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