minnesota"). local unit of government or
Application fees are not prorated, refundable, or transferable. has been denied, do not
Send to: Gambling Control Board send the application to the
1711 West County Road B, Suite 300 South Gambling Control Board.
Roseville, MN 55113
Feasibility Study
-
T e rmina rive Storm Water
Improvements
City Project No. 858
January 30, 2002
;z
y.
Prepared for the City of Eagan
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
4150 Olson Memorial Highway, Suite 300, Minneapolis, MN 55422 phone: 763-541-4800 fax: 763-541-1700
WSBI
i Project 1 1380-051
& Associates, Inc.
TERMINAL DRIVE STORM WATER
IMPRO VEMENT
CITY PROJECT NO. 858
FEASIBILITY STUDY
FOR THE
CITY OF EAGAN
January 30, 2002
Prepared by:
WSB & Associates, Inc.
4150 Olson Memorial Highway, #300
Minneapolis, MN 55422
(763) 541-4800
(763) 541-1700 (fax)
Terminal Drive Storm Water Feasibility Study
City of Eagan
WSB Project No. 1380-051
CERTIFICATION
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 professional engineer under the laws of
the State of Minnesota.
Todd E. Hubmer, P.E.
Date: January 30, 2002 Lic. No. 24043
Terminal Drive Storm Water Feasibility Study
City of Eagan
WSB Project No. 1380-051
A
WSB
I~
& Associates, Inc. January 30, 2002
Honorable Mayor and City Council
City of Eagan
3830 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, NIN 55122-1810
Re: Terminal Drive Storm Water Improvement Feasibility Study
WSB Project No. 1380-05
Dear Mayor and City Council:
We are pleased to present you with the Terminal Drive Storm Water Improvement
Feasibility Study.
This study discusses the alternatives available to resolve the storm water concerns
addressed by Global Equity Partners in their petition to the City of Eagan. This report
contains a description of each alternative, an opinion of cost, and recommendations for
construction and financing options available to fund the recommended improvements.
I would be happy to discuss this report with you at your convenience. Please don't
hesitate to contact me at (763) 287-7182 if you have any questions regarding this report.
Sincerely,
WSB & Associates, Inc
4-
Todd E. Hubmer, P.E.
Project Manager
c: Dave Hutton, WSB
4150 Olson
Memorial Highway
Suite 300
Minneapolis
Minnesota
Terminal Drive Storm Water Feasibility Study
55422 City of Eagan
763-5414800 WSB Project No. 1380-051
763.541-1700 FAX Minneapolis - St. Cloud Equal Opportunity Employer
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE SHEET
CERTIFICATION
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1. INTRODUCTION I
11. BACKGROUND INFORMATION 1
111. PROCEDURES AND METHODS 7
IV. ALTERNATIVES ...................................................................................................8
A. Alternative No. 1 8
B. Alternative No. 2 8
C. Alternative No. 3 9
D. Alternative No. 4 9
V. RECOMMENDATIONS 10
VI. FINANCING OPTIONS 11
A. Direct Assessments 11
B. Trunk Assessments 11
C. Cooperative Agreement with Mn/DOT 11
D. Storm Water Trunk Fund 12
VII. Revenue Source 12
VIII. Project Schedule 13
APPENDIX A 14
Figures .......................................................................................................................14
Project Location Map 15
APPENDIX B 20
Preliminary Opinion of Cost 20
Terminal Drive Storm Water Feasibility Study
City of Eagan
WSB Project No. 1380-051
January 2002
Terminal Drive Storm Water Improvement Feasibility Study
City Project No. 858
Eagan, Minnesota
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of Eagan retained WSB & Associates to prepare a feasibility study for the
Terminal Drive Industrial Park. This study has been completed at the request of the City
in response to a petition received from Global Equity Partners, LLC (GEP), a land owner
in the Terminal Drive Industrial Park.
The storm water runoff from approximately 25-acres of residential area lying on the east
side of Trunk Highway (TH) 13 discharges to the west through an existing 30"
corrugated metal pipe (CMP) culvert just south of the intersection of Terminal Drive and
onto GEP properties.
Four improvement alternatives are presented in this study.
Alternative 1. Convey the storm water runoff passing through the 30-inch
corrugated metal pipe culvert through GEP property to the
existing storm sewer system located at the low point of
Terminal Drive. Replace the existing Terminal Drive storm
sewer system with a combination of 30-inch and 42-inch
reinforced concrete (RC) pipes.
Alternative 2. Similar to Alternative 1, but instead of replacing the Terminal
drive storm sewer system, install a new parallel storm sewer
system.
Alternative 3. Convey runoff from the 30-inch culvert crossing TH 13 to the
low point of Terminal Drive and construct a storm water pond
on GEP property.
Alternative 4. Bulkhead the 30-inch culvert crossing TH13, and convey storm
water flows north in the ditch along TH 13 to a new storm pond
to be located east of TH 13 at Alexander Road.
It is proposed that Alternative 4 be constructed. The cost to complete the improvements
is between $210,000 and $235,000.
The proposed improvements may be financed through direct assessments, trunk storm
water fee assessments, storm water trunk fund, or possibly a Minnesota Department of
Transportation (MnDOT) cooperative agreement.
This project is feasible, necessary and cost effective from an engineering standpoint and
should be constructed as proposed.
Terminal Drive Storm Water Feasibility Study
City of Eagan
WSB Project No. 1380-051
I. INTRODUCTION
The Terminal Drive Storm Water Improvement Feasibility Study is being
completed by the City of Eagan in response to a petition received from Global
Equity Partners, LLC (GEP). Global Equity Partners owns a parcel of property
located in the southwest quadrant of the intersection of Terminal Drive and Trunk
Highway (TH) 13 in the City of Eagan. This petition requested the City of Eagan
to investigate alternatives available to accommodate storm water runoff from
approximately 25 acres of residential property passing under TH 13 and onto their
parcel.
The project area corresponds to the approximate watersheds of C-16 and C-4 of
the City of Eagan's Surface Water Management Plan. The total drainage area
tributary to the low point on Terminal Road is approximately 41.7 acres. The
project area can be seen in Appendix A.
The City of Eagan authorized WSB & Associates, Inc. to prepare a feasibility
report in November of 2001. The purpose of this feasibility study is to evaluate
the impact of storm water passing under TH 13 onto GEP property and to identify
alternatives available for conveying this storm water runoff to the Minnesota
River. This feasibility study identifies four alternatives.
11. BACKGROUND INFORMATION
To complete the feasibility study, background information regarding the drainage
area and the storm sewer system serving the Terminal Drive industrial parcels was
evaluated. This evaluation was based on the following information:
■ Two-foot (2') topographical mapping of the study area provided by the City of
Eagan,
• Aerial photographs of the study area provided by Metropolitan Council,
■ Land Use Guide for the City of Eagan dated January 1987, provided by the
City of Eagan,
■ Terminal Drive street improvement plans prepared by BRAA, dated March 9,
1970,
■ Terminal Drive storm sewer improvement plans prepared by Bonestroo,
Rosene, Anderlik & Associates (BRAA), dated June 5, 1990,
■ Field observation and photographs of the site.
Terminal Drive Storm Water Feasibility Study Page 1
City of Eagan
WSB Project No. 1380-051
Based on our review of the information provided, the following observations in
regard to the parcel in question are made:
■ The drainage area tributary to the TH 13 culvert crossing is approximately 25
acres. The land use within this watershed is residential and nearly fully
developed, with the exception of about 5 acres.
■ The TH 13 culvert crossing consists of a 30-inch corrugated metal pipe and a
small ditch block in the TH 13 east ditch (see Picture I on page 3).
■ Water directed under TH 13 flows overland through a poorly defined channel
on GEP property to the storm sewer located in the low point of Terminal
Drive (see Picture 2 on page 3).
■ Storm sewer from the low point on Terminal Drive conveys water to the west
and into an existing storm water pond (Pond CP-8) located just east of the
railroad tracks at the base of the bluff line (see Picture 3 on page 4). Water
from this pond then proceeds under the railroad tracks into the Minnesota
River.
■ The existing Terminal Drive storm water conveyance system is shown in the
project location map of Appendix A.
■ During intense rainfall events, water flows to the north over the ditch block
east of TH 13, overtopping the driveway for Richfield Blacktop, and into a
ravine located north of Alexander Road (see Pictures 4, 5 and 7 on pages 4,
5, and 6).
■ There is an existing 36-inch CM pipe culvert crossing TH 13 just north of
Alexander Road, which conveys overland flow from the east across TH 13
where it connects to the existing storm sewer system in Alexander Drive.
This system conveys water to the west into a large pond (Pond CP-9) adjacent
to the Minnesota River (see Picture 6 on page 5).
This background information was used in developing the alternatives presented within
this report.
Terminal Drive Storm Water Feasibility Study Page 2
City of Eagan
WSB Project No. 1380-051
- r,~ ,ate ' ~ •;i
a
Picture 1: Entrance of 30-inch culvert crossing TH 13; facing west
t.
'Ar
Picture 2: Outlet of 30-inch culvert crossing onto GEP parcel west of TH 13; facing west
Terminal Drive Storm Water Feasibility Study Page 3
City of Eagan
WSB Project No. 1380-051
ti
Picture 3: Parking Lot of 3209 Terminal Drive where existing Terminal Drive storm
sewer conveys water to a pond located at the base of the bluff and east of the
railroad tracks; facing west
. K~
y
Picture 4: Ditch flowing north along east side of TH 13 at Richfield Blacktop driveway
entrance; facing north
Terminal Drive Storm Water Feasibility Study Page 4
City of Eagan
WSB Project No. 1380-051
, `~~l III
Picture 5: Entrance to drop structure located in east ditch of TH 13. This culvert carries
water from the ditch to the bottom of the ravine; facing north
o
Picture 6: Entrance to 36-inch CMP culvert crossing TH 13 just north of the intersection
with Alexander Road; facing west
Terminal Drive Storm Water Feasibility Study Page 5
City of Eagan
WSB Project No. 1380-051
- Yet
Picture 7: Ravine located in east quadrant of TH 13 at Alexander Road. Potential site for
storm water pond described in Alternative 4; facing southeast
Terminal Drive Storm Water Feasibility Study Page 6
City of Eagan
WSB Project No. 1380-051
III. PROCEDURES AND METHODS
A hydrologic hydraulic model with the trade name HydroCAD was used to
evaluate the existing drainage conditions of the site. This model was also used to
evaluate the alternatives presented within this report.
The City of Eagan's existing storm sewer system is designed to accommodate a 5-
year storm event. The 5-year storm event is approximately 3.6 inches of rainfall
in a 24-hour period with an SCS TYPE-II distribution. The 100-year, 24-hour
storm event, which is approximately 6 inches of rainfall in 24-hours was also
analyzed. The results of the HydroCAD modeling for the existing condition and
the alternatives are presented in Appendix C.
Based on the hydrologic/hydraulic review, the following comments are made:
■ Storm water runoff from the east side of TH 13 is directed through the 30-inch
corrugated metal pipe through the use of a ditch block located in the east ditch
on the north side of the culvert.
■ During the 100-year storm event, approximately 47 cubic feet per second (cfs)
flows north along the east side ofTH 13, and approximately 33 cfs flows west
through the 30-inch corrugated metal pipe onto the GEP property.
■ During the 5-year storm event, approximately 3.3 cfs flows north along the
east side of TH 13, and an approximately 28 cfs flows west through the 30-
inch corrugated metal pipe and onto the GEP property.
■ The existing high water elevation at the low point in Terminal Drive for the 5-
year event is approximately 770.96 feet.
■ The 100-year high water elevation in the low point of Terminal Drive for the
100-year storm event is approximately 772.82 in the existing conditions.
■ Each of the alternatives presented in this report provide 100-year flood
protection to elevation 772.0 at the low point of Terminal Drive.
Terminal Drive Storm Water Feasibility Study Page 7
City of Eagan
WSB Project No. 1380-051
IV. ALTERNATIVES
Four alternatives were developed to accommodate the storm water runoff, which
discharges onto the GEP parcel and into the Terminal Drive storm sewer system.
A. Alternative No. 1
Convey the storm water runoff passing through the 30-inch corrugated metal pipe
culvert through GEP to the existing storm sewer system located at the low point
of Terminal Drive. To provide 100-year flood protection to the adjacent parcels,
the capacity of the Terminal Drive storm sewer system will need to be increased.
This alternative consists of the following:
■ Install 30-inch RCP from the culvert crossing of TH 13 through GEP to
the low point in Terminal Drive.
■ Replace the existing 24-inch crossing under Terminal Drive with a 30-inch
RCP.
■ Replace the existing 30-inch RCP with a 42-inch RCP from the low point
of Terminal Drive to Pond CP-8 located east of the railroad tracks.
This alternative is shown in Figure 1 of Appendix A. The estimated cost to
complete this alternative is approximately $427,573. A breakdown of these costs
is provided in Appendix B.
B. Alternative No. 2
This alternative varies from Alternative No. 1 by constructing a new 27-inch RC
pipe parallel to the existing pipe from the low point of Terminal Drive to Pond
CP-8 located east of the railroad.
This alternative can be seen in Figure 2 of Appendix A. The estimated cost to
construct this alternative is approximately $242,308. A breakdown of these costs
is provided in Appendix B.
Terminal Drive Storm Water Feasibility Study Page 8
City of Eagan
WSB Project No. 1380-051
V. RECOMMENDATIONS
All the options presented within this feasibility study provide adequate flood
protection to the low point on Terminal Drive and address the issues of the storm
water currently being discharged under TH 13 onto the parcels of GEP.
Alternatives No. 1 and No. 2 consider the replacement of the storm sewer system
downstream of Terminal Drive to the existing storm water treatment pond (Pond
CP-8) located just to the east of the railroad tracks. Construction of either of these
alternatives would significantly impact the operations at the current commercial
parcel located at 3209 Terminal Drive, as the new storm sewer would be
constructed through the parking lot of this parcel as shown in Picture 3 on page 4.
Alternative No. 3 proposes to use approximately 1.0 acre of developable land
from the GEP parcel to construct the storm water detention pond.
Alternative No. 4 is the least expensive alternative presented in this feasibility
study with an opinion of probable cost of $207,000 to $232,000. This alternative
proposes to redirect the drainage, which currently discharges onto the GEP Parcel
into the east ditch of TH 13, and into a proposed storm water rate control and
treatment pond.
Based on our review of the alternatives it is our recommendation that Alternative
No. 4 be considered for construction based on the following:
■ Least disruptive to existing businesses within the Terminal Drive, Industrial
Park.
■ Allows for the full development and utilization of land in the Terminal Drive
Industrial Park.
■ It is the least costly of the four alternatives presented within this report.
■ This ponding area may be expanded by Mn/DOT in the future to
accommodate a future expansion of TH 13.
■ This alternative routes all storm water drainage away from the GEP parcel
effectively eliminating the concerns contained in the petition filed by GEP to
the City of Eagan.
Should the City of Eagan desire to proceed with alternative No. 4 it is our
recommendation that the easement acquisition of a proposed ponding area be
acquired prior to a bidding the project. Land acquisition is the biggest unknown
in the cost opinion provided in this report. Not letting the contract before
acquiring the easements, allows the city the opportunity of exploring a different
alternative if easement negotiations cannot be reached for reasonable costs.
Terminal Drive Storm Water Feasibility Study Page 10
City of Eagan
WSB Project No. 1380-051
VI. FINANCING OPTIONS
The financial options discussed in this section of the study are available for each
of the four alternatives. However, we will focus specifically on Alternative No. 4.
Funding options available to the City of Eagan are as follows:
A. Direct Assessments
Special assessments of the properties located within the drainage area tributary to
the proposed pond east of TH 13 at Alexander Street would be difficult to sustain
on a benefit basis.
Due to the interest in the proposed improvements by the petitioner, it is proposed
that the GEP parcels be assessed for the improvements. This assessment should
be by an agreement between the City of Eagan and GEP, which allows GEP to
fully develop their parcel. Currently, development of the GEP parcel would
require additional ponding or an assessment to construct storm sewer
improvements to accommodate this development. The existing storm water
drainage, which enters the GEP parcel, is the historical drainage pattern in the
project area. It is typical that downstream property owners must perpetuate
existing drainage patterns through their property at their expense. Based on this
observation, GEP should contribute to the construction of any system which
would benefit their parcel by directing the drainage elsewhere.
B. Trunk Assessments
Properties tributary to the proposed drainage improvements in the City are
routinely assessed trunk storm sewer fees. The two GEP parcels directly
benefited by the proposed improvements have previously been assessed for the
trunk storm sewer.
C. Cooperative Agreement with Mn/DOT
Several acres of TH 13 currently drain to the proposed ponding location. This
project proposes to provide storm water treatment and rate control to this existing
drainage prior to being discharged into the City's storm sewer system and
downstream to the Minnesota River. Should Mn/DOT plan to upgrade TH 13 in
the future, they may be required to provide rate control and treatment of storm
water runoff from the right-of-way areas prior to discharging into adjacent
waterways. Therefore, Mn/DOT maybe interested in entering into a cooperative
Terminal Drive Storm Water Feasibility Study Page 11
City of Eagan
WSB Project No. 1380-051
VIII. Project Schedule
Present Feasibility Report to City Council/Order Public Hearing February 5, 2002
Meeting with Property Owner ................................................................February 27, 2002
Public Hearing (Approve/Deny Project) .......................................................March 4, 2002
If Project 858 is Approved:
Easement Acquisition July 5, 2002
Approve Plans and Specifications August 6, 2002
Award Contract September 3, 2002
Project Completion November 15, 2002
Final Cost Report ........................................................................................December 2002
Final Assessment Hearing Spring 2003
First Payment Due with Property Tax Statement May 15, 2004
Terminal Drive Storm Water Feasibility Study Page 13
City of Eagan
WSB Project No. 1380-051
APPENDIX A
Figures
Terminal Drive Storm Water Feasibility Study Page 14
City of Eagan
WSB Project No. 1380-051
Project Location Map
Terminal Drive Storm Water Feasibility Study Page 15
City of Eagan
WSS Project No. 1380-051
S RD
Existing Overland Flow
on GEP Parcel. ,
36" CMP
PONO CP-8
Global Equity
Partners Property
0
v
Ditch Block
o
Legend
Q Subwatershed Boundary
Structure
■ Bee Hive
• Manhole
■ Vained Grate
Storm Sewer
PROJECT LOCATION MAP
41500"d ,«,M..,,
S.:r 300
STORMWATER DRAINAGE ANALYSIS WSB m.-Pf.'""W4M
FEET
dv'oao CITY OF E A G A N . F x 61 ,-1 W
a 250 500
Figure I
Alternative 1
Terminal Drive Storm Water Feasibility Study Page 16
City of Eagan
WSB Project No. 1380-051
r y.
36' CMfP
J 1. CP
i
Y' t ~2Pe
v
Cp
• i
CAIP
I'
Legend'
clubwatershed sound
Ore ary
• gee 1q,.ve
Manhole
Vain
ed Grate
~ Existing
,mprOvernent rm sealer r aJ*~^N
New p- ry
ipe &
Repiace Old pipe; G f '~i►
4.
Cary
Op
S-.OR EgGN f
May R A
1Mpr'OVZMeN ARAINAi'e gNAIY
'reRN iVE 1 Sjg
'~P.e. , ay,y~ GORE 7
aoc y„vW
Figure 2
Alternative 2
Terminal Drive Storm Water Feasibility Study Page 17
City of Eagan
WSB Project No. 1380-051
w
yZJ <i' y
36
r
sf:3>
y
Legend
CZISubwatersh
Structure Boundary
. .5
Bee Nive
Manhole ,
gained Grate
Exisryn9 Storm S 4
Imprpvem ewer v,
ent
t r
New p• . ,
rY '{I
'Pe
Repiace Old pipe
C a.
ITy '
STORMyv EAGAN
1n4 t,ROVErAENR gRA,NAGE A
TERNATIVE 2 YSIS
° A URf 2
3°° `qM1
Figure 3
Alternative 3
Terminal Drive Storm Water Feasibility Study Page 18
City of Eagan
WSB Project No. 1380-051
4 Fi~~Ff
r`;'? * ray,
Fem. 3g CMP,~
9
R
t- s
~o.
f'rr 3p.
O~ 3p-` C
Ce9end
F.
SrOU m atershery
f to oUntlary 'Bee /live
Manryope
Van
ed Grape ?
f41.8&n9 St
New p, rrn
pa Sewer
p ,
posed Stormswater Pond ~
C~Ty
R~ `STO op EA
lMA RngwA T CAN
RO~eMEIV ~F'AtN
ALTERNATI ye 3tYS,S
a
o E 4
Figure 4
Alternative 4
Terminal Drive Storm Water Feasibility Study Page 19
City of Eagan
WSB Project No. 1380-051
~ , aY r
a 36" CMP
`4% ~r,q~oeR
r
I II,~
R
I
PON-
s
x
Remove Ditch Block
Q f F
1
Bulkhead
30" Culvert r
Legend
Q Subwatershed Boundary
Structure
Y -
Bee Hive Al,
Manhole
vained Grate
Existing Storm Sewer
New Pipe
FIGURE 4
CITY OF EAGAN
- 4150OYan Ywndullfyrrq
YY &Me 300
STORMWATER DRAINAGE ANALYSIS WCR
IMPROVEMENT ALTERNATIVE 4
0 1so 300 0
APPENDIX B
Preliminary Opinion of Cost
Terminal Drive Storm Water Feasibility Study Page 20
City of Eagan
WSS Project No. 1380-051
APPENDIX B
ENGINEER'S OPINION OF COST
TERMINAL DRIVE STORM WATER FEASIBILITY STUDY
CITY OF EAGAN
WSB PROJECT NO. 1380-05
ALTERNATIVE 1 - REPLACE EXISTING STORM SEWERS
ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT EST. QTY. UNIT PRICE EST. COST
1 MOBILIZATION LUMP SUM 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00
2 STREET REMOVAL SQ. YD. 133 $4.00 $532.00
3 CURB REMOVAL LIN. FT. 40 $2.10 $84.00
4 REMOVE RCP's 24" LIN. FT. 60 $6.50 $390.00
5 PARKING LOT REMOVAL SQ. YD. 2,000 $4.00 $8,000.00
6 REMOVE RCP's 30" LIN. FT. 1,052 $6.50 $6,838.00
7 REMOVE MANHOLES EACH 9 $1,200.00 $10,800.00
8 30" RCP LIN. FT. 852 $50.00 $42,600.00
9 42" RCP LIN. FT. 1,052 $85.00 $89,420.00
10 CONSTRUCT 54' MANHOLE LIN. FT. 5.0 $270.00 $1,350.00
11 CONSTRUCT 66MANHOLE LIN. FT. 60.0 $280.00 $16,800.00
12 CONSTRUCT 72' MANHOLE LIN. FT. 8.0 $290.00 $2,320.00
13 CONSTRUCT 78' MANHOLE LIN. FT. 15.0 $300.00 $4,500.00
14 INSTALL CURB & GUTTER LIN. FT. 40 $8.00 $320.00
15 REPLACE ROAD SECTION SQ. YD. 133 $42.00 $5,586.00
16 REPLACE PARKING LOT SQ. YD. 2,000 $42.00 $84,000.00
17 RESTORATION / SOD / SEED SQ. YD. 8,400 $3.00 $25,200.00
18 INSTALLATION OF CATCH BASIN EACH 3 $1,500.00 $4,500.00
SUBTOTAL $313,240.00
+5% CONTINGENCIES $15,662.00
SUBTOTAL $328,902.00
+30% INDIRECT COSTS $98,671.00
TOTAL ALTERNATIVE 1 $427,573.00
ALTERNATIVE 2 - INSTALL STORM SEWERS ADJACENT TO EXISTING STORM SEWERS
ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT EST. QTY. UNIT PRICE EST. COST
1 MOBILIZATION LUMP SUM 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00
2 STREET REMOVAL SQ. YD. 133 $4.00 $532.00
3 CURB REMOVAL LIN. FT. 40 $2.10 $84.00
4 REMOVE RCP's (24") LIN. FT. 60 $4.00 $240.00
5 REMOVE MANHOLES EACH 3 $1,200.00 $3,600.00
6 PARKING LOT REMOVAL SQ. YD. 2,000 $6.50 $13,000.00
7 27" RCP LIN. FT. 1,904 $46.00 $87,584.00
8 CONSTRUCT 54' MANHOLE LIN. FT. 55.0 $270.00 $14,850.00
9 CONSTRUCT 66' MANHOLE LIN. FT. 15.0 $280.00 $4,200.00
10 CONSTRUCT 72' MANHOLE LIN. FT. 7.7 $290.00 $2,233.00
11 INSTALL CURB & GUTTER LIN. FT. 40 $8.00 $320.00
12 REPLACE ROAD SECTION SQ. YD. 133 $42.00 $5,586.00
13 REPLACE PARKING LOT SQ. YD. 133 $42.00 $5,586.00
14 RESTORATION / SOD / SEED SQ. YD. 8,400 $3.00 $25,200.00
15 INSTALLATION OF CATCH BASIN EACH 3 $1,500.00 $4,500.00
SUBTOTAL $177,515.00
+5% CONTINGENCIES $8,875.75
SUBTOTAL $186,390.75
+30% INDIRECT COSTS $55,917.23
TOTAL ALTERNATIVE 2 $242,307.98
I
ALTERNATIVE 3 - CONTSTRUCTION OF STORM WATER POND ON GEP PROPERTY
ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT EST. QTY. UNIT PRICE EST. COST
1 MOBILIZATION LUMP SUM 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00
2 CLEAR AND GRUB TREE 22 $300.00 $6,600.00
3 POND EXCAVATION CU. YD. 9,000 $6.00 $54,000.00
4 30" RC PIPE APRON W/TRASH GUARD EACH 2 $2,500.00 $5,000.00
5 30" RC Pipe LIN. FT. 760 $50.00 $38,000.00
6 RANDOM RIP RAP CL VI (FIELD STONE) CU. YD. 20 $80.00 $1,600.00
7 GEOTEXTILE FABRIC TYPE IV SQ. YD. 25 $3.42 $85.42
8 STREET REMOVAL SQ. YD. 133 $4.00 $532.00
9 CURB REMOVAL LIN. FT. 20 $2.10 $42.00
10 REMOVE RCP's (24") LIN. FT. 60 $6.50 $390.00
11 REMOVE MANHOLES EACH 3 $1,200.00 $3,600.00
12 CONTRUCT 54" MANHOLE LIN. FT. 12.0 $270.00 $3,240.00
13 INSTALL CURB & GUTTER LIN. FT. 20 $8.00 $160.00
14 REPLACE ROAD SECTION SQ. YD. 133 $42.00 $5,586.00
15 INSTALLATION OF CATCH BASIN EACH 2 $1,500.00 $3,000.00
SUBTOTAL $131,835.42
+5% CONTINGENCIES $6,592.00
SUBTOTAL $138,427.42
+30% INDIRECT COSTS $41,528.00
LAND ACQUISITION ($3.00 TO $3.501 SQ FT) $120,000-$140,000
TOTAL ALTERNATIVE 3 $299,960-$319,960
ALTERNATIVE 4 - BULKHEAD 30" CULVERT, IMPROVE DITCH, AND CONTSTRUCT STORM WATER POND
ITEM DESCRIPTION UNIT EST. QTY. UNIT PRICE EST. COST
1 MOBILIZATION LUMP SUM 1 $10,000.00 $10,000.00
2 CLEAR AND GRUB ACRE 1 $3,500.00 $3,545.56
3 POND EXCAVATION CU. YD. 6,744 $6.00 $40,462.40
4 30" RC PIPE APRON W/TRASH GUARD EACH 2 $2,500.00 $5,000.00
5 30" RC PIPE LIN. FT. 75 $50.00 $3,750.00
g 42" RC PIPE LIN. FT. 50 $100.00 $5,000.00
7 RANDOM RIP RAP CL VI (FIELD STONE) CU. YD. 20 $80.00 $1,600.00
8 GEOTEXTILE FABRIC TYPE IV SQ. YD. 25 $3.42 $85.50
9 SEED, MULCH ACRE 0.5 $4,000.00 $2,066.12
10 WOOD FIBER BLANKET SQ. YD. 2500 $3.00 $7,500.00
11 BULKHEAD 30" RC PIPE EACH 1 $350.00 $350.00
12 DITCH GRADING/EXCAVATION CU. YD. 3556 $8.00 $28,444.44
13 REMOVE 12" CMP LIN. FT. 50 $7.00 $350.00
14 42" RC PIPE LIN. FT. 50 $100.00 $5,000.00
15 CLASS V AGGREGATE BASE TON 14 $60.00 $840.00
16 2331 BITUMINOUS BASE COURSE TON 15 $75.00 $1,100.00
SUBTOTAL $115,094.02
+5% CONTINGENCIES $5,755.00
SUBTOTAL $120,849.02
+30% INDIRECT COSTS $36,255.00
LAND ACQUISITION ($1.00 TO $1.50 / SO FT) $50,000-$75,000
TOTAL ALTERNATIVE 4 $207,100-$232,100
WSB
& Associates, Inc.