Loading...
01/18/2000 - City Council Regular AGENDA EAGAN CITY COUNCIL - REGULAR MEETING EAGAN MUNICIPAL CENTER BUILDING JANUARY 18, 2000 6:30 P.M. 1. ROLL CALL & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Girl Scout Troop 2118, Northwood & Pinewood Elementary Schools, will lead the Pledge of Allegiance II. ADOPT AGENDA & APPROVAL OF MINUTES (BLUE) III. VISITORS TO BE HEARD (10 MINUTE TOTAL TIME LIMIT) IV. DEPARTMENT HEAD BUSINESS (BLUE) I A. VIDEO PRESENTATION, Eagan 1999 Year in Review V. RECOGNITIONS & PRESENTATIONS P I A. PRESENTATION by Dakota County Economic Development Partnership VI. CENSUS 2000 UPDATE (BLUE) VII. CONSENT AGENDA (PINK) P /6 A. PERSONNEL ITEMS B. FINAL PLAT, Ballantrae 2nd Addition - Aurora Investments, LLC d C. FINAL PLAT, Carriage Hills Club House Addition - Rahn Family Partnership D. ADDITION to the 2000 Comprehensive Fee Schedule 5 E. CONFIRMATION of Findings of Fact, Conclusions & Resolution of Denial, New Earth Services, commercial/multi-family and residential trash hauler license F. OFF-SALE liquor license for Haskells, Inc. G. PROJECT 680, receive feasibility report, schedule public hearing (Cliff Road -Streets & Utilities) P H. APPROVE Joint Powers Agreement, street maintenance and traffic markings contractual services I. REQUEST Municipal State Aid route revisions/designations ~ J. PROJECT 768, authorize preliminary engineering/funding application report (Northwood Drive - Ring Road Overpass) 33 K. RENEWAL of Sentence to Service work contract with Dakota County 3 L. LICENSE RENEWALS for the year 2000, pet shop and tree contractor 3 M. RESIDENTIAL trash hauler licenses for Tennis Sanitation, Nitti Sanitation and Superior Services P and CONSTRUCTION/DEMO hauler licenses for Waste Tech and Haugen's Haulers VIII. 6:45 - PUBLIC HEARINGS (SALMON) P 37 7A. ADOPT Risk Management Plan, City Water Treatment Facilities J B. COMMUNITY Activity Center d C. VARIANCE, Brandt Engineering, a request of approximately three feet to the 30 foot setback l~ requirement from public right-of-way for a single family residential property legally described as Lot 8, Block 2, Gardenwood Ponds Fourth Addition, located at 3877 Big Timber Trail in the NE V4 i~ of Section 23 3 D. VACATION of a public drainage & utility easement (Lots 2 and 3, Block 1, Bell Lexington Addition), FINAL PLAT for Bell Lexington 2nd Addition - U.S. West Communications and a VARIANCE to allow drive aisle/parking setback for Lot 1, Block 1, Bell Lexington 2nd Addition rp 90E. PROJECT 784, Louis Lane (Streets and Utilities) IX. CITY ORGANIZATIONAL BUSINESS (GREY) 1 A. Advisory Commission Appointments O . Council Meeting Procedures B. Acting Mayor F. Standing Committee Appts. C. Official Legal Newspaper 1 G. Other Appointments o y D. City Council Meeting Schedule .T X. OLD BUSINESS (ORCHID) XI. NEW BUSINESS (TAN) p I la A. REZONING - Ray Miller, of approximately 12.73 acres from A (Agricultural) to R-1 (Single Family) and a PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION (Murphy Farm 3rd Addition) to create 25 single family lots, legally described as Lots 19 and 20, Block 2, Murphy Farm, located north of Murphy Parkway and east of Donegal Way in the NW / of Section 21 P 1 b I B. PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION - Mendota Homes (Oakwood Heights 2nd Addition) to divide common property into two parcels for a seven unit condominium development, legally described as Lot 1, Block 1, and Part of Outlot A, Oakwood Heights and Outlots B and C, Park Knoll Addition, located on Oakwood Heights Circle north of Wilderness Run Road in the SE / of Section 26 d C. CDBG Funding for Fiscal Year 2000 XII. LEGISLATIVE/INTERGOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS UPDATE (GREY) n A. RESOLUTION supporting the Dakota County City and County Managers recommended legislative issues for the 2000 session XIII. ADMINISTRATIVE AGENDA (GREEN) XIV. VISITORS TO BE HEARD (for those persons not on agenda) XV. ADJOURNMENT XVI. EXECUTIVE SESSION The City of Eagan is committed to the policy that all persons have equal access to its programs, services, activities, facilities and employment without regard to race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, disability, age, marital status, sexual orientation, or status with regard to public assistance. Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities will be provided upon advance notice of at least 96 hours. If a notice of less than 96 hours is received, the City of Eagan will attempt to provide such aid. Updated 1/14/00 - 10:15 a.m. MINUTES 0V-,.•ii 13- UG OF THE Eif:C'1C'Lff;: ,;:pagan, Minnesota January 4, 2000 A regular meeting of the Eagan City _w 11* :fin Tuesday, January 4, 2000 at 6:30 p.m. at the Eagan Municipal Center. Present were Tvtd j :.ts ire and Coundlmembers Masin, Blomquist, Carlson and Bakken." Also present were City Administrator Tom Hedges, Senior Planner Mike Ridley, Director of Public Works Tom Colbert, and City Attorney Jim Sheldon. Am. b City Administrator Hedges provided ari'o Ota'on item. Chief of Police Therkelsen commented on the addition of the three new polic9cers toEagan Police Department. City Clerk VanOverbeke administered .t > $i of oft ~a: b Police Officers Lisa Fancher, Paul Maier and Andrew Speakman. Mayor Awada moved, Councilmember Carlson seconded a motion to adopt the agenda with the removal of Item 1, Commission Appointments, from the Administrative Agenda. Councilmember Masin suggestec:tssion on this item should occur at tonight's meeting or be continued for one month. Coundlmemtiet63i i dI$ d that she was concerned about the appointment procedure since part of what occf red dui lf~st.year's appointment process was unprecedented. A vote was taken on the motion:,; ay • 2 (Councilmembers Masin and Blomquist opposed) , i SOP ` IJT~ HE 24 9 93 RE C AA IEE 7[ € Councilmember Bakken moved, Councilmember Carlson seconded a motion to approve the minutes as presented. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 E A 0.4 4-999.g CI XG 1TT1uS ~l~T11~E Councilmember Bakken moved, Counciln ber Ca4 seconded a motion to approve the minutes as presented. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 ti~•• Councilmember Bakken moved, Coundlmember Carlson seconded a motion to approve the minutes as presented. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 Et tEETIN Coundlmember.Masin requestsi t£ :l dB;~cKicl• J P ce in the first paragraph on page two be revised as follows, "Councilmember Masin asked if the City, hvs.regulations regarding the location for planting trees on private property that can impact adjoining pr, ty owners." Mayor Awada moved, Councilmember Carlson seconded a motion to approve the minutes as amended. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 EAGAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES; JANUARY 4, 2000 PAGE 2 I 41~ Nib% City Administrator Hedges provic, overview og s item. Director of Parks & Recreation Vraa commended both City Forester Hove af$yceztSirvisor Nowariak on the receipt of the their awards. Gregg Hove, City Forester, was recognized for receiving the Distinguished Service Award from the Minnesota Society of Arboriculture. Paula Nowariak, Recreation Supervisor, was recognized for receiving the Dorthea Nelson Award fronltjo.l?utesota Recreation and Parks Association. City Forester Hove thanked Director of 13 W*.SjVor'ks1bert for the letter of recommendation that he wrote on his behalf. He commented on the Mess of t €&ee preservation ordinance, the installation of new plant material within the City a#d-*preparin Ebr the future through public education. Recreation Supervisor Nowariak Rxi c S1' e G ttb it for their support of the Eagan Parks & Recreation program and the City staff, Eagan residenfS• 'her family for their support also. She further thanked former Superintendent of Recreation Dorothy Peterson for nominating her for the award. Councilmember Masin asked wltp:tl ljr:wi11 be burning cattail plants for the benefit of Thomas Lake. Director of Public Works Colberf•eitpfiedte_benefits of cleansing the wetlands and the balance that must be maintained. • • , Councilmember Masin asked if copiesAf-ft, 3itie %handout for public presentations and public participation in City Council meet s; 0ft .available to the public. She also suggested the City Council review the appointment process$id the guidelines/handout. She noted that the guidelines/handout for public presentations and public participation in City Council meetings stated that items can be pulled from the consent agenda. City Administrator Hedges state that the guidelines will be reviewed at the January 18, 2000 City Council meeting. 7-7 77 City Administrator Hedges provided an ovo*ew on•t, is item. Councilmember Blomquist stated that it is important to ensure the accuracy of;>o¢ census: }ures because of the effect it can have on the amount of federal-funding provided to the X . : A. Personnel Items Item 1. It was recommended to approve the hiring of Holly I1Qc raw as a Clerical Technician II in the Community Development Department. Item 2. It was recommended to ratify tl$i: ;0.1 , t $1.: duc as the Program & Events Supervisor in the Parks & Recreation De'tet:=:s : Item 3. It was recommended to approve the hiring of Dave fgers, Robert Rausch and. Ryan Rausch as seasonal park laborers. Item 4. It was recommended to approve the hiring of Ben Koenke and Justin Brown as seasonal warming house attendants. Item 5. It was recommended to approve the hiring of Kevin Weber as a seasonal skate guard. EAGAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES; JANUARY 4, 2000 PAGE3 Item 6. It was recommended to approve i!i f7ei ei singer as a temporary clerical worker in the Parks & Recreation Department. Item 7. It was recommended to approve lj;$jring of Aarogter as a seasonal concessions manager at Cascade Bay. Item 8. It was recommended to approve the hiring of Katy Jonas as a part-time Clerical Tech III in the Police Department. ,z4QU, 2001, and 2002 Collective Bargaining Contract with Item 9. It was recommended to approve the the Clerical Unit. B. Direct staff to initiate an ordinance amendmenwta'iiefine tYaiisfer stations as a conditional use in the Limited Industrial Zoning District. It was recomided to durtct staff to initiate an Ordinance Amendment to Chapter 11 to define the transfetM and, Q'rporate as a conditional use in the Limited Industrial Zoning District. C. Contract renewal for janitorial services with Lifeworks Services, Inc. It was recommended to approve a contract renewal for janitorial services with Lifeworks Services, Inc. for the period of 1/1/00 to 12/31/00 and authorize signature. D. Resolution approving the submissiomeLfa metro eRr enways planning grant application for Patrick Eagan Park. It was recommended to a o" esilution authorizing staff to submit a "Metro Greenways Planning Grant" application to tfi )Qg t#> ;of Natural Resources for the -development of a management plan for Patrick Eagan Park. E. Contract 99-11, approve final payment, au,pz,' ;i3ilitenance (Wescott Road - Pavement Markin s It was recommended to apprc2?~Bie;:f~~iayment for Contract 99-11 (Wescott Road - Pavement Markings) in the amount of to Warning Lites of MN, Inc., and accept the improvements for perpetual City maintenance :3'2 subject to warranty provisions. F. Contract 99-10, approve Change Order No. 1, Wescott Road & Lexington Avenue (Traffic Signalization). It was recommended to approve Change Order No.1 to Contract 99-10 (Wescott Road and Lexington Avenue - Traffic Signali Lu .c!Fl41;+3 1c4..$! Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. G. Project 740, receive final assessment roll/ordet:kblic heg (Silver Bell Road - Street Improvements). It was recommended to receive t:inal as ent roll for Project 740 (Silver Bell Road - Street Reconstruction Improvements) anddule ablic hearing to be held on February 1, 2000. H. Grant application, Minnesota Auto Theft Prevention Program. It was recommended to approve a resolution authorizing the City of Eagan to enter into a cooperative agreement with the State of Minnesota for the project entitled Minnesota Auto Theft Prevention Program. 1. Direct the City Attorney's office to amend Chapter 4, Tab" - Billboard Signage, of the City Code. It was recommended to direct the City,&W; s:Vcg,tc?rp{eg....are an ordinance amendment to Chapter 4 of the EaganCityCode, Table A - Bilf}; •g. . • J. License renewals for the year 2000, trash hauler and toba= It was recommended to approve the. trash hauler and tobacco license renewals for the year 2000:;; Councilmember Bakken moved, Councilmember Carlson seconded a motion to approve the consent agenda. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 EAGAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES; JANUARY 4, 2000 PAGE4 VACATE PUBLIC#RAINAGE & UT .TY EASEMENT TION) (LOTS &WQNTURY City Administrator Hedges provided ait dt% ii v'tin this item. Director of Public Works Colbert gave a staff report. Councilmember Carlson moved, Councilmember Bakken seconded a motion to approve the vacation of public drainage and utility easements icv'ft.Lots ;41d 2, Block 1, Century Addition as described and authorize the Mayor and C .y.; i~ ",U Belated documents. Mayor Awada opened the public hearing tWiiyone wg to speak. There being no one, she dosed the public hearing. A vote was taken on the motion.:; ~:$i1ay VACATE PUBLIC DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASEMENT (LOT 1, BLOCK 1 COMSERV NO.1 ADDITION) City Administrator Hedges provided an overview on this item. Director of Public Works Colbert gave a staff report. Councilmember Carlson moved, Counc>~iiiiljr n seconded a motion to approve the vacation of public drainage and utility easemens within t;oE Uk)ck 1, Comserv No.1 as described and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute, ref :L'1t , ....nts. Mayor Awada opened the public;iig`oanyone wishing to speak. There being no one, she dosed the public hearing. A vote was taken on the motion. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 VACATE PUBLIC DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASEMENT (LE i?i'# ON) City Administrator Hedges provided an o iew on-"* item. Director of Public Works Colbert gave a staff report. Councilmember Carlson moved, Cound,14er Bali seconded a motion to approve the vacation of public drainage and utility easements as described within Outlot B, Lexington 2nd Addition (now known as Northwood Business Park), and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. Mayor Awada opened the public hearing to anyone w~i8hing to speak. There being no one, she dosed the public hearing. A vote was taken on the motion" .r,'•' i R;3:~ TRASH HAULER LICENSES FOR NEW.A;RTH SERVICES, INC. City Administrator Hedges provided an overview oiritfi is item. Councilmember Bakken moved, Councilmember Carlson seconded a motion to deny a residential and commercial/multi-family waste-hauling license for New Earth Services, Inc. EAGAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES; JANUARY 4, 2000 PAGE 5 City Attorney Sheldon said it wabi#Wi 'i jipidpiiate foit##i Council to direct the preparation of findings of fact for consideration at the J ifary 18, 2000 City (IW4cil meeting. Councilmember Bakken agreed to y d the motto tb £indude directing the preparation of findings of fact. •f'l: Councilmember Bakken stated that since one of the two trucks does not comply with City standards he did not want to put the City in the position of having to police which truck New Earth would be using. He added that New Earth Services does not meet City Code requirements and unless the trucks are brought into compliance and,tJ)g other items are addressed as noted in the staff report he did not feel comfortable approving t h e li M ycic ;i d i % ted that the staff report also indicates that City contacts with this business have gone iiIiaiBre'~i9;' he City is in the process of filing a complaint. Councilmember Blomquist stated that I requests not completely follow the recommendations of the Solid Waste Abatement :Cp fission.; J e said the City needs to work hard to Wx promote neighborhood trash collection. Mayor Awada opened the pubh& i6aring to arighing to speak. Jeff Glewwe, General Manager of Superior Services Solid Waste Hauling and Recycling Collection Company, stated that competition has been reduced due to the large number of consolidations and mergers that have occurred in the solid waste industry. He added that competition is beneficial to the residents of the City. Robert Barber,1461 Richards Court, Sta£e important to maintain competition and commented on the national program of waste... ulers 4Wg %tit smaller independent haulers. Councilmember Blomquist said that rii~bYlitcfi:i?titt~d collectively solicit bids for garbage service. She noted that the garbage truciss x n WCity streets. .61 ed that the City Council had previously capped the number of Councilmember Carlson mention available licenses at five but recently increased the number to seven in an effort to commit to a more competitive market. There being no one else wishin .to•s R44: Ar ;Awo a dosed the public hearing. She stated that City Attorney Sheldon advised thp-C- J$` g I It i Uon of denial to a motion directing staff to prepare findings of fact. Councilmem'ber B ken agreed to amend the motion. A vote was taken on the motion. Aye: 5 P?: 0 Councilmember Carlson moved, Councilmember Ba1yih seconded a motion to direct staff and the City Attorney to review and recommend modifications to City Code Chapter 6.37 regarding waste- hauler licensing. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 CITY OF EAGAN'S BUSINESS SUBSIDY POLICY City Administrator Hedges provided an overview o .is item. Councilmember Bakken move ct.;}!7Ri;YSQn seconded a motion to adopt the City of Eagan Business Subsidy Policy. Mayor Awada opened the public hearing to anyone: i$hing to speak. There being no one, she dosed the public hearing. A vote was taken on the motion. Aye:. 5 Nay: 0 EAGAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES; JANUARY 4, 2000 PAGE 6 REPORT FROM THE CO1IUNITY ACTIV}!•;CENTER TASK FORCE City Administrator Hedges provides' : 8ta } gc t1%is item. Clyde Thurston spoke on behalf of the Community Facilities Land Acquisition Task Force and provided an overview of the proceedings of the Task Force. He noted that due to the complexity of the project and the holidays the Task Force did not have a final report to present at this time. He added that the Task Force has defined the groundwo>•tFke,U? pSSible.eleAtents of the community center. He said there should be a comprehensive and o . • uni He commented on the costs associated with land acquisition and the constructiq f [E fa . He further commented that cost could.be a barrier for some of the potential users ar~'id that'tiser fees need to be addressed. Councilmember Masin thanked Mr..'I **.Q4or his,. IC on the Task Force and also thanked the rest of the Task Force members for thQ: Danny Ducharme, a sixth-grade student at Dakota Hills Middle School, expressed her support for more gymnasiums and for a gathering place for the youth in the community. Sam Fields expressed his support for additional gym space and a recreation center. Dan Klekner, President of the Ea' #.,ASsociation, stated that many of the youth athletic teams need to travel outside the City to find gym sp Gi quested a commitment from the City for gym space. Ann Carlon, Executive Director of the*• Ott ti .tr itjon & Visitors Bureau, said that the proposed location is perfect for communl:~Y"e9 ~'~lie commented on the need for meeting space and encouraged the City Council to acquire t i -i hd and proceed with the plans for a community activity center. Cyndee Fields, 4725 Weston Hill& Drive, expressed her support for the community center and encouraged the Council to commit to giving approximately 20% of the available gym time to the EAA. Mayor Awada said that she wasi3i'k+isk'Coj?i a process moving forward. She noted that the land will be purchased over the next coup] ;q.( months. d a public hearing will be scheduled to discuss the proposed community center. Councilmember Masin thanked the Task Foie meml2i5:for attending the tour of the community centers. She said that perhaps the Task Force woNlike to meet again since many of the members were unable to attend the meeting in December. Councilmember Blomquist stated that the Council should ensure that the Task Force remain cohesive and that membership be expanded to include representatives from the girlscout and boyscout community. She requested an invitation be extended to them. Councilmember Carlson stated that she would like tii:cdntinue to obtain input from the public on a regular basis regarding the central* *S. .6tated that the process should not be held up and added that a public hearing shot,,.,#e:tepid that 'ask Force members should be asked whether they would like to meet again prior to t ie public hearing. Councilmember Masin questioned the 20% commits being requested by the EAA. Councilmember Carlson noted that specific elements have been identified for the community center and based on these elements it would be possible to obtain cost estimates. Mayor Awada referred to a motion that she prepared regarding the scheduling of a public hearing and the preparation of cost estimates for the community activity center. EAGAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES; JANUARY 4, 2000 PAGE 7 Councilmember Masin stated thacje'pWdSS'is'offto bod start but the Council should focus on getting as much information as possib'She said that schetg the public hearing for January 18 would be fine. Councilmember Blomquist ncurred with Ma. Awada stating that the process should move forward. Councilmember Carlson cbi xed also and_'W- d that it is not necessary to know the design elements at this point. She said that t 5'vould provide an opportunity for the public to indicate their support or opposition t6ri1 ed community activity center. She requested that two additional items be added to the list of elements including an entrance monument and courtyard area and fireproof storage area for the Historical Society. Mayor Awada concurred with thg :addiGwn of the two elements as suggested by Councilmember Carlson. Mayor Awada moved, Councilmember Bald en secon"a motion to set a public hearing on action required for a bond referendum January 18, 2000 to take citizen input and discuss t rocess and. for the community center and central park develht. Councilmember Blomquist quest3fiii a ii` the Cd'utii would be acting on whether to schedule a bond referendum at the January 18 City Council meeting. Mayor Awada noted that the purpose of the public hearing would be to take citizen input and if the Council so chooses to act on the issue of a referendum they may do so. Councilmember Carlson added that legally a bond referendum can not be held until 49 days following the public hearing. Councilmember Blomquist indica;#tilie was going to abstain on the vote stating that she was in favor of the idea of a community cenCet' rai%tt d.4 receive public input but questioned whether a public hearing was the appropriate grmat: 'Cti tit member Masin stated that she was supportive of a public hearing but was not re to analyz:tQ?d referendum at the January 18 meeting. A vote was taken on the motion:;: liW' ~ Nay: 1 Abstain: 1 (Coundlmember Masin opposed and Councilmember Blomquist abstained) Mayor Awada moved, Councilmmber Blomquist seconded a motion to direct staff to compile costs for the Eagan Community Center which generally includes the following elements: Four gyms with wood floors us _$pi tt} 9fsE8:: Banquet facility like Maplewood Senior center, teen center, EAA offices, his}b}•cal soci,and other meeting rooms and space, including storage space Large center atrium Running track Exercise space Locker rooms Enclosed kids indoor playground Contract hourly childcare Concessions managed by City Outside skating on pond Site development for festival a Infrastructure improvements Entrance monuments and courty Historical Society fireproof storage Aye: 5 Nay: 0 EAGAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES; JANUARY 4, 2000 PAGE 8 FINAL PLAT - CENTURY S ND ADDITION:,. A-1LlPPER'S & MORE, INC. City Administrator Hedges provide* e*.t t ;$us item. Senior Planner Ridley gave a staff report. Councilmember Bakken moved, Councilmember Carlson seconded a motion to approve a Final Plat (Century Second Addition) that will combine two parcels of land currently described as Lots 1 & 2, Century Addition into one platted lot 1oc is tif,X kee, ;Rppole Road and west of Coachman Road in the SW 1/4 of Section 9. Aye: 5 I~{ijjifl FINAL SUBDIVISION, RIVERPARK OFAft CENT R BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD City Administrator Hedges provow;,p}Icyv ;at`s item. Senior Planner Ridley gave a staff report. . Coundlmember Carlson moved, Councilmember Bakken seconded a motion to approve a Final Subdivision (RiverPark Office Center) consisting of one lot and one outlot located at 3400 Yankee Drive, west of Highway 13 and south of Yankee Doodle Road within the south 1/2 of Section 8 and the north 1/2 of Section 17. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 PLANNED DEVELOPEk IRJv1ENT - HONEY TREE LTD. City Administrator Hedges provided 4} overview ot1;t1¢ item. Senior Planner Ridley gave a staff report. Councilmember Bakken moved" ber Carlson seconded a motion to approve a Planned Development Amendment to al 8 additional building signage on the tower portion of the Sleep Inn hotel at 4510 Erin Drive (Lot 1, Block 1, Honey Tree First Addition) subject to the following conditions: 1. An Agreement amendir% the Planned Development shall be executed and recorded at the Dakota County rec bf#t:: 2. A sign permit for each sign is requk-dd prior tp.stallation. 3. There shall be no signage on the eaS ;t'levatiopol the building. Ray Anderson, applicant, stated that the lack of signage'has resulted in low occupancy. He referenced a letter declining the request for highway logo signage because of the lack of visibility of Sleep Inn's onsite signage from Cliff Road. He said that the Council has set a precedent for deviating from the City's Sign Code. A vote was taken on the motion. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 PLANNED DEVELOPM.TAHL CONSTRUCTION City Administrator Hedges provided an overview nu.,#lus item. Senior Planner Ridley gave a. staff report. Dean Olson, applicant, provided additional information regarding the proposed project. Councilmember Masin questioned if the new hotel would be under the same ownership as the Holiday Inn Select. Mr. Olson indicated that the ownership would be the same for both hotels. EAGAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES; JANUARY 4, 2000 PAGE 9 Mayor Awada commented on thgsyttiii'We'r'ofliotefslie c ?built in the City, but added that government is not in a position to dictate i v many can be bui : Todd Buyer, General Manager of t3yts'p~iday Inn Selt:#l Eagan, mentioned that the Holiday Inn Select will be changed to a four star, CrA"*. of 2000, which will appeal to a higher end market. He noted that most of the hotel oiaitieY, ity are not apprehensive about the addition of new hotels. Councilmember Masin inquired why no one from the hospitality industry was present at the Council meeting. Ann Carlon, Executive Rir 1:i X..qf the Eagan Convention & Visitors Bureau, stated that the hotel industry is doing well and its g ee-enterprise system. Mayor Awada moved, Councilmember MaGSMecond&:g motion to approve a Planned Development Amendment to allow t h e constructiot ; an 87 i i i hotel upon 1.7 acres of land located north of Corporate Center Drive and east p) t:0#kRoa4. property currently platted as Lot 2, Block 1, Eagandale Office Park 4th Additip'... ''to' l Ing conditions: RY. 1. The applicant and/or developer shall enter into a Final Planned Development Agreement with the City prior to building permit issuance. 2. The following exhibits are required for the Final Planned Development Agreement: A. Final Site~}::::::•: B. Final C. Final Building£levatioii :stud i nage Plan D. Lighting Plan 3. All trash/recycling conta:i;#iliie'stored within the principal buildings or within an enclosure consistent wit4ty`Code requirements. 4. All building, parking/drive aisles, and landscaped areas shall be properly maintained. 5. All exterior lighting shall be hooded and directed to deflect light way from adjacent properties and rights-of,;~xa,.• 6. All rooftop mechanical equipment si4 lie screened from view of all public rights-of- way. 7. The proposed ground sign shall mP,ign Cgorequirements. 8. City Officials find the proposed wall signage on the building's western facade to be acceptable. 9. The developer shall be responsible for providing as-built record plan drawings in accordance with City standards of the relocap ublic sanitary and storm sewer lines. R 10. The developer shall dedcatetpec~sges !.aage and utility easements over the relocated public sanitary;gaire 11. Building plans, materials and construction Sft*1Fbe such that they will ensure an interior sound level of 50 dBA. 12. This proposal shall be responsible for a cash parks and cash trails dedication at the time of building permit. 13. The installation of twenty-one (21) Category A trees, or forty-two (42) Category B trees, or eighty-four (84) Category C trees, or an equivalent combination of these trees as EAGAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES; JANUARY 4, 2000 PAGE 10 mitigation for tree remov?:*' itce'df allowa'1;imits shall be required. Mitigation shall be in addition to any ty required lands g. 14. A revised tree mitigation p1 all be subm i41)efore building permit issuance that separates tree mitigation tre gW Cc.~gR,ds quired trees. 15. Tree Protective measures (i.e. orange colored silt fence or 4 foot polyethylene laminate safety netting) shall be required to be installed at the Drip Line or at the perimeter of the Critical Root Zone, whichever is greater, of significant trees/woodlands to be preserved. 16. The applicant shall contac i : fit 'F#ii4 on and set up a pre-construction site inspection at least five days pnor•tq:•is5fuanggtff the grading permit to ensure compliance with the approved Tree•:l,'reservati40lan and placement of the tree protection fencing. 17. A water quality cash dedf . tiXiet O t i'%e~ponding) of $6,394 shall be required at the time of building perm f: Aye: 5 Nay: 0 SPECIA~~>4f:1rQ~,j1\TCIL MEETINGS City Administrator Hedges provided 4overviebti~ tjv~ item. Mayor Awada moved, Councilmemb&ei# Sieiiiide a motion to schedule the January 11 Special City Council meeting at 430p .m: c 15.i* Ei; ose of interviewing Advisory Commission candidates and schedule a Special City Gii'tircil meeting for Thursday, January 13 at 4:45 p.m. for the purpose of reviewing 2000 goals, with the possibility of additional items pertaining to CDBG funding and a proposed right-of-way ordinance. Councilmember Masin stated that she was in support of the January 13 Special City Council meeting but was opposed to the January. j.iectlst .l~ieyrocess regarding the appointment of commission members should be postpot#;;i ter date. A vote was taken on the motion. Aye: 3 lsi 2 (Coilmembers Masin and Blomquist opposed) INVER GROVE HEIGHTS DEVELOIQANT PROPOSAL (BETTY ALLEN PROPERTY) Director of Public Works Colbert gave a staff report. He identified that one of the concerns identified by staff is the lack of connection to provide a seco ry outlet for this development to be able to access Cliff Road to the north. He stated that a portion of 't-of-way needs to be acquired for an additional access. He commented on the additional traffic through Eagan neighborhoods that would result without the appropriate road con.•5; #b,:ie Joint Powers Agreement with the City of Inver Grove Heights allows the City q cga t:},a t cv; c )i&fopment proposals as a condition of the City of Eagan providing sewer and water utilities. He added that the Inver Grove Heights Planning Commission will be reviewing the development proposal orc11 nary 18. He further added that given- the late receipt of the development proposal, the Advisory Pft Commission has not had an opportunity to review any parks dedication issues with this development. He noted that there is a provision in the JPA that allows either land dedication or an equivalent cash dedication to the City of Eagan for parks purposes. EAGAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINLTTES; JANUARY 4, 2000 PAGE 11 Councilmember Masin expressedd>f'nf the p,04' for the Southern Hills .A' development in Inver Grove Heights has riff 'been resolved whiff is in violation of the JPA. She stated that it is important for the APrC to review." new developm;roposals in Inver Grove Heights. Director of Parks and Recreation Vraa comst d on a mee tween Eagan's Advisory Parks Commission and the Inver Grove Heights Psaid that the Inver Grove Heights Park Commission is planning to bring back a propos 'gtl%e ballfield. Councilmember Carlson questioned if Eagan residents were notified of this proposed development. Mike Black Royal Oaks Realty, st W 01 1.*V owners was supplied to the City of Inver Grove Heights and did include Eagan resi Councilmember Carlson said that she woultkot apprQWof this development until adequate access is provided. Mayor Awada said that ,thc,C . a and f to provide utilities to the City of Inver Grove Heights. Councilmember Carlson i1 1! tl i*ias the right to question this development because of the access issue afi the impact&Wjan neighborhoods. Mayor Awada suggested that the Council's comments be forwarded to the City of Inver Grove Heights and also requested that the development proposal be brought back before the Eagan City Council. Councilmember Masin said that Eagan's advisory commissions should review the development proposal before the Council provides any formal comment for consideration. Councilmember Carlson reiterated that, Eagan residents should be > i i,ed. Councilmember Masin moved, CounciTri~e7rr • u seconded a motion to direct staff to . present the development proposal to the City o :Eagan c......nissipns to allow for Eagan resident input. Councilmember Blomquist stated th3D. 5htttl1dbe eliminated and incorporated into adjacent lots with a pond easement. She t if a proposed plan should be shown for the property where utilities have to cross. Director of Public Works Colbert stated that a development proposal might have been submitted for this property when the Pines Edge First Addition development was considered. Councilmember Blomquist requested that a copy be provided to her. A vote was taken on the motion. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 The meeting adjourned at 8:55 p.m. to an Ei G~ttive Se abn for the purpose of receiving an update on the status of the central park land acquis and ttspkovide direction for police officer union negotiations. Present were Mayor Awada and Count' membe f:~i1asin, Blomquist, Carlson and Bakken, City Administrator Tom Hedges, and City Attorney Jim Shelcfdf MLK Date City Clerk If you need these minutes in an alternative form such as large print, $t$ille, audio tape, etc., please contact the City of Eagan, 3830 Pilot Knob Road, Eagan, MN 55122, (651) 681-4600,) 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. . MEMO city of eagan MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: JANUARY 14, 2000 SUBJECT: AGENDA INFORMATION FOR JANUARY 18, 2000 CITY COUNCIL MEETING ROLL CALL & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Six girls and two adults representing Girl Scout Troop 2118, Northwood and Pinewood Elementary Schools, will lead the Pledge of Allegiance. ADOPT AGENDAIAPPROVE MINUTES After approval is given to the January 18, 2000 City Council agenda and the minutes of the January 4, 2000 regular City Council meeting, the following items are in order for consideration. DEPARTMENT HEAD BUSINESS A. VIDEO PRESENTATION, EAGAN 1999 YEAR IN REVIEW "Community Journal" is an monthly news and information program that the Cities of Eagan and Burnsville produce as a partnership with Burnsville/Eagan Community Television. One of the segments in the January, 2000 program is a review of City events at the City of Eagan during 1999. (Another segment covers 1999 for the City of Burnsville.) The Year in Review segment was compiled from footage that was shot for Community Journal and other reasons during 1999. Staff thought it would be interesting for the Mayor and Council, persons in attendance at the Council meeting and cable viewers to view this segment at the beginning of the January 18, 2000 City Council meeting. (The City of Burnsville showed their segment at their last Council meeting.) The presentation is approximately five minutes in length. For your information, "Community Journal" shows three times a day at 6:00 a.m., noon, and 6:00 p.m. on Channel 16. There is no action required on this item. Agenda Information Memo January 18, 2000 Eagan City Council Meeting RECOGNITIONS & PRESENTATIONS A. PRESENTATION BY DAKOTA COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIP ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: No action required. FACTS: • Steve King from the Economic Development Partnership has requested time at Tuesday's meeting to provide a brief update on recent accomplishments and activities of the Partnership. ATTACHMENTS: • Enclosed on pages 3 through is a copy of the Partnership's 1998-99 Annual Report. .Dak NN^ f.w Annual Report 1998-99 3 Annual Report ¦ 1998-99 ¦ Page 2 DCEDP Our Mission To facilitate expansion and diversification of the Dakota County economy. Table of Contents HISTORY OF THE PARTNERSHIP 3 THE CHAIRMAN'S VIEW 4 INCOMING CHAIR'S PERSPECTIVE 5 DAKOTA 2000 - A BUSINESS RETENTION INITIATIVE 6 HIGHLIGHTS OF 1999 8 FINANCIAL STATEMENT 9 BOARD OF DIRECTORS 10 MEMBERSHIP 11 Annual Report ¦ 1998-99 n Page 3 DCEDP For eight years now, we have been building bridges for economic development throughout Dakota County N o organization can look down the road successfully without knowing where it has come from. Much has changed for the Dakota County Economic Develop- ment Partnership since its inception in 1991. Much more is certain to change in the years ahead. 1991-1993: Startup Partnership members estab- lished a Code of Ethics and an initial comprehensive plan. In March of 1994, with substantial public and private support, the Partnership incorporated as a 501(c) (6) corpo- ration and hired its first executive director, Scott Beckman. 1994-1997: Growth and Maturation The Partnership began making a - significant impact and developed a Development projects don't just happen. It takes partnerships to ensure the number of important initiatives. Dakota County economy continues to grow and divers These included the creation of Dakota County Capital to provide files of each town and city; and tor in August of 1998. A new five- gap and equity financing for emerg- introducing a grass roots, person- year strategic plan was developed, ing businesses in the county; con- centered business development complete with a supporting struc- ducting a business retention and program known as "Enterprise ture of committees and the neces- expansion survey; assisting in the Facilitation." sary adaptations to reflect the development and implementation changing nature of business at the of a county-wide Geographic 1998-1999: Transition close of the century. And the Information System; developing a Steve King was hired as the Partners newsletter was launched to web site with comprehensive pro- Partnership's new executive direc- spread the word on DCEDP's activities. The Partnersb:p was begun by the Dakota County Private Industry .s 2000 and beyond? Who knows what lies ahead for Council, now the Dakota County Workforce Council, in May of the Partnership? A strategic plan is f `'~t ° = •I' in place. A new initative is on the 1991. The PIC brougbt together representatives of private table to carry us into the year 2000. ' s s~== No doubt, more change will be nec- business, education, county, city and toumsbip governments and essary. One thing is certain: the Dakota County Economic Develop- agencies, non-profit organizations and citizens who believed ment Partnership will continue to pursue its mission in whatever ways that Dakota County's ultimate potential could be realized with are most appropriate for the times, as it has since 1991. a cooperative approach to economic dvelopment. Ito Annual Report ¦ 1998-99 ¦ Page 4 Outgoing Chair 1999: The year in review This was a year of transition, reflec- egy to address employment recruitment, tion and revitalization for the training and workforce development. Dakota County Economic Develop- 2. Improve the effectiveness of busi- ment Partnership. In August of 1998, we ness retention and development pro- welcomed Steve King as our new execu- grams. tive director after a six-month search 3. Promote communication, coopera- effort, and that step began to bear fruit tion and coordination by raising aware- in the past 12 months. ness of development issues and oppor- The five-year strategic plan the tunities. Partnership had developed in 1994 was 4. Expand membership and improve essentially completed. As a result, we 4 member and business involvement. needed to develop a new five-year i Those committees whose roles relate strategic plan in 1999, a plan which directly to one of these focus areas have focused on the issues facing economic been meeting for about six months. Each development today. The Partnership Arne Hendrickson is well on its way to understanding the also more needed g Reliant nnegasco visibility and also rededicate our Outotgoi issues developed through challenges. committees program of work to the issues facing us Outgoing Chair batr to key partners throughout the county now. Much work needs to be done in the com- I am happy to report that your Partnership was suc- ing years and I am sure your Partnership will be instru- cessful in developing a new five-year plan and also for- mental when solutions addressing these issues are mulating committees around that plan to carry out the developed and implemented. program of work. We must also remember that as we go forward we Economic development faces fundamental and chal- will continue to support our ongoing successes like lenging issues as we prepare to enter the next millenni- "Enterprise Facilitation" in Hastings and the Dakota um. The issues we once associated with economic County Capital Fund. Sometimes, it may appear as development have changed. While developing and though the challenges are simply too much. Look back, growing business is still important to Dakota County's though, from the viewpoint of our current successes economic health, a new challenge has arrived, one with and you might recall feeling the same way at the begin- which we are all too familiar. Finding employees to fill ning of the process. I am confident that your vacant positions at just about every business in the Partnership will meet the new challenges head-on. county as well as the school system and the various gov- I want to thank the members of the Partnership for ernment organizations throughout the county is a very allowing me the opportunity to help lead our efforts real issue. and I continue to see nothing but success in the years ahead. New Strategic Plan will focus on four areas In the next three to five years, we will focus on four Arne Hendrickson major areas. They are: Chairman of the Board 1. Design and coordinate implementation of a strat- Annual Report ¦ 1998-99 ¦ Page 5 Incoming Chair 2000: A look into the future As the year comes to a close and we Partnership then will be able to assist with - y4 the identification of possible resources or begin looking toward the next, this is an excellent time to reflect 4 _ the development of needed programs to on where we have been as a Partnership address issues raised in the survey and on where we are going in the process. months and years ahead. I'd like to express my sincere thanks Our goal is to facilitate communication and appreciation to the Partnership's The primary goal of the Dakota County board, management committee, volun- Economic Development Partnership is to teer committees, executive director, be the county's foremost source of infor- staff and especially to Arne Hendrick- mation and a facilitator of communication son, our outgoing board chair, for their between the public and private sectors, as unfailing dedication to the Partnership well as to organizations outside of Dakota and its activities during this past year. It County. The Partnership will do this by has been another year of transition, yet Linda Lund providing accurate, timely and reliable much has been accomplished. information. We seek to create a forum for As we stand poised for the new mil- C`4 Partners all parties to come together to address lennium, the Partnership has before it Doming Chair their needs, concerns, ideas and wishes so many opportunities. My vision for our that Dakota County remains a great place next year is one of increased communication and col- to work and live. laboration. Over this past year, Partnership leaders created an We have seen in the past that the creativity and organizational structure specifically designed to achieve expertise of the public and private entities involved in this' goal. I encourage all of our members who would the Partnership can accomplish great things when we like to be more actively involved to contact the work together. It is with this thought in mind that the Partnership office. Remember, two key benefits of being Partnership, together with local city councils, cham- a member of the Partnership include the opportunity to bers, and economic development professionals, will be shape our own future and the opportunity to interact launching a new business outreach program called with other leaders in the county. Dakota 2000 - Partnering for the County of the Future. I look forward to working with all of you over the (Please turn to pages 6 and 7 for more details.) next year. With our focus on communication and col- This interview/survey effort will further open the laboration, I know it will be a year filled with innovative lines of communication between the public and private ideas and high energy. sectors within Dakota County. In addition, it will assist the Partnership in identifying the most current issues Linda Lund and opportunities facing our business community. The 2000 Board Chair Annual Report ¦ 1998-99 ¦ Page 6 Looking Ahead Dakota 2000 Partnering for the County of the Future Every organization goes through Every community in Dakota Partnership contact, coordinated periods of transition, often long County can benefit in some fashion with the community, to provide tech- and difficult stretches of adapta- from a well-executed business reten- nical assistance is an excellent way to tion to changing times, expanding tion and expansion visitation pro- stay in touch with immediate needs needs and new priorities. That's gram. An ongoing visitation program and to collaboratively assess commu- where we in the Dakota County provides community members with a nity resources to assist our local busi- Economic Development better understanding of key nesses. Partnership have been for issues, keeps communities the past couple of years. focused on economic devel- Why should DCEDP do it? The transition is now opment efforts that are 1. Businesses have dosed or left. over. It's time to get down most needed, promotes a 2. Businesses are concerned to work. And the work I positive business climate, about many issues and often feel am proposing we take on and energizes Partnership neglected. in the year 2000 is vital to working committees. 3. Communities want to do more the future economic suc- to assist business but are under- cess of Dakota County. Background staffed. We're calling it Dakota The partnership has a 4. Most communities in Dakota 2000 and it truly is about one-year-old strategic plan, County would like to create a pro- building partnerships, Steve King complete with committees business climate. finding solutions to the Executive Director and open-ended action 5. The Partnership wants to set problems businesses face steps in place for delivery. its priorities for action and tangibili- and ensuring we are the entity play- The next step is obvious: It's time we ty. ing a crucial role as facilitator in get down to business. 6. Community leaders want to accessing the necessary resources so bring other leaders/organizations that business can thrive. Our current situation together to work on improving the There's no question that the year Since the inception of the culture for our business community. ahead promises excitement, chal- Partnership, our workplaces have 8. The community wants input lenges and opportunities. It may also changed dramatically. on key business and community be a turning point for this organiza- Technology has created incredible issues, such as capacity building, tion. occurrences. In most workplaces, workforce and training needs. Please allow me to outline our "jobs" have been consolidated, work- vision for Dakota 2000. loads have increased, and time avail- Benefits of a Visitation Program ability for working on "out of work" 1. The Business Retention and Executive Director's recommendation activities like the Partnership has Development (BRAD) and One of the most worthwhile activ- diminished rapidly and significantly. Workforce Development and ities in economic development is a The Partnership cannot possibly Training Committees will have real systematic business retention and achieve tangibility in every aspect of business issues to focus on. expansion program. It has become its strategic plan because of its broad 2. Improved public relations with apparent in Dakota County that an scope. existing firms. ongoing business retention and It is, therefore, reasonable to 3. Help business become more expansion program needs to be focus our economic development competitive. installed for the future economic resources and activity most efficient- 4. Developing action-based plans good of the County. ly and effectively. for visitation efforts. What better organization to lead An ever-tightening labor shortage, 5. Building community capacity. that effort than the Dakota County combined with rapidly expanding 6. linking the business communi- Economic Development Partnership? competitive productivity pressures, ty to resources. leaves our local businesses with little 7. Strengthen relations between time to problem-solve. A direct business, community. Annual Report ¦ 1998-99 ¦ Page 7 Goals for Dakota 2000 1. Visit three businesses a week. 2. Demonstrate to local business- es that the community appreciates their contribution. 3. Help businesses solve prob- lems collaboratively. 4. Assist businesses in using pro- no n o d grams aimed at helping them :be m become more competitive. ttha - an g w ate - o 5. Build community capacity to and on be ' 'd es sustain growth and development. a to n ceps,, mmunt ;good un nom""°~ic de elo effo p n 6. Achieve our mission. _'f tli a What net a i' e~ ost eede motes ~siti Why is this so necessary? that 'effori~than ahe co - ty - i I ss cllma an ene izes Why is Dakota 2000 so necessary? Economic Dc lop nt. a p? . P rtnecshtp w ng co n Existing firms are the County's engine for job growth. Recent National studies estimate the per- Certainly, the E.D. delivery system What's our timeline? centage of new jobs created by exist- for all partners in Dakota County is Perhaps the best answer is ing firms ranges from 40 to 80 per- up for discussion, as is improving "Yesterday." cent, and in Dakota County, about the quality of local services. No question, this is an important two-thirds of new jobs are created by initiative. It's important for our via- existing firms. Manufacturing, high What's our next step? bility as an organization. It's impor- technology and the service industry 1. Organize a call list (BRAD tant for the economic well-being of lead all other industries. committee). Dakota County. And it's important Another important reason to 2. Establish calling participants for the individual businesses that focus on existing businesses is the 3. Establish calling format/ques- may be in need of assistance but partnership's business-attraction tions (All committees/ don't know where to turn. efforts. Dakota County is less likely partners). I look forward to your support as to lure significant firms if our exist- 4. Begin three visits per week. we move forward with Dakota 2000, ing business climate is not "top- 5. Assist firms with specific Partnering for the County of the notch." Before deciding on a loca- needs/requests. Send letter of fol- Future. tion, a firm often will speak with low-up with summary of visit to the existing businesses about the labor Firm - Mayor - City Manager - ED situation, responsiveness of govern- Staff and any others as appropriate. ment, quality of services and so on. 6. Review surveys (BRAD By helping existing businesses Committee). succeed in Dakota County, we'll be 7. Build a file on each firm and building a strong foundation for computerize the visitation Steve King future economic growth. This is eco- results.(Executive Director) Executive Director nomic development capacity build- 8. Analyze the data (BRAD ing. Results will be tangible to every- Committee). j one who takes part. 9. Suggest future projects to pursue (all committees). Ancillary activities and benefits 10. Adopt projects to implement The potential spin-offs from a (Management Board/Board). sustained visitation program are no 11. Share results at annual meet- less important. Perhaps we'll offer ing and other appropriate times. management seminars or seminars (Executive Director) for executive directors. Maybe we'll 12. Increase membership via tan- venture into labor training programs gible results. (Membership and school-to-work partnerships. Committee) i Annual Report ¦ 1998-99 ¦ Page 8 Highlights Business retention efforts utilized in 1999 Making an effort to retain and recruit businesses in Dakota - County is not an entirely new effort for the Partnership. Rather, our new initiative, Dakota 2000, Partnering for the County of the Future, is intended to build on the ongoing efforts of the Business Retention and Development (BRAD) Committee. Its efforts have laid the - groundwork to ensure that this next step is successful. In 1999, the BRAD Committee;_ 1 employed three specific strategies to pursue its mission. Strategy 1: Developing and presenting workshops for local EDA professionals. Michael Sobota (left), Economic Development Director for the City of Lakeville, The workshops will improve andJudy 2scbumper (right), his counterpart from Burnsville, led a seminar on competencies and share information communications in 1999 as part of the BRAD Committee's three part strategy. for local development initiatives Similar workshops are planned in the year ahead. within Dakota County, thereby creat- ing a more "Business Friendly" envi- The workshop was well attended additional contacts will be made in ronment. and future workshops are planned the months ahead, both by the BRAD The first workshop was held on for the last quarter of 1999 and first Committee and Partnership staff September 2, 1999. The focus was quarter of 2000. on Economic Development strate- Strategy 3: Identify and present infor- gies in Burnsville and Lakeville. Strategy 2: Identify major corporations mation to the business community on Successful programs were identified for a county business retention effort. Issues of regional significance. and presented by Judy Tschumper, The BRAD Committee has identi- The committee is now working Economic Development Director fied the 22 largest industrial employ- with Executive Director Steve King to from the City of Burnsville and ers in Dakota County. develop a comprehensive business Michael Sobota, the Economic Preliminary contacts have been contact program. The contact pro- Development Director in Lakeville. made with some companies and gram will be an active, needs-based marketing effort intended to open a WEEK; EE3S: with the many gro: r • _ ated within Dakot• • 2000 on pages 6 and 7.) s ' Q 1 1VY1y lilt 000 The BRAD Committee is develop- ing a list of business contacts and a rshlp"Itiforination packet detailed strategy to market Dakota membership form.- The focus County to existing businesses. ou 1999: has, been on priThese three strategies are all rr o va c-Involvement: Four new intended to encourage expansion wY ^ 'r XRR . esscs olned our organization and development within Dakota the ast year and many more ° County. Strong participation from mmlttee sen Con are In process.. all partners has been building over e expand future The membership committee will this last year and the Committee is th ership. It more active role in the year poised for growth in activity into the e Curren .2 as soon as strategic goals and next Millenium. fee situ ; p d ores are plc'd. ho . Annual Report ¦ 1998-99 ¦ Page 9 Finances 1998-99 Financial Statement Unrestricted Funds Restricted Funds W. St. Paul Hastings Total Beginning Balance $48,853 $42,936 $35,970 $127,759 Revenues Memberships $84,516 $84,516 Public Grants $10,000 $14,500 $15,000 $39,500 Private Grants $6,815 $6,985 $12,500 $26,300 Other $984 $984 Total $102,315 $21,485 $27,500 $151,300 Expenses Salaries & Benefits $63,669 $41,044 $40,638 $145,351 Operating Expenses $48,570 $8,652 $2,143 $59,365 Total $112,239 $49,696 $42,781 $204,716 Ending Balance $38,929 $14,725 $20,689 $74,343 Annual Report ¦ 1998-99 ¦ Page 10 Volunteers Dakota County EDP Board of Directors 1998-99 Officers Arne Hendrickson, Chair Linda Lund, Vice Chair Bill Lucking, Secretary Robert Stowell, Treasurer 1998-99 Board Members Buzz Anderson, Koch Industries Inc. Jennifer Sayre, Northwest Airlines Inc. Patrice Bataglia, Board of Commissioners Andy Schriner, West Group LaDonna Boyd, Dakota Electric Association David Schroeder, Dakota County Technical College Willis Branning, Board of Commissioners Larry Severson, Severson, Sheldon, Dougherty & Don Chapdelaine, Safety-Kleen of Rosemount Molenda, PA. Charlie Crichton, City of Burnsville City Council Gerald Stelzel, Dakota County Township Assoc. Larry Crosby, People's Natural Gas Robert Stowell, U.S. Bank Helen Dahlberg, Dakota County Workforce Ronald Toppin, DCEDP Services Mark Ulfers, Dakota County HRA Robert Erickson, City of Apple Valley City Council Richard Vitelli, City of West St. Paul City Council Cheryl Frank, Inver Hills Community College Steve Wagner, Dakota Cry Employment & Training Bruce Halbasch, Kraus-Anderson Construction Joel West, City of Northfield Joseph Harris, Board of Commissioners Arne Hendrickson, Minnegasco Please note: All members of the Management Thud Hoopingarner, Dakota County Committee are shown in bold type. Additional Steve King, DCEDP members include: Bill Lucking, Progress Plus Richard Kelley, City of Apple Valley Linda Lund, CRESA Partners Michael Sobota, City of Lakeville George Macaulay, Board of Commissioners Mark Ulfers, Dakota County HRA James Mueller, Inver City Printing, Inc. Steve Wagner, Dakota County Employment & Jay Novak, Miller, Johnson & Kuehn, Inc. Training /2 Annual Report ¦ 1998-99 ¦ Page 11 Participants Dakota County EDP Membership Advanced Resources for Development Koch Industries, Inc. Airlake Development Kraus-Anderson Construction Anchor Bank Langer Construction Bisanz Brothers Development London, Anderson, Antolak & Hoeft, Ltd. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Minnesota Marquette Bank (Lakeville) City of Apple Valley Metro East Development Partnership City of Burnsville Minnegasco City of Farmington Northern Dakota County Chambers of City of Hastings Commerce City of Lakeville Northern Natural Gas Company City of Mendota Heights Northern States Power Company City of Northfield Northwest Airlines, Inc. City of West St. Paul Norwest Bank Minnesota, NA. Common Bond Communities Peoples Natural Gas CRESA Partners Progress Plus Dakota County Administration Regina Medical Center Dakota County Administration Center Rosemount National Bank Dakota County HRA Safety-Kleen of Rosemount Dakota County Technical College Severson, Sheldon, Dougherty & Molenda, PA Dakota County Township Association Signal Bank Dakota Electric Association Sprint/United Telephone First National Bank of Farmington Stahl Construction Company First National Bank Monticello/Lakeville St. Paul Metro East Development First State Bank of Rosemount Corporation Frontier Communications of Minnesota Straight River Media, Inc. Hampton Bank TCF Bank Hoyt Properties, Inc. The First National Bank of Farmington IBI, Inc. U.S. Bank Inver Hills Community College West Group For more information about the Partnership fi find out more about bow your and your organization can participate in the activities of the Partnerrsbip, please caU Steve Ring: (651) 450-2694 /3 . Dakotan. ecasr ~isxr~txrto r .C v Published by the Dakota County Economic Development Partnership 60 East Marie Avenue, Ste. 212, West St. Paul, MN 55118 Phone (651) 450-2694 Fax (651) 450-2948 E-Mail SteveKing@co.dakota.mn.us or visit our web site at wwwdcedp.org If, February 11 Management Committee Meeting 7:30 - 9:00 a.m. Apple Valley City Hall February 24 DCEDP Board Meeting 3:00 - 5:00 p.m. Room 101, West St. Paul March 23 DCEDP Economic Development Social 4:00 - 6:00 p.m. Famous Dave's, West St. Paul April 14 Management Committee Meeting 7:30 - 9:00 a.m. Apple Valley City Hall May 25 DCEDP Board Meeting 3:00 - 5:00 p.m. Location to be announced June 9 Management Committee Meeting 7:30 - 9:00 a.m. Apple Valley City Hall July 17 DCEDP Golf Event 10:00 a.m. - 6:00 p.m. Location to be announced August 11 Management Committee Meeting 7:30 - 9:00 a.m. Apple Valley City Hall September 14 DCEDP Board Meeting 3:00 - 4:00 p.m. Membership Social 4:00 - 6:00 p.m. Old Chicago, Apple Valley October 13 Management Committee Meeting 7:30 - 9:00 a.m. Apple Valley City Hall November 16 Annual Meeting 3:00 - 5:00 p.m. Location to be announced December 8 Management Committee Meeting 7:30 - 9:00 a.m. Apple Valley City Hall /.S' Agenda Information Memo January 18, 2000 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. PERSONNEL ITEMS Item 1. Maintenance Worker/Civic Arena/Cascade Bay-- ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of Nick Burt as a maintenance worker at the Civic Arena and Cascade Bay. Item 2. Seasonal Sports Program Associate-- ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of Kelly Lintz as a seasonal Sports Program Associate. Item 3. Seasonal Warming House Attendants-- ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of Kelly Hvinden, Chris Colbert, Jessica Darling and Megan Linville as seasonal warming house attendants. Item 4. Seasonal Program Leader-- ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of Michel Tubbs as a seasonal program leader. Item 5. Seasonal Preschool Program Assistant- ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of Sarah Kranz as a seasonal preschool program assistant. Item 6. Seasonal Preschool Program Assistant Substitute- ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of Cindy Yang as a seasonal preschool program assistant substitute. Agenda Information Memo January 18, 2000 Eagan City Council Meeting Item 7. Seasonal Lifeguards/Cascade Bay-- ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of Alison Wright, Katie Pastorius, Shannon Dunleavy and Susan Casey as seasonal lifeguards at Cascade Bay. Item 8. Seasonal Lifeguard Shift Leader/Cascade Bay-- ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of Kassandra Deml as a seasonal lifeguard shift leader at Cascade Bay. Item 9. Seasonal Concessions Shift Leader/Cascade Bay-- ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of Patrick Budion as a seasonal concessions shift leader at Cascade Bay. Item 10. Seasonal Guest Relations Workers/Cascade Bay-- ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of Brandon Mason and Lindsey Dulin as seasonal guest relations workers at Cascade Bay. / 7 Agenda Information Memo January 18, 2000, Eagan City Council B. FINAL PLAT (BALLANTRAE 2ND ADDITION) - AURORA INVESTMENTS. LLC ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: • To approve a Final Plat (Ballantrae 2" Addition) consisting of one lot at 3800 Ballantrae Road, south of Silver Bell Road, in the NW 1/4 of Section 20. FACTS: • Ballantrae 2n" Addition combines several existing parcels containing the Ballantrae Apartments and the complex's community building into a single lot. These parcels are being replatted into to allow for a deck addition to the community building which would not meet setbacks with the existing parcel lines. • The new plat also eliminates the existing outlot which contained the private street (Ballantrae Road) and dedicates public easements over the public utilities throughout the development. ATTACHMENT Final Plat, page +/--71-- Cti t5 cn Co g ' I N I y - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 6.~ Fil Ilil Y jj} a' - _-J - ' o r i ~s R - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - r ` ~ _'__L•L1 fle~fGa9?M'__-'___ - -'SA ~i' . -~j'~ r, ~•,.J Lxx .r R .'a ~ISil nor a I ~R I ~ 111 II' e V e-~I / Ia'~~C I^I q' is Y ` f / / / '(C•'Igi r ,ZI ; Yn trH - L•- ~ I / , I I, J s ep,r I `~.",*'r`~• ~,'rf:.`ryr I\d'i i r- rt/~ / / `4'• c.e aC rLL, `~``f(, ;;``J r`d`- O / \~\6°'` 'Fns.'. •a"rA~ B-%.ui'_y_ _ e i w r O / / F V • y4 - - -3 - 1 / - I ter I la f~ ~ `C "t I` R ; Clf cl R L-e-1------------------ e r R ~ I w I m~.. ----L-------------- I I mw I ~La et.r r,..a.. Y i I {fie ._~~IrJ., oa~_,.,-Irr.,r~ /9 Agenda Information Memo January 18, 2000 Eagan City Council Meeting C. FINAL PLAT (CARRIAGE HILLS CLUBHOUSE ADDITION) RAHN FAMILY PARTNERSHIP ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve a Final Plat (Carriage Hills Clubhouse Addition) to allow the creation of a five acre parcel of land within the Carriage Hills Country Club located south of Yankee Doodle Road and west of Wescott Woodlands in the NW 1/4 of Section 14. FACTS: ? The proposed five acre parcel of land overlays the clubhouse building for the Carriage Hills Country Club. ? The subject property is zoned P, Public Facilites. > As part of the recent improvement of Wescott Woodlands, the golf course clubhouse connected to municipal sewer and water. > The proposed subdivision is being pursued as a means of reducing connection charges associated with the recently provided municipal sewer and water service. > Because the proposed lot is not less than five acres in size, it is exempt from standard subdivision procedures and may be platted without a public hearing. ATTACHMENTS (2): Site Location map, page l Final Plat drawing, page loa c2D I Eagan Boundary Location Map Parcel Area Building Footprint v ¦ 7 U X assess, rue 0 CO. H.r. MO. ¦ (4Am= 500511 ¦L) ? V ~ ! ~ ® [IID~ Bs a l I • Sub ect site = ¦ ~t - 3 ¦ 1i~ ~¦uf ~ 1P t ~ • • * ¦ t so. d t ¦ ? r a i y ~O oa ? w f a b ° a @ d 11 t S s • f s¦ roan a? 9 Is 1000 0 1000 2000 Feet Development/Developer. Carriage Hills Clubhouse Addition Application: Final Plat Case No.: 14-FP-21-12-99 M4 ~¦psed wi!~ =NC%)iew 31. P¦oel • naP ~+Pn +¦d N byDaknhCcuMi'~'° p andfscu~arKsof lar~ayIDOQ City of Eagan THIS MAP 13 INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY E C.nwnwnny D.vN.pm.nt D.partm.nt The City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarant.e the accuracy of this Information and are not responsible for errors or omissions. S l,~fs~ a r r 41 t 111111 _ ~ i_ ~ z ~Ii°'l hI ~Y t I ~ 1111 a1. CD J1 H.-In ~s F~31iG~, 1 ~ L i~y ~~1 s• ~1 R ~a c n a~d~ I d~i~ - r tal i *s w m G ZV g r-,J 1• 1 _ _ I - 1t 1~ ; t• iiw~~i s * , 1 1 ~ YjAlt? ttT/1 1 ~ _ T ~ l\ E E 'Y : . 1 • I7.; Sid fn t; 1'. CD % . 11.OC.ZZ.0011- G='Gti is. i O.OG.U.Oml 06110 ~ ,IOI~Ytyt'~ I FT- 1AM tYl a an !i ~ t Jv Y ICJ /Y~.-. 1~1I~J tr ?J y, - L1 Agenda Information Memo January 18, 2000 Eagan City Council Meeting D. ADDITION TO 2000 FEE SCHEDULE ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve an addition to the 2000 Fee Schedule. FACTS: • On December 6, 1999 the City Council approved the City's comprehensive fee schedule for the year 2000. • The Public Works Department is in the process of implementing radio reads for water meters in commercial and industrial accounts. • The radio read program requires the purchase of additional equipment when the meter is acquired. This fee schedule addition makes that purchase the obligation of the user on new accounts. ATTACHMENTS: • Enclosed on page is a copy of the memo outlining implementation of the radio read transmitters for commercial and industrial accounts. 03 MEMO city-of eagan TO: TOM PEPPER, ASSISTANT FINANCE DIRECTOR DALE SCHOEPPNER, ASSISTANT BUILDING OFFICIAL FROM: WAYNE SCHWANZ, SUPERINTENENT OF UTILITIES DATE: JANUARY 3, 2000 SUBJECT: RADIO RE-TRANSMITTERS FOR COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL ACCOUNTS Starting in the year 2000, the Utility Division will be in an upgrade program with all its commercial and industrial accounts. The goal of this program is to place a Radio Read Transmitter at each site for the purpose to read meters using radio telemetry. The Utility Division is planning to upgrade all meters by the year end 2001. The cost of upgrading existing accounts will be the sole responsibility of the Utility Division. Starting on January 3, 2000 any domestic water meters which are sold for industrial or commercial purposes should also have included in the charges $159.00 which is the cost of a Radio Read Transmitter. One Radio Read Transmitter is required for each domestic meter and for all boulevard sprinkler meters. The transmitter will not be .installed by the plumber, rather after the building is complete and the final water-on has been executed, the transmitter will be installed by a Utility employee. - Any accounts which may have more than one domestic meter or a meter system which seems to be outside of normal, questions should be referred to Paul Heuer at Extension #327. I would appreciate it if you would share this information with the people within your divisions which are currently engaged in selling water meters to the plumbers for commercial and/or industrial application. If you have any questions please call me at Ext. #316. Wayne Schwanz Supt. of Utilities WS/nab cc: Doug Reid, Chief Building Official Tom Colbert, Director of Public Works I:\44b\pepper 003 Agenda Information Memo January 18, 2000 Eagan City Council Meeting E. CONFIRMATION OF FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS & RESOLUTION OF DENIAL, NEW EARTH SERVICES, INC. COMMERCIAL/MULTI-FAMILY AND RESIDENTIAL TRASH HAULER LICENSE ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To confirm the Findings of Fact, Conclusions & Resolution of Denial of the commercial/multi-family and residential trash hauler licenses for New Earth Services, Inc. FACTS: • New Earth Services, Inc. applied for a residential waste-hauling license on November 2, 1999. The request was continued in order to research the status of New Earth Services, Inc.'s compliance with City and County ordinances. Staff found that one of the two trucks New Earth Services, Inc. was requesting licensing for did not meet City Code standards, since it would not prevent the loss of liquid or solid cargo in transit. • A public hearing was held on January 4, 2000 to review the residential waste-hauling license application and also to consider the renewal of New Earth's commercial waste- hauling license. • Since one of the applicant's vehicles did not meet City Code requirements, the Council ordered the preparation of findings of fact in support of denial of the license application. ATTACHMENTS: • Findings of Fact, Conclusions & Resolution of Denial on pages through SENT BY: 1-13- 0 ; 15:06 ; SEVERSON SHELDON 6516814612;# 2/ 3 Erman City Council In Re, Application of New Earth Services, Inc. FINDINGS OF FACT, for renewal of a commercial/multi-family CONCLUSION AND waste-hauling license and for a request for a RESOLUTION OF DENIAL residential waste-hauling license. The above-entitled matters came on before the Eagan City Council at its regularly scheduled meeting on January 4, 2000 for a public hearing. The applicant, New Earth Services, Inc. requested renewal or a commercial/multi-family waste hauling license and requested a new residential waste-hauling license for the calendar year 2000. The City Council noted that the matter had been properly published in the City's official ncwspapcr and that the applicant had received notice by mail of the hearing. The applicant did not appear, however, the audience members spoke and the City's Recycling Coordinator, Joanna Foote, appeared to answer questions regarding the staffs report. THE CITY COUNCIL HAVING CONSIDERED THE STAFF REPORT, THE INFORMATION PRESENTED AT THE HEARING, THE INPUT OF RESIDENTS, AND THE COUNCH., COMMENTS, HEREBY MAKES THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT: 1. Eagan's City Code, Section 6.11 reserves to the Council the right to deny an application for any business license under Chapter 6 which involves use of public streets or other public property or which involves public health, safety or convenience. That ordinance also requires that the Council hold a public hearing on the issue. 2. Eagan City Code Section 6 requires residential dwelling haulers to also haul recyclables. This ordinance requires commercial/multiple dwelling haulers also to haul recyclables. 3. Chapter 6 of the Eagan City Code also provides that hauler licenses shall be granted only to a licensee which has water tight packer-type vehicles, and in the case of recycling, appropriate container vehicles conditioned to prevent loss in transit of liquid or solid cargo. 4. Upon review of the application and viewing of the vehicles, the applicant has one standard packer-type vehicle used for garbage pick-up. The other vehicle is a flat bed truck with metal fencing enclosure which does not meet the ordinance requirements in that it would allow liquid and/or solid cargo loss. 5. Loss of liquid or solid cargo could pose a hazard on City streets, and may also constitute a nuisance. a6 6124323780 CITY OF EAGAN ,TEL=6516814612 01/13100 16:04 SENT BY: 1-13- 0 ; 15:07 ; SEVERSON SHELDON- 6516814612;# 3/ 3 WHERFFORF, the City Council of the City of Eagan hereby makes the following conclusions: CONCLUSIONS 1. That this matter is properly before the City Council; 2. That the vehicle used for recycling collection and hauling by the applicant does not meet the City's requirement for water tight packer-type vehicles which would prevent the loss in transit of liquid or solid cargo; 3. The applicant does not meet the requirements of the City's Code with respect to commercial/multi-family waste hauler licensing or residential waste hauling licensing. RESOLUTION NOW THEREFORE, The City of Eagan, does hereby resolve that the applications of New Earth Services, Inc_ for a commerciaUmulti-family waste hauling license and a residential waste hauling license are hereby denied. Dated this 18`x' day of January, 2000_ Attest: City of Eagan Ry: E. J. VanOverbeke I3y: Patricia E. Awada Its. City Clerk Its: Mayor c~ 7 6124323780 CITY OF EAGAN ,TEL=6516814612 01/13100 16:04 Agenda Information Memo January 18, 2000 Eagan City Council Meeting F. OFF-SALE LIQUOR LICENSE FOR HASKELLS, INC. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve an off-sale liquor license for Haskells, Inc. located at 2260 Cliff Road. FACTS: • The liquor license application for Haskells, Inc. lists John Farrell, Jr. as President and Daniel Manning as Vice President. • The applicant plans on building an off-sale liquor store at 2260 Cliff Road. • They have submitted the required documents, which have been reviewed and deemed in order by City staff. • The police have conducted an investigation and do not find any reason to deny the applicant the off-sale license. ATTACHMENTS: • Application enclosed without page number. Agenda Information Memo January 18, 2000 Eagan City Council Meeting G. PROJECT 680, CLIFF ROAD STREETS & UTILITIES ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Receive the draft Feasibility Report for Project 680 (Cliff Road - Streets & Utilities) and schedule a public hearing to be held on February 15, 2000. FACTS: • On December 20, 1994 the City Council originally authorized the preparation of a feasibility report for the upgrade of Cliff Road (Dakota County Road 32) from Ches Mar Drive to Lexington Avenue. • On May 7, 1996, a public hearing was held before the Eagan City Council to consider the upgrade of Cliff Road. The City Council denied the project and requested that Dakota County schedule the upgrade on a future Capital Improvement Program. • Dakota County re-scheduled the upgrade of Cliff Road for program year 2000. This improvement project was also re-scheduled in the City of Eagan's most recent 5-Year Capital Improvement Program (2000-2004) for 2000. • A draft of the updated Feasibility Report has now 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 project. • The City of Eagan and Dakota County will host an open house on January 27, 2000 to review and discuss the proposed improvements. ATTACHMENTS: • Draft Feasibility Report is enclosed without page number. aI Agenda Information Memo January 18, 2000 H. 2000 STREET MAINTENANCE JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve the 2000 Joint Powers Agreement for street maintenance and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. FACTS: • For the past 15 years (1985), the City of Eagan had participated in a Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) with the cities of Burnsville, Apple Valley, Lakeville, Rosemount, Savage, Prior Lake and Shakopee to solicit competitive prices for pavement traffic marking, street sweeping, crack sealing and sealcoating. • This consolidation of administrative services and economy of scale competitive bidding has resulting in significant savings to the City of Eagan and resulted in a Certificate of Commendation from the Governor in 1995. • A similar JPA is now being presented to the City Council for their consideration of approval for 2000. It has been reviewed by the Superintendent of Streets/Equipment and found to be in order for favorable consideration. 30 Agenda Information Memo January 18, 2000 Eagan City Council Meeting I. REQUEST MUNICIPAL STATE AID ROUTE REVISIONS/ DESIGNATIONS ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve resolutions requesting the Commissioner of Transportation's approval of the deletion of Wescott Hills Drive (Wescott Road Yankee Doodle Road) from the Municipal State Aid (MSA) system and the addition of MSA street designation for Duckwood Drive (Denmark Avenue to Lexington Avenue). FACTS: • The MSA designation of a street enables the maintenance of the street to be financed by the City's portion of the gas tax money distributed by the state. • With the southern portion of Wescott Hills Drive no longer planned to be connected to the northern portion (now Wescott Woodlands), it is necessary to remove the MSA designation on that entire segment of Wescott Hills Drive/Wescott Woodlands (1.11 miles) because it will no longer meet eligibility requirements. • With this deletion of this MSA mileage, other appropriate streets within the City can be designated as MSA streets to ensure the City continues to receive its portion of the gas tax appropriation. • The existing section of Duckwood Drive from Denmark Avenue to Lexington Avenue (0.62 miles) meets the criteria of an MSA street in terms of location, function and construction. The remainder of Duckwood Drive (I-35E to Denmark Avenue) is designated as an MSA street. The remaining mileage can be banked by the city for designation on another segment. 21 Agenda Information Memo January 18, 2000 Eagan City Council Meeting J. PROJECT 768, NORTHWOOD DRIVE - RING ROAD OVERPASS ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Authorize the preparation of a preliminary engineering and funding application report for Project 768 (Northwood Drive - Ring Road Overpass). FACTS: • In 1999, the Council authorized the negotiated acquisition of right-of-way for the extension of Northwood Dr. over 35E from Denmark Ave. to Pilot Knob Rd. The City has been actively pursuing a land swap between MnDOT and the Glen Pond Apt. property owner. • There has been some interest expressed to schedule this public improvement in the 5 year CIP for 2001. The majority of the required financing will have to be through local funds. If the Council is interested in pursuing some outside funding, it would be beneficial to have a preliminary engineering and funding application report prepared to facilitate an application process including possible Federal Funding similar to Hwy 13. ISSUES: • The potential to obtain Federal or Region funding is very limited due to the local benefit and service of this roadway segment. But if no applications are prepared or submitted, the full financing responsibility will become the City's alone. 32 Agenda Information Memo January 18, 2000 Eagan City Council Meeting K. RENEWAL OF SENTENCE TO SERVICE WORK CONTRACT WITH DAKOTA COUNTY ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the renewal of a one-year contract with Dakota County for the provision of Sentence to Service work crews and authorization for the Mayor and Clerk to execute the agreement. FACTS: • The County will provide a work crew consisting of up to ten non-dangerous criminal offenders plus a supervisor. • The City will receive a minimum of 50 crew days during 2000. Additional days may be scheduled. • The City will schedule projects requiring unskilled labor in advance with the crew supervisor. Projects in 2000 will include landscaping, turf and rink renovations, park and pond cleanup, bridge sweeping. • The County provides supervision, transportation and insurance for all members of the crew and assumes all liability. • The City has successfully utilized the services of the Sentence to Service program for approximately 10 years. • The estimate 2000 cost of $9,500 due the County for the service is included in the approved Parks and Recreation Departmental budget. I:\45b\sentence to serve 012 33 Agenda Information Memo January 18, 2000 Eagan City Council Meeting L. LICENSE RENEWALS FOR THE YEAR 2000, PET SHOP & TREE CONTRACTOR ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the pet shop and tree contractor license renewals for the year 2000. FACTS: • The City annually licenses parties doing business in the above-referenced categories. These licenses are in order for review by the Council at this time. ATTACHMENTS: • List of licensees requesting renewal.-f-3-!r 3Y PET SHOP LICENSE RENEWALS Petco Animal Supplies Wal-Mart #1786 1296 Town Centre Drive 1360 Town Centre Drive Eagan, MN Eagan, MN 2000 TREE CONTRACTOR LICENSE RENEWALS Rainbow Tree Company Ciardelli Tree & Landscaping 2239 Edgewood Avenue S. 1200 Duckwood Trail Minneapolis, MN Eagan, MN 350- Agenda Information Memo January 18, 2000 Eagan City Council Meeting M. RESIDENTIAL TRASH HAULER LICENSES FOR TENNIS SANITATION NITTI SANITATION AND SUPERIOR SERVICES AND CONSTRUCTION/DEMO HAULER LICENSES FOR WASTE TECH AND HAUGEN'S HAULERS ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve residential trash hauler licenses for Tennis Sanitation, Nitti Sanitation and Superior Services and construction/demo hauler licenses for Waste Tech and Haugen's Haulers. FACTS: • City Code requires that all firms providing residential and construction/demolition debris roll-off services be licensed on an annual basis. • Tennis Sanitation, Nitti Sanitation and Superior Services have applied for residential hauler licenses. Approval of these licenses is based on the assumption that there will be an affirmative action regarding Item E of the Consent Agenda, Confirmation of Findings of Fact, Conclusions & Resolution of Denial, New Earth Services- commercial/multi-family and residential trash hauler licenses. If New Earth Service's license application is denied by the adoption of the findings of fact, there are three remaining residential hauling licenses available, which are being requested by the above mentioned companies. • Waste Tech and Haugen's Haulers have applied for construction/demo licenses. • The applications have been reviewed by staff and are in order for approval by the Council. ATTACHMENTS: • Applications enclosed without page number. 3" Agenda Information Memo January 18, 2000 Eagan City Council Meeting PUBLIC HEARINGS A. ADOPT RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN. CITY WATER TREATMENT FACILITIES This item was inadvertently scheduled for this agenda. The actual public hearing has been published for February 1. 37 Agenda Information Memo January 18, 2000 Eagan City Council Meeting B. COMMUNITY ACTIVITY CENTER ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: • To provide direction to the Task Force and staff regarding the on-going process for gathering information related to the construction of a Community Activity Center. FACTS: • At the November 16, 1999 City Council meeting the report from the Community Facilities Land Acquisition Task Force was accepted. Direction was provided by the City Council to purchase a minimum of a 45 acre site, to continue to pursue the public/private partnerships, continue negotiations to acquire the property using eminent domain, if necessary, and to explore all possible funding options. • At the December 6, 1999 City Council meeting a request by the EAA to give consideration for a Community Activity Center was presented. The City Council directed staff to prepare information for schematics, infrastructure, actual location and cost estimates for a proposed community activity center, to schedule a mobile workshop to tour metro community centers that includes the task force and City Council within two weeks, to schedule task force meetings during December to construct a "wants and needs" list of the community center and present findings at the January 4, 2000 City Council meeting and to welcome the expansion of the task force by including teen representatives, residents for recreation representatives and representatives from the EAA basketball programs. • At the January 4, 2000 City Council meeting the report of the Community Activity Center Task Force was presented. After accepting the report, the City Council scheduled a public hearing for January 18, 2000 to take citizen input and to discuss the process and action required for a bond referendum for the Community Center and Central Park development. Staff was also directed to compile costs for the Eagan Community Center including various elements. ATTACHMENTS: • Enclosed on pages _90_ through is a copy of a memo prepared by the Directors of Public Works, Parks and Recreation and Finance at the direction of the City Administrator projecting costs and outlining timelines for the construction of a Community Activity Center. 3 • Enclosed on page _ is a copy of a memo prepared by Communications/Recycling Coordinator Foote covering communication issues related to a referendum. • Enclosed on page 7 is a copy of a letter from Eagan resident Robert Barbour that he has sent to the newspaper for publication commenting on recent City Council deliberations. MEMO city of eagan TO: City Administrator Hedges FROM: Finance Director/City Clerk VanOverbeke Director of Parks and Recreation Vraa Director of Public Works Colbert DATE: January 14, 2000 SUBJECT: Community Activity Center Cost Projections, Bond Referendum Questions and Timelines and Request For Direction At your request we are developing this material and providing the information to you in one consolidated memo. We are providing the best possible answers that we can put together for each of the questions, however it must be noted that each conclusion is based on very specific assumptions. Any change to those assumptions will probably generate a different set of answers; consequently caution should be used as the material is reviewed. For example, building location could have a significant impact on final utility costs and items such as building finishes and atrium spaces will have a significant impact on total building costs. Therefore, this memo should be looked at as providing only a basic frame of reference for discussion and for additional research. It should not be viewed as providing definitive cost estimates. Infrastructure Cost Projections The development and construction of a potential Central Park Community Activity Center would require the installation of the following public infrastructure facilities to service the property. Total estimated cost: $ 1,821,000 Note: All costs reflect an estimated 20% for design and construction related engineering services. Also, only the parkland's anticipated share is reported. Public Street Access (Ring Road - Northwest quadrant) $ 550,000 Proposed as a 2-lane divided roadway with an 18 ft. landscaped center median and 10 ft. bituminous trails on both sides separated by a landscaped 12 ft wide boulevard. • Park land street frontage is approximately 1700 feet (29% of total). • Anticipates a respectable amount of grading but no significant soil correction. Pedestrian Underpass $ 240,000 A 220 ft long, 12 ft. wide and 10 ft. high concrete box culvert underpass with retaining walls, interior lighting and required fencing. 4O Landscaping $ 40,000 Trees to be located in median and boulevard similar to Civic Center Drive Street and Trailway Lighting $ 165,000 Continuous lighting on 30 ft. poles for street and 15 ft. poles for trailway. Right of Way $ 500,000 Right of way and temporary easement acquisition required from land not provided for through plat dedication. Sanitary sewer $ 18,000 Estimated 270 ft of service main to within 10 feet of building. Due to invert elevation limitations of trunk sewer, may only be able to serve first floor of building with gravity flow. Lower level will require an ejector pump (part of building plumbing cost). Water Main and service $ 185,000 Provides for 2,200 ft. of a 10 inch main looped through the site as necessary for water service and fire protection. Storm Drainage $ 123,000 Provides for drainage of parking lot west to Pond CP-3. The Outlet (Lift Station and Forcemain) for CP-4 in the center of the site will be financed in full by the Trunk Storm Sewer fund. (est. $ 300,000) Proposed Community Center: Potential Costs Staff has looked at recently constructed facilities in the metropolitan area as well as facilities constructed in other regions of the country that profile the elements proposed as part of the Eagan facility. Staff has also prevailed upon the willingness of former contractors and the Construction Manager for Cascade Bay to provide their perspectives on the construction industry and cost trends. For this projection, staff has taken the gross square foot method to determine a projection. This method encompasses estimating the number of square feet for the facility and multiplying it by an average square foot cost for projects of similar size and scope. An attempt has been made to further refine this estimate by defining square foot cost by area within the proposed structure. For example, the square foot cost for locker rooms and the kitchen is much higher then the square foot cost of office areas and storage areas. Because of insufficient design information at this early stage, this method could not be completed in its entirety. Assumptions as to cost for the Eagan facility include the following. Site development, to include such items as rough grading, parking lot, and access to utilities are not part of the building construction costs, but are considered as part of the site development package. Design fees and Construction Management fees have been included along with an allowance for equipment. Soil conditions are assumed acceptable for building construction. 41( Various cost assumption scenarios are presented to help frame the cost potential for this facility. The scenarios reflected begin with a 65,000 square foot design at a cost of $115 per square foot and end with a high side design scenario represented by an 80,000 square foot facility at $135 per square foot. 65,000 square feet @ $115 = $7,475,000 65,000 square feet @ $135 = $8,775,000 70,000 square feet @ $115 = $8,050,000 70,000 square feet @ $135 = $9,450,000 80,000 square feet @ $115 = $9,200,000 80,000 square feet @ $135 = $10,800,000 In an effort to determine the potential size of a future building staff has projected the previously identified components (as outlined by the City Council on January 4, 2000) and assigned the following approximation as to size. Component Net Square Feet Banquet Room 5,800 (Maplewood) Banquet Room Kitchen 1,400-1,600 Gym 10,000-10,200 (Four Courts) Walking/running track 600 Exercise/Fitness 5,300-5,600 Enclosed Play equipment 4,400-4,800 Dedicated for Seniors 1,400-1,600 Dedicated for teens 1,800-2,000 Meeting Rooms / Program Space for Seniors 3,400-3,800 Locker Rooms 4,800-5,200 EAA/Historical office 450 Concessions 1,800-2,000 Storage (EAA) 4,000 Storage (Historical) 400 Pre-school / Child care 1,200-1,400 Offices/Administration 4,600-4,800 Entrance / Lobby 1,750-2,150 Net Total* 53,100-56,400 Gross Total* 66,375-70,500 *Net Total only provides for the actual room requirements. It is a generally accepted practice to add 25% to the net to allow for hallways, janitorial spaces, public restrooms, mechanical areas and the like. Its unlikely that, given the general sense of direction and expectations exhibited on the recent bus tour and by the Task Force that a facility at the smallest size and at the smallest square foot cost will be acceptable. Further, contractors and owners alike are indicating that there are few contractors bidding projects and owners are paying a "premium price" because of the abundance of construction projects. Depending on the final design program, the 80,000 square foot assumption may be larger than necessary . Staff believes that it would be more prudent to look towards a facility encompassing about 70,000 sq. feet and at a cost between $115 and $135 per square foot, generating a total projected cost of approximately $8,750,000. Site Development Costs Site development assumes that soils are suitable for the construction of a building pad for a future building and that utilities are in near approximation to be brought into the building. In addition to grading, site development would include re-seeding of disturbed soils, trails for pedestrian access, primary electrical service, trail lighting, parking lot, development of a building pad for future construction for a band shell or for a portable stage. Funds have not been designated for construction of the amphitheater stage. An allowance for landscaping has been provided along with entrance signage. Detailed design and engineering services have been included. Once again, a range of potential cost has been provided. Component Lump Sum Projection Parking/Access Dr. $450,000-$500,000 Clearing/Grading $175,000-$200,000 Pond Modifications $50,000-80,000 Trails/Hard surface $125,000 Building Utilities $50,000 Turf/Landscaping $65,000-85,000 Primary Electrical/ Lights (site security) $100,000-$125,000 Entrance signage $25,000 Exterior Plaza $35,000 Site Development $1,075,000 - $1,225,000* *There is a potential cost implication associated with the need to lower the gas main and relocating a portion of the sanitary sewer line that is in the 100-foot wide easement. This has not been included as a cost pending an understanding of building design and layout beyond what is currently known. 413 The potential cost for the building at $8,750,000 and site development costs at $1,225,000 totals $9,975,000. A contingency of $500,000, representing half of the usual contingency at this phase, brings the projected cost to approximately $10,475,000. Total costs based on the assumptions included in this memo excluding the land acquisition are as follows: Infrastructure $1,821,000 Building 9,250,000 Site Development 1,225,000 Total $12,296,000 Bond Referendum Questions The basic administrative issues and time line related to a referendum are first, the 49-day requirement for notification of the County Auditor before a special election can be held. And second, setting the election date also requires adoption of the referendum ballot question wording, including the dollar amount. All other administrative election requirements can be met after the election date has been set. Those other requirements include the availability of absentee ballots, posting and publication requirements, election judge appointment and training and a number of similar activities. Eagan will probably be between election systems, having traded in the old machines and awaiting the arrival of the new equipment scheduled to be in place before the primary election on September 12, 2000. A referendum with only one question would probably utilize paper ballots, so the unavailability of the electronic equipment should not be an issue. Communications The communications process required to effectively educate and inform the public about the issues related to a referendum is covered in the enclosed memo written by Communications/Recycling Coordinator Foote. Financing Issues There are basically three components related to the financing of this undertaking. The first component relates to the purchase of the land. While the City Council has not taken formal action on this question, staff work has been proceeding under the assumption that available cash balances from the Community Investment Fund (CIF) and the Park Site Acquisition and Development Fund (PSAD) would be used first and then additional debt financing would be obtained through some sort of lease purchase arrangement. Discussions are underway with the Dakota County HRA as a potential agent for the sale of bonds. To be feasible the transactions must result in tax-exempt bonds and the debt service tax levy requirements must be outside of the City's levy limit. In the event that the Dakota County HRA is not able to participate in the transaction it is possible that the City could create an Economic Development Authority to allow for the sale of this type of bonds. There are some issues requiring a legal interpretation, 45' however. We expect to receive a response from the Dakota County HRA in the near future concerning their participation in this financing. This transaction is basically a general obligation bond without an election and results in slightly higher interest rates. The second financing component relates to the construction of the facility and improvements to the site. Again, the City Council has taken no formal action, although a referendum and 100% bond financing seems to be receiving the most consideration. Assuming a successful referendum, debt service payments would be made from tax levies not subject to the City's levy limit. There is certainly some concern about the second component being undertaken before the first is completed and what citizen reaction might be to that process. The third financing component relates to the operating costs of a completed facility. The extent to which this type of facility can be self-supporting has not been determined. The components actually constructed, the City Council's pricing policies and citizen utilization will ultimately determine the final operating results and required operating subsidy, break-even potential or positive income. Given the undefined nature of the issues, no work has been done on trying to complete a pro-forma and project operating results. However, this could become an important question in any referendum process. City Council Direction at the close of the Public Hearing At the direction of the City Council at the meeting on January 4, 2000 the Task Force that worked first on the land acquisition issue and than preliminarily on the Community Activity Center will be reconvened. A meeting has been noticed for January 25`h. It would be helpful if the City Council were to delineate their expectations for the Task Force regarding their process and expected outcome. Perhaps the following items could form the basis of a work plan for the Task Force: • Seek additional community input to determine the appropriate elements to be included in a Community Center and prepare a final recommendation for the City Council. • Explore any public/private partnerships that would be beneficial to the success of this project. • Explore phasing options. • Recommend an election date for a referendum to provide financing for the project. To effectively complete this work plan, staff is also recommending that authorization be provided by the City Council to hire a consultant to provide the professional expertise necess to prepare a site plan to assist t Task rce. ,W 40 Director of Public Works Director of Parks & Rec ector of Finance 4'c x^, MEMO city of eagan TO: TOM HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: JOANNA FOOTE, COMMUNICATIONS/RECYCLING COORDINATOR DATE: JANUARY 7, 2000 SUBJECT: TIMING REQUIREMENTS FOR SPECIAL CITY NEWSLETTER AND RELATED REFERENDUM COMMUNICATIONS As we have discussed, the City Council may soon be proposing that a bond referendum be held regarding the funding for a community center. Historically, when a referendum has been held, there is a certain amount of communication, which has been generated by City staff. I hoped it would be helpful to provide information regarding the amount of time required by staff to produce a special newsletter and other communications vehicles which will likely be requested to assist in notifying and educating the public about the facts, parameters and effects of a referendum. This information may then be considered as decisions are made regarding the timing of a referendum. A special newsletter generally takes approximately three to four weeks in information preparation, design and layout. This includes developing a consistent message to be used in all publications and correspondence, locating and creating any necessary graphics, formulating information, internal review and editing. It generally requires at least one to two more weeks for the City Attorneys to review and make comments and changes to be coordinated. At this point, the file is sent to the printer. Image output, print and binding takes one to two weeks, bundling and delivery to the Post Office requires two to four days and the Post Office requires ten business days for delivery of a bulk mail piece to all households. The general rule of thumb is to allow at least three to four weeks for the community to assimilate this information, seek clarification and to dialogue with other residents. The total recommended timeframe for this process would therefore be approximately eleven weeks. Other information can be generated and distributed to the public throughout this same time period including press releases and guest columns in local and regional newspapers, flyers, website information, cable crawl information and basic public service announcements on cable channel 16. Also recommended would be community informational meetings and an expanded cable informational segment (for Community Journal) or an independent program(s) on this topic. These pieces would require approximately six weeks lead-time to produce and at least three to four weeks of airing to be effective. Hopefully this information will be of assistance as the decisions are made regarding a proposed bond referendum. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you require additional information. Con1 iunications/Recycling Coordinator i 'I i ROBERT E. BARBOUR 1461 RICHARDS COURT EAGAN, MN 55122-2764 651-454-0197 January 5, 2000 Editor, Eagan This Week 1525 E Highway 13 Burnsville, MN 55337 To The Editor: My interest in the public hearing on a trash hauling issue prompted me to attend the January 4 meeting of the Eagan City Council but the report from the Community Activity Center Task Force proved a more revealing exposure of how our city government really works. The task force chair presented a thoughtful recap of the issue which illustrated a significant effort to identify the several areas of the community which will benefit from the proposed center. The suggested incremental approach to the project and ongoing identification and accommodation of future needs seemed most thoughtful. This presentation was followed by a representative of the EAA (Eagan Athletic Association) who proceeded to address only the athletic facilities of the project and seemed to threaten an EAA boycott of the entire project unless EAA was guaranteed control of a significant portion of the athletic facility in any planned community center. EAA seems to demand a slice of the pork before the pig is farrowed. Councilperson Masin challenged this demand as premature. There was no presentation by any of several other groups which could benefit from facilities other than athletic in a community center. Was this lack of participation by other than the EAA planned or accidental? I have the uneasy feeling that this community center project is driven by and primarily for the benefit of the EAA and others who will benefit from the athletic facilities of the center. The presentation mentioned several gymnasiums! A rush to a bond issue referendum to support the community center project was the primary concern of the mayor and council majority. Again we witness a "Pig in a poke" issue similar to a past parks referendum. The mayor and council are again asking for a blank check from the citizens without sufficient exposure of the true agenda, which could be merely a grandiose complex of several gymnasiums. Mayor Awada commented that a bond issue referendum authorizing several million dollars for the project may be in excess of the actual expenditures for the project and that the council would spend only the amount needed. How naive of our mayor to suggest that any governing body can resist spending all the money available. It appears that a public hearing to further explore the needs and desires of groups other than the EAA will not be held and we will be required to vote on a referendum to fund a project which may benefit a few and be funded by all. A clear need at this time is to proceed with land acquisition and negotiations with neighbors of the proposed site. Suitable sites are few and fast disappearing, land is becoming more expensive by the day. Councilperson Bakken proposed a preliminary non-binding outline of project features for presentation of the referendum which could suggest much and guarantee nothing. I wholeheartedly support this community center project and endorse the need for indoor athletic facilities. I also urge the city fathers to address the diverse needs of the community rather than make it a just a temple for jocks. Perhaps they could find a way to have an initial bond referendum fund only the site acquisition and a detailed meaningful preliminary architectural study and proposal which could then be subject for review and modification after publication of the study and public hearings. Sincerely, Robert Barbour C'C:-Eagan Mayor and Councilpersons , 97 Agenda Information Memo January 18, 2000 Eagan City Council Meeting C. VARIANCE (SIDE YARD SETBACK - 3877 BIG TIMBER TRAIL) RAY BRANDT ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve a 3 foot Variance to the 30 foot side yard setback requirement (from a public street) for Lot 8, Block 2, Gardenwood Ponds 4th Addition located in the NE t/4 of Section 23. FACTS: ? On November 1, 1999, the City Council considered a variance for the subject property. Specifically, the applicant requested an 8 foot variance from the 30 foot setback from Northview Park Road. The City Council concluded that sufficient hardship had not been demonstrated and denied the variance request. The Council did however, suggest that the applicant consider minimizing the variance by turning the home on the property such that only a 3 foot variance (27 foot setback from Northview Park Road) would be required. ? The vacant lot is zoned R- 1, Single Family Residential. The minimum setback from a public street is 30 feet in the R-1 district. ? The applicant is requesting a variance of 3 feet to the required 30 foot setback from Northview Park Road. ATTACHMENTS (1) Staff report, pages ijthrough • Enclosed on page _ is a copy of a memo prepared by Communications/Recycling Coordinator Foote covering communication issues related to a referendum. • Enclosed on page 7 is a copy of a letter from Eagan resident Robert Barbour that he has sent to the newspaper for publication commenting on recent City Council deliberations. PLANNING REPORT CITY OF EAGAN REPORT DATE: December 29, 1999 CASE: 23-VA-21-12-99 APPLICANT: Ray Brandt HEARING DATE: January 18, 2000 PROPERTY OWNER: Neil Hansen PREPARED BY: Bob Kirmis REQUEST: Variance (frontyard setback) LOCATION: 3877 Big Timber Trail COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: D-I, Single Family/(0-3 units/acre) ZONING: R-1, Residential Single Family SUMMARY OF REQUEST Mr. Ray Brandt is requesting approval of a 3 foot Variance to the 30 foot setback requirement (from a public street) for a single family residential property located at 3877 Big Timber Trail (Lot 8, Block 2, Gardenwood Ponds 4"' Addition). Specifically, Mr. Brandt is proposing to construct a new home that would lie 27 feet from the right-of-way of Northview Park Road. The subject property is zoned R-1, Single Family Residential. AUTHORITY FOR REVIEW City Code Chapter 11, Section 11.40, Subdivision 3C states that the Council may grant a variance and impose conditions and safeguards therein if: 1. The Council shall determine that the special conditions applying to the structures or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property and do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located, and that the granting of the application is necessary for the applicant. 2. The granting of the proposed variance will not be contrary to the intent of this Chapter and the Comprehensive Guide Plan. 3. That granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty. Planning Report - Brandt Variance (3877 Big Timber Trail) January 18, 2000 Page 2 CODE REQUIREMENTS The R- 1, Residential Single Family zoning district imposes a minimum setback requirement of 30 feet along any public street. BACKGROUND On November 1, 1999, the City Council considered a variance for the subject property. Specifically, the applicant requested an 8 foot variance from the 30 foot setback from Northview Park Road. The City Council concluded that sufficient hardship had not been demonstrated and denied the variance request. The Council did however, suggest that the applicant consider minimizing the variance by turning the home on the property such that only a 3 foot variance (27 foot setback from Northview Park Road) would be required. EXISTING CONDITIONS Gardenwood Ponds 4th Addition received Final Subdivision approval in April of 1999. The subject property is an undeveloped corner lot and measures approximately 21,000 square feet in size and 100 feet in width (at the front setback). The site is bounded on the north, east and west by single family detached homes and on the south by Eagan High School. APPLICANT'S ESTIMATE OF HARDSHIP According to the applicant, the hardship for the requested variance is based on the following factors as summarized below: ? The home size (2,535 square feet) is consistent with other home sizes in the area. A smaller home (which meets setback requirements) would be out of character. ? The curved alignment of Northview Park Road will make the proposed setback unnoticeable. > The buyers prefer this particular house design on the property. S 0-- Planning Report - Brandt Variance (3877 Big Timber Trail) January 18, 2000 Page 3 EVALUATION OF REQUEST The applicant is proposing to construct a 2,535 square foot home on the subject lot. The home would lie 27 feet from the Northview Park Road right-of-way. The proposed home measures 70 feet in width and includes a three-stall garage. The subject lot is currently vacant and there does not appear to be any unique physical features on-site that would prohibit an alternative design that would meet setback requirements. The hardship determination is considered a policy matter for City Officials. SUMMARY/CONCLUSION The applicant is requesting a 3 foot variance from the 30 foot public street setback applicable to the subject property. The subject lot is currently vacant and there does not appear to be any unique physical features on-site that would prohibit an alternative design that would meet setback requirements. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED To approve an 3 foot Variance from the required 30 foot setback applied to Lot 8, Block 2, Gardenwood Ponds 4' Addition. Ragan Boundary Area Location Map tAr a ®Building Footprint a a s r 410 V 7 ` rR If y * ~ , ~ M t? a tr • • tr s -11, 1k a ? ar R J r f•w • • a t r r !L OK Is IF ¦a a R h s'~ t w + r e a ~ r~ i w w + a eaaati a ~ • •w ~ + r ° M • • i I + * +a ! • + i • ! sa ? 1 r• •t htE -tea as t•t t s te• } `a• • I-ILI fa • a a ° + Sub ect Site r r • ! p a6 s+~ +e 1 • 4 q 1 a 7 t •1 tra as • as a a?• + a t ai i' e s fa+~ t 41 1 awe +.w~~ R 1 t ? re ?w ova , • ? ~ 1 f a*i i, la ? • e i AT + a s a a ~ +t ~ •'~wr t O ~ a ¦ a ? D •r a • 7 • to ? • 1 G y ` a a l t t o ° w 1 an :A~ It 4 1000 0 1000 2000 Feet Development/Developer. Ray Brandt Application: Variance Case No.: 23-VA-21-12-99 Mep Rapred uWrg tats Anilerr 3.1. P.od twee nap ir/orriulim provided N by WPM Cmwity Lard &u Nip grin and is aannt se d Swptwrbw 1998. W E ity of Eagan THIS MAP IE INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY Community owolopment Department The City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this Information and are s not responsible for errors or omissions. CERM WE OF dRVEY M32-2080-99 for G.R. HORTON 7 S r~ / I S7Q:T7' Itp.0l~ I 1 16 So v~ l ~fo d 1 j r ~ yb ` CCCCPPPP'''' 6 1 i#o-------~r``"'~ daj Q) O. f J ~;2f - Rr77j3~' c J Z North wi° w Pork R oad LOT= 2t, &-x sa.Fr. NovsE = 2, 5?s SQ_ S Top curb to Gar dab Top block r Lowest bsmt Or • SCQIe: 1 30' 3877 Big Timber Trail DESCRIP11ON I hereby certify that Oft survey. Plan. or Lot B, Block 2. report was prepared by mu or under my direct GARDENWOOD PONDS FOURTH supervision and that I an a duly Roostred Dakota County, Minnesota Land Surveyor under the Lows of the State of Minnesota Plot beorNOS shown tr~ (~L._ o Owata on monument -ie•~ J' Existing_,, Propoesd Dato_ 1 -1 Rea No. 8140 fix-- BRANDT ENGINEERING & SURVEYING 1600 West 143rd Street, Suite 206 Burnsville, MN 55306 (612) 435-1966 M32-2080-99 '3 PREVIOUSLY CONSIDERED SURVEY CERnFlCAM OF SURVEY for M32-2080-99 D.R. NORTON -7 S200i3 f 8 I l PIP .Co~ OA ~~ba $ ~2ab 0 V) 2 OTC 8 r $m $ / O 5' a o A'coo ~a`O L c E - bou~r~ ~h Q, C3 a a /70 'o L s '8-3-21 13, R 771.96 North Wile W ROQd House = 2.535 sq.'t. Lot = 21,001 sq.ft. -x to Gar slab = _xo~= -z*er :smt flr = Scale: 1" = 30' gig Timber Trail I hereby certify that this survey, plan, or s. =lock 2. report was prepared by me or under my direct Y' 1OOD PONDS FOURTH supervision and that I am a duly Registered :aunty, Minnesota Land Surveyor under the Laws of the State of Minnesota. ".r ;.,yngs shown =4':•es iron monument Date 2 DEC 1999 Reg. No. 8140 C~'.Tr~i / Proposed BRANDT ENGINEERING & SURVEYING 14041 Burnhaven Dr'vve, e 114 REVISED SURVEY Burnsville, MN (57: ) (612) 435-1966 M32-2080-99 Agenda Information Memo January 18, 2000, Eagan City Council D. VACATION OF PUBLIC EASEMENTS, FINAL PLAT, AND VARIANCE (BELL LEXINGTON 2ND ADDITION) - U.S. WEST AND HONSA LIGHTING ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: A. To approve the Vacation of public drainage and utility easements within Lots 2 and 3, Block 1, Bell Lexington Addition, and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. B. To approve a Final Plat to replat Lots 2 and 3, Block 1, Bell Lexington Addition as a single parcel (Lot 1, Block 1, Bell Lexington 2nd Addition). C. To approve a Variance to allow a zero side yard setback for pavement and parking for a shared driveway along the common lot line between existing Lot 1, Block 1, Bell Lexington Addition and Lot 2, Block 1, Bell Lexington Addition (proposed Lot 1, Block 1, Bell Lexington 2nd Addition). FACTS: • The site is located at the northeast corner of Lone Oak Road and Lexington Avenue in the SW '/4 of Section 2 and consists of three parcels, Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 1, Bell Lexington Addition. Lot 3 contains the U.S. West Central Switching Office and a communications antenna tower, Lot 1 contains Honsa Lighting (formerly occupied by Crate Prospects), and Lot 2 is vacant. • U.S. West has indicated the need to expand their facility in order to accommodate the growing telecommunications needs in this area. To accommodate the expansion, U.S. West is acquiring Lot 2, and proposes to combine Lots 2 and 3 as a single parcel through Final Plat (Lot 1, Block 1, Bell Lexington 2nd Addition). In addition, U.S. West is requesting the Vacation of existing easements between Lots 2 and 3 to accommodate the construction of the building addition to the west. • In conjunction with the building expansion, a shared driveway between the U.S. West development and Honsa Lighting will be established that necessitates a Variance to the required setbacks for pavement and parking. The shared driveway allows more efficient use of the land and provides access for Honsa Lighting to Lone Oak Road, and access for U.S. West to Lexington Avenue. • On November 29, 1999, City staff received a petition from Alma Fitzloff, representing US West Communications, Inc., requesting the Vacation of an existing drainage & utility easement adjacent to Lots 2 and 3, Block 1 of Bell Lexington Addition. On December 20, the City Council received the petition for this vacation, and set a public hearing for January 18, 2000, to consider vacating said easements. • The easements were included as part of the original plat of Bell Lexington Addition, in accordance with standard practice, and not necessary to accommodate any planned or existing utilities or drainage ways. ~r~ • All notices with regard to the requested Vacation have been published in the legal newspaper and sent to all potentially affected private utility owners informing them of this public -hearing. Notice regarding the requested Variance has also been published and sent to owners of property within 200 feet of the site. No objections to either request have been received to date. • The Vacation request has been reviewed by the Engineering Division and found to be in order for favorable Council action. ATTACHMENTS: _ Area and Easement Vacation Maps, pages S ?and.g Final Plat, page !U Variance Staff Report, pages ,60 through _j6y EIGHTS H10 2 ~ 0 w ~ o 0o io m ~D O • LONE OAK ROAD u I MOO< ! VACATION LOCATION $ I •~AY P aa ~o n (ca io s) DOODLE ROAD at ~0~~ ic? 0 4 12-22-99 BELL LEXINGTON ADDITION LOT 1 & 2, BLOCK 1 CITY OF EAGAN EASEMENT VACATION LOCATION MAP NORTH UNE OF BLOCK I N N UTILITY EASEMENT PER BELL LEXINGTON ApON. (J` DESCRIPTION OF DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT TO BE VACATED $ CJ\ The drainage and utility easements over those parts of the east 5.00 feet of Lot 2 and the west 5.00 feet of Lot 3, Block I. BELL LEXINGTON ADDITION, according o to the recorded plat thereof. Dakota County. Minnesota, lying south of the north 20.00 feet of said Block I and lying north of the south 10.00 feet of said Block 1. L-1 ~1 1 DRAINAGE & UTILITY EASEMENT PER BELL LEXINGTON ADON. TO BE VACATED f ~j L / v 9 t ss SOUTH LINE OF BLOCK I L ONE OAK ROAD N ~n (C. S. A. H. NO.26) . G1V ACATIcNS/BELLLEX.DWG BELL LEXINGTON ADDITION t~~r LOT 1 & 2, BLOCK 1 CITY OF EAGAN EASEMENT VACATION MAP IV Id IVNI3 - c - ~ ~s~ a s ° o a a : Ys a' a 1 Es.6 ° ~ sg 5 5 y _ I Y L 5 a r33 " b J- g Y s 5 2 a a C E= i m_i ! s = ce i s s 5 ga $ bg EYE ~ 5 y 6$ a a-c= $ Y 1 2 I~ sfi E g F =f s_ Y~ SSad • `6 6 ~f Y ai § e5 fis $ I 6 a ="a o g ~ m s o.i~ se Y xfisYF P z~. I. 08 FS3t A F I I ~g 5 r b, ft e I _i~ 00'99Z Hl f 05 - - - - i r_ - - oo ssz r ~ urun a. n.•+.o C 'I c~ cT ^ 4: ti ~C~ C) PAY CJe 1 IN v ~ h m `C W O 2 R J ~Y k3Y I I J 3 _ i ~ ~ rn J uru~ w. rn:.w.a~ I C:) . 00'S9l NJ HON I. I I I PLANNING REPORT CITY OF EAGAN REPORT DATE: January 12, 2000 CASE: 02-VA-20-11-99 APPLICANT: U.S. West HEARING DATE: January 18, 2000 PROPERTY OWNER: U.S. West Communications, Inc. PREPARED BY: Pamela Dudziak Honsa Lighting Sales & Service, Inc. REQUEST: Variance LOCATION: 2990 Lexington Avenue South COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: IND, Limited Industrial ZONING: I-1, Limited Industrial SUMMARY OF REQUEST U.S. West Communications is requesting a Variance to the required five-foot side yard setback for pavement and parking areas to allow a shared driveway with Honsa Lighting to the west. The Variance affects Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Bell Lexington Addition, on the northeast corner of Lexington Avenue and Lone Oak Road AUTHORITY FOR REVIEW City Code Chapter 11, Section 11.40, Subdivision 3C states that the Council may grant a variance and impose conditions and safeguards only if. 1. The Council shall determine that the special conditions applying to the structures or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property and do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located, and that the granting of the application is necessary for the applicant. 2. The granting of the proposed variance will not be contrary to the intent of this Chapter and the Comprehensive Guide Plan. 3. That granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty. 6' Planning Report - U.S. West/Honsa Lighting January 18, 2000 Page 2 CODE REQUIREMENTS The City Code requires a five-foot side yard setback for pavement and parking areas. BACKGROUND/HISTORY Bell Lexington Addition was platted in 1986, when Northwestern Bell vacated the building now occupied by Honsa Lighting to move into a new building, the one now occupied by U.S. West. A conditional use permit was approved in 1997 for construction of a communications antenna tower behind the existing U.S. West building. EXISTING CONDITIONS The proposed development affects Lots 1, 2, and 3, Block 1, Bell Lexington Addition. Lot 3 contains the U.S. West Central Switching Office and a communications antenna tower, Lot 1 contains Honsa Lighting (formerly occupied by Crate Prospects) and Lot 2 is vacant. Honsa Lighting's parking lot is located north of their building with a single access to Lexington Avenue. Lexington Avenue and Lone Oak Road both contain medians that restrict turning movements to right-in and right-out only in this location. The existing parking lot for Honsa Lighting was constructed without curb and gutter. U.S. West has direct access to Lone Oak Road and the parking is located north of the building. APPLICANT'S ESTIMATE OF HARDSHIP U.S. West has indicated that the existing switching facility does not have the capacity to meet the growing telecommunications needs in the area. Since the existing U.S. West site does not have space to accommodate an expansion, U.S. West is acquiring the vacant lot to the west for this purpose. Honsa Lighting and U.S. West have worked together and in addition to U.S. West's building expansion, the development plans include additional parking for both U.S. West and Honsa Lighting and a driveway connection between the two facilities. EVALUATION OF REQUEST In conjunction with these development plans, U.S. West is replatting Lots 2 and 3 as a single parcel, Lot 1, Block 1, Bell Lexington 2°d Addition. U.S. West also proposes to vacate the existing drainage and utility easements between Lots 2 and 3 to accommodate the building expansion. U.S. West proposes additional parking on the north end of the property and the establishment of a driveway connection between Honsa Lighting and U.S. West, providing direct access to Lone Oak Road for Honsa Lighting, and to Lexington Avenue for U.S. West. The Variance is requested because the proposed shared driveway straddles the lot line between the two parcels and does not provide the required five-foot pavement setback from the side lot lines. The shared 6/ Planning Report - U.S. West/Honsa Lighting January 18, 2000 Page 3 driveway design makes for efficient use of the land and better circulation and access for both buildings. Cross easements for ingress and egress should be established over the shared driveway areas. A sketch showing the areas proposed to be covered by the easement has been submitted, however, an easement agreement will also need to be executed and recorded at Dakota County. With the expansion, the U.S. West building will be 18,640 square feet and require 27 parking stalls (based on the standards for warehouse/storage). The existing U.S. West parking lot contains nine parking stalls, another 15 are proposed to be constructed with the expansion, and proof of parking for an additional 25 stalls is shown on the plans. The site plan also includes an expansion of Honsa Lighting's parking to the east to join with the new U.S. West parking lot. Concrete curb and gutter should be added to Honsa Lighting's parking lot to comply with current development standards. The new parking lot and driveway for U.S. West should also be constructed with concrete curb and gutter. Additionally, both of the existing buildings have trash dumspters that are not enclosed and screened. As required by the City Code, a trash dumpster enclosure consistent with the City Code should be constructed for each of the buildings. Landscaping, signage, and other elements of the proposed development should satisfy City Code requirements and will be reviewed for compliance at the time of application for the building permit. SUMMARY/CONCLUSION U.S. West Communications is requesting a Variance to the required five-foot side yard setback for pavement and parking areas for a shared driveway with Honsa Lighting to the west. The request is part of an expansion plan for U.S. West that includes construction of additional parking for both facilities. The Variance request and proposed expansion of parking for both buildings requires that the existing conditions of be upgraded to current development standards with the installation of concrete curb and gutter, and screening enclosures for trash dumpsters. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED To recommend approval of a Variance to the required five-foot side yard setback for pavement for Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Bell Lexington Addition. If approved, the following conditions should apply: 1. Cross easements for ingress and egress shall be established and the easement documents recorded at Dakota County. 2. Concrete curb and gutter shall be established around the Honsa Lighting parking lot, as well as for new parking areas and along the new driveway. Planning Report - U.S. West/Honsa Lighting January 18, 2000 Page 4 3. Trash dumpster enclosures meeting the requirements of the City Code shall be constructed for each building. 4. If within one year after approval, the variance shall not have been completed or utilized, it shall become null and void unless a petition for extension has been granted by the council. Such extension shall be requested in writing at least 30 days before expiration and shall state facts showing a good faith attempt to complete or utilize the use permitted in the variance. 63 r I Cagan Boundary Cantarlln. Stro*t Parch Area Location Map Building Footprint C, :F `f iaw.m n. 7 \ ¦ Sub ect Site .111110 OAK ROAD) C .AJ4. NO.26 (Lone RD.) r ¦ I I ~ 3i ¦ uN~ ~~f I ~ ~ I I .NUa w_ ' 1000 0 1000 2000 Feet Development/Developer: U.S. West/Honsa Lighting Application: Variance Case No.: 02-VA-20-11-99 Gi? Mtp Prepared rabq f3tg /Y O-11. Prroel be» mrp Irtarrauon provkbd N bi Dakota C. lard ~e~Y DeParbRert and to aster t at d Seplenber 1988. City of Eagan THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY E Community D.v.lopinent DepeTbnant The City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this Information and are not responsible for errors or omissions. Current Zoning and Comprehensive Guide Plan U.S. West/Honsa Lighting Land Use Map Case No. 02-VA-20-11-99 e f ra 41 / Zoning Map L1 41 A 4 41 41 Location Current Zoning: 41 , M 41 I-7 A Limited Industrial ro rb a 4, ro Y H r0 I'D 41 4, IA 41 "0 0 000 1200 F..t Comprehensive Guide Plan Land Use Map w. IND IND IND 1 Location IND two Current Land Use Designation: .N. ' IND Limited Industrial CPO flip IND 0 f i ie w. i wb IND IND 000 0 000 1200 P..t Vnoooo- pare N baw map bd.naabn praukkul byYakala Cetatly Land Survey Opabnot 0127NL Z.nkts bd0anau.n proald.d by Lawt,Ngo O mw 1900 and up"" by City Stain. City of Eagan E .COI?II w*D9v& pfrw* THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY Depar&nent The City of Ragan and Dakota County do not guarantee antaa the accuracy of this information. LC)QH TOW A. T t~ c _--i 1 TM Sam n b a PROOF 8s6 OF PARKING I I 0 • 1 / Ij i i i i i i i i i i r 1 ! 1 p .:y~_ f 1 to ~t ? y = r J I SITE PLAN (til IVDY w~c..... ¦ • ' I07S taNL fit LOAD LAOAKMH u. u.. ~~i~ Ia s 6I i g I v of ml r,l x x N V' 0 v' ELEVATIONS w meMITI?nonr~ Ilk ,wDMONTOBAW-O. +i 1 Y NIIUA oaA11. 1 • 1•n M r•I.I•r.t¦• 111.1.1.1, ••Mt••1r11 Ion LONG OAK ROAD lAMN,101 1111?rrM•r 11 r.~- _ ~ r r \OF 00, i i i 6 ?Oof FLOOR PLAN ! i 11 BACIAN GO. SRJDY r ADC MIT S C T I 11t ~iw+ • w~ At ACT . 1111111~~~1• Ar~11• 111 111111~~4 r111111r1111 / • MI1.1111 1075 111t11B OA[W1?D 6AGAN./47 N11M11«1111 S N21w3SV a1sodoHa •4 Oo'S9l HL/lOS N r I Aww COW -,m am In I~ ' F ld a ca I''veo' 0 m - - d'ra a 3 r -bib - - - - ,nor, ` - !f+%*•' 2 I .ae..0,~•.7+ ,.s ,u. I.G w.t Vn . 70Mwio" . » - 1N2MVtJ AVMAA1 47SOdOild lblb I 1~~ ~ • I ~ r I~ OJ I.I e I I ~ "I iI I Is a I 14 ~ ~ I ~ z ( Q I~~ t E ~ I.. 3%lN3A V 00,99C Minos NOl ON/X37 Agenda Information Memo January 18, 2000 E. PROJECT 784R, LOUIS LANE STREET & UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve / Deny Project 784R (Louis Lane - Street and Utility Improvements) and, if approved, authorize the preparation of detailed final plans and specifications and the acquisition of easements through the eminent domain quick-take process, if necessary. FACTS: • On June 15, 1999, the City Council approved a preliminary subdivision for 23 single-family lots (Cherrywood Knoll) at the east end of Chapel Lane (NE '/4 Section 12). A condition of final subdivision approval was the Council's approval of a public improvement for the construction of Louis Lane from Chapel Lane to Hwy 55 to accommodate the resulting increase in traffic through the neighborhood. • On August 5, City staff received a petition from Thomas Von Bische, representing Heritage Development, Inc., the developer of Cherrywood Knoll, requesting the construction of Louis Lane. • On August 17, the City Council authorized staff to prepare a feasibility report addressing the scope, cost, schedule and financing of new street improvements for Louis Lane between T.H. 55 and Chapel Lane and sanitary sewer lift station improvements. • On September 21, 1999, the feasibility report for Project 784 was presented to the City Council and a Public Hearing was scheduled for October 19 to formally present and discuss the report with the neighborhood. • An informational meeting was held on October 7 at 6:30 p.m. at City Hall. Of the 4 parcels proposed to be assessed, 8 people representing the 4 properties (100% of total notified) attended the informational meeting. • At the October 19, 1999 meeting, the City Council continued the public hearing to the January 18, 2000 meeting to allow preparation of property appraisals to determine the level of benefit from this project and the expected acquisition costs of easements. These appraisals have now been completed and the information incorporated into the revised Feasibility Report. • On Nov. 1, 1999, the City Council removed the condition regarding the need for Louis Lane to be constructed and approved the final Plat for Cherrywood Knoll. • All notices have been published in the legal newspaper and sent to all affected property owners informing them of this continued public hearing. ATTACHMENTS: • Revised Feasibility Report, pages through • Project Information Summary, page • Minutes From Informational Neighborhood Meeting, pages 97 through do 1 city of eagan Report for Louis Lane Street Improvements City Project No. 784 Eagan, Minnesota January 2000 File No. 49-99-104 Bonestroo, Rosene, Ander°k and Associates. Inc. is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer Bonestroo Principals: Otto G. Bone: troc, RE • Joseph C. Anderlik, PE • Marvin L. Sorvala, RE Glenn R. Cook. P.E. • Robert G Schunicht, RE. • Jerry A. Bourdon, RE. Rosene Robert W. Rosene, P.R. .Richard E Turner, RE and Susan M Eberlin, C.P.A. Senior Consultants mom Anderlik & Associate Principals: Howard A. Sanford, P.E. • Keith A. Gordon. P.E. • Robert R. Pfelferle, P.E. Richard W. Foster. RE. • David O. Loskota, P.E. • Robert C. Russek, A.I.A. • Mark A. Hanson, RE Michael T. Rautmann, P.E. • Ted K Field, RE. • Kenneth P Anderson. RE. • Mark R Rolls. RE. Associates Sidney P Williamson. RE., IS. • Robert E Kotsmith • Agnes M. Ring • Allan Rick Schmidt, P.E. Offices' St. Paul, Rochester. Willmar and St. Cloud, MN • Milwaukee, WI Engineers & Architects Website: www.bonestroo.com January 10, 2000 Mayor and City Council City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Re: Louis Lane Street Improvements Our File No. 49-99-104 Dear Mayor and Council: Attached is our report for Louis Lane - Project No. 784. Proposed street improvements are presented and discussed within the report along with detailed cost estimates/assessments. We will be pleased to meet with the Council and other interested parties at a mutually convenient time to discuss the report. Respectfully submitted, BONESTROO, ROSENE, ERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC. Mark A. Hanson, P.E. MAH/crw Enclosures I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Registered Professional Engineer under the laws of the Sta e of Minnesota. Mark A. Hanson Date: Janus 10, 2000 Re "stra on No. 14260 Z r /C CCY eviewed By: Reviewed BY Department of Public Works Finance Department 92 2335 West Highway 36 ¦ St. Paul, MN 55113 ¦ 651-636-4600 ¦ Fax: 651-636-1311 TABLE OF CONTENTS Letter of Transmittal Page 1 Table of Contents Page 2 Scope Page 3 Recommendations Page 4 Feasible, Necessary, and Cost Effective Page 5 Discussion Street Page 6 Sanitary Sewer (T.H. 55 Lift Station / Forcemain) Page 6 Easements Page 8 Permits Page 9 Cost Estimate Page 10 Area to be Included Page 10 Assessments Page 11 Revenue Sources Page 13 Project Schedule Page 14 Appendix A - Preliminary Cost Estimate Appendix B - Preliminary Assessment Roll Appendix C - Memo dated March 30, 1999 Figure No. I - Location Plan Figure No. 2 - T.H. 55 Frontage Road - City Project 749 Figure No. 3 - Street - Louis Lane Figure No. 4 - Sanitary Sewer - Lift Station / Forcemain Louis Lane Street Improvements 1)3 2 SCOPE This project provides for constructing Louis Lane from Chapel Lane to T.H. 55, as shown on Figure 1. Louis Lane presently does not exist as a public street maintained by the City of Eagan. However, a half right-of-way does exist which includes a gravel surface connecting Chapel Lane with T.H. 55, which also serves three abutting properties. The three abutting properties all have direct driveway access to the gravel surface. Two properties are residential while the third is zoned general business (GB), which includes a construction company. Louis Lane street improvements are proposed at this time based on the following: • Provide a public street connection to T.H. 55 from Chapel Lane to serve the existing homes south of T.H. 55 / east of T.H. 149 and the new development proposed east of Chapel Lane (Cherrywood Knoll). • Replace the two existing public street connections onto T.H. 55, which are proposed to be removed in conjunction with the T.H. 55 Frontage Road Improvements, Project No. 749. The two existing connections are located between T.H. 149 and Louis Lane as shown on Figure 2. The existing connections serve the same areas as the proposed Louis Lane connection to T.H. 55. The project also provides for reconstructing the existing sanitary sewer lift station and forcemain in and along T.H. 55 at Louis Lane, also shown on Figure 1. The sanitary sewer lift station and forcemain upgrade has been anticipated in Eagan's Comprehensive Sewer Policy Plans as additional development occurs in its service area. The existing sanitary sewer lift station and forcemain were constructed in 1970 and are in need of upgrades based on their limited capacity and outdated equipment. Louis Lane Street Improvements 3 RECOMMENDATIONS From an engineering standpoint the following is recommended: • The improvements for Louis Lane in T.H. 55 be reviewed with MnDOT and included in the Cooperative Agreement for T.H. 55 Frontage Road, Project No. 749. The median improvement cost for construction and 8% engineering in T.H. 55 right-of-way for Louis Lane be financed by MnDOT. • The existing buildings located in Louis Lane right-of-way be reviewed with the owner to determine if they can be removed or relocated before street improvements are constructed in Louis Lane. The proposed location for Louis Lane conflicts with the existing buildings. • The right-of-way / easement requirements for the easterly half of Louis Lane and lift station shall be reviewed with the property owner (Parcel 010-06) to determine the acquisition process. • A $46,000.00 assessment ($2,000 per lot:23 lots) for Louis Lane be a condition of the development agreement for the proposed Cherrywood Knoll Development. (Development Agreement approved on 11/01/99) • The 12" diameter forcemain alignment from T.H. 55 to Lone Oak Road be reviewed further with the developer of Oakview Center and any other affected property owner to finalize the alignment and determine any additional property acquisition needed. • The abandonment of the existing lift station be reviewed by the City of Eagan to determine if the existing equipment has any salvage value. • The new lift station location shall allow the existing lift station to remain in service while the new lift station / force main is constructed. • Sanitary sewer / water service extensions from the existing utilities in Louis Lane be reviewed with abutting property owners. This report assumes six (6) new service extensions to the abutting property. The services extension is not proposed to be assessed at this time, but would be at the time a connection is made. • The westerly half right-of-way (33' wide) for Louis Lane abutting the east line of Parcel 020- 03 shall be reviewed to confirm any conditions that may be attached to it. For purposes of this report, it is assumed that this easement will have to be acquired similar to the easement from Parcel 010-06. Louis Lane Street Improvements 4 FEASIBLE, NECESSARY, AND COST EFFECTIVE This project is feasible from an engineer standpoint and is in accordance with Eagan's Comprehensive Plans for Utilities / Streets. The street improvements in Louis Lane are necessary to provide an acceptable number of accesses to T.H. 55 and T.H. 149 for the homeowners south of T.H. 55 and east of T.H. 149. The sanitary sewer lift station and forcemain improvements are necessary to provide service for new development and replace outdated equipment. The project is cost effective based on existing conditions and acceptable construction standards for street and utility improvements. Louis Lane Street Improvements S '76 DISCUSSION Street This project provides for constructing Louis Lane from Chapel Lane to T.H. 55, shown on Figure 3. The proposed improvements include construction of a 32' wide street. A 32' wide street is Eagan's standard for a residential street. Louis Lane is proposed to be widened to a 40' width at T.H. 55 to provide for three traffic lanes; a protected center left turn lane and one traffic lane in each direction. The existing street section is also shown on Figure 3. Presently, two existing service buildings are located in the existing half right-of-way. The proposed street improvements, based on the location of Louis Lane, do not allow the street to be constructed without impacting the existing buildings in the half right-of-way. Therefore, the buildings need to be removed or relocated. Cost estimates to remove or relocate the existing buildings are included in this report. Storm sewer improvements are included at T.H. 55 to maintain the existing open ditch drainage along T.H. 55. Six (6) new sewer / water service extensions are proposed to the abutting property to accommodate future development. The Louis Lane connection at T.H. 55 is located where an existing paved median cut and right / left turn lanes exist in T.H. 55 right-of-way. Due to the improved connection of Louis Lane at T.H. 55 (which includes a 40' width, protected center left turn lane), and the anticipated increase in traffic using this access, the existing paved median cut and portions of the existing right / left turn lane in T.H. 55 are proposed to be reconstructed. The proposed improvements in T.H. 55 are also shown on Figure 3. Sanitary Sewer (T.H. 55 Lift Station / Forcemain) The existing sanitary sewer lift station / forcemain at Louis Lane / T.H. 55 was reviewed in March of 1999. The memo documenting that review is included in Appendix C located at the back of this report. Based on the recommendation in that memo (dated March 30, 1999) and the improvements proposed for Louis Lane at T.H. 55, this project proposes to reconstruct the existing sanitary sewer lift station and forcemain. The proposed lift station (duplex submersible) and forcemain (12" diameter) alignment is shown on Figure 4 located at the back of this report and is in accordance with the recommendations in said memo and Eagan's Comprehensive Sewer Plan. The existing lift station at Louis Lane / T.H. 55 will be abandoned as part of the Louis Lane Street Improvements 6 Louis Lane improvements, while the existing 8" CIP forcemain in T.H. 55 will be abandoned as part of the proposed improvements in T.H. 55 Frontage Road, Project No. 749. Louis Lane Street Improvements 7 EASEMENTS The centerline location for Louis Lane is proposed on the easterly line of Burrview Acres and/or the east line of the west 1/2 of the NE 114 Section 12. Presently, sufficient half right-of-way exists west of the centerline for Louis Lane within the Burrview Acre Plat (40' wide). Although a 33' wide half right-of-way is represented over the easterly portion of Parcel 020-03, it is assumed for purposes of this report that the easement will have to be formally acquired. In addition, based on the proposed location of Louis Lane, a 30' wide half right-of-way is proposed to be acquired from Parcel 010-06 located to the east. An utility easement is proposed over Parcel 010-06 to accommodate the lift station reconstruction at T.H. 55 east of Louis Lane. The proposed forcemain alignment between T.H. 55 and Lone Oak Road is located in Oakview Center, which also connects to Lone Oak Road (County Road 26) approximately 100' west of Lone Oak Drive. The connection is made by way of a piece of land, which measures approximately 10' wide by 600' long. The easements over Oakview Center have been dedicated as part of the Oakview Center development at no cost to the City. Additional easements will be required from the parcel's to the east to construct the 12" forcemain on the proposed alignment between T.H. 55 and Lone Oak Road. Easement requirements from Parcels 0 10-06 and 020-03 for Louis Lane and Parcels 010-01 and 010-02 for the forcemain are estimated below. Parcel 010-06 Easement (Sq, Ft.) Louis Lane 14,400 (480' x 30') Lift Station 400 (20' x 20') Parcel 020-03 Louis Lane 11,340 (378' x 30') Parcel 010-01, 010-02 Forcemain 6,000 (600' x 10') Louis Lane Street Improvements 8 PERMITS The median improvements in T.H. 55 near Louis Lane are proposed to be included and be a part of the Cooperative Agreement between the City of Eagan and MnDOT for the T.H. 55 Frontage Road improvements in the year 2000. The Cooperative Agreement process will address the permitting requirements for the improvements in T.H. 55 right-of-way, including the sanitary sewer improvements. A permit from Dakota County is required for the improvements in Lone Oak Road (County Road 26) right-of-way. Sanitary Sewer improvements associated with the lift station and forcemain will be reviewed with MPCA to determine if permits are required. Louis Lane Street Improvements 9 COST ESTIMATE A detailed cost estimate is presented in Appendix A, located at the back of this report, and is summarized below. The total estimated project cost is $799,560.00, which includes 10% contingency and 30% for indirect costs. Indirect costs include administrative, engineering, interest, and legal expenses. Easement costs for Louis Lane are based on an appraised value while the easement cost for forcemain based on $1.50/sq.ft. Street Louis Lane $170,500 T.H. 55 (Center Median) 35,950 Services 38,610 Sanitary Sewer Lift Station/Forcemain 493,400 Easements Louis Lane (26,140 S.F.) 52,100 Forcemain (6,000 S.F.) 9,000 Total $799,560 AREA TO BE INCLUDED NE Section 12 Parcel 010-05 (Cherrywood Knoll) Parcel 010-06 Parcel 020-03 (Pt Lot 2, Block 3, Auditors Subdivision 38) Burrview Acres - Lot 1/2 NW'/a Section 12 (Construction Only) Oakview Center Parcel 010-01; 010-02 Louis Lane Street Improvements 10 ASSESSMENTS Assessments are proposed to be levied for the street improvements in Louis Lane to the abutting property owners. Assessments are proposed to be levied in accordance with Eagan Policy and increase in value based on benefit in accordance with State Statutes. The four abutting parcels are proposed to be assessed or not assessed based on the following: Parcel 010-06 WE 114 Section 12): It is anticipated that the parcel will subdivide and the newly developed lots will access Louis Lane. Based upon the Eagan assessment policy, an assessment is calculated according to an appropriate street design for said parcel. The assessable cost to construct a 7-ton street adjacent to the single-family parcel is $32,725.00. The rate per front foot based on this project cost would be $65.70 ($32,725.00 / 498 F.F.). The assessment should not be greater than the benefit in property value received from the project improvements. An appraisal was completed and the benefit from the proposed project for said parcel was appraised at $25,500.00, which would have a front foot rate of $51.20 ($25,500 / 498 F.F.). Therefore, the total proposed street assessment should be capped at $25,500. Parcel 020-03 WE 1/4 Section 12): The present land use is general business (GB). Based upon the Eagan assessment policy, an assessment is calculated according to an appropriate street design for said parcel. The assessable cost to construct a 9-ton street adjacent to this parcel is $36,715.00. The rate per front foot based on this cost would be $97.15 ($36,715.00 / 378 F.F.). The assessment should not be greater than the benefit in property value received from the project improvements. An appraisal was completed and the benefit from this project was appraised at $34,200.00. Therefore, the total proposed street assessment should be capped at $34,200. Louis Lane Street Improvements 11 Lot 1 Burrview Acres: Driveway access is to Louis Lane; however, this lot is a corner lot with frontage on Chapel Lane. The estimated assessment policy rate for single-family frontage, similar to parcel 010-06, is $65.70/F.F. Due to the corner lot credit (75 F.F.) policy, the calculated assessment for Louis Lane would be $3,952.00 [$65.70 x (135 F.F. - 75 F. F.)]. However, because of the appraisal of Parcel 010-06 limiting the benefit amount to $51.20/F.F. for single-family parcels, the proposed assessment for Louis Lane would be $3,070.00 [$51.20 x (135 F.F. - 75 F. F.)] Cherrywood Knoll (Parcel 010-05 NE 1/ Section 12): A condition of the development agreement (approved 11/1/99) required the City Council's approval of a public street improvement connecting T.H. 55 to Chapel Lane. The developer has waived any right to object to assessments for Project 784. The actual assessment shall be capped at $46,000.00, per the development agreement. Louis Lane Street Improvements 73 12 REVENUE SOURCES Revenue sources to finance this project are summarized below: Project Cost Revenue Balance Street Louis Lane $170,500 Services 38,610 38,610 Easements 52,100 Assessments 62,770 Cherrywood Knoll Development 46,000 Total $261,210 $147,380 $(113,830) T.H. 55 Median Improvements $35,950 MnDOT (Cooperative Agreement) $20,000+/- Total $35,950 $20,000 $(15,950) Sanitary Sewer Lift Station/Forcemain $493,400 Eagan's Sanitary Sewer Trunk Fund $493,400 Total $493,400 $493,400 -0- The balance for Louis Lane ($113,830) and T.H. 55 median improvements ($15,950)'), not financed by MnDOT through the Cooperative Agreement process, will be financed by Eagan's Major Street Fund. The revenue from the sanitary sewer/water services would be collected at the time of connection and is not proposed to be assessed as part of the project. The sanitary sewer lift station and forcemain improvements are proposed to be financed by Eagan's Sanitary Sewer Trunk Fund. (1) The cooperative agreement proposal is included in Project 749 (T.H. 55 Frontage Road Improvements), MnDOT approval pending. Louis Lane Street Improvements 13 PROJECT SCHEDULE Present Draft Feasibility Report September 21, 1999 Neighborhood Meeting October 7, 1999 Public Hearing October 19, 1999 Continued Public Hearing January 18, 2000 Approve Plans and Specifications February 2000 Open Bids / Award Contract March 2000 Substantial Completion September 2000 Assessment Hearing October 2000 Final Completion November 2000 Louis Lane Street Improvements 14 ,LFL i? city of aagan Appendix A Preliminary Cost Estimate 0~ APPENDIX A PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE Louis Lane Street Improvements 49-99-104 9/14/99 Louis Lane Improvements Item Unit OTY $/Unit Total Mobilization LS 0.77 $ 10,000.00 $ 7,700.00 Traff ic control LS 0.22 9,000.00 $ 1,980.00 Saw cut bituminous surface LF 220 3.00 $ 660.00 Remove concrete curb LF 120 5.00 $ 600.00 Remove bituminous surface SY 960 2.50 $ 2,400.00 Salvage mailbox EA 1 20.00 $ 20.00 Salvage road sign EA 1 30.00 $ 30.00 Salvage Hydrant EA 2 500.00 $ 1,000.00 Salvage topsoil CY 300 3.50 $ 1,050.00 Remove Chain Link Fence LF 19 2.50 $ 47.50 Remove Building EA 2 5,500.00 $ 11,000.00 Plug Cl tee EA 2 100.00 $ 200.00 Remove CMP, 12" LF 30 5.00 $ 150.00 Remove CMP, 24" LF 54 5.00 $ 270.00 Remove CMP apron, 12" EA 2 50.00 $ 100.00 Remove CMP apron, 24" EA 2 50.00 $ 100.00 Remove RCP, 12" LF 40 10.00 $ 400.00 Remove catchbasin manhole EA 1 500.00 $ 500.00 Remove catchbasin EA 1 400.00 $ 400.00 Salvage casting, storm sewer EA 2 120.00 $ 240.00 Salvage casting, sanitary sewer EA 4 120.00 $ 480.00 Common excavation CY 1770 5.00 $ 8,850.00 Subgrade excavation CY 200 8.00 $ 1,600.00 Select granular borrow CY 200 8.00 $ 1,600.00 CI.5 Aggregate base, 8" TN 1200 8.00 $ 9,600.00 CI.4 Aggregate shoulder matl., 6" TN 70 7.00 $ 490.00 Type 31 bituminous base, 2" TN 270 25.00 $ 6,750.00 Type 41 bituminous wear, 1-1/2" TN 180 27.00 $ 4,860.00 Asphaltic material for tack GAL 116 2.00 $ 232.00 B618 concrete curb & gutter LF 1200 8.00 $ 9,600.00 Reinforcing for curb & gutter LF 80 2.00 $ 160.00 Concrete driveway apron, commercial SY 140 36.00 $ 5,040.00 Bituminous patch material, driveway SY 110 26.00 $ 2,860.00 Topsoil borrow CY 275 8.00 $ 2,200.00 Highland Sod SY 2240 2.50 $ 5,600.00 Stake/Peg sod SY 340 3.00 $ 1,020.00 Watermain DIP, 6" LF 24 20.00 $ 480.00 Install hydrant EA 2 1,500.00 $ 3,000.00 Cut in 6"x6" TEE EA 1 900.00 $ 900.00 Cut in 8"x6" TEE EA 1 900.00 $ 900.00 D.I. fittings LB 160 2.00 $ 320.00 RCP, 12" LF 38 20.00 $ 760.00 RCP, 24" LF 116 36.00 $ 4,176.00 Furnish Frame / Ring Assembly EA 4 125.00 $ 500.00 Install Frame / Ring Assembly EA 4 125.00 $ 500.00 Catch basin manhole EA 2 1,300.00 $ 2,600.00 Catch basin EA 1 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 RCP apron, 24" EA 2 950.00 $ 1,900.00 Construct CBMH over existing pipe EA 1 1,800.00 $ 1,800.00 Rip rap CY 14 50.00 $ 700.00 Adjust GV EA 3 150.00 $ 450.00 Erosion control @ catch basin EA 4 100.00 $ 400.00 Erosion control, silt fence LF 400 2.50 $ 1,000.00 Temporary mail boxes LS 1 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 Install mailbox EA 1 50.00 $ 50.00 Post for Sign EA 1 45.00 $ 45.00 Pavement Marking; Turn Lane LF 290 4.50 $ 1,305.00 Place salvage topsoil CY 370 4.00 $ 1,480.00 Motor grader w/operator HR 18 120.00 $ 2,160.00 Water for dust control, 1000 gal MG 17 20.00 $ 340.00 Power pick-up broom w/operator HR 14 120.00 $ 1,680.00 SubTotal $119,240.00 +10% for Contingencies $ 11,920.00 SubTotal $131,160.00 +30% for Add'n Inderect Costs $ 39,350.00 Project Total $170,510.00 T.H. 55 Median Improvements Item QTY Unit $/Unit Total Mobilization LS 0.23 $ 10,000.00 $ 2,300.00 Traffic control LS 0.78 9000.00 $ 7,020.00 Saw cut bituminous surface LF 533 3.00 $ 1,599.00 Remove bituminous surface SY 620 2.50 $ 1,550.00 Salvage topsoil CY 160 3.50 $ 560.00 Common excavation CY 150 5.00 $ 750.00 CI.5 Aggregate base, 8" TN 350 8.00 $ 2,800.00 CI.4 Aggregate shoulder matl., 6" TN 70 7.00 $ 490.00 Type 31 bituminous base, 2" TN 50 25.00 $ 1,250.00 Type 41 bituminous wear, 1-1/2" TN 40 27.00 $ 1,080.00 Asphaltic material for tack GAL 24 2.00 $ 48.00 Topsoil borrow CY 125 8.00 $ 1,000.00 Highland Sod SY 800 2.50 $ 2,000.00 Seeding AC 0.5 450.00 $ 225.00 Seed. 70#/AC LB 35 15.00 $ 525.00 Mulch, 2 TN./AC TN 1 210.00 $ 210.00 Fertilizer, 200#/AC LB 100 0.30 $ 30.00 Disk anchoring AC 0.5 100.00 $ 50.00 Erosion control, silt fence LF 300 2.50 $ 750.00 Place salvage topsoil CY 90 4.00 $ 360.00 Motor grader w/operator HR 2 120.00 $ 240.00 Water for dust control, 1000 gal MG 3 20.00 $ 60.00 Power pick-up broom w/operator HR 2 120.00 $ 240.00 SubTotal $ 25,140.00 +10% for Contingencies $ 2,510.00 SubTotal $ 27,650.00 +30% for Add'n Inderect Costs $ 8,300.00 Project Total $35,950.00 Sanitary Sewer (Lift Station/Forcemain) Duplex sumbersible lift station EA 1 $20,000.00 $ 200,000.00 12' DIP forecemain LF 2700 30.00 $ 81,000.00 Augerlack 12" forcemain LF 150 200.00 $ 30,000.00 Connect existing forcemain to MH EA 1 1,500.00 $ 1,500.00 Bituminous patch (Co. Rd. 26) SY 250 30.00 $ 7,500.00 Restoration/erosion control AC 3 5,000.00 $ 15,000.00 Traffic control LS 1 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 SubTotal $ 345,000.00 +10% for Contingencies $ 34,500.00 Total Construction $ 379,500.00 +30% for Indirect Costs $113,900.00 Total Sanitary Sewer $ 493,400.00 Services Sanitary Sewer Service EA 6 $2,000.00 $ 12,000.00 Water Service EA 6 2,500.00 $ 15,000.00 SubTotal $ 27,000.00 +10% for Contingencies $ 2,700.00 Total Construction $ 29,700.00 +30% for Indirect Costs $ 8,910.00 Total Sanitary Sewer $ 38,610.00 city of ccigen Appendix B Preliminary Cost Estimate APPENDIX B PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT ROLL Louis Lane Street Improvements City Project No. 784 Our File No. 49-99-104 Parcel Assessment Assessable Total Identification Rate FF Assessment NE'/a Section 12 Parcel 010-05 (Cherrywood Knoll) $46,000.00« Parcel 010-06 $51.20/F.F. 498 F.F. $25,500.00 Parcel 020-03 $90.48/F.F. 378 FF $34,200.00 Burrview Acres Lot 1 $51.20/F.F. 60 F.F. $3070.00 $108,770.00 Per Development Agreement dated 11/01/99 9/ III i i / I I 1 ` i I I SA ITARY SEWER N ! FORCEMAIN LLL R SE ER i1 1 IE vl~ IV,TER T LI T ST ION r l BUNK HICHWA.Y NO 55 I L AN I .L LOUIS LANE II PROPOSED ClHVKK D KNOLL YANKEE D00D RD (Cod. 28) 0 1000 2000 Scale in feet LOCATION PLAN Bonestroo 0 Rosene EAGAN, MINNESOTA URE 1 A & Associates CITY PROJECT NO. 784 Engineers & Architects LOUIS LANE STREET IMPROVEMEN K \49\4999104\CAD\c 4999,Q4r^; dwg 0 1'-^ 7%0: M CST 11 .1 NTAGE 0 749 T.H• 55 EMEN-~ pR0 JECT N 1 IMpp, 55 FRONT ~GE MOVE TWO T•p lTS TO T.H• 55 ROAp 'F CESS PROJEC CESS C LANE 55 T 0UI TI TO T.H• PROJEC TRUNK HIGHWAY NO. 55 • o CUI--CEJS ONTA E RO• T•H. 55 FR C A EL LA E _ ~;y~ _ L0U1S LANE 1 tpgO JEC 7 84) ACCESS ° IN EXISTING 55 FRONT` MAINTA 149 To T.". TO T.H• 1000 504 1 . r 0 Sale in feet Bonestroo \ ACT 7 49 R°$en k & ROpD PR~~ W!-10 Associates 55 FRpN~AGECESS T~ 1. H H. 55 RE 2 E~in9e~ Ar0itects ~ .H • VE A~ u RENIO ESO~A ~ 3 EN PM CS EAGAN, O E~1 Np. 78~ pROVEM oo a*9 C~N~t P SANE SIRE 99g~oa, 02 o~~07 i RrW EpS~ j0 jk~ cl~ eb~e GUAR S~oP~ 4 URA \ ~ G Ob ~3`5a0 so`OP~l25x ~EgPSV(cG gp54 1 ~E 5 pGGa 9x \ •~'cGUp55 ox ~ P N~ QRd~MEN't5 \ Z~P~ vNO 5c P RAW t N RJ R lotD~PN ~.E SRN VA RIW TRUNK HIGHWAY NO. S ~2 Ep~~ENt .a, 0110 GS ' 1PpR 0- E 015 E 00- SSE BURRVIE ACRES I ~ • 013 `pNE 0 e V\ { eei Bane C$,t_ SGQ 0 ftO d PPS 10 ``vs`O `v E~In~ N~ ~X vR~ 3 p. PM \s ~SZ o ,oo Lpv S() ?,p\IE o r 01 dwS ' EXISTING NECT 12„11 D R PINHOLE ~SA IT ARY SE'WE TION WIDE EASEMENT. NT DEDICA n 1 0-WOE p1 01p=02 TER 0 0 WIDE) ADDI-~ON AI- 1 _ ARCEE'p10- DDIP j0P0AE1N ` o,o o FORCE P PLEX S~BMERSIBI-E LIFT ST OAKVIEw 0,0-02 TRUNK CENTER HIGHWAY NO. 55 WE STtND CON RY L STEED C ST A 1pN O E WEB WELL SIFT LAND G AEA 1 _ 0RCEN tti /~ti~ NON S" CIP ROPOSED pRIS ONE 1p00 r- goo Scale feet gonestroo Rosene FORCEAp,IN Associates STATION Assoik & WER LI URE a Architects Engineers SANI~AR`( SE MINNESOTA B4 TS AN, 7 T- EA G tMPROVEM pRO~EC N0 o,~oo PM IS ENE. S 'F 999:04,04 d"9 LOUIS LANE - SCHAAF'S DRIVEWAY PROPOSED STREET IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT 784 Preliminary Project Schedule • August 5, `99 Petition Received Requesting Public Improvement of Louis Lane • August 17, `99 City Council Authorizes Feasibility Report • September 21, `99 Present Feasibility Report to City Council/Order Public Hearing • October 19, '99 Public Hearing - Continued • January 18, '00 Public Hearing - Council Orders Plans & Specs or Denies Project • February, `00 Approve Plans & Specifications • March, `00 Award Contract • June, `00 Construction Begins • September, '00 Construction Completed • September 15, '00 Final Cost Report • October 16, '00 Final Assessment Public Hearing • May 15, `01 1S` Installment Payment Due With Real Estate Property Taxes Preliminary Costs - Feasibility Report • $170,500 Louis Lane Street Construction/Upgrade • $ 35,950 TH 55 Median Improvements • $493,400 Sanitary Sewer Improvements • $ 52,100 Louis Lane Easements • $ 9,000 Sanitary Sewer Easements • $760,950 Proposed Total Project Cost • $108,770 (14%) Proposed Assessed to Property Owners • $ 35,950 (5%) Proposed Financed by MN DOT • $616,230 (81%) Proposed Financed by the City of Eagan Proposed Special Assessments • Proposed Assessment: $51.20/front foot per Single-Family parcels $90.48/front foot per General Business parcel • Prepayment option with no interest available for 30 days after Assessment Hearing • Any unpaid balance is certified to county to be collected with property taxes over 15 years • Interest rate is calculated on any remaining unpaid balance at the end of each year • Assuming no prepayment, annual cost: (Assumed 6.5% Interest) Single-Family per Front Foot • $7.02 per year 1" year $0.5 8 per month 1$` year • $3.64 per year 15`h year $0.30 per month 15`h year General Business per Front Foot • $12.40 per year 1 S` year $1.03 per month 0 year • $ 6.42 per year 15`h year $0.54 per month 15th year F: RM/My Documcnu//Froj 784 Info-Cont 1 512 2406 99 0 c:~:S 2 d Q fi (:ITV APPLE VAI.I.V 10002 5 I(1 :)ti i 11\ l LOUIS LANE NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING 10-07-99 MEETING NOTES • John Corder -History of project • Access management hearing • Specific access points onto IIWY 55 - figure 8 • Connections to HWY 55 @ Louis Ln is a condition for the development of Cherrywood Knoll • Hearing set for Oct. 19 @ 6:45 • Reviewed the project schedule • Mark Hanson - Project details • Explained the improvements for Louis Lane • Explained the sanitary L.S. improvements & new forcemain • Explained access changes for HWY 55 • Full access @ Louis Lane • Close both existing accesses and construct cul-de-sac on the frontage road • Neighborhood will have 3 accesses/exits • Louis Lane • 32' wide F-F / 55 to Chapel Ln • 40' at 55 for 3 lanes • Storm improvements at 55 & Chapel Ln • Existing building in conflict w/ proposed roadway as designed or adjust road to east • Costs are different inside & outside of HWY 55 R/W • MNDot will parpicipate in cost of road inside 55 R/W • San L.S. built in 70's • Currently cycling too often • Comp. Plan showed the improvement of L.S. in future • Covered costs of project • Estimated project cost • Estimated assessments • Estimated easements costs • Revenue sources OPEN DISCUSSION/ CONCERNS • Location of existing & proposed sanitary L.S. 6 12 95- 2405 C 1'fl \":\1.1.1 DOa 1(! OY 99 (l5::`i 115 61:. 953 2 a 0 fi • Mr. Hummel concerned about L.S. failure, not recently, but in the past he has had sewer backups in his basement • Mr Hummel concerned about a S20,000 assessement he'll have to pay if he sells land for the road • Road design/ 9TN, no, will be 7TN, concerned about the construction traffic & Schaaf Const. Loading & unloading equipment • Size & depth of new L.S. • Schaaf stated that they don't need the road, don't want the road; it serves no benefit to them or Hummel and won't increase the value of their property • Existing gravel road is built on black dirt • Schaff wants the plans for Windsor Est. finalized before agreeing to Louis Ln • All attending the meeting are against the improvement to Louis Ln • Schaaf concerned that they will not be allowed to move or relocate their buildings • Frontage Road cost concerns • VNDot will pay for the improvements to the frontage road if the existing 2 crossings are removed and the assess at Louis Lane is upgraded. This applies only if the work is done in year 2000. If done at a later time the City will need to go through a lengthy paper process with MNDot to get the funding again. • Meeting ended at 8:15 Agenda Information Memo January 18, 2000, City Council Meeting 2000 CALENDARYEAR CITY COUNCIL ORGANIZATIONALBUSINESS Each calendar year, Organizational Business is considered at the second regular City Council meeting in January. The items that require action of the City Council include: A) Advisory Commission Appointments B) Acting Mayor C) Official Legal Newspaper D) City Council Meeting Dates E) Council Meeting Procedures F) Council Standing Committee/Representative Appointments G) Other Appointments A. ADVISORY COMMISSION APPOINTMENTS: The following are the advisory commissions that make recommendations to the City Council: Economic Development Commission Advisory Planning Commission Solid Waste Abatement Commission Burnsville/Eagan Telecommunications Commission Airport Relations Commission Advisory Parks Commission Mayor Awada asked that if any member of an advisory commission has exceeded three consecutive absentees who is not up for reappointment, that position should be given attention by the City Council before all advisory commission appointments are considered. The City has used a system for its advisory commissions that the member is noted as being present, absent or has an official excused absence from a commission meeting. The excused absence is generally a call letting the staff person and commission know that, due to business or personal reasons, they are unable to attend the meeting. The matrix included in the advisory commission appointment packet provides each advisory commission member's appointment status based on this criteria. There is one individual on the Solid Waste Abatement Commission, Jim Weinzettel, who has three consecutive excused absences and one member on the Airport Relations Commission, Tom Pedersen, who is recorded with several consecutive absences. All other commission members who had more than three consecutive absences did not seek reappointment to an advisory commission for the year 2000. Mayor Awada asked that we contact those individuals with more than three consecutive absences so they are aware that she intends to raise this matter at the meeting on Tuesday. Advertisements were placed in the City newsletter, the local newspapers, Chamber newsletter and on the City's web page in December indicating that vacancies existed on advisory commissions. Applications were received from 27 individuals seeking either reappointment or appointment to an advisory commission. All individuals, including those currently serving on a commission, were invited to an interview with the City Council on January 11, 2000. The Council interviewed 20 individuals. The City Administrator will distribute the ballots for each commission. The number of vacancies is listed on each ballot. It is required by law that each City Councilmember initial each ballot and the City Administrator will be the custodian of ballots, announcing the votes for each commission appointment. A commission appointment requires a majority vote by the City Council. At the recommendation of the City Council, 3-year terms for all commission vacancies will be decided followed by appointments for all other terms. 99 Agenda Information Memo January 18, 2000, City Council Meeting 1. Economic Development Commission-This commission promotes the City's commercial-industrial climate, recommends general policy direction, and advises the City Council on matters pertaining to industry and commerce. It exists at the discretion of the City Council without formal authorization in the City Code, and terms are on a staggered, three-year basis. At the December 6, 1999 Special City Council meeting, Gary Morgan, Chair of the EDC, suggested the Council appoint representatives to the EDC that would have a background in manufacturing and hospitality. He also suggested that a representative from the Cedarvale area be appointed. Cathy Clark Matuszak is ineligible for re-appointment because she has served nine consecutive years on the commission. Those applying for a position on the commission are as follows: Present Members: Meetings Missed: Gary Morgan 0 Karl Oestreich 2 John Young 2 New Applicants: Tim Dunn (EDC) Hugh Fitzgerald (EDC) Clint Hooppaw (EDC, APC, ARC, APrC) Maggie Jensen (TC, EDC) Currently a member of the TC Ryan Kaess (APC, EDC) Linda Merkel (EDC, APC, ARC, APrC) Bill Raker (EDC, ARC, TC, APC) Hassan Saffouri (APC, ARC, APrC, EDC) Jason Shamblott (EDC, APC) Philip Vande Kamp (APC, EDC) REQUESTED ACTION: Appoint four members for 3-year terms. /ayj Agenda Information Memo January 18, 2000, City Council Meeting 2. Advisory Planning Commission-This commission reviews development plans and makes recommendations to the City Council. Larry Frank is not seeking re-appointment. Those applying for a position on the commission are as follows: Present Members Meetings Missed: Gale Anderson 1 Ron Miller 1 New Applicants Terry Davis (APrC, APC) Currently a member of the APrC Cyndee Fields (APrC, APC) Gary Hansen (APC, APrC, SWAC, TC) Clint Hooppaw (EDC, APC, ARC, APrC) Ryan Kaess (APC, EDC) Alice Kreitz (APC, ARC) Linda Merkel (EDC, APC, ARC, APrC) Mark Nosbush (APC) Bill Raker (EDC, ARC, TC, APC) Hassan Saffouri (APC, ARC, APrC, EDC) Jason Shamblott (EDC, APC) Philip Vande Kamp (APC, EDC) REQUESTED ACTION: Appoint two members for 3-year terms and one alternate for a 1-year term. Agenda Information Memo January 18, 2000, City Council Meeting 3. Solid Waste Abatement Commission-This commission reviews waste management issues and policies, which include the Eagan recycling program. Members include business and hauling community representatives and residents. There are currently openings for one business representative, three resident representatives and an alternate. Rick Patraw, a resident representative, indicated that he would like to be considered for re- appointment; however, he did not return a background information form in time to be included with the interview information the Council received for January 11. His application will be distributed Tuesday evening for Council's consideration with the other applicants. Floyd Hiar is not eligible for re-appointment because he has served nine consecutive years on the commission. John Tapper, a business representative, is not seeking re-appointment. Susan Bast resigned her position in October, which resulted in the 2-year resident vacancy. The alternate position was vacant in 1999. Linda Merkel and Clint Hooppaw indicated that they would be willing to be considered for all commission openings. Larry Spicer indicated he would be willing to be considered for the Solid Waste Abatement Commission, in addition to the ARC. Therefore, Ms. Merkel, Mr. Hooppaw and Mr. Spicer could be appointed to either of the three resident openings or the alternate opening. Those applying for a position on the commission are as follows: Present Members Meetings Missed: None New Applicants: Gary Hansen (APC, APrC, SWAC, TC) Clint Hooppaw (EDC, APC, ARC, APrC; Also, SWAC and TC) Linda Merkel (EDC, APC, ARC, APrC; Also, SWAC and TC) Larry Spicer (ARC; Also SWAC) REQUESTED ACTION: Appoint two residents for 3-year terms; one resident for a 2-year term; one business representative for a 3-year term, and one alternate for a 1-year term. 4. Joint Burnsville/Eagan Telecommunications Commission--This commission oversees the administration of the Joint Burnsville/Eagan Cable Television system. Jerry Sowells is not seeking re-appointment. Maggie Jensen has expressed her desire to be re-appointed to the Telecommunications Commission; however, she also listed the EDC as a second choice. The alternate position has been vacant. Linda Merkel and Clint Hooppaw indicated that they would be willing to be considered for all commission openings. The following are applicants for the Telecommunications Commission: Present Members Meetings Missed: Maggie Jensen (TC, EDC) 1 New Applicants: Gary Hansen (APC, APrC, SWAC, TC) Clint Hooppaw (EDC, APC, ARC, APrC; Also SWAC and TC) Linda Merkel (EDC, APC, ARC, APrC; Also SWAC and TC) Alan Miller (TC) Bill Raker (EDC, ARC, TC, APC) REQUESTED ACTION: Appoint two members for 3-year terms and one alternate for a 1-year term. /40W2 Agenda Information Memo January 18, 2000, City Council Meeting 5. Airport Relations Commission-This commission exists at the discretion of the City Council without formal authorization in the City Code. The commission reviews airport issues within the City of Eagan and recommends airport-related policy to the City Council. The alternate position has been vacant. The following are applicants for the Airport Relations Commission: Present Members Meetings Missed: Eric Drenckhahn 1 Ted Gladhill 1 New Applicants: Clint Hooppaw (EDC, APC, ARC, APrC) Alice Kreitz (APC, ARC) Linda Merkel (EDC, APC, ARC, APrC) Bill Raker (EDC, ARC, APC, TC) Hassan Saffouri (APC, ARC, APrC, EDC) Larry Spicer (ARC) Paula Vierra (ARC) REQUESTED ACTION: Appoint two members for 3-year terms and one alternate for a 1-year term. 6. Advisory Parks Commission-This commission advises the City Council regarding park dedication by developers, purchase of additional parkland, City recreation programs, and natural resources issues. Bonnie Karson and Robert Douglas Kane, Jr. are not seeking re-appointment. Terry Davis has expressed his desire to be re-appointed to the APrC; however, he also listed the APC as a second choice. Lee Markell is not eligible for re-appointment because he has served nine consecutive years on the commission. Those applying for a position on the commission are as follows: Present Members Meetings Missed: Terry Davis (APrC, APC) 2 New Applicants: Cyndee Fields (APrC, APC) Gary Hansen (APC, APrC, SWAC, TC) Floyd Hiar (APrC) Clint Hooppaw (EDC, APC, ARC, APrC) Linda Merkel (EDC, APC, ARC, APrC) Dorothy Peterson (APrC) Hassan Saffouri (APC, ARC, APrC, EDC) REQUESTED ACTION: Appoint three members for 3-year terms and one alternate for a 1-year term. /03 Agenda Information Memo January 18, 2000, City Council Meeting ACTING MAYOR B. Acting Mayor-There is a statutory requirement that a member of the City Council be appointed as acting mayor. All councilmembers are eligible for this appointment. The acting mayor presides in the absence of Mayor Awada at Council meetings and all other activities pertaining to the City of Eagan. Historically, the Mayor has made this appointment. Councilmember Paul Bakken was Acting Mayor in 1999. REQUESTED ACTION: The Mayor to appoint a member of the City Council as acting mayor. OFFICIAL LEGAL NEWSPAPER C. Official Legal Newspaper-There is a statutory requirement to designate a legal newspaper as the official newspaper for the City. The City can only designate a legal newspaper of general circulation in the City as its official newspaper for publication of items required by law, and other matters that the Council deems advisable and in the public interest to be published. The City has received proposals from This Week Newspapers/Dakota County Tribune, Inc. and Sun Newspapers. The Dakota County Tribune is slightly more expensive; however, they publish the agendas as news items and there is no charge for publishing them. The Sun-Current would charge for publications of agendas, making total costs higher than just for publication of legal notices. An actual cost comparison is difficult because of different type sizes, characters per line and lines per inch. The cost difference is not a significant factor in total. Even though the Dakota County Tribune is the designated official legal newspaper, legal notices would also appear in Eagan This Week. Deadlines for publication and publication dates match up much better with City activity with the Dakota County Tribune and Eagan This Week than with the Sun Current. Any agenda published in the Sun-Current would need to be submitted to the paper more than one week in advance of the meeting and would be sketchy at best. Tribune This Week Sun Current Legal Notices Deadline Tues. Noon Tues. Noon Thurs. 2:00 p.m. Publication Thursday Saturday Wednesday Agendas Deadline Tues. Noon Wed. 4:00 p.m. Wed. 5:00 p.m. Publication Thursday Saturday Wednesday Proposals attached on pages 1 Q ' through 1. REQUESTED ACTION: Approve retention of Dakota County Tribune as the City of Eagan's official legal newspaper. CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATES D. City Council Meetings-The City Council must designate the dates and times of regular City Council meetings, which have traditionally been the first and third Tuesdays at 6:30 p.m. A tentative schedule is attached on page 10,5 designating the first and third Tuesdays as regular Council meeting dates, with the exception of three meetings. For those dates, alternate dates are suggested. Wednesday, July 5 was tentatively designated as the first Council meeting in July due to the July 4th holiday on Tuesday. If the Council would prefer another date, this should be discussed at Tuesday's meeting. REQUESTED ACTION: Approve or modify the 2000 Schedule of Council Meetings as presented with the alternate dates. /0 f 2000 SCHEDULE OF COUNCIL MEETINGS January 4 January 18 February 1 February 15 March 6* March 21 April 4 April 18 May 2 May 16 June 6 June 20 July 5* (tentative) July 18 August 1 August 15 September 5 September 19 October 3 October 17 November 6* November 21 December 5 December 19 *Denotes a change in regular meeting date /OJ Agenda Information Memo January 18, 2000, City Council Meeting CITY COUNCIL. MEETING PROCEDURES E. Council Meeting Procedures- The City Council has adopted Robert's Rules of Order to govern all business conducted at Regular City Council meetings. Enclosed on page / / I is a copy of an outline of a Regular City Council agenda that was adopted during Organizational Business in 1999 for use by the Mayor and City Councilmembers as to how Robert's Rules will apply to the overall agenda. Also enclosed on pages through is a copy of a handout entitled Eagan City Council - Procedure and Motion Practice on Business Items that was adopted by the Council during Organizational Business in 1999. This handout provides a summary of Robert's Rules of Order in greater detail on how business will be conducted for each City Council agenda item. Also included on pages through is a guideline of meeting procedures for use by the public when attending Regular City Council meetings. The audience can vary from a school age child to a resident who may be attending their first meeting to an applicant who is very sophisticated in making presentations to City Councils nationwide. Therefore, the guideline was written for a diverse audience while retaining the main purpose to provide information and awareness on how a citizen can interact with the City Council during a Regular City Council meeting. REQUESTED ACTION: To acknowledge Robert's Rules of Order as the means to conduct official business at all Regular City Council meetings and further approve the attached guidelines/handout for public participation in City Council meetings. COUNCIL STANDING COMMITTEE AND REPRESENTATIVE APPOINTMENTS F. Council Committee Appointments--Standing committees of the City Council have been used to examine a specific subject matter at the request of the City Council. The standing committees for 1999 were as follows: Finance Committee: Councilmember Blomquist (Chair) and Councilmember Masin Public Works Committee: Mayor Awada (Chair) and Councilmember Blomquist Personnel Committee: Councilmember Carlson (Chair) and Councilmember Bakken Year 2000 (Y2k) Committee: Councilmember Bakken (Chair) and Councilmember Carlson Census Committee: Councilmember Blomquist (Chair) and Councilmember Masin Millenium Committee: Councilmember Masin (Chair) and Mayor Awada Historically, the Mayor has made the appointments to standing committees. The representative positions for 1999 were as follows: Minnesota Valley Transit Authority Board: Councilmember Masin School District #191: Councilmember Masin School District #196: Councilmember Carlson School District #197: Councilmember Bakken History Committee: Councilmember Carlson and Councilmember Blomquist Municipal Legislative Commission Board: Mayor Awada Historically, appointments to representative positions have been made by Council consensus. REQUESTED ACTION: The Mayor to appoint members of Council standing committees; and for the Council to volunteer as representatives to the above referenced groups. I/O' Agenda Information Memo January 18, 2000, City Council Meeting G. OTHER APPOINTMENTS 1. MASAC Representatives. The City is eligible to appoint two representatives and one or more alternates to the Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council, a Metropolitan Airports Commission advisory body. Lance Staricha, a member of the Airport Relations Commission, has been serving as one of the City's representatives. Assistant City Administrator Jamie Verbrugge was appointed as the staff representative to MASAC. No alternate was appointed to serve in 1999. If the City Council chooses to appoint an alternate for 2000, it may be appropriate to consider other Airport Relations Commission members for that position. REQUESTED ACTION: Appoint one member of the ARC and re-appoint Jamie Verbrugge and an alternate to the Metropolitan Aircraft Sound Abatement Council. NEWSPAPERS 1525 East Highway 13 Burnsville, MN 55337 612-894-1111 • FAX:612-882-6052 December 12, 1999 City of Eagan P.O. Box 21199 Eagan, Minnesota 55121 To the Mayor and City Councilmembers: Please accept the attached hid for legal newspaper status for 2000. We believe that the combination of the Dakota County Tribune and Thisweek Newspapers offers the city the best vehicle for communicating with its citizens. We offer the largest circulation and a dedicated staff to handle your legals efficiently. All of the legal notices that appear in our papers are typeset and proofed by professionals who have been working with such documents for many years. By designating the Dakota County Tribune as your legal newspaper, your legal notices will also be published free of charge in Eagan Thisweek, which reaches 12,220 homes in the city. We believe that our bid reflects our sincere desire to serve the City of Eagan as legal newspaper. If you have any questions, feel free to call. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Bob Temple Carol Haverland General Manager Legal Department Enc. /0 g QUOTATION FORM CITY OF EAGAN No. of Lines Per Column Inch 10 Printed Characters and Spaces Per Line Average 45 Average 450 Total Characters and Spaces Per Column Inch Per Line Cost 67.7G Per Column Inch Cost $6. . 77 DAKOTA COUNTY TRIBUNE, INC. Newspaper By Carol Haverland December 12, 1999 Date Comments : O newspapers December 21, 1999 Gene Van Overbeke City of Eagan 3930 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Dear Mr. Van Overbeke: The Eagan Sun Current would like to be considered for designation as the legal newspaper for the City of Eagan for the year 2000. Sun Newspaper is excited to announce that a new feature will be added to legal notices this year. Beginning in January, all published notices will be posted on our website (www.mnsun.com) at no additional charge. This will be an enhancement to the local news coverage already available on the Internet and broaden the readership of your legal notices. The rate structure for legals effective January 1, 2000 will be: 1 column width: $6.09 per inch for first insertion $3.04 per inch for subsequent insertions There are 11 lines per inch Notarized affidavits on each of your publications will be provided with no additional charge. The deadline for regular length notices is 2:00 pm the Thursday prior to publication; notices that are six pages or more deadline an extra 24 hours in advance. If you require more information to make your decision, please contact me or Meridel Hedblom, our Legal Representative, at 612-392-6880. Thank you for considering the Sun Current as the official newspaper for the City of Eagan in 2000. We appreciate the opportunity to serve the needs of your community. Sincerely, Fran Chllinski President and Publisher 10917 VAS ViEw ROAD * EDEN PxAixiE * MINNESOTA 55344 * 612-829-0797 * FAx: 612-941-3588 AGENDA FORMAT 1. Call to Order 1.1 Mayor customarily tolls city bell and returns to place at Council table. 1.2 Mayor states, "The Month, Day, Year meeting of the Eagan City Council is called to order." 2. Roll Call 2.1. Mayor states, "The Secretary will please take note of the role." 2.2. If appropriate, Mayor also states, "The Secretary will please note that [Mayor/Councilmember] has provided notice by [written correspondence/telephone message) that [he/she] is unable to attend this meeting. 3. Pledge of Allegiance 3.1. Mayor states, Please rise and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance." 3.2. Mayor leads in the Pledge. 4. Adopt Agenda* 4.1. Mayor states, "The Council will now consider adoption of the agenda." 4.1.1. If no Member requests recognition, Mayor prompts, "Is there a motion to adopt the agenda?" 4.2. Member requests recognition, "Mayor Awada, (may I be recognized) for (the purpose of making) a motion?" 4.3. Mayor recognizes Member, "Member (has the floor)." 4.4. Member makes motion, "Mayor Awada, I make the following motion." 4.4.1. "To adopt the agenda as printed." or 4.4.2 "To adopt the agenda as printed with the following change(s)." 4.4.2.1. "To delete item [item identification letter] under [agenda category]." or 4.4.2.2. "To add item [item identification letter] under [agenda category], which should read, [text of proposed new item]". or 4.4.2.3 "To substitute for item [item identification letter] under [agenda category] the following item, which should read, "[text of proposed item]." Or 4.4.2.4 "To separate item [item identification letter] under [Consent Agenda], and move to [agenda category]." 5. Approval of Minutes* 5.1. Mayor states, "The Council will now consider approval of the minutes. Does any Member have any changes on the minutes?" 5.2 Member makes motion with changes. 5.2.1 "To approve the minutes as printed" or "as amended." 6. Visitors to be Heard (10 minute total time limit) 7. Department Head Business* 8. Consent Agenda* 8.1 If items are pulled, it must be by motion at the time of the regular agenda adoption, subject to regular motion practice. 9. Public Hearings (7:00 PM)* 10. Old Business* 11. New Business* 12. Legislative/Intergovernmental Affairs Update* 13. Administrative Agenda* 14. Visitors To Be Heard 15. Adjournment* 15.1 Mayor asks, "Is there any further business?" 15.2 If not, "There being no further business, a motion to adjourn is in order." 16. Executive Session *Regular motion practice is observed. Eagan City Council-Procedure and Motion Practice on Business Items 1. Mayor introduces item A. Brief introduction of item. II. Staff Report A. Mayor gives staff the floor, "The Council will now hear from [Title and name] for the staff report. B. Staff concludes, "Mayor Awada, that concludes the staff report." C. Mayor, "The Council must now make a motion to frame the item for consideration. What is the pleasure of the Council?" III. Motion A. Member requests recognition from the Mayor. I. "Mayor, (I request recognition) for (the purpose of making ) a motion." B. Mayor recognizes Councilmember. 1. "Member [member's last name], (for a motion)." C. Member makes motion. 1. "Mayor Awada, I make the following motion." 2. "[text of motion]." (usually ended by, "as printed in the Council packet.") 3. If the motion is not included in the packet, a written sample motion should be prepared for distribution to Members, the Secretary and staff. 4. Similarly, if a business item is one that a Member has added to the agenda, the Member should provide a sample motion for the packet. D. For very controversial items, a Member may move simply to open up the item for public input. 1. In this case, the Mayor asks the Council, "If there is no objection?" 2. If a Member objects, the motion requires a second and is subject to debate. 3. If no Member objects, the Mayor may pronounce, "the motion carries, and the item will now be opened to the public for input." 4. Procedure picks up at VI.B. IV. Second A. Seconding Member need not request recognition or obtain the floor. B. "I second the motion," or just "second." Procedure goes on to VI. C. If no second is forthcoming, the Mayor asks, "Is there a second to the motion?" 1. If not, the Mayor says, "Since there is no second, the motion is not before the Council." 2. And then moves to next item or asks, "Is there any further business?" 3. Procedure begins again at III. D. If the motion is out of order, the Mayor makes the appropriate ruling, and procedure begins again at III. V. Revisions may be immediately suggested (in accordance with City policy attached) - see procedure at VIII A. "The motion has been made and seconded, and the item is now framed for consideration by the Council. Before the item is placed before the Council, it will be opened up to the public for input. B. "Does the applicant wish to be heard on this matter?" C. "If there are any present who wish to speak to this item, please come forward to the podium. Please state your name and address, and spell your name for the record." D. Mayor manages public input. Questions or responses from Council Members are not appropriate until the item has been brought back before the Council. E. Mayor continues to prompt for input, "Does anyone else wish to be heard on this matter?" VII. Mayor closes public forum A. If no one else wishes to be heard, Mayor states, "Seeing no one else, the public forum is now closed, and the item will be brought back to the Council. VIII. Before the Mayor States the Question, any Member may suggest a revision A. Members may offer revisions from right after motion is made until the public forum is opened and from after the forum is closed until the Mayor states the question on the motion. 1. Member asks, "Mayor Awada, for a revision?" 2. Mayor recognizes speaker, "Member (last name], (for a revision)." 3. Member asks, "Mayor Awada, would the Member accept the following modification to the motion?" a) Speaker states an addition, a deletion, a substitution, or combination thereof. 4. Mayor recognizes maker of motion. 5. Maker of the original motion may: a) Decline "Mayor Awada, I decline the modification." b) Accept "Mayor Awada, I accept the modification." (1) If accepted, the person who suggested the modification counts as a seconder. (2) If the modifier is the one who made the original motion, the original seconder must second it. 6. The Mayor states, "The Member has [accepted/declined) the modification." IX. Mayor States the Question on the motion A. Mayor states, "The motion has been made and seconded and the motion is now before the Council. B. Once the Mayor has stated the question, further revisions are out of order. C. Mayor asks, "Is there any discussion?" X. Discussion 1. Members may speak 2 times each, with a 2-minute limit each time. 2. Questions and requests for input count against the speaker's time. 3. Members must request recognition from the Mayor before speaking, and all comments and discussion are directed through the Mayor. Even if a question is directed to staff or another Member, the question is asked through the Mayor. (Ex., "Mayor Awada, is the Member suggesting that...?" or "Mayor Awada, would City Administrator Hedges please clarify what is meant by 4. Maker of motion may not speak against the motion, but the seconder may. 5. Maker of motion speaks first; seconder speaks second; other discussion is in the order recognized by the Mayor. XI. Putting the Question A. Once debate appears to have stopped, the Mayor asks, "Is the Council ready to vote on the question?" or "Is there any further discussion?" B. If not, the Mayor says, "Seeing none, the question is now before the Council." 1. This ends debate. At this point, one cannot "explain his or her vote," since that is the same as debate. C. "All those in favor (of the motion) say aye." D. "All those opposed (to the motion) say no." XII. Mayor announces the voting result A. "The vote is is favor and opposed, and the motion is [adopted/lost]." B. "(and staff is directed to take the appropriate action.)" C. After the vote is announced, there can be no further discussion on the item! D. A Member can change a vote up until the Mayor announces the result. After the Mayor announces the vote, a Member can change a vote only with the permission of the Council, either by unanimous consent or adoption of a motion to grant the permission, which is not debatable. E. If the motion is lost, and the business has not been dispensed with, a new motion is in order. Procedure begins anew at III. 113 eily oG aeaen EAGAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING PROCEDURES AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION GUIDELINES Mayor: Welcome to a meeting of the Eagan City Council. In order to Patricia Awado ensure that this and future Council meetings can be meaningful to you Council and other citizens, the City Council uses a set of rules to govern the members: conduct ofits meetings. These "Rules ofProcedure" are for the Bakken Beal Blomquist convenience ofthose attending the meeting. The City Council follows Peggy Carlson "Robert's Rules of Order" for conducting official business. The Sandy Masin following is a brief summary of the order ofbusiness for a City Council meeting which may be of interest to you. Members of City Staff COUNCIL MEETING PROCEDURES Generally Attending ORDER OF BUSINESS City Council Meetings: The schedule for a Council meeting is shown on the AGENDA. An Tom Hedges, agenda is simply a list ofbusiness to be considered at ameeting and City Administrator includes: Jim Sheldon, • Roll Call & Pledge ofAllegiance Consulting Legal • Adopt Agenda/Approve Minutes Counsel • Visitors to be Heard (10 Minute Total Time Limit) Tom Colbert, • Consent Agenda Director of • Public Hearings Public Works • Old Business Mike Ridley • New Business Senior Planner • Additional Items • Legislative/Intergovernmental Affairs Update • Administrative Agenda • Visitors to be Heard To find out specific items are which are scheduled on the agenda, refer to the Dakota County Tribune, This Week, or call the Municipal Center at (651) 681-4600. Copies of the agenda are available at the entrance to the Council Chambers at the time of the meetings. THE ROLE OF THE PUBLIC MEETING CONDUCT GUIDELINES The City Council welcomes the public to all The City Council has established the following Council meetings, workshops, and hearings guidelines for the conduct of City Council and you are encouraged to express your meetings: opinion during these meetings. To keep the 1. Persons attending a Council meeting may agenda moving smoothly, the Council has address the Council at the time at which adopted basic guidelines for making specific items appear on the agenda. presentations before the Council. 2. When addressing the Council, the presenter • The purpose ofthe guidelines is: shall approach the podium and begin present- to provide for a more orderly ing by stating his/her name and address. meeting 3. All persons who speak must address the • to provide equal and adequate Mayor. time for review and consideration 4. At public hearings, all questions and ofagenda items remarks from the audience are limited to • to provide equal rights to all four (4) minutes and shall be addressed to members ofthe public who address the Mayor. Each person is limited to one turn. The Mayor may use discretion whether the presiding officer to allow repeat statements from the same • to provide the City Council with an person. equal and rational approach to all 5. Presentations concerning items will be decisions. heard onl upon approval ofthe Mayor. 6. To help maintain order, applause or other disturbances are discouraged. 7. Petitions should be presented to the City Administrator. 8. Audience members are encouraged to address the Council but cannot make motions or otherwise participate in the meeting. NON-AGENDA ITEMS PUBLIC HEARINGS Individuals wishing to appear at regular Certain items on the agenda are identified as meetings ofthe City Council relative to items PUBLIC HEARINGS. These are formal not included on an agenda may speak or make proceedings giving citizens an opportunity to presentations under the sections of the agenda express their concerns on a specific issue. entitled, VISITORS TO BE HEARD. The Some issues on which the Council is required Visitors to be Heard section is scheduled at to hold public hearings are the annual budget, the beginning of the meeting; however, the public improvement projects, and levying of total time limit for all speakers is 10 minutes. special assessments. If time does not permit all to be heard, a The Council endeavors to complete action on second opportunity for Visitors is provided at each issue the same night as the hearing. the end of the meeting. No Council action on However, there may be circumstances where a visitor's presentation should be expected at additional information or action is needed this meeting, since the Council will want to making it desirable to defer action until a study all proposals or requests before making later date. Depending on the situation, the a decision. hearing may be closed or continued to a future THE CONSENT AGENDA meeting date. The Eagan City Council uses a CONSENT GENERAL HEARING PROCEDURES AGENDA procedure for routine items 1. Mayor opens the hearing. needing little orno deliberation. Those items are identified on the agenda and are approved 2. Staff describes the proposal. with one vote unless a councilmember or citizen requests that the item be discussed or 3. Those wishing to comment are heard. considered separately. 4. Formal action is taken to close the hearing. 5. Councilmembers have an opportunity to comment and ask questions on the issue. 6. Council takes action on the issue or defers decision. HOW THE COUNCIL VOTES COUNCIL MEETING CABLECASTING Three members of the Council constitute a With few exceptions, the regular City Council quorum. A majority vote is needed to adopt meetings are televised "live" over the City's motions and general resolutions. A vote of 3/5 Cable Television Access Channel Sixteen is required for most ordinances. Hearings on (16). These meetings are also recorded for preliminary reports for improvements, compre- replay, which generally occurs on the day hensive plan revisions, and zoning ordinance following the regular meeting (the first and changes require a 4/5 vote. Publication of an third wednesday of each month) at 9:00 a.m. ordinance in the official newspaper of the City and 5:00 p.m. is required before it actually takes effect. Beginning in 1999, on a six-month trial basis MEETING DATES the Special City Council meetings or With few exceptions, the City Council meets at "workshops" will also be televised when 6:30 p.m. on the first and third Tuesdays of applicable and feasible. each month in the Council Chambers of the Municipal Center Building at 3830 Pilot Knob If you would like to purchase a copy of a Road. The Council also meets in special televised City meeting, please contact the session as needed with notice ofthese meet- Bumsville/Eagan Community Television staff ings posted at the Municipal Center Building. at (651) 882-8213. Occasionally meeting dates are changed to avoid conflicts with holidays or other events so you may wish to consult staff at the Municipal Center for information on specific meeting dates. Agenda Information Memo January 12, 2000 Eagan City Council Meeting XI. NEW BUSINESS A. REZONING & PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION (MURPHY FARM 3an ADDITION) RAY MILLER ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: > To approve a Rezoning of approximately 12.7 acres from A (Agricultural) to R-1 (Single Family) located north of Murphy Parkway and east of Donegal Way in the northwest 1/4 of Section 21. ? To approve a Preliminary Subdivision entitled the "Murphy Farms 3Td Addition" located north of Murphy Parkway and east of Donegal Way in the northwest 1/4 of Section 21 subject to the conditions listed in the APC meeting minutes. FACTS: ? The 12.7 acre property in question currently overlays two individual parcels of land each occupied by a single family residence. Specifically, the property overlays Lots 19 and 20, Block 2 of the Murphy Farm subdivision which was platted in the summer of 1997. > The site has a topographic difference of over 80 feet from the southwest to the northeast. The northeastern portion of the subject site holds both significant vegetation and slopes. Some mature vegetation also exists in the south central area of the site. No wetlands exist on the property. > Approval of the subdivision as proposed will grant the applicant a variance to allow the creation of a lot (Lot 18) with less than 85 feet of width at the front setback. > At their regular meetings on December 16, 1999, the Advisory Parks Commission considered the Rezoning and Subdivision and raised concern over the impact of proposed Lot 18 upon the adjacent Blackhawk Park. To allow the developer to respond to such concern, the Commission continued the item to their January 10, 2000 meeting. The Commission requested and the developer agreed, to have a workshop session on December 28,1999 to examine options for the property, including the potential acquisition of a portion of the site. > At their regular meeting on December 21, 1999, the Advisory Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the Rezoning and Preliminary Subdivision (including the variance) and recommended approval subject to the conditions listed in the APC meeting minutes. I ATTACHMENTS (7): Minutes of the December 21, 1999 APC meeting, pages I .0 through Minutes of the January 10, 2000 APrC meeting, pages through J.30 Staff report, pages through i ~1 Development Alternative A, page Development Alternative B, pages through Development Alternative C, page's f /S$' John G. Ward correspondence dated 1/12/00 pages.l4hrough 4() ll? Page 2 December 21, 1999 ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION DRAFT PUBLIC HEARINGS REZONING AND PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION-RAY MILLER Chair Heyl opened the first public hearing of the evening regarding a rezoning of approximately 12.73 acres from A (agricultural) to R-1 (Single Family) and a Preliminary Subdivision (Murphy Farm 3'd Addition) to create 25 single family lots, legally described at Lots 19 and 20, Block 2, Murphy farm, located north of Murphy Parkway and east of Donegal Way in the NW V. of Section 21. Planner Kirmis introduced this item. Mr. Kirmis highlighted the information presented in City staffs planning report dated December 16, 1999. Mr. Kirmis noted the background and history, the surrounding uses and the existing conditions of the subject property. Mr. Kirmis highlighted two concerns of the development, namely, the length of the driveway for Lot 18 and the current alignment of Street "A," which could be realigned to save significant trees. Mr. Kirmis further stated that Condition 10 of the Report should be amended to indicate that a cash dedication is required for the trailway rather than requiring the developer to construct the trial along Murphy Parkway from the entrance to Blackhawk Park to Donegal Way. The applicants representative, Ray Miller, noted his presence. Jan Johnson, President of the Murphy Farm Homeowner's Association spoke concerning traffic concerns as a result of the seven lots that will access Donegal Way. Another resident expressed concern about the length of the driveway for Lot 18. Chair Heyl closed the public hearing. In response to an inquiry from Chair Heyl, John Gorder, Design Development Engineer, responded to inquiries concerning traffic on Donegal Way. Members Steininger, Frank and Miller discussed the design of the street layout. Member Frank moved, Member Steininger seconded, a motion to recommend approval of the rezoning of the property from A (Agricultural) to R-1 (Single Family), residential single family zoning designation. All voted in favor. Member Frank moved, Steininger seconded, a motion to recommend approval of a preliminary subdivision allowing the creation of a 25-lot single family residential subdivision entitled "Murphy Farm Third Addition" and consisting of 12.7 acres of land located north of the Murphy Parkway and East of Donegal Way in the NW of Section 21, subject to the following conditions: I ao Page 3 December 21, 1999 ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION 1. The property shall be platted. 2. The City shall approve a variance to allow Lot 18 to have a width of less than 85 feet at the front setback line. 3. The developer shall comply with these standards conditions of plat approval as adopted by Council on February 3, 1993: B l, C l , DI, El 4. A vehicle guardrail shall be constructed at the time of building permit for Lot 18 along the south edge of the driveway in the area of the retaining wall. 5. The following lot modifications shall be made: ? The area of Lot 19 shall be expanded from 11,997 to 12,000 square feet ? The widths of Lot 4 and Lot 6 shall be expanded from 82 and 84 feet respectively to 85 feet _6. "Street A" shall be realigned such that significant trees near Lots 14 and 15 may be retained. 7. Existing well and septic systems on the site shall be abandoned in accordance with County and City requirements. 8. The developer shall construct the hydrant lead pipe to serve Lot 18 entirely within the development site. 9. The sanitary sewer service for Lot 18 shall be constructed as a pump and forced pipe system with adequate depth to reduce the potential for freezing. 10. Cash trailway dedication payment is required prior to the issuance of any building permit. 11. Individual tree preservation plans will be required for lots 1-3, 5, 7-16, 18, 21-24. 12. Tree Protective measures (i.e. orange colored silt fence or 4 foot polyethylene laminate safety netting) shall be required to be installed at the Drip Line or at the perimeter of the Critical Root Zone, whichever is greater, of significant trees/woodlands to be preserved. 13. The applicant shall contact the City Forestry Division and set up a pre- construction site inspection at least five days prior to the issuance of the grading permit to ensure compliance with the approved Tree Preservation Plan and placement of the tree protection fencing. ~a~ Page 4 December 21, 1999 I)RAFT ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION 14. A cash dedication in lieu of on-site ponding shall be required for 40 percent of the area (5.1 acres) of this development. All voted in favor. PLANNED D VELOPMENT AMENDMENT-HONEY E LTD. Chair Hey] opened th ext public hearing of the evening reg ding a request to amend a Planned Development to allow uilding signage on the north, so and east elevations of the building at 4510 Erin Drive in the WW ~/4 of Section 30. Planner Dudziak introduced this, item. Ms. Dudziak highlighted the information presented in City staffs planning report dated December 16, 1999. Ms. Dudziak noted the background and history, the surrounding uses and the existing conditions of'the subject property. The applicant was not present. No one from the audience addressed the APC. Chair Heyl closed the public hearing. Discussion occurred regarding the appurtenances of signage on the east elevation. Member Frank moved, Member Tilley seconded, a motion to recommend approval of an amendment of the Planned Development Agreement to allow building signage on the north and south elevations of the building located at 4510 Erin Drive 1n the SW '/4 of Section 30 with a condition that there be no signage on the east elevation of the building. All voted in favor, with the following conditions: 1. An Agreement amending the Planned Development shall be executed and recorded at the Dakota County recorder's office. 2. A sign permit for each sign is required prior to installation. 3. There shall be no signage on the east elevation of the building. All voted in favor. PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION-MENDOTA HOMES Chair Heyl opened the next public hearing of the evening regarding the request for a Preliminary Subdivision to divide the common property for Oakwood Heights Condominiums to establish a separate ownership of the property and a separate association, for the seven-unit building being constructed on the north of the two existing buildings. 1 1 Advisory Parks Commission Minutes of January 10, 2000 Meeting Page 2 OLD BUSINESS MURPHY FARM 3RD ADDITION Director Vraa provided a brief background of this project noting that the Commission had reviewed this proposal at their December 16 meeting and again at a Land Acquisition sub-committee meeting on December 28. The establishment of Lot 18 as a flag lot and its impact to Blackhawk Park created the most concern for the Commission. Given that information, the developer came to the December 28 meeting with a modification to the plan whereby the driveway to Lot 18 would move to the west with all utilities planned to go within the roadway. This change was suggested to minimize the visual impact to Blackhawk Park and the adjacent neighborhood. Residents from the surrounding neighborhood were present at that meeting to share their concerns for the long driveway onto Murphy Parkway as well as the impact a house on Lot 18 would have on the park. Director Vraa reviewed the original plan presented by the developer along with the plan that moved the driveway to the west side of Lot 18 (Exhibits A and B2). He continued that the development to the west had provided a conservation easement over the lots adjacent to Blackhawk Park to preserve the visual integrity of the park. Vraa then shared Exhibit C, which showed a proposed conservation easement that covered a portion of Lots 21 and I I as well as Lot 18. Another alternative shared was the acquisition of approximately 25, 490 square feet of Lot 18 which would expand the size of Lots 12, 13, and 14(Exhibit D). Director Vraa concluded that another option the Commission may consider is no development on Lot 18 and/or no acquisition by the City. Mr. Miller addressed the Commission commenting that the discussion from the December 28 meeting was well represented by staff and said he was available for questions. John Ward, 1634 Murphy Parkway addressed the Commission noting that the neighbors' concerns focus primarily on the development of Lot 18 as it affects both the neighborhood and Blackhawk Park. Mr. Ward shared photos taken from Blackhawk Park to Lot 18 pointing out the visual impact a building on this lot would have to the park. He noted that Lot 18 was a fairly substantial lot ($140,000) and would most likely require an equally substantial home to maintain the value of the lot. He opined that the City's purchase of a portion of the lot would help to maintain the integrity of the park. Another resident on Murphy Parkway expressed his concern that the proposed width of the driveway will not accommodate the utilities that are being proposed within the 20' width. He also opined that the 380' driveway is not appropriate in this development and that Lot 18 should be left in its wooded state. Commission Members Johnson and Davis commented that staff s presentation and the information contained in the packet accurately reflected the content of the December 28 meeting. Member Davis added that the developer came prepared with an alternate plan to move the driveway to the west in response to the Commission's concerns. Davis also asked if the plan shown on Exhibit D were recommended, would there be an easement in the area abutting the entrance to Blackhawk Park. Director Vraa stated that an easement was not shown in this location nor had it been previously discussed. Director Vraa again referenced Exhibit C that showed existing conservation easements on the development to the west. He noted that Forestry Supervisor Hove had identified a proposed conservation easement over Lots 21, 11, 12,13 and 18. As a point of clarification, Member Petersen asked if a conservation easement covered all of Lot 18, would a house and road still be constructed an the lot. Director Vraa responded that although a conservation easement would be placed on the entire lot it would allow for a building pad and driveway as described in Alternative B. Member Davis suggested that if the City were to purchase the northeastern portion of Lot 18 that easements should be placed on the east side of Lots 13 and 14. Director Vraa stated that this option could certainly be discussed. P3 Advisory Parks Commission Minutes of January 10, 2000 Meeting Page 3 Member Filipi communicated that after the sub-committee meeting he visited the site and walked the area. He stated he had changed his opinion and now had a preference for purchasing all of Lot 18 rather than just a portion of it. Member Markell suggested that an appraisal be completed for this lot before spending $90-100,000. Member Petersen reiterated his concern for the development in general. He opined that this would be an excellent development for 24 lots and didn't feel that Lot 18 should be included as part of it. Petersen expressed his appreciation for the work the developer had done to mitigate the Commission's concerns but added that if the City were to acquire a portion of Lot 18 that conservation easements on Lots 12, 13 and 14 should be required to preserve vegetation. Mr. Miller responded that economics dictated the need for 25 lots and that if there were less lots, the viability of the development is compromised. He added that if a portion of Lot 18 is purchased by the City he would certainly be open to placing a conservation easement on whatever lots the City deemed appropriate. Member Gutknecht opined that the Commission should move forward cautiously and consider that a house on Lot 18 will forever change the look from Blackhawk Park. Mr. Miller reassured Commission Members that if a house is built on Lot 18 the existing vegetation will camouflage most of the building. He also stated that restrictive covenants can be placed on the building to be constructed on this lot to insure that the site is protected as the Commission intended. Member Gutknecht expressed his appreciation of the developer's willingness to mitigate the impact of construction on Lot 18 but opined that Blackhawk Park should be the priority in the Commission's decision. Member Bari asked what the square footage of Lot 18 was. Mr. Miller responded that it was originally 65,000 sq. ft. but with the movement of the driveway, the size has grown to approximately 72-73,000 sq. ft. Member Bari asked for clarification on the price of the 25,490 sq. ft. parcel proposed for acquisition compared to the previously identified $140,000 price for Lot 18. He opined that $90,000 was an inordinately high amount for the limited square footage. Director Vraa clarified that the purchase price of $90,000 would allow for acquisition of a portion of Lot 18 and provide conservation easements adjacent to Blackhawk Park entrance road. Member Kubik added that this scenario would also allow the developer to expand the size of Lots 12, 13 and 14 to mitigate the loss of a building site on Lot 18. Member Markell reiterated his concern that an appraisal should be completed for Lot 18 prior to the City's acquisition. Member Kubik asked how long an appraisal would take and questioned the cost. Director Vraa stated that a full appraisal is approximately a 60 day process, however, a more informal analysis can be attempted in time for further review if the Commission chooses. Member Davis asked if a motion could be framed to allow this proposal to move ahead to the January 18 City Council meeting as requested by the developer. Member Kubik reiterated that Mr. Miller has been very helpful in attempting to provide options to mitigate the Commission's concerns and felt the process should move ahead. Following further brief discussion, Barbara Johnson moved, Terry Davis seconded with all members voting in favor to make the following recommendations to the City Council relative to Murphy Farm Yd Addition: • The City would acquire a portion of Lot 18 for a negotiated amount up to but not exceeding $90,000 for the purpose of preservation and protection of Blackhawk Park/neighborhood views as shown conceptually on Exhibit D. The City would acquire the northeast portion of Lot 18 with the balance being added to adjacent Lots I I through 14. Conservation easemenst will be placed on the east side of Lots 13 and 14 to preserve the vegetative buffer to Blackhawt Park • Should the City not acquire a portion of Lot 18, the lot would be, figured in a manner intended to minimize tree loss by moving the driveway to the west resulting in the expansion of the area between the driveway and the adjacent Blaackhawk Park. The expanded area is intended to create a vegetative buffer. The developer would place a conservation easement over Lots 21 and 11, and all of Lot 18 per Exhibit C. Construction of a home and driveway on Lot 18 would be allowed with the developer relocating the fire hydrant and all utilities within the driveway access to the home. The road of Lot 18 would be proposed to be 12 feet in width and within an area of no more than 20 feet in width. .,0~ Mi U IM lAr• ~ ~i/ - w ova ' •trwMw..w.•w.~w. _ ~ •V ~ / r / f Liz: rr^--i rTr.w- flT j~> _ "III- - -I~I- "II ~'•.'~'`,t,t~` \'11 ~ > l ~ v • ~ Ili 1 I III /III - - - ~ \ ~ ~ ' If je_l or r. ` ` ¦ _ / 0 It i \'k:, / s ` `y iii 'I '/~a ii ~ r/rI NNW /A*1 m Awram iii w w. awmw Im A OWWAL ,.•.i."ia. w'~'iZ ww1 w BRW NEWS, ~T... GRADING PLAN a WOTA AafTY~ A w w GOVT. LOT 2 I / goo de- s 7 v L^ , IL 77 j; I o 17- '0 L9 1 4 p / lop Ill saaa~aa ` \ r , i:r!1 rammurr a: BRW I[VRPR~f FARM a MW ADDYPDON " • ....~,....aa \ / / ill ~ ll) ::T 111 III - ~ \ I'1 f , Tr'1 /ice j/III" III III III \ • \I r 11 f< ,o. ~ y / " 4 r aa, 1 . Y3 - y i ' i/jjjVVVYYYJJJ'''~~~ V. "i 1• ti3- i.~ .ice. ~f mil 111' i r /a 7 ~ a ~ w1r'r•10. AId ~M OOf11101 • ~"T~'Lr ~ ro , r . r.~iir~w w, w ~w w r~is~i r.err. BR W cm or (AOiw QQ W rove s .r. w w ..r, MINA CMINTY. MI TA & rs r s s' w not dwow aw Afmw JVA 1IOOIM OMA V w •r u w~ a r~ ris enm VIOL o 'ALW= VAOMVO .m MAX" a= iww NOW A AW _ ua `rw vwl-.Mas 16i°rw M89 \J (NL NKVN~ m .r„wi r~irrw~i NDLLI00V - MV4 ANAM 1~~ lw 'M 1Y ra. 1MY M lwl Mm am Y aaa~a~ua aaa nib 11hilF4bal a~uu~11LaIna a iaUa ul4~lllllLILULUwLL~au~iilia~ul~aunl 'W~W"'+nlni~ LNaLUF 1 I W I ! u+ u! LPL ' r r a h b N! aftilh pit .I e- O C N N l 17 wo 1 11 i ~r ~ Zzi r.._1! ~.ft 3x I Lam. * e°k~.. ' al N :i c R i I city A PARK ftl4 41 2 ? t 7 STREET 8 P1 rr>u # it d,~\ '•i.~" __107.66__ s ~ ~ ! yG St t7 s ~ t sn t T ? + GALWAY LANE Als, 1101, ' v~9a \ \ / Ott r~4 y4 ~4 / / ?~d1 U pEERW00D pRIVE CA) Mi. z z Y l CN O M.M n 1~ rn g o cry ° /3O PLANNING REPORT CITY OF EAGAN REPORT DATE: December 16, 1999 CASE: 21-PS-22-11-99 21-RZ-14-11-99 APPLICANT: Ray Miller HEARING DATE: December 21, 1999 PROPERTY OWNER: Dennis Murphy PREPARED BY: Bob Kirmis REQUEST: Rezoning and Preliminary Subdivision LOCATION: 1651 and 1655 Murphy Parkway (NW '/4 of section 21) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Mixed Residential (D-II) ZONING: Agriculture (A) SUMMARY OF REQUEST Ray Miller is requesting Preliminary Subdivision approval to allow the creation of a 25 lot single family residential subdivision entitled "Murphy Farm 3rd Addition". The proposed subdivision overlays 12.7 acres of land located north of Murphy Parkway and east of Donegal Way in the northwest 1/4 of Section 21. In conjunction with the requested preliminary subdivision, the applicant has also requested a Rezoning of the property from an A, Agriculture to an R-1, Residential Single Family zoning designation. The request also includes a Variance to allow a parcel of land with less than 85 feet of width at the front setback line. AUTHORITY FOR REVIEW Rezoning: City Code Chapter 11, Section 11.40, Subdivision 5 states, in part that the Council shall not rezone any land or area in any zoning district or make any other proposed amendment to this chapter without first having referred it to the planning commission for it's consideration and recommendation. 131 Planning Report - Murphy Farm 3rd December 21, 1999 Page 2 Subdivision: City Code Section 13.20 Subd. 6 states that "In the case of platting, the Planning Commission and the Council shall be guided by criteria, including the following, in approving, denying or establishing conditions related thereto: A. That the proposed subdivision does comply with applicable City Code provisions and the Comprehensive Guide Plan. B. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision complies with applicable plans of Dakota County, State of Minnesota, or the Metropolitan Council. C. That the physical characteristics of the site including, but not limited to, topography, vegetation, susceptibility to erosion and siltation, susceptibility to flooding, water storage and retention are such that the site is suitable for the type of development or use contemplated. D. That the site physically is suitable for the proposed density of development. E. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvement is not likely to cause environmental damage. F. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is not likely to cause health problems. G. That the design of the subdivision or the improvements will not conflict with easements of record or with easements established by judgment of court. H. That completion of the proposed development of the subdivision can be completed in a timely manner so as not to cause an economic burden upon the City for maintenance, repayment of bonds, or similar burden. 1. That the subdivision has been properly planned for possible solar energy system use within the subdivision or as it relates to adjacent property. (Refer to City Handbook on Solar Access). J. That the design of public improvements for the subdivision is compatible and consistent with the platting or approved preliminary plat on adjacent lands. K. That the subdivision is in compliance with those standards set forth in that certain document entitled "City of Eagan Water Quality Management Plan for the Gun Club Lake Watershed Management Organization" which document is properly approved and filed with the office of the City Clerk hereinafter referred to as the "Water Quality Management Plan". Said document and all of the notations, references and other 13c), Planning Report - Murphy Farm 3rd December 21, 1999 Page 3 information contained therein shall have the same force and effect as if fully set down herein and is hereby made a part of this Chapter by reference and incorporated herein as fully as if set forth herein at length. It shall be the responsibility of the City Clerk to maintain the Water Quality Management Plan and make the same available to the public." BACKGROUND/HISTORY The 12.7 acre property in question currently overlays two individual parcels of land each occupied by a single family residence. Specifically, the property overlays Lots 19 and 20, Block 2 of the Murphy Farm subdivision which was platted in the summer of 1997. The site is presently zoned A, Agriculture and a rezoning of the property to R-1, Residential Single Family is necessary. EXISTING CONDITIONS The site-has a topographic difference of over 80 feet from the southwest to the northeast. The northeastern portion of the subject site holds both significant vegetation and slopes. Some mature vegetation also exists in the south central area of the site. No wetlands exist on the property. As previously mentioned, the site is occupied by two single family homes (corresponding to the existing lots). In addition, two detached accessory structures exist on the westerly parcel. SURROUNDING USES The following existing uses, zoning, and comprehensive guide plan designations surround the subject property: North - Single Family Residential and Blackhawk Park; zoned R-1, Single Family Residential and P, Parks; guided D-II, Mixed Residential (0-6 units/acre) and P, Parks South - Single Family Residential; zoned R-1, Single Family Residential; guided D-II, Mixed Residential (0-6 units/acre). East - Single Family Residential; zoned R- 1, Single Family Residential; guided D-I, Single Family Residential (0-3 units/acre) West - Single Family Residential; zoned R-1, Single Family Residential; guided D-I, Single Family Residential (0-3 units/acre) /33 Planning Report - Murphy Farm 3rd December 21, 1999 Page 4 EVALUATION OF REQUEST Rezoning The requested rezoning from A, Agriculture to R- 1, Residential Single Family is necessary to allow the subdivision of the property. The proposed R-1 zoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Guide Plan which designates this property for D-II, Mixed Residential use (0-6 units/acre). Preliminary Subdivision Compatibility with Surrounding Area - The subject site is bounded on the south, east, and west by single family residential uses and on the north by both single family dwellings and Blackhawk Park. The proposed addition of single family residential uses of comparable density to the area is not anticipated to adversely affect surrounding land uses. Thus, the proposed use is considered compatible with existing and anticipated surrounding land uses. Density - A total of 25 dwelling units have been proposed upon the subject 12.7 acre property. This results in a density of 2.0 units per acre, consistent with the density of the Comprehensive Guide Plan. Subdivision Design - Generally speaking, the proposed subdivision design is considered positive and responds well to various site design parameters including existing vegetation and topography. There are however, two design-related concerns that exist. While technically meeting minimum street frontage requirements (50 feet), the flag lot configuration of Lot 18 presents some concern in regard to its isolation from the balance of the subdivision and excessive driveway length (approximately 380 feet). While the lot area is 60,394 square feet and the width of the lot where the home will be constructed is approximately 210 feet, the approval of a variance from the minimum 85 foot width requirement (imposed at the 30 foot setback) is necessary. A lot width of approximately 30 feet has been proposed at the 30 foot setback line. The acceptability of such lot width is considered a policy matter to be determined by City Officials. The second item of concern relates to the alignment of proposed "Street A". As currently depicted, construction of the street will necessitate the removal of several significant trees. By slightly altering its alignment in a more curvilinear manner, such trees could be saved without compromising the general layout of the subdivision or the number of lots being proposed. The realignment of the street has been discussed with and is agreeable to the applicant. As a condition of subdivision approval, "Street A" should be realigned such that significant trees near Lots 14 and 15 may be retained. Lots - Within R-1 zoning districts, a minimum lot area requirement of 12,000 square feet and lot width requirement of 85 feet is required. /ay r °r Planning Report - Murphy Farm 3rd December 21, 1999 Page 5 Lots within the proposed subdivision range from 11,997 to 60,394 square feet with an average size lot measuring 19,198 square feet in size. To satisfy R-1 district code requirements, the following lot modifications should be made: ? The area of Lot 19 should be expanded from 11,997 to 12,000 square feet ? The width of Lot 4 and Lot 6 should be expanded from 82 and 84 feet respectively to 85 feet Setbacks - The following minimum setbacks are applicable to the proposed development: Front yard 30 feet Side yard 10 feet Rear yard 15 feet All proposed lots demonstrate an ability to comply with the aforementioned setbacks. Gradin - The preliminary grading plan is acceptable. The existing site is moderately to heavily wooded with steep slopes along the north edge of the property. The site generally slopes to the northeast with elevations ranging from 928 in the center to 820 along the north edge. Due to these large variations in topography, the developer will be subject to stringent temporary and permanent erosion control requirements in accordance with City standards during grading operations. Existing well and septic systems on the site should be abandoned in accordance with County and City requirements. Storm Drainage - The preliminary storm drainage plan is acceptable. Existing storm sewer is available within Murphy Parkway to the east and Donegal Way to the west to accommodate storm water runoff from the development. Utilities - The preliminary utility plan is acceptable with modifications. Sanitary sewer and water main are available for connection and extension throughout the development. The developer is proposing to extend a hydrant along the Blackhawk Park entrance road from the existing water main within Murphy Parkway to provide fire protection coverage for Lot 18. The developer should construct the hydrant lead pipe within the development site so as not to disturb park property. The developer is proposing a gravity flow sanitary sewer service for Lot 18. Due to a lack of depth (2'-3'), a portion of the service pipe has a high potential for freezing during winter months. The sanitary sewer service for Lot 18 should be constructed as a pump and forced pipe system with adequate depth to reduce potential for freezing. Planning Report - Murphy Farm 3rd December 21, 1999 Page 6 Streets/ Access - Public street access for Lots 1-17 and 19-25 is proposed from three new public cul-de-sacs extended into the site from Murphy Parkway and Donegal Way. Public street access for Lot 18 is proposed directly from Murphy Parkway near the Blackhawk Park entrance road. The preliminary site plan shows that the driveway for this lot will be approximately 380 feet long with a portion lying directly above the existing 6' to 7' high retaining wall along the park entrance road. A vehicle guardrail should be constructed at the time of building permit for Lot 18 along the south edge of the driveway in the area of the retaining wall. Easements/ Permits/ Right-of-Way - The developer is responsible for obtaining all necessary regulatory agency permits prior to final subdivision approval. Water Quality/Wetlands - Stormwater from the site will drain through existing stormwater conveyance to BP-29, which has adequate capacity to treat the stormwater. Because the proposed development is adding untreated stormwater to the city's system however, a water- quality cash dedication in lieu of on-site ponding for a portion of the development is appropriate. In several areas of this development, the existing topography of the site requires proper installation and effective maintenance of erosion control practices. Such efforts are intended to prevent or minimize impacts to down-gradient resources and water quality. There are no jurisdictional wetlands associated with this development. Staff recommends that a cash dedication in lieu of on-site ponding should be required for 40 percent of the area (5.1 acres) of this development. Tree Preservation - The subject site is approximately 50% wooded with the remainder being open grassland, existing buildings and driveways. There is considerable grade change within this site with an elevation reading of 920 feet in the southwest part of the site, to an elevation of 818 feet in the northeast part of the site (along the park entrance road). A tree inventory has been submitted with this application and has been modified by staff to correctly indicate the number of significant trees (i.e. multiple-stemmed trees are to be inventoried as individual trees if they are split below 4.5 feet from the ground). The inventory now indicates that there are 565 individual significant trees on site. Individual deciduous tree species include red oak and bur oak (6" to 40" diameter), black cherry, birch, ash, aspen, and cottonwood (all of these various deciduous trees are in the diameter range of 6" to 39"). Individual significant conifer species include red pine, spruce, and cedar (height ranges from 12 feet to 50 feet, averaging about 40 feet). This is a relatively "old growth" northern hardwood forest type for our area. Typical tree species found in this forest type include oak, ash, birch, black cherry, and elm; all of which are present on the Murphy Farm site. Large individual trees within this site are evenly distributed throughout the forested areas. Some of the older oak trees (bur oaks) are estimated by staff to be at least 150 years old. Most of the conifer trees have been added to the site through planting, and 136 Planning Report - Murphy Farm 3rd December 21, 1999 Page 7 are approximately 40-50 years old. There also exists an ideal deciduous forest understory comprised of both shrubs and ground cover plants. Development as proposed for this site will result in the removal of 190 of the significant trees (33.6% of the total). According to the City of Eagan Tree Preservation ordinance, allowable removal for this type of development (single-phase multiple-lot residential) is set at 40.0%. With a significant tree removal less than allowable limits, there will not be tree mitigation applied to this application. However, individual lot tree preservation plans will be required for Lots 1-3, 5, 7-16, 18, 21-24. Parks - Park dedication associated with this development has previously been satisfied. In late 1989, the City contacted the then owner of this property, Leo Murphy, for the expressed purpose of negotiating an early park dedication in order to develop an access into Blackhawk Park. Since Mr. Murphy also wanted to re-acquire property previously needed for road construction, negotiations were started. Ultimately, an agreement was signed in January of 1991, which provided for a partial land dedication. The remainder would come at some future point in time. As part of the negotiations to acquire the land for the road, the City did a great deal of preliminary design and engineering for the access road in order to save as many trees as possible. This was the desire of both the City and Mr. Murphy. In January of 1991, an agreement was signed and the property was subsequently deeded to the City. In 1992, the City undertook the task of completing construction documents for the construction of the road, parking lot, storm sewer, as well as other elements of the park. In August of that year, the construction project was awarded. Construction began in September, but as soon as clearing operations began for the road construction, Mr. Murphy wanted the road changed to a different alignment to save trees on his remaining property to the south. Mr. Murphy was persistent with his request and the Council agreed to his wishes resulting in re-engineering of the road and the installation of a more extensive retaining wall along the road. This increased the project cost by several tens of thousands of dollars. Many of the trees that Mr. Murphy felt were important to save are within the area shown for the road leading to the "flag lot" (Lot 18). Staff has several concerns associated with the proposed subdivision. As represented in the proposal, the entrance to the flag lot (Lot 18) is near the park entrance. The driveway closely parallels Blackhawk Park entrance road, removing the vegetative cover this hillside provides. Further, vegetative cover is lost with the proposal to provide a water hydrant service line only three feet back of the existing trail into the park. This water line, at a depth of 8 feet, requires a trench 16 feet wide to be installed, removing any remaining vegetation along the park entrance between the park entrance road and the first 125-150 feet of the driveway serving the lot. Staff also has some concern for the future owner of Lot 18 and park users with a 10% grade coming /37 Planning Report - Murphy Farm 3rd December 21, 1999 Page 8 down a portion of the driveway that will not receive any sun to help melt winter snow and ice. Currently, there is a trail on the south side of the park entrance road that ends at Murphy Parkway and a trail along Deerwood Drive. The developer should construct a trail along Murphy Parkway from the park entrance to Donegal Way with this plat. Airport Noise Considerations - The subject property lies outside of the airport noise exposure zones established by the Metropolitan Council. SUMMARY/CONCLUSION The proposed 25 lot single family residential subdivision is consistent with the land use directives of the comprehensive plan and is considered compatible with existing and anticipated uses in the area. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED A. To recommend approval of a Rezoning of approximately 12.7 acres from A (Agricultural) to R-1 (Single Family) located north of Murphy Parkway and east of Donegal Way in the northwest 1/4 of Section 21. B. To recommend approval of a Preliminary Subdivision (Murphy Farm 3`d Addition), on property located north of Murphy Parkway and east of Donegal Way in the northwest 1/4 of Section 21. If approved, the following conditions should apply: 1. The property shall be platted. 2. The City shall approve a variance to allow Lot 18 to have a width of less than 85 feet at the front setback line. 3. The developer shall comply with these standards conditions of plat approval as adopted by Council on February 3, 1993: B1, Cl, D1, El 4. A vehicle guardrail shall be constructed at the time of building permit for Lot 18 along the south edge of the driveway in the area of the retaining wall. /38` Planning Report - Murphy Farm 3rd December 21, 1999 Page 9 5. The following lot modifications shall be made: ? The area of Lot 19 shall be expanded from 11,997 to 12,000 square feet ? The widths of Lot 4 and Lot 6 shall be expanded from 82 and 84 feet respectively to 85 feet 6. "Street A" shall be realigned such that significant trees near Lots 14 and 15 may be retained. 7. Existing well and septic systems on the site shall be abandoned in accordance with County and City requirements. 8. The developer shall construct the hydrant lead pipe to serve Lot 18 entirely within the development site. 9. The sanitary sewer service for Lot 18 shall be constructed as a pump and forced pipe system with adequate depth to reduce the potential for freezing. 10. A trail shall be constructed along Murphy Parkway from the entrance to Blackhawk Park to Donegal Way. 11. Individual tree preservation plans will be required for lots 1-3, 5, 7-16, 18, 21-24. 12. Tree Protective measures (i.e. orange colored silt fence or 4 foot polyethylene laminate safety netting) shall be required to be installed at the Drip Line or at the perimeter of the Critical Root Zone, whichever is greater, of significant trees/woodlands to be preserved. 13. The applicant shall contact the City Forestry Division and set up a pre-construction site inspection at least five days prior to the issuance of the grading permit to ensure compliance with the approved Tree Preservation Plan and placement of the tree protection fencing. 14. A cash dedication in lieu of on-site ponding shall be required for 40 percent of the area (5.1 acres) of this development. 13 FINANCIAL OBLIGATION - MURPHY FARM 3RD ADDITION There are pay-off balances of special assessments totaling $0 on the parcels proposed for platting. The pay-off balance will be allocated to the lots created by the plat. At this time, there are no pending assessments on the parcel proposed for platting. 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. IMPROVEMENT USE RATE QUANTITY AMOUNT Water Trunk C/I $920/lot 23 lots $21,160 TOTAL $21,160 Rate quoted is the 1999 rate, however, rate used will be the rate in effect at final plat approval. 9 STANDARD CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL A. Financial Obligations 1. This development shall accept its additional financial obligations as defined in the staffs report in accordance with the final plat dimensions and the rates in effect at the time of final plat approval. B. Easements and Rights-of-Way 1. This development shall dedicate 10 foot drainage and utility easements centered over all lot lines and, in addition, where necessary to accommodate existing or proposed utilities for drainage ways within the plat. The development shall dedicate easements of sufficient width and location as determined necessary by engineering standards. 2. This development shall dedicate, provide, or financially guarantee the acquisition costs of drainage, ponding, and utility easements in addition to public street rights-of-way as required by the alignment, depth, and storage capacity of all required public utilities and streets located beyond the boundaries of this plat as necessary to service or accommodate this development. 3. This development shall dedicate all public right-of-way and temporary slope easements for ultimate development of adjacent roadways as required by the appropriate jurisdictional agency. 4. This development shall dedicate adequate drainage and ponding easements to incorporate the required high water elevation plus three (3) feet as necessitated by storm water storage volume requirements. C. Plans and Specifications 1. All public and private streets, drainage systems and utilities necessary to provide service to this development shall be designed and certified by a registered professional engineer in accordance with City adopted codes, engineering standards, guidelines and policies prior to application for final plat approval. 2. A detailed grading, drainage, erosion, and sediment control plan must be prepared in accordance with current City standards prior to final plat approval. 3. This development shall ensure that all dead-end public streets shall have a cul-de-sac constructed in accordance with City engineering standards. l Y/ 4. A separate detailed landscape plan shall be submitted overlaid on the proposed grading and utility plan. The financial guarantee for such plan shall be included in the Development Contract and shall not be released until one year after the date of City certified compliance. D. Public Improvements 1. If any improvements are to be installed under a City contract, the appropriate project must be approved by Council action prior to final plat approval. E. Permits 1. This development shall be responsible for the acquisition of all regulatory agency permits required by the affected agency prior to final plat approval. F. Parks and Traits Dedication 1. This development shall fulfill its park and trail dedication requirements as recommended by the Advisory Parks, Recreation and Natural Resource Commission and approved by Council action. G. Water Quality Dedication 1. This development shall be responsible for providing a cash dedication, ponding, or a combination thereof in accordance with the criteria identified in the City's Water Quality Management Plan, as recommended by the Advisory Parks, Recreation and Natural Resource Commission and approved by Council action. H. Other 1. All subdivision, zoning and other ordinances affecting this development shall be adhered to, unless specifically granted a variance by Council action. Advisory Planning Commission City Council Approved: August 25, 1987 September 15, 1987 Revised: July 10, 1990 Revised: February 2. 1993 LTS#5 STANDARD.CON / ` Nolan 80"darV Location Map treat Zeal CentAree erline Par - tulldlnf Feptprlnt CMww wwW _W ' ? t • I f r t 1 10 a s Subject Site * • a? 1 1 1 f + / t Q e ~J - 31 33 • 7 - n..uc-.q 7e hne' as ~'e..ax ra ee lowum w 1 ! r 1000 0 7000 2000 Feet Development/Developer. Murphy Farm 3rd Addition Application: Rezoning and Preliminary Subdivision Case No.: 21-RZ-1411-99 and 21-PS-22-11-99 IV3 114ri.p.idwrno WE......p-Adel WCdaaCds*yladlrv.yOeP.1u.,ianei•ovrartad5.,4 ,t.r1M City of Eagan l l THIS MAP 12 INT[NOIO FOR *IPIRINCI Uit ONLY W E ON.Am.w1 The City of lef.n and Dakota County de net guarantee the accuracy of We I./ennaUen and are S Current Zoning and Comprehensive Guide Plan City of Eagan Case No. 21-RZ-1411-99 and Land Use Map 21-PS-22-11-99 Zoning Map Location Current Zoning: A ® w Agriculture w t PIP to *do "0 12" D PO Comprehensive Guide Plan Land Use Map 0 Location an Current Land Use Designation: .+r D-11 Mixed Residential (0-6 units/acre) eke all au ff o-m N .o•a1 W abop 1.•n.Mm provided by Ca•a1• Cw I La" Pussy Own. Za*.s ...ave.. ••"dad by 1994 a.d..a•..d by My Staff. City of Eagan 2 m E Dakota County do of Grant u the accuracy of this I onllation. 5 Carr>mu*D&vwkFnwWDarb w* The City of !a THIS t .r Iro mom c?~ml~ t I ; r- I \ ixr II f ~i~ r f X\ r I' o \ ~V 1 / r!• N ~?twaa. r L_ 50 r CO I IAr ~N 7_t ll_ Ylf? NA W W: MURPHY FARM BRW Ita rlat.l R _ 3RD ADDITION A o.M.. EXISTING CONDITIONS _.11._..1. GOVT. LOT 2 loll wwr.rt au.n - - - - I , Sol f/~ \ OOlE10~1L I , • I I new $ ti sluT ` y I UL- Jame 24 ftrw" aa~aas¦ /7(0 PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION mm=wa no of, BRW ~ / ~+*'-:s~r~~7rirrr+ri:. ~::sa:~t-' ....._..~...•:.~\l~a / / ~1` ~ ~~_""T I fit Y +"j //Ilt ~I III tlt- \ A--i"~ -071 , • 'iii ~ ~ / / / / % % ..jam. i~~ lv~\ \`t~ f 1 ~f~~, l.~ lilt sit / r* mis. wr r wra a ti rrs err W!!IY MUM Ma" me VA" CONIM r ~wmr~rr w wr ,w Mwr-Cp r w' BRW~ r- :wrwr, a., GRADING PLAN mue,wdr.w.amwtia oaw.w.r. Op OMMA COUI1Y. I I OTA Aftkh=& rO Q= V WN;W r4rwr Mrp 1.4f Tai( %WC 0101) R\w7M\wwol\MI-.`RM-p'MK-.bw..~ 1` \~J ~ .I t 6 el .1 \\111 \ ! ~I}\ ! / ` `1 \ \ ' II \'111'1\ ! ~ ~ 11 a}\ i// /ti 111111 I i r~~~•.-~ ~ \ \ / ~ ~ ~ \ \ ~ i//d+//~-~~///~/%//%%• iii 011 1 a , ~ \ \ 11 t'///iiif j /i/ii/iii/i/~,-}` •'•ii i am/ ~ • ~w S;.' / / \`\\\\\I ~ !I1!If1f 1 1 ()I)JI) ////~l~ri f l I'1' 1111 1 1 1 tli / • %h'111 r ! ~1sll l''~11$jljl~, ! f )/rjjllji/~~~~/~j~ d,l! tll II 111 I t /!/ii //iir; /r t ! /i, / / 00,/ /d C- \\Qi sy ! tags- li'hII //iii/ / c ) ) I I III ~ l /t 1 11 I Iy, \\\y~ - s_ \ \ /1 II IIl11111\\ \\\«I//I/\\\ / 11;;'' 111111\\\\ \ 11 'l / / -1-i '4" R ~/1(111, Oil' ~~~\111~t11 11/ ! / \ . ~ %~~%i j,/// ~ !'//iii i~~~~!// /I \ ~ / .r::_== - r, / r~~^~/rte/?/!///~i~/r ` ^.r w.~ V'im' / . / i //i' ~T~~•~- ~~•N'%// f-T Olk / . / /rte , , i. : = •r_ gill t ¦s~l~li s 9 U rgA0. O.ti /1l .n. II0T WY T WMPHY M _ 30 A1sx M ~0. ~~~I~ i is ~w'~ 001 / fits ¦II M T~T'~ Y .r rrr I r • nai m= s Tr BRW avy or co" W.~° UTILITY PLAN J! %C .AK' (1~.'J11 R \4TN\M„IOOI\A~r-. JIM-AM'\~FvM.wi "..l ~LJI 0~'L Or T. IM A7s.w 1 -0 r1T, J:j ri T, in\ -----J L---J L---J L---J L--! • ~s 19 fill I got I \ 11 w I ~ I • I wild s 1 I Iv 1 i ~;I ' wA d 1 I ~ I- I wll~ 1 411, I / / U! /~~JJJ I IT ~w AMT M Iy~ rA~ IV I.A Yt 0AA1 mum w = ~ AI VOI >•1 Y r MP MAAI M AAAII wrAl NO SWUM am BRW A rr ',t• N..c• (I-ko') R\u7..\•w•oo+\~.-•~YJ+.-wrMw?..u.v yr O Or al. IM •alw OPP V 4 ?~j ~ tt ~5 ~ #9 JL g tll Mr n t t 1Ill + • ar w • a, w ' ri Qr [r t ri t! t ett ft n r' r~ t r r r r ?r it rr rr lull ra in er r I tt n r a w a 91 s< ea r It n ai I a I I IR as aw a t 1 IrrR it it t t in l I II( f( e t{` ,I It tt r aI a to t + + ; + w a + wa t1 if 9 fit jr I I t li ri ftf 1 Ia i s r 4r in in U awr/warNMNwawa9artImneAAararaalawar:Imot11~1aagtw.wuuwtwula ~~"~"~`t~wrM..M+w.ww4wwtlwwatwwwrw+...wuw.~~wa•+\`w~wt+wa,a.••~swiw,w. ~aaa~tawwwf.~ aawwwwawwahaaawaC~ + (h l~ rmrtart~a{rk RRllaanlfnt~rkrNit;i~R1{NNBf{~IfrMii r~imnaie It a arkarermgt111~11nr are a k ; 1 t ~~rt n 1 la q Ifivil1P ium Pent" t t" I ~O ~f sr ~F r•r MU MU s wt as r= NUMff MIDI 20 AOWMW i ••'°t":°rswi isr~•w+ ' 001 • 1Q !R'MtlA11011 fKMI •w r. w. ~ .r • war ~w t• r ••isr N ~R uwsra rAr ,u, aM Y. TA BRWTREE PRESERVATION PLAN A MAd •NDae UOMIADN _ - _ _ ...r r °r ,•.ML iii 7.-1. =,,.T ? ~ I,• ~ l/Ul~t tit t~l ~t~tt~ ~~\~f-v~~=~~~~ Ore, \ ~ .i ` `te'e i~ \t, ~ ~ ~ ` \ ~ ~ / JINY I ~ ~ \ \ ~ / //i///iii///i//. 'AR -u r, / / Fill s e opal ~ Ili i s p s r r • r r r pip • w I Igo, coop ! ! eu a ire! fi•• / , ~r aRnr wr M qww ~r rv ri er V1 a°„?. rAcm ~ BRW e.~s wrr LANDSCAPE PLAN ~ wdus~.wo~sGO~itp\wIy r. r-we ~Y `Y ~,M1 1 ;do vu An"arma" Ile .51 .17'r Y 1 \ 1... N ~11~Ir.~ Ile I& q di ~M I • \ / 1-4 Ir. NS, m ` ~ rug T -..a•s 2 0 \ o `~0 OW I Z 101 1.A00 L > On December 28, 1999, the APrC subcommittee met with the developer and discussed three primary development options related to proposed Lot 18. A summary of these alternatives is provided under "Development Alternatives". > At their regular meeting on January 10, 2000, the Advisory Parks Commission again considered the Rezoning and Subdivision request and recommended that the City acquire a portion of Lot 18 as referenced in the APrC meeting minutes. ISSUES: > Resident Concerns At the Advisory Planning Commission hearing, area residents voiced concern over the potential traffic related impacts of the development upon Donegal Way. The preliminary subdivision calls for seven single-family lots to access Donegal Way via a cul-de-sac connection. > APrC Concerns The primary concern of the APrC related to the "flag lot" configuration of Lot 18 and the tree loss associated with the lot's development. In response to these concerns, an APrC subcommittee was established to discuss various alternatives to resolve the concerns. ? Street A Configuration Condition #6 of the planning report states that "Street A" should be re-aligned in order to retain significant trees presently located near Lots 14 and 15. Upon further review by the City Forester and the developer's engineer, it has been determined that such realignment is not possible due to lot depth limitations. DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES: On December 28, 1999, the APrC subcommittee met with the developer and discussed three primary development options related to proposed Lot 18. A summary of these alternatives is provided below followed by a discussion of associated issues. Alternative A - Existing Plan (see Exhibit A) Summary: Accept the plan (and the configuration of Lot 18) as originally proposed (Exhibit A). Discussion: Concerns related to the present configuration of Lot 18 have been previously documented in the APrC minutes. The long roadway to the home disturbs a significant woodland, is at a grade of 10% for over 100 feet which raises concerns for winter driving and the potential risk for park users. The Commission was also concerned about the hydrant construction along the road access to the park. Finally, there was concern for the visual impact of the road and house itself to Blackhawk Park. ~3 Alternative B - Reconfiguration of Lot 18 (see Exhibit B1) Summary: Alternative B (proposed by the developer) would reconfigure Lot 18 in a manner intended to minimize tree loss. As shown on Exhibit B 1, the driveway for Lot 18 has been shifted to the west resulting in the expansion of the area between the driveway and the adjacent Blackhawk Park. The expanded area is intended to create a vegetative buffer. As part of this alternative, the applicant has also proposed to establish a conservation easement. Attached as Exhibit B2 is a drawing prepared by City staff showing a potential conservation easement area. The developer would relocate the fire hydrant and all utilities within the driveway access to the home and the road is now proposed to be 12 feet in width and within an area of no more then 20' in width. The developer has also proposed the establishment of private covenants related to the house such as color and size. While such performance standards cannot be enforced by the City's subdivision requirements, they are intended to lessen the visual impact of the development of Lot 18 for the neighbors and park users. The expansion of the lot width eliminates the need for a variance. Discussion: Commission members present at the meeting of December 28 saw this plan as a significant improvement over the original plan. There is still some concern that the developer will be able to keep construction of the road and the placement of utilities within such a small area. Residents at the meeting expressed concern that the visual impact is still there with Lot 18. Residents responded that the. conservation easements and restriction of the size of the foot print of the home were important considerations in order to maintain the character of the area, if the lot had to be developed. Alternative C - City's acquisition of a portion of Lot 18 (see Exhibit C) Summary: A third alternative would involve City acquisition of a portion of Lot 18 for the purpose of preservation and protection of Blackhawk Park/neighborhood views. As shown conceptually on Exhibit C, the City would acquire the northeast portion of Lot 18 with the balance being added to adjacent Lots 11 through 14. The sales price of Lot 18, or any portion of it, has been set by the developer at $90,000-100,000 in order for the development to move ahead. Discussion: Acquisition of a portion of the lot would preserve the viewshed of the area, trees, and the perspective to the entrance to Blackhawk Park. Concern has been expressed for the location of the home on Lot 18 and how the house would "stand out" in comparison to the existing homes surrounding Blackhawk Park. The cost for acquisition of this property seems relatively high given that enlargement of the adjacent lots and the removal of a driveway behind the homes on Lots 12, 13 and 14 enhances their value. Funding for the acquisition would have to come form the park site acquisition and development fund. Based on a cost of $90,000 for all or a portion of Lot 18, acquisition of the portion identified in Exhibit C (25,490 square feet) would calculate to $3.53 per square foot. ESL/ ww AnMroo f10r011Q0w • ~r0 • M r r wr wwr ¦ www• t'f ~ Y a Nuevo A AID ! 1 \ _ rr.a•• wrw _-w~~ ~..w wr. - IRJ~w P / r ! / I li 1 ~ 1 ((t 01, N / 1, / / - % It. t. Xwo It I ~Mj%~% iJ'UfflI-iII i1~ r 1 yrrri/rte! ~ I'• , ` 1 •''i~-, '>ti _-1 r-^__, ~-Ya: -lip ~ ~ --Tf~\~~ . ~ ~ _ _ III/•'" _ III - I I !11 j '.fr^~~ EXHIBIT A L1 / `J I - w low rw ApU~CD f10~ ~100~1 •W IU A111O0 9=1 MOM A MO wr .Iw Ms~~~wafMwl !M ..r.w as •a rw CLw Kid 9 VOL OO M00010 OM umm On on-, Dial 000 .0: , fir".-- - -y? : y ~ t~-r-~ _ ~ q- 9 , 't /fir - 1 I all to I ` ~ h CIQ 34 00, to ft* V i~ ~ III ~ ~ ,~I~ L ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . / . iCc , • _ ~I~ 4,/] EXHIBIT B1 - - T 4}1 Ar r I~ \ -F 77 Ilb 40 Lam` 4 ~b~ ~J / 1 ^ ` ~•I~•1 \ • . ~ • . 'fits, ~ \ ~ •`,^t ` ^ ~r`~\ \ 0 00 •G i V r' Ae vz i` • O °r 1 IN. 1.1 i I. R. .sei»~ .:rim ; »~.i,;»iii»~~»? s: Uzi N»:i:::.. • is»iei »?ez•":.... :izi.:: January 12, 2000 Mayor Patricia Awada Councilmember Paul Bakken Councilmember Bea Bloomquist Councilmember Peggy Carlson Councilmember Sandra Masin City Administrator Thomas Hedges The January 18'b City Council meeting includes your consideration of purchasing part of "lot 18" of the Murphy Farm 3`d Addition for inclusion into Blackhawk Park with accompanying conservation easements on the adjacent lots. This is, I believe, a very good use of city money, as a house built on lot 18 would intrude into what now appears to be parkland. There are many homes bordering the park in this area from Blackhawk Pond and Murphy Farm 1" Addition but they are hidden either by trees or are at some distance on the top of a hill. The home site of lot 18 is much lower and would appear "inside" the park-now the park seems to start at the entrance from Murphy Parkway; if a home was constructed on this lot, visitors would not feel they had entered Blackhawk Park until arriving at the parking lot. I, along with others concerned with this development, have attended three preliminary meetings where we noticed that the strongest recommendations for purchase came from committee members who had driven into Blackhawk Park and looked back towards lot 18 and imagined a house there. If possible, please drive just to the parking lot at Blackhawk and look back to the right side of the entrance road-lot 18 includes the low forested hill just past the two small ponds beside the road (see map). Eagan Forestry Staff report that some of the oaks on this lot may be up to 180 years old and the forest is an undisturbed mature forest with natural ground cover, understory and canopy. Many of the wooded areas of Eagan are "disturbed" or "second growth"; this is part of the original, historical Eagan and, I believe, worth preserving as part of Blackhawk Park. Sincerely, i Ward 'Ak'~ wwnooxn~ •s wv xoLLtaav alas mivy .kHd?IM N rn mug aw ain ~ i~~r"o.°^a~- 40 L3AMS SHOLuaNO0 9m=m N it'll I fill, Yo, pq% Alf Agenda Information Memo January 18, 2000, Eagan City Council B. PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION (OAKWOOD HEIGHTS 3RD ADDITION) - MENDOTA HOMES ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: • To approve or deny a Preliminary Subdivision to divide the common property for Oakwood Heights Condominiums to establish separate ownership of the property and a separate association, for the seven-unit building being constructed north of the two existing buildings, subject to the conditions in the APC meeting minutes. FACTS: • The site is located north of Wilderness Run Road in the SE !/4 of Section 26. • The Oakwood Heights condominium development was initially approved in 1982, two of the buildings have been constructed and total 12 units; the third building site was previously graded but has remained vacant for several years. • Mendota Homes and the current condominium homeowners' association recently have agreed to divide the common property underlying the development so that the new seven-unit building Mendota Homes is constructing will have a separate homeowners' association and separate ownership of the land surrounding the building. • The Advisory Planning Commission held a public hearing on February 23, 1999, and did recommend approval of the Preliminary Subdivision, subject to the conditions in the APC meeting minutes. ATTACHMENTS: December 21, 1999, APC Minutes, pages ,through /J Staff Report, pages through /78 /6 / Page 4 December 21. 1999 I)RAFr ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION-MENDOTA HOMES Chair Hey! opened the next public hearing of the evening regarding the request for a Preliminary Subdivision to divide the common property for Oakwood Heights Condominiums to establish a separate ownership of the property and a separate association, for the seven-unit building being constructed on the north of the two existing buildings. Page 5 DRAFT December 21, 1999 ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION Planner Dudziak introduced this item. Ms. Dudziak highlighted the information presented in City staffs planning report dated December 16, 1999. Ms. Dudziak noted the background and history, the surrounding uses and the existing conditions of the subject property. The applicant noted its presence. No one from the audience addressed the APC. Chair Heyl closed the public hearing. Member Frank moved, Member Steininger seconded, a motion to approve a Preliminary Subdivision to divide the common property for Oakwood Heights Condominiums to establish a separate ownership of the property, and a separate association, for the seven-unit building be constructed on the north of the two existing buildings, subject to the following conditions: 1. The developer shall comply with these standards conditions of plat approval as adopted by Council on February 3, 1993: Al, B l, B4, C4, G1, H1 2. The property shall be platted. 3. A landscape plan that provides similar plant materials and similar design shall be submitted as part of the final subdivision application. 4. A cash dedication for water quality cash shall be required in lieu of on-site ponding. All voted in favor. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT-STAHL CONSTRUCTION Chair Heyl opened the next public hearing of the evening regarding the request for an amendment to a Planned Development to allow the construction of an 87 room hotel upon 1.7 acres of land located north of Corporate Drive and east of Pilot Knob Road on property currently platted at Lot 2, Block 1, Eagandale Office Park 4"' Addition, which property lies directly east of the Holiday Inn Select property. Planner Kirmis introduced this item. Mr. Kirmis highlighted the information presented in City staffs planning report dated December 16, 1999. Mr. Kirmis noted the background and history, the surrounding uses and the existing conditions of the subject property. The applicant, through its representative, Todd Byer, noted its presence. Also present was the applicant's architect, Dean Olson, who provided information concerning the elevations of the proposed hotel. No one from the audience addressed the APC. Chair Heyl closed the public hearing. /63 PLANNING REPORT CITY OF EAGAN REPORT DATE: December 16, 1999 CASE: 26-PS-23-11-99 APPLICANT: Mendota Homes, Inc. HEARING DATE: December 21, 1999 PROPERTY OWNER: Mendota Homes, Inc. and Oakwood Heights Homeowners' Association PREPARED BY: Pamela Dudziak REQUEST: Preliminary Subdivision LOCATION: North of Wilderness Run Road west of Park Knoll Drive COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: D-I, Single Family (0-3 units/acre) ZONING: PD, Planned Development SUMMARY OF REQUEST Mendota Homes is requesting a Preliminary Subdivision to divide the common property for Oakwood Heights condominiums to establish a separate ownership of the property, and a separate association, for the seven-unit building being constructed to the north of the two existing buildings. AUTHORITY FOR REVIEW Subdivision: City Code Section 13.20 Subd. 6 states that "In the case of platting, the Planning Commission and the Council shall be guided by criteria, including the following, in approving, denying or establishing conditions related thereto: A. That the proposed subdivision does comply with applicable City Code provisions and the Comprehensive Guide Plan. B. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision complies with applicable plans of Dakota County, State of Minnesota, or the Metropolitan Council. C. That the physical characteristics of the site including, but not limited to, topography, vegetation, susceptibility to erosion and siltation, susceptibility to flooding, water storage and retention are such that the site is suitable for the type of development or use Planning Report - Mendota Homes, Inc. December 21, 1999 Page 2 contemplated. D. That the site physically is suitable for the proposed density of development. E. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvement is not likely to cause environmental damage. F. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is not likely to cause health problems. G. That the design of the subdivision or the improvements will not conflict with easements of record or with easements established by judgment of court. H. That completion of the proposed development of the subdivision can be completed in a timely manner so as not to cause an economic burden upon the City for maintenance, repayment of bonds, or similar burden. I. That the subdivision has been properly planned for possible solar energy system use within the subdivision or as it relates to adjacent property. (Refer to City Handbook on Solar Access). J. That the design of public improvements for the subdivision is compatible and consistent with the platting or approved preliminary plat on adjacent lands. K. That the subdivision is in compliance with those standards set forth in that certain document entitled "City of Eagan Water Quality Management Plan for the Gun Club Lake Watershed Management Organization" which document is properly approved and filed with the office of the City Clerk hereinafter referred to as the "Water Quality Management Plan". Said document and all of the notations, references and other information contained therein shall have the same force and effect as if fully set down herein and is hereby made a part of this Chapter by reference and incorporated herein as fully as if set forth herein at length. It shall be the responsibility of the City Clerk to maintain the Water Quality Management Plan and make the same available to the public." BACKGROUND/HISTORY The site is located north of Wilderness Run Road in the SE 1/4 of Section 26. This site is part of the Lexington South Planned Development, which was approved in 1976 for a 15-year term. Oakwood Heights initially approved in 1982 and consisted of three buildings. Two of the buildings have been constructed and total 12 units; the third building site was previously graded with the initial development. The lot for the third condominium building has changed ownership several times in the intervening years since the initial two buildings were completed. Mendota 1's" Planning Report - Mendota Homes, Inc. December 21, 1999 Page 3 Homes purchased the building site and began construction of seven townhouse-style condominium units on the lot earlier this fall. Mendota Homes and the current condominium homeowners' association have agreed to divide the common property (Outlot A, Oakwood Heights) so that the new building will have a separate homeowners' association and separate ownership of the land surrounding their building. The conveyance of a portion of Outlot A requires that the property be subdivided. EXISTING CONDITIONS The site has recently been graded and construction of a seven-unit townhouse-style condominium building has begun. SURROUNDING USES The following existing uses, zoning, and comprehensive guide plan designations surround the subject property: North - Park; zoned P (Public); guided P (Parks) South - Office; zoned CSC; guided CSC East - Residential (single-family); zoned PD; guided D-I (Single-Family, 0-3 units/acre) West - Walnut Hill Park; zoned P (Public); guided P (Parks) EVALUATION OF REQUEST Compatibility with Surrounding Area - The seven-unit townhouse style building is consistent with the other two condominium buildings previously constructed in this Planned Development. Densi - The development was originally approved following R-3 (townhouse) zoning standards, and a total of 20 units were approved for these three condominium buildings (two eight-unit buildings and one four-unit building). The developer is building one less unit than the original plans had approved. The density of the new seven-unit building and its proposed underlying parcel is slightly higher than will be the resulting density of the existing two buildings and their underlying parcel. The density for new building is 7.5 units per acre, with a lot area of 5,824 square feet per unit. The two existing buildings have a density of 5.8 units per acre and lot area of 7,507 square feet per unit. The overall density of the three condominium buildings is 6.3 units per acre, with a lot area of 6,887 square feet per unit. Lots - The proposed subdivision splits the northern portion of Outlot A encompassing the building site from the remainder of Outlot A, which surrounds the two existing buildings. The northern portion of Outlot A, along with the building site (Lot 1) and two remnant parcels from a Planning Report - Mendota Homes, Inc. December 21, 1999 Page 4 previous subdivision (Outlots B and C, Park Knoll) will be combined into a single parcel underlying the new condominium building. Setbacks - R-3 Zoning District standards were applied to this development at the time of its approval in 1982. The R-3 zoning district requires a 30-foot building setback from property lines, and 30 feet between buildings within a development. As a Planned Development, required setbacks are as approved by the City. The locations for these condominium buildings were approved in 1982, and the new building is being constructed in accordance with those plans. The proposed subdivision establishes a lot line between the new building and the existing buildings. With this new lot line, the required setback under R-3 zoning standards would be 30 feet for each building rather than 30 feet between buildings. The new building is set back 10 feet from the proposed lot line and the closest of the existing buildings is set back 38 feet from the proposed lot line. The distance between buildings is 48 feet. Although the new building is set back less than the required 30 feet, the location of the buildings has not changed from the development plans approved in 1982, and the new building is being constructed in accordance with those plans. Landscaping - The City Code requires that the site be landscaped, however, a landscape plan has not been submitted. A landscape plan should be prepared and submitted to the city for review and approval as part of the final subdivision. The landscape plan should be similar in design and incorporate similar plant materials as the existing two buildings. Streets/ Access - Street access for the development will be from Oakwood Heights Circle, a private street that extends north from Wilderness Run Road. Grading= The site has been graded as part of the present building construction. A retaining wall is necessary along the north edge of the site. Storm Drainage - Storm sewer to accommodate drainage from this development was constructed with the original Oakwood Heights plat. No modifications to the system are necessary. This storm sewer drains to Pond LP-50, an existing wetland west of the site. Utilities - Existing sanitary sewer and water main of sufficient size, depth and capacity to serve this building were constructed with the original Oakwood Heights development. Wetlands/Water Duality - This subdivision will generate runoff that enters the existing stormwater system that connects to the eastern end of a high quality wetland, LP-50, which is located directly west of the site in Walnut Hill Park. Within a short distance, stormwater exits the wetland to the south and flows through a series of ponds and conveyances leading to Thomas Lake. LP-50 currently has the highest biodiversity of aquatic plants known to any wetland in Eagan, making it 4 Planning Report - Mendota Homes, Inc. December 21, 1999 Page 5 one of the city's highest quality wetlands. However, additional stormwater volumes to Lp-50 as a result of this development are not judged by staff to be sufficiently high to cause degradation of the wetland, so there are few concerns regarding potential negative impacts. Because of the small size of this development, on-site treatment of stormwater for water quality purposes is not practicable. Therefore, this development is subject to a water quality cash dedication in lieu of on-site ponding. This development site requires proper installation and effective maintenance of erosion control practices, to prevent or minimize impacts to down-gradient resources and water quality. There are no jurisdictional wetlands located on this development site. Tree Preservation - There is no significant vegetation on the site. Parks and Recreation - There are no parks or trails dedication requirements for this Preliminary Subdivision. SUMMARY/CONCLUSION Mendota Homes is requesting a Preliminary Subdivision to divide the common property for Oakwood Heights condominiums in order to establish separate ownership of the property, and a separate association, for the seven-unit building being constructed to the north of the two existing buildings. A landscape plan that satisfies the zoning ordinance and provides landscaping similar to the existing development should be submitted to the City for review and approval as part of the final subdivision. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED To recommend approval of a Preliminary Subdivision of Outlot A, Oakwood Heights in the SE 1/4 of Section 26. If approved, the following conditions should apply. 1. The developer shall comply with these standards conditions of plat approval as adopted by Council on February 3, 1993: Al, B1, B4, C4, G1, H1 2. The property shall be platted. 3. A landscape plan that provides similar plant materials and similar design shall be submitted as part of the final subdivision application. 4. A cash dedication for water quality cash shall be required in lieu of on-site ponding. / FINANCIAL OBLIGATION OAKWOOD HEIGHTS 3RD There are pay-off balances of special assessments totaling $-0- on the parcels proposed for platting. The pay-off balance will be allocated to the lots created by the plat. At this time, there are no pending assessments on the parcels proposed for platting. This estimated financial obligation is subject to change based upon the areas, dimensions and land uses contained in the final plat. Based upon the study of the financial obligations collected in the past and the uses proposed for the property, the following charges are proposed. The charges are computed using the City's existing fee schedule and for the connection and availability of the City's utility system. IMPROVEMENT USE RATE QUANTITY AMOUNT Trunk Storm Sewer MF $.105/Sq. Ft. 40,767Sq. Ft. $4,218 TOTAL $4,281 Computed using the 1999 rate, however, rate used will be the rate in effect at final plat approval. 9' STANDARD CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL A. Financial Obligations 1. This development shall accept its additional financial obligations as defined in the staffs report in accordance with the final plat dimensions and the rates in effect at the time of final plat approval. B. Easements and Rights-of-Way 1. This development shall dedicate 10-foot drainage and utility easements centered over all lot lines and, in addition, where necessary to accommodate existing or proposed utilities for drainage ways within the plat. The development shall dedicate easements of sufficient width and location as determined necessary by engineering standards. 2. This development shall dedicate, provide, or financially guarantee the acquisition costs of drainage, ponding, and utility easements in addition to public street rights-of-way as required by the alignment, depth, and storage capacity of all required public utilities and streets located beyond the boundaries of this plat as necessary to service or accommodate this development. 3. This development shall dedicate all public right-of-way and temporary slope easements for ultimate development of adjacent roadways as required by the appropriate jurisdictional agency. 4. This development shall dedicate adequate drainage and ponding easements to incorporate the required high water elevation plus three (3) feet as necessitated by storm water storage volume requirements. C. Plans and Specifications 1. All public and private streets, drainage systems and utilities necessary to provide service to this development shall be designed and certified by a registered professional engineer in accordance with City adopted codes, engineering standards, guidelines and policies prior to application for final plat approval. 2. A detailed grading, drainage, erosion, and sediment control plan must be prepared in accordance with current City standards prior to final plat approval. 3. This development shall ensure that all dead-end public streets shall have a cul-de-sac constructed in accordance with City engineering standards. / 2& 4. A separate detailed landscape plan shall be submitted overlaid on the proposed grading and utility plan. The financial guarantee for such plan shall be included in the Development Contract and shall not be released until one year after the date of City certified compliance. D. Public Improvements 1. If any improvements are to be installed under a City contract, the appropriate project must be approved by Council action prior to final plat approval. E. Permits 1. This development shall be responsible for the acquisition of all regulatory agency permits required by the affected agency prior to final plat approval. F. Parks and Trails Dedication 1. This development shall fulfill its park and trail dedication requirements as recommended by the Advisory Parks, Recreation and Natural Resource Commission and approved by Council action. G. Water Quality Dedication 1. This development shall be responsible for providing a cash dedication, ponding, or a combination thereof in accordance with the criteria identified in the City's Water Quality Management Plan, as recommended by the Advisory Parks, Recreation and Natural Resource Commission and approved by Council action. H. Other 1. All subdivision, zoning and other ordinances affecting this development shall be adhered to, unless specifically granted a variance by Council action. Advisory Planning Commission City Council Approved: August 25, 1987 September 15, 1987 Revised: July 10, 1990 Revised: February 2, 1993 LTS#5 STANDARD.CON 07~ Location Map sue" Contothm Parcel Footprint 'anan I,, Elt ` • -.r al • • * • • 9 din s ! • w ? • • Sub t Site + + a r a¦ • 1 • • * • ¦1 S¦~ • • 1 ~ a r • /+1 t ? • V ! 7! f r ! it a • ar% 21 46 E 1000 0 1000 2000 Fiat Development/Developer: Oakwood Heights 3rd Addition Application: Preliminary Subdivisio n Case No.: 26-PS-23-11-99 tAy Rown utep E0.4 Maas I. Mar rO t+li MUSS 4 praldri Odooh Cam Laid ar w OWuNfK aMrOwed a of &*W UN #City of Eagan THIS MAP IS INTEN/a/ FOR wEItEwCI USE ONLY a....rry s...l•s I.1 t+wfrw.we TM Clty of Eagan and Dakota County do not gn.?.ne•• tM SC••nroy of tkls Inferrn.tl.n and are not r.spon.IM$. for •n r. Of 001 "S. Current Zoning and Comprehensive Guide Plan Land Use Map Oakwood Heights 3rd Addition Case No. 21-PS-23-11-9 Zoning Map JP° U .D P Location P p 0 Current Zoning: P pro 0 PD .o Planned Development rD r A O IF1 It-1 A O 4 ~ R-1 o-+ P r A .M . t~.. r.r w Comprehensive Guide Plan Land Use Map 041 ; /00", oa o-i o-i Location Current Land Use Designation: O o-i AT w D-1 Single-Family Residential D4 04 04 NEAT w NIAT at D-I r arr..s.rr ".odr by L..r.r. o.. -to" w .p.e.a ?y City $t.%. 41111'.city of Eagan 2. E ~ bf~ THIS tanty ty guarantee ONLY The City of Eagan and Dakota a County do o not t grantss the the accuracy of this information. jil W ins iw auusoo. ; an naw.aas 8 t 3 ~0 44 $ 3 a~fi: •o ul h1himm x I~v~ I Isis Sf PRELIM. PLAT Surveyor's Certificate SURVEY FOR :MENDOTA HOMES DESCRIBED AS : Lot 1, Block 1. OAKW000 HEIGHTS, City of Eagan. Dakota County. Minnesota and reserving easements of record. 6' 001 54^ 70100 ?a \ 32. ry fg .r-- gt \ I 1 of o acrl. 4 N89*5554 W 79.67 °l 00 60.00 M R s 10.110 901 gala 1600 936 25,00 00 0 16.00 901 . 801,9 10 y Io 0000 1 00 to-oo w 905 o a Q :•ea. or. V a ip~• 16.00 0 a L 0 00 z ry~ 3 0 Prasosed 16 00 905. ` h tD ri 7-Unit 1a V a O 12cs. Cold* 907 b1 W 10.00 ~ X u) o- g 909 ; c dos O qol 1600 - .o ! ,1y RI `rte 16.00 - e d'a 1 00 - 1 600 sill ° 9`4• F O ~ ss. 00 10-00 x my., s69•ss'src se.w O 9d qo~ ',t R 9'1 - R ~9 ~O S6g. `r 16.00 54' 1.- 89B. 0'f B .4j of N89°55 ' 446 79.6726-00V N 9' 54"W 191.95 PROPOSED ELEVATIONS BENCHMARK, rww p :i t Y Top of Foundation E1ev• q07. f31 Coroge Floor = q0~,3 Basement Floor = 11D1.Z Aprox. Sewer Service = are A%.su. = O MIN. SETBACK REQUIREMENTS Proposed Elev. Existing Elev. Drainage Directions = Front - House Side - Denotes Offset Stoke = e InCA - 30 NO Reor - Coroge Side - I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT REPRESENTATION .IOe N0: HEDL(fJND Or THE BOUNDA OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PROPERTY AS SURVEYED 994-319 BY ME OR R U UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION ON AND DOES NOT T PURPORT TO T TO 600x: fcc. SHOW IMPROVEMENTS OR ENCROACHMENTS. EXCEPT AS SHOWN. PLANNING SNCINI RINC SURYLY/NC po pp 2005 PM OWI Drive ro/ Z'0 lL A' E.: MN 55122 DATE Ph (6 onr. (651) 405-6600 LINOOREN, LAN URVEraR SITE PLAN roe : (651) 405-6606 NNE OTA LICENSE NUMBER 14376 JNIOVUO S oi. 1 \ I 1 = 1 1111 e ' ' :`i\" y\ • ,..ice' i : : •.1.' t \ sq. F.. 1 1.•r~~/ 1 1 F[ t 111 1 1\\\~~,\ t r { e - 2 J Cl! N .a 1 = ? i ~a p Y • -Ile cc. s•~ _ v 4r . ~ n a~ O H: / STORM SEWER WdAVIW ijilhiji t a=# t -zf~- O i:i:ii:~•:+:r::~ ~:.:wr~wivr:titiw'i~ }s'r:. r> ° ' ; m O .m, _ _ ° Z saw gas' "tt p oC M jo. 2 y 2 i n~ f t r = Y¦ : j E` F ' _ °I a ief`'l: E F~ E t= ' t t ~ ~ tFr ap t[ E ::t r t F t t r F I II s e E~ ~ ~ sF~ ~ ~ Es$rg I lit: i1 ffim O~ SEE E. Et 1 Agenda Information Memo January 18, 2000 Eagan City Council Meeting C. CDBG FUNDING FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000 ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: ? To provide formal direction for the distribution of FY 2000 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds. ? To adopt a resolution authorizing the City Administrator to submit the CDBG Program applications, per Council distribution direction, to Dakota County. FACTS: • The CDBG fiscal year begins July 1. The U S Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) provides block grant funding for programs that adhere to national objectives and eligible activities per CDBG Program regulations. • Eagan's FY 2000 funding amount is expected to be $240,632. • The Dakota County CDA/HRA administers the CDBG program and will review and forward the City's desired funding allocations on to HUD for approval. ATTACHMENTS: (2) • January 14, 2000 Staff Memo, page through • Resolution, page /2 t'°.. Ca MEMO city of eagan TO: Tom Hedges, City Administrator FROM: Mike Ridley, Senior Planner //F` DATE: January 14, 2000 SUBJECT: FY 2000 CDBG In response to the confusion experienced at the Special City Council meeting yesterday, this memo will restate some of the information contained in the Special Council packet. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) ? The U S Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) provides the block grant funding. ? Generally, CDBG funding can be used to assist people with low to moderate incomes and for efforts that eliminate slums and blight. ? The Dakota County Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program sets off its new program year annually on July 1st. ? CDBG funding programs need to adhere to national objectives and eligible activities under the CDBG Program regulations. HISTORY ? The City has historically provided funding for housing rehab loans, Wescott Youth Services, homeownership assistance, and set aside dollars that will accumulate in the Home Swap fund and are earmarked for senior housing. ? Due to allocations made in FY's 1998 and 1999, the existing balance in the Home Swap (senior housing) Program Fund is $230,000. ? There is also an existing balance in the Blight Removal (Cedarvale) Program Fund of $60,000. ? Although there is currently money in the housing rehab loan program and the homeownership assistance program, virtually all of the unexpended money has been committed. / f6' ? The FY 1999 CDBG funding amount was $236,000; however, CDBG Program Income from 1998 and unspent program funds from previous years added $121,000 for a total of $357,000. FISCAL YEAR 2000 ? The CDBG funding amount for Eagan for FY 2000 increased slightly from 1999 and is expected to be $240,632. ? The Parks & Recreation and Police Departments have identified Wescott Square as a primary area of need. ? There was consensus at the Department Head level that the City Council should consider dedicating funds to assist with finding a lasting solution to the growing problems in the Wescott Square area. ? The Resource Center for Fathers & Families (RCFF), a sliding scale non-profit agency established to provide resources that will help men become better parents and better parenting partners regardless of marital status, is requesting the City of Eagan allocate $1,000 of FY 2000 CDBG dollars. January 13, 2000 Special City Council Meeting As I understood the motion, the Council direction was to allocate FY 2000 CDBG funding as follows: Home Swap (Senior Housing) $100,000 Housing Rehabilitation Loans $ 60,000 Wescott Youth Services $ 9,632 Homeownership Assistance $ 10,000 Eagan PD Presence/Wescott $ 20,000 Cedarvale Blight $ 40,000 Fathers and Families (RCFF) 1,000 Total $240,632 Please contact me if you have any questions or need additional information. /g/ CITY OF EAGAN DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE APPLICATION OF THE CITY OF EAGAN FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000 DAKOTA COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDING BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the city of Eagan as follows: 1. The City Administrator is authorized to submit the attached application to Dakota County for a Community Development Block Grant in Fiscal Year 2000. 2. The application is approved by the City Council and the Mayor and City clerk are authorized to execute it on behalf of the City of Eagan. 3. That the Dakota County HRA be designated as the administrative entity to carry out the program on behalf of the City. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Eagan this 18`h day of January, 2000. Ayes: Nayes: , Mayor ATTEST: , Deputy Clerk Agenda Information Memo January 18, 2000 Eagan City Council Meeting X LEGISLATWE/.INTERG.O. RN ENTAL AFFAIRS I)ATE- A. RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE DAKOTA COUNTY CITY AND COUNTY MANAGERS' RECOMMENDED LEGISLATIVE ISSUES FOR THE 2000 SESSION ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve a resolution supporting the Dakota County City and County Managers' recommended legislative issues for the 2000 session. FACTS: • The Dakota County city and county managers/administrators have been discussing legislative issues pertinent to the county and all cities in Dakota County. • The issues that have been addressed are the tax and revenue system including state aids, levy limits, reverse referendum, limited market value and sales tax on local government purchases. Other issues include state mandates, the transportation policy and housing. • It is the intention of each city and the county to present the issues to their respective legislative delegation. ATTACHMENTS: • Summary of legislative topics on pa es 5 through • Resolution attached on pages /R'7 through /8'3 Dakota County City and County 1. State Aids Managers/Administrators HACA. Reductions in the Homestead and Legislative Issues Agricultural Credit Aid (HACA) should not occur, unless reductions are part of a dollar-for dollar History of collaboration: Dakota County's city and assumption of previous County expenditures by county managers have met monthly for the past 11 the State. years to work on matters of mutual concern. This collaboration has resulted in successful partnerships to • LGA Local Government (LGA) is a necessary, share Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and state-raised resource to supplement local property criminal justice data. Working together on legislative taxes, and avoid increasing reliance on property issues of common concern for local governments in tax levies. The need to create an equitable Dakota County is a natural outgrowth of the ongoing funding distribution formula is important to the collaborative efforts of the city managers and county long-term viability of this state aid. administrator. • Other Aids. Criminal Justice, Community Background: As the State's third most populous Corrections, Community Health and Community county, the cities and county share a diverse Social Services Aids should be increased. The population faced with social and economic challenges gap between the County share of these program as we enter the 21st century. Although the county's costs and the state share has widened, shifting rate of growth is expected to slow over the next 25 costs to the County property tax levy. It is years, Dakota County will add nearly 105,000 people appropriate to link these increases to a measure between 2000 and 2020; only Hennepin County will of need for the aids. add more people. The cities of Farmington, Rosemount and Lakeville will continue to lead this • Property Tax Administration. The property tax growth, more than doubling in population by 2020. administration reimbursement for counties should become permanent. Growth will permeate all aspects of life in Dakota County and its cities. Demographically, the County's • Financing Reforms Financing reforms should profile in 2020 indicates that the senior population will continue, with priorities for continuing reforms in more than double and racial and ethnic diversity will the funding of courts and income maintenance. continue to change the face of the County. Congestion Dakota County will monitor the development of on county and city roadways will dramatically increase plans for state assumption of court administration and commuting times will double without significant costs and evaluate the report of the Conference of action on commuting alternatives. Chief Judges to the Legislature (December, 2000), particularly with respect to definitions of costs to be The City Managers and County Administrator of assumed by the State of Minnesota and the Dakota County have joined together to support the timetable for the statewide assumption of court following policies and positions during the 2000 administration costs. Legislative Session. 2. Levy Limits THE ISSUES The Legislature should remove levy limits on local governments. The Dakota County experience TAX AND REVENUE SYSTEM under which the County and many cities have levied at less than the legislatively imposed limit in A strong and stable state tax system that provides recent years demonstrates that such limits are not adequate revenues without placing unacceptable necessary to control spending. Looking ahead, burdens on City and County property taxes is low inflation rates and slowing population growth essential. The current reliance on the property tax for coupled with rising health care costs and program funding County services is excessive. Service and caseloads will make it increasingly difficult to funding responsibilities must be aligned, with state maintain current services within the current levy revenues directed to funding the delivery of state limits. mandated services. City and county property taxes should provide for the delivery of services over which 3. Reverse Referendum local elected officials have policy controls. Dakota County Cities and County Managers/Administrators oppose the imposition of a "reverse referendum" requirement. These requirements are unnecessary and unworkable, and undermine the basic precepts of frequently frustrated by state demands for a specific representative democracy. service and/or administrative procedure. The state seldom provides sufficient state aid to finance the 4. Limited Market Value service or procedure that it has mandated, including The City and County managers strongly oppose the cost of administration. further extension of artificial limits in valuing property at market for property taxation purposes. The State of Minnesota relies heavily on the property Limiting market value increases on existing tax for funding services for children and families, property to a non-market index or set rate will corrections, courts, and other public services. cause various property tax system problems. Because of the state's paramount interest in and Similar properties will be taxed differently if new or control over these services, state revenue is more sold and improvements will be discouraged. The appropriate than the property tax for funding these market, not a legislatively mandated one, should services. Between 75% and 80% of the services be the primary determinant in the assignment of delivered by the County are mandated by the state, but housing values for property taxation purposes. only 25% to 30% of the County's budget comes from state or other intergovernmental revenue. In 2000, SALES TAX ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT state and other intergovernmental revenue will account PURCHASES for only 26% of the Dakota County operating budget. Dakota County and the Cities of Dakota County Additional mandates and costs should not be imposed support full exemption from Minnesota Sales Tax on all on Dakota County or its cities without sufficient purchases by local government. We believe that the financial assistance to implement these mandates from state sales tax on local government is essentially a the State of Minnesota. Specifically, no new mandates State imposed property tax. As the Legislature should be imposed on local government pending the contemplates methods for property tax relief, completion and evaluation of the analysis being elimination of this sales tax on local government would conducted by the Office of Legislative Auditor of state achieve two objectives. First, elimination of the sales mandates. tax on local government purchases would reduce the property tax burden on residential and commercial Above all else, the goal of mandate reform should be property owners who actually pay this tax as a "pass to insure that when state policy makers make a through" from local government. And secondly, decision triggering a local expense, that they provide a preserving local government accountability for levies it means for financing that expense other than letting it actually imposes and uses for its own purposes versus fall by default on the local property tax. Linking the acting as a collection arm for a disguised state decision to provide a service with the responsibility to government tax. pay for that service is the only real way to assure accountability. In addition to mandate accountability, It is estimated that state sales tax on local government reform should achieve the following objectives: purchases continues to be a tax burden on local property tax payers costing approximately $80 million • Repeal: Obsolete mandates should be repealed in 2000 and $93 million in 2001. In addition, as there • Focus On Results: When imposed, new mandates was no increase in state aids to cities and counties should focus on results as opposed to process. when the sales tax was imposed, there should be no Mandates should specify a desired outcome giving corresponding reductions in state aids upon its repeal. local governments flexibility to achieve that result Accordingly, this exemption must not be coupled with in the most cost-effective manner, instead of any reductions in Local Government Aid or HACA. dictating administrative process. Over time, existing mandates should be revised accordingly. • State Aid: State aid to finance mandates should be STATE MANDATES tied to the marginal cost of achieving a specific outcome. The state must accept the responsibility The business community, state government and local to fund the mandates it requires. governments have a mutual interest in reforming state Fiscal Notes And Evaluation: The 1997 legislation mandates on local governments. Businesses pay a requiring fiscal notes for all proposed mandates disproportionate share of the cost of any unfunded should be implemented in full, without exception mandate because of the structure of Minnesota's and expanded to cover existing mandates. property tax. Furthermore, their tax expense may exceed the direct benefit of mandated services. Local To improve the assessment of legislation that has the governments' efforts to minimize tax increases and potential to impose unfunded mandates on local provide services in the most cost-effective manner are governments, the local impact note process should be 8's strengthened. Specifically: HOUSING • The authority to request the preparation of a local Dakota County and its cities are encouraged by the impact note should be broadened to include efforts of the legislature regarding the production and requests of a Chair of a standing committee to preservation of affordable housing. The state of which a bill is referred and the Chair of the House Minnesota should continue as a partner with local Ways and Means or the Senate Finance government in addressing housing issues in our Committee. (Minnesota Statutes, Section 3.987 communities. In the spirit of this partnership: now provides for requests to be made by the Cities should be acknowledged as the unit of Chair or Ranking Minority member of either the government primarily responsible for the authority House or the Senate Tax Committee.) to regulate location, size, amount and type of • The local impact note process must be a priority housing within their boundaries. within the Department of Finance. To facilitate the • The state of Minnesota should encourage more role of the Department in this process, adequate affordable housing by providing financing funding for this purpose should be provided to the assistance and incentives, including but not limited Department and a reporting accountability for the to sales tax exemptions for construction materials. process should be established with the Increased state funding for these incentives should Legislature. not reduce existing programs. • The Legislature should expand state efforts to • Where a local impact note has been requested, provide resources for housing rehabilitation and the budget/finance division or the tax committee to continue to increase funding the housing which the bill is referred should not be permitted preservation program for federally subsidized to act on the measure if the local impact note has housing that could be converted to market rate not been received and distributed in advance of housing. the hearing. TRANSPORTATION POLICY 1. County State Aid Highway Distribution Formula Equity should be restored to the County State Aid Highway (CSAH) distribution formula. More equitable results when measure by per capita, per vehicle mile, or per vehicle registered distributions should be pursued. 2. Transit The creation of a separate, dedicated source of funds for transit and related transit needs should be created. 3. Transitways A continued state commitment to the development of transit ways should be pursued, including the Hiawatha Corridor project with a terminus in northern Dakota County and its longer-term linkage to a Cedar Avenue Transit Way. 4. Commuter Rail Development Commuter rail development consistent with the findings of the Minnesota Department of Transportation's studies, should be evaluated further. This includes the potential development of commuter rail lines serving Dakota County's western and eastern borders. l Q' CITY OF EAGAN RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE DAKOTA COUNTY CITY AND COUNTY MANAGERS RECOMMENDED LEGISLATIVE ISSUES FOR THE 2000 SESSION WHEREAS, Dakota County's City and County Managers/Administrators have an eleven year history of successful collaborations on a wide range of important issues affecting local governance; and WHEREAS, these successful partnerships have benefited the citizens of Dakota County in providing cost-effective, high quality government services such as geographic information systems which support local decision-making and the sharing of essential criminal justice data between multiple jurisdictions; and WHEREAS, working together on legislative issues of common concern for local governments in Dakota County is a natural outgrowth of these collaborative efforts; and WHEREAS, Dakota County, as the State's third most populous county, is expected to add nearly 105,000 people by 2020, and will consequently be faced with a variety of social and economic challenges associated with an ever increasingly diverse and aging population; and WHEREAS, changes to existing law as may be considered by the State Legislature has a profound impact on local government services in the areas of taxes and revenues, cost of local government services, transportation funding, housing and state-imposed mandates; and WHEREAS, the commonality of interests between Dakota County and Cities in Dakota County suggest that a unified approach in legislative advocacy is essential in ensuring that the needs of our current and future residents are appropriately addressed at the local level. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Eagan City Council that the City of Eagan hereby supports the 2000 Dakota County/Cities Legislative Position Paper and respectfully requests legislative support from legislators in Dakota County in the upcoming legislative session. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution be forwarded to Governor Jesse Ventura and the Dakota County legislative delegation. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eagan this 18`h day of January, 2000. Motion by: CITY OF EAGAN Seconded by: CITY COUNCIL Those in Favor: By Those Against: Its Mayor Dated: Attest: J g ? Its Clerk CERTIFICATION I, E. J. VanOverbeke, Clerk of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, in a regular meeting thereof assembled this 18th day of January, 2000. E. J. VanOverbeke, City Clerk Sg Minnesota Department of Public Safety di,?}. LIQUOR CONTROL DIVISION 444 Cedar St., Suite 100 L. S). Paul. MN 55101-2156 (612)296-6430 -1TIY(612)282-6555 APPLICATION FOR OFF SALE INTOXICATING LIQUOR LICENSE No license will be appru ved or released until the S20 Retailer ID Card fee Is received by MN Liquor Control. Work-cr.compaisation insurance company. Name AMERICAN COMP. INS. CO. Policy# AC - WC-001197-4 1.1CEN SEE:'S SALES & U SE TAX Il) # 7602953 To apply for sales tax call 296-06181 or 1-800- 657-3777 If a corporation, an officer shall execute this application If a partnership, a partner shall exeaite this application. Licensee Name (indiv-idual. Corporation, Partnership) Trade Name or D13A HASKELL'S, INC. HASKELL'S license Location (Street Address & Block No.) License Period Applicant's Home l1bonc 2260 Cliff Road From To 612-377-3326 City County State Zip Code EAGAN DAKOTA MN 55122 Name of Store Manager Business Phone Number DOB (Ind vidual Applicant) JOHN F.-FARRELL JR. 612-342-2437 01/17/42 If a corporation, state name, date of birth, address, title, and shares held by each officer. If a partnership, state names, address and date of birth of each partner. Partner Officer (F•ira. middle. last) DOB Title Shares Address. City, State. Zip Code 1785 Emerson Avenue South JOHN FRANCIS FARRELL, JR. 011742 PRESIDENT 305 Minneapolis, MN 55403 Ferriage Ofljeer (First. middle. Iasi) DOD Title Shares Address, City, State, Zip Code VICE 1920 East 86th Street # 136 DANIEL AMBROSE MANNING 040149 PRESIDENT -0- Bloomington, MN 55425 Partner Officer (Fir i. middle. last) DOB Title Shares Address, City, State, Zip Code Partner Officer (first, middle, lag) DOB Title Shares Address, City, State, Zip Code 1. If a corporation, date of incorporation 09/18/70 , date incorporated in Minnesota , amount paid in capital $10,000 . If a subsidiary of any other corporation. so state N/A and give purpose of corporation N/A . If incorporated under the laws of another state, is corporation authorized to do business in the state of Minnesota? 0 Yes 0 No 2. Describe premises to which license applies; such as (Resit floor, second floor, basement. etc.) or if entire building, so state. 10,000 sa ft. First Floor With Basement 3. Is establishment located near any state university, state hospital, training school, reformatory or prison? 0 Yes I No If yes state approxisnate distance. 4. Name and address of building owner- Through Caldwell Banker Has owner of building any connection. directly or indirectly, with applicant? 0 Yes 3EkNo 5. Is applicant or any of the associates in this application, a member of the governing body of the municipality in which this liceusa: is to be issued? Yes %1 No Uyes. in what capacity? 6. State whether any person other than applicants has any right, title or littered in the furniture, f dures or equipment for which lice sc is applied and if so, give name and details. U S BANK - As Loan Collateral 7. Have applicants any interest whatsoever, directly or indirectly, in any other liquor establishment in the slate of Minnesota? G Yes - . No Uyes. give came and address of esstabliduuent. Other Haskell's Stores in Mi_nneaDo is St. Paul, Minnetonka, Bloomington & Excelsior, MN R. Arc the prerniscs now occupied or to be occupied by the applicant entirely separate and exclusive from any other business establishment? XYcs ' No 9. State whether applicant has or will be granted. an On sale Liquor license iu cog unction with this Off Sale Liquor License and for the same premises. D Yes No 'i Will be granted 10. State whether applicant has or will be granted a Sunday O u Sale Liquor License in cog unction with the regular Ou We Liquor l.iccus:. "i Yes , No iJ Will be granted 11. If this application is for a County Board ONT Sale License. -date the diaaucc in miles to the nearest municipality. N/A I. '-A me whether applicant or any of the associates in this application, lire ever had an application for a liquor license r4 acted by any municipality or sate authority; if an, give dates and details. NO 2. I [as the applicant or any of the associates in this application, during the fine years cnmediately preceding this application aver had a license under the Minnesota liquor Control Act revoked for any violation of huh laws or local ordinances; if -o. give dates and details. NO 3. Has applicant. partners, officers. or employees aver had any liquor lace violations in Minnesota or elsewhere, including State Liquor Control penalties? X. Yes : No Ifycs. give dates. charges and final outcome. See Conies Enclosed 4. During the past license ycr, has a summons beta issued under the Liquor Civil liability Law (I)raru Shop) M.S. 340A.802. Yes X. No If yes. attach a cop% of the summons. This licensee must have one of the following: (ATTACH CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE TO THIS FORM.) Med me XX A. Liquor Liability Insurance (Dram Shop) - 550,000 per person. S 100.000 more than ooc person; S 10.000 property destruction; S50 000 and S 100.000 for loss of means of support. err D B. A surety bond from a surety company with minimum coverage as specified in A. D C. A certificate from the State Treasurer that the licensee has deposited with the state, trust funds having market value of S 100.000 or S 100.000 in cash or securities. I certify that I have read the above questions dthak-flik th answers are true and correct of my own knowkd e. Print name of applicant & title Si star f Appli Date JOHN F. FARRELL, JR. PRESIDENT 0~ of c l REPOR POL SHERIF S j4fPARyk-EN7/ This is to certify that the applicant and the i amod herein have not been convict is the pact five yers for any violation of laws of the State of Minnesota or municipal ordinances relating to intoxicating liquor except as follows: D€ M4rr qJ 01 PCF Police! crifl's Department Title Si ature PS 9136-94 County Attorney's Si ature IMPORTANT NOTICE All retail liquor licensees must have a current Federal Spacial Occupational Stamp. This stamp is issued by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms. For information call (612)290-3496. MEMORANDUM j2dath PWIRRok EAGAN POLICE DEPARTMENT 3830 Pilot Knob Road T;; Eagan, MN 55122 651-681-4700 StiN ~ o ^ r 651-681-4738 FAX DATE: January 14, 2000 TO: Chief Kent Therkelsen FROM: Det. Doug Matteson SUBJECT: Haskell's Inc., dba Haskell's Liquor Haskell's Inc. doing business as Haskell's Retail Liquor has made application with the City of Eagan to operate an off sale retail liquor establishment. Haskell's plans to build a building located at 2260 Cliff Road, between the existing SuperAmerica gas station and Penn Cycle. John Francis Farrell, Jr. has made the application as President of Haskell's Inc. Also named on the application is Daniel Ambrose Manning, who is acting as his Vice President. I have run complete criminal background checks on each individual and cannot locate any criminal activity. Haskell's Inc. currently operates five retail liquor stores located in Minneapolis, Minnetonka, Highland Park, Bloomington, and Excelsior. The applicant did include a copy of a criminal complaint showing that a clerk at the Excelsior store did sell to a minor during a compliance check in May of 1994. I was not able to find any other liquor law violations at the other stores. Based on the results of my investigation I find no reason to deny the applicant for the requested off sale liquor license. f I T 830 Pilot Knob 3 Road Eagan, MN 55122-1897 (612) 681-4600 City of Eagan Hauler Licensing Application Residential ' i. , hereby make application for a Refuse/Recycling license for the year 00 . Owner: Grcc Pnn; c 936 y ' SL 51-• Paul Ark iTht' 55-j 7/ Name Address L51 - /k07 City I '1 State Zip Te ephone Business Name: IPnn, S S An~ p-4'0x1, L L-n dye F0 9d,c Name Address ISS7 PC, 'd t k/ M /y, !515 07 1 City State Zip i eiephone Municipalities where presently licensed: _C~ffc<<Q rove WfA)v()pa,4 1.i 1"ark LI ENSE TYPE: Residential Refuse/Recycling (Number of trucks) - Required for haulers serving single family detached, duplex and four-plex units. - Recycling and compost vehicles may be included in the residential license, if operated by a single company. Each must be counted as an additional vehicle. - State, county and city mandates require residential recycling opportunities be provided. - Additional requirements outlined in Hauling Ordinance as attached. Residential Recycling Only (Number of trucks) - Required for haulers performing only residential recycling for single family, duplex and four- plex residential. - Applicable to independent firms, subcontractors, and licensed haulers. FEES: $50 for first vehicle, plus $25 for each additional vehicle. TOTAL NUMBER OF VEHICLES TO OPERATE IN EAGAN: 1 @ $50: 50 @ $25 each: Total: *Vehicles used in more than one licensing category must fill out a separate application, but pay only one fee per truck. Example: One truck which picks up both residential and commercial recycling needs two licenses, but only one fee. Please note if this is applicable. The following must be included in order for your application to be processed: Motor Vehicle Insurance _ Date of Expiration Worker's Comp. Insurance Q~ D to of Expiration Rate Schedule(s ee raIQs J,c~ *If your company wishes to operate as either a Commercial / Multiple Dwelling, or a Construction / Demolition Debris hauler, a corresponding license must be obtained, and additional fees must be paid if additional trucks are to be used. If you need application forms or have questions please call the City of Eagan at 681-4600. 15 /C/9'? /,a/ ~afcs o `a/~s ~~c/ua/~ /-rcy/c% anc e r/ 5 //on _ /~,c9p p/us fart s 9a// /S. 3~ PAus Ael 10146 fa x/750 '/mss 7' 3830 Pilot Knob Road (,Q ~av l Eagan, MN 55122-1897 (612) 681-4600 City of Eagan Hauler Licensing Application Residential } l D f `I' lV f` 4-i , hereby make application for a Refuse/Recycling license for'the year 01 Owner: P,-Yjx 6a r-CL Address nn 11 City State Zip Telephone i 1, Y1' Tic Business Name: Nam A dress ity State Zip Telephone Municipalities where presently licensed: iP oSJ Qu..tl LICENSE TYPE: 'I Residential Refuse/Recycling (Number of trucks) - Required for haulers serving single family detached, duplex and four-plea units. - Recycling and compost vehicles may be included in the residential license, if operated by a .iingiv compan . Each must be counted as an additional vehicle - State, county and city mandates require residential recycling opportunities be provided. - Additional requirements outlined in Hauling Ordinance as attached. Residential Recycling Only (Number of trucks) - Required for haulers performing only residential recycling for single family, duplex and four- plex residential. - Applicable to independent firms, subcontractors, and licensed haulers. FEES: $50 for first vehicle, plus $25 for each additional vehicle. TOTAL NUMBER OF VEHICLES TO OPERATE IN EA CAN: •-3 n 1 @ $50: - 50. oC @ $25 each: 64 Total: / *Vehicles used in more than one licensing category must fill out a separate application, but pay only one fee per truck. Example: One truck which picks up both residential and commercial recycling needs two licenses, but only one fee. Please note if this is applicable. d-J ~YY . The following must be included in order for your application tb be processed: Motor Vehicle Insurance Date of Expiration Worker's Comp. Insurance Date of Expiration Rate Schedule *If your company wishes to operate as either a Commercial / Multiple Dwelling, or a Construction / Demolition Debris hauler, a corresponding license must be obtained, and additional fees must be paid if additional trucks are to be used. If you need application forms or have questions please call the City of Eagan at 681-460. - '3 I l ~S fi SQL soy cr~,zl~ - -50 ~o •7S IDA o D,r+M .4 1 lad t4 00 f +1 co) ajj 90 90J - IS X (,v~Cu-tit ho-4 _ _ vivvi-rviV IL/ IJ 77 I I.JI IVV.V7V ve/V4: IVO 3830 Pilot Knob Road U` \ lJ~ G\ 1 Eagan, MN S5122-1997 (612) 681-4600 City of Eagan Hauler Licensing Application Residential 1, Est(.. LOGE hereby make application for a Refuse/Recycling license for the year aboo Owner: Name Address City State Zip Telephone Business Name: I~2r,o~- u.CS t 3~S 7 / . _ po Box a l Name Address NewocVV rrlnr 30x5 City I State Zip Telephone Municipalities where presently licensed: A.6. l?,, d~,l B(... t«.., ii6rs, Ngsh:ns, l l ~ c . l ti ,l,~ d . I ¢ , O A act.J l~lck,P,,,,1 N~: N, St 9 .l 1 O-.kJ&Jc.. 1041 P4itt N.~,y'4s 1 ,cc1l-~ Roses, Ite, 7T'Sa,l4%9t.' uks~5.l. r. tl t 1 LICENSE TYPE: Residential Refuse/Recycling (Number of trucks) Required for haulers serving single family detached, duplex and four-plea units. Recycling and compost vehicles may be included in the residential license, if operated by a single company. Each must be counted as an additional vehicle. State, county and city mandates require residential recycling opportunities be provided. Additional requirements outlined in Hauling Ordinance as attached. Residential Recycling Only (Number of trucks) Required for haulers performing only residential recycling for single family, duplex and four- plex residential. Applicable to independent firms, subcontractors, and licensed haulers. FEES! $50 for first vehicle, plus $25 for each additional vehicle. TOTAL NUMBER OF VEHICLES TO OPERATE IN EAGAN: Phk~' I 6C-44) Cld 1 @ $50: @ $25 each: z,5- -Total: *Vehicles used in more than one licensing category must fill out a separate application, but pay only one fee per truck. Example: One truck which picks up both residential and commercial recycling needs two licenses, but only one fee. Please note if this is applicable. The following gf be included in order for your application to be processed: Motor Vehicle Insurance Date of Expiration Worker's Comp. Insurance Date of Expiration Rate Schedule *If your company wishes to operate as either a Commercial / Multiple Dwelling, or a Construction / Demolition Debris hauler, a corresponding license must be obtained, and additional fees must be paid if additional trucks are to be used. if you need application forms or have questions please call the City of Eagan at 681-4600. C11( OF EAGAN 6516814612 01/07 '00 17:24 NO.783 02/04 3330 Pilot Knob Road Fagan, MN 55122.1847 (612) 681-4600 City of Eagan Hauler Licensing Application Construction F Demolition Debris 1, hereby make application fbr a ReNse/Recycling license for the year U Owns- Addrew 07 Ctty Stan Zip Telephone Business Name G t Dr.~ Sate Zip Telephone Municipalities where presently licensed: LICENSE TYPE Construction/Demolition Debris (Number of trucks) • Required for haulers or contractors using containers greater than four cubic yards • Additional requirements outlined in Hauling Ordinance as attached. F'ZES: $50 for first vehicle, plus S25 for each additional vehicle. TOTAL NUMBER OF VEFIIJCLES TO OPERATE U1 EAGAN! I ® $sc:„_ $25 each: Total, •Vehlclei used in more than one licensing categor> must fill out a separate application, but pay- only one cc per truck. Exwnplc: One truck which pickt up both residential and commercial recyclinj needs two licenses, but gtly one N. Please note if this Is applicable, Me fbilowing iIQYJ>t be ineJudod in order for your application to be pronausdt Motor Vehicle Insurance Date of Expiration Worker's Comp. Insurance Date of Espiratlon Rate Schedule If your company wishes to operate as either a Residential or aCommarclal / Multi Dwelling hauler, a torrespotding lease ravel be obtalnad, and additional foes mull be paid if additional trucks we to bt used. Ifyeu need application arms or hive q;ustiuns please call the City of Eagan at 651-4600. 6125339490 CITY OF EAGAN ,TEL=6516814612 01/13100 08:54 •r Z y Y 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122- 1 897~~~r (612) 681-4600 et City of Eagan J a3 pf w Hauler Licensing Application µ 1 4 Construction / Demolition Debris I, 5 r a Firms hereb make a lication for a Refuse/Rec clip license the • Y PP Y g year - y! R -rw.. e t a+".EF~;1 %.S t R.5~I'k Y 4 k y..¢ Owner.\r <n Name Address ; .b tr; t I FrO r loZ - '/771. city 5~~ 13 ` w State Zip Telephonc'-Y,`,`r. Rusiiiess Nance S 3 -s Name Address City State Zip, Telephone Municipalities where presently licensed: . Lov.s %k,, pl iMoic ~ t) V (AS C. , ('h6i 7 ti y2 SETYPE:LINConstruetion/Demolition ' c r Debris (Number of trucks) Required for haulers or contractors using containers greater than four cubic yards:` Additional. requirements outlined in Hauling Ordinance as attached. s ~y 7 a\:S td 1ftr ~x ~'~~.=la ~Y3r ~ 1~ ~~1 "4 Sri:~1s erk '~SG ~`f$~~. r 4, hof i'~tig4..e.. 4r ~1. 4 +~'F' r J r } !r k r4 A J t FEES: $50 for first vehicle;'plus'$25 foreach additional vehicle: TOTAL NUMBER OF VEHICLES TO OPERATE IN EAGAN: 1 @ $50 0 @ $25 each:, Total i 'Vehicles used in more than one licensing category must fill out a separate application, but pay only one fee per truck. Example: One truck which picks up both residential and commercial recycling'needs two licenses, but gply one fee. Please note if this is applicable. The following must be Included in order for your application to be eased: 4 pr9c Motor Vehicle Insurance 3 Date of Expiration Worker's Comp. Insurance Date. of Expiration Rate Schedule If your company wishes to operate as either a Residential or aCommercial I Multi Dwelling hauler, a eoriesponding license must be obtained, and additional fees must be paid if additional trucks are to be used. `If you need application forms or have questions please call the City of Eagan at 681-4600 1 I ''i