Loading...
01/17/2006 - City Council Regular r ' AGENDA EAGAN CITY COUNCIL - REGULAR MEETING EAGAN MUNICIPAL CENTER BUILDING January 17, 2006 6:30 P.M. 1. ROLL CALL & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE H. ADOPT AGENDA (At approximately 8:00 p.m. the Council will take a short recess) III. RECOGNITIONS & PRESENTATIONS IV. CONSENT AGENDA p A A. APPROVE MINUTES B. PERSONNEL ITEMS ~aC. APPROVE CHECK REGISTERS 3 D. APPROVE 2005 General Fund Budget Adjustments sE. APPROVE Amendment to the 2006 City Fee Schedule Adding Various Park Facility Fees 6. F. APPROVE Premise Permit Renewal for Eagan Lions Club to Conduct a Pulltab Operation on Cedarvale Lanes Premises 9 G. APPROVE Name Change on Liquor License for Jesimo, Inc. from Eagan Steak House, located at 1448 Yankee Doodle Road, to Steakbones Grill ~aO H. APPROVE Final Subdivision (Esmeralda Addition) - Charles Hanf - A Final Subdivision of .62 acres to create two / lots located at 3702 Denmark Avenue in the SW of Section 15 ~aa I. APPROVE Extension of Final Plat for Recording, Kennerick Yd Addition, located in the SE of Section 4 J. APPROVE Final Payment and Authorize City Maintenance for Contract 05-02 (City-Wide Street Overlays) ~~tt K. RECEIVE Draft Feasibility Report, for Project 928, Meadowview Road / Alexander Road (Street Improvements) / and Schedule Public Hearing for February 21, 2006 P15% RECEIVE Draft Feasibility Report, Project 930, Silver Bell Road (Street Overlay) and Schedule Public Hearing for February 21, 2006 M. APPROVE the Renewal of a One Year Contract with Dakota County for the Provision of Sentence to Service Work Y Crews and Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to Execute the Appropriate Documents N. AUTHORIZE the Preparation of a DNR Outdoor Recreation Grant Application for Improvements to Thresher Fields Park and Direct the Advisory Parks and Recreation Commission to Conduct the Required Pubic Hearing at their Regular Meeting of February 16, 2006 /~ap O. AUTHORIZE the Preparation of a Local Collaborative Grant Application to Independent School District's Family V Services Collaborative for Outreach Programming Opportunities. paQ P. APPROVE Amendment to Park Dedication Use Agreement between the City and Faithful Shepherd Catholic V School pYO Q. APPROVE 2006 Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan 31 R. APPROVE Renewal of a One Year Contract with Lifeworks Services Inc. for the Provision of Limited Janitorial P Services in Designated Park Buildings, and Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to Execute the Appropriate Documents p3~ S. APPROVE Amendment to the Gun Club Lake Watershed Management Joint Powers Agreement to Permit if Staggered Terms of Members Appointed to the Gun Club Lake Board ,03,?T. APPROVE the 2006 Parks and Recreation CIP U. APPROVE the Concept for a Miniature Golf Amenity to be Incorporated into Cascade Bay and Authorize Staff to Proceed with a Plan to have it Implemented for the 2006 Season V. PUBLIC HEARINGS SA. EASEMENT VACATION - Lot 2, Block 1, Cliff Lake Centre 3'd Addition _17 B. PROJECT 888, Cedar Grove Parkway Trail and Lighting Improvements (continued from 12-20-05) ?D C. PROJECT 933, Town Centre Drive / O'Leary Lane / Golfview Drive (Street Overlay) er. . CITY ORGANIZATIONAL BUSINESS /f 10 A. Acting Mayor PinBOff cial Legal Newspaper /03C. City Council Meeting Schedule D. Council Meeting Procedures /pi E. Standing Committee Appointments / Representative Appointments F. Disband Economic Development Commission VII. OLD BUSINESS VIII. NEW BUSINESS f abA. COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN AMENDMENT - Wensmann Homes - A Comprehensive Guide Plan 1 Amendment of 120 acres from Park (P) to Special Area (SA) located at 3535 Wescott Woodlands in the east '/2 of Section 14. IX. LEGISLATIVE/INTERGOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS UPDATE LJv A. City of Eagan's 2006 State Bonding Requests IX. ADMINISTRATIVE AGENDA A. Comments by City Council, City Administrator, and Department Heads X. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY P The Council acting as the Board of Commissioners of the Economic Development Authority ("EDA") may discuss and act on the agenda items for the EDA in conjunction with its actions as a Council. A. CALL TO ORDER B. ADOPT AGENDA dD~93 C. APPROVE MINUTES D. OLD BUSINESS aq 1. CEDAR GROVE REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT - Consider Findings of Fact, Conclusions and Resolution for Approval of the Tax Increment Development Agreement with Schafer Richardson for property located in the Core Area of ht Cedar Grove Redevelopment District. P.31a2. CEDAR GROVE REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT - Schedule Public Hearing on February 21, 2006 to Consider an Amendment of the TIF Development Agreement and to Consider the Sale of City Owned Property to U.S. Homes/Lennar for Private Development in the Nicols Ridge Project Area E. NEW BUSINESS F. OTHER BUSINESS P-336'1. EDA 2006 Organizational Business G. ADJOURNMENT XI. VISITORS TO BE HEARD (for those persons not on agenda) XH. CLOSED SESSION XIH. ADJOURNMENT 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. Me~o City of E To: HONORABLE MAYOR & COUNCILMEMBERS From: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES Date: JANUARY 13, 2006 Subject: AGENDA INFORMATION FOR JANUARY 17, 2006 CITY COUNCIL MTG ADOPT AGENDA After approval is given to the January 17, 2006 City Council agenda, the following items are in order for consideration. l Agenda Information Memo January 17, 2006 Eagan City Council Meeting CONSENT AGENDA The following items referred to as consent items require one (1) motion by the City Council. If the City Council wishes to discuss any of the items in further detail, those items should be removed from the Consent Agenda and placed under Old or New Business unless the discussion required is brief. A. APPROVE MINUTES ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the minutes of the January 3, 2006 regular City Council meeting and the January 10, 2006 special City Council meeting as presented or modified. ATTACHMENTS: • Minutes of the January 3, 2006 regular City Council meeting are enclosed on pages through -R-. • Minutes of the January 10, 2006 special City Council meeting are enclosed on pages through MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE I)RAFT EAGAN CITY COUNCIL Eagan, Minnesota January 3, 2006 A Listening Session was held January 3, 2006 at 6:00 p.m. prior to the regular City Council meeting. Mayor Geagan and Councilmembers Tilley, Maguire and Fields were present. There were no visitors who wished to be heard. A regular meeting of the Eagan City Council was held on January 3, 2006 at 6:30 p.m. at the Eagan Municipal Center. Present were Mayor Geagan, Councihnember Fields, Tilley, Maguire and Carlson. Also present were City Administrator Tom Hedges, Community Development Director Jon Hohenstein, City Planner Mike Ridley, Public Works Director Tom Colbert, City Attorney Bob Bauer, and Administrative Secretary / Deputy Clerk Mira Pepper. AGENDA Councilmember Tilley moved, Councilmember Fields seconded a motion to approve the agenda as presented. Aye:5 Nay:0 RECOGNITIONS AND PRESENTATIONS There were no recognitions or presentations. CONSENT AGENDA City Administrator Hedges noted that a request to continue item I, an easement vacation and the final plat for Halley's 2"d Addition, had been submitted by the applicant. Councilmember Fields moved, Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to approve the consent agenda as presented. Aye:5 Nay:0 A. Minutes. It was recommended to approve the minutes of the December 20, 2005 regular City Council meeting and the December 12, 2005 special City Council meeting as presented. B. Personnel Items. 1. It was recommended to approve the hiring of Michael Hemmingson, Cody Johnson, Chris Kantor, Ngoc Ly and Jennie Schorn as part-time seasonal winter recreation leaders. 2. It was recommended to approve the hiring of Randy Boyden, Mike Boyer and Keith Wallace as part-time seasonal broomball/boot hockey officials. 3. It was recommended to approve the hiring of Brian Schlichting as a part-time seasonal basketball scorekeeper. 4. It was recommended to approve the hiring of Andrea Eknes and Pam Bersie as part-time guest services representatives at the Community Center. 5. It was recommended to approve the revised Health Care Savings Plan policy. C. Check Registers. It was recommended to ratify the check registers dated December22, 2005 and December 29, 2005 as presented. D. 2006 Fee Schedule. It was recommended to amend the 2006 Fee Schedule to include escrows for industrial revenue bond, multi-family housing bond, and tax increment bond issues. E. Travel Policy. It was recommended to approve the City of Eagan Elected Officials Out-of-State Travel Policy. F. Insurance Broker Services. It was recommended to accept a proposal from Arthur J. Gallagher & Co. for insurance broker services, subject to the execution of a signed agreement between the City of Eagan and Arthur J. Gallagher & Co. G. Easement Vacations. It was recommended to receive the petition to vacate public drainage and utility easements within Lot 1, Block 1 Bicentennial 6d' Addition and Lot 1, Block 2 Bicentennial 7`h Addition and schedule a public hearing to be held on February 7, 2006. H. Drainage and Utility Easement. It was recommended to accept a Drainage and Utility Easement within Lebanon Hills Regional Park from Dakota County and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. 1. Final Plat and Easement Vacation. It was recommended to continue action on the vacation of easements and the Final Plat for Halley's 2"d Addition to the March 21, 2006 City Council meeting. 3 Eagan City Council Meeting Minutes NAFr January 3, 2006 Page 2 J. Homeland Security Grant. It was recommended to allow the Eagan Police Department to apply for the Commercial Equipment Direct Assistance Program - Phase II Grant. NEW BUSINESS CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - WATER HEATER INNOVATIONS City Administrator Hedges introduced this item regarding a Conditional Use Permit to allow outdoor storage of up to two storage silos for Water Heater innovations located at 3107 Sibley Memorial Highway. City Planner Ridley gave a staff report. A representative of Water Heather Innovations discussed the proposed locations for dumpsters and requested that one of the dumpsters be permitted without an enclosure. It was the consensus of the Council that all dumpsters be enclosed. Councilmember Carlson moved, Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to approve a Conditional Use Permit to allow outdoor storage of up to two storage silos for Water Heater Innovations located at 3107 Sibley Memorial Highway in the NW `/4 of Section 9, subject to the following conditions: Aye: 5 Nay: 0 1. The Conditional Use Permit shall be recorded with Dakota County within 60 days of the date of approval and proof of its recording be provided to the City. 2. The silos shall be located as indicated on the Site Plan received November 14, 2005. 3. The silos shall be painted to match the building. 4. The dumpsters shall be enclosed or relocated inside the building. If an enclosure is constructed a building permit is required prior to construction. 5. The parking stalls in the public right-of-way shall be removed or a permit shall be obtained from MNDOT to be in the right-of-way. Councilmember Carlson moved, Councilmember Fields seconded a motion to approve a Conditional Use Permit to allow outdoor storage of 125 pallets, 16 racks, 5 trailers and one dumpster for Water Heater innovations located at 3107 Sibley Memorial Highway in the NW '/4 of Section 9, subject to the following conditions: Aye: 5 Nay: 0 1. The Conditional Use Permit shall be recorded with Dakota County within 60 days of the date of approval and proof of its recording be provided to the City. 2. The applicant shall submit a revised Site Pan that indicates the location and number of the pallets and truck trailers. 3. All outdoor storage should meet setback requirements. 4. Outdoor storage area shall not interfere with pedestrian or vehicular movement. 5. The dumpsters shall be enclosed or relocated inside the building. If an enclosure is constructed a building permit is required prior to construction. 6. The parking stalls in the public right-of-way shall be removed or a permit shall be obtained from MNDOT to be in the right-of-way. 7. A maximum of 125 pallets, 16 racks, and up to 5 trailers shall be allowed in the locations shown on the revised Site Plan. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT - INTERSTATE PARTNERS City Administrator Hedges introduced this item regarding a Planned Development Amendment (Grand Oak 5) to allow on-sale liquor for a Class I restaurant at 2864 Highway 55; and a request to allow off-sale liquor for the Fragneto's wine store at 2874 Highway 55. City Planner Ridley gave a staff report. Matt Miller representing Interstate Partners was present to answer any questions of the Council. Councilmember Fields moved, Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to approve a Planned Development Amendment (Grand Oak 5) to allow on-sale liquor for a Class I restaurant at 2864 Highway 55 in the SE '/4 of Section 2 subject to the following conditions: Aye: 5 Nay: 0 Y Eagan City Council Meeting Minutes DRAFT January 3, 2006 Page 3 1. A Planned Development Agreement must be executed and recorded with the Dakota County recorder. Councilmember Fields moved, Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to approve a Planned Development Amendment (Grand Oak 5) to allow off-sale liquor for the Fragneto's wine store at 2874 Highways 55 in the SE 1/2 of Section 2 subject to the following conditions: Aye: 5 Nay: 0 1. A Planned Development Amendment Agreement must be executed and recorded with the Dakota County recorder. PRELIMINARY AND FINAL SUBDIVISION (EAGAN PLACE 2No ) SOLOMON REAL ESTATE GROUP City Administrator Hedges introduced this item regarding a Preliminary Subdivision and Final Subdivision of 9.24 acres to create three lots (Eagan Place 2nd ) for property located at 1235 Town Centre Drive. City Planner Ridley gave a staff report. Anne Knuth of Solomon Real Estate was present to answer questions of the Council. Councilmember Maguire moved, Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to approve a Preliminary Subdivision and Final Subdivision (Eagan Place) of 9.24 acres to create three lots (Eagan Place 2nd) for property legally described as Lot 1, Block 1, Eagan Place located t 1235 Town Centre Drive; subject to the following conditions: 1. The developer shall comply with these standards conditions of plat approval as adopted by Council on February 2, 1993: A 1, B 1, 2, 3, 4, C 1, 2,.3, D 1, E 1. 2. The property shall be platted. 3. Development of Lots 2 and 3 require Final Planned Development and Site Plan approval. 4. All mechanical equipment shall be screened from the ground level view of adjacent properties and public streets. 5. All exterior trash enclosures shall be attached to the building and constructed with the same materials and colors as the principal building. 6. All signage is subject to the Planned Development Amendment Agreement. 7. Building materials are subject to the Planned Development Amendment Agreement. 8. Uses for Lots 2 and 3 are limited to retail, restaurant. 9. The site shall be developed a indicated on the Site Plan. 10. The developer shall ensure that minimum sight distances, in accordance with the MNDOT Road Design Manual, are provided without obstruction for all proposed accesses. 11. The developer is hereby notified that the complete closure of Yankee Place at Yankee Doodle Road may occur in conjunction with the Yankee Doodle Road improvement project by Dakota County scheduled in 2006. 12. If City Project 933 is approved, this owner shall sign a waiver of objection to the proposed special assessment for City Public Improvement Project 933, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney. 13. The developer shall provide evidence of private ingress/egress easements between the three lots, for review and approval by the City Attorney. WAIVER OF SUBDIVISION - PAUL O'CONNELL City Administrator Hedges introduced this item regarding a Waiver of Subdivision requirements to split a twin home lot located at 2243 and 2245 Mahogany Way. City Planner Ridley gave a staff report. Councilmember Tilley moved, Councilmember Carlson seconded a motion to approve a Waiver of Subdivision requirements to split a twin home lot located at 2243 and 2245 Mahogany Way in the NE '/4 of Section 31. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 ORDINANCE AMENDMENT - CITY OF EAGAN S Eagan City Council Meeting Minutes DRAFT January 3, 2006 Page 4 City Administrator Hedges introduced this item regarding an Ordinance Amendment to modify the uses allowed in Chapter 11, Section 11.60, Subdivision 19 regarding uses allowed in the Park (P) Zoning District. City Planner Ridley gave a staff report. City Administrator Hedges stated that the City Council discussed this item at their September 12, 2005 workshop and directed the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance amendment based on that discussion. Four people spoke in opposition to the proposed amendment. One person questioned if City sewer and water connections would be required should residential development occur in a Park Zoning District. Staff indicated City services would be required. Councilmember Maguire moved, Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to approve an Ordinance Amendment to modify the uses allowed in Chapter 11, Section 11.60, Subdivision 19, Park District and direct the City Attorney to prepare and publish the amendment in the legal newspaper. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 LEGISLATIVE / INTERGOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS UPDATE No update was provided. PRESENTATION - DAKOTA FUTURE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PARTNERSHIP BILL COLEMAN Bill Coleman, Executive Director of the Dakota Future Economic Development Partnership, provided an overview of Dakota Future's recent past and expectations for 2006. ADMINISTRATIVE AGENDA City Administrator Hedges stated that a closed session would be held to discussed the John Cina litigation. VISITORS TO BE HEARD Peter Dumas questioned the Council in regard to the Carriage Hills litigation issue and the possibility of a bond referendum to purchase the Carriage Hills property. The City Attorney and City Administrator discussed the process necessary for a bond referendum, explaining that the City Council could not initiate such a referendum for the Carriage Hills property. Dan Nichols expressed concern regarding traffic should development occur on the Carriage Hills property. Councilmember Maguire moved, Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to adjourn the regular City Council meeting at 7:50 p.m. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 Date Administrative Secretary / Deputy City Clerk If you need these minutes in an alternative form such as large print, Braille, audio tape, etc., please contact the City of Eagan, 3830 Pilot Knob Road, Eagan, MN 55122, (651) 675-5000, (TDD phone: (651) 454-8535). The City of Eagan is committed to the policy that all persons have equal access to its programs, services, activities, facilities and employment without regard to race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, disability, age, sexual orientation, marital status or status with regard to public assistance. MINUTES SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING JANUARY 10, 2006 5:30 P.M. EAGAN ROOM - EAGAN MUNICIPAL CENTER City Councilmembers present: Mayor Geagan, Councilmembers Carlson, Fields, Maguire, and Tilley. City staff present: City Administrator Hedges, Assistant to the City Administrator Miller, Director of Administrative Services VanOverbeke, Public Works Director Colbert, Director of Community Development Hohenstein, City Engineer Matthys, Director of Parks and Recreation Johnson, Director of Communications Garrison, Superintendent of Enterprise Operations Mesko, Superintendent of Recreation Asfahl, and Superintendent of Parks Olson. 1. ROLL CALL AND AGENDA ADOPTION City Administrator Hedges noted that a request has been made by a member of the City Council to move Visitors to be Heard to the end of City Council Workshop agendas. It was the consensus of the Council to discuss this item under Other Business. City Administrator Hedges also inquired of the Council if they had any questions regarding the information included in their most recent packet regarding the proposed improvements to the Diffley/Rahn intersection. The Council had no questions. Councilmember Tilley moved; Councilmember Maguire seconded a motion to approve the agenda with the addition of Visitors to be Heard to be discussed during Other Business. Aye: 5, Nay:0 II. VISITORS TO BE HEARD There were no visitors to be heard. III. REVIEW RECOMMENDATION OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION (EDC) RE: ROLE/CHARGE OF THE EDC City Administrator Hedges introduced the item noting that the Council and the Economic Development Commission (EDC) had discussed the Commission's role and responsibilities a number of times in its history. Hedges also noted that in August of 2005, Mayor Geagan met with the Chair and Vice Chair of the EDC to discuss the future of the Commission. Per the recommendation of the City Council, the EDC discussed how they view their role as an advisory commission. Hedges noted that the Commission opted to suspend its meetings until such time as the City Council establishes specific, clear projects or outcomes with time tables that would support the Economic Development initiatives of the City. Community Development Director Hohenstein provided a brief overview of the history of the EDC and the recent discussions that the EDC had regarding the Commission's role. 7 Hohenstein introduced five members of the EDC who were present in the audience. EDC Chair Zoberi and Vice Chair Gilbert also commented on the question of whether the EDC should continue. Gilbert offered the alternative of rather than the EDC serving as a permanent advisory commission, members of the EDC could instead be used as an ad-hoc committee to consider issues before the City as needed. The Mayor and City Council discussed the recommendation of the EDC and commented on how they see the role of the Economic Development Commission. It was the consensus of the City Council to disband the EDC, and rather contact members on an as needed basis to serve as ad-hoc committee members when issues arise. The Council also noted that by disbanding the EDC at this time, the current EDC members could apply to serve on other City advisory commissions. The Mayor and City Council thanked the members of the EDC for the work and guidance they have provided to the City. Members of the EDC who were present thanked staff for their work with the Commission. The City Council directed that the formal disbanding of the EDC be added to the January 17 City Council meeting under Organizational Business. The Council also directed that a letter be sent to the members of the EDC to thank them for their service. Councihnember Maguire made a request of staff to include a uniform summary of each Commission, including its mission and purpose, in the interview packets prior to Advisory Commissioners being appointed in April. IV. STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN UPDATE City Administrator Hedges noted that the proposed Storm Water Management Plan Update is the most recent update since the 1990 plan. Hedges noted that the current updated plan will continue to serve as a guide to the City in developing, operating, and maintaining its storm drainage system. Hedges also noted that the Storm Water Management Plan is a different issue than water quality/wetland mitigation. City Engineer Matthys provided an overview of the Storm Water Management Plan, which he distributed to the City Council. Matthys summarized changes in the plan that have occurred since 1990. Matthys noted that no changes to the design standards are proposed in the 2006 update; rather, many of the changes resulted from improvements made following the July 2000 super storm. The City Council discussed the proposed Storm Water Management Plan Update. City Administrator Hedges noted that the plan will be on the January 17 City Council Consent Agenda for formal consideration. V. 2006 PARKS AND RECREATION CIP Mayor Geagan welcomed members of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission in attendance. City Administrator Hedges introduced the item noting that one of the primary responsibilities of the Advisory Parks and Recreation Commission (APrC) is the annual preparation and updating of the departmental Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). It was noted that the CEP serves as a blueprint and planning guide for parks' projects. Hedges noted that at the December APrC meeting, the Commission unanimously approved a CEP recommendation for 2006 for presentation to the City Council. APrC Chair Terry Davis provided an overview of the projects included in the CIP, including the preparation of a Master Plan for Patrick Eagan Park, which he stated surfaced as a high priority in the 20/20 Vision and is, therefore, brought back in the 2006 CIP. The Mayor and City Council discussed the projects proposed in the 2006 CIP and the impact of the 20/20 visioning process. The Council discussed whether there is a need to master plan Patrick Eagan Park at this time. Parks and Recreation Director Johnson noted that through a master planning process, the City would be able to determine desirable land for acquisition. The City Council also discussed the need to create a master plan for Caponi Art Park. Maguire noted he would coordinate with the Art Park Board regarding a Master Plan for the property. Councilmember Fields noted her enthusiasm for the proposed BMX bike area. Director Johnson informed the Council that the 2006 CIP would be included for formal consideration on an upcoming regular City Council meeting agenda. VI. REVIEW CASCADE BAY EXPANSION OPPORTUNITY City Administrator Hedges noted that Cascade Bay is entering its eighth year of operation and at this time has had no significant capital expansion improvements. He noted that it has been the City's intent to keep Cascade Bay attractive through added features and enhancements, which is specifically reinforced in the 20/20 Vision. Hedges also noted that in late 2003, consideration was given to the addition of a Flow Rider; however, the preliminary feasibility study indicated that the cost could not be recovered in a reasonable period of time to make this a viable option. At that time, Hedges noted the Council challenged staff to find a new option for consideration. Parks and Recreation Director Johnson presented the concept of a miniature golf course to be added to Cascade Bay. Johnson noted that the miniature golf course fits within the constraints of the site and the limited opportunity for expansion. Johnson also noted that the concept of a miniature golf course takes advantage of an area currently underutilized and creates an expanded play opportunity, a fresh revenue source, and expands existing concession and admission revenue for the facility. Johnson added that the option being proposed not only will enhance Cascade Bay during their June to August operation, but provides an opportunity to use a portion of the park pre and post season as well as after the 8:30 p.m. closing time. The City Council. discussed the miniature golf course proposal, including how the course would operate and how the fee structure would work. It was noted that the estimated cost for the miniature golf course project would be $202,500. Upon further discussion, the City Council directed staff to proceed ahead with the proposed plans for the miniature golf course at Cascade Bay, and directed that the item be included on the January 17, 2006 City Council agenda for ratification. VII. OTHER BUSINESS Councilmember Fields moved, Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to move Visitors to be Heard to the end of all Special City Council agendas. Aye: 5, Nay: 0 Mayor Geagan reported on a meeting he had with Dakota County regarding bonding requests for 2006. City Administrator Hedges summarized the proposed bonding requests of the City and County for 2006, which include Lebanon Hills storm water drainage improvements, Cedar Grove bus rapid transit, Cedar Grove transit station, Long Meadow Lake Bridge rehabilitation, and a multi jurisdictional communications and public safety support center in Dakota County. City Administrator Hedges provided information about the RFP that was issued for beverage and catering services at the Community Center. There was City Council consensus for the Community Center Operating Committee to meet to review the proposal submitted. City Administrator Hedges also noted that staff will be ready to conduct interviews of the full-time Fire Chief candidates in mid-February. It was suggested that the interviews be held in conjunction with the February 21, 2006 City Council meeting. The Council requested to interview 3 candidates. VIII. ADJOURNMENT Councilmember Maguire moved; Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to adjourn at 7:20 p.m. Aye: 5; Nay: 0 Agenda Information Memo January 17, 2006 Eagan City Council Meeting B. PERSONNEL ITEMS Item 1. Police Officers-- ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of two police officers contingent upon successful completion of physical, drug and psychological testing. Item 2. Police Sergeant-- ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the promotion of Officer Jenni Ruby to Sergeant. Item 3. Part-time Guest Services Rep/Community Center-- ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of Dawn Peterson as a part-time guest services rep at the Community Center. 1 / Agenda Information Memo January 17, 2006 Eagan City Council Meeting C. RATIFY CHECK REGISTERS ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To ratify the check registers dated January 5, 2006 and January 12, 2006 as presented. ATTACHMENTS: • Check registers dated January 5, 2006 and January 12, 2006 are enclosed without page number. Agenda Memo January 17, 2006 Eagan City Council Meeting CONSENT AGENDA: D. Approve 2005 General Fund budget adjustments. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve 2005 General Fund budget adjustments related to the baseline noise study, Dakota County Communications Center start-up costs, contributions received by the City's Fire department, a reallocation of expenditures within the Human Resources department, and the NE Eagan land use studies. FACTS: • It is customary for staff to present budget adjustments for formal Council approval for the preceding year, shortly after that budget year has been completed and preliminary year-end account balances are known. • The adjustments are retrospective and are formalized for reporting purposes only. They do not represent proposed spending changes. • Generally, only those adjustments that involve significant dollar amounts are proposed; staff does not endeavor to make line item adjustments that are not material. • Five 2005 budget adjustments are recommended. In total they utilize the entire $40,000 operating budget contingency, plus an additional $62,400 of the General Fund fund balance: A A $39,500 increase to expenditures in the Administration Department for a baseline noise study completed by Wyle Laboratories. By Council direction, this expenditure was to be paid for out of the General Fund fund balance. ➢ An $18,500 increase to expenditures in the Police Department for start-up costs for the Dakota County Communications (dispatch) operations. Again, by Council direction, this expenditure was to be paid for out of the General Fund fund balance. ➢ A $6,500 increase in current and deferred employment advertising from donations to the Fire Department from Thomson West ($5,000) and Ecolab ($1,500) to aid in firefighter recruitment efforts; and a $3,200 increase in equipment expenditures from Eagan Fire Relief Assn. donations for the purchase of gas monitors related to haz- mat cleanup and photography equipment. ➢ A reallocation of $23,400 from personal services in the Human Resources Department to other line items within the department. The 2005 budget was approved with the HR director position at the higher level of the retiring HR Director (Asst. to City Administrator). ➢ A $44,400 increase in professional services in Community Development for the NE Eagan land use studies (SRF and Hoisington Koegler). By Council direction, these expenditures were to be paid for out of the General Fund fund balance. ATTACHMENTS: • Spreadsheet detailing affected budget line items is attached as page . 13 2005 Proposed Budget Adjustments General Fund Increase/ (decrease) 1. Admin Professional svcs 6310 39,500 Unalloc Contingency/Fd bal 6810 (39,500) Council approved base-line noise study by Wyle Labs to come from fund bal. 2. Police DCC start-up 6330 18,500 Unalloc Contingency/Fd bal 6810 (18,500) Council approved DCC (joint dispatch) start-up to come from fund bal. 3. (a) Fire Contrib/donations rev 4663 6,500 Fire Employment ads 6358 5,300 Fire Defer balance to 2006 1,200 Thomson West ($5,000) and Ecolab ($1,500) donations for volunteer recruitment. (b) Fire Contrib/donations rev 4663 3,200 Fire Other equipment 6670 3,200 Fire Relief contribution for gas monitors and photography equipment. 4. HR Personal services 61XX (23,400) HR Office supplies 6210 1,000 HR Office forms 6211 2,000 HR Reference materials 6215 900 HR Personal autolparking 6353 100 HR Employment ads 6358 4,900 HR General print/binding 6370 500 HR Miscelleneous 6475 500 HR Conferences/schools 6476 4,000 HR Local meeting exp 6477 500 HR Dues/subscriptions 6479 1,500 HR Other contractual svcs 6535 6,000 HR Office furniture 6660 1,500 Reallocate salary budgeted at level of prior HR Director (Asst to Administrator). 5. Comm Dev Prof svc - Engineering 6312 17,000 Comm Dev Prof svc - Planning 6313 27,400 Unalloc Contingency/Fd bal 6810 (44,400) Council approved NE Eagan land use study to come from fund bal. /V Agenda Memo January 17, 2006 Eagan City Council Meeting CONSENT AGENDA: E. Approve amendment to 2006 Fee Schedule adding various Parks facility fees. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To amend the 2006 Fee Schedule to reflect changes in fees for the Band Shell; for large group use of parks, trails, open space; and for use of park pavilions/shelters and the Moonshine Retreat Center by fundraising/profit generating entities as detailed on the "Additions to 2006 Fee Structure" document. FACTS: ➢ At its December 19 meeting, the Advisory Parks Commission recommended adoption of a fee schedule for the Band Shell as interest in the use of this facility continues to increase beyond the traditional uses of Parks and Recreation-sponsored activities and ECC weddings. Recommended fees are detailed in the attachment. ➢ At the same meeting, the Commission recommended adoption of additional fees for the use of parks, trails, and open space by large groups (i.e., 50 or more people). Recommended fees are detailed in the attachment. ➢ The Commission also recommended a 15% increase in fees for the use of parks, pavilions and shelters, and the Moonshine Retreat Center for fundraising or commercial profit-generating activities. The attachment contains additional conditions required for such rentals. ➢ Other tax-supported facilities, such as the Eagan Room and the Fire Administration meeting rooms, already have two-tier rental fee structures for not-for-profit and for- profit entities. ATTACHMENTS: • Additions to 2006 fee structure are detailed on page . 15 Additions to 2006 Fee Structure Band Shell and Public Address System: Rental of the Band Shell only: Half day Full day • Resident $340.00 $ 640.00 • Non-resident 425.00 800.00 Rental of Band Shell w/sound system* • Resident $540.00 $1,000.00 • Non-resident 675.00 1,250.00 *Required staff technician at $20/hour Half-day and full day are consistent with all pavilion/shelter reservations 10am-4pm 5pm-10pm 10 am-10pm Use of Parks, Trails or Open Space for Large Group Event All groups wishing to use a City of Eagan park or open space for a large group event must apply for a permit and pay permit fee in advance of their event. Activities will only be allowed if they are not in conflict with existing City programs/services. • $60.00 for a half day event* • $90.00 for a full day event* *includes city staff presence to support event through set-up, clean-up and garbage removal. • Fee for additional services will be charged based on current city rate schedule. (includes portable toilets, additional tables, additional waste barrels, etc.) Use of Parks, Pavilions and Moonshine Retreat Center for Fund, Raising or Commercial Profit Generating Activities Groups wishing to use a park, shelter, pavilion or Moonshine Retreat Center for a fund raising or commercial profit generating activity will be charged a rate that is higher than the public rental. • Fee would be 15% more for commercial profit or fund raising activities. • Group(s) may not use the City's name as an endorsement of the event. • Businesses would pay resident or non-resident fee based on the location of their business rather than the address of the person making the reservation. • Revenue facilities (Cascade Bay, Civic Arena and Eagan Community Center) are not subject to this change since their rental fees are set to cover full costs and do not include a tax subsidy. Agenda Memo January 17, 2006 CONSENT AGENDA: F. PREMISE PERMIT RENEWAL - EAGAN LIONS CLUB ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve Premise Permit Renewal for Eagan Lions Club to conduct a pull-tab operation on Cedar-vale Lanes premises, 3883 Cedar Grove Parkway. FACTS: • The Eagan Lions Club has applied with the Minnesota Gambling Control Board for a renewal of their premise permit to conduct a pull-tab operation at Cedarvale Lanes, 3883 Cedar Grove Parkway. • The Eagan Lions Club has held a gambling premise permit at Cedarvale Lanes since June 1, 2000 with no reported problems. • Staff deems the application in order for approval. ATTACHMENTS: • Attached as page ~g is a copy of the proposed resolution approving the premise permit renewal. RESOLUTION CITY OF EAGAN PREMISE PERMIT RENEWAL FOR EAGAN LIONS CLUB ON CEDARVALE LANES PREMISES WHEREAS, the Eagan Lions Club conducts a pull tab operation at Cedarvale Lanes, 3883 Cedar Grove Parkway, and WHEREAS, the Eagan Police Department has reviewed the renewal application and has not identified any reason to deny; and WHEREAS, the Eagan Lions Club held a gambling premise permit at the above location since June 1, 2000 with no reported problems; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, hereby approves the Eagan Lions Club premise permit renewal application at Cedarvale Lanes, 3883 Cedar Grove Parkway. CITY OF EAGAN CITY COUNCIL By: It's Mayor Attest: It's Clerk Motion by: Seconded by: Those in Favor: Those Against: Dated: January 17, 2006 CERTIFICATION I, Maria Petersen, City 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 17`h day of January, 2006. Maria Petersen, City Clerk Agenda Information Memo January 17, 2006 G. APPROVE NAME CHANGE ON LIQUOR LICENSE FOR JESIMO, INC. FROM EAGAN STEAK HOUSE, LOCATED AT 1448 YANKEE DOODLE ROAD, TO STEAK13ONES GRILL ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve a name change on the liquor license for Jesimo, Inc. from Eagan Steak House, located at 1448 Yankee Doodle Road, to Steakbones Grill. FACTS: ➢ Jesimo, Inc., the entity that holds the on-sale wine and 3.2 percent malt liquor license formerly doing business as Eagan Steak House, 1448 Yankee Doodle Road, has requested a name change to doing business as Steakbones Grill. There was no change in stock ownership or management of the establishment. Staff does not find any reason to deny the name change. ATTACHMENTS (0): ~9 Agenda Information Memo January 17, 2006, Eagan City Council Meeting H. FINAL SUBDIVISION - ESMERALDA ADDITION (CHARLIE HANF) ACTIONS TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve a final subdivision to create two lots (Esmeralda Addition) of 0.62 acres for property located at Lot 1, Block 1, Pilot Knob Heights Fourth in the SW '/4 of Section 1. REQUIRED VOTE FOR APPROVAL: Majority of Council Members present. FACTS: The Preliminary Subdivision was approved on November 1, 2005. ➢ All documents and Agreements are anticipated to be signed and in order for execution at the regular meeting of the City Council. ATTACHMENTS (1): Final Plat, page 02 v LL ;i s;i? I. A 3:~5 d~ ~s !q!q; ]5R III, /;'n rr l.. I ~s t ~~o g k $ NnVe'30'21'M 19 99 e p - 3 _ a b I 1 III 18:1 gu I o I g 1 1 ~ "'4` f i a~: I II ~ ill it sl I n ~ti ~ 1 O by m ~ I _ c- _ m 1 i I 77, _1 la o i1i '(rT~i ? ~ I 1 F y r i ~ .1) eye ~ 1 i c~ 1 U ti !a ,y ( ~ rTl U ) I7 t ! F'Tl A=i e n ~ y \ ` It ~ ~ I I ti I I ~ s aF y~ ge~ o> _ $q9 3A am 6 'c ens ~ $ ~~@6 ed ag o ~ ~ ~ gg 2 l ne ~ f- g ek > r ir ?I $ ! gEe € 3~ E gg ~ 5F[ x e 'e ; 4 R 1 ■ Agenda Information Memo January 17, 2006, Eagan City Council Meeting 1. EXTENSION FOR RECORDING FINAL PLAT - KENNERICK 3" ADDITION ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve a 60-day extension of time to record the final plat for Kennerick 3rd Addition, located west of Pilot Knob Road and north of Lone Oak Road in the SE 1/4 of Section 4. REQUIRED VOTE FOR APPROVAL: Majority of Councilmembers present FACTS: The City Council approved the final plat on November 15, 2005. The plat is required to be recorded within 60 days of approval, which would be January 14, 2005. ➢ It appears that the City did not provide notice to the applicant of the recording deadline in a timely manner and therefore, the applicant was unaware of the remaining steps necessary to complete the final plat and recording process. ➢ The 60-day extension would allow until March 15, 2006 for the plat to be recorded. ATTACHMENTS (None): 02 42- Agenda Information Memo January 17, 2006 Eagan City Council Meeting J. CONTRACT 05-02, CITYWIDE STREET OVERLAYS ACTION. TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve the final payment for Contract 05-02 (Citywide - Street Overlay Improvements) in the amount of $36,807.57 to McNamara Contracting, Inc., and accept the improvements for perpetual City maintenance subject to warranty provisions. FACTS: • Contract 05-02 provided for the bituminous overlay of the streets in the Cinnamon Ridge/ Berkshire Ponds/ Ridgecliffe Additions neighborhoods, as authorized by the City Council under City Projects 878, 911, and 915, respectively. • These improvements have been completed, inspected by representatives of the Public Works Department, and found to be in order for favorable Council action of final payment and acceptance for perpetual maintenance subject to warranty provisions. o? 3 Agenda Information Memo January 17, 2006 Eagan City Council Meeting K PROJECT 928, MEADOWVIEW RD/ ALEXANDER RD - STREET IMPROVEMENTS ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Receive the Draft Feasibility Report for Project 928 (Meadowview Road/ Alexander Road - Street Improvements) and schedule a public hearing to be held on February 21, 2006. FACTS: • On June 7, 2005 the City Council directed staff to prepare a feasibility report considering the street upgrade of Meadowview Road and the street rehabilitation of Alexander Road, west of Highway 13 in northwest Eagan. • These street improvements are programmed for 2006 in the City of Eagan's 5-Year CIP (2006-2010). • An informational neighborhood meeting will be held with the adjacent property owners prior to a public hearing to review and discuss the proposed improvements. • A draft of this Feasibility Report has been prepared and is being presented to the Council for their consideration of scheduling a public hearing for February 21, 2006. ATTACHMENTS: • Draft Feasibility Report, attached without page numbers. a~ Agenda Information Memo January 17, 2006 Eagan City Council Meeting L. PROJECT 930, SILVER BELL ROAD - STREET REVITALIZATION ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Receive the Draft Feasibility Report for Project 930 (Silver Bell Road - Street Revitalization) and schedule a public hearing to be held on February 21, 2006. FACTS: • On June 7, 2005 the City Council directed staff to prepare a feasibility report considering a street rehabilitation of Silver Bell Road (Kennebec Drive to Nicols Road), in the Cedar Grove area of northwest Eagan. • The bituminous overlay of this street segment is programmed for 2006 in the City of Eagan's 5-Year CIP (2006-2010). • An informational neighborhood meeting will be held with the adjacent property owners prior to a public hearing to review and discuss the proposed improvements. • A draft of this Feasibility Report has been prepared and is being presented to the Council for their consideration of scheduling a public hearing for February 21, 2006. ATTACHMENTS: • Draft Feasibility Report, attached without page numbers. C~ Agenda Memo January 17, 2006 City Council Meeting M. 2006 CONTRACT RENEWAL with DAKOTA COUNTY, SENTENCE to SERVICE PROGRAM ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED Approve the renewal of a one year contract with Dakota County for the provision of Sentence to Service work crews and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the appropriate documents FACTS • The County will provide a work crew consisting of up to 10 non-risk criminal offenders, who have been assigned community service, and a supervisor, for a minimum of 50 work days. • The City has utilized the services of the County Sentence to Service Program for approximately 15 years. • The County provides supervision, transportation and insurance for all members of the crew and assumes all liabilities. • The City will utilize the crew to complete labor intensive tasks requiring unskilled laborers including park, pond and bridge cleaning, trash removal, painting outdoor rinks, brush removal and routine landscape maintenance. • The total 2006 cost of $15,750 ($315 per crew day) due the County for the provision of services will be funded from the approved 2006 Parks and Recreation Department operating budget. ATTACHMENTS None C:216 Agenda Memo January 17, 2006 City Council Meeting N. SUBMISSION of DNR OUTDOOR RECREATION GRANT for THRESHER FIELDS IMPROVEMENTS and SCHEDULING of PUBLIC HEARING ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Authorize the preparation of a DNR Outdoor Recreation Grant Application for improvements to Thresher fields Park and direct the Advisory Parks and Recreation Commission to conduct the required Public Hearing at their regular meeting of February 16, 2006. FACTS • Thresher Fields fully opened for youth field activities in the spring of 2005. • Given the size of the site, a large number of participants and spectators are expected throughout its season of use. There is no water available, portable toilets will be brought in until such time as a toilet facility is developed. • Water, sewer and electricity were extended into the site during the initial construction in anticipation of additional amenities, minimizing the projected expenditure. • Planned amenities include; trail extension, toilet/service building, open sided shelter structure, play features, security lights, handicapped accessible features and landscaping. • The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) makes available to local units of government Outdoor Recreation grants to aid with the funding of eligible projects. • The process of obtaining a grant is competitive and becoming increasing difficult to obtain due to funding reductions. A similar request was not awarded in 2004 or 2005. • By submitting an application the City is under NO obligation to accept a grant award or make an expenditure. There is no application fee. • Grants are awarded as a 50% match with the City contribution being in-kind services or cash • The estimated project cost is in the range of approximately $420,000 to $450,000. Should a grant be awarded, a more refined estimate would be developed. • The estimated City expenditure/value of $ 210,000 to $225,000 would come from the Park Site Fund and in-house labor. Partnership opportunities will also be explored. Work would not begin until 2007. • The APrC has encouraged the use of grants and partnerships to offset the cost of CIP projects • A public hearing must be held prior to submission of the grant. The APrC has previously conducted the public hearings relative to DNR grants. • A summary report of the Public Hearing will be provided to the Council for consideration prior to authorization to submit the grant. ATTACHMENTS: None Agenda Memo January 17, 2006 City Council Meeting 0. AUTHORIZE THE PREPARATION OF A LOCAL COLLABORATIVE GRANT APPLICATION FOR OUTREACH PROGRAMMING OPPORTUNITIES ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Authorize the preparation of a Local Collaborative Grant application to Independent School District 196's Family Services Collaborative for outreach programming opportunities. FACTS: • Youth Development programs have historically been supported by local collaborative Time Study grant funds. The opportunities for accessing these funds have become less frequent. • Recently, Independent School District 196's Family Services Collaborative re-opened the granting opportunities with two cycles. This current request is due February 15. • The requested funding of $10,000 is targeted for expanding the traveling puppet program to more areas in the community and to support the on-going Recess program. The City's contribution to this project is projected to be $6,000, which was included in the 2006 budget. • Specifically the funds are planned to support a portion of staffing costs, additional materials for expanding the Recess program, funds to initiate a vehicle lease for transporting the puppet wagon, transportation for three field trips and stipends for our partners' contributions to the program. • The request would expand the traveling puppet program from Friday in 3-4 parks to Monday through Friday at 10 parks with additional craft/game activities after each show. This free program has seen continued growth over the years. • Recess is the community outreach program offered 8 weeks in the afternoons during the summer for youth age 5 + with a traveling recreation team that will facilitate games and activities Four park sites have been chosen and sites have been identified as possibilities for the summer of 2006. o Sites are chosen by their density, income brackets, isolation due to barriers and access to recreation programs within their neighborhood. o Outreach includes door to door knocking, direct mail flyers and literature drops. • The preliminary list of partners who will visit and support these activities include; Dakota county library, U of M Extension "simply good eating", Dakota County 411, U of M Extension "on the move for Minnesota families program", and the Eagan Art House. It is anticipated that this list will increase. • Potential field trips being considered include: Caponi Art Park, Cascade Bay, Dakota City, Apple Valley Water Park, Franconia Sculpture Garden and Lake Elmo Park Reserve. Fifteen spots will be reserved for children only and the remainder will be open for family groups to register, to encourage family play time. ATTACHMENTS: None C:)- Agenda Memo January 17, 2006 City Council Meeting P. APPROVE AMENDMENT TO PARK DEDICATION USE AGREEMENT WITH FAITHFUL SHEPHERD CATHOLIC SCHOOL ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve an amendment to the original Park Dedication and Use Agreement between the City and Faithful Shepherd School and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign the appropriate documents. FACTS: • In 1999, the City entered into an agreement with Faithful Shepherd School whereby the school agreed to construct athletic fields on school property and allow scheduled community use in lieu of paying a park dedication fee. • The agreement was intended to become effective for a 15 year period beginning at such time as the fields were determined to be of a condition appropriate for community use, during which time the park dedication amount owed would be reduced consistent with an amortized schedule. • Due to weather, soil conditions, staff changes and budgetary considerations the fields were not determined to be appropriate for community use until 2005. The most significant improvement being the installation of irrigation. • During the interim period, as the operational and functional needs of the school were better understood, it became apparent that clarification of several of the terms and conditions of the original agreement was required. This has necessitated the development of amendments to the agreement with the intention of better serving the interests of both parties. • The amendment focuses primarily upon revisions to the hours of use, maintenance responsibilities and the need to meet regularly to review schedules and any special events. • In general, the community will have full use of the fields for scheduled activities evenings and weekends during the school year, afternoons and evenings throughout the summer. • In the event the agreement is terminated by either party, that portion of the Park Dedication remaining as defined by the fee schedule shall become due as a cash payment. • The amendments have been reviewed for form and content by the City Attorney and City staff, and have been formally approved by the school. ATTACHMENTS: Copy of agreement on pages Wi-11 Agenda Information Memo January 17, 2006, Eagan City Council Meeting Q. STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN UPDATE ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve the update to the Stormwater Management Plan for the City of Eagan dated December, 2005. FACTS: • On January 10, 2006, the City Council received the 2005 update of the Stormwater Management Plan from staff and reviewed its contents, questioning staff on various components. • The City of Eagan has been developing since the late 1950s. To accommodate this growth, an extensive storm drainage infrastructure system was constructed over the years based on various related Stormwater Management Plans. Previous Plan updates occurred in 1965, 1972, 1978, 1984 and 1990 during the City's growth years. • The 1990 plan included cost effective, state-of-the-art computer modeling techniques that provided a master blueprint for a stormwater conveyance and storage system that accommodated the increases in the rates and volumes of runoff caused by the extensive urbanization based on accepted design criteria. • This current updated plan will continue to serve as a guide to the City in developing, operating, and maintaining its storm drainage system. It is designed to address primarily stormwater volume and rate control management issues for flood protection. We anticipate that this will be the last major update performed for this Comprehensive Plan based on the degree of development that currently exists. 3~ Agenda Memo January 17, 2006 City Council Meeting R. 2006 RENEWAL of CONTRACT with LIFEWORKS INC. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve the renewal of a one year contract with Lifeworks Services Inc. for the provision of limited janitorial services in designated park buildings, and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the appropriate documents. FACTS: • Lifeworks provides unskilled employment opportunities for physically and mentally challenged adults. • The City of Eagan has contracted annually with Lifeworks Inc for the past 14 years to provide limited janitorial services, on a variable part-time basis, at park buildings designated by City staff. The efforts of Lifeworks are intended to supplement City staff. • The "Not to Exceed" contract total of $1,860 for 2006 has been incorporated into the approved 2006 Parks and Recreation Department operational budget. This represents a"0" increase over the 2005 cost. • Lifeworks provides an on-site supervisor, insurance and assumes liability for its staff. • The contract may be canceled by either party when appropriate notice has been given to the other party. ATTACHMENTS: None 21 Agenda Information Memo January 17, 2006 Eagan City Council Meeting IV. CONSENT AGENDA S. APPROVE AMENDMENT TO THE GUN CLUB LAKE WATERSHED MANAGEMENT JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT TO PERMIT STAGGERED TERMS FOR MEMBERS APPOINTED TO THE GUN CLUB LAKE BOARD ACTIONS TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve an amendment to the Gun Club Lake Watershed Management Organization joint powers agreement to permit staggered terms for members appointed to the Gun Club Lake Board. FACTS: ➢ This past fall, the Gun Club Lake Watershed Management Organization (WMO) Chair sent correspondence to the City to notice the City of three upcoming vacancies on the WMO Board of Directors. ➢ At that time, the WMO Board requested that the City give consideration to staggered terms on the Board. ➢ The City responded to the WMO's letter, noting that in 2004, the City Council took action to appoint Advisory Commission members in April of each year, as opposed to January, and therefore, was suggesting the same appointment timeframe for the WMO. It was also noted that the Advisory Commissions have staggered terms. ➢ Upon receiving the City's letter, the WMO responded by stating that the Board formally agreed to make appointments to the Board in April, and that the 2006 appointments would reflect staggered terms. ➢ Campbell Knutson, the law firm that serves the WMO has prepared a proposed amendment to the WMO Joint Powers Agreement to reflect the agreement to have staggered terms. No amendment is needed, according to Attorney Joel Jamnik, regarding the April appointments since the current JPA does not specify the month in which Board members are appointed. ATTACHMENTS: ➢ Enclosed on page33 is correspondence that was sent by the City to the WMO Board in October 2005 regarding the proposed changes to the Board members' terms. ➢ Enclosed on pages,Y and is correspondence from Attorney Joel Jamnik regarding the proposed change to the JPA. Enclosed on page and -V- is the proposed amendment to the JPA. (If any member of the City council would like to view the JPA in its entirety, please contact the City Administrator. 3c2 City of Eapn October 25, 2005 Pat Geagan MAYOR Mr. Jerry Walerak Chair, Gun Club Lake WMO 4669 Parkridge Drive Peggy Carlson Eagan, MN 55123 Cyndee Fields Mike Maguire Dear ler Meg Tilley Thank you for contacting the City of Eagan regarding the upcoming expiration of terms of the managers COUNCIL MEMBERS and alternate appointed by the City to the Board of the Gun Club Lake Watershed Management Organization (WMO). Thomas Hedges CITY ADMINISTRATOR Two years ago, based on feedback from advisory commissioners, the City Council took action to move the appointment of advisory commission members from the month of January to April. Additionally, rather than collecting commission applications for a set period of time before the appointments, the City now accepts commission applications year-round. The City found that it was very difficult to recruit members during the busy month of January, and it was difficult for newly elected City Council members to appoint advisory commission members two weeks into their terms of office. The City very much values our participation on the Gun Club Lake WMO, and for that reason, would MUNICIPAL CENTER like to inquire about the WMO's willingness to make two changes to the WMO board appointment 3830 Pilot Knob Road process: Eagan, MN 55122-1810 651.675.5000 phone 1.) In order to be consistent with other Commission appointments in the City, would the WMO agree to have the terms for the managers and alternate take place in April, with the appointees 651.65.5012 fax taking their seats on the board in May? 651.454.8535 TDD 2.) As you suggested in your letter, would the WMO be agreeable to staggering the terms of the managers appointed to serve? - - MAINTENANCE FACILITY Once you and the Board have had time to consider these requests, would you please contact me so I can 3501 Coachman Point proceed ahead in working with the City Council on the most appropriate appointment process. If the Eagan, MN 55122 Board is amenable to these changes, we will need to speak to our existing WMO board members to 651.675.5300 phone inquire as to whether they will agree to extend their terms through April 2006. 651.675.5360 fax Thank you for your consideration of our request. I will look forward to hearing from you soon. 651.454.8535 TDD Since y www.cityofeagan.com Thomas L. Hedges City Administrator cc: Tom Colbert, Public Works Director Eric Macbeth, Water Resources Coordinator THE LONE OAK TREE The symbol of strength and growth in our community. 32 CAMPBELL KNUTSON 1-3rofessio,rnal Association Direct Dial. (651) 134-6219 E-mailAddrrss. jjamaikriick-law.cmn JAN 0 0 2006 Thomas J. Campbell January 6, 2006 BY. Roger N. Knutson Thomas M. Scott Elliott B. Knetsch Joel.( 1znTiiil: Thomas Hedges, City Administrator Andrea Nlcl)o%uell Poehler City of Eagan Matthew K. Brold' 3830 Pilot Knob Road John F. Kelly Eagan, MN 55122-1810 Soren W h4atticlt Henry A. scli.ieffer, III Jim Willis, City Administrator A[ina Schwartz City of Inver Grove Heights ivlar;uerite 10. McCarron 8150 Barbara Avenue Cina M. Brandt Inver Grove Heights, MN 55077-3410 Also Licensed in Wisconsin Jim Danielson, City Administrator City of Mendota Heights 1101 Victoria Curve Mendota Heights, MN 55118-4106 RE: GUN CLUB WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION Dear Tom, Jim, and Jim: At the last meeting of the Gun Club Watershed Management Organization, the Board reviewed the request from the City of Eagan to amend the Joint Powers Agreement to allow Eagan to establish staggered terms for its members and alternates in order to foster greater continuity. The Board asked me to prepare a draft of an amendment to the Joint Powers Agreement to authorize staggered terms and to forward it to the member cities for adoption. That draft and a copy of the current Joint Powers Agreement are enclosed for your review. If the draft amendment is acceptable, I ask that you submit it to your respective Council's for their approval. While each city can proceed to approve the amendment concurrently, in order to coordinate the signing of the amendment, after Council approvals I suggest that Tom 7380 Corporate Center Currc would have Eagan sign first, and then forward that signed copy to Jim Willis, and then suit. 37; - Eagan, MN 55121 finally to Jim Danielson. Once Mendota Heights has signed it, I can pick it up at City 651-452-50oc Hall from Jim. I will then make copies and distribute them for each city's records. Fax 657-452-5550 wv:w.c{i-Iaw.com V Thomas Hedges, Jim Willis, Jim Danielson January 6, 2006 Page 2 Contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, CAMPBELL KNUTSON Professional Association B~ ~1 J. Ja~i~fiik Attorney for the Gun Club WMO JJJ:srn Enclosures 3~ AMENDMENT TO GUN CLUB LAKE WATERSHED JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT ESTABLISHING A WATERSHED MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION THE PARTIES TO THIS AGREEMENT are cities which have land within the Gun Club Lake Watershed. This Agreement is made pursuant to the authority conferred upon the parties by Minnesota Statutes 2005 471.59 and 10313.201, et. M. 1. EXISTING AGREEMENT. The existing Joint Powers Agreement for the Gun Club Lake Watershed Management Organization (dated 1999) shall remain in full force and effect, except as specifically amended by this Agreement. 2. PARAGRAPH/ITEM 6, Subdivision 3 of the Joint Power Agreement is amended by adding the underlined language below: Subdivision 3. Term. Managers and alternates shall serve a three (3) year term and until their successors are appointed and qualify. The council of Eagan may in its discretion modify the term of a member or alternate at the time of their appointment in order to establish and maintain staggered terns. The terms of the managers and alternates serving on the effective date of this Agreement are as shown on Exhibit A attached hereto. A manager or alternate may not be removed from the Board prior to the expiration of the manager's term, except for just cause by the governing body that made the appointment. The Board of Water and Soil Resources shall be notified of all appointments to the Board and of all vacancies as required by state law. All vacancies shall be filled within ninety (90) days after they occur. The Board shall comply with state laws regarding published notice of Board vacancies. 122773 1 349 Approved by the City Council CITY OF EAGAN , 2006. BY: Its Mayor AND Its City Clerk Approved by the City Council CITY OF INVER GROVE HEIGHTS , 2006. BY: Its Mayor AND Its City Clerk Approved by the City Council CITY OF MENDOTA HEIGHTS , 2006. BY: Its Mayor AND Its City Clerk 122773 2 43;1 Agenda Memo January 17, 2006 City Council Meeting T. APPROVE THE 2006 PARKS AND RECREATION CIP ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve the 2006 Parks and Recreation CIP as presented. FACTS: ■ One of the primary responsibilities of the APrC is the annual preparation and updating of the Departmental Capital Improvement Plan. The CIP serves as a blueprint and planning guide for park projects. Projects included in the CIP must be either a park development or improvement project. Funding for the CIP comes from the Park Site Fund (PSF), which consists primarily of money collected from developments at the time of platting in lieu of a dedication of land. ■ At its December meeting, the APrC unanimously approved a CIP recommendation for 2006 and is pleased to present it to the Council for consideration. ■ The new 20/20 Vision has been a guide to assist the APrC in reviewing the priorities and needs for capital expenditures for 2006. ■ As with the 2005 CIP, the 2006 CIP is still considered more custodial addressing the continuation of on-going projects and initiatives that are time sensitive or made necessary by existing conditions. ■ The preparation of the Patrick Eagan Park Master Plan surfaced as a high priority in the 20/20 Vision and is brought back to the current year CIP. ■ As in previous CIF's the 2006 proposal also includes two line item allocations that are renewed on an annual basis as needed. These is the land acquisition "opportunity" fund, which would be used to help acquire priority open space should it become available, and the "small projects" fund, which is used to complete smaller, unanticipated, capital projects or to help leverage additional financial assistance from an association or alternative funding source. These funds remain in the account for reallocation if not spent in that given year. ■ The Council reviewed the overall CIP at a joint workshop with the Advisory Parks Commission on January 10. ATTACHMENTS: • List of 2006 CIP projects, Page. • Activity Summary of 2005 Park Site Fund, Pag#d. 31 CITY OF EAGAN PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT 2006 Capital Improvement Program L:O~at1012: Pl'© eCt DE5CTl tln EstimAed CoS~NO.eS,~ i Patrick Eagan Park Master Plan preparation $90,000 Carnelian Park Hockey rink lighting upgrade $30,000 Central Park Site improvements, per plan $35,000 Additional lighting & signage Holz Farm Farmstead upgrades, Phase 3 $30,000 On-going per Master Plan Holz Farm Acquisition of west access As per appraisal Pending willing seller Rinks • Ridgecliff Park Replacement of hockey rink $10,000 Projected location • Carnelian Park Replacement of hockey rink $10,000 Projected location Playgrounds • Kettle Park Replacement of play structure $35,000 Projected location • Carnelian Park Replacement of play structure $35,000 Projected location • Meadowlands Park Replacement of play structure $35,000 Projected location Tennis Courts • Lexington Park Rehabilitation of court $25,000 Projected location • Highview Park Rehabilitation of court $25,000 Projected location TBD BMX bike area $10,000 Berms and trails TBD Small projects - TBD $30,000 Partnership opportunities, immediate needs TBD Acquisition opportunity $650,000 Pending a need/opportunity Subtotals: Projects $400,000 Potential Acquisitions $650,000 TOTAL $1,050,000 Revised 12/20/05 G:parks 05/2006 Crn 3? 2005 PARK SITE FUND ACTIVITY SUMMARY Beginning Fund Balance 1/2005 $2,715,480 Revenues and Other Financing Sources: State and County Grants $1,340,000 Park Dedication Fees $650,000 Interest $70,000 Other $10,000 Total Revenue and Financing Sources $2,070,000 TOTAL AVAILABLE $4,785,480 Expenditures: Park Improvements $363,300 Land Acquisition $2,080,000 Committed Carryover $10,000 TOTAL 2005 EXPENDITURES $2,453,300 AVAILABLE FUNDS 112006 $2,332,180 Figures are un-audited estimates G:Parks 05/2005 ACTIVITY SUMMARY Agenda Memo January 17, 2006 City Council Meeting U. APPROVE THE CONCEPT FOR A MINIATURE GOLF AMENITY TO BE INCORPORATED INTO CASCADE BAY ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve the concept for a miniature golf amenity to be incorporated into Cascade Bay and authorize staff to proceed with the plan to have it implemented for the 2006 season. FACTS: ■ Cascade Bay is entering its 8`l' year of operation and at this point has had no significant capital expansion improvements. It has been the City's intent to keep Cascade Bay attractive through added features and enhancements and this was specifically reinforced in the 20/20 Vision. ■ In late 2003 consideration was given to the addition of a FlowRider however the preliminary feasibility study indicated that the costs could not be recovered in a reasonable period of time to make this a viable option. The Council then challenged staff to find a new option for consideration. ■ Given the constraints of the site and the limited opportunity for expansion staff needed to be creative in how to approach expansion opportunities. The concept of a miniature golf course takes advantage of an area currently underutilized and creates an expanded play opportunity, a fresh revenue source in addition to expanding existing concession and admission revenue for the facility. ■ The option being proposed will not only enhance Cascade Bay during their June-August operation but provides an opportunity to use a portion of the park pre and post season as well as after the 8:30 p.m. close time. ■ The estimated cost for this project is $202,500. Included in the packet is a brief Performa that illustrates the initial construction costs and expense/revenue projections and has been reviewed by Director of Administrative Services VanOverbeke. ■ The plans will mimic the appearance of a regular course. This is not proposed to be an amenity that includes obstacles (walls, windmills, characters, etc) but is designed to provide a more realistic "miniature" golf experience. ■ The Council reviewed this plan and proposal at a January 10 workshop with the Advisory Parks Commission. ATTACHMENTS: • Memo and performa, Pages ~j City of ENQ To: Tom Hedges, City Administrator From: Juli Seydell Johnson, Director of Parks and Recreation Date: December 23, 2005 Subject: Cascade Bay Expansion Option - Miniature Golf Course Background: Cascade Bay is entering its 8'' year of operation and at this point has had no significant capital expansion improvements. In late 2003 consideration was given to the addition of a FlowRider however the preliminary feasibility study indicated that the costs could not be recovered in a reasonable period of time to make this a viable option. The Council then challenged staff to find a new option for consideration. Given the constraints of the site and the limited opportunity for expansion staff needed to be creative in how to approach expansion opportunities. The concept of a miniature golf course takes advantage of an area currently underutilized and creates an expanded play opportunity and a fresh revenue source for the facility. The option outlined below will not only enhance Cascade Bay during their June-August operation but provides an opportunity to use a portion of the park pre and post season as well as after the 8:30 p.m. close time. Proposal: Construction of a miniature golf course on the existing turf area adjacent to the concessions patio. Construction at this location would capture a little used area while maintaining the landscaped integrity of the park. The miniature golf course would incorporate features found in many regulation golf courses with water and sand elements. The turf would be artificial to eliminate maintenance and mowing. A portion of the fence near the concessions patio area would be moved to incorporate the existing turf space immediately outside the fence. This would also allow the potential for a separate entrance to the course during non-traditional open hours. Construction costs: The proposed construction costs for this project are estimated at approximately $200,000. These are the 2005 rates that will be effective through mid-January. After that time the cost will increase by 3-5% or $6-10,000. "X72- Operation: It is proposed that the golf course would operate before, during and after the regular Cascade Bay season. This amenity could be opened as early as May and remain open through October, weather permitting. During the pre and post Cascade Bay season, the concession operation would also be open to allow a full service opportunity for isitors.-ILaddition tkcQUld~r~n~ai~Qpen after the water ark closes at 8:30 .m. to capture guests who are looking for expanded evening activities. This may also be a way to engage the 13-17+ age group looking to fill their evening hours. Two distinct operating options being considered: 1. During Cascade Bay's 11 am. - 8:30 p.-m. operating hours: a Anyone wishing to play golf during CB open hours would need to purchase a CB daily admission ($8.00). b. Guest would pay an additional per round fee to play miniature golf. ($3.00) c. Season pass holders only would be offered the option to purchase a punch pass as an added "bonus" for being a pass holder. ($20.00 for 10 rounds) Advantages: • Good way of providing a "perk" to season pass holders and potentially growing membership. • Allows for better control of use. For example, ticket required for play so staff is clear who is using the course at all times. Challenges: • Guests who wish only to play golf will need to pay the $8 general admission to CB to enter the facility. Note: This would be the easiest option to begin the operation of the course. 2. During Cascade Bay's 11:00 am. - 8:30 p.m. operating hours: a Everyone entering CB would pay an increased fee that would cover all amenities within the park; for example, general admission would include use of the water park and one round of golf. ($9-10.00 for example) Advantages: • Guests could "have it all". The park now appeals to a wider range of ages and interests. Challenges: • The increased fee might create an issue for guests wanting to use only the water park • Monitoring the allowed round(s) per guest provided in the admission. Would this be handled with a stamp/wristband/other to clearly identify who has played? Note: This may be an option to consider after a full year of operation; i.e. 2007 season. Costs: 2006 Capital Costs: Construction $200,000 Start-up 2,500 $202,500 Operational Cost Projections 2006 2007 Revenue Projections • Punch cards for season pass holders $ 54,000 $ 54,000 (2700 x $20) • Per round sales* (10,000/11,000 x $3) 30,000 33,000 • Concession sales 2,000 2,000 $ 86,000 $ 89,000 Expense Projections: • Additional seasonal staff $ 9,000 $ 9,500 • Merchandise for resale 750 1,000 • Miscellaneous 1,000 1,500 • Advertising 1,500 1,500 • Additional utility costs 1,000 1,000 $13,250 $14,500 Summary of Projections: 2006 2007 2008 • Revenue $ 86,000 $ 89,000 $ 90,000 • Expenses 13,250 14,500 16,000 Revenues minus expenses $ 72,750 $ 74,500 $ 74,000 Cumulative amount available to finance capital costs and to fund renewal and replacement $ 72,750 $147,250 $221,250 *Number of rounds estimate is based on the City of Richfield's miniature golf course use. Their use is in the range of 14-15,000 rounds annually as a stand alone facility. Agenda Information Memo January 17, 2006, Eagan City Council Meeting PUBLIC HEARINGS A. LOT 2, BLOCK 1, CLIFF LAKE CENTRE 3' ADDITION EASEMENT VACATION ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Acknowledge the procedural error and remove from further consideration the vacation of a portion of a public drainage and utility easement within Lot 2, Block 1, Cliff Lake Centre 3rd Addition. FACTS: • On November 18, 2005, City staff received a letter from Jay W. Feider, President, Positive Companies, Inc., requesting the vacation of a portion of an existing drainage and utility easement on Lot 2, Block 1, Cliff Lake Centre 3rd Addition, southwest of the intersection of Cliff Lake Road and Rahn Road. • On December 20, the City Council received the petition to vacate a portion of said drainage and utility easement and scheduled a public hearing to be held on January 17, 2006. • Public drainage and utility easements were dedicated as part of the Cliff Lake Centre 3rd Addition plat for the encompassed pond area impacted up to the high water level (HWL) of the 1% (100-Year) Storm Event. • The purpose of the request is to allow the developer to construct a new office building on Lot 2. • The configuration of the retaining wall being constructed, in addition to a portion of the proposed building, would encroach upon some of the existing drainage and utility easement • Prior to the publication of the public hearing notice an error was discovered in the legal description for the requested easement vacation. The applicant was made aware of the error and directed to correct the description prior to the hearing notice being published. Due to the applicant not providing the corrected legal description, the vacation was not able to be published in the legal paper. The applicant has also delayed the consideration of the associated Final Plat. ATTACHMENTS: • Location Map, page 7b . I/ 510~ SILVER BELL RD. > LAKf I I Q Y p g~ Q N I ~ w ~ o0 0 ~I j N I~ Q O DIFFLE V RD DIFFLEY ROAD Q Proposed Vacation t =o U it U CLIFF RD. ( co. RD. 32 > g CLIFF ROAD I ' s4 R,P W U' O yK Q U Z}Z a4x~/ S c V 9 I LE VALLEY GAVacationslENORE LOC Lot 2, Blk. 1, iff Lake Centre 3rd Add. Clty Of ap Proposed Easement Vacation 12/15/05 Engineering Department Location Map Agenda Information Memo January 17, 2006 Eagan City Council Meeting B. PROJECT 888, CEDAR GROVE PARKWAY TRAIL AND LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve Project 888 (Cedar Grove Parkway - Trail and Lighting Improvements) and authorize the preparation of detailed plans and specifications. FACTS: • On September 6, 2005, the City Council directed staff to prepare a feasibility report considering trail and lighting improvements along Cedar Grove Parkway, from Nicols Road to Rahn Road. • A draft Feasibility Report for the trail and lighting improvements was received by the Council on November 15, 2005 and a Public Hearing was scheduled for December 20, 2005. • On December 20, 2005, the City Council opened and continued the Public Hearing to January 17, 2006 to facilitate ongoing negotiations between US Homes/Lennar and the Eagan Economic Development Authority regarding the purchase of several parcels for future additions to the Nicols Ridge development. This resulted in an agreement whereby the developer will waive their rights to object to the project and related costs based on the assessments being calculated and allocated in a mutually acceptable manner to specific remaining parcels in their overall development. The City Attorney has reviewed and approved this agreement. • Informational meetings have been held individually with each property owner, or their representative, adjacent to the project. • All notices have been published in the legal newspaper and sent to all affected property owners informing them of the public hearing continuance to the January 17, 2006 meeting. ATTACHMENTS: • Feasibility Report, pages 71 a through . 7 Cit Y V, Report for Cedar Grove Parkway Trail and Lighting Improvements City Project No. 888 A&W - a fc - i Eagan, Minnesota January 13, 2006 City of Eapn January 13, 2006 Pat Geagan MAYOR Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Peggy Carlson Eagan, MN 55122 Cyndee Fields Mike Maguire Re: Cedar Grove Parkway Meg Tilley Trail and Lighting Improvements COUNCIL MEMBERS City Project No. 888 Dear Mayor and City Council: Thomas Hedges CITY ADMINISTRATOR Attached is our report for the Cedar Grove Parkway - Trail and Lighting Improvements, City Project No. 888. The report presents and discusses the proposed improvements and includes a cost estimate, preliminary assessment roll and schedule. We would be pleased to meet with the City Council at your convenience to review and discuss the contents of this report. MUNICIPAL CENTER Sincerely, 3830 Pilot Knob Road `~~?,~~~~~Q'~ Eagan, MN 55122-1810 651.675.5000 phone Timothy J. Plath, PE, PTOE 651.675.5012 fax Transportation Engineer 651.454.8535 TDD I hereby certify that this report was prepared by me or under my direct MAINTENANCE FACILITY supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under 3501 Coachman Point the laws of the State of Eagan, MN 55122 Minnesota. 651.675.5300 phone 651.675.5360 fax 651.454.8535 TDD Timothy Path Date: VIM* Reg. No.42024 www.cityofeagan.com Reviewed By: DepartrAent of Public Work Date: f - 13 L(c Review6flBy: THE LONE OAK TREE 1 The symbol of strength and growth Finance ept. Date: in our community. ' ~9 TABLE OF CONTENTS Letter of Transmittal/Certification Table of Contents Page 1.0 Introduction 1 2.0 Scope ................................................................................................................................1 3.0 Feasibility and Recommendations 2 4.0 Proposed Improvements 2 4.1. Bituminous Trail 2 4.2. Modular Block Retaining Wall 3 4.3. Street Lighting 3 4.4. Ornamental Fencing 4 5.0 Easements/Permits 5 6.0 Cost Estimate 6 7.0 Assessments 6 7.1. Nicols Ridge Area 6 7.2. Community Shopping Center 7 8.0 Assessment Financing Options 7 9.0 Revenue Source 8 10.0 Project Schedule 9 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Preliminary Cost Estimate Appendix B Preliminary Assessment Roll Appendix C Figures -1 Location Map -2 Proposed Typical Sections -3.1 and 3.2 Trail Improvement/ Assessment Maps SD January 2006 Project 888 Trail and Lighting Improvements Cedar Grove Parkway Eagan, Minnesota 1.0 Introduction Cedar Grove Parkway is a two-lane, median divided local roadway in the west-central portion of Eagan, as shown in Figure 1. It is a significant transportation element of the Cedar Grove Redevelopment Area and was reconstructed in 2002 as part of City Contract 01-05. Originally, construction of an off-street bituminous trail and installation of street lighting, from Silver Bell Road to Nicols Road, was included in Contract 01-05. However, installation of the off-street trail and street lighting, from Rahn Road to Nicols Road, was removed from Contract 01-05 due to difficulties in acquiring timely access easements from some adjacent property owners. As part of the City's redevelopment efforts, the adjacent properties have been purchased by either the Eagan Economic Development Commission or US Homes/Lennar which provides convenient access to these properties for the construction of the proposed trail and lighting improvements. 2.0 Scope This project provides for the following improvements: ■ Construction of an 8-foot wide, off-street bituminous trail. ■ Construction of modular-block retaining walls adjacent to the proposed trail. ■ Reconstruction of driveways and a portion of the existing parking lot at the Cedarvale Business Center to facilitate construction of the proposed trail. ■ Replacement of existing, non-compliant ADA pedestrian ramps along Cedar Grove Parkway, including at Rahn Road and Nicols Road. ■ Installation of street lighting. ■ Installation of ornamental fencing. Page 1 57 3.0 Feasibility and Recommendations This project is necessary to provide for safe pedestrian and vehicle movement along Cedar Grove Parkway. It also complies with the Council approved concept plan (Village Plaza) for the Cedar Grove Redevelopment Area. On December 13, 2004, the City Council approved the Community Transportation Trail System Policy for staff implementation. The policy states that proposed sidewalk/trail segments should be evaluated with its criteria to ensure the utmost safety and practicality for the citizens of Eagan while bearing in mind proper fiscal responsibility. The policy also states that its guidelines should be used as a general method to rank all future sidewalk/trail segments to be constructed as public improvements. In reviewing the proposed trail segments throughout the City, the trail policy evaluation indicated a very high ranking for this segment. Based on this evaluation, the trail segment is strongly supported by the City's trail policy. This project is cost-effective in that the trail and lighting improvements will be constructed as a whole instead of in portions by individual contracts. It is recommended that these improvements be combined with other similar improvements within the City to encourage additional cost saving due to the benefit of scale. 4.0 Proposed Improvements 4.1. Bituminous Trail This project provides for the construction of an 8-foot wide bituminous trail with a variable width boulevard green space adjacent to Cedar Grove Parkway from Nicols Road to Rahn Road. The proposed bituminous trail will supplement the safety lanes within the existing roadway and provide multiple options for cyclists and pedestrians. Typical sections of the proposed trail construction are shown in Figure 2. Construction of the proposed trail will require reconstruction of portions of the existing driveways and parking lot at the Cedarvale Business Center. Reconstructing the Page 2 S~ driveways and portions of the existing parking lot will provide for acceptable grades on the driveways and reduce the height of the proposed modular block retaining wall. Construction of a bituminous trail was required as part of the development agreement and is shown on the construction plans for Nicols Ridge, from Nicols Road to the east property line of the Nicols Ridge Plat. US Homes/Lennar has requested that the improvements be constructed by the City as part of a City Improvement project. Per the terms of the assessment agreement, US Homes/Lennar will be responsible for the construction and indirect costs of the bituminous trail improvements immediately adjacent to Nicols Ridge. 4.2. Modular Block Retaining Wall Construction of modular block retaining walls is required in several locations due to the significant elevation difference between the proposed trail and existing ground at the right-of-way line. 4.3. Street Lighting As part of the Cedar Grove Redevelopment efforts, the City Council authorized a design study in 2002 to create a unified and enhanced appearance for the Redevelopment District. The study recommended a general design concept and specific streetscape improvements within the Redevelopment district. These recommendations include the installation of decorative street lighting along Cedar Grove Parkway. The proposed decorative street lighting is intended to further enhance the pedestrian environment and improve the safety of vehicles traveling along Cedar Grove Parkway ~Page 3 Installation of decorative street lighting was required as part of the development agreement and is shown on the construction plans for Nicols Ridge, from Nicols Road to the east property line of the Nicols Ridge Plat. US Homes/Lennar has requested that the . improvements be constructed by the City as part of a City Improvement project. Per the terms of the assessment agreement, US Homes/Lennar will be responsible for the construction and indirect costs of the street light improvements immediately adjacent to Nicols Ridge. 4.4. Ornamental Fencing The design study also recommended the installation of ornamental fencing to further enhance the pedestrian environment and provide a unified appearance in the Cedar Grove Redevelopment district. Installation of ornamental fencing was required as part of the development agreement and is shown on the construction plans for Nicols Ridge, from Nicols Road to the east property line of the Nicols Ridge Plat. Similar to the decorative street lighting, US Homes/Lennar has requested that the improvements be constructed by the City as part of a City Improvement project. Per the terms of the assessment agreement, US Homes/Lennar will be responsible for the construction and indirect costs of the ornamental fence improvements immediately adjacent to Nicols Ridge. Installation of ornamental fencing is also r proposed adjacent to the proposed retaining wall on the southwest corner of Cedar Grove Parkway and Rahn Road as a safety Al precaution. The height of the proposed - _ , flG retaining wall will vary from 5 feet to 7 feet Zpresenting a significant fall hazard. The Page 4 5/ decorative fence installed in this location will include several masonry posts to compliment the existing "gateway" monumentation present at this intersection. 5.0 Easements/Permits Temporary construction easements will be required from six (6) parcels along the length of the project as shown in the following table: PID No. Address Estimated Temporary Easement (s q. ft. 10-01900-020-12 3996 Cedar Grove Pkwy (1) 1,300 10-01900-030-12 3990 Cedar Grove Pkwy 1,400 10-01900-042-12 3986 Cedar Grove Pkwy 850 10-01900-041-12 3980 Cedar Grove Pkwy 1,460 10-72840-011-01 3932 Cedar Grove Pkwy 31,250 10-72840-020-01 3900 Cedar Grove Pkwy 3,050 Total 37,710 Notes: (1) Parcel is currently owned by Eagan Economic Development Authority (2) Parcel is currently owned by US Homes/Lennar (3) Temporary easement agreement has been secured Additionally, a permanent easement will be required from the following parcel for elements of the reinforced modular block retaining wall which will extend into the parcel: PID No. Address Estimated Permanent Easement (s q. ft.) 10-72840-020-01 3900 Cedar Grove Pkwy 610 Total 610 It is anticipated that a Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Construction Stormwater Permit for projects disturbing over one acre will be required. Page 5 SY 6.0 Cost Estimate A detailed cost estimate is located in Appendix A. The estimate is based on anticipated 2006 construction costs and includes a 10% contingency and indirect costs of 30%, which include legal, administration, engineering, and bond interest. Cedar Grove Parkway Trail and Lighting Construction $978,900 7.0 Assessments A preliminary assessment roll is provided in Appendix B located at the back of this report. An assessment map is shown in Figures 3.1 and 3.2. Assessments are proposed to be levied against the benefited properties for the total improvement with costs allocated in accordance with prior easement agreements, prior development agreements, and the City of Eagan's Special Assessment Policy for sidewalk/trail and lighting improvements adjacent to Community Shopping Center parcels on local streets. All assessments will be revised based on final costs. A preliminary assessment roll is included in Appendix B. City Special Assessment Policy Assessment Ratio Property City Local Sidewalks/Trails/Lighting • Community Shopping Center 100%* 0% * The City's Special Assessment Policy states that 100% of the trail and lighting costs are assessable to Community Shopping Center parcels to a maximum amount equivalent to the benefit, or increase, to the property value. 7.1. Nicols Ridge Area The proposed improvements adjacent to the Nicols Ridge Area parcels are included in the Nicols Ridge development agreement. The development agreement states, in part, that US Homes/Lennar should construct these improvements as part of the construction of the Nicols Ridge development. As previously stated, US Homes/Lennar has requested that Page 6 the improvements be constructed by the City as part of a Public Improvement project. Per the terms of the assessment agreement, US Homes/Lennar will be responsible for all of the construction costs and a portion of the indirect costs of the trail, lighting and fencing improvements, from Nicols Road to the east property line of the Nicols Ridge plat. An assessment agreement, based on actual construction and indirect costs, was recently reached with US Homes/Lennar in an amount not to exceed $494,000. As part of the assessment agreement, US Homes/Lennar has agreed to waive their right to appeal the final assessment. 7.2. Community Shopping Center The City's Special Assessment Policy states that 100% of the trail and lighting improvement costs are assessable to adjacent Community Shopping Center parcels to a maximum amount equivalent to the benefit, or increase, to the property value. A recent preliminary benefit analysis completed by an independent appraiser on a similar streetscaping and trail project within the City estimates that parcels would be benefited in the amount of $0.077/Square Foot by the proposed improvements. Therefore, the Community Shopping Center assessments will be limited by the preliminary benefit analysis rate of $0.077/Square Foot. The assessment costs for the proposed improvements adjacent to the Cedarvale Business Center, including the reconstruction of a portion of the parking lot, shall be in accordance with the Easement and Assessment Agreement, dated June 1, 2004. The proposed assessment for trail and lighting improvements adjacent to the Cedarvale Business Center is $17,500. 8.0 Assessment Financing Options The property owners will have the option at the time of the assessment hearing to pay the full assessment or include the assessment in with their property tax statement. If the Page 7 S7 assessment is included with the property tax statement, the assessment will be spread over ten years with the interest determined by the results of the bond sale used to finance the improvements. The following payment schedule will result based on an estimated 5.5% interest for the assessed amounts: Assessment Schedule (per $10,000 Assessment) Principal Interest Cost Per Year Per Year Per Year First Year $1,000 $550 $1,550 Tenth Year $1,000 $55 $1,055 9.0 Revenue Source Estimated Estimated Project Cost Assessment Revenue Balance $978,900 $527,600 $451,300 The City's Major Street Fund will finance the estimated project deficit of $451,300 (46.1 % of total). Page 8 10.0 Proiect Schedule ■ Present Feasibility Report to City Council/ Order Public Hearing .................................................................November 15, 2005 ■ Public Hearing January 17, 2006 ■ State Aid Plan Approval March 2006 ■ Approve Plans and Specifications April 2006 ■ Award Contract May 2006 ■ Begin Construction .............................................................................July 10, 2006 ■ Project Completion ........................................................................October 31, 2006 ■ Final Cost Report .November 2006 ■ Final Assessment Hearing Fall 2006 ■ First Payment Due with Property Tax Statement May 15, 2008 Page 9 Appendix A Cedar Grove Parkway Trail and Lighting Improvements City Project No. 888 Preliminary Cost Estimate Improvements Adjacent to Nicols Ridge Est. Item No. Item Unit Q . Unit Price Est. Cost 2021.501 Mobilization LS 0.70 $30,000 $21,000 2104.501 Remove Concrete Curb and Gutter LF 80 $6.50 $ 520 2104.505 Remove Bituminous Parkin Lot Pavement SY 590 $2.50 $ 1,475 2105.501 Common Excavation CY 200 $10.00 $ 2,000 2211.501 6" Aggregate Base, Cl. 5 (100% Crushed TON 700 $20.00 $14,000 2350.501 2" Bituminous Walk (LV45030B) SY 1,670 $8.00 $13,360 2411.602 F&I Masonry Post EA 7 $4,000.00 $28,000 2521.602 Pedestrian Ramps (w/ Truncated Domes) EA 3 $750.00 $ 2,250 2531.501 Concrete Curb and Gutter, B618 LF 80 $16.00 $ 1,280 2545.501 Electric Light System A LS 0.67 $126,000 $84,420 2557.603 Ornamental Fence Design Special LF 1,620 $130.00 $210,600 2563.601 Traffic Control LS 0.70 $2,500.00 $ 1,750 2575.505 Sod and 4" Topsoil SY 1,980 $5.00 $ 9,900 Subtotal $390,600 + 10% Contingencies $39,100 Subtotal $429,700 + 30% Indirect Costs $128,900 NICOLS RIDGE AREA TOTAL $558,600 or Appendix A (continued) Cedar Grove Parkway Trail and Lighting Improvements City Project No. 888 Preliminary Cost Estimate Improvements Adjacent to Community Shopping Center (CSC) Est. Item No. Item Unit Qty. Unit Price Est. Cost 2021.501 Mobilization LS 0.30 $30,000 $ 9,000 2101.502 Clearing TREE 6 $300.00 $ 1,800 2101.507 Grubbing TREE 6 $200.00 $ 1,200 2104:501 Remove Concrete Curb and Gutter LF 480 $6.50 $ 3,120 2104.505 Remove Bituminous Parkin Lot Pavement SY 2,580 $2.50 $ 6,450 2104.513 Sawing Bituminous Pavement (Full Depth) LF 300 $4.00 $ 1,200 2105.501 Common Excavation CY 1,520 $10.0U $15,200 2211.501 6" Aggregate Base, Cl. 5 (100% Crushed) TON 1,195 $20.00 $23,900 2350.501 2" Bituminous Walk (LV45030B) SY 635 $8.00 $ 5,080 2350.505 Bituminous Mixture for Parkin Lot TON 320 $40.00 $12,800 2350.505 Bituminous Mixture for Patching TON 10 $125.00 $ 1,250 2357.502 Bituminous Material for Tack Coat GAL 90 $2.00 $ 180 2411.602 F&I Masonry Post EA 5 $4,000.00 $20,000 2411.618 Modular Block Retaining Wall- Non-Reinf. SF 1,960 $25.00 $49,000 2411.618 Modular Block Retaining Wall- Reinforced SF 1,150 $30.00 $34,500 2503.541 12" RCP Sewer, Cl. 5, Des 3006 LF 50 $26.00 $ 1,300 2506.501 Construct Drainage Structure Type C LF 9 $350.00 $ 3,150 2521.501 4" Concrete Walk Special SF 880 $11.00 $ 9,680 2521.602 Pedestrian Ramps (w/ Truncated Domes) EA 14 $750.00 $10,500 2531.501 Concrete Curb and Gutter, B612 LF 480 $14.00 $ 6,720 2545.501 Electric Light System A LS 0.33 $126,000 $41,580 2545.602 Adjust Handhole (PVC) EA 1 $500.00 $ 500 2557.603 Ornamental Fence Design Special LF 200 $130.00 $26,000• 2563.601 Traffic Control LS 0.30 $2,500.00 $ 750 2564.602 Pavement Message (Handicap) - Paint EA 4 $125.00 $ 500 2564.603 4" Solid Line White- Paint LF 1,100 $1.50 $ 1,650 2575.505 Sod and 4" Topsoil SY 1,380 $5.00 $ 6,900 Subtotal $293,900 + 10% Contingencies $29,400 Subtotal $323,300 + 30% Indirect Costs $ 97,000 COMMUNITY SHOPPING CENTER TOTAL $420,300 TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTS $978,900 Appendix B Cedar Grove Parkway Trail and Lighting Improvements City Project No. 888 Preliminary Assessment Roll Cedar Grove Parkway Trail and ighting Improvements Parcel Area Rate/ Square Estimated Parcel ID No. (Square Feet) Foot Assessment Outlot A, Beau D Rue Drive Plat 10-13520-010-00 N/A See Note (A) $163,900 Lot 2, Block 1 Beau D Rue Drive Plat 10-13520-020-01 N/A See Note (A $25,300 Lot 1, Block 1 Beau D Rue Drive Plat 10-13520-010-01 N/A See Note (A) $33,700 Section 19, Twn 27, Range 23 (Un latted 10-01900-020-12 N/A See Note (A $91,200 Section 19, Twn 27, Range 23 Un latted 10-01900-030-12 N/A See Note (A $93,900 Section 19, Twn 27, Range 23 Un latted 10-01900-042-12 N/A See Note (A $53,100 Section 19, Twn 27, Range 23 (Un latted) 10-01900-041-12 N/A See Note (A) $32,900 NICOLS RIDGE AREA SUBTOTAL $494,000 Lot 1, Block 1 Stryker Addition 10-72840-011-01 N/A See Note (A $17,500 Lot 1, Block 1 Stryker Addition 10-72840-012-01 43,839 $0.077 $ 3,376 Lot 2, Block 1 Stryker Addition 10-72840-020-01 36,847 $0.077 $ 2,837 Section 19, Twn 27, Range 23 (Un latt ed). 10-01900-010-10 128,254 $0.077 $ 9,876 COMMUNITY SHOPPING CENTER SUBTOTAL 208,940 $ 33,600 PROJECT TOTALS 208,940 $527,600 Notes: (A) Amount of assessment for this parcel is per agreement. APPENDIX C Figure 1- Project Location Figure 2- Proposed Typical Sections Figures 3.1 and 3.2- Proposed Improvements/Assessment Maps 6.S- P~ Q ~O 65 ~O G ~o m yJ~ ~J PROJECT LOCATION z~ i S p0 SILVER BELL RD. I I o I I i I Y U I ~ m I I O cc y I Z w z DEERWOOD DR. ~i 1 = t i LL I ~ 0 ~I Q I J O I U z U DIFFLEY ROAD I - Y ~ I O U I ~ Z 8 I o I = Q I ~ I r~Q ~r I I I ~ I- R41p I I I c C i~ I o ` x I O ~ m CLIFF RD. 0 > sir U GALA.XIE i 3sRe oris\FeasRe orts2D05%Pro'888 Cedar Grove Parkway Trail& Lighting Figure City of EanriIl Project 888 Engineering Department ¢ 2 R /W VARIES 40' R 4' SAFETY 4 SAFETY ORNAMENTAL LANE 44' TYPICAL F-F LANE FENCE ®3900 12' DRIVE LANE 12' MEDIAN 12' DRIVE LANE 5' B' 2' 3' CEDAR GROVE PARKWAY STREET UGH71NG 2% MODULAR BLOCK 1:4 RETAINING WALL (HEIGHT VARIES) Y BITUMINOUS 6' AGGREGATE BASE TYPICAL SECTION CEDAR GROVE TR TO RAHN RD 3 ~ 3 R /W VARIES R /W VARIES 33' - 40' 4' SAFETY 4' SAFETY LANE 44' TYPICAL F-F LANE i 12' DRIVE LANE 12' MEDIAN 12' DRIVE LANE 8' 8' 2' I STREET ORNAMENTAL LIGHTING r FENCE 4% 2% 2' BITUMINOUS 6' AGGREGATE BASE TYPICAL SECTION NICOLS RD TO CEDAR GROVE TR aasRe ortsTeasRe orts2O051Pro'888 Cedar Grove Parkway Trail & Lighting Figure City of Egan Project 88 2 Engineering Department ) W _ , - - tij Q~ ,yA°'~, y ~9~p . . I1j U . Q Qo ~~a Jam. C~ 4 OP a~ r - - ~9~6 G ~o V 0O - G eP~ea Gectie~` to - a9 . NE, odo cS~ - ~cl Q~ 'S°j a°~~ CG Ol e< op5 or, z Epo M'`'~ OeQeZ~ ~~9rz V,, -V 3910 - t . 390 - 3909 1~ 3980 398 3909 / 16 LEGEND Nicols Ridge Area Community Shopping Center (CSC) 'Aatth \BA[Ien\Cedor_Grove_Assess2 ,~-:;CHs Cedar Grove Parkway Trail & Lighting Figure City of EaLan Project 888 3.2 Engineering Department e~9 1 1 Agenda Information Memo January 17, 2006 Eagan City Council Meeting C. PROJECT 933, TOWN CENTRE DRIVE/ O'LEARY LANE/ GOLFVIEW DRIVE/ YANKEE PLACE STREET REVITALIZATION ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve Project 933 (Town Centre Drive/ O'Leary Lane/ Golfview Drive/ Yankee Place - Street Revitalization) and authorize the preparation of detailed plans and specifications. FACTS: • Since 1990, the City has implemented a comprehensive Pavement Management Program that provides timely pavement rehabilitation to our local streets, significantly extending their overall life expectancy. During these past sixteen years, the City has rehabilitated approximately 77 miles of local streets. • The resurfacing of streets in the Town Centre area, including Town Centre Drive (Denmark Ave. to Lexington Ave.), O'Leary Lane, Golfview Drive, and Yankee Place has been programmed for 2006 in the City's 5-Year Capital Improvement Program. In September, 2004, advanced notices of this pending capital improvement were sent to all affected property owners. • On June 7, 2005, the City Council authorized the preparation of a feasibility report identifying the scope, cost, financing and schedule of the rehabilitation of these streets. • On December 20, 2005, the feasibility report for Project 933 was presented to the City Council and a Public Hearing was scheduled for January 17 to formally present and discuss the report with the adjacent property owners. • An informational neighborhood meeting was held on January 12 in the City Hall Conference Room 1 for the adjacent property owners and representatives to discuss the proposed improvements. Of the 248 total properties (227 high density/ condos, and 21 commercial/ industrial) proposed to be assessed under this improvement, four property owners representing two properties attended the informational meeting. • All notices have been published in the legal newspaper and sent to all affected property owners informing them of this public hearing. ATTACHMENTS- • Feasibility Report, pages 91 through_qt?. • Minutes of Informational Meeting, pageV! O throughW. City of Ea all Report for Town Centre Drive/ O'Leary Lane/ Golfview Drive Area Street Revitalization City Project No. 93 3 Eagan, Minnesota January, 2006 City of EaPH January 12, 2006 Pat Geagan Honorable Mayor and City Council MAYOR City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Peggy Carlson Cyndee Fields Re: Town Centre Drive/ O'Leary Lane/ Golfview Drive Mike Maguire Street Revitalization Meg Tilley City Project No. 933 COUNCIL MEMBERS Dear Mayor and City Council: Thomas Hedges Attached is our report for the Town Centre Drive/ O'Leary Lane/ Golfview Drive - Street CITY ADMINISTRATOR Revitalization, City Project No. 933. The report presents and discusses the proposed improvements and includes a cost estimate, preliminary assessment roll and schedule. We would be pleased to meet with the City Council at your convenience to review and discuss the contents of this report. Sincerely, MUNICIPAL CENTER j~ 3830 Pilot Knob Road P. Corder Eagan, MN 55122-1810 Assistant City Engineer 651.675.5000 phone 651.675.5012 fax I hereby certify that this report was 651.454.8535 TDD prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. MAINTENANCE FACILITY 6 3501 Coachman Point i' Eagan, MN 55122 John P. Gorder 651.675.5300 phone Date: I - V6, Reg. No. 22813 651.675.5360 fax 651.454.8535 TDD Reviewed By: www.cityofeagan.com Department o Public Wor Date j Reviewe By: Finance D artment Date THE LONE OAK TREE The symbol of strength and growth in our community. qc)-- TABLE OF CONTENTS Letter of Transmittal/Certification Table of Contents Page Introduction .......................................................................................................2 Scope 4 Feasibility and Recommendations ..............................................................................4 Street Evaluation 4 Proposed Improvements ..........................................................................................5 Easements/Permits 7 Cost Estimate 7 Assessments 8 High Density Residential 8 Commercial/Industrial 9 Assessment Financing Options 10 Revenue Source ....................................................................................................................................10 Project Schedule ...................................................................................................................................10 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Preliminary Cost Estimate Appendix B Preliminary Assessment Roll Appendix C Figures - I Location Map - 2A & B Street Improvement/Assessment Area Map - 3A & B Typical Section - Overlay - 4 Detail Plate - Commercial & Industrial Concrete Entrances ~13 January 2006 Neighborhood Street Revitalization Town Centre Drive/ O'Leary Lane/ Golfview Drive/ Yankee Place Eagan, Minnesota Introduction/ History As a part of Eagan's Pavement Management Program, (PMP), the City evaluates streets within the community throughout their life cycle and implements appropriate maintenance strategies. In 1989, a Pavement Management System (PMS) was developed that allowed the City to evaluate the condition of the existing pavement surface for all the streets on a routine basis and schedule timely maintenance. A Five Year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for street rehabilitation is developed from this information. The 1.3 miles of 32 to 44-feet wide streets of Town Centre Drive (Denmark Avenue to Lexington Avenue), Yankee Place, O'Leary Lane, and Golfview Drive in central Eagan are identified for the 2006 overlay improvements. Figure 1, located in Appendix C, illustrates the project location. The streets were constructed from 1981 to 1985 as part of an adjacent development. Based on the data and engineering strategies available at this time, the City's current PMP incorporates local and ongoing maintenance strategies with seal coating occurring as needed at 5 to 7 years, again at 12 to 14 years with a bituminous overlay at approximately 20 years. Overlaying these roadways located within the project area, which are presently at the 20+ year time frame, will prevent further decay of the pavement surface, thus protecting and extending the structural life of the street. Timely maintenance work, such as bituminous patching, crack sealing and seal coating have occurred at appropriate intervals during the life of the pavement. The City of Eagan's maintenance records indicate that the streets were last seal coated in 2000. The Public Works maintenance program typically includes extensive patching and crack sealing during the summer prior to the overlay. During the past few construction seasons, the Public Works crews, as part of the Preparatory Pavement Management Plan, removed and replaced several deteriorated pavement areas, placed leveling, and maintenance overlays on portions of the streets under consideration. These repairs alone will not substantially extend the life expectancy of the street pavements if not combined with the proposed bituminous overlay proposed with this project. (See example photo) k - e E r i x t a.r y HF3' u' 7- Y ia'•.,1:..I ti ..yFYY.i Lnf01 .tii..t✓'fiACCPR':E'2..WT. rc4?•dxnw1%. Example of City Street Pavement Preparatory Maintenance Area The Public Works Department has also inspected the utility infrastructure (sanitary sewer, water main, and storm sewer) in the project area and determined the system is in good working order and that no major repairs are necessary. Scope This project will provide resurfacing (edge mill and overlay) for approximately 13 miles of roadway. Figures 2A and 2B located in Appendix C, illustrate the project limits. Also included in this project are replacement of the damaged curb and gutter/ concrete entrances, traffic sign replacement, adjustments to sanitary/storm sewer utility castings and water gate valves. Feasibility and Recommendations This project is necessary to prevent further decay of the pavement section, create a safer driving surface, increase ride ability, and add structural strength. This project is cost effective in that the proposed improvement (resurfacing) is considerably less expensive than complete reconstruction of these streets. This project is feasible in that this type of improvement has been used successfully to extend the life expectancy of numerous other streets throughout the City and the region. This project is in accordance with the Five Year Capital Improvement Plan (2006 - 2010) for the City of Eagan and the schedule as outlined in the Pavement Management Program. It is recommended that the project be constructed as proposed in this report in combination with other similar projects in the area. Street Evaluation The City of Eagan's Pavement Management System allows the City to evaluate the condition of the existing street surface to help schedule timely maintenance and improvements. The Pavement Condition Index (PCI) ranks the surface condition for each street. The general categories that define PCI rankings are as follows: PCI Recommended Improvement 56 - 100 Routine Maintenance/Crack Seal/Seal Coat 36 - 55 Patch/Repair and/or Overlay 0-35 Reconstruct 4 The 2005 PCI rankings for Town Centre Drive/ O'Leary Lane/ Golfview Drive has a pavement condition rating of 54 which falls in the higher rankings of the "Patch/Repair and/or Overlay" category, mainly due to the preparatory maintenance performed by City crews as mentioned above. Therefore, with ratings and the age of the streets, the 2006 construction season is the optimal time to construct the bituminous overlay on these streets. The project can be delayed until the PCI ratings fall further into the "Patch/ Repair and/or Overlay" category, however, if it is delayed, the structural benefit to the pavement may be reduced. Proposed Improvements Pavement - The proposed street improvements are shown in Figures 3A & 3B. The existing street section for the local commercial/ industrial and high density residential streets _ consist of 3" to 4" bituminous pavement supported by 6" to .Y 8 gravel base. The existing bituminous surface will be milled adjacent to the existing curb and gutter (6'-8' wide) to accommodate a 1 %z-inch bituminous overlay. The overlay, combined with the existing street section, will provide a street section consistent with current City standards for commercial/ industrial and high density residential streets. The combination of patching, and overlay will not eliminate cracking due to the temperature extremes experienced in Minnesota. Bituminous overlays will show some continued frost movements and reflective cracking consistent with the underlying pavement. Routine maintenance will still need to continue under the City's Pavement Management Program. Concrete curb & gutter - Damaged curb and gutter e a will be replaced if severely cracked, spalled, or settled. It is estimated that approximately 5% (0.15 miles) of the existing concrete curb and gutter will have to be replaced. Boulevard sod will be removed and replaced by a new 2' wide roll behind each section of curb and gutter that is replaced. While the contractor who performs the work is responsible for it's establishment in the first 30 days after placement, adjacent property owners are encouraged to consistently water the new sod to help ensure its growth. Signage - All traffic control and street identification signage within the project limits will be replaced due to their diminished reflectivity, deteriorated support posts, and the signs or posts no longer meet City and State standards. Driveway Replacement - While a majority of properties within the project area have concrete driveway aprons consistent with current City standards, two properties (Lot 2, Block 1 TC 100 Second Addition and Lot 1, Block 1 TC 100 Third Addition) were constructed with bituminous driveway entrances and are proposed to be replaced. The entrances will be reconstructed with 7- thick concrete entrance aprons in accordance with Eagan Standard Detail 440, as shown on Figure 4. This driveway entrance replacement provides commercial entrances of adequate strength and width and is consistent with similar past projects in commercial/ industrial areas throughout the City and the other properties within the project area. Sidewalk/ Path Pedestrian Ramps - Recent revisions to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requires jurisdictional agencies to provide detectable warnings at all existing pedestrian ramps of sidewalks and paths with public streets that are improved, including mill & overlay improvements. The most common method of providing this detectable warning is through the Y~ installation of truncated domes a minimum of two feet in length across the width of all pedestrian ramps.= a ' Example of a truncated dome pedestrian ramp This project provides for the installation of eighteen truncated dome pedestrian ramps on the bituminous paths and concrete sidewalks on the streets within the project area. O I- P-W Y - ar V"~ Example of a recent street overlay project in Eagan (St. Francis Woods, 2005) Easement/Permits All work will be in the public right-of-way. No additional easements will be necessary. It is anticipated that no permits will be required for the resurfacing project. Cost Estimate Detailed cost estimates are located in Appendix A. The estimates are based on anticipated 2006 construction costs and include a 5% contingency and indirect costs of 30%, which include legal, administration, engineering, and bond interest. A summary of the costs is as follows: Town Centre Drive/ O'Leary Lane/ Golfview Drive • Edge Mill and Overlay (32' Streets) .........................$46,290 • Edge Mill and Overlay (44' Streets) $176,620 • Concrete Driveway Replacement ...............................$8,610 • Repair Existing Concrete Curb & Gutter ..................$69,130 ■ Total ................................................$300,650 Assessments Assessments are proposed to be levied against the benefited properties for the total improvement with costs allocated in accordance with the City of Eagan's Special Assessment Policy for a mill and overlay improvement for local commercial/ industrial and multiple residential streets. All assessments will be revised based on final costs. A preliminary assessment roll is included in Appendix B. City Special Assessment Policy Assessment Ratio Property City Mill and Overlay • Multiple Residential (R-4) 75% 25% • Commercial/Industrial 100% 0% Driveway Replacement 100% 0% Repair Existing Concrete Curb and Gutter 0% 100% High Density Residential Lots (R-4) All high density R-4 residential lots as shown on Figures 2A & 213, having driveway access on to the streets to be improved are proposed to be assessed. The City's Assessment Policy states that 75% of the mill and overlay costs are assessable for these residential properties. The estimated cost per R-4 residential foot to be assessed based on the City Assessment Policy is $13.00 per foot and is calculated as follows: 1) % High Density Residential (R-4) = 5,321 ff. / 12,863 (total f.f.) = 41.4% 2) [$46,290 (Mill & Overlay Cost) x 75% x 41.4%] + [$176,620 (Mill & Overlay Cost) x 75% x 41.4%] = $69,210 [Total High Density Res. Assessment (R-4)] 3) $69,210 (High Density Residential Assessment) 4 $13.00/foot (R-4) 5,321 High Density Residential F.F The proposed assessment to the high-density residential condominiums at Tomark lst & 2nd Additions (3420/ 3425/ 3440 Golfview Drive) will be assessed on a per unit basis, as follows: 1) Front footage = 855 f. f. + 1,004 ff. = 1,859 total f.f. 2) 1,859 ff./227 units = 8.19 ff./ unit 3) 8.19 f. f. x $13.00/ f. f. = $106/ unit Commercial and Industrial Lots All commercial and industrial lots as shown on Figures 2A & 2B, having driveway access on to the streets to be improved are proposed to be assessed. The City's Assessment Policy states that 100% of the mill and overlay costs are assessable for both local and collector streets, regardless of width. The estimated cost per commercial/industrial foot to be assessed based on the City Assessment Policy is $17.32/foot and is calculated as follows: 1) % Commercial/Industrial = 7,542 f. f. / 12,863 (total f. f.) = 58.6% 2) [$46,290 (Mill & Overlay Cost) x 100% x 58.6%] + [$176,620 (Mill & Overlay Cost) x 100% x 58.6%] =$130,630 (Total Commercial/ Industrial Assessment) 3) $130,630 (Commercial/Industrial Assessment) 4 $17.32/foot 7,542 Commercial/Industrial F.F Assessment Financing Options The property owner will have the option at the time of the assessment hearing to pay the full assessment or include the assessment in with their property tax statement. If the assessment is included with the property tax statement, the assessment will be spread over ten years with the interest determined by the results of the bond sale used to finance the improvements. For example, commercial/industrial lots with a total assessment = $1,000 the following payment schedule will result based on an estimated 5.5% interest for the assessed amounts: Interest Cost Principal - Per Year Per Year Per Year First Year $200 $110 $310 Fifth Year $200 $11 $211 Revenue Source A summary of revenue sources is listed below: Project Property City Cost Assessment Contribution Mill and Overlay $222,910 $199,840 ($23,070) Concrete Driveway Repl. $8,610 $8,610 -0- Repair Existing Curb $ 69,130 -0- $6~ 9,130 Total $300,650 $208,450 ($92,200) The City's Major Street Fund will finance the estimated project deficit of $92,200 (31% of total). N~ Proiect Schedule Present Feasibility Report to City Council/ Order Public Hearing December 20, 2005 Neighborhood Meeting January 12, 2006 Public Hearing January 17, 2006 Approve Plans and Specifications February, 2006 Award Contract March, 2006 Project Completion August, 2006 Final Cost Report September, 2006 Final Assessment Hearing Fall, 2006 First Payment Due with Property Tax Statement May 15, 2007 0 Appendix A -Street Overlay - City Project No. 933 Preliminary Cost Estimate Town Centre Drive/ O'Leary Lane/ Golfview Drive Bituminous Street Overlay - 32' Streets Est. Unit Est. Item Unit Qty. Price Cost Mobilization L.S. 1 $1,000.00 $1,000 Mill Bituminous Pavement S.Y. 2,200 $1.15 $2,530 2350/2360 Wear Course Mixture Ton 550 $40.00 $22,000 Bituminous Material for Tack Coat Gal. 300 $2.00 $600 Adjust Frame & Ring Casting (Manhole) Each 9 $400.00 $3,600 Adjust Valve Box Each 2 $175.00 $350 Repair Valve To Section w/ cover Each 3 $275.00 $830 Traffic Control L.S. 1 $1,000.00 $1,000 Replace Street & Traffic Signs L.S. 1 $2,000.00 $2,000 Subtotal $33,910 +5% Contingencies $1,700 Subtotal $35,610 + 30% Indirect Costs $10,680 Total - 32' $46,290 Bituminous Street Overlay - 44' Item Est. Unit Est. Unit Qty. Price Cost Mobilization L.S. 1 $1,500.00 $1,500 Mill Bituminous Pavement S.Y. 6,600 $1.15 $7,590 2350/2360 Wear Course Mixture Ton 2,250 $40.00 $90,000 Bituminous Material for Tack Coat Gal. 900 $2.00 $1,800 Adjust Frame & Ring Casting (Manhole) Each 20 $400.00 $8,000 Adjust Valve Box Each 14 $175.00 $2,450 Repair Valve To Section w/ cover Each 6 $275.00 $1,650 Pavement Messages L-. S_. - $1;000-00- 4-Inch Double Yellow Striping L.F. 4,900 $1.00 $4,900 4-Inch White Striping L.F. 9,000 $0.50 $4,500 Traffic Control L.S. 1 $2,000.00 $2,000 Replace Street & Traffic Signs L. S. 1 $4,000.00. $4,000 Subtotal $129,390 +5% Contingencies $6,470 Subtotal $135,860 + 30% Indirect Costs $40,760 Total - 44' $176,620 Driveway Entrance Replacement Est. Unit Est. Item Unit Qty- Price Cost Driveway Entrance Replacement S.Y. 90 $70.00 $6.300 Subtotal $6,300 + 5% Contingencies $320 Subtotal $6,620 + 30% Indirect Costs $1,990 Total - Driveway $8,610 Repair Existing Concrete Curb & Gutter Est. Unit Est. Item Unit Qty. Price Cost Remove Concrete Curb and Gutter L.F. 700 $5.00 $3,500 B618 Concrete Curb and Gutter L.F. 700 $22.00 $15,400 Concrete Driveway Remove & Replace S.Y. 50 $60.00 $3,000 Concrete Valle Gutter S.Y. 30 $50.00 $1,500 Conc Sidewalk w/ Trunc Domes Each 10 $700.00 $7,000 Conc Sidewalk Patching S.F. 750 $15.00 $11,250 Adjust Frame & Ring Casting (C.B) Each 20 $300.00 $6,000 Sod w/To soil S.Y. 180 $10.00 $1,800 Bituminous Path Patching S.Y. 50 $24.00 $1,200 Subtotal $50,650 +5% Contingencies $2,530 Subtotal $53,180 - + 30°lo Irrdirect- Costs $15,950 Total - Curb/Gutter $69,130 Total Proiect Cost $300,650 Appendix B - City Project No. 933 Preliminary Assessment Roll Town Centre Drive/ O'Leary Lane/ Golfview Drive Front Rate / Street Footage F.F. Assessment HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 4 Eagan Senior Housing Addition 1200 Town Centre Drive 10-22477-010-01 800 $13.00 $10,400 Stuarts First Addition Stuarts First Addition 10-72850-010-01 821 $13.00 $10,673 Stuarts Second Addition Stuarts Second Addition 10-72851-010-01 648$13.00 $8,424 Tomark 1" and 2° Additions 3420 Golfview Drive 100 10-76900-000-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 101 10-76900-001-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 102 10-76900-002-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 103 10-76900-003-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 104 10-76900-004-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 105 10-76900-005-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 106 10-76900-006-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 107 10-76900-007-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 108 10-76900-008-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 109 10-76900-009-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 110 10-76900-010-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 111 10-76900-011-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 112 10-76900-012-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 113 10-76900-013-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 114 10-76900-014-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 115 10-76900-015-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 116 10-76900-016-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 117 10-76900-017-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 118 10-76900-018-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 119 10-76900-019-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 120 10-76900-020-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 121 10-76900-021-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 -342.0_Golfview-Drive-.22 10-76900-022-03 8.19 _$13.00 $106 _ Carriage Hills Condo Assn 10-76900-023-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 200 10-76900-024-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 201 10-76900-025-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 202 10-76900-026-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 203 10-76900-027-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 204 10-76900-028-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 205 10-76900-029-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 206 10-76900-030-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 207 10-76900-031-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 208 10-76900-032-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 209 10-76900-033-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 210 10-76900-034-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 211 10-76900-035-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 212 10-76900-036-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 213 10-76900-037-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 214 10-76900-03 8-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 215 10-76900-039-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 216 10-76900-040-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 217 10-76900-041-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 218 10-76900-042-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 219 10-76900-043-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 220 10-76900-044-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 221 10-76900-045-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 222 10-76900-046-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 223 10-76900-047-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 300 10-76900-048-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 301 10-76900-049-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 302 10-76900-050-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 303 10-76900-051-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 304 10-76900-052-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 305 10-76900-053-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 306 10-76900-054-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 307 10-76900-055-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 308 10-76900-056-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 309 10-76900-057-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 310 10-76900-058-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 311 10-76900-059-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 312 10-76900-060-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 313 10-76900-061-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 314 10-76900-062-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 315 10-76900-063-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 316 10-76900-064-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 317 10-76900-065-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 318 10-76900-066-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 319 10-76900-067-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 _3_4.20_GolfviewDrive321L_0L-7-69-00_0603 _ 8.19 X13.00 $_106 3420 Golfview Drive 321 10-76900-069-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 322 10-76900-070-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3420 Golfview Drive 323 10-76900-071-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 100 10-76900-154-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 V 3425 Golfview Drive 101 10-76900-155-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 102 10-76900-156-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 103 10-76900-157-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 104 10-76900-158-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 105 10-76900-159-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 106 10-76900-160-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 107 10-76900-161-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 108 10-76900-162-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 109 10-76900-163-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 110 10-76900-164-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 111 10-76900-165-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 112 10-76900-166-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 113 10-76900-167-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 114 10-76900-168-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 115 10-76900-169-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 116 10-76900-170-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 117 10-76900-171-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 118 10-76900-172-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 119 10-76900-173-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 120 10-76900-174-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 121 10-76900-175-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 122 10-76900-176-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 123 10-76900-177-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 200 10-76900-178-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 201 10-76900-179-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 202 10-76900-180-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 203 10-76900-181-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 204 10-76900-182-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 205 10-76900-183-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 206 10-76900-184-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 207 10-76900-185-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 208 10-76900-186-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 209 10-76900-187-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 210 10-76900-188-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 211 10-76900-189-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 212 10-76900-190-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 213 10-76900-191-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 214 10-76900-192-03 8.19 $13.00 $106' 3425 Golfview Drive 215 10-76900-193-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 216 10-76900-194-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425_Golfvle_Drive217 .10'69_Q0ml9_5_03 _-9-11-j-$13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 218 10-76900-196-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 219 10-76900-197-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 220 10-76900-198-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 221 10-76900-199-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 F 9 3425 Golfview Drive 222 10-76900-200-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 223 10-76900-201-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 300 10-76900-202-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 301 10-76900-203-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 302 10-76900-204-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 303 10-76900-205-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 304 10-76900-206-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 305 10-76900-207-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 306 10-76900-208-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 307 10-76900-209-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 308 10-76900-210-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 309 10-76900-211-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 310 10-76900-212-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 311 10-76900-213-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 312 10-76900-214-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 313 10-76900-215-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 314 10-76900-216-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 315 10-76900-217-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 316 10-76900-218-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 317 10-76900-219-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 318 10-76900-220-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 319 10-76900-221-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 320 10-76900-222-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 321 10-76900-223-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 322 10-76900-224-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3425 Golfview Drive 323 10-76900-225-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 100 10-76900-309-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 101 10-76900-310-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 102 10-76900-311-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 103 10-76900-312-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 104 10-76900-313-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 105 10-76900-314-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 106 10-76900-315-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 107 10-76900-316-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 108 10-76900-317-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 109 10-76900-318-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 110 10-76900-319-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 111 10-76900-320-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 112 10-76900-321-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 113 10-76900-322-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 ._3440_GAlfview-Drive114_ _10_7_69_0(1-323_0 8._19_ $13.00 __$106 3440 Golfview Drive 115 10-76900-324-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 116 10-76900-325-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 117 10-76900-326-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 118 10-76900-327-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 ~9 3440 Golfview Drive 119 10-76900-328-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 120 10-76900-329-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 121 10-76900-330-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 122 10-76900-331-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 123 10-76900-332-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 124 10-76900-333-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 125 10-76900-334-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 200 10-76900-335-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 201 10-76900-336-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 250 10-76900-337-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 203 10-76900-338-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 204 10-76900-339-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 205 10-76900-340-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 206 10-76900-341-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 207 10-76900-342-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 208 10-76900-343-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 209 10-76900-344-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 210 10-76900-345-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 211 10-76900-346-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 212 10-76900-347-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 213 10-76900-348-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 214 10-76900-349-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 215 10-76900-350-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 216 10-76900-351-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 217 10-76900-352-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 218 10-76900-353-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 219 10-76900-354-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 220 10-76900-355-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 221 10-76900-356-03 8.19$13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 222 10-76900-357-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 223 10-76900-358-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 224 10-76900-359-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 225 10-76900-360-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 300 10-76900-361-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 301 10-76900-362-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 302 10-76900-363-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 303 10-76900-364-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 304 10-76900-365-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 305 10-76900-366-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 306 10-76900-367-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 - 3440-Golfview Dr-ive 307 1-0-76900-X68-03----8.-1.9 _$13.00 - $-1O6-_ 3440 Golfview Drive 308 10-76900-369-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 309 10-76900-370-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 310 10-76900-371-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 311 10-76900-372-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 312 10-76900-373-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 313 10-76900-374-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 314 10-76900-375-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 315 10-76900-376-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 316 10-76900-377-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 317 10-76900-378-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 318 10-76900-379-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 319 10-76900-380-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 320 10-76900-381-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 321 10-76900-382-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 322 10-76900-383-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 323 10-76900-384-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 324 10-76900-385-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 3440 Golfview Drive 325 10-76900-386-03 8.19 $13.00 $106 Town Centre 100 5t Addition 1110 Town Centre Drive 10-77054-010-01 241 $13.00 $3,133 1120 Town Centre Drive 10-77054-020-01 211 $13.00 $2,743 Town Centre 100 8t Addition 1160 Town Centre Drive 10-77057-010-01 147 $13.00 $1,911 1150 Town Centre Drive 10-77057-020-01 199 $13.00 $2,587 1140 Town Centre Drive 10-77057-030-01 192 $13.00 $2,496 1130 Town Centre Drive 10-77057-040-01 203 $13.00 $2,639 Totals - High Dens. R4 5,322 $69,210 Driveway Assessment COMMERCIAL/ INDUSTRIAL Gatewoods Addition 1185 Town Centre 769 Drive 10-28900-010-01 $17.32 $13,319 3445 O'Leary Lane 10-28900-020-01 306 $17.32 $5,300 Town Centre 100 2" Addition 1270 Yankee Doodle 319 $17.32 $5,525 Road 10-77051-010-01 1260 Yankee Doodle 155 $17.32 $2,685 Road 10-77051-020-01 $4,605 Town Centre 100 3` Addition 1101 Town Centre 165 Drive 10-77052-010-01 $17.32 $2,873 $4,605 Town Centre 100 6th Addition 1274 Town Centre 287 $17.32 $4,997 Drive 10-77055-021-01 1260 Town Centre 200 $17.32 $3,482 Drive 10-77055-030-01 1250-1258 Town 10-77055-040-01 Centre Drive 10-77055-041-01 479 $17.32 $8,339 Town Centre 100 9t Addition 1195 Town Centre 225 Drive 10-77058-010-01 $17.32 $3,917 Town Centre 100 101 Addition 1252 Yankee Doodle 10-77059-010-01 Road 10-77059-011-01 520 $17.32 $9,053 Town Centre 100 11' Addition 1180 Yankee Doodle 101 Road 10-77060-010-01 $17.32 $1,323 Town Centre 100 121 Addition Outlot A 10-77061-010-00 336 $17.32 $5,850 __Ea an, Place 2° Addition 1235 Town Centre 10-77061-010-01 Drive 10-77064-010-01 1,296 $17.32 $22,563 Town Centre 100141 Addition 1190 Yankee Doodle 10-77063-010-01 100* $17.32 $1,306 Pco?_ Road Town Centre 100 16t Addition 1110 Yankee Doodle 304** Road 10-77065-010-01 $17.32 $5,293 Town Centre 100 17t Addition 1150 Yankee Doodle 391 Road 10-77066-010-01 $17.32 $6,807 Town Centre 100 18` Addition 3450 O'Leary Lane 10-77067-010-01 502 $17.32 $8,740 3440 O'Leary Lane 10-77067-020-01 211 $17.32 $3,674 Town Centre 100 191Addition 1121 Town Centre 3 3 5 Drive 10-77068-010-01 $17.32 $5,832 Eagan Senior Housing 2" Addition 1228 Town Centre 541 Drive 10-22478-012-01 $17.32 $9,419 Totals - Commercial/ 7,542 Industrial $130,630 $8,610 TOTAL ASSMT $193,500 * Frontage footage split evenly with Town Centre 100 1 Ph Addition (1180 Yankee Doodle Road) - Shared Access (100 + 201 = 201 Total) Front footage based on average FF of adjacent parcels (Town Centre 100 17''-196' Additions) that share access with Town Centre 100 166i 1,214 FF/4 parcels = 3 04 F.F ^ n a~YU~ ox lU'V`.JI s.n.E no rePwnu no naa on ~ LLi . Z LONE OAK ROAD Q LONE OAK ROAD PIM .menrry SC1cd 0 N,'"' O A. Z mO z Project Location flyYU YANKEE DOODLE ROAD _...1 J YNN![ K OM1 TOYR1 TOWN CENTRE DRIVE Z Yy DUCKWOOD 7DR WESC07T ROAD S~ P DEERWOOD AVE. _ O m ' z Y r- o DIFFLEY ROAD ~.xcss rtw no Town Centre &r-Y~L'lne / Golfview Drive City of Dan Fig. 1 Engineering Department Location Map - Project 933 0 N C4 _ 1 I O I z 3 o rn r C O ^ LLI i Z i1 j • z z W L T Q~ 365.91' C U a c KcaEa,< O ry r ~ I _ a r 'od r ^ C9 WO Z N I Q o = c~ i 0 > r z 0 c z co LL W $ N w z 3 2 0 o~dG P ~\~`o Q O 0 LL 0 O> W r~ ~ Q Ur Q ` CL Q I 0 w N E Q Q( DO \ r Q 0] C ~~b! w ` W U co Z ° z .2 w ti/Lj z Z w z Q ca U) w z w w ~ WU J i O +_j 0 w w b O CL LL 0 U) IT 0 Cl) W M * I a¢ X 0 > W I \1 z LU ~f " 0 r zz ■ t Q .•oy p O U a. C w / p, ■ N h h ' o - - / 129559 _ O~ ~ ■ ~ OO'tsz Id 3ANVA tg f zz Z V2WN N ~a ^ O N l Q g r = - o ~g Q CYO W $ X 2 c • c (A N "roz~ N o o N r Z6_ w W o w ~ o U r z w F-- _ 3o Z~ z y 0 ~O co ~W F- z ^ N 3: 4 O 9 CD >il JVVVN34 cm w 0 o ~ d5 o Z rn N ~ Z ~ QI ~ ~ I 06 0 ~ .LL•b00.` Q Z ;i 'Will w Z LZgg8 O p } Q O y ~O U ; II j O I LLJ o° II o Q" U- U- 0 H I I a m zw z- a) 116 O E G C w w a Q I O O> / r = I Q O A w ~ LU c O E w Q Q ~v I w Q O Z N z ° W ca W Z V J - J O w LL 2 O co 3AV NOlJNIX3l j ~ Q ° > 6 r,? z ~ goo ~ ~ ■ N u w~ q 0 O N 00~~(i~/ ° O w¢ b. Q U O ~~~~0 t o r L° ILJ Z I 0 0 ~~I Ob M 0 LL z N N j o Z ~O o ~ ■ / ~O r I /r I r- o a ~ , U W° U') ~ I Q i I" c 1 o 0 0 rn CZ`Pba` F- l o N W Q COQ 277.49' -D Z O 21130 c " Q I w w - v 365.91 OOV H1 LL P~ C n V ~06 3b1N30 NMO-L O 390.97' O - 7 r 111 Q N 11.1. Q Y LLQ Z O O m o E " O ea Q ¢EJ H ~O N P4 I t0 ii Q ~ wsa ' ~ ~ v Sol _ cy~ d 14.1N~J _0 - - y w u 60' ROW 32' (F-F) 3" BITUMINOUS SURFACE EX. B618 6" CL. 5 AGGREGATE BASE CURB & GUTTER Existing Typical Section Golfview Drive 60' ROW 28-32' (F-F) EDGE MILL (6'-8' wide) Typ. 11/2- TYPE 2350/2360 BITUMINOUS OVERLA REPLACE EX. CURB & GUTTER AS DIRECTED BITUMINOUS TACK COAT 3" BITUMINOUS SURFACE 6" CL. 5 AGGREGATE BASE Bituminous Street Overlay - Proposed Typical Section G: FeosibilityReports2006\Hillandole_931 \typical sections 11-30-05 Town Centre / Qjaary Lane / Golfview Drive City of ~~~l~Il Fig. 3A Engineering Department TypiC s - Project 933 60'-80' ROW 44' (F-F) EX. SIDEWALK 4" BITUMINOUS SURFACE EX. 8618 8" CL. 5 AGGREGATE BASE CURB & GUTTER Existing Typical Section Town Centre Dr / Yankee Place / O'Leary Lane 60'-80' ROW 44' F- F EDGE MILL (6'-8' wide) Typ. 11/2- TYPE 2350/2360 BITUMINOUS OVERLAY REPLACE EX. CURB & Z,EX. SIDEWALK GUTTER AS DIRECTED BITUMINOUS TACK COAT 11 4 BITUMINOUS SURFACE 8" CL. 5 AGGREGATE BASE Bituminous Street Overlay Section G: FeosibilityReports2006\Hillandate_931 \typical sections 10-10-05 Town Centre Dr. / O'Leary Lane / Golfview Drive City of Fig. 3B Engineering Department Typ' c to - Project 933 011 \-~o SLOPE 3 4" PER FT. • a _ _ ° =1 I I-III=f I I Ii- -1 I f-1 11=1 11=1 I i-1 ~ I _ - NOTE: 7" MINIMUM THICKNESS REQUIRED ON ENTIRE APRON. SUITABLE GRANULAR SUBGRADE OR CL. 5 (100% COMPACTION) EXCAVATE SUBGRADE TO ACCOMODATE 7" THICKNESS AT FLOW LINE SECTION A-A MAXIMUM 8' TRANSVERSE JOINT BETWEEN JOINTS 25' Min. Rod. / A B6 Curb ♦ d 4' 12'-6„ . m 'a lJ . ° • . " . .a fax. .a. CONTRACTION JOINT EXPANSION JOINT A (TYP.) 1. WHERE NEW DRIVEWAYS ARE TO BE ADDED 3. CONTRACTION JOINT PATTERN TO BE ACROSS EXISTING C&G, REMOVE EXISTING DETERMINED BY ENGINEER. C&G AND REPOUR INTEGRAL WITH THE CONCRETE ENTRANCE. 4. REQUIRED MIX DESIGNATION = 3A32 2. CONCRETE APRON REQUIRED FOR ALL ENTRANCES. P LAN G:DEiAIL PLATES/E440 - - - REVISED STANDARD COMMERCIAL & INDUSTRIAL PLATE Ciq of Eap 3~~5 440 CONCRETE ENTRANCES Engineering Department FIGURE 4 CITY PROJECT NO 933 INFORMATIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING TOWN CENTRE DR./ O'LEARY LANE/ GOLFVIEW DR. STREET REVITALIZATION THURSDAY, JANUARY 12, 2006 6:30 P.M. EAGAN CITY HALL - CONFERENCE ROOM Attendance: John Gorder, Assistant City Engineer, 4 property owners representing 2 properties (see attached sign-in sheet). A. Presentation of Project Details • Gorder welcomed the residents and provided project presentation, including details such as construction, costs, schedule and assessments. B. Questions/ Comments - City Responses • I'm concerned about accessibility to my business during paving activities. In similar situations, the City has allowed or required night paving. The City will work closely with the contractor and the businesses to reduce accessibility impacts. If the project is paved during the day, impact to accessibility will be minimal. • When will the widening of Yankee Doodle Road from Promenade to Lexington Avenue be done? This portion of Yankee Doodle Road is being considered in an upcoming corridor study by Dakota County, and a project widening the roadway is scheduled for consideration in 2006, also by Dakota County as lead agency. The meeting adjourned at 7:00 p.m. G:FR/2006/Minutes-931 TC Drive etal AID_ NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING TOWN CENTRE DR/GOLFVIEW DR/O'LEARY LN PROJECT 933 City of Eap THURSDAY, JANUARY 12, 2006 - 6:30 P.M. NAME ADDRESS 1. ~~iit/1 ~ C:GD,Qi.~Y ~Cir/~ ,3~5~.~ O C~ ~,4•t/C' ~IGe16-21Q Be e%- ~aWitl 2. 3. vS,4,Ja .x•171-11 .~Jrgy 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. G:FORMS/SIGN-IN.Sheet Al/ Agenda Memo January 17, 2006 VI. 2006 CALENDAR YEAR CITY ORGANIZATIONAL BUSINESS 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. Acting Mayor B. Official Legal Newspaper C. City Council Meeting Dates D. City Council Meeting Procedures E. Standing Committee Appointments / Representative Appointments F. Disband Economic Development Commission ACTING MAYOR A. Acting Mayor - There is a statutory requirement that a member of the City Council be appointed as Acting Mayor (See memo attached without page number for further clarification). All Councilmembers are eligible for this appointment. The acting mayor presides in the absence of Mayor Geagan at Council meetings and all other activities pertaining to the City of Eagan. Historically, the Mayor has made this appointment. Councilmember Cyndee Fields was Acting Mayor in 2005. REQUESTED ACTION: The Mayor is asked to appoint a member of the City Council as acting mayor. OFFICIAL LEGAL NEWSPAPER B. 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 / Dakota County Tribune, Inc. and Sun Newspapers. 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. Currently, the Thisweek Newspaper is the designated official legal newspaper and a lift rate into the Dakota County Tribune is offered. Deadlines for publication and publication dates match up much better with City activity with the Eagan Thisweek. 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 incomplete and may change between publication and the meeting. A o0z Tribune This Week Sun Current Legal Notices Deadline Tues Noon Tues Noon Thurs 2 pm Publication Thursday Saturday Wednesday Agendas Deadline Tues Noon Wed 4 pm Wed 5 pm Publication Thursday Saturday Wednesday Proposals are attached on pages jo through //.I, REQUESTED ACTION: Approve retention of Thisweek Newspaper as the City of Eagan's official legal newspaper. CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATES C. 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 Tuesday of each month at 6:30 p.m. A tentative schedule is attached on page I t.3 designating the first and third Tuesdays as regular City Council meeting ates, with the exception of July 4`~, July 6 is recommended for that day; August I (National Night out), August 3rd is recommended for that day; November 7th (Election Day), November 9`h is suggested for that day; December S (Truth in Taxation), December 4 is suggested for that day. Also included on page /M is a list of workshops to be scheduled at 5:30 p.m. the second and fourth Tuesdays of each month on an as needed basis with the exception of September 11 rather than September 12 due to the primary election; December 11 rather than December 12 due to Truth in Taxation. It has been requested that the special Council meeting scheduled for February 14 be changed to February 13. If the Council prefers an alternate date to the ones proposed on the schedule, this should be discussed at the meeting. A Listening Session will be held at 6:00 p.m. before each City Council meeting. REQUESTED ACTION: Approve or modify the 2006 Schedule of City Council Meetings as presented noting the alternate dates, if any. CITY COUNCIL MEETING PROCEDURES D. 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 / / is a copy of an outline of a Regular City Council agenda for use by the Mayor and City Councilmembers as to how Robert's Rules will apply to the overall agenda. /0.3 Also enclosed on pages -1 4 through //7is 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 2005. 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 / tathrough is a guideline of meeting procedures for use by the public when attending Regular City Council meetings. The audiences 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. It has been recommended that the EDA agenda be placed on the agenda prior to the Administrative Agenda and this change is indicated on the outline. REQUESTED ACTION: To acknowledge Robert's Rules of Order as the means to conduct official business at all Regular City Council meetings, approve the changes to the agenda format and further approve the attached guidelines/handout for public participation in City Council meetings. It has been the City's past practice and policy for Visitors to be Heard to take place after adjournment and not be televised during the City Council filing period (July - November) in election years. Additionally, the ten minute time limit for Visitors to be Heard has been enforced during this time. If it is the Council's desire to continue this practice, it is suggested that the Council formally ratify the policy through the action below. REQUESTED ACTION: Ratify the Council's past practice and policy that during the City Council filing period (July - November, 2006), Visitors to be Heard shall occur after adjournment for a period of time not to exceed ten minutes and Visitors to be Heard will not be televised during this time. Adding an Item to the Agenda It has been the past practice of the City Council to require two members of the City Council to make a request of the City Administrator that an unscheduled item be added to a City Council meeting agenda. For example, if a resident has a concern needing a timely response and at least two members of the City Council would like to discuss the concern, the two Councilmembers could request that the City Administrator include the concern on the next workshop or regular City Council meeting. This practice of requiring two members of the City Council to place an item on an agenda does not usually apply to items of business that are already scheduled to go through the regular process and procedures such as development proposals, ordinance amendments, etc. If it is the Council's understanding that this again be the practice for 2006, formal ratification of the policy is requested. M 41 REQUESTED ACTION: Formally ratify the practice that at least two members of the City Council must make the request of the City Administrator to place an item on an upcoming City Council agenda. a~ COUNCIL STANDING COMMITTEE AND REPRESENTATIVE APPOINTMENTS E. 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 2005 standing committees that are again proposed for 2006 are as follows. The Mayor and Council shall determine if members change or stay the same. Finance Committee: Councilmember Carlson and Mayor Geagan Public Works Committee: Councilmember Fields and Councilmember Maguire Personnel Committee: Mayor Geagan and Councilmember Carlson Communications Committee : Councilmember Maguire and Councilmember Carlson Special Committees and Other Representative Appointments: Community Center / Central Park Operations Committee: Mayor Geagan and Councilmember Carlson Caponi Property Subcommittee: Councilmember Maguire and Councilmember Fields Council may want to evaluate the need to continue with the Caponi Property Subcommittee. 2008 Comprehensive Guide Plan Update Committee - Historically consists of two Council members and two Advisory Planning Commission members (to be appointed by APC) Two City Council appointments requested Minnesota Valley Transit Authority Board: Councilmember Tilley Suburban Transit Association: Councilmember Tilley School District #191: Councilmember Fields and Councilmember Tilley School District #196: Councilmember Fields and Councilmember Tilley School District #197: Councilmember Fields and Councilmember Tilley Municipal Legislative Commission: Mayor Geagan Cedar Corridor Committee: Councilmember Maguire Councilmember Maguire was appointed in May, 2005 to serve on the Cedar Corridor Committee and it was presumed that the appointment would be for the duration of the committee's charge, which should be completed within the next 12-18 months. City Administrator Hedges was appointed as alternate. Historically, appointments to representative positions have been made by Council consensus. REQUESTED ACTION: The Council to appoint members of Council standing committees; and for the Council to volunteer as representatives to the above referenced groups. /06 1. Advisory Commissions Liaison Assignments: (as assigned in 2005) APrC - Councilmember Carlson ARC - Councilmember Fields APC - Councilmember Maguire BETC - Councilmember Tilley REQUESTED ACTION: Mayor Geagan to appoint above representatives as Advisory Commission Liaisons. 2. Holz Farm - Special appointment to the long range planning core committee. REQUESTED ACTION: Appoint representative to the Holz Farm Long Range Planning Core Committee. 3. MSP Noise Oversight Committee (NOC). This Committee was established in 2002 and is the successor organization of MASAC. City Councilmember Fields currently serves as the City Representative on the NOC with Assistant to the City Administrator Miller and Community Director Hohenstein serving as alternates. REQUESTED ACTION: Council to appoint a member of the City Council to serve as the City's representative on the NOC and reaffirm Assistant to the City Administrator Miller and Community Development Director Hohenstein as alternates. 4. ECVB Board of Directors. Section 7.2 of the joint agreement between the City of Eagan and the Eagan Convention and Visitors Bureau requires "three (3) representatives appointed by the City." Typically two of those three representatives have been members of the City Council, but that is not a requirement of the agreement. Most meetings are once a month at 3:30 or 4 p.m. In 2003 the three voting members of the ECVB board were: Councilmembers Carlson and Fields and City Administrator Hedges. Currently, Communications Director Garrison (through whom the Bureau must prepare its work plan and budget) serves in an ex-officio capacity, but that is not a requirement of the joint agreement. The 3 ECVB Board Directors chosen are completely the discretion of the City Council. REQUESTED ACTION: Appoint three City representatives to the Eagan Convention and Visitors Bureau Board of Directors. Ao 7 F. Disband Economic Development Commission The City Council took action at their Special City Council meeting January 10, 2006 to disband the Economic Development Commission. REQUESTED ACTION: Disband the Economic Development Commission. /O NEWSPAPERS men % WV% ISM 12190 County Road 11 Burnsville, MN 55337 952-894-1111 • FAX:952-846-2010 December 19, 2005 City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 To the Mayor and City Council members: Please accept the attached bid for legal newspaper status for the city of Eagan. We have a dedicated staff as well as the largest circulation to handle your legals in an efficient manner. We would like to offer you three options for placing your legals. The first option is to place your legals in The Dakota County Tribune. The Dakota County Tribune has been serving the residents of Dakota County for over 100 years. The second option is having the legals placed in the Thisweek Eagan Newspaper, a qualified legal newspaper, which offers the city the best vehicle for communicating with the residents of Eagan. By designating Thisweek Eagan as your legal newspaper, your legal notices will reach 13,201 homes in the city. Our most recent newspaper audit shows that over 84% of Eagan residents read Thisweek Newspapers regularly. We are also offering a lift rate from Thisweek Eagan into the Dakota County Tribune. We are confident by offering you choices of the Dakota County Tribune, Thisweek Newspapers, or both will better serve the residents of Eagan. We can accept your legal notices by e-mail (carol.haverland@ecm-inc.com) or at our Burnsville office by fax at 952-846-2010. We believe that our bid reflects our desire to serve Eagan as your legal newspaper. If you have any questions, please feel free to call. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Eric Olson Carol Haverland General Manager Legal Department Enc. /9f NEWSPAPERS Quotation Form Newspaper Dakota County Tribune City Eagan Number of lines per column inch 10 Printed characters and spaces per line Average 45 Total characters and spaces per column inch Average 450 Per line cost 901 Per column inch cost $9.00 Circulation 1 162 Legal notice deadline Tuesdays @ noon Newspaper THISWEEK EAGAN Number of lines per column inch 10 Printed characters and spaces per line Average 45 Total characters and spaces per column inch Average 450 Per line cost 90¢ Per column inch cost $9.00 Circulation 12,526 Legal notice deadline Wednesdays 9 4 p.m. Newspaper THISWEEK EAGAN & DAKOTA COUNTY TRIBUNE Number of lines per column inch 10 Printed characters and spaces per line Average 45 Total characters and spaces per column inch Average 450 Per line cost $1.22 Per column inch cost $12.25 Circulation 13,688 Legal notice deadline DCT-Tuesdays @ noon/Eagan Thisweek-Wednesdays @ 4 p.m. Date 12/19/05 By PA ))I C-1jr Ild November 15, 2005 newspapers City of Eagan City Council 3930 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Dear City Council Members: The Eagan Sun-Current would like to be considered for designation as the legal newspaper for the City of Eagan for the year 2006. All published legal notices are posted on our website (www.mnsun.com) at no additional charge. This is an enhancement to the local news coverage already available on the Internet and will broaden the readership of your legal notices. One of the main benefits of publishing your legal notices with the Sun-Current is our FREE home delivery. Sun Newspapers has become the primary source of community news in the suburbs. Your notices in our paper have the best chance of being seen and read. Despite rising costs of operating our newspapers, there will be no rate increase during the calendar year 2006. Our legal prices will remain the same. The rate structure for legals effective January 1, 2006 will be: 1 column width: $6.39 per inch for first insertion / $3.38 per inch for subsequent insertions Our columns are 14 picas wide. There are 11 lines per inch Because price comparisons between newspapers are difficult due to differences in column width, font size, etc., we would be happy to provide a price quote on an e-mailed submission. Two notarized affidavits on each of your publications will be provided with no additional charge. The deadline for regular length notices is 2:00 p.m. the Thursday prior to publication. E-mailing the legal notices is an efficient and accurate way of getting the notices to us. The e-mail address for the legal department is legals@mnsun.com. We still accept notices on disk, faxed or through the mail. If you require more information to make your decision, please contact me or Mary Ann Carlson, our Legal Representative, at 952-392-6829. Thank you for considering the Sun-Current as the official newspaper for the City of Eagan in 2005. We appreciate the opportunity to serve the needs of your community. Sincerely, Jeffrey Coolman Vice President and Group Publisher 10917 VALLEY ViEw ROAD ® EDEN PxAMM ® MINNESOTA 55344 ® 952-829-0797 ® FAx: 952-941-3588 l// Certified Audit Newspaper Audit Report CAC MINNESOTA SUN PUBLICATIONS Wednesday of Circulations EDEN PRAIRIE WNNEPIN COUNTY) MINNESOTA TOTAL AVERAGE CIRCULATION FOR THE TWELVE-MONTH PERIOD ENDED JUNE 30, 2005 TYPE OF PUBLICATION: Community Newspaper CONTACT INFORMATION: FREQUENCY: Weeldy 10917 Valley View Road LOCATION: Eden Prairie, Minnesota Eden Prairie, Minnesota 55344 PUBLISHED BY: Minnesota Sun Publications Tel: (952) 392-6835 ESTABLISHED: 1912 Fax: (952) 941-3588 Jeff Coolman, Vice-President, General Manager Herb Hesse, Circulation Director Circulation Data Sun Sun Sun Sun Sun Sailor Current-; Current-D Post Focus Total % Total % Total % Total % 1A. Total Average Circulation, Distribution A. Paid 1) Home Delivery - - - - 2) Mail Subscriptions 1:1 0.2 67 0.1 100 0.2 187 0.2 - 3) Single Copy Sales 146 0.2 16 - 81 0.1 59 0.1 26 0.1 4) Employee Copies - - - - - 5) Newspaper in Education - - 6) Bulk - - - - - Paid Circulation 267 0.4 83 0.1 181 0.3 146 0.3 26 0.1 B. Other Paid 1) Home Delivery 1,663 2.7 425 0.5 2,301 3.4 1,558 3.1 12 - 2) Single Copy Sales - - - - - 3) Newspaper in Education - - - - - 4) Event Sales - - - - - 5) Bulk - - - - - Total Other Paid 1,663 2.7 425 0.5 2,301 3.4 1,558 3.1 12 - Total Paid 1,930 3.1 508 0.6 2,482 3.7 1,704 3.4 38 0.1 C. Unpaid Distribution 1) Home Delivery 55,641 89.4 83,691 99.0 58,811 86.6 44,851 90.0 48,938 90.3 2) Mal - - - - - 3) Residential Bulk 4,525 7.2 - 6,091 9.0 3,070 6.2 - 4) Non-Residential Bulk 165 0.3 318 0.4 536 0.7 215 0.4 5,244 9.6 5) Samples - - - - - Total Unpaid Distribrbm 60,331 96.9 84,009 99.4 65,438 96.3 48,136 96.6 $4,182 "A 0. Total Distribution 62,261 100.0 94,517 100.0 67,920 100.0 49,840 100.0 54,220 100.0 2006 SCHEDULE OF REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS JANUARY 3 MAY 2 SEPTEMBER 5 JANUARY 17 MAY 16 SEPTEMBER 19 FEBRUARY 7 JUNE 6 OCTOBER 3 FEBRUARY 21 JUNE 20 OCTOBER 17 MARCH 7 JULY 6* NOVEMBER 9*** MARCH 21 JULY 18 NOVEMBER 21 APRIL 4 AUGUST 3** DECEMBER 4**** APRIL 18 AUGUST 15 DECEMBER 19 * July 6 due to July 4th holiday August 3 rather than August 1 due to National Night Out November 9 rather than November 7 due to Election Day December 4 rather than December 5 due to Truth in Taxation There will be a Listening Session at 6:00 p.m. before each regular Council meeting. 113 2006 SCHEDULE OF SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS AND WORKSHOPS JANUARY 10 MAY 9 SEPTEMBER 11** JANUARY 24 (tentative) MAY 23 (tentative) SEPTEMBER 26 (tentative) FEBRUARY 13* JUNE 13 OCTOBER 10 FEBRUARY 28 (tentative) JUNE 27 (tentative) OCTOBER 24 (tentative) MARCH 14 JULY 11 NOVEMBER 14 MARCH 28 (tentative) JULY 25 (tentative) NOVEMBER 28 (tentative) APRIL 11 AUGUST 8 DECEMBER 11*** APRIL 25 (tentative) AUGUST 22 (tentative) * February 13 rather than February 14 due to request of a Council member September 11 rather than September 12 due to Primary Election December 11 rather than December 12 due to Truth in Taxation T AGENDA FORMAT 1. Call to Order 1. 1. Mayor customarily tolls City bell and returns to place at Council table 2. Pledge of Allegiance 2.1. Mayor states, "Please rise and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance" 2.2. Mayor leads in the Pledge 3. Roll Call 3.1. If appropriate, Mayor 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. 4. Adopt agenda* 4.1. Mayor states, "The Council will now consider adoption of the agenda." 4.1.1. If no Member or the City Administrator requests recognition for any change, Mayor prompts, "Is there a motion to adopt the agenda?" 4.2. Member requests recognition, "Mayor Geagan, (may I be recognized) for (the purpose of making) a motion?" 4.3 Mayor recognizes Member, "Member (has the floor)." 4.4 Member makes a motion, "Mayor Geagan, I make the following motion." 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)." 8. Consent Agenda* 8.1. Items can be pulled for separate action 9. Public Hearings (6:45 PM)* 10. Old Business* 11. New Business* 12. Legislative/Intergovernmental Affairs Update* 13. Economic Development Authority 14. Administrative Agenda** 15. Visitors to Be Heard 16. Closed Session 17. Adjournment* *Regular motion practice is observed. Eagan City Council-Procedure and Motion Practice on Business Items I. 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 Geagan 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. 1. "Mayor, (I request recognition) for (the purpose of making) a motion." B. Mayor recognizes Councilmember. I. "Member [member's last name), (for a motion)." C. Member makes motion. I. "Mayor ' , 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. IN. 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?" I . 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 VI. Mayor opens item to public foram 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 foram A. If no one else wishes to be beard, 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 Geaganfor a revision?" 2. Mayor recognizes speaker, "Member [last name), (for a revision)." 3. Member asks, "Mayor Geaganwo>~~ the Member accept the following modification to the motion?" 6 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 , I decline the modification." b) Accept "Mayor 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." 1X. 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. 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 - • , is the Member suggesting that...?" or "Mayor , would City Administrator Hodges please clarify what is meant by 3. Maker of motion may not speak against the motion, but the seconder may. 4. 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 (tc the motion) say no." XU. 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 M. /19 '00 ~ C .uG ~ r°~ ~PZdj C ~ o0~i •aa ari W 0 u C u ~~~~~YCCp~++ ~ G us y u ,b N fi~ O pJ p~W ~Uiy,~ ~ C ~ y r] O~ ~ V ° v °.v o u ha u R. Ed ~it, o w Z fi' u O+ y 0 V 'A u 6l q q y a u u u ~ C- .0 15" Ou iuu+ q Q ,y O b0 ti O u U N ° A ~O U JU O O W d ~ ~ ~'u~j •gO as 'V Id 4~ = u en w .v Z o~ ° oo ~ u o u U U a v o > o o 3 y a~ '4° ffi q u x a e W GCi a m w p 0, q ao J .y U a' x Aa ¢ H Gad x ° UO.c cab u 6ngi' od'Q y u _ c~aU~oz.~caa>~ w c4~o > ~s ~ouu O cd E v is V Q Cp ~ O q C m O ~5 y m = e C C C (aG uZ a m N C ~u ~ ~ m T m p O( C F ~jV 2 ~+0 U V V = m0 100 0 id V 00.000 G G~ V I-- V ~ V J 1b-0. 0 "1 V as -E ~ N .v q G m b rW-. Z U U u o `O a ~b~~pp++0!! ° ca o g -S !2 Q, t 83 p •o a a, a J O Q v cd O 4j O Cp O v lu U u q O a b t'+ 7` O. U, u A u u v U a~ F, 3 u ea E G ~''°u. a o0 I 0 lu -ct ca o o v°i `u' o u o u t c v 00 N. Q y a `xui a~i '0 F. q o u .G u E O 'O y 5 A, u O ch p W w u 0 v N a> OC aCgi > '1 F z F ~ U 'q C j vu, b . ~ is o mac, n ~ ~ i3 a 'n A a imp p Q U O Foo 'N ld O U F 4+ N V V V. n Yj U z 8 12 -S E U~ 'OW 4P 2'Qy p x o.S~jCg u ewe T.~~,44~5 W a b ' 1 .5 b O J u q 'N N ~d ;S = u u 0. u v u o ,a H? V w q q Y u U. I .5 e~~d 0 A U •o = a- a s v o 3 "0 u 4 b o ° CA ° e«°o o ° a~i ai ai g ai .5 b 00 0 3 r' ° u o' u ° N ai C° Q ~ C CCL N N •F„' ~ ~ G ~W ~ al 4.L O ti oy QQ~ V Fo U H C. U y ¢ v ° V O V t0 V U U y V V ,UG O eu O U O ~C r 43, r o en „ C7 o E° OO a q c p C% (Z-0 Z° e 3 u 8 ~i •v eci go! I •5 .15 __d p5 .'O+ y LL ~ •r~' ~ u" ~ ~ 'U-' ~ OD ~ O b ~ U •U Q y •V t~ V .y. ~'WO ~.~7f" W c~C ~eO J u N a '2. v cn° r, v kn ~d as _ m o A C fi fi Ot h O b CU 00 'O pvp ~j ,p y m p~ BLS a N p ad • a 7G ` w m a~ 0.a v"i e0 V O ~Up> U.°CgU 0 ^fi fi.z - ZO C O y y it a .C 3. h q -s g go ri W O .rte u ° v~ . z o Q aui O w cpi a b y W d O u m Z fi ll y o~ V a r. ai C a w O° ypj U G H eC ° O O O a C •fi f` a W 'U w m Cd D, « U eo Co a to v F u r, N b H ~ V y V h O ¢ O O "+S N ca ad: Q :a u O a°i o c U ti c d tL y'' c c c ca 'a- z Q eo o tia wo m U eo o O oo eo o ° C4 Az O o c o F'i ~'e ► a a o g o 2 o z S a a u w 3& + m a a, o y 4. r- Q 'r3 'v v 00 y V O •U bD C A 'C v 'O y V O V O •O 7 .8 v, a. a ° T y ? u LL, 41 Z-i U u u a°°o o~° 0 8 G E a ° V u ° L, M 'U H h q l0 w w U ~~p+ 4W 4.) 41 4.), Q Q Ua v O U fp3. v W 8 m°° R ai a~i = p a Oca0 'U G. Cq U ~EO bNp a C 'C U y 5 O .cJ L V i Oz N v O ;3 p 4i" 43 •O ° H 3 0 0 o c 3. a o u °c o a 4) dj en 8 (D to O A 41 C-) AM ll~ W N Lti. m Ei' H vVi « •p •F u u p N a 72 p E^v as Q (V m V vi ~L t~ o0 Q y LL~ ~E-+ p C p.p. 34 4-1 m T m U u b° 'S U a "12 4) LL eo ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ end ~ .v a~i u ems""., m ^Y U yy w Q ° U u P L a p yam, a a~i a~i a s ~i w a~ p api p R. E~ O E~ .r~ t v a Agenda Information Memo January 17, 2006 Eagan City Council VIII. NEW BUSINESS A. COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN AMENDMENT - WENSMANN HOMES ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To direct that a Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from P, Park and Recreational Open Space to SA, Special Area, upon approximately 120 acres located south of Yankee Doodle Road and west of Wescott Woodlands in the west be submitted to the Metropolitan Council for review and approval. To approve the Special Area Plan and Conceptual Site Plan to serve as the narrative and land use exhibit for submittal of the Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment to the Metropolitan Council. REQUIRED VOTE FOR APPROVAL: At least four votes FACTS: • In August 2004, the City denied a request by Wensmann Homes to change the land use from P to LD. • Pursuant to a lawsuit, the City reached a Contingent Settlement Agreement with Wensmann and the property owner in November 2005 regarding a revised petition for an amendment to the City's Comprehensive Guide Plan. • The golf course was not operated or open in 2005. • The applicant is requesting a change in the land use designation from P to SA on the 120-acre site. • The Special Area Land Use Guide Plan Designation allows for the creation of a small area plan identifying a specific future land use plan and corresponding policies for transitioning between existing and proposed future uses within the Special Area. • A Concept Site Plan has been submitted with this application showing a variety of housing types with a total unit count not exceeding 480, a density of not more than 4.0 units per acre, a 30-acre 9-hole executive golf course, and an additional -5 acres of open space. • The Concept Site Plan includes a mix of housing types including single-family detached; twinhomes, rowhomes and townhomes; and multiple family senior and condominium units. The acreage breakdown is 58 acres of single- and two-family dwellings; 22 acres of townhomes and rowhomes; 10 acres of multifamily and condominium; and approximately 35 acres golf and open space • The site is located within Airport Policy Noise Zone 4. The Met Council has recently adopted new land use compatibility guidelines, which incorporate the 2007 Noise Policy Contours, that will be used in their review of this proposal. • Based on the Concept Site Plan and unit count submitted, an EAW will be required before a rezoning or subdivision could occur. /.),o • Based on the Concept Site Plan, an estimated 3,200 daily trips would be generated with the development of this site, with a vast majority of the traffic directed to and from the north and west via Yankee Doodle Road and Lexington Avenue. • To provide an adequate neighborhood collector traffic system for Section 14 (between Lexington and Elrene, and from Wescott to Yankee Doodle) both an east-west and a north- south collector street were anticipated. • The Concept Site Plan indicates trails and sidewalks adjacent to the higher-volume streets to provide pedestrian access throughout the site. • The property can be adequately served by trunk water main and trunk sanitary sewer. • 34% of the City's total land area is guided LD, and approximately 82% of the city's residential land is guided LD. • The City of Eagan currently exceeds the Metropolitan Council's benchmark range for attached and multi-family units. • The site is served by Glacier Hills and Woodland Elementary Schools, Dakota Hills Middle School, and Eagan High School. • The school district has indicated that projected enrollment from this proposed development can be accommodated. • The proposed Concept Site Plan includes conservation easements over the approximately 30 acres of land which includes the proposed 9-hole golf course. • This site would be served by existing park facilities at Mueller Farm Park and Woodlands Elementary School. • Additional public or private open space in addition to the golf course may be appropriate within the new development to accommodate recreational activities and/or facilities for a broader range of ages and services needed for all new potential residents. • The APC held a public hearing on the proposed Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment on December 27, 2005 and recommended approval with a 4-3 vote. • A recent Minnesota Supreme Court case involving a golf course in Mendota Heights is currently being reviewed by legal counsel for the City of Eagan for what impacts that case may have on the Wensmann/Carriage Hills case in Eagan. ISSUES: • Issues related to the merits of the proposal, public input in their regard and the Commission member comments related to the APC action are outlined in the Commission minutes. ATTACHMENTS (3): December 27, 2005, APC Minutes, pages/,2U through 1, Staff Report and exhibits, pages 4" through Additional Correspondence not included in APC packet, pages/througbC / /C~ ~ City of Eagan Advisory Planning Commission Meeting Minutes December 27, 2005 Page 7 D. Carriage Hills Applicant Name: Wensmann Homes Location: 3535 Wescott Woodlands; Carriage Hills Application: Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment A Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from Park (P) to Special Area (SA). File Number: 14-CG-05-11-05 Chair Heyl introduced the item and explained the process and timing of the application consideration, that the December 27 APC meeting was scheduled in January 2005, and that once a complete application is submitted, the City has, without fail, scheduled items for Public Hearing/consideration at the next available meeting. She stated that the three previous items considered by the APC illustrate that there is a defined schedule and it is maintained. Planner Dudziak introduced this item and highlighted the information presented in the City Staff report dated December 21, 2005. She noted the background and history. Applicant Terry Wensmann provided a PowerPoint presentation to the Planning Commission and audience. Subsequent to this presentation,` Chair Heyl asked why there was less green space with this proposal than the one that the Planning Commission saw 18 months ago. Mr. Wensmann responded that the difference in green space is approximately 5 acres and that had to do with the inclusion of the 9-hole executive golf course. Before opening the Public Hearing, Chair Heyl acknowledged all of the emails and correspondence received by the City regarding this application and stated that it would be helpful for audience members to give specific reasons why a decision by the Planning Commission on the Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment should not be made tonight and/or specific reasons as to why the proposed Guide Plan Amendment is not appropriate. Chair Heyl then opened the Public Hearing. Mike Haugen, 946 Wild Rose Court and spokesperson for Carriage Hills Coalition narrated a PowerPoint presentation. He spoke of the need to maintain green space, environmental issues, wildlife that would be affected by development of the Carriage Hills property, the importance of the Comprehensive Plan calling for the space to be parks/open space, and detrimental impact tree loss, etc. Sharon Ysebaert, 915 Wild Rose Court, questioned why a Special Area was appropriate in this instance. She stated that a 9-hole executive golf course run by an HOA would be a recipe for failure and added that the development, if it moves forward, should have more buffer around the perimeter of the site. She referenced traffic and density as issues with the conceptual site plan. She also questioned what would happen to the golf course if it fails and why the proposal has only 30 acres of green space with the same number of units when the previous proposal had 40-45 acres of green space. Attorney Tom Casey, representing the Carriage Hills Coalition, stated that his clients should have more time to fully review information in the staff report and applicant /00,10 City of Eagan Advisory Planning Commission Meeting Minutes December 27, 2005 Page 8 submittal. That additional time would allow the Coalition to hire experts on traffic and environment, etc. He requested that the item be tabled. Dan Bailey, 3662 Cardinal Way, questioned life cycle housing, whether or not it would be owner-occupied, and if the 30-acre golf course calculation included drainage areas they would need for the development anyway. He also spoke about the final plat, questioned what costs would be to the public for public streets, utility extensions and reduced right- of-way, if there will be variances necessary to develop the property, if a sidewalk/walking path is included, questioned the estimated green fee for the executive 9-hole course, and asked if the conceptual site plan would be a reality or could the numbers change? Dan Nichols, 922 Wild Rose Court, asked what alternative uses were considered and suggested possibly a school because he had a recent discussion with a private school headmaster looking for land to expand. He thought the"site would be perfect for that use and stated that egress, not ingress, is the issue in the area relative to traffic, especially morning conditions at Wescott Woodlands and Yankee Doodle. Cristina Stutler, 938 Wild Rose Court, stated that Mr. Rahn claims the golf course is not viable, yet why does Eagan utilize Mendota Heights for youth golf? She does not believe the owner actively tried to market this golf course to make it a successful business. She cited traffic as a concern for development and asked whether or not there would be sidewalks for kids to get to the school bus stop at Wescott Woodlands and Yankee Doodle Road. Rick Vandurram, 937 Wild Rose Court, stated concern about traffic lights actually resulting in a more dangerous situation and wanted the Planning Commission to be aware that we are at the cusp of a housing bubble. He also asked who would be responsible if the project were not completed. Michelle Harrington, 3572 #101 Blue Jay Way, on behalf of the Lexington Place Condominium Association, inquired about the way density is calculated. She asked if the golf course is not viable, why add a golf course to the end picture for the development of the site? She also claimed that there are issues with water drainage on her townhouse association property from the golf course and finally asked why the City Council is afraid to fight for the rights of the citizens. Bob Acton, 3490 Wolfberry Court, spoke about drainage and that the school that would serve this site is Glacier Hills which is listed as a segregated school due to the percentage breakdown of minority/non-minority population and the proposed development by Wensmann would perpetuate that segregation which would not be a flower in Eagan's cap. Jill Nichols, 922 Wild Rose Court, stated concern for the loss of green space. Tony Vinge, 3544 Westcott Woodlands, stated the City should consider raising taxes in order to purchase the golf course. /62_3 City of Eagan Advisory Planning Commission Meeting Minutes December 27, 2005 Page 9 Bruce Ness, 3614 Wescott Hills Drive, stated his concern with traffic and a connection of the development with Wescott Hills Drive. Tom Rybak, 3707 Greensboro Drive, stated that not having a south access does not make sense and he questioned Mr. Wensmann's earlier comments on working with all the cities they develop in. He questioned how bringing a lawsuit against the City can count as working with the City. He further stated that there have been three proposals in the past 10 years for the Carriage Hills property and that nothing has significantly changed. Peter Demos, 3507 Thornwood Court, stated concern that the City is bailing out a failed business and that should not be the role of City government. Tom Jensen, 1123 Tiffany Drive, stated the question is whether to take land out of recreational use and change it to development and-that- it is the job of the Advisory Planning Commission to find alternatives for the property. Darryl Isebrand, complimented the APC for its volunteerism and for doing the job they do. He appreciated the effort they put in and stated that he has learned a lot from the discussion tonight and does not have an opinion on the proposed Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment. There being no further public comment, Chair Heyl closed the public hearing and turned the discussion back to the Commission. City Engineer Russ Matthys explained that Duckwood Drive was built as a minor collector street with a range of 5,000 vehicles per day. He also explained that with improvements, Wescott Woodlands is also a minor collector street. He stated the estimated additional 3,000 vehicles per day with access would be reasonable. He stated the County will monitor the intersection of Wescott Woodlands and Yankee Doodle and determine if/when signalization is needed. He stated understanding for the need of sidewalks and explained that minor collection streets usually have sidewalks. He stated five acres will be considered for storm ponding. He explained assessments will not be necessary unless the fees were not collected at the time of purchase. He explained that signalization may increase the number of accidents; however the severity of the accident would be reduced and that a controlled intersection moves traffic much more efficiently. He stated drainage is a valid concern and is always addressed by City Staff. He stated he has not heard of any flooding south of Duckwood Drive. He discussed the Developers Agreement that insures completion of the project. Planner Dudziak stated density was calculated the same as all other developments and in the Comprehensive Plan, it is based on the gross site area. Garret Gill, Gill Design Inc. discussed comparable golf courses in the metropolitan area. He explained that an easement would be necessary on lots 1, 2, 51, and 52 to allow golfers to get from the green to the next tee box. He explained that the Homeowners Association would most likely hire a golf course management company rather than /a? ~ City of Eagan Advisory Planning Commission Meeting Minutes December 27, 2005 Page 10 managing it themselves. He stated he has designed viable courses such as the one proposed. Chair Heyl asked Mr. Wensmann to discuss the drainage and wetlands and asked if fewer lots and more green space had been considered. Member Bendt asked about the condition of the topsoil and if all units would be owner occupied. Mr. Wensmann discussed drainage and wetlands and stated the possibility of improvement. He stated it is possible to redesign the layout to assist in the flow of the golf course around lots 1, 2, 51, and 52. He stated the topsoil is adequate and all units will be owner occupied. Chair Heyl stated the proposal is substantially different--than the previous proposals in that it includes a golf course, which was requested at previous Public Hearings. She explained that the lawsuit was not won at the District Court and if the City loses at the Appeals Court, control of the property is lost.- She explained that the Planning Commission and the City Council have to determine what is best for the City of Eagan as a whole. Member Keeley inquired about the need for more schools in the future. City Planner Ridley explained that the City is not involved in the needs determination of schools; the School District determines its needs, acquires property and builds facilities. Member Bendt stated he supports the 9-hole executive golf course, believes an overall density of 0-4 units/acre is appropriate, and that the conceptual plan presented by Wensmann is a good one. Member Gladhill stated the City should not give up on a golf course because the current owner said it is not viable. He stated there should not be any homes on the property and alternative conforming options have not been fully explored. He stated objection to changing the Comprehensive Guide Plan. He also stated objection to the proposed plan due to the high density and increased traffic. He stated he sees the question before the Planning Commission as one of whether to change the property from no development open/recreation space into development and he has not heard a convincing reason to make that change. He stated a Special Area designation is not appropriate for this property therefore, he will vote against approval. Member Keeley stated agreement with Member Gladhill. She asked what would become of the property if the proposed golf course is not viable. She stated there is great value in open spaces. She stated she will not support the proposal and stated faith in the appeal process. Chair Heyl posed a general question as to what would be a better use of the property given the fact that 18 months ago the Planning Commission and City Council acknowledged that it would not be a golf course forever. ~p?Sr City of Eagan Advisory Planning Commission Meeting Minutes December 27, 2005 Page 11 Member Dugan inquired about the ramification if the Advisory Planning Commission denied the request. City Attorney Sharon Hills explained that the appeal is on hold pending the outcome of the application; therefore the recommendation of the Advisory Planning Commission will be forwarded to the City Council who will consider the APC action and all other information as they make their decision on January 17th. Commission Member Dugan stated that the City Council negotiated a settlement agreement for a purpose and is concerned what the alternative use of the site would be should the City not be successful in an appeal to the District Court action. Member Bendt stated that the City has had many opportunities to buy the course and has consistently chosen not to do so. He stated that he is concerned about losing local control of a land use decision to an appeals court. Chair Heyl Chair Heyl requested that the audience be respectful. In response to the Special Area questions, she stated that whilo~not all in agreement, the Planning Commission's decision and comments have been thoughtful and not a knee-jerk reaction. She stated that the conceptual plan before them might not be the greatest; in particular she would like to see an exit to the south and a slight redesign of the golf course, but that life-cycle housing is important. She believes that the development provides an appropriate buffer from existing neighbors and contrary to earlier statements, property values surrounding the property will not drop, in fact will likely increase due to the value and quality of the development She further stated that drainage and wetland issues will be worked out in the detail stage and that a compromise in this instance makes sense. She added that the concern with the previous proposal was to have a golf course here, not to have no houses and she reiterated the fact that the APC and City Council both previously acknowledged that the site would not be a golf course forever. Member Dugan stated that he was impressed and grateful for the neighborhood input. He said he would support the Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment for the following reasons: 1) The City Council has made a decision to enter into a settlement agreement because they have determined it is the best course of action for the City and he believes 2) he presumes. the Council is using common sense and good stewardship in making that determination; and 3) The long term use of the property will not be as a golf course. Given all that, the proposal before the Planning Commission is not a bad plan and he will support the amendment. Member Matthees asked if the City will have involvement in the planning if the appeal is lost. City Attorney Sharon Hills stated the District Court ordered the Land Use designation and Zoning be changed. Therefore, and if the appeal proceeds and the City loses at the Appeals Court, the District Court's order stands and the City would need to change the land use designation of the property to LD and the zoning changed accordingly to accommodate the 2004 proposal. City of Eagan Advisory Planning Commission Meeting Minutes December 27, 2005 Page 12 Member Gladhill stated given the available information, the LD designation that would result from loss of the appeal is no worse than the proposed Special Area designation. Member Chavez questioned if proposed Special Area 8 was prepared by staff and were the conclusions and policies also prepared by staff? Planner Dudziak responded "yes" to both questions. He further stated that as an attorney, he is aware that, statistically speaking, appeals are generally lost and that a settlement is a strategic move by the City Council, on behalf of the City, to maintain control of the outcome. His concern is that if the City loses the appeal (which is likely), there will be no compromise and no opportunity for the City to affect the development of the site. He indicated that while he is not wild about the proposal, he will vote for it. Member Bendt moved, Member Dugan seconded a motion to recommend approval of a Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from P, Park and Recreational Open Space to SA, Special Area, upon approximately 120 acres located south of Yankee Doodle Road and west of Wescott Woodlands in the west Y2 of Section 14. Chair Heyl stated the City Council needs to review the design in regard to the golfers crossing the street to continue the course. Aye: Chair Heyl, Members Bendt, Dugan, and Chavez Nay: Members Keeley, Gladhill, and Matthees Motion carried 4-3. Member Bendt moved, Member Dugan seconded a motion to recommend approval of a Special Area Plan and Conceptual Site Plan to serve as the narrative and land use exhibit to the Comprehensive Guide Plan for the approximately 120 acres located south of Yankee Doodle Road and west of Wescott Woodlands in the west half of Section 14. With the following additional policies added: 7. A south exit should be provided to Wescott Hills Drive 8. The development should provide for more green space and golf course space 9. The development should have fewer lots and fewer units 10. Park dedication needs should be met and recreation features should be added to the overall development, if needed 11. Grading, landscaping, wetlands and runoff issues need to be addressed with subdivision 12. The development should include fewer variances Member Chavez identified a typographical error in the Draft Special Area #8 Plan on policies 4 and 6 change references to "study area" to "Special Area Property." Aye: Chair Heyl, Members Bendt, Dugan, and Chavez /0? City of Eagan Advisory Planning Commission Meeting Minutes December 27, 2005 Page 13 Nay: Members Keeley, Gladhill, and Matthees Motion carried 4-3. lo2 c?/ PLANNING REPORT CITY OF EAGAN REPORT DATE: December 21, 2005 CASE: 14-CG-05-11-05 APPLICANT: Wensmaml Realty HEARING DATE: December 27, 2005 PROPERTY OWNER: Rahn Family LP APPLICATION DATE: November 30, 2005 REQUEST: Comprehensive Guide PREPARED BY: Pamela Dudziak Plan Amendment LOCATION: South of Yankee Doodle Road and west of Wescott Woodlands COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: P, Park ZONING: P, Park SUMMARY OF REQUEST Wensmann Realty is requesting a Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from P, Parks, Open Space and Recreation, to SA, Special Area, upon approximately 120 acres located south of Yankee Doodle Road and west of Wescott Woodlands in the west half of Section 14. AUTHORITY FOR REVIEW The city's Comprehensive Guide Plan was prepared pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.864. As defined by statute, the Land Use Plan is a guide and may be amended from time to time as conditions change. The city's Guide Plan is to be implemented by official controls such as zoning and other fiscal devices. The creation of land use districts and zoning is a formulation of public policy and a legislative act. As such, the classification of land uses must reasonably relate to promoting the public health, safety, morals and general welfare. When a change to a city's Comprehensive Guide Plan is requested, it is the city's responsibility to determine if the change is in the best long-range interests of the city. The standard of review of a city's action in approving or denying a Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment is whether there exists a rational basis. A rational basis standard has been described to mean having legally sufficient reasons supportable by the facts which promote the general health, safety and welfare of the city. Planning Report - Wensmann Realty (Carriage Hills) December 27, 2005 Page 2 BACKGROUND/HISTORY History - A proposal by Pulte Homes for a Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment to change the land use designation of this property from PF, Public Facilities, to D-II, Mixed Residential (0- 6 units/acre) was denied by the City in 1996. In May 2004, Wensmann Realty made application for a Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from P, Park, to LD, Low Density residential. The City Council denied that request in August 2004. The golf course was not operated or open in 2005. In November of 2005, the City reached a Contingent Settlement Agreement with Wensmann and the property owner regarding a revised petition for an amendment to the City's Comprehensive Guide Plan. Area Development - At the time the golf course was established in 1959, the surrounding area consisted of large rural parcels. Until 1979, the only platted subdivision in the area was Wescott Garden Lots which was east of the golf course and consisted of several 10-acre lots, some containing residences. In 1979, a residential subdivision was approved east of the golf course and south of Yankee Doodle Road. Between 1980 and 1985, the multi-family developments of Carriage Hills Condominiums and Lexington Place Condominiums, which lie west of the golf course, were developed. Between 1985 and 1987, the remaining area lying west of the golf course and the Greensboro subdivisions (which lie south of the golf course) were developed. From 1988 to 1990, the Woodlands lying southeast and east of the golf course and the Sunrise and Suncrest Additions were developed. By 1990 nearly all of the surrounding land had been developed and these areas had become established neighborhoods. Since 1990, the area south of Yankee Doodle Road lying east of the golf course and west of Elrene Road has been developed and redeveloped into residential uses. Zoning - According to the former property owner, W.H. Smith, construction of the golf course began in 1959 after issuance of a building permit from Eagan Township, contingent upon a rezoning of the property from Agricultural to Public. The rezoning was accomplished in 1962 and the golf course opened in 1965 as a nine-hole course. Two years later, the course was expanded to its present 18 holes. Prior to May 1962, the City's zoning map shows the site as Agricultural. In 1962, the property owner, William Smith, requested a rezoning from A, Agricultural, to P, Public Facilities, for the purpose of constructing a golf course. At that time, the P district was the only zoning district that allowed for a golf course, which was a permitted use. The rezoning was approved. On zoning maps dated after 1962, the property has been zoned P. In 1962, the then Township of Eagan amended the Zoning Ordinance text to restrict golf courses and other similar uses in the P district to those which are not commercial profit-making enterprises. Since Carriage Hills Golf Course is privately owned and operated as a for-profit enterprise, it became a non-conforming use with that text amendment. In 1975, the city amended its Zoning Ordinance text to allow golf courses as a conditional use in the Agricultural and Residential districts, while continuing to allow golf courses as permitted uses in the P district with the restriction on for-profit enterprises. /2O Planning Report - Wensmann Realty (Carriage Hills) December 27, 2005 Page 3 In conjunction with the Comprehensive Guide Plan update, the zoning ordinance was amended in 2001 to establish a zoning district for parks and recreational open space (P, Park District) to correspond with the new land use designations of P (Parks, Open Space and Recreation) and PF (Public Facilities). The three golf courses in the city, as well as all the neighborhood and regional parks, received the Park District zoning designation in 2001 as part of a city-wide zoning map update to correspond to the amended zoning ordinance. The P zoning district allows golf courses as a permitted use with no restrictions on for-profit enterprises. Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan - The city's first comprehensive land use guide plan and map were prepared in 1974, after the golf course had been established on this site. That plan designated the property "Golf' and the map legend identified it as quasi-public and it remained so until 1991. In a comprehensive revision of the city's land use guide plan map in 1991, the City Council made a policy decision to change all schools, churches, parks, golf courses and other public or quasi-public properties to one of two designations, either P for Parks or PF for Public Facilities to correct errors from previous maps and for consistency. This resulted in the PF designation for Carriage Hills Golf Course Property. With the city-wide update of the Comprehensive Plan in 2001, the PF (Public Facilities) land use designation was eliminated and the properties holding that designation were given a designation of either P (Parks, Open Space and Recreation), or QP (Public/Quasi-Public). The three golf courses in the city, including Carriage Hills were designated P (Parks, Open Space and Recreation). EXISTING CONDITIONS The site consists of approximately 120 acres located in the eastern half of the NW '/4, and the northeast quarter of the SW of Section 14. The site is generally open with wooded areas, wetlands, and rolling topography. The site was previously cleared for golf course use and generally consists of maintained turf, although approximately 25% of the site contains mature woodlands, individual trees and/or wetlands. Buildings on property include the clubhouse, office, shed and maintenance facility. Access to the site is currently provided from the east off Wescott Hills Drive. Residential developments of varying densities surround the site to the west, south, and cast. To the west and to the east just south of Yankee Doodle Road are multiple family developments zoned R-4 and designated HD, High Density and MD, Medium Density. To the southwest, south and east are single family developments with zonings of PD, Planned Development, and R-1, single family residential, and a land use designation of LD, Low Density. To the north across Yankee Doodle Road is Faithful Shepherd school, zoned BP, Business Park. SURROUNDING USES The following existing uses, zoning, and comprehensive guide plan designations surround the subject property: Planning Report - Wensmann Realty (Carriage Hills) December 27, 2005 Page 4 Existing Use Zoning Land Use Designation North School BP, Business Park BP, Business Park South Residential PD, Planned Development LD, Low Density residential East Residential; Mary R-1, Single Family LD, Low Density residential Mother of Mercy Residential; LB, Limited O/S, Office Service Shelter Business West Residential R-4, Residential Multiple; HD, High Density residential, PD, Planned Development LD, Low Density residential; EVALUATION OF REQUEST PROPOSAL Wensmann Homes is proposing a change in the land use designation of this 120-acre parcel from P, Park, to SA, Special Area. The SA land use designation is typically used in areas "where unique circumstances exist that can best be dealt with in a manner specific to the area." The Special Area land use designation allows for the creation of a small area plan- identifying a specific future land use plan and corresponding goals and policies for transitioning between existing and proposed future uses within the Special Area. The applicant's narrative states "The requested designation will not be inconsistent with the developments of varying densities that surround the site." The narrative also indicates that "upon approval, a PD zoning would subsequently be requested." Wensmann has submitted a Concept Site Plan illustrating anticipated development within the proposed Special Area designation. Pursuant to the terms of the Contingent Settlement Agreement, the Site Plan consists of a variety of housing types with a total not exceeding 480 dwelling units and a "9-hole executive Golf Course that surrounds the housing and common area association facilities." The 480 dwelling unit maximum has a gross site density of 4 units per acre. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Topography - The site is generally open with wooded areas and rolling.topography. In general, the north portion of the site slopes to the north, and the south half slopes to the south. Elevations range from 860 to 920 feet. Storm. Water Drainage - The northern portion of the site lies within the LeMay Lake drainage district, Drainage Basin D, and ultimately drains to the west. Four natural low areas within the site are designated as storm water basins in the City Storm Water Management Plan and could be modified for flood volume control for the development of this site. The Storm Water /.3 Planning Report - Wensmann Realty (Carriage Hills) December 27, 2005 Page 5 Management Plan also identifies the construction of outlet pipes with allowable storm water discharges for these basins, which would be a requirement of development of the site. Trees/Ve etg_ation - Much of the site was previously cleared for golf course use and is maintained turf. Approximately 25% of the site contains mature woodlands and/or individual trees. The most prevalent tree species are Bur Oak and Northern Red Oak, Northern Pin Oak and Aspen. Several other varied species make up the remaining trees on the site. The City's Tree Preservation Ordinance would apply to any development of this property. The ordinance emphasizes avoidance of tree removal and provides for mitigation of lost significant trees or woodlands above a certain threshold. Wetlands/Wildlife - The property contains nine separate natural wetland areas and a portin of another wetland area. The property contains wildlife habitat for whitetail deer, rabbits, raccoons, muskrats, minks, owls, song birds, waterfowl and a few species of fish. Any development of the site would be subject to the requirements of the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act, which emphasizes avoidance of drain, fill, and excavation impacts to wetlands, and requires replacement of wetlands where such impacts are determined to be unavoidable. Water Quality - LeMay Lake is one of the top-seven Class I direct contact recreation water bodies and O'Leary Lake is one of 15 Class II indirect contact recreation water bodies according to the Eagan Water Quality Management Plan (1990). Because of the large size of the parcel and intensive development that already exists in the watershed in which this site lies, treatment of storm water through the construction of on-site detention basins would likely be recommended for this site. Airport Noise - The City of Eagan considered airport noise as a factor in its Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan. The Metropolitan Council has adopted an Aviation Chapter in Metropolitan Development Guide, that anticipates the impacts from the continued operation of the airport at its current location. Historically, the City has attempted, where possible, to minimize land uses that would be in conflict with operations at MSP. The City's adopted Comprehensive Guide Plan currently designates the area as P, Parks, Open Space and Recreation. If the City determines that residential uses are appropriate on this site, regional policy provides guidance in gauging whether such uses can be compatible, provisionally or conditionally acceptable, or inconsistent. The site is located four miles southeast of the parallel runways at MSP, adjacent to primary arrival and departure flight tracks for those runways. Based on the Metropolitan Council Policy Contours adopted in 1996, the site is located within the one-mile buffer area of the 60 dB contour, placing it within Noise Policy Zone 4. The Met Council has recently adopted new land use compatibility guidelines, which incorporate the 2007 Noise Policy Contours, that will be used in their review of this proposal. Under the new guidelines it is anticipated that new residential uses with individual entrances will remain 133 Planning Report - Wensmann Realty (Carriage Hills) December 27, 2005 Page 6 conditional uses within the Buffer Zone. Development of new residential uses with shared entrances, such as typical apartments, are anticipated to be considered either provisional or compatible uses. Conditional residential uses must meet several land use review factors identified in the compatibility guidelines, which will be determined at the time of rezoning. Provisional residential uses must be acoustically constructed to achieve a 45 dBa interior sound level. Environmental Review - Any development of the subject site will be required to address the physical and environmental factors that could influence the development potential of the property. As depicted in the Concept Site Plan submitted by the applicant, the residential unit count exceeds the threshold set forth in state law, thereby triggering preparation of a mandatory Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW). Summary - Environmental Impacts - The site is generally open with wooded areas and rolling topography. The property is located mainly within the drainage district of O'Leary and LeMay Lake. The City's Storm Water Management Plan identifies several low areas within the site as storm water basins which could be modified for the development of this site. Construction of storm drainage outlet pipes would be a requirement of development of this site. Any development of this site would be subject to the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance and the requirements of the Wetland Conservation Act. Treatment of storm water through the construction of on-site detention basins would likely be recommended for this site. The property is located within Airport Policy Noise Buffer Zone. Regional policy provides guidance in gauging whether residential uses can be provisionally or conditionally acceptable within the Buffer Zone. Based on the residential unit count proposed in the Concept Site Plan submitted by the applicant, an EAW will be required for development of this site. INFRASTRUCTURE IMPACTS Streets/ Access / Circulation - The property is primarily served by Yankee Doodle Road (County Rd 28) along the north edge of the site and Lexington Ave.(County Rd. 43) 1300 ft. to the West via the Duckwood Dr. collector street connection. The intersection of Duckwood Dr. and Lexington Ave. provides for full access with a traffic signal. The intersection of Wescott Woodlands/Columbia Drive and Yankee Doodle Road provides for full access with side street stop control. Dakota County's access spacing guidelines may provide for a limited right-in right- out access to Yankee Doodle Rd if it can meet the 1/8th mile spacing guideline. Local street and/or trail access is available to the site from several locations: • Duckwood Drive to the west, • Hunter Lane to the south, • Wescott Hills Drive to the southeast • Wescott Woodlands to the northeast, and, /3 Planning Report - Wensmann Realty (Carriage Hills) December 27, 2005 Page 7 • a City-owned lot near the southwest corner of Carriage Hills (Outlot B, Lexington Place South) connecting Cardinal Way with the Carriage Hills property. These existing potential street extensions/connections were planned with adjacent development to accommodate the possible development of the Carriage Hills property, and to provide inter- connection between neighborhoods as well as access to the local elementary school and neighborhood park. To provide an adequate neighborhood collector traffic system for Section 14 (Lexington to Elrene, Wescott to Yankee Doodle), both an east-west and a north-south collector street were anticipated. The east-west collector was planned to be the extension of Duckwood Drive from the west to connect with Wescott Hills Dr. on the east edge of the site. Existing Duckwood Drive was designed and constructed as a 44' wide collector street with a sidewalk on the north side and no driveway accesses or front yards. The north-south collector was originally planned to be the extension of Wescott Hills Drive near the southeast edge of the site to its connection with Yankee Doodle Road. While Wescott Hills Drive was originally intended to be a collector street, it was constructed as a typical residential street (i.e. direct driveway accesses, no sidewalks and houses fronting on the street). In 1998, the City Council did not approve the connection of the two street segments and renamed the north segment as the current "Wescott Woodlands". Based on the preliminary site plan submitted by the applicant with the mixture of housing types, an estimated 3,200 daily trips would be generated with the development of this site, with a vast majority of the traffic directed to and from the north and west via Yankee Doodle Road and Lexington Avenue. All of the inter-neighborhood street connections were planned to provide connectivity to Mueller Farm Park and Woodland Elementary School which service this development area, and provide multiple access points to disperse future trips and minimize impacts at any one location. The Concept Site Plan indicates trails and sidewalks adjacent to the higher-volume streets to provide pedestrian access throughout the site. Sanitary Sewer - Trunk sanitary sewer exists in Yankee Doodle Road to the north and in Wescott Road to the south. Lateral sanitary sewer has been stubbed to serve the site from Hunter Lane to the south, Wescott Hills Drive to the southeast and at the intersection of Wescott Woodlands and Yankee Doodle Road to the northeast. The City's Comprehensive Sewer Policy Plan (2000) shows the property can be served by three sanitary sewer sub districts, one to trunk sewer in Yankee Doodle Road and the other two flowing to the trunk sewer in Wescott Road. The excess capacities available in the trunk sanitary sewer within Wescott Road and Yankee Doodle Road, and their associated lateral sewer lines, have sufficient capacity to handle the average and peak flows from this site generated by the proposed mixed residential development /2s- Planning Report - Wensmann Realty (Carriage Hills) December 27, 2005 Page 8 and the surrounding existing development within the sub districts. Adequacy of the sewer depths, and sewer allocation to each of the trunk sewer lines, would need to be reviewed at the time of a specific development proposal. Sanitary sewer lift stations, at the developer's expense, may be required to adequately serve the property. Water Main - Adequate trunk water main to serve the possible land use change has been constructed through and surrounding the property. Summary - Infrastructure - Existing streets provide access to the site from all sides. However, direct access to the site is restricted directly from Yankee Doodle Road to right-in/ right-out movements, but is provided via the Wescott Woodlands intersection at Yankee Doodle Road. The developments surrounding the site are established, fully-developed neighborhoods. The development as shown on the preliminary site could generate additional traffic of over 3,000 trips per day, most of which would be directed to Yankee Doodle Road and Lexington Avenue via Wescott Woodlands and Duckwood Drive. Trunk sanitary sewer lines of sufficient capacity exist both north and south of the site to adequately serve residential development flow rates of this property. Water lines are available and could be extended to adequately service residential development on this property. COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE IMPACTS Residential Land Use Designations - In the City of Eagan, land designated for residential uses in the Comprehensive Guide Plan totals approximately 7,302 acres, or 34% of the total land area of the city. The residential land supply is categorized into three designations based on density: LD, Low Density (0-4 units per acre); MD, Medium Density (4-12 units per acre); and HD, High Density (12+ units per acre). These land use designations do not restrict the type of residential dwelling (i.e. single family, duplex, townhome, apartment, condominium) allowed within the district. Residential Land Supply - Approximately 82% of the city's residential land is in the LD, Low Density, land use category. This includes all of the single-family residential developments, as well as duplexes and twin homes and some of the townhome developments which have less than 4 units per acre density. The remaining 18% of residential land is in the MD, Medium Density (12.7%) and HD, High Density (5.3%) land use categories. Of the 938 acres of vacant and underutilized residential land (January 2005), 863 acres or 92% are designated LD. Under the proposed amendment, the 120-acre site would have a mixed use of several unit types that breaks down to generally 10 acres of HD, 22 acres of MD and 58 acres of LD. The remainder (-30 acres) is planned for a golf course use allowing the overall density not to exceed 4 units/acre. If the entire site is considered LD, this would increase the percentage of vacant and underutilized land to 983 acres or 93% of total. Planning Report - Wensmann Realty (Carriage Hills) December 27, 2005 Page 9 Housing Construction Trends - During the late 1970s and early 1980s, market conditions were favorable for the construction of apartments. As a result, the overwhelming majority of the city's apartments were developed during a six-year period of time and are of similar design and age. During the 1980s and early 1990s, much of the low density residential land in the city was developed in single family uses. In the early- to mid-1990s, townhome development dominated due to increased land costs, environmental considerations and market demand. Eagan continues to see an increase in the percentage of multifamily, attached housing unit development and it is expected that this trend will continue through 2030 as buildable land becomes scarce and development pressure continues to produce higher land costs. Also, redevelopment in Eagan is anticipated to produce an additional 1,000 multi-family, attached units within the Cedar Grove Redevelopment Area. Housing Goals and Policies - An update of Eagan's housing mix was completed in January 2005. The update shows that the City is maintaining an excellent mix of housing types and life cycle housing choices. As indicated in the City's 2000 Comprehensive Plan, the City achieved a strong diversity of housing types by 1998. At that time, 47% of Eagan's housing consisted of attached, multi-family units, where the metropolitan average and Metropolitan Council Livable Community goal for attached housing was around 38%. This proposal includes a variety of housing types proposed as follows: 19.5% single-family detached; 43% twinhomes, rowhomes and townhomes; and 37.5% multiple family senior and condominium units. Development Density and Housing Types in Surrounding Area - This neighborhood is one of three neighborhoods in the City of Eagan that have significant concentrations of non-single family detached housing and higher development densities. The other neighborhoods include Surrey Heights/Quarry Park neighborhood along Yankee Doodle west of I-35E and the Cedar Grove area. Development consists of apartments, townhomes and condominiums along Yankee Doodle Road and single family developments further to south. The developments to the west of the site have an overall density of about eight units per acre. To the east the overall density is about two units per acre. The proposed SA land use designation for this property would allow a mix of housing types not exceeding an overall gross density of 4 units/acre. The Concept Site Plan shows lower densities of single family dwellings on the southern portion of the site with medium density townhomes and rowhomes in the central part of the site and a senior apartment and condominium buildings on the northern portion of the site. The overall density based on the Concept Site Plan is 4.0 units per acre. Summary - Comprehensive Land Use Impacts The residential land supply is categorized into three designations based on density which do not restrict the type of residential dwelling allowed within the land use district. Approximately 82% of the city's residential land is in the LD, Low Density, land use category. Of the vacant and !J Planning Report - Wensmann Realty (Carriage Hills) December 27, 2005 Page 10 underutilized residential land, 92% is in the LD category. If the entire site is considered LD since the overall density is not more than 4 units/acre, this would increase the percentage of vacant and underutilized land to 983 acres or 93% of total. Since the late 1990s, the City's housing supply has been a consistent 53% single family detached, and 47% non-single family detached. The City of Eagan currently exceeds the Metropolitan Council's benchmark range of 35% to 38% for non-single family detached units. Surrounding developments to the west of the site have an overall density of about eight units per acre. To the east the overall density is about two units per acre. The Concept Site Plan shows a mix of single family units, twinhomes, townhomes, rowhomes, senior and condominium buildings, with an overall density not exceeding four units per acre. SCHOOL SYSTEM ISD #196 submitted a letter regarding capacity and enrollment. The letter is attached as an exhibit to this report. The site is served by Glacier Hills and Woodland Elementary Schools, Dakota Hills Middle School, and Eagan High School. The district indicates that students who reside within their attendance boundaries may be enrolled under any circumstance. Additionally, the district states "our projected enrollment figures combined with recent added classrooms at Eagan High School enable us to accommodate projected enrollment for this proposed development." PARKS AND RECREATION SYSTEM Parks Systems Plan - The City of Eagan adopted its first official Park System Plan in 1973. That Plan recognized, as have all subsequent plan updates, that the city's park and recreation system is a complex interweaving of natural and man-made resources provided to the city's residents through the combined efforts of many individuals and organizations, both public and private. The city's Park System Plans have consistently recognized Carriage Hills, a privately owned, open-to-the-public golf course, as a component of the community's parks and recreation system. The Special Area Concept Plan retains a nine hole golf course on a smaller amount of land than the previous course. The 30 acres of open space, occupied by the golf course in the proposed plan, would likely not be present in the absence of a Special Area Guide Plan Designation. The 1983 Park Plan acknowledged that Carriage Hills and other private golf courses satisfied a public recreational need. The 1994 Parks Plan distinguished commercial recreational facilities from public or quasi-public facilities and includes Carriage Hills Golf Course in the list of commercial recreational opportunities. Neighborhood Parks System - The property proposed to receive Special Area Guide Plan designation is located within park service area #14 which is projected to be served by Mueller Farm Park and the facilities at Woodlands Elementary School. Together, these facilities provide A 3 ~ Planning Report - Wensmann Realty (Carriage Hills) December 27, 2005 Page 11 ball diamonds, a hard court, soccer field, playground equipment, and an internal walking path with a trail connection to the east and west. An additional Park, Wescott Commons is located to the northeast of the subject property, south of Yankee Doodle Road. This park is intended to serve the needs of the area immediately surrounding it, and has limited capacity to accommodate significant additional use. In terms of size and population, park service area #14 falls into the upper /middle when compared with the other service districts. Should a new zoning designation be given to the property, an additional 1,000 to 1,200 residents may be added to the service district, as determined by the designation. Given the size of the Mueller Faun Park/ Woodland School facilities in terms of area, this additional influx could potentially be accommodated. However, the City may need to provide additional recreational activities and/or facilities to service the area for the new and existing residents. Given the potential for a significant influx of new residents, it may be appropriate to consider the inclusion of either a public or private open space as an element of the new development in addition to the golf course to accommodate the activities and/or facilities. Although the golf area would serve as open space and provides recreational benefit to those who pay to play golf, it may not serve the full range of ages and services needed for all of the potential new residents of the area. If additional park, recreation or open space needs are identified that would need to be addressed because of the development, the extent would be determined by several factors including location, size, intended use, existence of an association, access and density. In the absence of the Special Area Guide Plan Designation proposed by the Applicant that provides for approximately 30 acres of open space, the City could require the developer to make a cash park dedication, land dedication, a combination thereof, or recommend and approve the development of private amenities to meet the immediate needs of the new residents. Ill this instance, the proposed site plan includes incorporation of conservation easements over the land which includes the proposed 9-hole golf course. The details of the terms and conditions of the conservation easements and public amenities (community clubhouse) will need to be detennined during the Planned Development process. Summary - Parks and Recreation System - The City's park and recreation system is that of a public-private partnership in which the private sector has always been given the first option to provide desired recreational opportunities in the community. This site is projected to be served by Mueller Farm Park and the facilities at Woodlands Elementary School. Wescott Commons is located to the northeast of the subject property, but has limited capacity to accommodate significant additional use. Given the size of the Mueller Farm Park/ Woodland School facilities in terns of area, the additional influx of residents could potentially be accommodated, however, the inclusion of either a public or private open space in addition to the golf course as an element of any residential development of this site may be beneficial to accommodate additional activities and/or facilities, the details of which will be determined in the Planned Development process. /3~ Planning Report - Wensmann Realty (Carriage Hills) December 27, 2005 Page 12 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS In evaluating this proposal, the following items should be considered: General Considerations • Wensmann Homes is requesting a change in land use designation to SA, Special Area, for 120 acres of property currently used as a golf course located south of Yankee Doodle Road and east of Lexington Avenue. • The request is made pursuant to a Contingent Settlement Agreement reached in November 2005. • The golf course was established on this site in 1965, after the property had been rezoned in 1962 to P, Public, which permitted golf courses at that time. • When the City of Eagan prepared its first Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan in 1974, the Plan identified the use of this property as a golf course and it remained so in subsequent plans. In 1991, the city designated all golf courses, PF, Public Facilities and in 2001, the city eliminated the PF (Public Facilities) land use designation and the three golf courses in the city, including Carriage Hills were designated P (Parks, Open Space and Recreation). • The Special Area Land Use Guide Plan Designation allows for the creation of a small area plan identifying a specific future land use plan and corresponding goals and policies for transitioning between existing and proposed future uses within the Special Area. • The Concept Site Plan submitted by Wensmann Homes involves a mix of housing unit types, and a 30-acre 9-hole golf course. The total residential unit count is 480, with an overall density not to exceed 4 units/acre. Environmental Impacts • The property is located within two drainage basins ultimately draining to LeMay Lake and Fish Lake. • The City's Storm Water Management Plan identifies several low areas within the site as storm water basins which could be modified for the development of this site. Construction of storm drainage outlet pipes would be a requirement of development of this site. • Any development of this site would be subject to the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance and the requirements of the Wetland Conservation Act. Treatment of storm water through the construction of on-site detention basins would likely be recommended for this site. /yo Planning Report - Wensmann Realty (Carriage Hills) December 27, 2005 Page 13 • The property is located within the Airport Policy Noise Buffer Zone. Regional policy provides guidance in gauging whether residential uses can be provisionally or conditionally acceptable within the Buffer Zone. • Based on the unit count shown on the Concept Site Plan submitted by the applicant, a mandatory Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) will be required for development of this site. Infrastructure Impacts • Existing streets provide access to the site from all sides. However, access to the site directly from Yankee Doodle Road is restricted to right-in/ right-out movements. Full access is provided via the Wescott Woodlands intersection at Yankee Doodle Road and the signalized intersection of Duckwood Drive at Lexington Ave. • To provide an adequate neighborhood transportation system, both an east-west and a north- south collector street were anticipated. The east-west collector was planned to be an extension of Duckwood Drive to connect with the north-south collector of Wescott Woodlands and the extension of Wescott Hills Drive connecting Yankee Doodle Road to Wescott Rd. • Wescott Hills Drive southeast of the development was constructed as a typical residential street with direct driveway accesses and houses fronting on the street. In 1998, the City Council did not approve the connection of Wescott Hills Drive and Wescott Woodlands. • The development as shown on the Concept Site Plan submitted by the applicant could generate an additional 3,000 trips per day, most of which would be directed to Yankee Doodle Road and Lexington Avenue on the north and west side of the development. • Trails and sidewalks adjacent to higher-volume streets provide pedestrian access throughout the site. • Trunk sanitary sewer lines of sufficient capacity exist both north and south of the site to adequately serve residential development flow rates of this property. Water lines are available and could be extended to adequately service residential development on this property. Comprehensive Land Use Impacts • Approximately 34% of the total land area of the city is designated for residential use. The residential land supply is categorized into three designations based on density which do not restrict the type of residential dwelling allowed within the land use district. Plaiming Report - Wensmann Realty (Carriage Hills) December 27, 2005 Page 14 • Approximately 82% of the city's residential land is in the LD, Low Density, land use category. The remaining 18% of residential land is in the MD, Medium Density (12.7%) and HD, High Density (5.3%) land use categories. • The Metropolitan Council's target range for non-single family detached housing in Eagan is between 35% and 38% and the target range for single family detached housing is between 65% and 62%. • Since the late 1990s, the City's housing supply has been a consistent 53% single family detached, and 47% non-single family detached and the City of Eagan currently exceeds the benchmark range for non-single family detached units. • Surrounding developments to the west of the site have an overall density of about eight units per acre. To the east the overall density is about two units per acre. • The Concept Site Plan includes a mix of housing types including 20% single-family detached; 43% twinhomes, rowhomes and townhomes; and 38% multiple family senior and condominium units with an overall density not exceeding four units per acre. School System • The site is served by Glacier Hills and Woodland Elementary Schools, Dakota Hills Middle School, and Eagan High School. • Projected enrollment figures, along with recent added classrooms at Eagan High School, enable the school district to accommodate projected enrollment for this proposed development. Parks and Recreation System • Since 1973, a key principle, implicit in all the city's park planning has been that of a complex interweaving of natural and man-made resources provided to the City's residents through the combined efforts of many individuals and organizations, both public and private. • The City's Park System Plans have always acknowledged the need for golf courses as part of the overall recreation system, and have consistently recognized Carriage Hills, a privately owned, open-to-the-public golf course, as a component of the community's parks and recreation system. • This site is projected to be served by Mueller Farm Park and the facilities at Woodlands Elementary School. Wescott Commons is located to the northeast of the subject property, but is intended to serve the needs of the area immediately surrounding it and has limited capacity to accommodate significant additional use. Planning Report - Wensmaml Realty (Carriage Hills) December 27, 2005 Page 15 • Given the potential for a significant influx of new residents, the inclusion of either a public or private open space as an element of the new development in addition to the golf course may be appropriate to accommodate a broader range of ages and services needed for all new potential residents of the area. • The proposed Concept Site Plan includes conservation easements over the approximately 30 acres of land which includes the proposed 9-hole golf course. The details of the terms and conditions of the conservation easements and public amenities (community clubhouse) will need to be determined during the Planned Development process. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED To recommend approval of a Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from P, Park to SA, Special Area, upon approximately 120 acres located south of Yankee Doodle Road and west of Wescott Woodlands in the west. To recommend approval of a Special Area Plan and Conceptual Site Plan to serve as the narrative and land use exhibit to the Comprehensive Guide Plan for the approximately 120 acres located south of Yankee Doodle Road and west of Wescott Woodlands in the west half of Section 14. Eagan Boundary Right-of-way Para Location Map ~Park Area k Area ® Building Footprint q ° to 2) G75~ a plI ~ EE? o O Er 0 Cnil C3 , AA AD @A AID 1195 101 6 A ~3 ~ a'~ R- W o BQ' -10 D Subject i[ s°~ O p Site o o d vq d app-S-4. a Q~~~caat~ ~ o. ® d a• m ~ r~ $ p b ~ d 4 ie L7 O0♦] p a ® ® 6 m o m is © D 0 0 ® 8 a°~ 8 e a b' o a a° a ® q o ® as 0 o r p~.~~~4~ O d 0 ~ ® ® ~ ®y © '•O b d 4 ° ® Q ® ❑ 4 n 9 a ~ n 0 ~ C r""`... r o O 8 ® O. l3 p © 0 O S ~3 O D o® O ~ _ DA D D p Q 3, p C © ~ P~ O p D ~ O, p b p d p pO G Q ~ ® 9 0 ma a s O e P e ~ r 9 4 0 FF~ 4 Q f7 a E v a ~w o © D eat 1000 0 1000 2000 Feet Development/Developer. Carriage Hills/Wensmann Realty Application: Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment Case No.: 14CG-05-11-05 Map prepare sing ERS 1 I map data provided N n by Dakota ounty ice an 46-1 t as of April 2005. City Y Of Eap THIS MAP INTENDED REFERENCE USE ONLY W E J 666 The City of Eagan and Dakota County o guarantee the accuracy of this information and are S Community D-Wpm.nt D.part-t not responsible for errors or omissions. Current Zoning and Comprehensive Guide Plan Land Use Map Wensmann Realty (Carriage Hills) Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment Case No. 14-CG-05-11-05 GO. W. ND. 2. (YANKEE DOODLE RD.( Zoning Map R. R- 13M R-4 LB R- D Q P 0 o H 4 7 R-1 z Current Zoning: - ` R-4 P Subject Park Area D R-4 R-1 I P R-3 1 Goo 0 600 1200 Feet 71 r Go. NNY. Np. 2e (YRNKLE poopLE w.l Comprehensive Guide Plan DP D D F- Land Use Map HD DDS P i HD LD d Subject Current Land Use Designation: r HD Area C LD z °u P Se LD HD Park and Recreational Open Space ® LD D P Goo 0 600 1200 Feet I'' I I I I I I l~~ I ~e Pareel be.. m InfoynIn pfIIdjff by Geunty L. survey Department June 2003. N o Intelned b ity Stan. City of Eagan W E TH AP IS INTENDE REFERENCE USE ONLY Community Development Department The City of Eagan and Da do not guarantee the accuracy of this information. S G 97~ NV-ld AIIS 1d~]ONOO _ n n -45 n ~ - o Q n N m h N y ..4\ N N N - 1 ~ d C/ a ~ u1 a a N G N N N ( N u r O vsus ate, n ~ °u 0 N ~ Z Z 6 i N a n i 0i m o u xs qq 0 i m v ~ 0 77 L..] o QED _ 2 S, o ~o~~ ~ ~ oo<~am=9~ ~i L < I Q O y fY C h V i• _ <a ~T, W c ^N Y " oU 9.5 A~2~^7 W0 NxO]OJt 00 O n O O o ~o ~i $ ~°orc ~"~°n° a N w N ^ P ~ O 2 n+ P O E ~ at ~ _ Z c d O ~ N N n N n ~ O n ~ „ N ^ n i N n n " < < n N 7 " n 4 ° a V ? n ~ Y ~ ~ y )Q~ CEE M a k Wks o a m a a x as u ° "a9 ~fg I~u o ii a 3e~ ¢g~ ON tb~ F'o`b Sr e F; a.ui, a••un, ts, 2!3 Y i A-9i ~e ) ~ z CITY OF EAGAN COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN CARRIAGE HILLS (AREA 8) Special Area #6 (Carriage Hills) Draft 12-21-05 for APC 12-27-05 Revised 1-11-06 per APC recommendations for CC 1-17-06 /e-1 I Background: This Special Area consists of a 120-acre site located south of Yankee Doodle Road and west of Wescott Woodlands in the west half of Section 14 (the "Special Area Property"). A golf course was established on the Special Area Property in the early 1960s. Construction began in 1962 and it opened as a 9-hole course in 1965, expanding to its present 18-holes two years later. At that time, the surrounding area consisted of large rural parcels. Until 1979, the only platted subdivision in the area was Wescott Garden Lots which was east of the Special Area Property and consisted of several 10-acre lots, some containing residences. In 1980, development around the site began to increase and by 1990, nearly all of the surrounding land had been developed and the surrounding areas had become established neighborhoods. Since 1990, the area south of Yankee Doodle Road lying east of the Special Area Property and west of Elrene Road also has been developed and redeveloped into residential uses. The Special Area Property was rezoned from Agricultural to Public in 1962, at the request of the property owner, for the purpose of constructing a golf course. At that time, the P district was the only zoning district that allowed for a golf course, which was a permitted use. In 1962, a text amendment to the Zoning Ordinance restricting golf courses and other similar uses in the P district to those which are not commercial profit- making enterprises rendered the private for-profit golf course a non-conforming use. In conjunction with the Comprehensive Guide Plan update in 2001, the zoning ordinance was amended to establish a zoning district for parks and recreational open space (P, Park District) to correspond with the new land use designations of P (Parks, Open Space and Recreation) and PF (Public Facilities). The P zoning district allows golf courses as a permitted use with no restrictions on for-profit enterprises. In August 2004, the City Council denied a requested Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment to change the land use designation of this 120-acre area from Parks and Recreational Open Space, to LD, Low Density. In November of 2005, the City reached a Contingent Settlement Agreement with the applicant and the property owner which resulted in the submittal of a revised petition for an amendment to the City's Comprehensive Guide Plan. The revised petition proposes the creation of a Special Area land use designation and the inclusion of a Concept Site Plan as part of the establishment of the new land use designation. . As a Special Area, policies are adopted to guide the transition of the existing golf course use to a future mixed residential development. The intent is to allow a variety of residential development to occur within the parameters of an overall concept plan that also provides for preservation of open space as a 9-hole golf course within the Special Area Property. Special Area #8 (Carriage Hills) Draft 12-21-05 for APC 12-27-05 Revised 1-11-06 per APC recommendations for CC 1-17-06 1 Q' / ~4 2 General Area Description: Land Use The 120-acre site is generally open with wooded areas, wetlands, and rolling topography. The site was previously cleared for golf course use and generally consists of maintained turf, although approximately 25% of the site contains mature woodlands, individual trees and/or wetlands. Existing buildings within the Special Area Property include the clubhouse, office, shed and maintenance facility which are located in the central portion of the site. Access is currently provided from the east off Wescott Hills Drive and from the west at Duckwood Drive. Surrounding Development Residential developments of varying densities surround the Special Area Property to the west, south, and east. To the west and to the east just south of Yankee Doodle Road are multiple family developments zoned R-4 and designated HD, High Density and MD, Medium Density. To the southwest, south and east are single family developments with zonings of PD, Planned Development, and R-1, single family residential, and a land use designation of LD, Low Density. To the north across Yankee Doodle Road is Faithful Shepherd school, zoned BP, Business Park. Transportation The study area lies adjacent to a County Road and has access to several local streets. Direct access to Yankee Doodle Road is subject to-approval by Dakota County may be restricted to ensure safe circulation and traffic flow. A vast majority of the traffic generated by this development is anticipated to be directed to and from the north and west via Yankee Doodle Road and Lexington Avenue. With development of the site, both an east-west and a north-south collector street would need to be constructed. The east-west collector can be accomplished by an extension of Duckwood Drive through the site, and the north-south collector can be provided by extending Wescott Hills Drive to connect with Wescott Woodlands. Utilities The City's Comprehensive Sewer Policy Plan (2000) shows the Special Area Property can be served by three sanitary sewer sub districts, one to trunk sewer in Yankee Doodle Road and the other two flowing to the trunk sewer in Wescott Road. The adequacy of the sewer depths, and sewer allocation to each of the trunk sewer lines, would need to be reviewed in conjunction with a specific development proposal. Sanitary sewer lift stations, at the developer's expense, may be required to adequately serve the property. Special Area #8 (Carriage Hills) Draft 12-21-05 for APC 12-27-05 Revised 1-11-06 per APC recommendations for CC 1-17-06 /41 ~ 3 Adequate trunk water main to serve residential development within this area has been constructed through and surrounding the Special Area Property. Environmental The property is located within two drainage basins ultimately draining to LeMay Lake and Fish Lake. There are several storm water basins within the area which could be modified with development. These storm water management basins, coupled with the existing wetlands, appear to be able to accommodate the increased runoff that would be produced from development of this area. A detailed hydrology study will be done at the EAW (Environmental Assessment Worksheet) stage. The requirements of the State Wetland Conservation Act also apply and will be evaluated relative to a specific development proposal at the time of subdivision. Development would be subject to the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance at the time of subdivision. Preservation of significant trees and woodland areas is encouraged, however, where tree removal is necessary, relocation and replacement of trees to meet mitigation requirements is allowed. Airport Implications The Special Area Property lies approximately four miles southeast of the Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport and is within the Airport Noise Policy Buffer Zone based on the new land use compatibility guidelines adopted by the Metropolitan Council, which incorporate the 2007 Noise Policy Contours. Under the new guidelines it is anticipated that new residential uses with individual entrances will remain conditional uses within the Buffer Zone. Development of new residential uses with shared entrances, such as typical apartments, are anticipated to be considered either provisional or compatible uses. Conclusions: 1. The Special Area Property was developed in the 1960s as a golf course and was used as such until 2004. 2. The limited supply of developable land within the City dictate that planning efforts be directed toward development of the Special Area Property in a manner that will best serve the City. 3. The Special Area Property has significant natural features that would be beneficial for the City when dedicated as permanent open space for wildlife and aesthetics. 4. In consideration of uses that border the Special Area Property, an extension of residential uses in the area is considered appropriate. Special Area 98 (Carriage Hills) Draft 12-21-05 for APC 12-27-05 Revised 1-11-06 per APC recommendations for CC 1-17-06 /6 4 5. To ensure adequate neighborhood collector traffic system for Section 14 (Lexington to Elrene, Wescott to Yankee Doodle), a north-south and an east-west neighborhood collector plan are anticipated for the Special Area Property. 6. Due to the area's proximity to the airport and subsequent exposure to aircraft noise, new residential development within the area should be consistent with the land use compatibility guide lines adopted by the Metropolitan Council. Land Use Designations: Within the Special Area Property, portions have been designated for LD, Low Density (-48%), MD, Medium Density (-18%) and HD, High Density (-8%) residential development. Approximately 30 acres of the area are designated P, Parks and Recreational Open Space. The P land use area would generally encompass the 9-hole golf course that would wrap around and through the housing development. Zoning Designations: The anticipated ultimate zoning for the entire Special Area Property is PD, Planned Development Zoning. The PD zoning.district can accommodate the variety of housing types as well as the golf course open space throughout the area. The Concept Site Plan includes a mix of housing types that include 20% single-family detached units, 43% twwnhomes; rowhomes and townhomes; and 37% multiple family senior and condominium units with an overall density not exceeding 4 units per acre. The total area of the golf course is approximately 30 acres. The golf course will be included in the first phase of platting, developed as part of the first phase of development, and opened as soon as the turf is properly established. The Concept Site Plan attempts to utilize much of the existing foliage and/or provide a golf course view on the west side of the development. Along the east side of the development, golf course views will be retained along the majority of Westcott Woodlands. The twin homes in the southeast area of the Concept Site Plan incorporate additional setbacks as buffering to existing homes to the west. The golf course, common property and amenities within the Concept Site Plan necessitate the creation of a homeowners association to provide ownership and maintenance of the common property and amenities, especially the golf course. While the golf course will be privately owned, public play will be available for a fee. A conservation easement should be established over the land which includes the golf course, to preserve for the future the use of the encumbered property as a golf course. Should the golf course cease operating, it could not be developed as additional housing, but rather would revert to conservation easement/open space. Special Area #8 (Carriage Hills) Draft 12-21-05 for APC 12-27-05 Revised 1-11-06 per APC recommendations for CC 1-17-06 /s`/ 5 Policies: 1. The City ultimately expects the entire Special Area Property to develop with residential uses. 2. The City will support Planned Development zoning of the Special Area Property that is consistent with the Concept Site Plan, which provides a mix of Low Density, Medium Density and High Density residential uses and a 30-acre 9-hole golf course, not exceeding a total of 4 units per gross acre within the area. 3. The City will not support development that would result in piecemeal development of small tracts. Rather, the City supports a development of the Special Area Property through a master development plan. 4. In recognition of the study area's Special Area Pro-pert y location, the City will take full advantage of opportunities to present an attractive City image (via development quality, erection of City identification signage etc.). 5. To the extent possible, new development shall respond and strive to retain the natural features of the area including wetlands and mature vegetation. 6. New development within the study Special Area Property shall incorporate sound attenuating construction techniques as suggested by the Metropolitan Council. 7. A south exit should be provided to Wescott Hills Drive. 8. The development should provide for more green space and golf course space. 9. The development should have fewer lots and fewer units. 10. Park dedication needs should be met and recreation features should be added to the overall development, if needed. 11. Grading, landscaping, wetlands and runoff issues need to be addressed with subdivision. 12. The development should include fewer variances. Special Area #8 (Carriage Hills) Draft 12-21-05 for APC 12-27-05 Revised 1-11-06 per APC recommendations for CC 1-17-06 _`J I I YANKEE DOODLE RD I Zoning: _ P-Park f WILD ROSE C7 Land Use Plan: ~I - P-Park and Recreational Open Space ~ i I - DUCKWOOD DR fLF. 0 225 450 900 city of E818Il Feet Special Area No. 8-Carriage Hills Current Zoning/Land Use Pla nation Exhibit 3.7.8.a 7 -J ~ I I YANKEE DOODLE RD H19- -4 I i I , r-rr j - , I T tYtD - . ~ ~ T t ice,:., fp ~~I 3 r r' u WILD ROSE CT - P j 7, -J-7 I - DUCKWOOD DR kf 4 F1 - - i i - LD N-N + \ : L l I( 0 225 450 900 Clt] of EBjD Feet Special Area No. 8-Carriage Hill Land Use Plan-Generalized Exhibit 3.7.8.b J I I YANKEE DOODLE RD - - rr \ - i I WILD ROSE CT , I. _I I , I I DUCKWOOD DR - - i - I ' j 0 225 450 900 CRI Of Eva Feet Special Area No. 8-Carriage Hill Ultimate Zoning ~S~ Exhibit 3.7.8.c YANKEE DOODLE RD r, 4 - Jj 5 )~O J-- C a WILD ROSE CT ' u u O 4 J N ~ ` G Y. _ r\ u O N m C3 J ~ u~ o~ u E23 t cil ~ o u 0 444555 21 DUCKWOOD DR a QQQpp1~ DED zy dQdd~~b p ~ N Q J Q y w V a l7 + + d v rq1? P Q r m~ y J Ad N 0 U LJ Q cfj- p T 11 r1 0 225 450 900 City of Eagan Feet N Special Area No. 8-Carriage Hills Carriage Hills Concept Site Plan 10 Exhibit 3.7.8.d Exhibit "C" Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment Request Carriage Hills Golf Course from "P" Parks to "'Special Area" November 28, 2005 Owner: Rahn Family Partnership, LLP 3855 145th Street East Rosemount, MN 55068 651-437-4653 Developer: Wensmann Homes, Inc Mr. Terry Wensmann 1895 Plaza Drive, Suite 200 Eagan, MN 55122 Engineer: Pioneer Engineering Mr. Nick Polta 2422 Enterprise Drive Mendota Heights, MN Background: Wensmann Realty, Inc and the Rahn Family Partnership, LLP have been working to create a residential development plan for the former Carriage Hills Golf Course, that will be responsive to both neighborhood concerns and the larger City of Eagan concerns. In September 2004, the City of Eagan Planning Commission and City Council held public hearings for a previous Comprehensive Guide Plan application submitted by the Rahn Family, LLP and Wensmann Realty, Inc. It was the decision of both the Planning Commission and City Council to deny the application as submitted. Since that decision, Wensmann Realty, Inc. has been diligently working on re-designing its development plan in an attempt to meet the greater community wishes, to maintain a portion of the property as a golf course, and to preserve as much open space as possible. The enclosed Site Plans demonstrate that Wensmann Realty, Inc. has been able to attain the desired goals. REWOv H Comprehensive Land Use Designation Request Wensmann Realty, Inc ("Wensmann") is requesting an amendment to the current Comprehensive Guide Plan from the current Land Use Designation of "P" Park to a designation of "Special Area". Upon approval, a PD zoning would subsequently be requested. The requested designation will not be inconsistent with the developments of varying densities that surround the site. To the west and to the east just south of Yankee Doodle Road are multiple family developments zoned R-4 and designated HID, High Density and MD, Medium Density. To the southwest, south and east are single family developments with zonings of PD, Planned Development, and R-1, Single family residential and a land use designation of LD, Low Density. To the north across Yankee Doodle Road is Faithful Shepherd School, zoned BP Business Park. The following existing uses, zoning, and Comprehensive Guide Plan designations surround the subject property: Existing Use Zoning Land Use Designation North School BP, Business Park BP, Business Park South Residential PD, Planned LD, Low Density Residential Development East Residential; Mary R-l, Single Family LD, Low Density Residential; Mother of Mercy Residential, LB, 0/S, Office Service Shelter Limited Business West Residential R-4, Residential HID, High Density Multiple; PD, Planned Residential; LD, Low Density Development Residential; Plan Overview The development, as proposed herein and illustrated on the attached Site Plans, does not exceed the maximum requirement under the LD designation of 4 units/acre, or a maximum number of residential housing units of 480. The Life-cycle housing mix incorporated in the plan includes: 41 Single Family Homes (min 85' wide lot) *52 Single Family Homes (min 60' wide lot) *39 Luxury Twinhomes (three detached) *96 Row Townhomes *72 New Urban Townhomes *60 Senior Housing Units *I 20-condominium Units (four 30-unit buildings) 9 hole executive golf course Clubhouse/ Community Building * Owner occupied 2 The total area of the golf course is approximately 30 acres. The golf course will be included in the first phase final plat, developed as part of the first phase, and opened as soon as the turf is properly established. Neighborhood concerns were key elements included in the current Site Plan. Neighboring properties on the west side of the development will benefit by plan design that includes much of the existing foliage and/or golf course views. Homes along the East property line are separated by Westcott Woodlands. Golf course views will be retained along the majority of the road. The twin homes in the south-east area of the Site Plan have incorporated additional set-backs as buffering to the existing homes. During the preliminary plat and final plat stages, some variances may be requested and required as part of the PD. These include: Private streets 28' front to front or 30' back to back per plan, or Public streets with reduced right-of-way and bump out parking areas Reduced front yard setbacks for twin home lots to 15" due to Side load garage design Reduced front yard setbacks for Urban Row Town homes - Plan Design has no unit garage doors requiring street frontage A very exciting feature of the Site Plan is the 9-hole executive golf course that surrounds the housing and common area association facilities ("Golf Course"). Wensmann has engaged professionals to study the viability of and to design the Golf Course. Wensmann believes that the Golf Course will be a significant amenity for the housing planned on the subject property. In addition to the Golf Course, residents of the development will enjoy other recreational facilities, all under an association umbrella. The Golf Course will be professionally designed to reduce or minimize the risk of play damage to both the existing and proposed residential housing. The Golf Course will be privately owned by a master homeowners association. Public play will be available for a fee. The Site Plan includes incorporation of conservation easements over the land which includes the Golf Course, to preserve for the future the use of the encumbered property as a golf course. The details and conditions of the conservation easement will be determined during the PUD process, but Wensmann understands that the Golf Course will not be developed as future housing. In consideration for designing, constructing, and operating the Golf Course, park dedication fees in the form of additional land or cash in lieu of land will not be required at final plat stage or the phased platting of any outlots. The golf course will serve as a community recreational facility for the area. /5? / ~i Duckwood Drive will be extended to Westcott Woodlands and is designed as a public collector street 44' in width with no driveways to access of housing fronting the street. Right-of-way will be dedicated to the south for future connection of Westcott Woodslands, however the proposal does not anticipate construction of this connection, just the availability for the future.' Previous Community Issues Addressed Traffic Traffic issues regarding the intersection of Westcott Woodlands and Yankee Doodle were addressed previously, This plan may help alleviate congestion at the intersection by increasing daily traffic counts to warrant a light at the interchange. The complete report performed in 2004 by RLK-Kuusisto, Inc. has not significantly changed with the new design. Schools Concerns that the Eagan School District did not have the capacity to accept enrollment of new students from this development were previously addressed. The table below demonstrates that the district does have the capacity. School Capacity Actual Projected 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Glacier Hills Elementary 615 487 455 437 416 375 377 Woodland Elementary 660 626 556 489 436 384 334 Dakota Hills Middle 1255 1345 1369 1384 1354 1292 1188 Eastview High School 1965 2097 2006 1937 1845 1745 1740 Eagan High School 2215 2180 2202 2277 2272 2219 2252 The golf course is in Independent School District 196 (ISD196). Specifically within the following schools service areas: Glacier Hills Elementary School, Woodland Elementary School, Dakota Hills Middle School, and Eagan High School. ISD 196 has provided the 2005 - 2008 Projected Enrollment for these Schools. Water Runoff Concerns The Lexington Place Condominiums(north of Duckwood between Lexington Avenue and the golf course) have had problems with drainage since the buildings were occupied Many of the surrounding neighborhoods are utilizing wetlands as stormwater treatment basins. This was ' Development of the Property, the improvements and housing proposed are subject to the City's design review and approval and any modifications to the approved design must be approved by the City Council, pursuant to City regulations. 4 4 /d accepted practice when those neighborhoods were constructed. With the implementation of the 1991 Wetland Conservation Act (WCA) and the Clean Water Acts, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) this is no longer the case. This legislation was enacted to preserve, protect and enhance existing wetlands and stormwater discharges. This project will need to adhere to a series of best management practices and strict regulations that encompass these acts. This includes the construction of stormwater management basins to pretreat stormwater before discharge into any wetland or offsite. A preliminary analysis indicated that approximately 53 acres will be set aside for stormwater management basins. These basins if designed correctly often times mirror the functions and aesthetics of wetlands. As an example Wetland H on the golf course was created in 1999 with the reconstruction of Wescott Woodlands and is now considered a Type 3 - inland shallow marsh. These stormwater management basins coupled with the existing wetlands serve the purpose of mitigating the increased runoff produced from the development of impervious areas. The City's Stormwater Management Plan regulates flow rates off of the site to existing conditions. This ensures no flooding downstream of the golf course. This plan has also anticipated the storage volume required for the site. As such it is deemed feasible to meet the stormwater requirements of the site. A detailed hydrology study will be done if the site moves to the EAW stage. The storm sewer/wetland construction will be designed to the standards and require the permits of the following. • City of Eagan Public Works Design Manual and Specification • Standard Utilities Specifications, City Engineers Association of Minnesota • NPDES Permit, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) • WCA Permit, City of Eagan • Protecting Water Quality in Urban Areas - Best Management Practices, MPCA (1983). These problems have included; excessive surface water collection in and around walk areas; excessive surface water in garages, entryways, and residences; and displacement of porches and patios by frost action. In 1994 the Association hired Project Engineering and Management, Inc. (PEM) to determine the cause of the problems. Their evaluation lead to the following conclusions: Based on the results of visual inspection, soil borings, and engineering surveys, the principal cause of the water problems experienced at the Lexington Place Condominiums appears to be the result of poor planning of local drainage during the original construction of the complex. Poor drainage planning includes: • improper grading at terrain surrounding the condominiums and garages; • improper grading at drive ways to provide for proper flow of rainfall and/or melt off • proper backfill material was not used around the foundations and under porches and/or patios; and • buildings are not equipped with sufficient gutters to carry rainfall away from building. The combined effect of these factors has contributed to the water problems being experienced at the Lexington Place Condominiums Complex. tt 5 I~ Since that time the Association has instituted the recommendations in PEM's report. These included regarding drainageways; installing draintile; removal and replacement of structures placed on new competent soils. There appears to be no direct contribution from the Golf Course to the problems that the Lexington Place Condominiums experienced. The Golf Course does not drain into or around the buildings in question. Wildlife and Tree Preservation Pioneer Engineering completed a habitat assessment on 2004. The conclusion of the report is that the same species that currently inhabit the property are likely to continue. The species found on site are commonly found in residential areas, especially areas with park and open spaces. A method of tree preservation that would be implemented on this property would be the transplanting of non-significant sized hardwood and evergreen trees. From preliminary inspection for tree moving, it was determine that approximately (80) trees that range in DBH (diameter at breast height) size from 2.5" to 5", could be moved and used for landscaping or reforestation on the site. Tree transplanting would need to take place outside of the growing season and happen in two stages. The first stage the trees would be stockpiled into a temporary nursery setting and maintained until the site is ready for the final placement of the tree spaded. The following is a list of trees that could be moved by a tree spading contractor: (70) green ash (9) bur oak (1) Colorado spruce Existing Infrastructure Sanitary Sewer There is sufficient capacity and depth within the existing trunk and lateral sanitary sewer to accommodate the proposed development. In fact there is capacity for 771 units within the two trunk district for this site. The five existing lateral sanitary sewers terminating in the site will minimize the depth of the proposed sanitary sewer for the development. These laterals will be extended into the site to serve the development. The breakdown of use of each individual lateral and therefore trunk line will be determined with the final construction plans. The sanitary sewer construction will be designed to the standards and require the permits of the following: • City of Eagan Public Works Design Manual and Specification • Sanitary Sewer Extension Permit , Metropolitan Council Environmental Services • Sanitary Sewer Extension Permit, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency • Standard Utilities Specifications, City Engineers Association of Minnesota. /e/;7C2 6 fla Watermain There is sufficient capacity within the existing trunk and lateral water main to accommodate the proposed development. The residual pressures range 54-61psi, with the static pressure of 66-74 depending consistent with the surrounding areas, providing the required fire flows of 500-100 gpm. To ensure maximum flow rates internal looping and connection to all available laterals will be incorporated in the final design. The trunk watermain was already installed and assessed to this property. The water main construction will be designed to the standards and require the permits of the following: • City of Eagan Public Works Design Manual and Specification • Watermain Extension Permit, Minnesota Department of Health • Standard Utilities Specifications, City Engineers Association of Minnesota. The City's Comprehensive Sewer policy Plan (2000) shows the subject property can be serviced by three sanitary sewer sub districts, one to a 12" trunk sewer in Yankee Doodle Road and two from the 10" trunk sewer in Wescott Road. The site has several sanitary sewer laterals stubbed to service the site, on Wescott Woodlands to the west; Duckwood Drive that currently services the clubhouse; the north end of Westcott Hills Drive; at the end of Hunter Lane to the south. The capacity in the available trunk sanitary sewer, and associated lateral sewers have sufficient capacity to handle the average and peak flows for up to 771 residential units. The allocation of these units, across the varying capacities of the available trunks and laterals will be determined with the site plan of any development. The City's Water Supply and Distribution Plan (1996) shows the property is serviced by two trunk water mains, an 18" water main along Yankee Doodle Road; and a 16" water main that bisects the golf course from Duckwood Drive to Wescott Woodlands along the clubhouse driveway. In addition the site is serviced by lateral water mains; Hunter Lane to the South; Wescott Hills Drive in the south east; and Wescott Woodlands across from Rose Hill Court to the west. The City's Storm Water Management Plan (1990) shows the property with 6 basins to be used for stormwater management. These basins are to serve two main purposes; controlling water quality; and managing water quantity. This is accomplished through storage and flow attenuation. The on site basins range from Class V to Class VII Basins. The Stormwater Management Plan defines these classes as follows: • Class V - Nutrient Trap (Nutrient removal efficiencies greater than 50%) • Class VI -Sediment Basin (Nutrient removal efficiencies between 30- 50%) • Class VII- Storm Water Storage (Nutrient removal efficiencies negligible) 43 6 7 17 Currently the onsite basins treat the stormwater of the golf course as well as stormwater from Wescott Woodlands. Many of the basins do not have piped outlet. These outlets show as future construction in the stormwater management plan. Conclusion In closing, we are asking for your consideration and support of this plan. V 8 INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT 196 14445 DIAMOND PATH WEST ■ MARK PARR, Ph.D ROSEMOUNT, MINNESOTA 55068-4199 Director of Secondary Education (651) 423-7712 FAX (651) 423-7614 E-mail: mark.parr@district196.org December 20, 2005 Ms. Pamela Dudziak Planner, City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota 55122 RE: 14CG-05-05-04 (Carriage Hills) Dear Ms. Dudziak: I received a phone call from you regarding the settlement that has been reached regarding the development of the property noted above. You asked the school district to render an opinion regarding the status of our school buildings should the property be developed regarding the enrollment in our schools located within that attendance area. Where School District 196 will not express an official position regarding this settlement and potential development we do take the position that students who reside within our attendance boundaries may be enrolled under any circumstance. Additionally, our projected enrollment figures combined with recent added classrooms at Eagan High School enable us to accommodate projected enrollment for this proposed development. We look forward to continuing to meet the public education needs of all District 196 students and working with you to that end. Sincerely, ark Parr M D Educating our students to reach their full potential 196 Serving Apple Valley, Burnsville, Coates, Eagan, Inver Grove Heights, C Lakeville, Rosemount, and Empire and Vermillion Townships www.district196.org ~6~ Ciety of Eapn ma To: Chair Heyl and Planning Commission Members From: Mike Ridley, City Planner Date: December 22, 2005 Subject: Wensmann Application Attached to this memo are copies of the e-mail and other correspondence received regarding the Wensmann Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment application. The correspondence is separated into groups by sender. Some of them are e-mail chains that may be best read in chronological order from oldest to newest. Please call me at 651-675-5650 if you have any questions. Page 1 of 7 Mike Ridley From: Jon Hohenstein Sent: Thursday, December 22, 2005 12:45 PM To: 'Jim Taylor' Cc: Jack G. Conrad; Pam Dudziak; Mike Ridley; Tom Hedges; Mike Haugen; Paul Stutler; Mira Pepper Subject: RE: SPAM: RE: Planning Commission Hearing regarding Wensmann proposal Dear Mr. Taylor, I appreciate your separate email apologizing for the tone of some of the emails you have sent. I understand that you feel very strongly about this issue, so I also appreciate you indicating that you recognize that our City staff is doing its best in this situation - balancing all of the aspects of its review of the Wensmann application and communication with the public in the context of the contingent settlement agreement. Because we have a very talented and experienced staff that is committed to performing its responsibilities professionally, it is good when those who take active positions on public issues understand that. We expect people to have a range of opinions, but I appreciate people treating our staff respectfully, regardless of how strongly they feel on an issue. That having been said, I apologize for the delay in responding to your email below. It was received at the same time as the fax arrived from Mr. Casey indicating his representation of you and the Coalition. Since his letter made assertions regarding the law and addressed some of the same issues you had raised, it was necessary to forward his correspondence to the City Attorney for his review and response before I responded to you. Mr. Dougherty's response has since been sent and faxed to Mr. Casey. The APC packet, including the Carriage Hills/Wensmann application report, is being run at this time and will be distributed to the APC members this afternoon. Jan will contact you when the hard copy you requested is ready to be picked up. In the meantime, the report and attachments have been posted on the City website and can be accessed through links from the main home page and the Community Development page. Jon Jon Hohenstein Community Development Director City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 651-675-5660 Fax 651-675-5694 ihohenstein(a)-cityofeagan.com From: Jim Taylor [mailto:jtaylor@interlogusa.com] Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005 4:50 PM To: Jon Hohenstein Cc: Jack G. Conrad; Pam Dudziak; Mike Ridley; Tom Hedges; Mike Haugen; Paul Stutter; Peggy Carlson, Council Member Subject: RE: SPAM: RE: Planning Commission Hearing regarding Wensmann proposal Jon, cc. City Staff/City Council This phrase causes me great trepidation: The exact language for the action items for this item is still in draft, but, as outlined by Pam in a response to one of your earlier emails, it will essentially be both a recommendation on whether to create a Special Area Comp Plan designation for the site and, if a Special Area designation is recommended to be approved, a recommendation on the site plan and narrative that would be applied to that Special Area. A Special Area can only be designated with a plan that defines what is expected to occur within it. A 12/22/2005 Tom, Page 2 of 7 - It am deeply troubled that the exact item the APC will be asked to review is still in draft form and the meeting is basically 4 working days away. How can your staff even provide input when they don't know what the exact question is? How can citizens be expected to provide feedback or participate when we don't even know the question? Or is that the point? If so, someone is giving the city some very bad legal advise. - The fact that the APC will be asked to decide on something whose exact language did not exist in the settlement agreement which the Council approved on Nov 28th is quite upsetting to me. - The fact that the "lawyer-agreed upon" deadline of hearing this at the Dec 27th APC hearing was never in the agreement and was never disclosed to the public at the Nov 28th meeting and was not, in fact, disclosed to us until just a few days ago causes me great concern. - You are asking for SA designation yet no one (the city, the citizens, etc) knows the exact issue. If you look at past comprehensive plan amendment requests, never has there been anything that has been rushed through in such a haphazard manner. The city is skating on very thin ice as it applies to the MN Government Data Practices Act compliance, taking the "gag order" / lawyer - client confidentiality privilege too far (to circumvent), the city's own vision statement, and the city's fiduciary obligation to its citizens. You must understand my resolve in seeing this handled in a proper and respectful (to ALL parties) manner. The Mayor is an honorable man. He assured us that the issue or approval was not in any way pre-ordained and that it would undergo the "normal review process". If the city's actions in this case is the "normal" review process would hate to think what an "abnormal" review process books like. Please do not put the Mayor in such a bad position. He's a good man. I don't want the city to make him look bad. Jon, obviously you can choose to comment on the above or not. I wish you would. However, as the Community Development Director, I want you to specifically reply to me as to how you rectify the lawyer to lawyer agreement for a Dec 27th APC hearing (which was not part of the settlement itself nor was it disclosed until just days ago) with the city's vision statement that we, the citizens, are your primary customer and we, your customers, want the issue rescheduled until February. Similarly, please also answer me in this particular instance: which is more important to you personally, the citizens, or the settlement agreement? do request you reply to both questions. I also request that this email and all associated and preceding emails on this subject be put in both the APC's "packet" and the Councils packet. Mr. Mayor & City Council: how long are you going to let this go on? Your silence concerns me. Thanks, Jim Taylor Interlog USA, Inc.® 2818A Anthony Lane South Minneapolis, MN 55418 Ph: 612-789-3456 x104 Fax: 612-395-5356 email: jtaylor@interlogusa.com website: www.interlogusa.com -----Original Message----- From: Jon Hohenstein [mailto:JHohenstein@cityofeagan.com] Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005 12:45 PM To: Jim Taylor Cc: Tom Hedges; Mike Ridley; Pam Dudziak Subject: RE: SPAM: RE: Planning Commission Hearing regarding Wensmann proposal Dear Jim, In order to be certain that the decision making bodies have the same information that the public has, we make the full staff reports and attachments available to the public at the same time as they are distributed /49 12/22/2005 Tom, Page 3 of 7 to the APC and/or City Council. In this case, that will be late Thursday or early Friday. We will be posting the entire report and attachments on the website at that time, but, if we know in advance, we can also prepare a hard copy for you and provide it to you through the ordinary document request process that you have used with Ms. Pepper to date. In either case, we will be certain that you and other interested members of the public have access to all of the same items as the APC has before it. The report will include a staff report compiling the reviews of the submittal by the various City departments, the developer's submittal (site plan and narrative) and copies of comment letters and emails received at the time that the packet is distributed. The action to be considered by the Commission is identified at the end of staff reports. The exact language for the action items for this item is still in draft, but, as outlined by Pam in a response to one of your earlier emails, it will essentially be both a recommendation on whether to create a Special Area Comp Plan designation for the site and, if a Special Area designation is recommended to be approved, a recommendation on the site plan and narrative that would be applied to that Special Area. A Special Area can only be designated with a plan that defines what is expected to occur within it. I would also forewarn you that the standard form of the staff report states the action to be considered in the affirmative, that is "to approve" a particular recommendation. This is not intended to encourage one outcome over the other, it is meant to reflect the fact that the matter before the Commission is in response to an application requesting approval of an action. The APC can also recommend denial if that is their conclusion. Jon Jon Hohenstein Community Development Director City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 651-675-5660 Fax 651-675-5694 jhohensteingP,cityofeagan.com From: Jim Taylor [mailto:jtaylor@interlogusa.com] Sent: Friday, December 16, 2005 6:20 PM To: Jon Hohenstein Subject: RE: SPAM: RE: Planning Commission Hearing regarding Wensmann proposal Jon, I just want to make sure that I have the exact same items the Planning Commission will have. Can you please list out what documents the Planning Commission will receive in their pre-hearing "packet". Secondly, can you please clearly state the exact issue or question that the Planning Commission will be asked to hear / vote upon? Thanks, Jim Taylor Interlog USA, Inc.® 2818A Anthony Lane South Minneapolis, MN 55418 Ph: 612-789-3456 x 104 Fax: 612-395-5356 email: jtaylor@interlogusa.com website: www.interlocusa.com l I 12/22/2005 Tom, Page 4 of 7 -----Original Message----- From: Jon Hohenstein [mailto:JHohenstein@cityofeagan.com] Sent: Friday, December 16, 2005 4:S1 PM To: Jim Taylor; Tom Hedges Cc: patsue@comcast.net; Cyndee Fields; cyndee.fields@house.leg.state.mn.us; Meg Tilley; mike maguire; Pat Geagan; Peggy Carlson; Shira Kantor; Meghan Lindsay; Lea Mcclean; Erin Johnson; Josh Subject: SPAM: RE: Planning Commission Hearing regarding Wensmann proposal Dear Jim, In response to your question regarding whether the City is obligated to have the Advisory Planning Commission hear the Wensmann Comprehensive Guide Plan application at its meeting on December 27, 2005, Mr. Hoff has provided the attached email. In response to the question regarding the 60-120 day rule, it does not apply to Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment applications. The agreement calls for the application to go through the normal review and hearing process. The City Attorney indicates that this includes not only scheduling of the initial hearing date, but the designation of anticipated meeting dates for subsequent meetings. As noted in the previous email, if either the Planning Commission or City Council determines, during their consideration of the application, that a continuation is warranted, they may do take such an action without being limited by the 60-120 day rule. The agreement does call for the review to be timely, the time frame for which may be a matter of debate as the review goes forward. With respect to requests for written materials associated with the development application, the Comprehensive Plan Amendment application has been available for review since it was submitted to the City on November 30. It is made up of the same site plan and narrative that was attached to the Contingent Settlement Agreement that was made available to the public on November 29. Since that time, Mike Haugen of the Coalition came to City Hall, reviewed the application files and requested copies of specific information, which was provided to him before he left that day. We are in receipt of your requests for copies of the signed Contingent Settlement Agreement and Comprehensive Guide Plan application documents, which were submitted to the City's Data Practices Officer, Mira Pepper, dated December 14 and December 15. Those documents were prepared today and Ms. Pepper advises that you were going to have your wife pick them up this afternoon. At your request, we are also in the process of preparing a cost and preparation time estimate for you for the hard copies of materials pertaining to the 2004 Carriage Hills application and, in addition to your request, we have emailed you a copy of the pdf file of the 2004 staff report and attachments. If there have been any other requests for documents that are not noted above, please let us know and we will follow up on them as well. Jon Jon Hohenstein Community Development Director City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 651-675-5660 Fax 651-675-5694 ihohenstein(acityofeagan.com From: Jim Taylor [mailto:jtaylor@interlogusa.com] 17/77/2On5 Tom, Page 5 of 7 Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2005 11:49 AM To: Tom Hedges Cc: patsue@comcast.net; Jon Hohenstein; Cyndee Fields; cyndee.fields@house. leg.state.mn.us; Meg Tilley; mike maguire; Pat Geagan; Peggy Carlson; Shira Kantor; Meghan Lindsay; Lea Mcclean; Erin Johnson; Josh Subject: Planning Commission Hearing regarding Wensmann proposal Jon, cc. City Council/Others I just want to confirm my understanding - there is no actual 60 day time limit for a comprehensive plan amendment request? This deadline is purely arbitrary which the City could change if it wanted. At the same time you believe, but are not certain, that the Dec 27th and Jan 17th dates (for sure the 27th) were mutually agreed upon by the lawyers and not the City Council. In other words: Dec 27th and Jan 17 are contrived dates not found in the agreement or in law but rather in "Eagan history". Jon, you made this statement: "we do not have a history of rescheduling or postponing the initial hearing of an item, unless it is requested by the applicant". Are you stating that there has never ever been one single instance where a hearing has been rescheduled at the request of someone other than the applicant? Would it be entirely without precedence that a comprehensive plan amendment request require more than 60 days to be reviewed? As Community Development Director I am sure you are well aware of the first line of the City's vision statement: "The City of Eagan considers everyone with whoa: it interacts as a constituent and as a customer. First and foremost among these customers is its citizens. To serve its customers, the City is committed to equal representation, personal dignity, the value of diverse opinions, democratic participation and the importance of honest feedback. " Does the City really believe its own words? Who is more important to the City: the "applicant" or "the citizens"? Pursuant to the vision statement you should be going to bat for us, your customers. This would be normal. Remember that your title is "Community" Development Director and NOT "Applicant" Development Director". You refer to the city's "practices" as the reason the city might not want to reschedule. We just want you to "practice" what you preach in the vision statement. We are constituents. We are citizens. We request equal representation (at least as equal as Mr. Wensmann) before both the Planning Commission and City Council. We have our dignity and our own opinions. We also want to participate in the democratic process. We have honest feedback. What we don't have is enough time to review the issue and prepare for our representation prior to the Planning Commission and City Council voting on the issue. Mr. Wensmann has had months if not years to prepare. The current hearing schedules are way unequal (in favor of Mr. Wensmann) and do not allow us equal representation, participation in the democratic process, or an opportunity to give feedback. We have requested from the City, but have not as yet received, copies of the final executed contingent settlement agreement, the actual comprehensive plan amendment request and any associated correspondences. Assuming we got those items today we would have essentially 5 working days before the Planning Commission receives their packet from the City for their Dec 27th meeting. That's no time at all and certainly not equal to the amount of time Mr. Wensmann has had. How can you expect us to participate in the democratic process, have equal representation, and express honest feed back when we haven't even X71 12/22/2005 Tom, Page 6 of 7 received the documents let alone had time to review them? We need the same consideration as the applicant: 60 days. I would be shocked if you did not do this for us, your number 1 customers. We once again respectively request that the City live us to its own words and vision statement and move the Wensmann comprehensive plan amendment request to the February Planning Commission date. This would establish a reasonable amount of time for public input and participation- in the normal review process. Certainly it would "abnormal" if the citizens were unable to participate or otherwise have unequal consideration. Mr. Mayor, is public input and scrutiny part of the normal review and hearing process? Jon, I eagerly await your reply. Thanks, Jim Taylor -----Original Message----- From: Tom Hedges [mailto:THedges@cityofeagan.com] Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2005 9:33 AM To: Jim Taylor Cc: patsue@comcast.net; Jon Hohenstein; Cyndee Fields; cyndee.fields@house.leg.state.mn.us; Meg Tilley; mike maguire; Pat Geagan; Peggy Carlson Subject: FW: Planning Commission Hearing regarding Wensmann proposal Jim I have asked our Community Development Director Jon Hohenstein to respond to your most recent a mail relative to the Planning Commission Hearing process regarding the Wensmann proposal. Your recent a mail was in response to an a mail I sent to you last Friday regarding the Wensmann application. The following a mail summarizes much of what we discussed on the telephone yesterday; if you have any further questions feel free to contact either Mr. Hohenstein or our City Planner Mike Ridley. Thanks Jim Tom From: Jon Hohenstein Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 3:33 PM To: Tom Hedges; Mike Ridley Cc: 'George Hoff; 'Dougherty, Mike' Subject: RE: Planning Commission Hearing regarding Wensmann proposal Tom, In follow up to our conversation about the process steps for consideration of a Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment generally and the Wensmann Special Area Plan in particular, your email of December 9 to Mr. Taylor summarizes the application review process very accurately. / 2CZ 12/22/2005 Tom, Page 7 of 7 Once the application review process has begun, we do not have a history of rescheduling or postponing the initial hearing of an item, unless it is requested by the applicant. This would be the same for this application, the other three applications to be heard on the 27th or other applications on other Advisory Planning Commission agendas. Some applications are heard and acted on at the same meeting, but once an item has its initial hearing before the Planning Commission or is forwarded to the City Council, either body may consider the item over more than one meeting, by continuing it, if the information presented or the discussion at the time warrants it. Such continuances, if found to be warranted by those bodies, would be part of the normal process to which the contingent settlement agreement refers. The only things I would add to your previous memo are the following. The City Attorney has advised that 60-120 day action timeline applies to zoning and subdivision applications, but does not apply to Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment applications. Even so, the City's practice has been to address Comprehensive Plan applications in a similar timeframe. It is also my understanding, and Mr. Hoff has confirmed, that at the time the developer submitted the contingent settlement agreement to the City for consideration, they did so with the condition that the application would be placed on the agenda to be heard at the December 27, 2005 APC meeting. Upon approval of the settlement agreement by the City Council, the developer submitted the application and the item was set on the APC agenda. believe this confirms our conversation. If you have other questions, please let me know. Jon Jon Hohenstein Community Development Director City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 651-675-5660 Fax 651-675-5694 jhohensteinCc~cityofeagan.com 17.3 12/22/2005 Tom, Page 1 of 6 Jon Hohenstein From: Jim Taylor btaylor@intedogusa.com] Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005 5:00 PM To: Jon Hohenstein Cc: Pam Dudziak; Mike Ridley; Tom Hedges Subject: RE: SPAM: RE: Planning Commission Hearing regarding Wensmann proposal Jon, cc. City Staff/City Council This sentence in your below email causes me great trepidation: The exact language for the action items for this item is still in draft, but, as outlined by Pam in a response to one of your earlier emails, it will essentially be both a recommendation on whether to create a Special Area Comp Plan designation for the site and, if a Special Area designation is recommended to be approved, a recommendation on the site plan and narrative that would be applied to that Special Area. - It am deeply troubled that the exact item the APC will be asked to review is still in draft form and the meeting is basically 4 working days away. How can your staff even provide input when they don't know what the exact question is? How can citizens be expected to provide feedback or participate when we don't even know the question? Or is that the point? If so, someone is giving the city some very bad advise. - The fact that the APC will be asked to decide on something whose exact language did not exist in the settlement agreement which the Council approved on Nov 28th is quite upsetting to me. - The fact that the "lawyer-agreed upon" deadline of a Dec 27th APC hearing was never in the agreement and was never disclosed to the public at the Nov 28th meeting and was not, in fact, disclosed to us until just a few days ago causes me great concern. I only have an email from George Hoff indicating this date. How do I know the Council DID agree to it? It was not discussed or otherwise contained in the minutes or in the agreement. - You are asking for SA designation yet no one (the city, the citizens, etc) knows the exact issue. If you look at past comprehensive plan amendment requests, never has there been anything that has been rushed through in such a haphazard manner. The city is skating on very thin ice as it applies to the MN Government Data Practices Act compliance, taking the "gag order'/ lawyer - client confidentiality privilege too far (to circumvent), the city's own vision statement, and the city's fiduciary obligation to its citizens. You must understand my resolve in seeing this handled in a proper and respectful (to ALL parties) manner. The Mayor is an honorable man. He assured us that the issue or approval was not in any way pre-ordained and that it would undergo the "normal review process". If the city's actions in this case is the "normal" review process I would hate to think what an "abnormal" review process looks like. Please do not put the Mayor in such a bad position. He's a good man. I don't want the city to make him look bad. Jon, obviously you can choose to comment on the above or not. I wish you would. However, as the Community Development Director, I want you to specifically reply to me as to how you rectify the lawyer-to-lawyer agreement for a Dec 27th APC hearing (which was not part of the settlement itself nor was it disclosed until just days ago) with the city's vision statement that we, the citizens, are your primary customer and we, your customers, want the issue rescheduled until February. Similarly, please also answer me in this particular instance: which is more important to you as Community Development Director, the citizens, or the settlement agreement? I do request you reply to both questions. I also request that this email and all associated and preceding emails on this subject be put in both the APC's "packet" and the Councils packet. Mr. Mayor & City Council: how long are you going to let this go on? Your silence concerns me Thanks, 17Y 12/20/2005 Tom, Page 1 of 7 Jon Hohenstein From: Jim Taylor ataylor@interlogusa.com) Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005 3:20 PM To: Jon Hohenstein Cc: Tom Hedges; Mike Ridley; Pam Dudziak; Mira Pepper; Jan Severson Subject: RE: SPAM: RE: Planning Commission Hearing regarding Wensmann proposal **Correction** ***Correction*** I do have the Wensmann 2004 proposal in a PDF file format. I therefore don't need copies of of the 2004 Wensmann proposal*** ***Still need an answer on the below. Concerning the rest of the documents that the planning commission will receive... please advise if any of the information the APC or Council receive can be made available to the public any earlier than when the APC and Council receive it? Is this normal Eagan's policy or something? The reason I ask is that this really gives us little or no time to thoroughly review and thus unable to allow us to properly participate in the process. Thanks, Jim Taylor Interlog USA, Inc.® 2818A Anthony Lane South Minneapolis, MN 55418 Ph: 612-789-3456 x 104 Fax: 612-395-5356 email: jtaylor@interlogusa.com website: www.interlogusa.com -----Original essage----- From: Jon H enstein [mailto:JHohenstein@cityofeagan.com] Sent: Monday, ecember 19, 2005 2:43 PM To: 31m Taylor Cc: Tom Hedges; ike Ridley; Pam Dudziak; Mira Pepper; ]an S erson Subject: RE: SPAM: : Planning Commission Hearing regar ' g Wensmann proposal Dear Jim, We will make an extra copy the full staff report d we will have someone call you when it is ready later in the week. In addition, Mira is out ill today and ha the other information that you requested, so I want to forward that to you as well. Staff has completed the page cou for all the information in the 2004 Wensmann application file and there are 905 ($226.25) pages d a full size copy of the properly survey ($5.00) for a total reproduction cost of $231.25. Since we h to fit this into o er support staff responsibilities, this will take 2-3 days to complete, from the time yo ask us to proceed. I he meantime, as Mira has indicated, the file is available for review during regular ice hours, if you or othe would like to do so and identify specific items that you may wish to have pied sooner than that. Please let us kno ow you would like to proceed. Jan, Please ve the staff who are running the packet prepare an extra y for Mr. Taylor and contact him with 2/20/2005 /02 1 Tom, Page 1 of 7 Jon Hohenstein From: Jim Taylor Btaylor@interlogusa.com] Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005 3:00 PM To: Jon Hohenstein Cc: Tom Hedges; Mike Ridley; Pam Dudziak; Mira Pepper; Jan Severson Subject: RE: SPAM: RE: Planning Commission Hearing regarding Wensmann proposal Please go ahead and produce hard copies of the Wensmann application and property survey. Let me know when it is available. Concerning the rest of the documents that the planning commission will receive... please advise if any of the information the APC or Council receive can be made available to the public any earlier than when the APC and Council receive it? Is this normal Eagan's policy or something? The reason I ask is that this really gives us little or no time to thoroughly review and thus unable to allow us to properly participate in the process. Thanks, Jim Taylor Interlog USA, Inc.® 2818A Anthony Lane South Minneapolis, MN 55418 Ph: 612-789-3456 x 104 Fax: 612-395-5356 email: jtaylor@interlogusa.com website: www.interlogusa.com -----Original Message— From: Jon Hohenstein [mailto:JHohenstein@dtyofeagan.com] Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005 2:43 PM To: Jim Taylor Cc: Tom Hedges; Mike Ridley; Pam Dudziak; Mira Pepper, Jan Severson Subject: RE: SPAM: RE: Planning Commission Hearing regarding Wensmann proposal Dear Jim, We will make an extra copy of the full staff report and we will have someone call you when it is ready later in the week. In addition, Mira is out ill today and we have the other information that you requested, so I want to forward that to you as well. Staff has completed the page count for all of the information in the 2004 Wensmann application file and there are 905 ($226.25) pages and a full sized copy of the property survey ($5.00) for a total reproduction cost of $231.25. Since we have to fit this into other support staff responsibilities, this will take 2-3 days to complete, from the time you ask us to proceed. In the meantime, as Mira has indicated, the file is available for review during regular office hours, if you or others would like to do so and identify specific items that you may wish to have copied sooner than that. Please let us know how you would like to proceed. Jan, Please have the staff who are running the packet prepare an extra copy for Mr. Taylor and contact him with the cost of the copy at the time at which the other packets are delivered to the APC. Thanks. I Tom, Page 2 of 7 Jon Jon Hohenstein Community Development Director City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 651-675-5660 Fax 651-675-5694 johenstein@city_ofgagan.com From: Jim Taylor [mailto:jtaylor@interlogusa.com] Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005 1:09 PM To: Jon Hohenstein Cc: Tom Hedges; Mike Ridley; Pam Dudziak Subject, RE: SPAM: RE: Planning Commission Hearing regarding Wensmann proposal Noted. Yes, please ask Mira to prepare hardcopies for me. I understand this costs $0.25/page. Thanks, Jim Taylor Interlog USA, Inc.® 2818A Anthony Lane South Minneapolis, MN 55418 Ph: 612-789-3456 x 104 Fax: 612-395-5356 email: jtaylor@interlogusa.com website: www.interlogusa.com -----Origi I Message----- From: Jo ohenstein [mailto:JHohenstein@cityofeagan.com] Sent: Mon December 19, 2005 12:45 PM To: Jim Taylor Cc: Tom Hedges, ike Ridley; Pam Dudziak Subject: RE: SPA RE: Planning Commission Hearing regarding ensmann proposal Dear Jim, In order to be certain that t decision making bodies ve the same information that the public has, we make the full staff report s nd attachments av ' le to the public at the same time as they are distributed to the APC and/or ' Council. In t ' case, that will be late Thursday or early Friday. We will be posting the entire rep and attac ents on the website at that time, but, if we know in advance, we can also prepare a ha cop or you and provide it to you through the ordinary document request process that you h used with Ms. Pepper to date. In either case, we will be certain that you and other interested bers of the public have access to all of the same items as the APC has before it. The report will include a sta eport compiling a reviews of the submittal by the various City departments, the develop s submittal (site plan nd narrative) and copies of comment letters and emails received at the ' e that the packet is distri ted. The action to be c sidered by the Commission is iden ed at the end of staff reports. The exact language for th ction items for this item is still in draft, b as outlined by Pam in a response to one of your lier emails, it will essentially be both a recom endation on whether to create a Special Ar Comp Plan designation for the site and, if a Spe I Area designation is recommended 1?7 12/20/2005 Tom, Page 2 of 6 Jim Taylor Interlog USA, Inc.® 2818A Anthony Lane South Minneapolis, MN 55418 Ph: 612-789-3456 x 104 Fax: 612-395-5356 email: jtaylor@interlogusa com website: www.interlogusa.com -----Original Message----- From: Jon Hohenstein [mailto:]Hohenstein@cityofeagan.com] Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005 12:45 PM To: Jim Taylor Cc: Tom Hedges; Mike Ridley; Pam Dudziak Subject: RE: SPAM: RE: Planning Commission Hearing regarding Wensmann proposal Dear Jim, In order to be certain that the decision making bodies have the same information that the public has, we make the full staff reports and attachments available to the public at the same time as they are distributed to the APC and/or City Council. In this case, that will be late Thursday or early Friday. We will be posting the entire report and attachments on the website at that time, but, if we know in advance, we can also prepare a hard copy for you and provide it to you through the ordinary document request process that you have used with Ms. Pepper to date. In either case, we will be certain that you and other interested members of the public have access to all of the same items as the APC has before it. The report will include a staff report compiling the reviews of the submittal by the various City departments, the developer's submittal (site plan and narrative) and copies of comment letters and emails received at the time that the packet is distributed. The action to be considered by the Commission is identified at the end of staff reports. The exact language for the action items for this item is still in draft, but, as outlined by Pam in a response to one of your earlier emails, it will essentially be both a recommendation on whether to create a Special Area Comp Plan designation for the site and, if a Special Area designation is recommended to be approved, a recommendation on the site plan and narrative that would be applied to that Special Area. A Special Area can only be designated with a plan that defines what is expected to occur within it. I would also forewarn you that the standard form of the staff report states the action to be considered in the affirmative, that is "to approve" a particular recommendation. This is not intended to encourage one outcome over the other, it is meant to reflect the fact that the matter before the Commission is in response to an application requesting approval of an action. The APC can also recommend denial if that is their conclusion. Jon Jon Hohenstein Community Development Director City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 651-675-5660 Fax 651-675-5694 johenstein@cityo- - a.n_.com From: Jim Taylor [mailto:jtaylor@interlogusa.com] Sent: Friday, December 16, 2005 6:20 PM To: Jon Hohenstein Tom, Page 3 of 6 Subject: RE: SPAM: RE: Planning Commission Hearing regarding Wensmann proposal Jon, I just want to make sure that I have the exact same items the Planning Commission will have. Can you please list out what documents the Planning Commission will receive in their pre-hearing "packet'. Secondly, can you please clearly state the exact issue or question that the Planning Commission will be asked to hear I vote upon Thanks, Jim Taylor Interlog USA, Inc.® 2818A Anthony Lane South Minneapolis, Mx 55418 Ph: 612-789-3456 x 104 Fax: 612-395-5356 email: jtaylor@interlogusa.com website: www.interlogusa.com i I Message From: Jon hensbein [mailbDJHohenstNn@a'tyofeagan.com] Sent: Friday, ber 16, 2005 4:51 PM To: Jim Taylor, Hedges Cc: patsueCcb net; Cyndee Fields; cyndee.fields@house. state rnn.us; Meg Tilley; mike maguire; Pat Geaga Peggy Carlson; Shira Kantor; Meghan U say, Lea Mcdean; Erin Johnson; Josh Subject: SPAM: RE: Pla ng Commission Hearing regard' g Wensmann proposal Dear Jim, In response to your question reg ding whether City is obligated to have the Advisory Planning Commission hear the Wensmann mprehen ' e Guide Plan application at its meeting on December 27, 2005, Mr. Hoff has pr ided t attached email. In response to the question regarding th 0-120 day rule, it does not apply to Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment applications. e a Bement calls for the application to go through the normal review and hearing process. he City orney indicates that this includes not only scheduling of the initial hearing d , but the des nation of anticipated meeting dates for subsequent meetings. As note in the previous a it, if either the Planning Commission or City Council determines, during th r consideration of the plication, that a continuation is warranted, they may do take such an ion without being limited b the 60-120 day rule_ The agreement does call for the review to be ti ely, the time frame for which be a matter of debate as the review goes forward. With respect to req is for written materials associated with development application, the Comprehensive P n Amendment application has been available or review since it was submitted to the City on N ember 30. It is made up of the same site plan a narrative that was attached to the Contingen ettlement Agreement that was made available to th public on November 29. Since that me, Mike Haugen of the Coalition came to City Hall, reviewe the application files and requeste copies of specific information, which was provided to him befor a left that day. We in receipt of your requests for copies of the signed Contingent Settlem t Agreement and Co prehensive Guide Plan application documents, which were submitted to the ity's Data P ctices Officer, Mira Pepper, dated December 14 and December 15. Those do ments were 12/20/2005 Message Page 1 of 1 From: George Hoff [ghoff@hbklaw.com] Sent: Friday, December 16, 2005 2:15 PM To: Tom Hedges; Mike Ridley; Jon Hohenstein Cc: 'Dougherty, Mike' Subject: FW: Planning Commission Hearing regarding Wensmann proposal The Settlement Agreement with Wensman's was originally scheduled to be heard before the City Council on November 15th. At the request of interested citizens, consideration of the Settlement Agreement was postponed until November 29th. Discussions occurred with Wensman concerning the request to continue the consideration from the 15th to the 29th. Wensman indicated that change of date was acceptable and the Settlement was still viable provided the matter would be placed on the APC agenda in December. The City understood that as a condition to the tender of the Settlement offer by the Plaintiffs so that the wishes of the interested citizenry could be accommodated. George C. Hoff HOFF, BARRY & KUDERER, P.A. 160 Flagship Corporate Center 775 Prairie Center Drive Eden Prairie, MN 55344 dir: 952-746-2706 main: 952-941-9220 fax: 952-941-7968 ghoff@hbklaw.com www.hbklaw.com The information contained in this message is privileged and confidential information intended for the use of the addressee listed above and no one else. If you are not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible to deliver this message to the intended recipient, please do not use this transmission in any way, but contact the sender by telephone or email. go ri_.I1l.\T\ ..„..„~~0/_7(~nn~°/7(1Ca++inrrelihnl+Pnetain\T.oral°/„2~~ettin~s\Temnorarv%20I... 12/20/2005 Tom, Page 3 of 6 Subject: RE: SPAM: • Planning Commission Hearing regarding We ann proposal Jon, I just want to make sure that I h e the exact same item a Planning Commission will have. Can you please list out what documents th lanning Commis n will receive in their pre-hearing "packet". Secondly, can you please clearly state a exa , issue or question that the Planning Commission will be asked to hear / vote upon? Thanks, Jim Taylor Interlog USA, Inc.® 2818A Anthony Lane th Minneapolis, MN 5 18 Ph: 612-789-345 x 104 Fax: 612-395 56 email: jtay r@interlogusa.com website• interlogusa.com Original Message---- From: Jon Hohenstein [mailto:JHohenstein@cityofeagan.com] Sent: Friday, December 16, 2005 4:51 PM To: Jim Taylor; Tom Hedges Cc: patsue@comcast.net; Cyndee Fields; cyndee.fields@house.leg.state.mn.us; Meg Tilley; mike maguire; Pat Geagan; Peggy Carlson; Shira Kantor; Meghan Lindsay; Lea Mcclean; Erin Johnson; Josh Subject: SPAM: RE: Planning Commission Hearing regarding Wensmann proposal Dear Jim, In response to your question regarding whether the City is obligated to have the Advisory Planning Commission hear the Wensmann Comprehensive Guide Plan application at its meeting on December 27, 2005, Mr. Hoff has provided the attached email. In response to the question regarding the 60-120 day rule, it does not apply to Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment applications. The agreement calls for the application to go through the normal review and hearing process. The City Attorney indicates that this includes not only scheduling of the initial hearing date, but the designation of anticipated meeting dates for subsequent meetings. As noted in the previous email, if either the Planning Commission or City Council determines, during their consideration of the application, that a continuation is warranted, they may do take such an action without being limited by the 60-120 day rule. The agreement does call for the review to be timely, the time frame for which may be a matter of debate as the review goes forward. With respect to requests for written materials associated with the development application, the Comprehensive Plan Amendment application has been available for review since it was submitted to the City on November 30. It is made up of the same site plan and narrative that was attached to the Contingent Settlement Agreement that was made available to the public on November 29. Since that time, Mike Haugen of the Coalition came to City Hall, reviewed the application files and requested copies of specific information, which was provided to him before he left that day. We are in receipt of your requests for copies of the signed Contingent Settlement Agreement and Comprehensive Guide Plan application documents, which were submitted to the City's Data Practices Officer, Mira Pepper, dated December 14 and December 15. Those documents were 1g~ 12/20/2005 Tom, Page 4 of 6 prepared today and Ms. Pepper advises that you were going to have your wife pick them up this afternoon. At your request, we are also in the process of preparing a cost and preparation time estimate for you for the hard copies of materials pertaining to the 2004 Carriage Hills application and, in addition to your request, we have emailed you a copy of the pdf file of the 2004 staff report and attachments. If there have been any other requests for documents that are not noted above, please let us know and we will follow up on them as well. Jon Jon Hohenstein Community Development Director City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 651-675-5660 Fax 651-675-5694 johenstein@cilyofeagan.com From. Jim Taylor [maiito:jtaylor@interlogusa.com] Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2005 11:49 AM To: Tom Hedges Cc: patsue@comcast.net; Jon Hohenstein; Cyndee Fields; cyndee.fields@house.leg.state.mn.us; Meg Tilley; mike maguire; Pat Geagan; Peggy Carlson; Shira Kantor; Meghan Lindsay; Lea Mclean; Erin Johnson; Josh Subject: Planning Commission Hearing regarding Wensmann proposal Jon, cc. City Council/Others I just want to confirm my understanding - there is no actual 60 day time limit for a comprehensive plan amendment request? This deadline is purely arbitrary which the City could change if it wanted. At the same time you believe, but are not certain, that the Dec 27th and Jan 17th dates (for sure the 27th) were mutually agreed upon by the lawyers and not the City Council. In other words: Dec 27th and Jan 17 are contrived dates not found in the agreement or in law but rather in "Eagan history". Jon, you made this statement: "we do not have a history of rescheduling or postponing the initial hearing of an item, unless it is requested by the applicant". Are you stating that there has never ever been one single instance where a hearing has been rescheduled at the request of someone other than the applicant? Would it be entirely without precedence that a comprehensive plan amendment request require more than 60 days to be reviewed? As Community Development Director I am sure you are well aware of the first line of the City's vision statement: "The City of Eagan considers everyone with whom it interacts as a constituent and as a customer. First and foremost among these customers is its citizens. To serve its customers, the City is committed to equal representation, personal dignity, the value of diverse opinions, democratic participation and the importance of honest feedback " Does the City really believe its own words? Who is more important to the City: the "applicant" or "the citizens"? Pursuant to the vision statement you should be going to bat for us, your customers. This would be normal. Remember that your title is "Community" Tom, Page 5 of 6 Development Director and NOT "Applicant" Development Director". You refer to the city's "practices" as the reason the city might not want to reschedule. We just want you to "practice" what you preach in the vision statement. We are constituents. We are citizens. We request equal representation (at least as equal as Mr. Wensmann) before both the Planning Commission and City Council. We have our dignity and our own opinions. We also want to participate in the democratic process. We have honest feedback. What we don't have is enough time to review the issue and prepare for our representation prior to the Planning Commission and City Council voting on the issue. Mr. Wensmann has had months if not years to prepare. The current hearing schedules are way unequal (in favor of Mr. Wensmann) and do not allow us equal representation, participation in the democratic process, or an opportunity to give feedback. We have requested from the City, but have not as yet received, copies of the final executed contingent settlement agreement, the actual comprehensive plan amendment request and any associated correspondences. Assuming we got those items today we would have essentially 5 working days before the Planning Commission receives their packet from the City for their Dec 27th meeting. That's no time at all and certainly not equal to the amount of time Mr. Wensmann has had. How can you. expect us to participate in the democratic process, have equal representation, and express honest feed back when we haven't even received the documents let alone had time to review them? We need the same consideration as the applicant: 60 days. I would be shocked if you did not do this for us, your number 1 customers. We once again respectively request that the City live us to its own words and vision statement and move the Wensmann comprehensive plan amendment request to the February Planning Commission date. This would establish a reasonable amount of time for public input and participation in the normal review process. Certainly it would "abnormal" if the citizens were unable to participate or otherwise have unequal consideration. Mr. Mayor, is public input and scrutiny part of the normal review and hearing process? Jon, I eagerly await your reply. Thanks, Jim Taylor. -----Original Message---- From: Tom Hedges [maiito:THedges@cityofeagan.com] Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2005 9:33 AM To: Jim Taylor Cc: patsue@comcast.net; Jon Hohenstein; Cyndee Fields; cyndee.fields@house,leg.state.mn.us; Meg Tilley; mike maguire; Pat Geagan; Peggy Carlson Subject: FW: Planning Commission Hearing regarding Wensmann proposal Jim I have asked our Community Development Director Jon Hohenstein to respond to your most recent a mail relative to the Planning Commission Hearing process regarding the Wensmann proposal. Your recent a mail was in response to an a mail I sent to you last Friday regarding the Wensmann application. /,3 12/20/2005 Tom, Page 6 of 6 The following a mail summarizes much of what we discussed on the telephone yesterday; if you have any further questions feel free to contact either Mr. Hohenstein or our City Planner Mike Ridley. Thanks Jim Tom From: ]on Hohenstein Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2005 3:33 PM To: Tom Hedges; Mike Ridley Cc: 'George Hoff; 'Dougherty, Mike' Subject: RE: Planning Commission Hearing regarding Wensmann proposal Tom, In follow up to our conversation about the process steps for consideration of a Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment generally and the Wensmann Special Area Plan in particular, your email of December 9 to Mr. Taylor summarizes the application review process very accurately. Once the application review process has begun, we do not have a history of rescheduling or postponing the initial hearing of an item, unless it is requested by the applicant. This would be the same for this application, the other three applications to be heard on the 27th or other applications on other Advisory Planning Commission agendas. Some applications are heard and acted on at the same meeting, but once an item has its initial hearing before the Planning Commission or is forwarded to the City Council, either body may consider the item over more than one meeting, by continuing it, if the information presented or the discussion at the time warrants it. Such continuances, if found to be warranted by those bodies, would be part of the normal process to which the contingent settlement agreement refers. The only things I would add to your previous memo are the following. The City Attorney has advised that 60-120 day action timeline applies to zoning and subdivision applications, but does not apply to Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment applications. Even so, the City's practice has been to address Comprehensive Plan applications in a similar timeframe. It is also my understanding, and Mr. Hoff has confirmed, that at the time the developer submitted the contingent settlement agreement to the City for consideration, they did so with the condition that the application would be placed on the agenda to be heard at the December 27, 2005 APC meeting. Upon approval of the settlement agreement by the City Council, the developer submitted the application and the item was set on the APC agenda. I believe this confirms our conversation. If you have other questions, please let me know. Jon Jon Hohenstein Community Development Director City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 651-675-5660 Fax 651-675-5694 johensteincityofeagan..com 12/20/2005 From: Jim Taylor Utaylor@interlogusa.com] Sent: Friday, December 09, 2005 4:46 PM To: Tom Hedges; Peggy Carlson, Council Member Cc: Josh; Erin Johnson; Lea Mcclean; Meghan Lindsay; Shira Kantor; Paul Stutler; Bob Acton; Claudia Battaino; Dan & Meg Hoke; Dan Bailey; Daniel Carlin; Eric Vevea; Jack Daniels; Jack G. Conrad; Jess Carsello; Jill Nichols; Jodie Zesbaugh; John Ward; Mark Zesbaugh; MaryCay Carsello; Matt and Jennifer; Mel Wong; Mike Haugen; Neil R Charpentier; Pete Demos; Rachael Thorpe Newman; Rick Van Buren; Sharon Ysebaert; Terry Wirt; Tom Hurley; Pam Dudziak; Tom Colbert; Jon Hohenstein; Mike Ridley Subject: Planning Commission Hearing regarding Wensmann proposal To: Mr. Tom Hedges CC. Eagan City Council, Members of the Media, Certain Citizens of Eagan We understand the agreement says "timely". However, it did not, as I recall, have a deadline or otherwise define "timely". I am sure it certainly did not define timely as "blinding speed". Please don't confuse "timely" with "precipitous" which is defined as "undue haste". The current schedule is too hasty. By law, the City has up to 120 days to accept or deny an amendment application. The 120 days is, therefore, considered timely. Otherwise why would they have the 120 day deadline? The amendment request was submitted November 28th. Thus you could reasonably have the APrC hearing until February and still have time for the Council to review it in March - all while still being timely. Last time we checked the Council was elected to serve the citizens and not developers. By rushing this amendment application through well before the 120 day deadline (and against the wishes of many citizens) it appears as though there is a double standard: one for developers and one for the citizens. I'm assuming that they have not changed the due . process provision of the Minnesota Constitution. Therefore we still retain the same rights as Mr. Wensmann. (Unless elimination of the due process provision was also part of the "contingent settlement agreement". So much was in secret I guess I shouldn't assume!) We need time to study the proposal and request that the amendment issue be heard at the regularly scheduled February APrC hearing. Given that the issue has been in litigation for nearly two years surely using the full 120 days cannot hurt nor would it violate the "timely" stipulation of your agreement. Conversely, maintaining the current schedule is reckless, impetuous and would be an acknowledgement that the City really could care less about what the public thinks. It might even give the impression that the City cares more about what Judge Sutherland, Ray Rahn, Terry Wensmann, and George Hoff think than what its constituents think. Tom, if the City really wants to be the Grinch that steals Christmas as well as democracy, so be it. If you do please at least give us specific reasons as to why the City will not move the issue to the February APrC hearing. The Mayor, Peggy, Mike, Meg, and Cyndee owe us this explanation. After all, we helped elect them in to office. To the Mayor and City Council. I'll bet you did not realize how high the cost of the settlement would be. Look what it's costing. democracy, the integrity of the entire political process, the faith of your constituents in representative government, and probably your political futures. I'm glad George Hoff and Mike Doherty are not my campaign managers ! Truly, Jim Taylor -----Original Message----- From: Tom Hedges [mailto:THedgesgcityofeagan.com] Sent: Friday, December 09, 2005 3:13 PM To: Jim Taylor; Peggy Carlson, Council Member Cc: Josh; Erin Johnson; Lea Mcclean; Meghan Lindsay; Shira Kantor; Paul Stutter; Bob Acton; Claudia Battaino; Dan & Meg Hoke; Dan Bailey; Daniel Carlin; Eric Vevea; Jack Daniels; Jack G. Conrad; Jess Carsello; Jill Nichols; Jodie Zesbaugh; John Ward; Mark Zesbaugh; MaryCay Carsello; Matt and Jennifer; Me[ Wong; Mike Haugen; Neil R Charpentier; Pete Demos; Rachael Thorpe Newman; Rick Van Buren; Sharon Ysebaert; Terry Wirt; Tom Hurley; Pam Dudziak; Tom Colbert; Jon Hohenstein; Mike Ridley Subject: RE: Planning Commission Hearing regarding Wensmann proposal Mr. Taylor, We have received your email and it has been forwarded to the members of the City Council. Under the contingent settlement agreement, the City has agreed to process the application in a timely manner by the normal review and hearing process. In keeping with the intent of the agreement, the item has been scheduled for the Planning Commission meeting of December 27, the fourth Tuesday of the month being the regular Planning Commission meeting date. Currently, there are three other applications that will also be heard by the Commission that evening. The normal review and hearing process for a Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment does not include review by the Advisory Parks and Recreation Commission, however if the Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment is approved, the APrC will review the application for the subdivision of the property as is normal for that review process. /9~ Similarly, the normal review process would require consideration of an EAW for a proposed development of this scale at the zoning and subdivision review stage and not at the Comprehensive Guide Amendment stage. Basic traffic analysis is part of the staff review of a Comprehensive Guide Amendment. An EAW includes additional analysis of traffic impacts and potential steps necessary to accommodate or mitigate those impacts. As a consequence, the normal review process will take into account the issues that you have raised in their ordinary sequence. As we have to date, we will be happy to share the information that we have in this regard with you. Sincerely, Tom Hedges -----Original Message----- From: Jim Taylor [mailto:jtaylorainterlogusa.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2005 6:48 PM To: Peggy Carlson, Council Member Cc: Josh; Erin Johnson; Lea Mcclean; Meghan Lindsay; Shira Kantor; Paul Studer; Bob Acton; Claudia Battaino; Dan & Meg Hoke; Dan Bailey; Daniel Carlin; Eric Vevea; Jack Daniels; Jack G. Conrad; Jess Carsello; Jill Nichols; Jodie Zesbaugh; John Ward; Mark Zesbaugh; MaryCay Carsello; Matt and Jennifer; Mel Wong; Mike Haugen; Neil R Charpentier; Pete Demos; Rachael Thorpe Newman; Rick Van Buren; Sharon Ysebaert; Terry Wirt; Tom Hurley; Pam Dudziak; Tom Colbert; Jon Hohenstein; Mike Ridley; Tom Hedges Subject: Planning Commission Hearing regarding Wensmann proposal To: Eagan City Council From: Jim Taylor, Carriage Hills Coalition/Eagan Open Space Coalition/Citizen On behalf of the citizens of Eagan, the Carriage Hills Coalition and the Eagan Open Space Commission we would like to request that the Planning Commission delay review of the Wensmann proposal until February. Given the Christmas and New Years holidays, the 27th is a terrible day for the citizens to attend the hearing (the day before the City is closed for Christmas, for example). Many people will be out of town or busy preparing/celebrating. Furthermore, since the plan was just made available the public needs more time to review it. The current time table (especially given the holiday season) is not reasonable. Conversely since there is obviously huge public interest we believe that our request is reasonable. Secondly, while the City does not require an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) until an actual zoning change is requested, it does not mean it cannot request one prior to the Planning Commission Hearing and review. I cannot find a statute or ordinance that would preclude this. Therefore we would like the City to request one. We would also like the Parks and Recreation Commission to review the proposal before the Planning Commission does. Since it has a golf course or park element we feel they must be involved. Lastly, we would like the City Transportation Director to study the impact of the additional traffic. We are quite concerned about this impact. Again, we request that this information be obtained and sufficient time given for the public to review and comment on it before the Planning Commission meets. Without sufficient public review, sufficient public comment, an EAW, Parks and Recreation Commission input, and Transportation Department input PRIOR to any Planning Commission review we might conclude that the entire political process has been bypassed and that two standards of law exist: one for Mr. Rahn/Mr. Wensmann and one for the rest of Eagan. We are taking you at your word that the Wensmann proposal will go through "the normal process". You are our fiduciaries. We have to trust you. I can assure you that any appearance of "rushing" this issue through or trying to convolute it amidst the chaos of the holidays will be looked upon by the citizens quite unkindly. It would be a shame for the political process and public trust to be a casualty of the Wensmann suit not to mention a bad legacy for the Council. / VIP c- 00 The issue has been fermenting for years. Surely waiting a while longer for the sake of a thorough consideration and review. Please reply as soon as possible but no later than Friday. Thanks, Jim Taylor 934 Wild Rose Court Eagan, MN 55123-2486 From: Jim Taylor [jtaylor@interlogusa.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2005 4:23 PM To: Mike Ridley; Tom Hedges Cc: Jon Hohenstein; Tom Colbert; Pam Dudziak Subject: RE: Yes, if/when they submit, please ask them submit electronically so we can obtain copies. I appreciate all your help. Thanks, Jim Taylor Interlog USA, Inc.R 2818A Anthony Lane South Minneapolis, .MN 55418 Ph: 612-789-3456 x 104 Fax: 612-395-5356 email: jtaylor@interlogusa.com website: www.interlogusa.com -----Original Message----- From: Mike Ridley [mailto:MRidiey@cityofeagan.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2005 3:48 PM To: Jim Taylor; Tom Hedges Cc: Jon Hohenstein; Tom Colbert; Pam Dudziak Subject: RE: Jim, Jim, The current application is for a Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment. Because an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) is development based, it will not be required until an application is made that pertains to a Rezoning and/or property subdivision request. If and when that occurs, a copy of the EAW document will be made available. If you would like multiple copies at that time, we can request the developer provide an electronic version for us to provide you. Mike -----Original Message----- From: Jim Taylor [mailto:jtaylor@interlogusa.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2005 11:37 AM To: Mike Ridley; Tom Hedges Cc: Jon Hohenstein; Tom Colbert; Pam Dudziak Subject: RE: I appreciate it. Secondly, will there be an Environmental Assessment Worksheet developed? If so, when and how many we get copies? Thanks, ~~D Jim Taylor Interlog USA, Inc.R 2818A Anthony Lane South Minneapolis, MN 55418 Ph: 612-789-3456 x 104 Fax: 612-395-5356 email: jtaylor@interlogusa.com website: www.interlogusa.com -----Original Message----- From: Mike Ridley [mailto:MRidley@cityofeagan.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2005 11:00 AM To: Jim Taylor; Tom Hedges Cc: Jon Hohenstein; Tom Colbert; Pam Dudziak Subject: RE: Jim, The meeting on the 27th begins at 6:30 PM. Please contact Planner Pam Dudziak (651-675-5691) to arrange a time to review the development file and copies can be made of information you'd like. Mike Michael J. Ridley, AICP City Planner City of Eagan 651-675-5650 651-675-5694 Fax mridley@cityofeagan.com -----Original Message----- From: Jim Taylor [mailto:jtaylor@interlogusa.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2005 10:56 AM To: Tom Hedges Cc: Mike Ridley; Jon Hohenstein; Tom Colbert Subject: RE: Well received. Jon/Mike, what time is the APC meeting on the 27th? Secondly, can we get a copy of the application now? We'd like to study it in advance of the meeting on the 27th. Thanks, Jim Taylor Interlog USA, Inc.R 2818A Anthony Lane South Minneapolis, MN 55418 Ph: 612-789-3456 x 104 Fax: 612-395-5356 email: jtaylor@interlogusa.com website: www.interlogusa.com -----Original Message----- From: Tom Hedges [mailto:THedges@cityofeagan.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2005 10:00 AM To: Jim Taylor Cc: Mike Ridley; Jon Hohenstein; Tom Colbert Subject: RE: Jim The city has received the application from Wensmann; the staffs review by the Community Development and Engineering Division of Public Works will occur until the planning report is prepared for distribution to the Planning Commission for their meeting on the 27th. The APC meeting on the 27th is a public hearing. Please feel free to contact either Jon or Mike for additional information about the planning report, agenda schedule for the meeting etc. The traffic analysis will be included in the report. Tom -----Original Message----- From: Jim Taylor [mailto:jtaylor@interlogusa.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2005 9:46 AM To: Tom Hedges Subject: Did Mr. Wensmann submit a formal request/plan? Can we get copies of it? Thanks, Jim Taylor Interlog USA, Inc.(r) 2818A Anthony Lane South Minneapolis, MN 55418 Ph: 612-769-3456 x 104 Fax: 612-395-5356 email: jtaylor@interlogusa.com website: www.interlogusa.com Page I of 1 Jon Hohenstein From: Jack Daniels [jack.daniels@hunttechnologies.comj Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2005 5:12 PM To: patsue@comcast.net; Jon Hohenstein; cyndee.fields@house.leg. state. mn. us; Meg Tilley; mike maguire; Pat Geagan; Peggy Carlson; Shira Kantor; Meghan Lindsay; Erin Johnson; Josh Cc: Jim Taylor, Tom Hedges; Claudia Battaino Attachments: Jack Daniels.vcf Dear Eagan Employees, It has come to my attention that the Wensmann proposal for resubmitting a revised application for the development of the Carriage Hills property will be brought before the City's Planning Committee (CPC) 12/27/05. The approval for this action was voted upon and action granted at the 11/28/05 City Council Special session. As you know, the people of Eagan have not had an opportunity to review this proposal in depth, even though it's been requested. The "gag order" imposed has had a negative affect on this entire process. My expectations are that the City Council and the CPC needs to be more flexible in providing it's residents information concerning this issue and enough time, once we've had the data, to study it and provide input during the process. We know the City Council and the CPC want to provide the "BEST" service to it's constituents as is possible. After all, its in the City's Vision statement. In order to accomplish this task, I request that the currently planned review, be postponed until 2/06 thus giving all parties the opportunity absorb the information and make intelligent decisions moving forward. I'm sure that Mr. Wensmann won't object to this request because he too is a citizen of Eagan and has the City's best interest at heart. Please don't deny the people of Eagan the opportunity to have a voice in this matter! We need to work together to keep the City of Eagan a "GREAT PLACE TO LIVE" ! ! ! ! Respectively, John W. Daniels 3667 Wescott Hills Dr. This message is to inform you that all Hunt Technologies' E-Mail addresses have changed. My new E-Mail address isjeck.danie_Is@hunttechnologies.com_ Please update your records. Thank You! <<Jack Daniels.vcf>> 1 ?_/20/2005 Jon Hohenstein From: acton002 [acton002@umn.edu] Sent: Saturday, December 17, 2005 4:35 PM To: Jim Taylor; Tom Hedges Cc: patsue@comcastnet; Jon Hohenstein; Cyndee Fields; cyndee.fields@house. leg. state.mn. us; Meg Tilley; mike maguire; Pat Geagan; Peggy Carlson Subject: Re: Planning Commission Hearing regarding Wensmann proposal ***Jon - please reply ASAP to my questions and comment accordingly. Time is obviously important in this matter** Dear Mayor and City Council Members, I can not agree with Mr Taylor's email and request more. I am sure that you also agree with the importance of the Citizens of Eagan having a fair opertunity to respond to the Development Petition. Over the last few days in various stores within Eagan, I have over heard numerous conversations regarding the Golf Course development. None have been infavor of housing. Most believe a "Back room" deal was made. I would strongly encourage a delay in the meeting so that the Citizens of Eagan can be heard. Bob Acton 3490 Wolfberry Ct Eagan On 16 Dec 2005, Jim Taylor wrote: > Tom,Jon, cc. City Council/Others > I just want to confirm my understanding - there is no actual 60 day > time limit for a comprehensive plan amendment request? This deadline > is purely > arbitrary which the City could change if it wanted. At the same time > you believe, but are not certain, that the Dec 27th and Jan 17th dates > (for sure > the 27th) were mutually agreed upon by the lawyers and not the City > Council. In other words: Dec 27th and Jan 17 are contrived dates not found > in the agreement or in law but rather in "Eagan history". > Jon, you made this statement: "we do not have a history of > rescheduling or > postponing the initial hearing of an item, unless it is requested by > the applicant". Are you stating that there has never ever been one > single instance where a hearing has been rescheduled at the request of someone > other than the applicant? Would it be entirely without precedence that a > comprehensive plan amendment request require more than 60 days to be > reviewed? > As Community Development Director I am sure you are well aware of the first > line of the City's vision statement: "The City of Eagan considers everyone > with whom it interacts as a constituent and as a customer. First and > foremost among these customers is its citizens. To serve its > customers, the > City is committed to equal representation, personal dignity, the value > of diverse opinions, democratic participation and the importance of > honest feedback. " > Does the City really believe its own words? Who is more important to > the > City: the "applicant" or "the citizens"? Pursuant to the vision statement > you should be going to bat for us, your customers. This would be normal. > Remember that your title is "Community" Development Director and NOT > "Applicant" Development Director". You refer to the city's "practices" as > the reason the city might not want to reschedule. We just want you to > "practice" what you preach in the vision statement. > We are constituents. We are citizens. We request equal > representation (at > least as equal as Mr. Wensmann) before both the Planning Commission > and City > Council. We have our dignity and our own opinions. We also want to > participate in the democratic process. We have honest feedback. What > we don't have is enough time to review the issue and prepare for our > representation prior to the Planning Commission and City Council > voting on > the issue. Mr. Wensmann has had months if not years to prepare. The > current hearing schedules are way unequal (in favor of Mr. Wensmann) > and do. > not allow us equal representation, participation in the democratic process, > or an opportunity to give feedback. > We have requested from the City, but have not as yet received, copies > of the > final executed contingent settlement agreement, the actual > comprehensive plan amendment request and any associated > correspondences. Assuming we got > those items today we would have essentially 5 working days before the > Planning Commission receives their packet from the City for their Dec 27th > meeting. That's no time at all and certainly not equal to the amount of > time Mr. Wensmann has had. How can you expect us to participate in > the democratic process, have equal representation, and express honest > feed back > when we haven't even received the documents let alone had time to review > them? We need the same consideration as the applicant: 60 days. I would > be shocked if you did not do this for us, your number 1 customers. > We once again respectively request that the City live us to its own > words and vision statement and move the Wensmann comprehensive plan amendment > request to the February Planning Commission date. This would establish a > reasonable amount of time for public input and participation in the normal > review process. Certainly it would "abnormal" if the citizens were unable > to participate or otherwise have unequal consideration. > Mr. Mayor, is public input and scrutiny part of the normal review and > hearing process? > Jon, I eagerly await your reply. > Thanks, > Tom, Page 1 of 6 Jon Hohenstein From: Jon Hohenstein Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005 11:53 AM To: 'Dan Bailey; Jim Taylor, Tom Hedges Cc: patsue@comcast.net; cyndee.fields@house.leg.state.mn.us; Meg Tilley; mike maguire; Pat Geagan; Peggy Carlson; Shira Kantor; Meghan Lindsay; Lea Mcclean; Erin Johnson; Josh; Mike Ridley; Pam Dudziak; Tom Garrison Subject: RE: Planning Commission Hearing regarding Wensmann proposal Attachments: George Hoff-TLH 121605 Agreement on December 27 APC.htm Dear Dan, You're welcome. Our correspondence with you is public and, while I would ask that you be careful not to extract excerpts of communications in a way that would cause people to take things out of context, you are free to share explanations or clarifications of information with others or on the website, if you want to. I also understand that you and some others have shared concerns about the item being scheduled for the December 27th APC meeting. The attached email from Mr. Hoff explains further why the City is obligated to begin the application review process at that meeting. If you have other questions, please let us know. Jon Jon Hohenstein Community Development Director City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 651-675-5660 Fax 651-675-5694 jhohenstein@citVrofeagan_com From: Dan Bailey [mailto:dan.bailey@comcast.net] Sent: Saturday, December 17, 2005 12:15 PM To: Jon Hohenstein; Jim Taylor; Tom Hedges Cc: patsue@comcast.net; cyndee.fields@house.leg.state.mn.us; Meg Tilley; mike maguire; Pat Geagan; Peggy Carlson; Shira Kantor; Meghan Lindsay; Lea Mcclean; Erin Johnson; Josh Subject: Re: Planning Commission Hearing regarding Wensmann proposal Dear Jon, Thank you for returning my email. I appreciate you taking the time to explain the City's recent history behind the Special Area Plan designation. I would like to use this information on the Coalition's Website www.carriagehills.org to help others better understand. In my opinion your email does not address why the City is unwilling to reschedule the Planning meeting two weeks later to allow more citizens to attend? From what I understand the City has plenty of time to schedule this meeting while still meeting the requirements of moving the process along in a timely and reasonable manner. You stated, 'When the Contingent Settlement Agreement was presented to the Council on November 29, the agreement referenced the site plan and narrative that were attached to it as the necessary submittals for consideration of a Special Area Plan application. The developer submitted those documents together with the application form and fees the next day. The application review that is being done for the Advisory Planning Commission review is based on those submittals" So my understanding from what you said is that City must act / ?AI:V 12/20/2005 Tom, Page 2 of 6 on a date that the developer entered on the application which will effect thousands of residents. I believe the City Council is always supposed to have the public's best intensions in mind. I would think it would better serve the citizens to do everything the City can to allow the thousands of effected the best opportunity to join the process. Scheduling the meeting on December 27 when the City can have the same meeting two weeks later is in my humble opinion not best for the citizens of Eagan. I am looking to the City Council closely to see who will be the next leaders of our City. Thank you again for your time. Dan Bailey 651-340-6400 Original Message From: Jon Hohenstein To: Dan_-Bailey_ ; Jim Taylor ; Tom Hedges Cc: patsue@comcast.net cy-ndee.fields@house_leg.state mn.us ; Meg_Tilley ; Mike _maguire : Pat Geagan ; Peggy Carlson , Shira_-Kantor: Meghan_Lindsay ; Lea Mcclean ; Erin Johnson ; Josh Sent: Friday, December 16, 2005 4:03 PM Subject: RE: Planning Commission Hearing regarding Wensmann proposal Dear Mr. Bailey, Tom Hedges asked that I respond to your question regarding Special Area Plans. The Special Area Plan designation was developed during the City's 2000 Comprehensive Guide Plan update as a means of defining the uses and relationship of uses in certain areas of the City and laying out more specific goals and policies for areas that had mixes of land uses or unique considerations. It is a designation that gives more control and definition to an area than the straight Comprehensive Guide plan designations that primarily define general uses and densities. All of the current Special Area Plan properties were designated. by the City as a part of that update and not in response to an application. They include the Cedar Grove Redevelopment Area, three areas of business park development and redevelopment in northeast Eagan, a residential and commercial area around the Blue Cross-Blue Shield campus and an area in which a number of private properties are scattered throughout Lebanon Hills Regional Park. When the City Council was approached about whether to consider a settlement agreement or not, it was suggested that if a settlement were to be considered relative to processing a Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment, the Special Area Plan designation would be a mechanism that could more clearly define the mixture of uses and more specific conditions that might be considered than would a straight Comprehensive Plan designation. While Carriage Hills has a single owner, it is as large as several of the City-defined special areas and the developer's proposal involves a mixture of uses. So while the City has not processed a Special Area Plan application from an property owner or developer in the past, the Council determined that it would only consider the Contingent Settlement Agreement if the application to be submitted for review were a Special Area Plan. When the Contingent Settlement Agreement was presented to the Council on November 29, the agreement referenced the site plan and narrative that were attached to it as the necessary submittals for consideration of a Special Area Plan application. The developer submitted those documents together with the application form and fees the next day. The application review that is being done for the Advisory Planning Commission review is based on those submittals. Jon Jon Hohenstein Community Development Director City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 12/20/2005 Tom, Page 3 of 6 651-675-5660 Fax 651-675-5694 johenstein@city_ofeagan,com From: Dan Bailey [mailto:dan.bailey@comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2005 11:28 PM To: Jim Taylor; Tom Hedges Cc: patsue@comcast.net; Jon Hohenstein; cyndee.fields@house.leg.state.mn.us; Meg Tilley; mike maguire; Pat Geagan; Peggy Carlson; Shira Kantor; Meghan Lindsay; Lea Mcclean; Erin Johnson; Josh Subject: Re: Planning Commission Hearing regarding Wensmann proposal Dear Tom, Thank you for all your help and consideration on the highly publicized Carriage Hills application. I'm sure the other two applicants on Dec. 27 are applying for similar SAPs and thousands of voters are waiting to hear their results as well. "...we do not have a history of rescheduling or postponing the initial hearing of an item, unless it is requested by the applicant". - Jon Hohenstein Does the City have a history of amending it's Comprehensive Guide Plan by creating a Special Area Plan for a single developer and land owner? In my opinion, you are correct that our Community Development Director Jon Hohenstein "summarizes" the situation nicely for every citizen who would like to attend but cannot because of holiday commitments. Thank you for your response. Best regards, Dan Bailey - Original Message - From: Jim Taylor To: Tom_Hed_ges Cc: patsue@co_.mcast_net ; Jon_ ohenstein ; Cyndee Fields ; cynd _ .fields@house_leg,.state.mn._us ; Meg Tilley ; mike Maguire ; Pat Geaga ; Peggy Carlson ; Shira Kant ; Megha_n Lindsay ; Lea Mcclean ; Erin Johnson ; Josh Sent: Thursday, December 15, 200 11:49 AM Subject: Planning Commission Head regarding Wens nn proposal Jon, cc. City Council/Others I just want to confirm my understanding - re is no actual 60 day time limit for a comprehensive plan amendment request? This deadline ' p ly arbitrary which the City could change if it wanted. At the same time you believe, but are t ce ' that the Dec 27th and Jan 17th dates (for sure the 27th) were mutually agreed upon by a lawyers d not the City Council. In other words: Dec 27th and Jan 17 are contrived date not found in the eement or in law but rather in "Eagan history". Jon, you made this stateme : "we do not have a history o scheduling or postponing the initial hearing of an item, unles t is requested by the applicant". you stating that there has never ever been one single instan a where a hearing has been rescheduled at the request of someone other than the applicant? Wou it be entirely without precedence that a comprehensive plan amendment request require 7 than 60 days to be reviewed? 19f 12/20/2005 Please retain this copy for the file and packets. Jon Hohenstein Community Development Director City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 651-675-5660 Fax 651-675-5694 ihohenstein (a)cityofeagan.com From: Mira Pepper Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2005 8:23 AM To: Van De Walker, Dawn, R Subject: RE: Carriage Hills Golf Course Your message has been forwarded to the Mayor and City Council. Thank you for your comments. From: Van De Walker, Dawn, R [mailto:DRVandewalker@Bremer.com] Sent: Mon 12/19/2005 4:14 PM To: City Council Subject: Carriage Hills Golf Course To whom it may concern: I am writing regarding the Carriage Hills golf course situation. I am writing to tell you that I believe the following: -I reject the Special Area Plan (SAP) submitted by Wensmann Homes -I support the current city comprehensive guide plan which best serves the citizens of Eagan and preserves green space -I oppose the develpment of Carriage Hills Golf Course. Thank you for your time and understanding in this issue. I hope the city will work to keep what little land we have left which makes our city one of the most beautiful in the Twin Cities area. Sincerely, Dawn R. Van De Walker Dawn R Van De Utfaike: -f emer Deafer _inc7- nc b, } 734-43 '5 1(800) 479-5650 ext 437 t ax 65:t-734-42%r T 10 , ~pfnx ! n' 1 ~C CO P G F , I L~ ~ N' E Tl,a L I ' i F P« - he information in this ca mun!i.c2f o is proprietary and strictly conficentlal. It is intended soieiy for the use of the :ndividual or entity named above. !f the reader of this message is not the intended recipient. or the employee cr agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient an dissemination, distribution, copying or other use of the inforJ cation contained in this ,OP11-1,Unlcatlon is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error; please first notify the sender immediately and then delete this communication frorn all data storage devices and destroy all hard copies NOTICE - CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION: The information in this communication is proprietary and strictly confidential. It is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, any dissemination, distribution, copying or other use of the information contained in this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please first notify the sender immediately and then delete this communication from all data storage devices and destroy all hard copies. This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. v Jon Hohenstein From: Mira Pepper Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2005 9:08 AM To: Cyndee Fields; Meg Tilley; Mike Maguire; Pat Geagan; Peggy Carlson Cc: Tom Hedges; Jon Hohenstein Subject: FW: concerned citizen -----Original Message----- From: Tim Schmitt [mailto:b t schmitt@comcast.net] Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005 7:43 PM To: Pat Geagan Subject: concerned citizen Dear Mayor Geagan, I am writing in response to the developments surrounding the Carriage Hills Golf Course. I am outraged and dismayed by the way you and the other city council members have failed to look out for the citizens of Eagan by defending our city's comprehensive guide plan. Your reasoning for settling is flawed at best. You are letting greedy developers and a dirty property owner change OUR city's plan by out-lawyering you. It is a travesty. It all smacks more of dollar signs than anything having to do with the good of our city. I can appreciate your situation after the judge's initial ruling. Why the city of Eagan has to guarantee Mr. Rahn a profitable golf course, regardless of how he runs it, is beyond me. The fact he bought the property from someone who failed to do the same thing he is doing now makes the whole affair that much more reprehensible. Of course, he's going to walk away a very, very rich man. Dollars will be flying for everyone, and the only losers will be the citizens of Eagan and their quality of life. I've lived in Eagan for 27 years. I'm beginning a family now and would like to raise my new son here as well. The city has done many things right over the years. In most cases the delicate balance between development and preservation has been respectfully considered. The Carriage Hills fiasco, however, is a slap in the face to any such balance. I can tell you this, as well, people are going to see through the shallow victim role the city is hiding behind and hold you and your fellow council members accountable for selling us out. It is certainly the way I will vote. But my ultimate vote of no confidence is one I'm saddened to make. If this Carriage Hills sell out goes through, I am going to move to Lakeville or another city where, perhaps, there will be more respect for the rights of citizens over the dollar signs of the developers. You still have a chance to do the right thing. Sincerely, Tim & Barb Schmitt 4679 Parkridge Drive Eagan, MN 55123 Jon Hohenstein From: Mike Ridley Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2005 9:12 AM To: 'Carla Heyl'; 'steve chavez'; 'Dugan, Peter @ Minneapolis'; 'DueyBendt@aol.com'; 'garyhansen@1 stcounsel.com'; 'Jenifer Matthees'; 'ted.gladhill@ncr.com'; 'Dana. Keeley@mpls.frb. org' Cc: Tom Hedges; Jon Hohenstein; Pam Dudziak Subject: FW: Carriage Hills Proposal - A Response from the Eagan Open Space Coalition (FOECG) APC Members: Jack Conrad asked that I forward this to you. See you Tuesday night! Mike From: Jack G. Conrad Lmailto:jackgconradCa)earthlink.net] Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005 10:47 PM To: Mike Ridley; Geagan, Patrick J.; Fields, Cyndee; Carlson, Peggy; Tilley, Meg; Maguire, Mike; Tom Hedges Cc: City Council; Conrad, Jack G.; Brunet, David; Gauer, Susan; Hedlund, Laura; Roundtree, Alane; Burns, Heather; Holmes, Don; Jackson, Val & Chris; Ward, John; dueybendt@aol.com; Mike Ridley Subject: Carriage Hills Proposal A Response from the Eagan Open Space Coalition (FOECG) Dear Mayor Geagan, Council Members Carlson, Fields, Maguire, Tilley, City Administrator Hedges, City Planner Ridley, Eagan Advisory Planning Commission Chair Carla Heyl, and Planning Commissioners Bendt, Chavez, Dugan, Gladhill, Hanson, Keeley and Matthees (to be forwarded by Mike Ridley and included in Planning Commission packet), As you know, both Friends of the Eagan Core Greenway and the Carriage Hills Coalition are charter members of the Eagan Open Space Coalition. This multi-group coalition is based upon the principle that a threat to open space anywhere is a threat to open space everywhere. For that reason, I am writing you along with other members of "Friends'" Board in order to recommend that you seriously consider postponing the timetable for the Carriage Hills proposal before the Advisory Planning Commission, from December 27th into the new year---or at least consider offering a continuance to permit additional testimony from citizens and domain experts who will be unable to attend the Christmas week session. I honestly cannot recall any time in the past five years when I have witnessed among our citizens the level of disappointment, distrust, rancor, and even disgust with City Council like I'm seeing today, certainly not in relation to an open space issue. Not since members of Council fabricated interest in an executive golf course and rapidly pursued it have I seen citizens this disturbed. To push the Carriage Hills proposal through the Planning Commission over the Holidays, when many in the community are away and otherwise committed, will only add insult to injury in the minds of our residents. It would fuel an already high level of ill-will between citizens and City Hall. Surely we are all aware that we are not talking about a corner lot to be developed to host a QuikTrip; rather, we are focusing on one of the City's last remaining and significant open spaces. That said, is such apparent haste really the way any prudent elected official would wish to begin an election year? adc;~_ Let's be honest with ourselves, given the 120 day window the City has to work with on this issue, a one meeting postponement---or continuance---would be a reasonable means of restoring some confidence the citizenry may have in Council and the City. It would also allow the citizenry to more thoroughly review the proposal and critique it before the Commission, while also consulting domain expertise. Not to do so would further suggest that Council is offering undeniably preferential treatment to a persistent developer. And that is a perception, whether warranted or not, that everyone involved should wish to avoid. With growing civic concern, ---Jack Conrad, Co-Chair Friends of the Eagan Core Greenway www.Ea.ganCoreGreenway.org Joined by the following FOECG Board Members: David Brunet, Heather Burns, Susan Gauer, Laura Hedlund, Donald Holmes, Val Jackson, Alane Roundtree, John Ward - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - CITY OF EAGAN VISION STATEMENT VIEW OF MISSION The City of Eagan exists to serve the needs and interests of its present and future citizens by providing quality public services, personal and property protection, a healthy environment, a stable tax base, attractive amenities, a sense of community and ethical representation. The City will endeavor to reflect community values in an effective, responsible, efficient and visionary marmer. VIEW OF CONSTITUENTS The City of Eagan considers everyone with whom it interacts as a constituent and as a customer. First and foremost among these customers is its citizens. To serve its customers, the City is committed to equal representation, personal dignity, the value of diverse opinions, democratic participation and the importance of honest feedback. In its interactions with citizens and all other constituents, the City of Eagan is committed to the qualities of fairness, openness and responsiveness. Quality customer service will be central to all interactions with the City. VIEW OF SERVICE DELIVERY The City of Eagan is committed to being responsive in meeting the needs of the community within the fiscal parameters the community will support. Services will be provided effectively and efficiently for the quality and level of service desired by the public, through the employment of highly-qualified, creative, dedicated employees and the application of the highest standards of responsible fiscal management. VIEW OF QUALITY OF LIFE c~ 3 The City of Eagan encourages the maintenance and enhancement of all aspects of its quality of life. This includes its commitment to economic opportunity, educational excellence, efficient service delivery, environmental integrity, recreational variety, attractive neighborhoods and community pride. VIEW OF THE ENVIRONMENT The City of Eagan will proactively protect its natural environment. The land, water and air. as well as the things which live in them and on them, are important assets to be preserved and enhanced for our own enjoyment and well-being and that of future generations. The City's role with respect to the environment shall be that of active steward and conservator. Pollution, abuse of the environment and unnecessary modifications of the environment will be opposed. The City, collectively and individually, will endeavor to maintain the environment, mitigate impacts on it and enhance it to the extent possible. ~T I ice) ~f..~t/-C.~C.~~`~•/1~1 ~ ~ l i r "Cl i 2005 RECEIVED DEC 19 Page 1 of 1 Pam Dudziak From: Dan Bailey [dan.bailey@comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2005 10:33 PM To: signup@carriagehills.org Subject: Carriage Hills Public Hearing Notice & Attached Petition Attachments: CarriageHillsPetition.pdf Public Hearing Notice & Attached Petition To: Property owners near 3535 Wescott Woodlands, Carriage Hills Golf Course and citizens concerned about the loss and development of precious green space in Eagan. Date/Location of Hearing: Advisory Planning Commission Meeting: Tuesday, December 27, 2005 at 6:30 pm, City Hall Council Chambers, 3830 Pilot Knob Road. Development/Applicant: Carriage Hills/Wensmann Realty Request: Comprehensive Guide Plan - A Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from Park (P) to Special Area (SA). File Number: 14-CG-05-11-05 The Advisory Planning Commission conducts public hearings on these requests and makes a recommendation to the City Council. The tentative date for City Council action is January 17, 2006. *The above request(s) may require other variances to Eagan City Code, Chapters 11 and 13, that or not listed. How to Participate: 1. We urge you to attend the hearings and feel free to testify. We realize it is the holiday season, but unfortunately so does the City! Please schedule Dec. 27 and Jan. 17 in your calendars. 2. Print and sign our petition or go to wwvy.carriagehills.org and click on "Petition Signup", then print the attached pdf and hand them out in your neighborhood! 3. Send letters and emails before the hearing to your City Council members and the Community Development Department. Information available at www.carriagehills.org under "Representatives". Fax: (651) 675-5694 Community Development Department 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Questions: Call the Planning Department at (651) 675-5685 or Pam Dudziak, the Project Planner at (651) 675- 5691 with the above information. Thank you for your support! Happy Holidays & Best Regards, Dan Bailey Carriage Hills Coalition signup carriagehills.org www.carriagehitls.org o~ ~ 6 12/22/2005 Me-Is" Ta Eagan Advisory Planning Commission City departments From: Michael Haugen - Member of Carriage Hills Coalition and Resident of Eagan CC: File Date: December 22, 2005 Re: Wensmann Homes, Inc. and Rahn Family Partnership, LLP Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment Request Members of the Advisor Planning Commission: On December 27 you will be asked to review and vote on the feasibility of amending Eagan's Comprehensive Guide Plan to accommodate the development of 480 housing units on the Carriage Hills Golf Course. First and foremost we are asking that you postpone the review of the Wensmann proposal until a time that will allow the residents to review the documents and materials that are included in your packets. Given Christmas and the New Years holidays, the 27th is a terrible day for the citizens to attend the hearing, much less review the findings in the packet The current timetable is unreasonable; since there is obviously huge public interest and our request for postponement is very reasonable. I have included several documents for your review regarding the meeting date/ proposal. • A notice of Intervention filed by Thomas Case, Attorney at Law on behalf of the Carriage Hills coalition. • A copy of a letter that I sent to Planning Commission Members on December 8, 2005 requesting a postponement • A copy of the presentation given by the Carriage Hills Coalition at the June 22, 2004 Planning Commission Meeting expressing the concerns over the development with a very similar proposal in 2004 • Traffic is a significant concern with a change to the property. I have attached a document from the Minnesota Department of Transportation and Dakota County that illustrates the increase in the number of accidents as a result of adding traffic lights. • The owner's argument for development has been that the property is no longer viable as a golf course. I have attached a copy of a proposal from the Royal Oaks Development Group, a group that would be interested in buying the property and operating it as a golf course. The proposal was reviewed with the city, but cannot be commented on due to the current lawsuit Hopefully you will consider postpone the date for review and the additional information will be considered as you review the proposal itself. Sincerely, Mike Haugen 946 Wild Rose CT Eagan, MN 55123 RECEIVED DEC 2 ~2005 1 THOMAS E. CASEY Attorney at Law 2854 Cambridge Lane Mound, MN 55364 (952) 472-1099 (952) 472-4771(fax). tcaseydvisi.com December 19, 2005 Eagan City Council and Planning Commission c/o Department of Community Development City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 VIA FAX AND U.S. MAII, (651) 675-5694 RE: Notice of Intervention.- Minnesota Environmental Rights Act (Minn. Stat. 11613,09) Application of Wensmann Realty, Inc. to.Amend the Comprehensive Guide Plan Dear City Council, Planning Commissioners, and City Staff, On behalf of my client, Carriage Hills Coalition; enclosed please find my client's Notice of Intervention, pursuant to the Minnesota Environmental Rights Act (Minn. Stat. 116B.09, Subdivision 1). As the Notice states in detail, my client becomes a "party" to this proceeding upon the filing of this Notice with your office. As a party to this proceeding, my client . respectfully requests (and is entitled to) all "due process" considerations including, but not w limited to. timely receipt of documents; adequate time to review documents and prepare for the hearing; adequate opportunity to present my client's viewpoint at the hearing; etc. Also, as a party, my client requests no "ex-parte" communications between the City of Eagan and the Applicant. You will also note that the Notice of Intervention contains a continuing Minnesota Government Data Practices Act request. To ensure expeditious receipt of subsequent data, the Carriage Hills Coalition offers to submit a money deposit to offset city copying fees. Please contact Jim Taylor at his work telephone number - (612) 789-3456 extension 104 - to discuss details in this regard. Please contact me at your earliest convenience if you have any questions or comments regarding the Notice of Intervention. As of today, the Carriage Hills Coalition has not received all of the previously requested documents from the City files. Considering time constraints during the Christmas holidays, neither my client nor I will have an adequate opportunity to prepare for the December 27, 2005 Planning Commission meeting. Therefore, on behalf of Carriage Hills Coalition, I request that f✓ RECENFD DEC `'4.21 * City of Eagan December 14, 200 staff recommend to the Planning Commission that they refrain from voting at their meeting and that the public hearing be "continued" until a mutually acceptable date in January. On behalf of the Carriage Hills Coalition, I thank you in advance for your kind consideration. Ve trul ours Tho s E. asey TEC/mc / cc: Carriage Hills alition file Enclosure a9 CITY OF EAGAN EAGAN CITY COUNCIL In re the Application of Wensmann Realty, Inc. to Amend the City of Eagan NOTICE OF Comprehensive Guide Plan. INTERVENTION TO: Eagan City Council, c/o City of Eagan Department of Community Development, 3830 Pilot Knob Road, Eagan, MN 55122. PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that, pursuant to the Minnesota Environmental Rights Act (Minnesota Statute 116B.09, Subdivision 1), the undersigned intervenes in the above-entitled proceedings and any subsequent proceedings pertaining to the Wensmann Realty, Inc. development proposals before the Eagan City Council, Planning Commission, and other applicable commissions and committees. BACKGROUND 1. Wensmann Realty, Inc. (hereinafter, the "Developer") has filed an application with the City of Eagan for a Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment from "P - Park and Recreational Open Space" to "SA- Special Area" to develop the Carriage Hills Golf Course property, located at the address of 3535 Wescott Woodlands. 2. Therefore, a "proceeding" has been commenced pursuant to Minn. Stat. 116B.09, Subd. 1. 3. Intervenor is Carriage Hills Coalition, a Minnesota non-profit association of Eagan residents, local businesspeople, and other interested citizens that are very concerned about the impacts the proposed project could bring to the Carriage Hills area. James G. Taylor, the authorized representative, lives within the City of Eagan. All members reside within the State of Minnesota. 4. Intervenor asserts its legal right to be a party to this proceeding pursuant to the Minnesota Environmental Rights Act (Minn. Stat. 1 I6B.09, Subd. 1), which states in part, "Except as otherwise provided in section I I6B.10, in any administrative, licensing, or other similar proceeding any natural person residing within the state or any association, organization, or other legal entity having members residing in this state shalt be permitted to intervene as a party upon the filing of a verified pleading asserting that the proceeding involves conduct that has caused or is likely to cause pollution, impairment, or destruction of the air, water, land or other natural resources located within the state." (Emphasis added.) ~O RECEIVED DEC ~ 22005 5. The Minnesota Environmental Rights Act (Minn. Stat. 11613.02, Subd. 4) states, "Natural Resources shall include, but not be limited to, all mineral, animal, botanical, air, water, land, timber, soil, quietude, recreational and historical resources. Scenic and esthetic resources shall also be considered natural resources when owned by any governmental unit or agency." Consequently, the scenic and esthetic resources of city property, including parks, streets and other easements, are included as natural resources under this statute. ALLEGATIONS OF FACT This Notice of Intervention is based on the following: 1. Upon information and belief, as explained below, the Developer's application for an amendment to the Comprehensive Guide Plan, if granted, will result in a development that is likely to cause pollution, impairment, or destruction of the air, water, land and other natural resources located within the state." 2. WATER QUALITY.. Impervious surface will be added by the development. Runoff from the site contains pollutants that can adversely affect water quality. Even the most carefully designed stormwater treatment system cannot remove all pollutants. Consequently, water quality will diminish downstream from the site. 3. WETLANDS. Wetlands are likely to be impacted by additional stormwater runoff during and after construction. Human activity and the overall massive size of this project will disturb and destroy many of the property's wetlands areas as well as disrupt the natural flow of water. The property is adjacent to other developments; animals, whose habitat is destroyed, will have no other place to live. Since the wetlands on the property are home to many migratory birds, reptiles and mammals, there could be a massive reduction if not elimination of a number of species. 4. TREES. The property is 127 acres. Despite its use as a golf course, it contains a substantial number of both hardwood and softwood trees, many of which appear to be remnants of original, old growth forests and woodland wetlands. A large portion of these trees is sensitive to damage caused by construction and root damage. These trees are integrated in to the wetlands areas and provide a natural buffer between the rest of the property and the wetlands. They also provide shelter for indigenous animals. Due to the construction and subsequent human activity; many of the trees will be lost, thereby destroying the natural buffer, the wetlands areas, and animal habitats. 5. AIR QUALITY. The increased traffic will add mobile source pollutants into the air. Moreover particulates and other debris generated during the massive construction project will add unacceptable levels of dust, dirt, and other pollution to the surrounding neighborhoods. This will not only cause a large nuisance but also pose a health risk. 6. NOISE. Noise from construction equipment along with post construction traffic will substantially increase noise in the surrounding neighborhood and adversely affect animals that live in the area. 7. SCENIC AND AESTHETIC RESOURCES. Large-scale buildings will have an adverse effect on the scenic resources of Carriage Hills. Loss of trees, fauna, wildlife, and open space will also have an adverse affect. The increase in air and water pollution as well as a 2 / a~ massive increase in construction and post-construction traffic will substantially harm the scenic and aesthetic resources of the area. Result traffic congestion due to the large increase in residents will also hurt the aesthetic resources. 8. WILDLIFE, FLORA AND FAUNA. The flora and fauna associated with Carriage Hills are likely to be substantially impaired-by the proposed development. Carriage Hills is home to many deer, fox, mink, raccoon, possum, coyotes, rabbits, birds, reptiles, and other fauna. There is no way to avoid massive destruction of their habitats and wetlands needed for their survival. Given that the property is in effect, landlocked by other development, there is no other place for these animals, reptiles, and other fauna to live. They will suffer from starvation and habitat loss and eventually die out. It should also be noted that we believe Blandings turtles live on the property. The Blandings turtle is designated as "threatened". We also believe there may be other species that are designated "threatened" or "concerned" on the property. 9. ADDITIONAL FACTS AND ISSUES, Intervenor will submit additional facts and investigate other issues in support of the Notice of Intervention at the various hearings in this proceeding. STATE OF MINNESOTA) )ss. COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) James G. Taylor, being first duly sworn on oath, states that he is an Authorized Representative of Carriage Hills Coalition, the Intervenor above-named, that he has read the foregoing Notice of Intervention, and that the same is true of his own knowledge, except as to those things stated on information and belief and as to such he verily believes it to be true. 13! NT A. K4UGWAN Z NO`+ARY PUBLIC-MINNESOTA - MytommiswoeE*r"Jan.31,2010 James G. Taylor, Authorized Representative p -X Carriage Hills Coalition Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of. Decembe 2005. otary ubli MINNESOTA GOVERNMENT DATA PRACTICES ACT REQUEST This Notice is also deemed a request by the Intervenor, pursuant to the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act (Minn. Stat. 13.01 et seq.), that Intervenor be provided a copy of all data and information pertaining to the Developer's applications at the time said data and/or information are generated. All information and correspondence shall be submitted to: (1) Carriage Hills Coalition, c/o James G, Taylor, 934 Wild Rose Court, Eagan, MN 55123-2486, 3 and (2) Intervenor's attorney: Thomas E. Casey, 2854 Cambridge Lane, Mound, Minnesota 55364. James G. Taylor, Authorized Representatj~-e ' ' Carriage Hills Coalition APPROVED S TO FORM: Dated: December 2005. Thomas E. Casey #15647 Attorney for Intervenor 2854 Cambridge Lane Mound, MN 55364 (952) 472-1099 - office {952) 472-4771 - fax 4 /3 December 8, 2005 To: Members of Eagan's Advisory Planning Commission Re: Wensmann Homes, Inc. and Rahn Family Partnership, LLP Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment Request Dear Members of the Advisor Planning Commission: You are at this point most likely aware that on December 27 you will be asked to review and vote on the feasibility of amending Eagan's Comprehensive Guide Plan to accommodate the development of 480 housing units on the Carriage Hills Golf Course. I am writing to you as resident of Eagan, a member of the Carriage Hills Coalition and the Eagan Open Space Commission. Our neighborhood groups support the preservation of green space and as a resident I have an underlying belief that our city officials have been bestowed a trust of residents to uphold the long-term vision of the city, but more importantly support the wishes of those residents. As a result on the recent actions by the city council to move towards a settlement of the lawsuit, we feel that our trust has been severely compromised and we the residents have found ourselves right back to where we were 18 months ago...Fighting a development that no one other than the developer or owner wants. I would ask how many times do the citizens of Eagan have to tell our officials (via petitions, e-mails, phone calls, letters, attending meetings, etc) this is NOT how they want this land used or developed? I would ask you to review the attached reprint of the city's own resident survey that addresses open space and development in Eagan. There are several actions we would like you to make well before the December 27 Advisory Planning Commission meeting: 1. Given the Christmas and New Years holidays, the 27th is a terrible day for the citizens to attend the hearing (the day before the City is closed for Christmas, for example). Many people will be out of town or busy preparing/celebrating. Furthermore, since the plan was just made available the public needs more time to review it. The current time table (especially given the holiday season) is not reasonable. Since there is obviously huge public interest we believe that request our request is reasonable. 2. The City does not require an Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) until an actual zoning change is requested, it does not mean it cannot request one prior to the Planning Commission Hearing and review. I am not aware of statue or ordinance that would preclude this. Therefore we would like the City to request one. RECEIVEFj DEC 2 22005 3. We would also like the Parks and Recreation Commission to review the proposal before the Planning Commission does. In the new plan the developer is proposing a golf course or park element we feel they must be involved. 4. We would like the City Transportation Director to study the impact of the additional traffic, We are quite concerned about this impact. Again, we request that this information be obtained and sufficient time given for the public to review and comment on it before the Planning Commission meets. I don't think any of these requests are unreasonable considering the magnitude of these decisions and the high involvement of Eagan's residents. Lastly I would hope that since the city has faced this problem for nearly 10 years and I hope this proposal merits the same scrutiny it would as though it has come before the city for the first time. Sincerely, Mike Haugen 946 Wild Rose CT Eagan, MN 55123 651-340-4910 michael.haugen(t)comcast.net I~ REPRINT FROM THE CITY'S WEBSITE 12/8/05 Eagan Ranks Highly in New Survey The 2005 City of Eagan survey is back and 95% of residents rate the quality of life in Eagan as excellent or good. 81 % of the 400 residents polled in the random survey say Eagan is moving in the right direction. That's tops in the metro area according to research consultant Dr. Bill Morris of Decision Resources, Ltd. Morris says residents like their location, their neighborhoods and the parks and trails most. Growth, traffic and airport noise were seen as the most serious issues facing the city, though 24% could find no serious issue. In terms of community characteristics- everything from entertainment to housing options-most residents surveyed felt Eagan had "about the right amount" of establishments. However, 48% said we had too little affordable housing and 46% said we had too few starter homes for young families. Cliff Road narrowly outpolled Pilot Knob as the county road perceived to be the busiest in Eagan. 48% said they commute from Eagan, with most going to St. Paul, Minneapolis or Bloomington. While more Eagan residents say their ease of getting to work is better than in 2002, nearly a third have commute times of between 26 and over 30 minutes. What's missing from Eagan? Eagan residents appear to want more sit-down family restaurants; they would like to attract some additional upscale fine dining choices and ethnic restaurants. 77% said they would be somewhat or very likely to shop at a consumer electronics store in Eagan. The poll was conducted in August, prior to the news being widely known that a new Best Buy is planned to open in the spring of 2006 on the site of the former Eagan 9 Mann Theater and Red Robin Restaurant. 60% would be likely to shop at a women's clothing chain store, and 59% said they would be likely to shop at an organic or natural foods grocery store. Speaking of nature, Eagan residents want to preserve more of it. 86% say it is somewhat or very important to purchase additional open space areas for preservation even if it involved the use of tax dollars. Nearly 60% say they would be willing to pay something more per month in taxes to fund land acquisition. That amount averages out to $3.54 per month, but at least two out of ten residents polled are unwilling to pay any additional property taxes and nearly 20% indicate that it would depend on the specific site being acquired. Furthering the green trend, a nearly universal 99% say it is very important or somewhat important that Eagan have good water quality in its lakes and ponds. At least seven out of ten Eagan residents rated all City services as excellent or good with park maintenance, police and fire protection all regarded highly by over 90% of residents. 94% rank the courtesy of city staff as excellent or good, 92% say the staff is prompt in responding and 91% say they got their question or inquiry answered when they contacted city staff. C;?16 "While we must always strive to improve and find new ways to serve the public, these numbers are a credit to the excellent city staff and all they do each day," said Eagan Mayor Pat Geagan. In addition, 83% of residents polled approve or strongly approve of the job the City Council is doing. Again, according to Morris, that is the highest approval rating for a City Council in the metro area. Morris summed up the survey this way: "To a degree seen in only three other metro communities (Minnetonka, Shoreview and Woodbury), Eagan residents are pleased where they are and confident about where they are moving. The survey is accurate to plus or minus five percentage points. The last time the survey was conducted was in 2002. Look for replays of the October 11 City Council Workshop survey presentation on Cable Channel 16. Check back again for postings of charts and survey analysis as soon as it becomes available. Re: Page 1 of 2 Haugen, Michael From: Jim Taylor 5taylor@interlogusa.com] Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2005 12:10 PM To: John Ward; Jack G. Conrad; Claudia Battaino; Paul Stutler; Haugen, Michael Subject: FW: From: Tom Lewanski [mailto:tlewansk@fmr.org] Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2005 11:12 AM yam' To: Jim Taylor Subject: Re: G Hello Jim. Here are a couple of rare species that are found in Eagan. In addition to the species specific information you can also ask the DNR to check their Natural Heritage Information System. Here is the website that explains this. http://www.dnr.state.nm.us/ecological-services/nhrirp/nhis.html lilia leaved twayblade (liparis lilifolia). State special concern. This is an orchid that grows in rich woods. CBlandings Turtle (Emydoidea blandingii). State Threatened. This species is known to occur and nest in Dakota County. Habitat Needs: This turtle utilizes several different types of habitat. They prefer shallow, slow moving water with mud bottoms which has abundant aquatic vegetation. Large marshes that border rivers provide ideal habitat. They hibernate on the bottom of marshes and ponds. Blandings turtles, however, also require undeveloped sandy grasslands for nesting, sometimes traveling up to a mile or more to locate suitable nesting habitat. This species is known to occur at: 1. Murphy Hanrehan Regional Park Area T115N R24W - southern 1/4 of Section 27, SW 1/4 of Section 26, western 1/2 of Section 35, Section 34. TI 14N R21 W - Section 2, SW 1/4 of Sectionl (west of Highway 5), NW1/4 and SW 1/4 of Section 12 west of Highways 5 and 35, W1/2 of the NW 1/4 and the W1/2 of the SW1/4 of Section 13, W1/2 of the NW 1/4 of Section 24 west of Highway 35, Section 14, Section 23, NWl/4 of Section 26. Daniel Huff s extension is 18. I had the chance to talk with him briefly about the situation at the golf course. Happy Holidays TL RECEIVED DEC 2 M r71 rmnS Re: Page 2 of 2 Tom Lewanski Doctor of Public Administration Conservation Director Friends of the Mississippi River 46 East 4th Street, Suite 606 Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101-1112 phone 651-222-2193 ext. 12 fax 651-222-6005 For the latest updates on FMR events and programs, visit us on the web at http://www.finr.org Are you receiving "Mississippi Messages," FMR's monthly e-mail update with information about FMR events, volunteer opportunities, and news on river-related issues? To subscribe, visit http://www.fmr.org/update.html. l 2/21 /2005 c~21 Carriage Hilts Coalition The Carriage Hills Coalition Response to Wensmann Home's Application to Change Eagan's Comprehensive Guide Plan Case Number: 94-CG-05-05-04 June 22, 2004 Agenda Carriage Hills Coalition Introduction Legal • Golf Marketplace • Traffic, Environmental and Educational a;. Issues • Community Response Cl RECEIVED DEC 2 22005 ~ Who is the Carriage Hills Coalition? Carriage Hills Coalition • The Carriage Hills Coalition is a non- a4.. profit, grassroots community organization that has joined together to preserve open space. • Founded in 1996 • www.carriagehills.org ]2/JJ20D5 3 Today's Situation Carriage Hills Coalition Opposed to amending the ,1 Comprehensive Guide Plan from its current designation of Parks • Majority of residents of Eagan are opposed to changing the Comprehensive Guide Plan. a 12/7/2005.. 4 aC~ 2 The Strength of our City Lies in Its Plan Carriage Hills Cation Changing the Plan requires the following F - Significant burden of proof or justification - Requires more than just a simple majority - Evidence that the comprehensive guide and the zoning are inconsistent. (1995 Metropolitan Land Planning Act) r.. This change has other repercussions. - Others are watching ...the City must act consistently and confidently to show the strength and reliability of the plan - -Reliability permits citizens to rationally plan for the use of their property The Strength of our City Lies in Its Plan Carriage Hills Coalition y `h The Plan is intended to provide opportunities :f r.~~~,r3? and balance within the community s~ - "The City will pursue the acquisition and k development of neighborhood parks in order that each neighborhood ...is adequately served with appropriate recreational facilities." . NO sufficient rationale supports this application - Lack of justification for any change - The current zoning is consistent with the Plan's goals and objectives (in fact, a change would be a direct conflict) This change would weaken the Plan and open the door for others to seek changes 3 Enclosed Data Provided by a 2003 Golf CamageHills Coalition Industry Overview conducted by all of the major golf associations in the US. ,~`_k The following organizations have contributed financially to GOLF 20/20 in 2004: V''C le ✓ F}tL'u`do :151 Y 1 Golf'tjeek r Trends in Golf (Golf Industry Report, National Golf Foundation, 2003) Caaiage Hills Coalition w In 2003, there were 27.4 million golfers... an ALL TIME HIGH. Over the past 7 years, no other sport has experienced as big an increase in fan support than golf.... period. • Golf fan base grew by 16.8%...nearly double NASCAR which was the next fastest growing segment at 8.7% • 2001 to 2003 rounds played dropped 3%. 2002 to 2003 rounds dropped by 1.5% indicating that as the economy rebounds, so will rounds played per person. • Although the overall rounds played decreased in the US, the Upper Midwest (which includes Minnesota) was the one of the regions that increased its rounds played over 2002 (+4.4%) 4 Amin. Increasing Golf Course Traffic Carriage Hills Coalition Frequency: Marketing programs need to be focused on increasing the number of rounds per individual. w Discount programs, frequent golfer programs, group rates are examples. • New Players: Target marketing programs for growth segments. Opportunity is greatest in the female and junior population where there are significant growths in interest (Juniors segment (5-17) increased 37.5% over past 3 years) • Prudent investment in the golf facility (including driving ranges; etc.) is.necessary to increase return play or justify grounds fees. Conclusion • The data demonstrates that the demand for golf in Carriage Hills Coalition Minnesota continues to grow despite economic conditions. It is still important, however, to understand that t+" investment in "play frequency' marketing and hz respectable grounds keeping are key elements of a -do . 11111111M.- financially viable golf course. • It is logical and reasonable to question whether which, if any, of the elements have been present and to what magnitude at CHGC.... placing the claim that "the Carriage Hills Golf Course is not a viable business T entity" in serious question. Finally, we must recognize that the comprehensive plan outwardly states `The City will strive to provide a variety of parks and recreation, facilities that meet the diverse age groups and ability levels:' 5 Canriage Hills Coalition Traffic, Education and Environmental Issues Best Long-Range Interest of the City Carriage Hills Coalition Continued Open Public Space • Recreational Facilities within our city • Wildlife within our city • Clean water • Quality of Life a ~.S 6 History Carriage Hills Coalition ~r G F 4 Zoned "Public" on May 15th 1962 Not changed for 40 years • Every Comprehensive Guide Plan review has kept the zoning the same A prior attempt to develop the Golf Course was overwhelmingly denied by a joint Planning / City Council meeting on March 25, 1996 Traffic Carriage HIls Coalition >3000 additional trips per day Connection to Wescott Hills Drive - Not designed as a collector street - New cut-through from Yankee-Doodle to Wescott 1998 City Council denied upgrade of Wescott Hills Dr when Wescott Woodlands was upgraded. Traffic Carriage Hills Coalition =r New traffic to Hunter Lane - Currently has no traffic - Not designed as collector street • Traffic increase at Wescott Woodlands / Yankee-Doodle - Across from a School - Traffic Light? • County? Housing Goals Carriage Hills Coalition tr" ;y. 44 rgit , f Eagan is predicted to EXCEED i Z. recommended Non-single family homes at build out. • We are at 47% • Met Council recommends 35-38% • This will put us at 48.4% x ' 8 Education Carriage Hills Coalition Our Middle and Senior High Schools are already filled beyond capacity. • The peak is at 8th grade • Will take 5 years to improve. Our children's education is priceless • Another development will only overcrowd the schools worse. • If we build more schools - in 10 years we will have too many schools. Parks Carriage Hills Coalition 4e.,7- r k rf;A` Carriage Hills - integral to Park system City has not developed "Municipal Course" because of Carriage Hills • Eagan High School Golf Team Just won 3rd in State. ;r • Do we always want to have to drive to other cities for recreation? Essential to our community health 9 IMP Water Carriage Hills Coalition a d:` j:3, `ct: Fl'L F'kytS - • Ponds = Storm run-off basins • Altered water quality • Dry up in summer • Freeze in winter 9.. Loss of natural wildlife • Breed Mosquitoes • West-Nile Virus Wildlife Carriage Hills Coalition Golf course is extensively used by: - Geese, Ducks, Song Birds, Deer, Rabbits etc • Humans and development is the biggest threat to wildlife. • Once open land is gone it is gone. • Once the wildlife are gone they are gone. • How do: homes "enhance natural resources 10 Abb 0" Increased Property Value Carriage Hills Coalfion ,'7+r',tii~' . 160 Million - New Taxes Cr • c i • s n c 'ty space ss o • s of a if Eagan Carriage Hills Coafition Eagan is a gem Recent passage of a School eferend m ort e, No 84% Support Land in agan t °b Su o increasin taxes to said u rt 6110 Its veg 11 No 30 11 Community Response Carriage Hills Coalition Hundreds of concerned citizens have "donated time and financial support. • The community is speaking loudly in opposition of amending the Comprehensive Guide Plan. • We have had thousands of hits on our website and hundreds of individuals have subscribed to our newsletter -M 4. . • Citizens want to maintain our quality of life in. Eagan. - ~ / 12 r. t k A qt C~ tiFC~~Ki ~jL C,j'.• L c4 N 7 fl~C-_ ~'~'y JF T= = L 9 ^r~ ~~jr w7.djL~ ~G.i, .0 `~.._y U'1• mm M C° C Ju t c tYS 7 7 v W ~ 4 c~ k ~m U~ i :i• m s fi. "r ~ ~ t• c ~ F ~ ~ ~ c f'' yy O mk V N y 'Ll :2 ^I-7 '7L-QF+ t .~'ai :1779: f0 V C t 7 i U c w k i = C J• .jl L il: 7i ^ F z~ m T :J j ~~`~'.j L pl au tl'~'~F iR TMm }4 mZi a{ 4£.9;ak1°~ ~ .j M m9 ~ Z 9gcc~22at vF~F r.c_~r :y ~SS~as~••E ~ M (J s-N--9VwA^ kS1t, m my ~rp:i 7 1 ! +~J Vq Ll.., V V i:. _ ^7 k ` rA V ,y T 4 C7, v 1... 4Jl V l Ll '1: ~TMfnc~ii~ sfiFcv eA~;y~.~~ °CS:rn ~ ~ 't mc,~llt ac iL}t"~ €YLm 9. cif ~ivC~2 7l ~fi- m%7cc C7 }`~FO'+~S~L~ ~'?+3? r vmb o +avc 5~ n &<~ LL n C art q • o 44 y a o v IL 6S ti. N _ N. a ~ $ t~•. •L 4 0 o C~ ~ c ' ~ mrr _ . y yc- h `L m ~ ~ _ Cl) T+ a LL o f L N f V o Q N C " to RECEIVED DEC 2.22005 f_ - "J C VL '1 E ~ •Y m C - ~ y .U ~ C£ C y G C^ !.~U x a~i m G f t b '7 N ' N'~~'~.'.• r~y~~m ''a1 ~`C •qC J T~j~~r'•1°T'ti°`'j$'~`~''3-'• 41 -7 cC' qV F}~7 T `NN of ptL- J~S C4:~ V ,sJ tiJ~V 'ju V ^1 27 4 27 L' /ll ' ' C J rp m .p c:. 4Y V } m 4 mN cIJ'!' vo GM•tb ~u~r~~Tv~cC7v ~.:~qv S~~.~~!~ 4•p~' ~N~im u~v"°~4s7~~q~1>.~~°ac~N ~.T ~l.?.C ~'A N~L .Cq N~CC .Vr~£PZN•rotiyr4J +i .gym N•S 7I V c- N~~ G~ N C L C• ~ }.{V~. ..Vi Y14 L~'V v_J Slri Urr L` C 'L~ Si 73C 7 t*7 G0 C M ~ C T `yJ~j 'U _U ry~j ~ s• S • S q ~i3mc Qc`~t ~•~v c2~ aL-M c c n v a _ ~L Y ❑ a' k, .G ~ fa 0 ? v is o _ L L 4 • X11 • qft RECEIVED DEC 2"21005 a~ • N C O V M ~ m N V L ~ ~ Q w+ C 0 U~ cc ° (Q co O cc Q Q N p a O W N AY/ c U W O A-A ~_OQ O C O N \ s -p1 co N 2 d 3 M~ ¢ V N a o ° om O O ° 43 V ~ y o N U L V ~ i LO co RECEIVED DEC 2 22005 a O L~ MAMMON----- - m ' 0 o - • 0 • • CD ti 0 RECEIVED DEC 2 22005 Royal Oaks Development Group Mr. Tom Hurley 916 Wild Rose Court Eagan, MN 55123 Tel: 651-653-0707 Proposal to Present Purchase Offer For the Carriage Hills Golf Club Property RECEIVED DEC 2 ,22005 O Overall Concept Royal Oaks Development Corporation (RODC) seeks to work the City of Eagan in order to create a renowned family golf, recreation and sports learning center hereinafter referred to as "The Eagan Golf & Entertainment Center" or the "Center". Like the National Sports Center has done for Blaine and the Mall of America for Bloomington, the center we envision will help put Eagan on the map. It will provide the city's constituents with family-friendly and healthy entertainment while also attracting tourism to the area. This center will have several components. The first component consists of a comprehensive golf learning, practice and play center situated on the Carriage Hills Golf Club (CHGC) property. The property will be transformed to consist of a double-tiered 350 yard driving range, an 18- hole putting course, and a full-length 9-hole golf course. Since 80 percent of Americans have a 20 or higher handicap or do not play much golf, the center will provide a safe place for families and people of all abilities to learn the sport and play. In addition to the "golf-learning" aspect of the property the center will also sponsor many tournaments and events to generate income and promote the center. Such events include a "golf triathlon" (drive, putt, and play), mountain bike races, cross-country skiing races, cross-country running marathons (like a Grandma's or Twin Cities' Marathon), and snowshoe marathons around its cart paths and perimeter. By offering cash prizes, obtaining corporate sponsorships, extensive promoting, and working with the Eagan Convention and Visitors Bureau we feel we can make such events regionally and nationally known. The second component of the center is its non-sports orientated entertainment aspect. While the center will have traditional concession operations the RODC hopes to lease a small portion of the property or otherwise build on its facility either a sit-down family or an upscale fine dining restaurant. Part of the restaurant building would be restaurant, part would be pro-shop, and part would be banquet facility. Given the results of the recent survey of the quality of life in Eagan we feel such a restaurant would be well received. In addition, if properly laid out it would provide a reception hall for banquets and other activities such as weddings, corporate events, etc. The third aspect of the center is an enclosed "indoors sports complex". This facility, perhaps to be placed on the former Snyder Drug warehouse property, would consist of two indoor ice rinks, an indoor soccer field, and an indoor lacrosse field. Because it would be indoors it would allow nearly year-round use and would meet the growing demand for indoor sports facilities. When not being used for sports, its size would enable it to serve as a convention or other large group facility. By having such a large facility, Eagan could sponsor tournaments or hold other events that would bring in additional tourism dollars. Other aspects/property considerations might also be the current Lost Spur Golf Club property. Such a large parcel might enable additional indoor facilities or outdoor activities such as a mountain-bike course, a small ski / snowboard facility, running course, or even a paint ball facility. Because the golf learning and play center on the Carriage Hills property is the cornerstone of RODC efforts as far as Eagan is concerned this report here on out deals only with that aspect of the Eagan Golf & Recreation Center. Revenue & Costs As indicated, our concept is to increase revenues on the current property by not only reconfiguring the course but also by adding additional sources of revenue. In this way we intend the first component of the center to derive its revenues from five major sources: traditional golf, nontraditional golf, food/restaurant, sponsored or group events (tournaments, etc), and non-golf sports activities. We anticipate that it will take approximately 18 months for this component of the Center to be fully operational. Below is a more detailed description of each area and its anticipated annual revenue streams: Traditional Golf Revenues: Daily fees for 9-hole course, daily fees for 18-hold putting course, patron cards for 9-hole course, driving range, golf gars, rood and beverage concessions, merchandise, and rentals (pull carts and clubs). Estimated annual revenues: $1,270,000 Nontraditional Golf Revenues: Night golf, lighted driving range, lighted putting course. Estimated annual revenues: $120,000 Restaurant: Food and liquor operations, banquet hall and facilities rental. Estimated annual revenues: $280,000 Sponsored / Group Events: Center rental for corporations, Bike/Running/Cross-country, tournaments, Community education, at risk youth programs, Parks & Rec. Dept, School District or other educational entities. Estimated annual revenues: $200,000 Non-golf Sports Activities: Cross-country ski daily and annual use fees, snow tubing daily and annual use fees, mountain bike daily and annual use fees, snowshoe daily and annual use fees, snowboarding daily and annual use fees, paint ball, Frisbee golf, and rental of respective equipment Estimated annual revenues: $70,000 Total Estimated Annual Revenues: $1,940,000 Below are the annual operating expenses we anticipate we will incur to generate these revenues. Selling General and Administrative Expenses: $980,408 Course & Grounds Maintenance: $550,000 Total Estimated Annual Operating Expenses: $1,530,408 Estimated annual net income from operations: $409,502 Investment Money RODC believes a $7,600,000 capital investment will be required for the first component of its plan: $6,000,000 for the purchase of the Carriage Hills property, $1,100,000 in capital improvements and $500,000 to cover expected operating losses while the property is being improved. The $7,600,000 will come from a 10 percent investment cash investment by the RODC and the rest through financing. As for the restaurant: the RODC will, in all likelihood, merely lease a small portion of the land in exchange for lease payments and/or royalties off food, liquor, and other activities. Thus the actual restaurateur will be responsible for payment of necessary improvements. As for the property purchase: if one examines the golf-only aspect of the Center's operations, we believe that the property's value, as zoned and in its current condition is $6,000,000. Obviously this amount is well below the $13,000,000 Wensmann offered the current owner. The offers are dissimilar, though, in that our offer is based on current zoning and comprehensive guide plan. Wensmann's is offer is based on a contingent offer that takes issue with the zoning and guide plan. The offers are not apples to apples but rather apples to oranges. While on first blush it might appear that our offer would be turned down our strategy is to "wait out" the Wensmann option. We believe that our willingness to acquire the property as currently zoned and at a price that represents a nice return on the property may be attractive to Mr. Rahn if he feels the zoning cannot be reasonably changed. Moreover, it undercuts his argument that the City's refusal to change the zoning caused him economic harm. On the other hand if the City allows the zoning change or otherwise allows residential development on the property, our offer will of course be unacceptable. What the RODC Requests from the City We request the following from the city: 1. We request that the city assist us with obtaining public/private financing. Due to the litigation and surrounding negative publicity, traditional bank financing is not an option. 2. Allow appropriate variances for parking, course improvements, signage, etc. 3. Allow a liquor license for the center and restaurant. 4. Actively work with us to promote the Center. 5. Through its Park and Recreations Department, guarantee a minimum of revenues by offering golf and other events by and through the Center. 6. Offer cross marketing and promotion through Cascade Bay, The Blast, Eagan Civic Arena, etc. 7. Jointly sponsor and assist with event costs (police, fire, ambulance, cleanup), etc. 8. Work with the RODC to obtain County, State and other governmental entities to promote the Center, its events, and its well-being. 9. Long-term property tax relief for the Center and assist the RODC in obtaining relief at the County and State level. 10. The ability to utilize existing city parks and recreation or other grounds keeping capabilities at a reduced rate. . 11. Work with RODC to acquire and develop other properties related to the other components of the Center. 12. Continue efforts to retain current zoning and comprehensive plan integrity. What's Does the City Get in Return? The City gets many things in return: 1. A safe investment guaranteed by a large parcel of land that some (Wensmann) are indicating is worth $15,000,000. 2. Demonstrates that the current zoning is reasonable and should undercut any legal efforts that state to the contrary (i.e., preserves comprehensive plan and zoning). 3. Citizenry that respects its government for remembering that the comprehensive plan and open space are worth fighting for (remember the Mayor's words as to why the City appealed as well as the results of the recent survey of the Eagan quality of life). 4. Good press and accolades from the media and citizens. 5. Tourism dollars associated with not only the Center itself but also the tournaments and other events the Center will bring. 6. Eagan will be put on the map and shall be recognized as a leader in sports and recreation. 7. Another place for the City to demonstrate its commitment to the quality of life in Eagan. An Alternative to where "everyone wins": Mr. Wensmann has indicated to the RODC that it would take approximately $15,000,000 for the RODC to buy the course and his interest. If the city wants a possible dispute resolution we propose that the city become a partner with RODC or become a shareholder in RODC. The city would then contribute, along with the RODC towards the $7,600,000 in capitalization. Pamela Dudziak -----Original Message----- From: Mira Pepper Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2005 3:05 PM To: 'philrunge@charter.net' Subject: RE: Your message has been forwarded to the Mayor and City Council. Thank you for your comments. -----Original Message----- From: philrunge@charter.net [mailto:philrunge@charter.net] Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2005 2:29 PM To: Peggy Carlson; Pat Geagan; Cyndee Fields; Mike Maguire; Meg Tilley Cc: support@carriagehills.org Subject: I am happy to see that the members of the City Council have come to understand that the ruling of the District Court was significant in showing the shortcomings of the City's Comphehensive Plan concerning Case #14-CG-05-05-04. It is refreshing to see that members of the cities governing body are able to perform an abrupt, yet needed, about-face when the realism of due process on equal ground provides evidence to support the rights of property owners over secondary rights of adjacent dwellers. Steps to insure the advancement of progress have resulted from the courts decision to uphold the rights of Mr. Rahn and Wensmann Homes. I am appalled by the feeble attempts of non-property owners who use leverages not associated with property rights to stop the development of needed home development. Toll Brothers and Wensmann Homes Inc. are providing a needed service that can not be balanced against the wants of area residents who argue that their rights are being violated as property owners because the private land next to their dwelling under consideration for tract development. I am proud that the rights of the correct parties in this matter were vindicated. The man who thinks he can and the man who thinks he can't are both correct. a Pamela Dudziak -----Original Message----- From: Tim Schmitt fmailto:b t schmitt[a)comcast. net~ Sent: Monday, December 19, 2005 7:43 PM To: Pat Geagan Subject: concerned citizen Dear Mayor Geagan, I am writing in response to the developments surrounding the Carriage Hills Golf Course. I am outraged and dismayed by the way you and the other city council members have failed to look out for the citizens of Eagan by defending our city's comprehensive guide plan. Your reasoning for settling is flawed at best. You are letting greedy developers and a dirty property owner change OUR city's plan by out-lawyering you. It is a travesty. It all smacks more of dollar signs than anything having to do with the good of our city. I can appreciate your situation after the judge's initial ruling. Why the city of Eagan has to guarantee Mr. Rahn a profitable golf course, regardless of how he runs it, is beyond me. The fact he bought the property from someone who failed to do the same thing he is doing now makes the whole affair that much more reprehensible. Of course, he's going to walk away a very, very rich man. Dollars will be flying for everyone, and the only losers will be the citizens of Eagan and their quality of life. I've lived in Eagan for 27 years. I'm beginning a family now and would like to raise my new son here as well. The city has done many things right over the years. In most cases the delicate balance between development and preservation has been respectfully considered. The Carriage Hills fiasco, however, is a slap in the face to any such balance. I can tell you this, as well, people are going to see through the shallow victim role the city is hiding behind and hold you and your fellow council members accountable for selling us out. It is certainly the way I will vote. But my ultimate vote of no confidence is one I'm saddened to make. If this Carriage Hills sell out goes through, I am going to move to Lakeville or another city where, perhaps, there will be more respect for the rights of citizens over the dollar signs of the developers. You still have a chance to do the right thing. Sincerely, Tim & Barb Schmitt 4679 Parkridge Drive Eagan, MN 55123 a 12/22/2005 15:42 6516880072 AMEX PAGE 02 December 21, 2005 To: Advisory Planning Commission City of Fagan From: Jeff Pohland 3425 Golfview Drive #305 Eagan, MN 55123 Re: Carriage Hills/Wensrnann Realty Case: 14-CG-05-11-05 I fully oppose the development of Carriage Hills Golf Course. I believe nothing has changed since 1996 when over 4,000 citizens made it abundantly clear that they opposed the golf course being developed. The following support my position: 1) Property values will be negatively impacted on properties surrounding the golf course. 2) The increase in people and vehicles will result in more congestion, traffic and road noise in an already increasingly congested area. 3) The loss of open green space is not acceptable. Residential development should not replace open space. Once it's gone, it's gone. Eagan is overdeveloped as it is. The golf course is designated as a Public Facility and needs to remain zoned as such. There is very little or no benefit in developing the golf course. I request the Advisory Planning Commission recommend the City Council deny Wensmann's request to amend the City of Eagan's Comprehensive Guide Plan and to deny approving a Special Area Plan for the course. Thank You, 4 Jeff Pohland Community Development Department 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 RE: Advisory Planning Commission Meeting Carriage Hills / Wensmann Realty 3535 Wescott Woodlands, Carriage Hills Comprehensive Guide Plan Greetings Advisory Planning Commission, I am a resident of 3440 Golfview Drive, which is adjacent to the 3535 Wescott Woodlands, Carriage Hills Golf Course area in question before this planning commission. The deciding factor in my decision to move to Eagan was the presence of the Wescott Woodlands/Carriage Hills Area. I was looking at a number of properties in other suburbs at the time, and I can guarantee that I would NOT have purchased the property at 3440 Golfview Drive if the Wescott Woodlands/Carriage Hills Area was not the park/green space it is today. I can also say with certainty that if the Comprehensive Guide Plan is amended to allow for the destruction of the Wescott Woodlands park space, I will be looking for a new home. The Wescott Woodlands/Carriage Hills area is a vital and attractive component of our community that must remain designated park space. If the zoning is changed to allow for so-called "development," we will be losing a special piece of Eagan that can never be reclaimed. Therefore, I must strongly object to the proposed amendment. Thank you for taking the time to hear my thoughts and concerns on this subject. Si erely, / Nathan C. Pakan 3440 Golfview Drive #316 Eagan, MN 55123 ~L/ y Pamela Dudziak -----Original Message----- From: DMolda@a-p.com [mailto:DMolda@a-p.com] Sent: Friday, December 23, 2005 11:51 AM To: thomas.jensen@comcast.net; City Council Cc: Benton G. Ford; City Council; David Spillman; David Spillman; Greg Haupt; George & Brenda Lohmer; Deb Haupt; John P Jensen; Mary Jo Jensen; Liz Spillman; Mike Pierce; Jay Lauby; Roberta Mueller; signup@carriagehills.org; Thomas (ATT) Jensen; Thomas J Germann Subject: Re: Carriage Hills Golf Club Redevelopment Eagan City Council, I support the position that Mr. Jensen has voiced to you in his email to you this date. It is most unfortunate that this meeting is scheduled over the holiday week as it interferes with many City residents' vacation plans. Hopefully this is not why it comes up in your agenda at this time. As a resident of Eagan for the past 21 years, I use to enjoy the open spaces but knew at sometime that they would tend to go away, however we do not need for them all to go away. Yes, we have parks and bike trails to enjoy but please do not add to the residential clutter that already surrounds the county roads of Lexington and Yankee Doodle. Residents of Eagan are just now having to deal with more air traffic noise with the new runway at MSP International, which I know the City did a lot to fight the issue with MAC, however this issue is something you can do something about. Keep the green spaces in tact even if you cannot control the airspace over our head. Over the 21 years I have lived here, the citizens of Eagan have incurred many tax increases to build the quality schools of district #196 and without much of a lot of opposition. We are a group of residents that enjoy a high standard of living. Please help us maintain that quality of life by preserving the green areas of Carriage Hills Golf Course. We can be pro-development and still think green. Redevelop the developed areas of the city where bituminous paving already exists such as where the new Best Buy is going and the movie theatre was failing. That is a more even exchange rather than green grass and golf balls for bricks, mortar and asphalt roofs and parking lots. Thank you in advance for your proactive approach to keeping Eagan a city that cares about its residents. David Molda Eagan Resident "Thomas P. Jensen" <thomas.jensen@comcast.net> To: <citycouncil@ci.eagan.mn.us> Cc: 12/23/2005 10:39 "Thomas \(ATT\) Jensen" AM <thomas.jensen@comcast.net>, "Mary Jo Jensen" <jensenmj@comcast.net>, "John P Jensen" Please respond to <jens05850d.umn.edu>, "Jay Lauby" <thomas.jensen@co <plasfab@aol.com>, "David Spillman" comcast.net> <David_Spillman@hines.com>, "David Spillman" <dspi116185@aol.com>, "Benton G. Ford" <bford@rehder.com>, "Thomas J Germann" <tomgerm ann@solutionsresource.org>, "Mike Pierce" <piercem@comcast.net>, "George & Brenda Lohmer" <glohmer@mnmed.org>, "Greg Haupt" <gdknahaupt@aol.com>, "Roberta Mueller" 0 ys <ramueller@gwest.net>, "Deb Haupt" <hauptantiek@comcast.net>, "David Molda" <dmolda@a-p.com>, "Liz Spillman" <LSpillman@Gresserco.com>, <signup@carriagehills.org> Subject: Carriage Hills Golf Club Redevelopment For Information and petition sign up: HYPERLINK "http://www.carriagehills.org" www.carriagehills.org To: Eagan City Council From: Mr. Thomas P. Jensen 1123 Tiffany Drive Eagan, MN 55123 Subject: Carriage Hills Golf Club Redevelopment I object to your plans to redevelop the parcel of property we Eagan residents refer to as Carriage Hills Golf Club. I cannot attend the Planning Commission Hearing on December 27th at 6:30pm. I have copied on this email many of my lifelong friends and residents of Eagan to advise them of this upcoming activity. I propose that Eagan Planning Commission: 1. Reject this concept of redeveloping the Carriage Hills Golf Club. a. It's a long tem asset of Eagan b. It's some of the last remaining open space in "built out" Eagan C. Once gone, it's gone..... Diamond T Ranch riding stable forhorseback riding and hayridesM d. The city/county/state tax revenues don't need this additional revenue e. This proposed development will place additional loads on infrastructure of utilities and school district _..what's the NET benefit? 2. Continue with the current land usage. a. Continue with private ownership. (Why not when another course flourishes in the community?) i. Maybe the course needs new ownership, promotion, and marketing. ii. Who else besides the housing developer is interested? iii. A reduced 9 hole course is not what's needed as an appeasement. b. What's the possibility of entertaining a developer to take the course AND some adjoining properties and take it an upscale neighborhood with fairway residential lots rather than aging multi-dwelling properties? 3. Propose a municipal Golf Course a. It would compliment the fine collection of Eagan's assets: Ice Arenas, Parks, and Water Park. b. It would demonstrate "Vision" on the part of the planning commission. I challenge you, Planning Commission, to come up with more appealing "LONG TERM" alternatives for the interests of the Eagan residents. We don't need a developer to eliminate an open space asset to the community and replace it with additional residential development. Sincerely, Thomas P. Jensen a L/ oF 3 HYPERLINK "mailto:thomas.jensen@comcast. net" thomas.jensen@comcast.net 651.334.0035 FAX: 253-295-7260 This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email by mistake please notify the sender immediately by e-mail and delete this e-mail from your system. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the company. No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.51212 - Release Date: 12/23/2005 (See attached file: winmail.dat) a~~ Pamela Dudziak From: Larry & Kim Woods [mailto:woods598@earthlink.net) Sent: Friday, December 23, 2005 3:39 PM To: City Council Subject: Opposition to Carriage Hills Development Dear Eagan City Council, My family and I are Eagan residents and we are very much in favor of keeping the 120-acre Carriage Hills area an open space and not allowing it to be sold for private development. We live less than one mile from Carriage Hills and if the area were developed, I firmly believe the quality of life my neighbors and my family currently enjoy would be significantly eroded. Development would mean the permanent loss of a prized "green" space along with all of its benefits. The influx of people following the development would only compound the loss with increased traffic congestion and other ills. My family and my neighbors prize the open spaces in our community and we oppose development of the Carriage Hills area. I therefore encourage the city council to hold a special election to allow the citizens to vote on whether the city should issue bonds in order to buy Carriage Hills and retain its designation as a park. Respectfully, Larry Woods 3653 Windtree Court Eagan, MN 55123 651-452-8103 a To Don't Let The City of Eagan Destroy our Plan - Carriage Hills Update The City of Eagan has decided to settle its lawsuit with a developer who wants to destroy the City's Comprehensive Plan in order to turn one of our last large pieces of undeveloped properties, Carriage Hills Golf Club, in to a very large housing development. Unfortunately the City used flawed logic to arrive at its decision. By their reasoning: in order to save the plan from change they had to change it. Put another way, in order to save the plan they had to destroy it. The Comprehensive Plan is designed to develop a long-term strategic vision for the City. It's so important that there are procedures in place to ensure that our City is developed responsibly and for the good of the entire community. The Plan has been developed over decades and involved an enormous amount of effort on the part of past City administrations and countless citizens. The current City Council has hastily decided it knows best and is prepared to throw away all this effort and careful planning. Since Eagan has nearly reached build out, we're at the end of the "long term". The entire Eagan infrastructure was developed relying on the comprehensive plan and plan process. All who have invested in Eagan have also relied on the plan. The infrastructure was not designed for nor can it safely and reasonably accommodate over 1000 new residents and another 3000+ car trips per day. That's why the Comprehensive Plan has Carriage Hills guided as it currently is---open space. Unfortunately the picture gets darker. The City is trying to move this whole issue "under the radar screen". They're doing this by rushing it through the Planning Commission and City Council hearing process and scheduling the Planning Commission hearing the week between Christmas and New Years. They believe by scheduling at this time no one will notice. Well we did. Don't let the City get away with this. Don't let them abuse the citizens in this way. We can save the comprehensive plan and Eagan open space. We can demand that the City put the whole issue on the ballot. It's within the Council's ability to do so. Here's what you can do: 1. On the reverse side of this page is a petition. Complete and submit the petition. Get your friends, family and neighbors to also submit a petition. 2. Show up at the Planning Commission Hearing on December 27, 2005 and the City Council meeting on January 17. Both are at 6:30pm in the City Hall Council Chambers. Let your voice be heard. 3. Call the City and let them know how you feel. You may call or email the City at 651-675-5001 or citycouncil(fti.eaQan.mmus 4. Join the fight by joining the Carriage Hills Coalition by visiting our website at www.carriagehills.ora. HELP SAVE THE CITY PLANNING PROCESS AND OPEN SPACE IN EAGAN. ACT NOW BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE! RECEIVED DEC 27ypp~ ~~q PETITION To: Eagan City Council and Planning Commission From: Citizens of Eagan Re: Carriage Hills Golf Club We, the undersigned, hereby demand that the City of Eagan NOT amend its comprehensive plan to accommodate the development of Carriage Hills Golf Club. We also demand that the City put the issue as to whether or not it should buy the property in order to preserve both the plan and public open space, to a vote of the citizens of Eagan. (Please have members of your household, friends, and family, etc., that are residents of Eagan fill out the petition). You may mail, email, or fax the petition as follows: Carriage Hills Coalition C/O Dan Bailey 3662 Cardinal Way Eagan, MN 55123 Email: si4nup a0carriaQehills.org Fax: 612-395-5356 I A Name Telephone or Email Name Telephone or Email Name Telephone or Email Name Telephone or Email Name Telephone or Email Name Telephone or Email DEC11200~ PETITION To: Eagan City Council and Planning Commission From: Citizens of Eagan Re: Carriage Hills Golf Club We, the undersigned, hereby demand that the City of Eagan NOT amend its comprehensive plan to accommodate the development of Carriage Hills Golf Club. We also demand that the City put the issue as to whether or not it should buy the property in order to preserve both the plan and public open space, to a vote of the citizens of Eagan. (Please have members of your household, friends, and family, etc., that are residents of Eagan fill out the petition). You may mail, email, or fax the petition as follows: Carriage Hills Coalition C/O Dan Bailey 3662 Cardinal Way Eagan, MN 55123 Email: signup carriagehills.org Fax: 612-395-5356 Name Telephone or Email N me Telephone or Email Name Telephone or Email Name Telephone or Email Name Telephone or Email Name Telephone or Email Pamela Dudziak From: Paul Larsen (mailto:paulthepal@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, January 09, 2006 6:57 PM To: Peggy Carlson; Cyndee Fields; Mike Maguire; Meg Tilley; Pat Geagan; cheyl@cityofeagan.com; Tom Hedges; Jeff Johnson Subject: Carriage Hills Solution (Idea) Good Evening, I am Paul Larsen living at 3635 Blue Jay Court, a block from Carriage Hills. Last week I called Mayor Geagan with an idea, and he called me back within two hours. I appreciate that kind of responsiveness very much. I want to share with you the idea I submitted to the Mayor. I am NOT a member of Carriage Hills Coalition, and disagree with their tone, and the espersions that have been cast towards the Rahn's, Mr. Wensmann, and the City. I am speaking for myself, with the City and future generations in mind. My idea was to have the 30 acres that are being dedicated for a being proposed for a wrap around golf course, instead, be placed in an area south of Duckwood Drive and become a neighborhood park. I have spent hours thinking about this and will detail the reasoning and logic for your assessment. I think the best part of that property is the south end with the big pond on the SE corner and the two ponds on the west edge which was hole 12. This could be a walking trail around the ponds a picnic area, maybe a tennis court,and a small parking lot. This would maintain green space in a large area. Additional single family homes could be placed along Duckwood Drive, and various type homes be located on the proposed golf area. I was a member of Carriage Hills Golf Course and love golf. I understand that this property will be developed. I also understand Ray Rahn can't make money in the present configuration. As a golfer of over 38 years, I have serious reservations about the proposed new golf course layout. A golfer doing damage to property or persons is legally liable. So you take a risk when you hit a golf ball. The course layout makes it a high risk to play, and will cause people to avoid patronizing it, in my opinion.There are homes within 39 to 50 feet of the greens. On #5, which is 180 yards, an error of distance of 8% long will result in hitting a townhouse. I assure you that I have an error of that distance every round at some point, especially since a short shot goes in the pond in' front of the green encouraging a long shot. Similar problems exist on numbers 7 ,8 and a long shot on number #9 will hit the road. Additionally, in the course of nine holes, you have to cross four streets. This layout is really tight all the way around. This type of par three course is meant to attract beginners and so bad shots will be commonplace. If the course fails, the City would have a strip of land around a neighborhood, which would afford a limited value. Rather a park would stay that way, be enjoyed right away, and maintain a value to the City. This dedication of 30 acres approximate value ($3 million), will cost the City nothing to get, better than buying the whole parcel, and has no risk of ; (what if we get this strip of land?), what will we do with it? The Coalition just wants it left all golf, that will not happen, they need to look at the big picture. Please feel free to email or call me (651-428-9157) with your comments. Thank you for your service to the City. Sincerely, Paul G. Larsen Yahoo! DSL Something to write home about. Just $16.99/mo. or less a oco~, Pamela Dudziak From: Glenn & Natalie Elliott [mailto:gjelliott8@msn.com] Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 3:15 PM To: City Council Subject: Carraige Hills golf club Hello- I am a resident of north-east Eagan and want to voice my opinion about the possible development of a housing development on the current sight of the Carriage hills gold club. I am strongly OPPOSED to this development and feel that the city of Eagan should keep this space for green space. I am concerned about the additional traffic, congestion and loss of natural beauty that it will create for our city. Thanks for your consideration. Natalie Elliott 910 Wild Rose Court Eagan,MN 55123 Gjelliott8@msn.com ~S3 Pamela Dudziak -----Original Message----- From: Rick Van Buren fmailtoAcklvb0hotmail.coml Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 8:40 AM To: Peggy Carlson; Cyndee Fields; Pat Geagan; Mike Maguire; Meg Tilley Subject: Minnesota Ranking of Over Valued Real Estate Markets >Dear Eagan City Council Members, >>I have no doubt that Wensmann has all good intentions to fulfill the build >>out as planned. However, there are mitigating circumstances that can >>change the outcome.... For example, a large offer from a "National >>Builder" (Pulte, Hovnanian, DR Horton etc.) for the land (last Sunday's >>St. Paul Pioneer Press had an ad from Hovnanian looking for large tracts >>of land in the Metro area). Also, if he gets into financial difficulty >>how will he finish the project? I think Eagan requires only a 50% bond to >>be posted.... right? Wouldn't it be ironic if Pulte (through aquiring >>Wensmann) >>eeded up owning the golf course they were denied 10 years ago? >>Attached to this note (Word Format) is a chart showing the overvaluation >>of real estate in the Twin Cities. Quite revealing and disturbing. The >>link to the web site shows several charts for areas around the U.S. The >>Twin Cities ranks #18. >>Best regards, >>Rick THURSDAY, JANUARY 05, 2006 Over-valued real estate ##18 - Minneapolis-St.Pauls minnealxilis-St. Pauls =w~ Housing Market Index 199511=10Q WO kK.rv>rlu:u Real estate prices in Minneapolis have taken off like a rocket. Prices have risen by 56 percent in five years. The market is now 60 percent above long run trend. If this rocket runs out of fuel, there is only one direction it can fly - downwards! http://overvalued.blogspot.com/ SS Pamela Dudziak From: DMK KROLICK [mailto:icerink@msn.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2006 12:25 PM To: City Council Cc: mriedley@cityofeagan.com Subject: carrige hills golf course This is in response to the last Planning Commission meeting. I would like to comment on Duckwood Dr. as the main road out of the Golf Course property. There are three driveways on the north side of Duckwood between Carriage Hills and Lexington Ave. Two of the driveways have 8 garages each and parking for 10 to 12 more vehicles. The third driveway serves the pool area and party room for the condos. There are 250 units on the north side of Duckwood and there only access out of the area is Duckwood Dr. There are also 3 streets that intersect Duckwood from Carriage to Lexington. They are, Blue Jay Way, Hummingbird Ln and Falcon Way. These 3 streets service the 225 single family homes on the south side of Duckwood, as well as the Condos. Almost all of the people use Duckwood as the way out of the complex because it has a stop sign at Lexington. The only other way out of the complex is Falcon Way and people do not like to use Falcon because there is no stop sign at Lexington. I would like to suggest that you come and look at the area before you make a decision on this very important issue. I would also like to comment on Ray Rahn not being able to make any money on the Golf course. When you drove into the course it was like driving into a junk-yard. There were old pipes , bags of beverage cans (the bags were broken open),branches of trees that had been cut down etc. He also lost many players when he dug a "water" hole in the middle of the fairway on #12. When he dug the hole the pile of dirt stayed there for 2 years and when he finally decided to remove it, he waited until it had rained for a few days , so there were big ruts in the fairway from the dump truck, they are still there if you want to see them. And if that wasn't enough he then ruined 2 more holes (#13 and #17) when he put in the driving range. He also put the driving range in the worst spot on the property because every Spring that area was under water so nobody could use the range and of course Spring is when most people want to hit balls. The year before he closed the course he told everyone that he would not be open the following year . When he did open is 2004 he told everyone he would only be open until September, so nobody wanted to buy a Season Pass. He also told the Leagues to find someplace else to play because he wouldn't be open. He also had many people playing for free because he couldn't see holes #1 or 18. People would come in the club-house and buy a ticket and go out and pick up their buddy and get two for the price of one. No-one ever checked tickets. When Bill Smith owned the course he had the ticket seller in the front room of the club house and was able to see what was going on. My husband, son, brother and I played there all the time, at least 2 or 3 times a week. We didn't buy a season pass the last year because of the above reason, altho my son did buy one that last year. If Rahn had advertised the course, he would have had more business. There were many people in Eagan who did not even know the course was there. We talked to some people just the other night who are golfers and they said they lived in Eagan 5 years and had never heard of Carriage Hills. ~J~ We hope you reconsider your decision and let this go through the Appeals Court. If you would like to come to Carriage Hills and take a look at it , my husband and I will go with you and show you what he did to the course. Pamela Dudziak From: Gerald Larson (mailto:ljerry4@msn.com] Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 7:28 AM To, City Council Subject: Carriage Hills - please reconsider ! Importance: High In the news today: Mendota Heights WINS their appeal It was city zoning against comprehensive guide plan and the COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN WON This proves these cases CAN be won ! I urge all of you to reconsider! We need to contact and/or use the Lawyer used by Mendota Heights and continue the appeal ! All is not lost! This is what the citizens of Eagan want you to do! Thank you! Gerald (Jerry) Larson and Jan 3616 Falcon Way Eagan, MN 55123 651-687-0529 Pamela Dudziak From: sjobergalaix@comcast.net [mai[to:sjobergalaix@comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 7:41 AM To: peagan@cityofeagan.com Subject: Carriage Hills Dear Mayor and Council Members: Please continue to fight against the rezoning of the Carriage Hills golf course. I live in the Greensboro neighborhood just south of the golf course. Hooking up our horseshoe street to the golf course development would destroy our safe streets. It would make our street a thouroughfare for cars. We picked this location because of the low traffic, as many people do when they buy a home. I am sorry that Carriage Hills cannot seem to make a profit as a golf course. But the Owners bought it as a golf course and I do not believe that they were ever told that they could count on converting it to housing and make a ton of money. Please continue to fight to keep your comprehensive zoning in place. I believe most of Eagan residents stand behind that stance. I just saw that in Mendota Heights, they have had some success fighting the development again. Sincerely, John Sjoberg 3747 Greensboro Drive Eagan, MN 55123 Y Pamela Dudziak From: Al and Roxanne [mailto:atglo99@comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2006 9:07 PM To: Joanna Foote; Meg Tilley; Mike Maguire; Cyndee Fields; Peggy Carlson; Pat Geagan; Tom Hedges Subject: Carriage Hills Hi, My name is Roxanne Reed. My husband Al Glover and I have owned our home at Carriage Hills Condominiums for nearly 10 years. I myself have lived in Eagan since 1976. 1 feel I must speak out regarding the situation involving the Carriage Hills Golf Course. I have loved living in Eagan, have raised my children here and am a local church member. I am very proud to live in this city, and very proud of it. I am however, not proud or happy with the changes you are now considering making to the comprehensive guide plan. This plan was made many years ago by very wise people who realized how important it is to keep our area green and beautiful. This city, like many others have allowed homes to be built where one wouldn't think you could squeeze another one in. I am asking you please to reconsider the decision you are considering to allow Wensman Homes, or anyone else to ruin one of the last areas like this. You have recently allowed the Diamond T to be demolished and that beautiful area ruined, please do not let it happen to this area also. At the bottom of this email I have copied a statement you yourselves wrote as recently as May 27, 2005. What changed your mind in such a short time from then until now to make such a drastic change other then threats or money from either the Rahns or Wensman Homes. Thank you for taking the time to read my email and I do ask you very strongly to consider NOT changing the City's Comprehensive Guide Plan. I also feel this is worth fighting for. Respectfully Roxanne Reed 3440 Golfview Dr #216 Eagan MN 55123 City of Eagan Published May 27, 2005 The Eagan City Council issued the following statement this morning: After careful analysis, the City of Eagan has decided to appeal the District Court's decision on the Carriage Hills case. We take very seriously protecting the integrity of the City's Comprehensive Guide Plan and all the years of careful thought, public participation and work that went into it. We, as elected officials, have a legal responsibility to protect the integrity of the City's Comprehensive Guide Plan. Otherwise there would be unrestrained and unplanned development. We think the guide plan is worth fighting for. ago Pamela Dudziak -----Original Message----- From: Stephanie Devine (mailto:stephanie devineCaD_hotmail.coml Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2006 11:02 PM To: Pat Geagan Cc: paul_devine@visi.com Subject: Strive to Keep C. Hills as Green as You Can! Dear Mr. Mayor and Council Members, As a neighbor bordering the Carriage Hills property and as a concerned citizen of this fine community, I urge you to do what you can to keep this area "green", or at least as much as is possible. I think it is safe to say that those of us who would prefer to see this area undeveloped have lost the battle. While this is a somewhat bitter pill to swallow, I feel that the time has come to accept that we will soon acquire a few more neighbors around here. I don't have any extensive, or even minimal, knowledge on the subject of development and city planning. As a matter of fact, I'm just a Mom, with a few ideas about what it takes to keep kids and families in general happy. Here is what I think would help make the proposed development truly beneficial to our neighborhood: (and when I say "our neighborhood", I mean the people who will be living in the development as well): *The 30 acre 9 hole executive golf course, most definitely, as long as it is well-maintained. I think it would be a real treat to the children as well to allow sledding in the winter. Frankly, that is what the kids do now and they get a huge amount of enjoyment from it. * A commons, which would contain a playground, a skating rink in the winter, and possibly even a small swimming pool (nothing approaching Cascade Bay). * A walking/bike path around the perimeter of the development which could be used for cross-country skiing in the winter. * And of course, maintaining as many trees and wetlands as possible. In the light of all that's transpired, I don't feel this is too much to ask. On the contrary, I think these enhancements to the development can only benefit everyone in the long run. I can only hope that you will thoughtfully consider them. The future of our community really is in your hands. Sincerely, Stephanie Devine 6/ Pamela Dudziak From. Dan Bailey [mailto:dan.bailey@comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2006 11:21 PM To: Peggy Carlson; Pat Geagan; Cyndee Fields; Mike Maguire; Meg Tilley Subject: Mendota Heights won! Dear Mayor & City Council, From what I understand a similar golf, course issue was decided in MN Supreme Court recently for a case concerning Mendota Heights and a golf course owner there. The Court over turned a lower Court's ruling in favor of the City and it's Guide Plan. Please ask our City Attorneys to look into this case to see if it could help in the Carriage Hills issue. At worst it could scare the other side to stay away from the Appeal enough to provide some real bargaining power with the recent requests of our Planning Commission: "More Green Space" - Drainage ponds should be called Green or Open Space. "Fewer Lots" - 480 is Not a Compromise! "Fewer Units" - The Density levels are as High as Allowed. Where is the Compromise? "Park Dedication Needs Are Met" - Provide at least the 45 acres in the Original plan. "Grading, Landscaping, Wetlands, Runoff need to be addressed" - Ask the developer if they would be willing to pay for all the surrounding lots to have flood insurance if they are so sure it won't affect the neighbors. "Fewer Variances" - If you can't even make them build on lots the size of what the law says, and the size everyone else has too, then really how much power over a Special Area Plan do you really have? I am looking for Leadership from you as Leaders of our City. There will be a lot of people attending the January 17th meeting. This is your opportunity to show everyone why we should vote for you in the next election. I intend on becoming very vocal about my opinions before this next election. I believe many of the folks I have been meeting with recently feel the same way. I look forward to listening to your deliberations on January 17. Best regards, Dan Bailey 651-340-6400 Pamela Dudziak From: rockhopper70 [mailto:rockhopper70@netzero.net] Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 6:49 AM To: Pat Geagan Subject: Please fight to protect the comprehensive plan Dear Mayor Geagan, Wild places rejuvenate our spirits, offer much needed recreation, fortify our connection with nature, and sustain a vast array of wildlife. But greed has taken a toll. Land developers keep up the pressure to use our last remaining public wild lands for their profit. The quest for large, new homes are the epitome of class distinction. New technology has spread the epidemic of urban sprawl into a pandemic of destruction to our natural environment. We can no longer take this natural bounty for granted. Wetlands have been drained and filled. Aquifers have been lowered and streams converted to canals for the quick disposal of storm water. Forests have been cut, and prairies plowed and paved. We all realize that the plans to build a high-density residential development on the picturesque 120-acre parcel, one of the rapidly vanishing open green spaces in Dakota County will create a increased tax base. But is that really a benefit? Developing Carriage Hills Golf Course will also mean 120 acres of open space lost forever, loss of prime recreational space, added strain on water and sewer, increased traffic, and most of all, loss of precious wetlands, wildlife, and habitat. Developers say it's better to convert failing golf courses into much-needed housing and boost city tax rolls. Eagan does not need more upscale executive homes, townhouses and condos. Of course Ray Rahn has the right to sell his land but he had no right to assume that the city would change its zoning laws to accommodate his whim when he bought the land. The benefits of keeping Carriage Hills for public facility use goes far beyond the sport of golf. Everyone benefits from the availability of valuable open space, recreation, community beautification, natural resources preservation, reduced air pollution, water quality preservation, and flood control. Stand in the middle of Carriage Hills golf course, in the late fall, early spring, or dead of winter, and you can forget that you're in the midst of the city. It's tough to completely blot out a metropolitan area. Planes fly overhead and, yes, traffic rushes by on nearby Lexington Avenue and Yankee Doodle Road. But inside Carriage Hills, woodlands and a marsh where bird chatter fills the air, the cacophony of urban life is almost imperceptible. Look around the abandoned golf course. Drop a few breadcrumbs into the marsh and a gaggle of ducks and Canada geese are likely to assemble, hissing and honking as they fight over the food. Look up, and you can see an egret soaring gracefully through the air. As you look down, you see oak leaves that cover the ground. Once this land is gone, it's gone for good. 6.~ Soon, it could be rolling under lawns of sod, with formaldehyde enriched executive estates and over-priced town homes. The bulldozers will begin what to them, is just another day's work to earn their living. As they scrape, flatten, and destroy the ecosystem before them, nature will explode. Out of every tree, bush, weed, hill, crevice, out of the very air itself, life will explode. Deer, rabbits, groundhogs, birds, squirrels, gophers, mice, insects, everything alive and self-propelled, will erupt with impending doom. Developers today believe that nothing, not rabbits, not trees, not wetlands, must get in the way of their profits. I write this e-mail to ask you to follow the city's comprehensive plan, to reject the proposal and to keep the area as public open space. Not long ago, you believed that the comprehensive plan was worth fighting for. You appealed the initial decision to allow the golf course to be rezoned but now you've abruptly changed your mind. Regards, Marie Malinowski 3560 Blue Jay Way a~~ Pamela Dudziak From: Jan Larson [mailto:Jan.Larson@state.mn.us] Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 8:41 AM To: City Council Subject: Carriage Hills zoning As you probably heard, the MN Supreme Court overturned a lower court ruling in regard to a Mendota Heights golf course case that allowed the golf course owner to sell property to a developer against their comprehensive plan. This provides a great opportunity for Eagan since Eagan can then cite this case for the Carriage Hills golf course. urge all of you to reconsider and continue the appeal! This is what the citizens of Eagan want you to do. Thank you, Jan Larson 3616 Falcon Way Eagan, MN c~9 165 Pamela Dudziak -----Original Message----- From: refarleel@mmm.com fmailto:refarlee1(a-)mmm.coml Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 8:45 AM To: Pat Geagan; Peggy Carlson; Cyndee Fields; Mike Maguire; Meg Tilley Subject: Wescott Hills Drive and the January 17 City Council Meeting Dear Mayor Geagan and City Council Members Carlson, Tilley, Fields, and Maguire, I am writing in regards to the proposed "access to the south" for the potential development on the Carriage Hills Golf Course. In the December 29, 2005 St. Paul Pioneer Press, the chairperson of the Eagan Advisory Planning Commission is quoted as saying "The commission recommended the amendment with a few conditions: the developer has to add more green space, include an access on the south, and build fewer units and lots, Heyl said." called Pam Dudziak, an Eagan City Project Planner, about this statement. Ms. Dudziak was kind enough to explain that the details of roads into and out of the Carriage Hills Development will not be discussed or finalized until later in the process if the development proceeds. However, Ms. Dudziak said it was appropriate to raise the issue of the roads now since roads were addressed by the Advisory Planning Commission. I live on Wescott Hills Drive. According to Ms. Dudziak, this street is considered to be a collector street. Ms. Dudziak said that collector streets typically do not have driveways directly off the street. Because Wescott Hills Drive has such driveways, Ms. Dudziak said that the consideration of making this street a through street is "problematic". I submit that this is more than problematic for the following reasons: 1. By my own measurements, Wescott Hills Drive is 32 feet wide. There are no sidewalks on either side of the street. Other collector streets in the area are North Ridge Drive at 38 feet wide with a sidewalk on one side, and Elrene Road at 44 feet wide with a sidewalk on one side. I think you will agree that North Ridge Drive and Elrene Road were designed to be through streets. Wescott Hills Drive was not designed to be a through street. 2. If collector streets typically do not have driveways directly off the street, please note that there are 47 such "non-typical" driveways on Wescott Hills Drive. 3. The children in the neighborhood walk to Woodland Elementary School. Without a sidewalk beside a through street, the children will either need to be bused to school or to walk on a busy through street. If you do build a sidewalk, whose land will be taken? What is the plan for Wescott Hills Drive if the road is connected to Wescott Woodlands? Will parking be banned on this street? Will the street be widened? Will cars need to pass single file past parked cars? Unfortunately, those are your options if you decide to make this street a through street. My plea is that you consider these very real issues NOW as you decide on the future of Carriage Hills. If you decide to develop Carriage Hills, I ask that you do NOT connect Wescott Hills Drive to Wescott Woodlands. The time to make this connection was 20 years ago when the street was created, before houses were built along the street. Now 47 families own homes on this street. This is not the time to think about redesigning the street. Please research the issue of "access to the south" for the Carriage Hills development before the January 17 meeting. Do not vote for the development and later find out about the problems in making Wescott Hills Drive a through street. a~2 6l VOTE AGAINST ACCESS TO THE SOUTH ON WESCOTT HILLS DRIVE. My concerns are shared by other homeowners on Wescott Hills Drive and Wescott Woodlands. We do not know if we will be given a chance to talk about this issue at the January 17 meeting. Therefore, please contact me about this letter so that I have an opportunity to discuss my concerns before the meeting. Thank you for your time. Renee Farlee 3694 Wescott Hills Drive Eagan, MN 55123 phone: (651) 454-1927 Pamela Dudziak --Original Message----- From: mywongl@mmm.com fmailto:mywong1(@mmm.coml Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 9:50 AM To: Cyndee Fields; Peggy Carlson Subject: A Personal Note Dear Peggy and Cyndee, am writing both of you because of any of the members of City Council, you both seem to "get it" when it comes to understanding that once we lose Carriage Hills, its gone... done... no going back. I know that your legal counsel has painted a number of "what if' scenarios that really put into question whether this appeal and case is truly winnable. What I don't want you to forget is this.... we can look to lawyers to help assess the situation (keep in mind, in this case, anything they project would be pure speculation as this is new to all of us...including them) but we must look to ourselves for the courage to defend what we know in our hearts is right. The case involving Mendota Heights presents a much less likely chance of prevailing (as it is zoned residential to begin with) than what we have here in Eagan and although Mendota has lost the appeal, they remain on track to take it to the Supreme Court ...to defend what they want for their citizens. In the case that we lose and have to acquire the property, you know that an overwhelming majority of citizens support funding to preserve what green space we have left. Recent reports show that we have one of the lowest taxes in the metro area ...we have to really question whether this is an enviable place to be if it reflects a lack of investment in critical elements such as green space. Not to be melodramatic about this, but you are our hope in this process. Many of us feel steamrolled despite our best efforts. We have spoken to countless Eagan citizens who remain shocked at the City's lack of courage to unequivocally defend our comprehensive plan. have stated that the strength of our City lies in its plan.... settling at this point is the easiest path to choose. What I am hoping that you know is that the citizens are willing to pay the price of defending this plan because we believe in it...that it is a key to our success. What I am asking is for you to have the courage to not give in...fight for what has made us successful... fight for us. Sincerely, Mel Mel Y. Wong 275-4W-02 3M Medical Division Marketing Operations Manager Tel: 651-737-6342 Fax: 651-733-6771 Pamela Dudziak -----Original Message----- From: Mike Kraus fmailto:mikekraus(a)hotmail.coml Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 10:24 AM To: Pat Geagan Subject: Carriage Hills Greetings Mayor Eagan, I am writing to express my concern over the planned development of Carriage Hills. While I am a golfer, and liked to golf on the course, that is not the reason I am writing today. My concern is the point of contract law pertaining to this case. My understanding is that the current owners of the course purchased the land, and the golf course, under contractual obligation to keep it as such. That should be the end of the story. This land was never to be zoned for housing development, and the current owners knew that going in. I understand that they want to make a buck, we all do, but as it pertains to the law what if we all just forgot about our contractual obligations in favor money when it was convenient? That is not what our society is built upon, and the current owners should not be allowed to develop on this basis. Thank you for your time and continued excellence in the running of our fine city. Mike Kraus 6 Pamela Dudziak From: FREDANNETTE@aol.com [mailto:FREDANNETTE@aol.com] Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 10:25 AM To: Meg Tilley; Mike Maguire; Cyndee Fields; Peggy Carlson; Pat Geagan Subject: proposed carriage hill dev As a 35 year resident, 3590 Wescott Woodlands, I feel that the city should not have let the pressure and threats of lawsuits from the owner anddeveloper cave in and agree to change the long range plan to preserve greenspace in the city to this type of developement. I also feel that if the city can afford to build a waterpark, it can also be able to run a public golf course in one manner or other. Possibly changing it to ex-9 hole course. Also, in regards to Wescott hills drive being put thru, as I understand you intend to do. Consider the amount of traffic this would promote thru a residential area without sidewalks and curving street. This is definitely a safety issue. Children walk to school and play in the area. Especially with prposed addition to West Publishing in addition to UPS traffic and other- to and from work traffic this would promote. 1 urge you to work to find a better use for this area than the proposed one. Your consideration would be appreciated by all concerned. The city cannot afford to lose one of the green areas left. Fred Wessel 3590 Wescott Woodlands Pamela Dudziak From: dan.bailey@usbank.com [mailto:dan.bailey@usbank.com] Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 10:52 AM To: Pat Geagan; Peggy Carlson; Cyndee Fields; Mike Maguire; Meg Tilley Subject: Please Read Dear Council, The Leaders of this City did not give up because of 1 Judge's ruling! The financial costs maybe high, but the end result is well worth it and could make you true Public heroes. Please read the following article posted in the Pioneer Press: http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/news/local/l 3604553.htm Thank you. Dan Bailey 651-340-6400 dan.bailey@usbank.com Electronic Privacy Notice. This e-mail, and any attachments, contains information that is, or may be, covered by electronic communications privacy laws, and is also confidential and proprietary in nature. If you are not the intended recipient, please be advised that you are legally prohibited from retaining, using, copying, distributing, or otherwise disclosing this information in any manner. Instead, please reply to the sender that you have received this communication in error, and then immediately delete it. Thank you in advance for your cooperation. Golf course housing ruling is overturned Page 1 of 2 Posted on Thu, Jan. 12, 2006 Golf course housing ruling is overturned High court: City plan trumps zoning designation BY NHIA TONGCHAI LEE Pioneer Press The Mendota Heights Par 3 Golf Course won't be sprouting houses anytime soon. In a 4-3 ruling Tuesday, the Minnesota Supreme Court overturned a lower court ruling that allowed the course's owners to sell the property so it can be developed into single-family homes. The high court ruling means Mendota Height's comprehensive plan listing the property as "golf course" trumped a zoning designation for the site as residential. "We're certainly pleased with the results," Mendota Heights Mayor John Huber said. "They wanted to force us to change our comprehensive plans, and we declined." The city's comprehensive plan, adopted in 1979, reaffirmed in 2002 and detailing land use, states that the 17.5-acre site is designated as a "golf course." But under the city's zoning ordinance, the land is labeled as low-density residential, meaning a development of single-family homes is a possibility. In an e-mail response to the Pioneer Press, Alan Spaulding, golf course co-owner, said that they had full legal rights to develop the property as stated in the city's current zoning ordinance when he and a partner bought it in 1995. "Although the lower court rulings were reversed, the City of Mendota Heights is now required to resolve the conflict between the zoning of our property and its guidance under the Comprehensive Plan," Spaulding wrote. "We are hopeful this conflict is resolved in a manner which allows our group to complete the pending sale of the property." He added that a resolution of the conflict would determine the course's future. Spaulding did not, however, indicate what the new owner would do with the land. He also wouldn't name the potential buyer. The golf course is still on par to open for the 2006 season. According to court documents, the owners wanted to pursue alternative uses for the property because the golf course failed to generate profitable returns. Spaulding would not comment on whether the course was operating on a budget deficit or not. In 2004, the district court first ordered the city to amend its comprehensive plan to allow low-density residential housing at the property. The city's lawyer disputed the ruling, citing that the adoption of the Minnesota Land Use Planning Act of 1995 gave overriding power to the city's comprehensive plan when it conflicted with zoning ordinance. The city's comprehensive plan provides for preservation of the majority of the natural environment of properties. It wants to resist the deterioration of the environment as well as maintain existing residential areas. After being upheld in the appellate court, the ruling was appealed by the city to the state Supreme Court. Huber said the City Council will meet soon to discuss the changes that need to be made with the comprehensive plans and zoning ordinance so they won't conflict. Nhia TongChai Lee can be reached at 6S1-228-2120 or nlee@pioneerpress.com. C;L l1f-?tP,mn1nte=cnntentM... 0111212006 Pamela Dudziak From: Rand, Michael H [mailto:Michael.Rand@ci.minneapolis.mn.us] Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 12:35 PM To: Pat Geagan; Peggy Carlson; Cyndee Fields; Mike Maguire; Meg Tilley Subject: Upcoming Council Decision on Carriage Hills Golf Course As the President of Carriage Hills Condominiums Inc., I would encourage you to vote against this development next Tuesday. There are many reasons why this should either be left as green space or run as a golf course, however too many to list in this email-here are a few of them you should consider: 1. The most recent Minnesota Supreme Court ruling overturning a lower court decision to force the city of Mendota Heights to change its comprehensive plan. I don't see anything different from what has happened in Mendota Heights than what is currently happening with the City of Eagan. 2. During the construction of this property, there has been speculation that property values, especially the condominiums of Carriage Hills, may decline while this is happening. People who may decide to sell or have to sell for one reason or another (especially senior citizens facing the possibility of going into nursing homes, etc.) may realize a decrease in value of their homes. 3. Many homeowners, including myself, bought property in Eagan and especially within close proximity of the golf course, expecting to have this green space available to use as a golf course or even possibly other uses. Now we as homeowners don't know what to expect. People are feeling that the council does not have the guts to stand up to a developer and the property owner who has sued the city to get their way...We are faced with having "more control" over this development (which remains to be seen) vs. going on with the appeal. 4. The current discussion of what is guaranteed to the city as to the fulfillment of the development by Wensman or any other developer. The response has been that a bond would be guaranteed to ensure development. I'm not too clear about this but if you remember that when Carriage Hills Condominiums was in the planning states, six buildings were originally planned. We have three buildings to our association. The developer for our condominiums ran out of money. So, what has changed in the 22+ years that would make the golf course developer guarantee that what he planned on developing actually takes place? 5. People who are affected by this are voters and for the most part they will remember what will take place on January 17, 2006 regardless what happens... Some of you are up for reelection and this is one campaign issue that will affect the upcoming council elections, so please remember this!!! Thanks for your consideration. Michael Rand President, Carriage Hills Condominiums, Inc. 3425 Golfview Drive #215 Eagan, MN 55123 ty of Minneapolis-Finance 350 S. 5th Street, Suite 127 Minneapolis, MN 55415-1314 Office: 612-673-2929 Fax: 612-673-2719 michael.rand(aDci.minneapolis.mn.us e;~ 7.3 Pamela Dudziak From: PaulBresher@cs.com [mailto:PaulBresher@cs.com] Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 1:05 PM To: Cyndee Fields; Peggy Carlson; Pat Geagan; Mike Maguire; Meg Tilley Subject: Carraige Hills Golf Course January 12,2006 Concerning: Carriage Hills Golf Course From: Paul Bresher, 3698 Greensboro Dr., Eagan To: City of Eagan Mayor and Council members: This email is in support of the city abiding by their comprehensive plan and the wishes of many interested parties to leave Carriage Hills undeveloped. We have dealt with this issue for too long now. Last time around, the present owner came forward and said he was the person whom we could count on to purchase and manage this golf course. No one forced him. And now he is planning to simply sell the property, for what are no doubt huge financial gains, because he has decided to move on. I suggest there are commitment and trust issues associated with this matter that many of us have chosen to ignore. I would not assume I know what motivates this property investor other than money; it always does. He is taking the easiest and most profitable way out of a failed business opportunity. But what is the city council doing? The Mayor and City Council have the moral responsibility and made pledges to manage and guide us in the best direction for the city overall and to the greater good of its residents. It appears that once again special interest, developer, and big money have dictated the policy direction. When this land is thought about many years from now it will always be known as the 120 acres of open green space taken from the city and given away by a compliant City Council. What ever happened to the pledge of the city council to do the right thing for the city? No one likes the plan and the road we're moving down, yet no one demonstrates the courage to step up and say NO! Your positions on the city council are shrouded in public trust and the sense that you won't be guided by special interests. By selling out to this development you too are taking the easy way out. Commitment and courage are hard to measure, but it is always easy to recognize when it is lacking. Sincerely, Paul Bresher Pamela Dudziak From: Thomas Stephens fmailto:tstephens8l@msn.coml Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 1:10 PM To: Pat Geagan; Peggy Carlson; Cyndee Fields Cc: Mike Maguire; Meg Tilley; tstephens81 @msn.com Subject: Carriage Hills Discussion Dear Mr. Mayor and City Council Members, My wife and I have owned property at Carriage Hills Condominiums since August of 2003 and enjoy our immediate surroundings. Therefore, we do not support the proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Guide Plan of the green space, which is currently occupied by the Carriage Hills Golf Course. It would be quite unfortunate if developers were allowed to create further housing in an already well-populated city. To do away with such precious green space is simply not necessary at this time nor at any other future time. It is my hope that both my wife and I are not let down by the Mayor and Council Members of such a pleasant city to call home. My wife and I are planning to make time to attend the meeting on January 17th and anticipate a worthwhile discussion about this on-going debate. If such a change were allowed to this piece of land, it will be lost forever. Such an act will affect the area's immediate neighbors and many other individuals that chose this area to live based upon its surroundings. I do believe that quality citizens of the city of Eagan will relocate from this area if the development were allowed. This issue is greater than simply the residents living at Carriage Hills Condominiums. The impact of developing this area will spread beyond the immediate neighbors. Thank you for your consideration on this important community issue. Tom Stephens 3425 Golfview Drive Eagan, MN 55123 Pamela Dudziak From: Bumblis, Joseph R. (mailto:JRBUMBLISa-stthomas.edul Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 2:12 PM To: Pat Geagan; Peggy Carlson; Cyndee Fields; Mike Maguire; Meg Tilley Cc: j.bumblis@ieee.org Subject: Current Events Surrounding the Carriage Hills Golf Course January 12, 2006 Mayor Pat Eagan (pgeagan@cityofeagan.com) Council Member Peggy Carlson (pcarlson@cityofeagan.com) Council Member Cyndee Fields (cfields@cityofeagan.com) Council Member Mike Maguire (mmaguire@cityofeagan.com) Council Member Meg Tilley (mtilley@cityofeagan.com) Eagan City Council Members, My name is Joseph R. Bumblis. I reside at 3627 Wescott Hills Drive, Eagan, MN 55123. Hills Driver. I am writing to express my outrage regarding the current events surrounding the Carriage Hills Golf Course. Specifically, the April 28, 2005 ruling by District Court Judge Patrice Sutherland in favor of the Rahn Family Limited Partnership and Wensmann Realty, Inc. stating that the City of Eagan must either amend the property's zoning to allow for the housing development or begin eminent domain proceedings to take the 40-year old public golf course within 30 days. I do applaud the Eagan City Council's statement on May 27, 2005 where the City of Eagan decided to appeal the District Court's decision on the Carriage Hills case. However, since that time it appears the Eagan City Council has decided to retreat from the appeal (or at least their effort to save our green space) due to the public appearance of pressure from Wensmann Realty and the influence of Wensmann's financial leverage. It is my understanding that through the efforts of Wensmann Realty, the current owner of the Carriage Hills Golf Course won the aforementioned law suite based on the "financial burden" and "financial damage" to the Rahn Family allegedly caused by the City of Eagan's Comprehensive Plan; more specifically the City Council's refusal to modify the current Comprehensive plan to accommodate Wensmann Realty and the current owner of the Carriage Hills Golf Course. If you (our current city council members) permit this fiasco to continue, then it is us, the residents surrounding the current Carriage Hills Golf Course that will bare the burden of your decision, forcing us to experience "financial burden" and "financial damage" due to: - The decrease in our property value; especially properties adjacent to the new "Wensmann Carriage Hills Development Project", - Increased traffic on our streets leading to the "Wensmann Carriage Hills Development Project", - The possible destruction of the ponds and tree lines bordering the current Carriage Hills Golf Course, and - Increased taxes or reduced city services to accommodate the approximate (i.e. pay for) 4000 people occupying the "Wensmann Carriage Hills Development Project" in the form of extra Police Officers, extra Fire Fighters, increased Police and Fire equipment, street maintenance, utilities, etc. Question 1: If the Eagan City Council does not challenge the Court's decision through legal means, or decide to begin/continue eminent domain proceedings, and blindly submits to the c;) 76 Wensmann Realty law suit, what is the Eagan City Council going to do to protect the residents who own property adjacent to the current Carriage Hills Golf Course? Specifically regarding: - Protecting and maintaining property values adjacent to the current golf course? - Protecting the ponds and tree lines to prevent the possibility of the ponds becoming a swampy mess (less water) or becoming flooded (more water) thus adversely changing the size of our useable lots; if not flooding our homes should massive drainage issues arise due to the construction causing the ponds to rise due to excessive water? Please keep in mind this situation has already occurred in Eagan to a development off of Diffley Road. - Placing a check on taxes (this includes the artificial inflation of current resident's property values just to increase the tax base) to ensure we-the residents of Eagan-do not have to finance Wensmann Realty's business model? - Continuation of current levels of city services? Perhaps even increasing service levels? - Increasing capacity on our Eagan Public School system to accommodate the children (and continued accommodation of our children) of families dwelling in the new "Wensmann Carriage Hills Development Project"? - Management and costs of the increased school bus traffic and personal vehicle traffic (many High School students drive) to accommodate these new students? - Safety issues of our schools, streets, and communities? Question 2: If the Eagan City Council decides to accept the terms of the Rahn Family Limited Partnership and Wensmann Realty, Inc. law suit, then what safeguards remain in place to prevent any business, operation, or individual from invading our residential and park areas? It appears to me that once the Rahn Family Limited Partnership and Wensmann Realty, Inc. law suit is accepted by the Eagan City Council through the amendment of the Comprehensive Plan; a precedence has been set! It is my belief that any one or any company will now be able to build, change, or relocate anything to anywhere in Eagan due to legal precedence set by the Carriage Hills case. If these possible activities are not approved by the City Council, a simple law suite remedies the problem! I urge all Eagan City Council members to either: 1. Block the sale, and the building of homes, on the current Carriage Hills Golf Course through litigation and protect the Eagan Comprehensive Plan. This not only preserves our green space, but will deter such future activities that could materialize due to the legal precedence set by the Council's decision to accept the ruling of District Court Judge Patrice Sutherland. Or, 2. Begin/resume eminent domain proceedings by placing the purchase of the Carriage Hills Golf Course on the ballot and allow the people of Eagan to decide the fate of this green space through a public vote. Thank you, Joseph R. Bumblis 3627 Wescott Hills Drive Eagan, MN 55123 651-683-9737 7 -7 Pamela Dudziak From: skybluemn@comcast.net [mailto:skybluemn@comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 3:48 PM To: Pat Geagan; Peggy Carlson; Cyndee Fields; Mike Maguire; Meg Tilley Subject: Carriage Hills Hi, Our names are Rob and Kathy Fagot. We moved to Eagan almost 3 years ago. One of the reasons we chose Eagan to purchase a home and raise our 3 children was how well laid out Eagan was, the terrific schools, proximity to the airport, number of parks and recreation facilities and many other reasons. We moved from Southern California. Southern California just got too crowded for us. The zoning issues were so lax that builders were purchasing small, single family homes, tearing them down and building 2 or 3 single family homes or little apartments on a very small lot. Needless to say, the roads became extremely crowded, schools were overcrowded, there was an increase in crime, an increase in transient workers, etc. Please reconsider and not allow Wensmann or any other builder build homes on the Carriage Hills Golf Course. There are so many other and better uses for the property that would greatly benefit and enhance the City of Eagan. Let's not allow developers to destroy our wonderful city. We all know that developers are not looking out for the best interest of the city. They are looking out for the best interest of their bank accounts. We would like Eagan to continue to fulfill our needs. Developing homes, townhomes, condos and apartments should not be a priority for Carriage Hills property. Thank you for your time and consideration. Rob and Kathy Fagot, 830 Hidden Meadow Trail, Eagan, MN 55123 Kathy Fagot Sky Blue Promotions & Events, LLC 830 Hidden Meadow Trail Eagan, MN 55123 651-454-6550 Pamela Dudziak From: The Olsons [mailto:lisaandluke@comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 5:45 PM To: Pat Geagan; Peggy Carlson; Cyndee Fields; Mike Maguire; Meg Tilley Subject: Carriage Hills Proposed Development Honorable Mayor Geagan and Honorable Council Members Carlson, Tilley, Fields, and Maguire: We oppose the re-guiding and rezoning of the Carriage Hills Golf Course Property. We ask you to do the same at the meeting Tuesday, January 17, 2006. While we understand your concern about the legal implications of continuing the appeal, a recent Minnesota Supreme Court Ruling in the case Mendota Golf, LLP vs. City of Mendota Heights greatly strengthens our case in the appeal. You can read the entire Ruling at http://www.courts.state.mn.us/opinions/sc/current/opa040206-0110.htm, but we will quote here: "A city has a rational basis to deny a proposed amendment to its comprehensive plan with respect to property currently used as a golf course when the city has a legitimate interest in reaffirming a historical comprehensive plan designation and in protecting open and recreational space. Because the amendment of a city's comprehensive plan is a discretionary act and the city had a rational basis to deny a proposed amendment to the comprehensive plan, the district court erred in issuing a peremptory writ of mandamus directing the city to approve an application for a comprehensive plan amendment." The Court has now stated very definitively that a city can deny re-guiding "to protect open and recreational space". This is precisely the reason for originally denying the request by Mr. Rahn, et. al. Hooray for members of the Mendota Heights' staff and Council who stood up for their rights, and the rights of all cities, including Eagan, to set and maintain zonings within their cities. Hooray that these people believed in democracy; in government of the people, by the people, and for the people. Hooray that these people believed that the citizens of the city, not the Courts, should determine how their city is run. We can only hope that our elected officials here in Eagan show the same courage. Lisa and Luke Olson 3794 Greensboro Drive Eagan, Mn 55123 C)" 100 C IVED JAN 0 1juc; Eagan City Council BY: Eagan City Hall 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55123 Re: Carriage Hills Golf Course Dear Members: I moved to Eagan in 1995 because of the view of the golf course, I needed the green as many Minnesotans do. When I first came, a rooster crowed every morning. In 10 years so much has changed. No more rooster, no more farm on Lexington & Yankee Doodle and no more empty land on either side of Yankee Doodle from Lexington to Pilot Knob. I know that the "city" is encroaching upon Eagan which to me means that Eagan has to fight harder to keep its' suburban qualities. The open spaces are disappearing one by one, if you destroy the golf course in favor of even more housing, you destroy nature. What about the fireflies that are prevalent in the summer? They are in danger of becoming extinct all over the U. S. because of the chemicals we use. What about the deer, the raccoons, the badgers, the turkies, the rabbits and even the coyotes? You will be taking their home along with the pleasure many get from seeing these wonders of nature. Please think about what you are being asked to do! Once you destroy nature it is gone for good! Is that what you want to be remembered as-the council who killed nature forever? We have something rare, let's preserve it! Please! Sincerely, ~Juli Szyszka 3440 Golfview Drive Unit 113 Eagan, MN 55123 Tel: 651-405-0844 VV RECEIVED JAN 0 3 2GC6 December 29, 2005 BY: Mayor Pat Geagan City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Dear Mayor Geagan, The future of the Carriage Hills golf course challenges all of us who care about the future of Eagan. I recognize it will not be not an easy decision for you or for any of us. I don't want to take a lot of your time. But I would like you to consider three things: 1. A golf course may not be the best use of the open space, neither in the past nor in the future. A golf course, especially an "executive golf course," serves a very small portion of the community. It is expensive for the community-tons of fertilizer and grass clippings are intrinsic features of golf courses. The run-off puts stress upon our ponds and wetlands and creates problems for our water treatment facilities out of proportion to the course's economic value to the community. What alternatives do we have? Perhaps you've visited the city gardens in Victoria, British Columbia, or the Minnesota Landscape Arboretum. (Or the wonderful Japanese gardens in St. Louis, Missouri, or in Brooklyn, New York.) Such open spaces invite intensive public use without stressing the environment. Please consider some of the genuinely viable alternatives to the two options on the table, golf course or housing. 2. It is not necessary for one side to win and the other side to lose. It would be possible to develop the land and preserve open space. I had coffee with developer Ray Miller and talked about the "cluster housing" concept used in Lake Elmo. He liked the idea, incorporated some of it into his Lexington Heights development, and created a space in which housing and open space co-exist. If the Carriage Hills property must be developed, I would hope you insist upon a plan that preserves about 70 percent of the property as jointly-owned open space. 3. What matters most is our grandchildren. I lived in New York City for many years, and I loved the many and various public parks. In fact, without the public parks, it would be a much more stressful place to live. Why is there open space in the middle of New York? Because visionaries in the 19`h century foresaw the pattern of development and insisted on preserving some open space in every borough and neighborhood. Today, it would be impossible to restore a piece of already-developed property to a natural state. No one could afford the property, and all the inherent beauty and natural grace of the property have been destroyed. Eagan is not New York City, but it's tending in the same direction, toward shoulder-to-shoulder housing and industry. Will our grandchildren have open space? Not unless you and I preserve it for them now, while undeveloped land is still available. Tbey will thank us for preserving open space. They will disparage us if we do not. How many opportunities will you have to preserve open space in Eagan? Not very many. Please don't ow away this opportunity to preserve life-enhancing open space for your grandchildren and mine. Th o David Brunet 3781 Windtree Drive Eagan, MN 55123 (651) 452-6847 Ell Pamela Dudziak From: Maureen O'Connor [mailto:moconnor@vischool.org] Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 8:02 AM To: Peggy Carlson; Cyndee Fields; Mike Maguire; Meg Tilley Subject: Carriage Hills Dear Council Member, I respect how thoughtfully you have worked for the City of Eagan. I know that your work is not easy, for the politics of running a city can be very complex. My husband and I have lived here since 1988. Part of our reason for moving here was the openness of the land. This openness, alas, has disappeared. We treasure that there are people here who are continuing to work for keeping green space present in this city and who are disappointed with the Council's decision to place homes on the Carriage Hills site. We too are disappointed with this decision and hope that you will reconsider. We ask you to take more time with this decision, to keep the comprehension plan in mind, as I am sure that you do, and know that our preference would be to preserve the gift of life that green space is to all of us. Sincerely, Maureen O'Conno Pamela Dudziak From: Skoras of Eagan, MN [mailto:jskora@usfamily.net] Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 8:23 PM To: Pat Geagan Subject: The future is in yor hands Go to : http://www.courts.state.mn.us/ Then click on SUPREME COURT OPINIONS links near the top right corner Then scroll down to the Mendota Golf, LLP, Respondent, vs. City of Mendota Heights, Appellant. Given this new ruling, we EXPECT you to continue with the appeal. Please "Do the right thing" especially when it comes to zoning and "Green Space" Keep in mind, what your ancestors have done, What we are doing, And what the future of our children will be. Joe Skora Family USFamily.Net - $8.25/mo! Highspeed - $19.99/mo! Pamela Dudziak From: SAMasin@aol.com [mailto:SAMasin@aol.com] Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 12:54 AM To: Pat Geagan; Peggy Carlson; Cyndee Fields; Mike Maguire; Meg Tilley Subject: Carriage Hills Golf Course Mayor Geagan and Council Members: I strongly urge you not to change the land use designation of Carriage Hills Golf Course at this time. That property has been designated for recreational use for a long time. The priority should be to determine the validity of the Comprehensive Guide and Zoning Plans. If they are not valid, you need to find some other way to maintain control and stability over development. In my opinion, if you settle without a firm resolution, you are making the city incredibly vulnerable from now on and saying the plans are irrelevant to anyone with enough cash and influence. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Sandra Masin 1795 Carnelian Lane Eagan, MN 55122 651-405-1857 gy Pamela Dudziak From: Laura Hedlund [mailto:Laura@AirAmericaMinnesota.com] Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 9:22 AM To: Mike Maguire Subject: protect our planning process After reading the editorial in this week's Sun Current as well as learning about Mendota Heights success in protecting the integrity of its comp plan, I am optimistic that the City Council will feel empowered to also protect our comprehensive plan. Why even have comprehensive plans and city planning if any developers can come along and change the rules simply because they have money for a lawsuit? Protect Eagan's planning process. Thank you Laura Hedlund 1364 Wilderness Run Drive Eagan, Minnesota 55123 651-405-9751 Pamela Dudziak From: marlyslun@netzero.net [mailto:marlyslun@netzero.net] Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 10:56 AM To, Pat Geagan Cc: marlyslun@netzero.net Subject: Greetings My name is Marlys Lund and I live at Carriage Hills Condos and I think what is going on is a very bad deal for Carriage Hills Condos and Eagan. I have been at the meetings and when I hear that poor Ray Rahn purchased this property so he could develop the land and he hasn't been able to develop this land and is still having to pay high taxes, what in the world would anyone say such a thing at a public meeting? My condo is very satisfactory for me. the taxes are satisfactory and I intend to continue to live in this area and not have the council determine what is to be done with this land. Poor Ray Rahn's money for this property would end up in the millions for developement so we all knoow what is going on, don't think tha we ware fools for what is going on. See you at the meeting, make some sense at the meeting, you are not talking to fools. Marlys Lund 0 1 Pamela Dudziak From: DMK KROLICK [mailto:icerink@msn.com] Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 10:52 AM To: Pat Geagan Cc: City Council Subject: carriage hills I hope you all saw the decision of the Minnesota Supreme Court regarding Mendota Heights Golf Course decision, and that you will take that into consideration when you vote on Jan. 17. We are begging you to keep the zoning as it is. Eagan does not need more condos and town houses. Thanks for your consideration. The Krolicks Agenda Information Memo January 17, 2006 Eagan City Council Meeting III. LEGISLATIVE/INTERGOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS UPDATE A. CITY OF EAGAN'S 2006 STATE BONDING REQUESTS ACTIONS TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the City of Eagan's 2006 State Bonding Requests. FACTS: ➢ State Senator McGinn contacted the City Administrator's office in December to inquire about Eagan's need for State bonding funds in 2006. ➢ It was communicated to Senator McGinn that the City Council has not yet taken formal action on a specific list of projects in which the City will be seeking State bonding funds. However, in order to make him aware of the cities needs, a letter was sent to Senator McGinn to make him aware of some of the key projects that the City Council has discussed as being needs of the City and County in 2006. ➢ This letter, which is attached, was shared with the City Council in the December 23 Additional Information Memo, with the note that the bonding requests would be included on a January City Council agenda for formal Council consideration. ➢ The following bonding requests are proposed for 2006 (descriptions of each request are included in the attached correspondence to Senator McGinn): o Lebanon Hills storm water drainage improvements o Cedar Grove bus rapid transit o Cedar Grove transit station o Long Meadow Lake Bridge rehabilitation o Multi jurisdictional communications and public safety support center in Dakota County. ➢ If it is the desire of the Council, upon considering the bonding requests for 2006, a letter can be sent to the City's entire Legislative delegation to make them aware of the City's 2006 bonding needs. ATTACHMENTS: ➢ Enclosed on pagesa throughQ*is correspondence from the City Administrator, which was sent to State Senator McGinn summarizing the bonding needs that the City Council had discussed in 2005 for the coming year. s City o E'aRan Pat Geagan December 20, 2005 MAYOR State Senator McGinn Peggy Carlson G-19 State Office Building Cyndee Fields St. Paul, MN 55155 Mike Maguire Meg Tilley Dear Senator McGinn: COUNCIL MEMBERS Thank you very much for contacting the City to discuss our project and capital needs for consideration in the 2006 bonding bill. Per your request, I am providing a list of projects in Thomas Hedges which the City and/or County is requesting bonding funds for 2006. You will notice that a CITY ADMINISTRATOR few of the projects listed below are in collaboration with Dakota County and other cities within the county, including the Lebanon Hills storm drainage improvements, Cedar Avenue Bus Rapid Transit (BRT), and the joint public safety dispatch center more commonly referred to as the Dakota Communications Center. As is the City's usual practice, the project list will go before the City Council in January for MUNICIPAL CENTER formal consideration, but I wanted you to be aware that the City Council has discussed the 3830 Pilot Knob Road following needs. Eagan, MN 55122-1810 phone • Lebanon Hills Storm Water Drainage Improvements - Currently, storm water 651651.675..65000 5000 2 fax originating in Dakota County's Lebanon Hills Regional Park, and the cities of Eagan, Apple Valley, and Rosemount, travels through the Regional Park and ultimately 651.454.8535 TDD discharges through the City of Eagan's storm water drainage system to the Minnesota River. Dakota County and all three of the communities recognize that improvements to the drainage system are needed as regional facilities within the park, residential homes MAINTENANCE FACILITY and arterial roadways have continually been flooded due to the nonexistant storm 3501 Coachman Point drainage system within the Park. Eagan, MN 55122 651.675.5300 phone Dakota County, in coordination with all three communities, the two Watershed 651.675.5360 fax Management organizations (i.e. Gun Club Lake and Vermillion River), and the 651 A54.8535 TDD Minnesota DNR, has just completed a Comprehensive Storm Water Management Plan to address these drainage issues. The improvements protect and enhance the water quality of State protected lakes, including Holland Lake, which is a MDNR trout www.cityofeagan.com fishery, and also assures dependable recreational use to the 509,000 annual visitors from across the State. Lastly, public access to State Highway 3 is assured, and residents living around the regional park can be secure in the knowledge that their homes will no longer be flooded as a result of drainage through the park. It is evident that the necessary improvements have a regional impact and would best be THE LONE OAK TREE approached on a regional basis. The City of Eagan is strongly supporting the County's The symbol of request for $1.918 million in State bonding funds to initiate the region-wide strength and growth improvements to Lebanon Hills Park. Without State bonding assistance, it is doubtful in our community. that sufficient funds are available to address this long standing drainage problem of this CPS, 7 City of Eagan / 2006 Bonding Requests December 20, 2005 Page 2 regional facility. With State assistance, the County will be able to use the $1.75 million raised in local matching funds to complete the necessary storm drainage improvements. • Cedar Grove Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) - Dakota County and the Metropolitan Council have submitted bonding requests suggesting that an additional $5,000,000 in 2006 bonding funds be dedicated to the Cedar Avenue BRT project. In January of 2006, it is expected that Dakota County will formally make a request of cities within the County to pass resolutions of support for this allocation. It has been acknowledged that these funds could not be used on the trunk highway portion of Cedar Avenue and, as a consequence, would be allocated to portions of the project south of 138th Street. While the improvements to be made with 2006 bonding funds would not be made within Eagan's City boundaries, the improvements would benefit the community and surrounding region by relieving the transportation congestion through a transit opportunity found to be very popular with Dakota County residents. • Cedar Grove Transit Station - The City of Eagan is requesting $4.7 million in bonding funds for the Cedar Grove Transit Station, as the facility will be a means of providing the near term transit presence in an area that will draw transit riders from Burnsville, Eagan, and Apple Valley. The location of the transit station in the Cedar Grove area is especially appropriate given that alone, the new urban redevelopment project underway in the area anticipates approximately 2,400 new residents. If funded, the bonding allocation would pay for approximately half of the $9.7 million cost to construct the facility. • Long Meadow Lake Bridge Rehabilitation - The Long Meadow Lake (old Cedar Ave) Bridge on the Bloomington side of the Minnesota River is currently closed to all traffic including pedestrian and bike traffic due to its current deteriorated and unsafe condition. The bridge is a critical link between the trail systems in the cities of Eagan and Burnsville, the Dakota County's Trail System and the south metro's Regional Trail System in Hennepin County and Bloomington. The Long Meadow Lake Bridge is the only river crossing between 35W and I-494. Eagan has joined the cities of Bloomington and Burnsville, along with Dakota and Hennepin Counties, in pursuing funding assistance for the project. $1 million in Federal funding might be available if matching funds can be found. We are requesting $2.5 million in 2006 State bonding funds to be used towards the reconstruction of the bridge. This project has strong support from Representatives Tim Wilkie (38A) and Ann Lenczewski (40B). • Multi-Jurisdictional Communications and Public Safety Support Center in Dakota County - Dakota County and its cities are requesting $7,760,000 in 2006 State funding to go towards the construction of the Dakota Communications Center, which will serve as a County-wide joint public safety dispatch center. The Center will consolidate the multiple public safety answering points (PSAP) that now exist across the County. The 09,!~ City of Eagan / 2006 Bonding Requests December 20, 2005 Page 3 proposed project is a result of Dakota County's High Performance Partnership (HiPP) project, a year-long review of ways that local governments within the County could more efficiently and effectively provide services to our citizens. In addition to the County-wide dispatch operation, the facility would also be used as a centralized booking/holding facility, a location for a law enforcement indoor firing range, a storage facility for the County's Special Operations Team and Drug Task Force, and a location for training, major investigations, and a centralized Emergency Operations Center. The Communications Center is a partnership of the 11 largest cities in Dakota County. The Center will provide a direct interface with the region's 800 MHz communication system and the CriMNet system being developed by the Department of Public Safety, which will ensure that Dakota County has enhanced, and more cost effective services for the security of the citizens of Dakota County. Again, thank you for representing the needs of the City and Dakota County during the 2006 bonding bill discussions. I will be sending similar correspondence to your fellow Eagan legislators in January as I thought it would be helpful to share our needs with the entire Eagan legislative delegation. I will be sure to note our appreciation for you proactively contacting the City to learn more about our needs for 2006. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions about the aforementioned projects. Have a wonderful holiday season! Since , Thomas L. Hedges City Administrator cc: Brandt Richardson, Dakota County Administrator Eagan City Council AGENDA CITY OF EAGAN REGULAR MEETING OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY EAGAN MUNICIPAL CENTER JANUARY 17, 2006 A. CALL TO ORDER B. ADOPT AGENDA eG) 3 C. APPROVE MINUTES D. OLD BUSINESS d~ q 1. CEDAR GROVE REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT - Consider Findings of Fact, conclusions and resolution for approval of the Tax Increment Development Agreement and the Supplement to the Development Agreement with Schafer Richardson for property located in the Core Area of the Cedar Grove Redevelopment District. 3t~ 2. CEDAR GROVE REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT - Schedule Public P Hearing on February 21, 2006 to Consider an Amendment of the TIF Development Agreement and to Consider the Sale of City Owned Property to U.S. Homes/Lennar for Private Development in the Nicols Ridge Project Area E. NEW BUSINESS F. OTHER BUSINESS 3 3,5r 1. EDA 2006 Organizational Business G. ADJOURNMENT Agenda Information Memo Eagan Economic Development Authority Meeting January, 17, 2006 NOTICE OF CONCURRENT ACTIONS The Council acting as the Board of Commissioners of the Economic Development Authority ("EDA") may discuss and act on the agenda items for the EDA in conjunction with its actions as a Council. A. CALL TO ORDER ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To convene a meeting of the Economic Development Authority to run concurrent with the City Council meeting. B. ADOPT AGENDA ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To adopt the agenda as presented or modified. C. APPROVE MINUTES ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the minutes of the December 20, 2005 EDA meeting as presented or modified. ATTACHMENTS: /l • Minutes of the December 20, 2005 EDA meeting on pages 02 99 - a q3 MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE EAGAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Eagan, Minnesota December 21, 2005 A meeting of the Eagan Economic Development Authority was held on Tuesday, December 21, 2005 at the Eagan Municipal Center. Present were Commissioner Fields (serving as Acting President), Commissioner Carlson, Commissioner Tilley, and Commissioner Maguire. Also present were Executive Director Hedges, Community Development Director Hohenstein, City Planner Ridley, Director of Public Works Colbert, and City Attorney Dougherty. ADOPT AGENDA Commissioner Tilley moved, Commissioner Maguire seconded a motion to approve the agenda as presented. Aye: 4 Nay: 0 APPROVE MINUTES Commissioner Maguire moved, Commissioner Tilley seconded a motion to adopt a resolution approving the minutes of the May 3, 2005 EDA meeting as presented. Aye: 4 Nay: 0 OLD BUSINESS There was no old business. NEW BUSINESS CEDAR GROVE REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT-PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE PROPOSED REOUEST FOR THE SALE OF CITY OWNED PROPERTY AND APPROVAL OF THE TAX INCREMENT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH SCHAFER RICHARDSON (CEDAR GROVE REDEVELOPMENT CORP) FOR PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE CORE AREA OF THE CEDAR GROVE REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT. City Administrator Hedges discussed the Cedar Grove Redevelopment District. Community Development Director Hohenstein provided background on the redevelopment efforts. David Frank, of Schafer Richardson, provided an overview of the redevelopment including housing, commercial/retail, transit and public space components as well as the phasing timeline of the proposed redevelopment. Chris Enger was also present to represent Ryland Homes. Acting President Fields opened the public hearing. ~S Six people spoke, including representatives from the Metropolitan Interfaith Council on Affordable Housing, current business owners in the redevelopment area, and concerned citizens and neighbors. City staff and Mr. Frank responded to questions generated during the public comment period. Commissioner Maguire moved, Commissioner Tilley seconded, a motion to close the public hearing to consider a development agreement with Schafer Richardson (Cedar Grove Redevelopment Corp) including consideration of the public purpose of the sale of City owned property located in the Core Area of the Cedar Grove Redevelopment District and to direct preparation of findings of fact, conclusions and resolution for approval of the agreement to be considered at a future City Council-EDA meeting on January 17, 2006 and to direct staff to explore the following provisions as conditions of the development agreement: 1. At the time of each development application, the developer will disclose and define the Home Owner Association's responsibility for public space maintenance and improvement. 2. Master Home Owner Association policies will restrict non-owner occupied properties to a particular percent in an attempt to limit investment properties in the redevelopment area. Staff is directed to explore the advantages and disadvantages of this particular percent being memorialized to the Fannie Mae standards or of creating separate standards. Aye:4 Nay:0 OTHER BUSINESS There was no other business. ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Carlson moved, Commissioner Tilley seconded a motion to adjourn the meeting. Aye: 4 Nay:0 Agenda Memo Eagan Economic Development Authority Meeting January 17, 2006 1. CEDAR GROVE REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT - CONSIDER FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS AND RESOLUTION FOR APPROVAL OF THE TAX INCREMENT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH SCHAFER RICHARDSON FOR PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE CORE AREA OF THE CEDAR GROVE REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the findings of fact, conclusions and resolution for approval of the Tax Increment Development Agreement and the Supplement to the Agreement between the City and Schafer Richardson for property located in the Core Area of the Cedar Grove Redevelopment District. FACTS (New Information in Bold): • The City has taken steps to bring about the redevelopment of the Cedar Grove Redevelopment Area, including public improvements, environmental reviews, comprehensive plan and zoning modifications and the initiation of redevelopment activity in portions of the district consistent with the City's plans for the area. • In 2004, the City issued an RFP for a master developer for the core area of the Cedar Grove Redevelopment Area. As an outcome of that process, on February 1, 2005, the Council and EDA acted to: 1. Designate Schafer Richardson as Master Developer of the Cedar Grove Redevelopment District and lead in the partnership with Ryland Homes. 2. Approve the refined conceptual redevelopment plan and development program, including general land uses, layout and building types. 3. Confirm the role of the Council Finance Committee as liaison to staff for negotiation of development agreement. 4. Authorize staff to proceed with negotiation of the development agreement. • Since that time, staff and the developer have reviewed the developer's proforma for the project and negotiated a development agreement that would implement the City's priorities for the area as outlined in the original RFP, in consideration of the economics associated with a redevelopment of this type. • The development agreement covers issues including the level of TIF assistance that may be provided to the developer, the sale of public property to the developer for redevelopment purposes and the potential for the developer to request that the ~ q6 City use eminent domain to acquire the remaining parcels. The development agreement includes a provision that the city will be the lead in property acquisition, and the likely use of eminent domain for property assemblage. Unlike other redevelopment agreements, this agreement does not impose an obligation upon the developer to pursue good faith efforts to acquire the property prior to requesting that the city exercise its power of eminent domain. • In consideration of the current discussions regarding potential legislation that could modify the means by which cities may use eminent domain for redevelopment or economic development purposes, the agreement acknowledges that the City will exercise good faith efforts to acquire properties. If state action modifies local government authorities for the use of eminent domain, such efforts will need to occur within the modified standards. • At its meeting of October 18, 2005, the EDA and City Council approved an agreement in concept and directed staff and the developer to finalize a draft development agreement to be presented to begin the public review and public hearing process. • Since the Council direction was given, the developer and staff have confirmed that the height of the building on the Phase 5-Hotel site will be a minimum of 85' from ground level. • In cases in which property may be acquired for resale to a private entity and in which eminent domain may be necessary to do so, the local unit of government must hold a public hearing to take testimony and to make findings as to the public purpose of entering into the agreement. • The draft agreement was completed and was presented to the Economic Development Authority and the City Council at it meeting of November 15, 2005, at which time a public hearing was scheduled for December 20, 2005. Notices were mailed and published. • In addition to the public hearing, a neighborhood open house was held on December 8 for neighbors and area business owners. A City Council workshop was held on December 12. Several of the property owners made contact with staff and one property owner submitted written comments to date. • General facts concerning the redevelopment area and the redevelopment agreement are as follows: • The City performed an analysis of properties in the Cedarvale/Cedar Grove commercial area on the east side of Cedar Avenue/Hwy 77 at its intersection with Hwy 13 and found that properties within the area met the standards necessary under Minnesota statutes to qualify as a redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District. • On the basis of those findings, the City created the Cedar Grove TIF District October 2, 2001. The purpose for the District under the TIF Plan is to replace a market obsolete regional shopping center, provide new life cycle housing options for existing Eagan residents, enhance the public transit infrastructure and correct a number of traffic problems within the project area. The proposed project will be located in the core area of the redevelopment district, which lies between Hwy 13. It will consist of 974 housing units and 143,200 s.f of new commercial space in addition to the Jensen's and Cedarvale Lanes properties, which are anticipated to remain. • At the direction of the City Council, the City has begun to acquire properties from willing sellers in the redevelopment area. Under the agreement, three City-owned properties that were acquired prior to March of 2005 (the former Twin City Poultry/Donut Shop; Valley Bank and Ski; and Jim Cooper Goodyear) to the developer for the sum of $1.00 each. The agreement provides for the City to perform future acquisitions of properties directly and does not require the developer to attempt to acquire them first. Under the agreement, properties acquired after March 2005 will be sold to the developer at the cost paid by the City. • The TIF Plan makes a finding that but-for creation of the District, the intended redevelopment activity would not happen. The City's Redevelopment Consultant has reviewed the financial proforma for the proposed development and has prepared a memo indicating, likewise, that the specific proposed redevelopment contemplated by the agreement would not occur but-for the assistance outlined in the TIF Development Agreement. • The TIF assistance to the project is outlined in the proforma for the development and will be transferred in stages at the completion of each development phase. • At its meeting of December 20, 2005, the EDA and City Council held a public hearing, reviewed background regarding the proposed redevelopment, took public testimony and directed the preparation of findings of fact for approval of the TIF Development Agreement between the City of Eagan and Schafer Richardson for the redevelopment of the Cedar Grove Core Area. • As part of the motion, the Council directed staff to work with the developer to incorporate two additional conditions in the agreement - that the developer disclose with each development phase a proposed plan for the maintenance of common areas and public spaces within the phase and that the developer agree to limit the maximum percentage of non-owner occupied units in portions of the project in which individual units are offered for sale. • These conditions have been negotiated and are contained within a Supplement to the Development Agreement that is also being presented for consideration at this time. Under the terms of the Supplemental Agreement, no more than 12% of such units may be non-owner occupied at the time of building occupancy and that maximum will be maintained by conditions ~9~ required to be included in the home owners association documents for those properties. • In consideration of the EDA/City Council direction at the meeting on December 20 and the incorporation of the additional conditions in the Supplement, both the TIF Development Agreement and the Supplement to the Agreement are in order for action at this time. ATTACIIMENTS: • Redevelopment District map on page 360 • Proposed Revised Concept Plan on page • Proposed Phasing Plan on page _3 0 4;~ • Ci Redevelopment Consultant's memo regarding the "but-for" finding on page • Supplement to Development Agreement enclosed on pages 3a 3/1 • Development Agreement distributed previously and available upon request. ~ ~9 Rd s~\~ec Be\\ N~ ~3 Prey cove t~p'g~eetr er 0e\ep~ Red ,~eQ, 6aa<, G 0 n fl. Properties to Consider for Sale 0 400 800 1,600 A Feet v' ZCedar Grove Redevelopment Agreement Core Area .Soo - V y ` D1 ~ Peo1111918WS D ~ E N 0 0 m Q V U - ■ ■ CL CL p OJ t < Cr O" Q' Q F Z a E N E O O O O O O O O O O r Ln S V N v V r _ y c c v / --I _X N V X 10 ; `dam m d n. E E c 1AA d f A2 c c c c .t _ J J J J J J CO 7 - in co co I 00 t0 O O O 1~ N C Ot O n J J Y N X 4 ~ O- ul C N -I1 Oh M C C E 0 d tN O O p a, 0 do m n E o 0 N d -y LA c ~oz C N - - - F ~Y (v 0 2 V r~ y' • / a V m CU m x 7 C O - _ > 19 O ra i O O O o v to ~ ---_w `n = V ,L^ o \ (i ` d E L GJ o 30/ r 0 rm- ~ V 47 _ N r p_ t f ; ~ T f i N I w - 44 44 y ,y! v ~4j rr o- t ~ H1 Y n , ti rot 1 6'„ ~j 14 co N N,~ Q a~ A L 3 ~ ~ m O a a ~ o n C N N C (Q ~ W ~ E %3oc;L EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC O To: Jon Hohenstein Community Development Director, City of Eagan am From: Sid Inman, Ehlers & Associates W Rebecca Kurtz, Ehlers & Associates Date: January 13, 2006 Subject: Cedar Grove - RSR Project - But-For Analysis The City has asked Ehlers & Associates to review the developer's project feasibility analysis for the Cedar Grove Project to determine what level of the assistance is needed to make the project financially feasible. The developer provided to Ehlers financial information which includes a statement of Revenue and Expense for the five proposed phases of the project. We have met a number of times with the developer's representatives to discuss, review and refine the information provided. We have agreed on a form and content of a document that best represents the estimates of what is needed for the proposed project. That document is the basis for how we arrived at the estimate for the amount of assistance needed. Additionally, this document is an attachment to the development agreement. Further, to insure that the City is providing only the necessary amount of assistance, the development agreement includes a "Look Back" provision. This means that after all phases of the project are complete the financial document will be updated to reflect actual expenses, revenues and profit. In the event that the project had a higher amount of profit than projected, the assistance will be reduced proportionately. If the profit is less, the assistance will not be increased. Please let me know if you have any questions or comments, or if we can be of further assistance on this matter. LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE 3060 Centre Pointe Drive 302- Phone: 651-697-8507 Fax: 651-697-8555 Roseville, MN 55113-1105 sidoehlers-inc.com BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF EAGAN, DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA In Re: Consideration of the Tax Increment FINDINGS OF FACT, Development Agreement and the CONCLUSIONS AND Supplement to the Agreement with Schafer RESOLUTION Richardson for Property Located in the Core Area of the Cedar Grove Redevelopment District This matter came before the Eagan Economic Development Authority (the "EDA") at its meeting of January 17, 2006. The EDA received and considered public comment; input from City staff; the proposed Tax Increment Development Agreement and the Supplement to the Agreement between the City of Eagan (the "City") and Schafer Richardson (the "Developer") for property located in the Core Area of the Cedar Grove Redevelopment District; together with all existing files, records and prior proceedings and material as presented to the EDA. Based upon all the files, records and input which were presented at the meeting, the EDA makes the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions and Resolution. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The City has taken steps to bring about the redevelopment of the Cedar Grove Redevelopment Area, including public improvements, environmental reviews, comprehensive plan and zoning modifications and the initiation of redevelopment activity in portions of the district consistent with the City's plans for the area. 30Y 2. In 2004, the City issued an RFP for a master Developer for the core area of the Cedar Grove Redevelopment Area. As an outcome of that process, on February 1, 2005, the Council and EDA acted to: a. Designate Schafer Richardson as Master Developer of the Cedar Grove Redevelopment District and lead in the partnership with Ryland Homes. b. Approve the refined conceptual redevelopment plan and development program, including general land uses, layout and building types. c. Confirm the role of the Council Finance Committee as liaison to staff for negotiation of Development Agreement. d. Authorize staff to proceed with negotiation of the Development Agreement. 3. Since that time, staff and the Developer have reviewed the Developer's proforma for the project and negotiated a Development Agreement that would implement the City's priorities for the area as outlined in the original RFP, in consideration of the economics associated with a redevelopment of this type. 4. The Development Agreement covers issues including the level of TIF assistance that may be provided to the Developer, the sale of public property to the Developer for redevelopment purposes and the potential for the Developer to request that the City use eminent domain to acquire the remaining parcels. The Development Agreement includes a provision that the city will be the lead in property acquisition, and the likely use of eminent domain for property assemblage. Unlike other redevelopment agreements, this Agreement does not impose an obligation upon the Developer to pursue good faith efforts to acquire the property prior to requesting that the city exercise its power of eminent domain. 3og- 5. In consideration of the current discussions regarding potential legislation that could modify the means by which cities may use eminent domain for redevelopment or economic development purposes, the agreement acknowledges that the City will exercise good faith efforts to acquire properties. If state action modifies local government authorities for the use of eminent domain, such efforts will need to occur within the modified standards. 6. At its meeting of October 18, 2005, the EDA and City Council approved an agreement in concept and directed staff and the Developer to finalize a draft Development Agreement to be presented to begin the public review and public hearing process. 7. Since the Council direction was given, the Developer and staff have confirmed that the height of the building on the Phase 5-Hotel site will be a minimum of 85' from ground level. 8. In cases in which property may be acquired for resale to a private entity and in which eminent domain may be necessary to do so, the local unit of government must hold a public hearing to take testimony and to make findings as to the public purpose of entering into the agreement. 9. The draft agreement was completed and was presented to the Economic Development Authority and the City Council at it meeting of November 15, 2005, at which time a public hearing was scheduled for December 20, 2005. Notices were mailed and published. 10. In addition to the public hearing, a neighborhood open house was held on December 8 for neighbors and area business owners. A City Council workshop was held on December 12. Several of the property owners made contact with staff and one property owner submitted written comments to date. 11. General facts concerning the redevelopment area and the Development Agreement are as follows: • The City performed an analysis of properties in the Cedarvale/Cedar Grove commercial area on the east side of Cedar Avenue/Hwy 77 at its intersection with Hwy 13 and found that properties within the area met the standards necessary under Minnesota statutes to qualify as a redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District. • On the basis of those findings, the City created the Cedar Grove TIF District October 2, 2001. The purpose for the District under the TIF Plan is to replace a market obsolete regional shopping center, provide new life cycle housing options for existing Eagan residents, enhance the public transit infrastructure and correct a number of traffic problems within the project area. The proposed project will be located in the core area of the redevelopment district, which lies between Hwy 13. It will consist of 974 housing units and 143,200 s.f. of new commercial space in addition to the Jensen's and Cedarvale Lanes properties, which are anticipated to remain. • At the direction of the City Council, the City has begun to acquire properties from willing sellers in the redevelopment area. Under the agreement, three City-owned properties that were acquired prior to March of 2005 (the former Twin City Poultry/Donut Shop; Valley Bank and Ski; and Jim Cooper Goodyear) will be sold to the Developer for the sum of ,3O? $1.00 each. The agreement provides for the City to perform future acquisitions of properties directly and does not require the Developer to attempt to acquire them first. Under the agreement, properties acquired after March 2005 will be sold to the Developer at the cost paid by the City. • The TIF Plan makes a finding that but-for creation of the District, the intended redevelopment activity would not happen. The City's Redevelopment Consultant has reviewed the financial proforma for the proposed development and has prepared a memo indicating, likewise, that the specific proposed redevelopment contemplated by the agreement would not occur but-for the assistance outlined in the TIF Development Agreement. • The TIF assistance to the project is outlined in the proforma for the development and will be transferred in stages at the completion of each development phase. 12. At its meeting of December 20, 2005, the EDA and City Council held a public hearing, reviewed background regarding the proposed redevelopment, took public testimony and directed the preparation of findings of-fact for approval of the TIF Development Agreement between the City of Eagan and Schafer Richardson for the redevelopment of the Cedar Grove Core Area. 13. As part of the motion, the Council directed staff to work with the Developer to incorporate two additional conditions in the agreement - that the Developer disclose with each development phase a proposed plan for the maintenance of common areas and public spaces within the phase and that the Developer agree to limit the 3oF maximum percentage of non-owner occupied units in portions of the project in which individual units are offered for sale. 14. These conditions have been negotiated and are contained within a Supplement to the Development Agreement that is also being presented for consideration at this time. Under the terms of the Supplemental Agreement, no more than 12% of such units may be non-owner occupied at the time of building occupancy and that maximum will be maintained by conditions required to be included in the home owners' association documents for those properties. 15. In consideration of the EDA/City Council direction at the meeting on December 20 and the incorporation of the additional conditions in the Supplement, both the TIF Development Agreement and the Supplement to the Agreement are in order for action at this time. CONCLUSIONS 1. The City, by adoption of an enabling resolution in compliance with the procedural requirements of Minnesota Statute Section 469.093, established the EDA having the powers contained in Minnesota Statutes Sections 469.090 to 469.108. 2. The Tax Increment Development Agreement and the Supplement to the Agreement between the City of Eagan (the "City") and Schafer Richardson (the "Developer") for property located in the Core Area of the Cedar Grove Redevelopment District, is proper and desirable and will replace a market obsolete regional shopping center, provide new life cycle housing options for existing Eagan residents, enhance the public transit infrastructure and correct a number of traffic problems within the project 307 area, and further the City's ultimate objective of creating an economically viable redevelopment project. 3. The Tax Increment Development Agreement and the Supplement to the Agreement are in the best interests of the City and the Redevelopment Area and its people, and is in the public interest. 4. The Tax Increment Development Agreement and the Supplement to the Agreement furthers the EDA's general plan of economic development. 5. The Tax Increment Development Agreement and the Supplement to the Agreement furthers the aims and purposes of Minnesota Statutes Sections 469.090 to 469.108. 6. The Tax Increment Development Agreement and the Supplement to the Agreement are consistent with and achieves the City's objectives as set forth in the comprehensive guide plan. 7. The EDA and the City hereby approve the Tax Increment Development Agreement and the Supplement to the Agreement. RESOLUTION 1. The EDA does hereby resolve that the Tax Increment Development Agreement and the Supplement to the Agreement are in the public interest and furthers the EDA's general plan of economic development consistent with Minnesota Statutes Sections 469.090 to 469.108. 2. Pursuant to the provisions of Minnesota Statutes Sections 469.090 to 469.108, the EDA does hereby resolve that the Tax Increment Development Agreement 3 ~o and the Supplement to the Agreement are consistent with and achieves the City's objectives as set forth in the comprehensive guide plan. 3. The City, by and through the Mayor and Clerk, and the EDA, by and through its President and Executive Director, are authorized to execute the Tax Increment Development Agreement and the Supplement to the Agreement. Dated at Eagan, Minnesota this day of 2006. EAGAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY By: Pat Geagan Its: President By: Thomas L. Hedges Its: Executive Director Agenda Memo Eagan Economic Development Authority Meeting January 17, 2006 2. CEDAR GROVE REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT - SCHEDULE PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AN AMENDMENT OF THE TIF PLAN AND TO CONSIDER THE SALE OF CITY OWNED PROPERTY TO US HOMES/LENNAR FOR PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT IN THE NICOLS RIDGE PROJECT AREA ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To receive the proposed amendment of the Tax Increment Financing Agreement for the Nicols Ridge Project and to schedule a Public Hearing on February 21, 2006 to meet and consider the advisability of the sale of the properties identified below and for approval of the proposed Amendment to the Amended and Restated Development Agreement with U.S. Home Corporation, a Delaware corporation, relating to Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 for private development in the Nicols Ridge Project Area. FACTS: • The City has taken steps to bring about the redevelopment of the Cedar Grove Redevelopment Area, including public improvements, environmental reviews, comprehensive plan and zoning modifications and the initiation of redevelopment activity in a portion of the district consistent with the City's plans for the area. • As a part of the redevelopment activities, the EDA and City Council have entered into a Tax Increment Financing Agreement with US Home/Lennar for the development of the Nicols Ridge housing development. The agreement lays out the responsibilities of the parties relative to the acquisition and assembly of property for the redevelopment of the Nicols Ridge portion of the redevelopment area. • At the present time, the City has acquired four properties within the project area that are to be sold to US Home/Lennar. Details of the proposed sales, including their timing and the payment of a carrying cost to the City for early acquisition required an amendment of the TIF Agreement. That amendment is being presented to the EDA and City Council for consideration. • TIF Amendments and the sale of publicly owned property to private parties are subject to public hearing requirements. This action will set a public hearing for consideration of these items on February 21, 2006. ATTACHMENTS: • Redevelopment District map illustrating the properties proposed to be sold on page • Nicols Ridge Development Plan on page • Resolutions on pages -31& 13 • TIF Agreement Amendment on pages 3/7 - 3,3 ~ 1 • TIF Agreement available for review. J /a B 1 pia e d - i a-~ r % Cedar GrovwRevel6 ment ~4rea~ p o Properties Proposed• For"Sale G~ v Nicols Ridge ~A Development @ _ 0 325 650 1,300 Feet city -F aagan Cedar Grove Redevelopment Area Proposed Sale Properties 3~3 9 • Lt>. /Y:Mi GGM-GGr (IG~1 aaJ J~+t~u GGNrGr flGfl aury~ p GO•r_GOr IIGr! arw GCIGG •1•r•+yn 4a0r # 3 l cxlsG r. •..se~ .a.a •a.a.•a sosf N t •va wo w woo ~VV1 - •S11''j""ws ,/'~~~f/ag`J ~~`'•/L .LN3Rd073A30 Y1730 ~ „ 1 Y ^ G•'• M I ON, 1 / A'Y7d 31fS AlryWNl7",r s V joam S70.7111 ~ j$r 77 ~7 1 i y a +I o ~FSf ~ tL. C n _ sgma3a n t:q V p - 3r . 4 sgggG @@@@19'ni@@I@@!@@~ c SL s s~ J:• a Q ~ p/IC@ z rS~gpphhp i~'~~~aY+¢„ ~ 3 z sE= Fhei€4~rV06~ k•j = D3 J Y'3p Y' ~ ~ t c "GY! Y1aYY t~ ~ of a 23a'^tyP.W_9i° y C I ~ 1 I \ F 1 . 1 C \ I ~ I I „ I \ \ ' 11 1 Gj I _ I y I \ 1 a 1 `.r \ I F 1 11 X\ V r n .~A \ ti I .s ~ - _ ate. / pop ~ I I \ \ 1 86Kr gg ~ y t eeEe - ~1 I n ' III x 3 ~ ~ CITY OF EAGAN RESOLUTION TO SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE SALE OF CITY OWNED PROPERTIES AND FOR APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH U.S. HOME CORPORATION RELATING TO TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. I - NICOLS RIDGE PORTION OF THE CEDAR GROVE REDEVELOPMENT AREA FOR PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT BE IT RESOLVED by the Eagan City Council to schedule a Public Hearing on February 21, 2006 to meet and consider the advisability of the sale of the properties identified below and for approval of the proposed Amendment to the Amended and Restated Development Agreement with U.S. Home Corporation, a Delaware corporation, relating to Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 for private development in the Nicols Ridge Project Area. Motion by: Second by: Those in Favor: Those Against: CERTIFICATION I, Maria Petersen, City 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 in a regular meeting thereof assembled this 17`h day of January, 2006. Maria Petersen, City Clerk 315 EAGAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY RESOLUTION TO SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE SALE OF CITY OWNED PROPERTIES AND FOR APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH U.S. HOME CORPORATION RELATING TO TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 1- NICOLS RIDGE PORTION OF THE CEDAR GROVE REDEVELOPMENT AREA FOR PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners of the Eagan Economic Development Authority to schedule a Public Hearing on February 21, 2006 to meet and consider the advisability of the sale of the properties identified below and for approval of the proposed Amendment to the Amended and Restated Development Agreement with U.S. Home Corporation, a Delaware corporation, relating to Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 for private development in the Nicols Ridge Project Area. Motion by: Second by: Those in Favor: Those Against: CERTIFICATION I, Jon Hohenstein, Secretary/Deputy Executive Director of the Economic Development Authority of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted by the Authority in a regular meeting thereof assembled this 170' day of January, 2006. Jon Hohenstein, Secretary/Deputy Executive Director ~b AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT 1 This agreement to amend ("Amendment") the Amended and Restated Development Agreement relating to Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 dated April 1, 2004 ("Agreement") between the Eagan Economic Development Authority ("EDA"), the City of Eagan ("City") and U.S. Home Corporation, a Delaware corporation, ("Developer"), is made this day of , 2005, by and between the EDA, the City and Developer (referred to collectively as the "Parties"). RECITALS WHEREAS, the Parties entered into the Agreement to redevelop certain property with the TIF District referenced therein (the "Development"). WHEREAS, the Development is a phased housing development (defined therein as "Phase I," "Phase II" and "Phase III"), which the City and the EDA have approved. WHEREAS, the EDA has. purchased four parcels as set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein ("Parcel I," "Parcel II," "Parcel III" and "Parcel IV " respectively) (collectively the "Additional Properties"), which are needed by Developer to complete the Development. WHEREAS, Section 3.6 of the Agreement does not specify the mechanism by which Additional Properties shall be purchased and conveyed to Developer for incorporation into the Development, and the Parties intend this Amendment provide such a mechanism. ' NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree as follows: 1. CREATION OF OPTION. EDA hereby grants Developer an option to purchase the Additional Properties in accordance with the Agreement and terms set forth herein ("Option"). 2. OPTION TERM. Developer shall exercise the Option to purchase the Additional Properties in accordance with the dates and deadlines set forth in the Agreement. During the term of the Option, the Developer may request that the EDA grant it, and/or its agents or contractors, reasonable access to enter upon the Additional Properties to investigate the condition of the same. The EDA agrees to grant such entry provided that appropriate financial security and insurance is provided by Developer. 3. EXERCISE OF OPTION. Developer shall exercise its Option on one or more of the Additional Properties in accordance with Section 6.4 of the Agreement by giving written notice. City of Eagan/Nicols Ridge/Amendment to Development Agreement Said written notice shall include the following: (i) Developer's declaration of its intent to exercise its Option pursuant to the terms herein; (ii) the description of the Parcel or Additional Properties contained in Exhibit "A" herein, for which Developer is exercising its Option; and (iii) an executed purchase agreement or agreements substantially the same as that contained in Exhibit "B" herein. 4. PURCHASE PRICE. The purchase price for the Additional Properties is set forth in Exhibit "A." The purchase price is subject to a per diem increase, based upon a 3% per annum rate (non-compounding), beginning January 1, 2006. 5. REMAINING TERMS. All remaining terms and obligations contained in the Agreement not expressly amended by this Amendment shall remain in full force and effect. EAGAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, a Minnesota body politic and corporate By: Pat Geagan Its: President By: Thomas L. Hedges Its: Executive Director STATE OF MINNESOTA) ) ss. COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 2005, by Pat Geagan and Thomas L. Hedges, the President and Executive Director of the Eagan Economic Development Authority, a Minnesota body politic and corporate, on behalf of the body. Notary Public 2 CITY OF EAGAN, a Minnesota municipal corporation By: Pat Geagan Its: Mayor By: Maria Petersen Its: City Clerk STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 2005, by Pat Geagan and Maria Petersen, the Mayor and Deputy Clerk of the City of Eagan, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the municipal corporation. Notary Public U.S. OME CORPORATION, a Delaware corp ation By: arc S. Anderson Its: „ivision President STATE OF MINNESOTA ) i+enry---p~n ) SS. COUNTY OF OAItff-A ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 21~ day of December, 2005, by Marc S. Anderson, a Division President of U.S. CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation, on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public, CAROLE L TOOHEY NOTARY PUs:IC - MINNESOTA My Cm"VISSion Expt%S J;u 31, 20Q7 ; 4 ~o EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION AND PURCHASE PRICE CALCULATION PROPERTY DESCRIPTION PURCHASE PRICE Parcel Number Legal Description Parcel I That part of the NE of Section 19, Township 27, Range 23, $305,000.00 described as follows: Beginning at a point on the South line of said NE said point being 998.13 feet East of the center of said Section 19, thence Northwesterly at an angle of 55°34' to said line 558.58 feet to the center of the Old Sibley Highway as now used, thence Northeasterly along the centerline of said road 130 feet, thence Southeasterly and parallel with the first described line to a point on the South line of said NE'/,, said point being 156.7 feet East of the point of beginning, thence 156.7 feet West to the point of beginning. Parcel II Lot 1, Block 1, BEAU D RUE DRIVE PLAT, $95,000.00 according to the recorded plat. Parcel III That part of the Northeast Quarter of Section 19, Township 27, $600,000.00 Range 23, described as follows: Beginning at a point on the South line of said Northeast Quarter, said point being 1155.73 feet East of the center of said Section 19, thence Northwesterly at an angle of 55 degrees, 34 minutes to the South line of said Northeast Quarter to the centerline of the Old Sibley Highway as now used, thence Northeasterly along the centerline of said road 120 feet, thence Southeasterly and parallel with the first described line 624.2 feet, thence Southerly to a point on the South line of said Northeast Quarter, said point being 98.5 feet East of the point of beginning, thence west along said quarter line 98.5 feet to the point of beginning, Dakota County, Minnesota according to the Government Survey thereof. Parcel IV Lot 2, BEAU D RUE DRIVE PLAT, Dakota County, $500,000.00 Minnesota. EXHIBIT "B" PURCHASE AGREEMENT This Purchase Agreement ("Agreement") is made this _ day of , 20_ ("Effective Date"), by and between the EAGAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, a Minnesota body politic and corporate (hereinafter "Seller") and U.S. HOME CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation (hereinafter "Buyer") (collectively referred to as the "Parties"). WHEREAS, Seller is the owner of certain real estate located in Dakota County, Minnesota and legally described as set forth on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein (the "Property"); and WHEREAS, the Property is located within City of Eagan's Tax Increment Financing District No. 1; and WHEREAS, Buyer has entered into an Amended and Restated Development Agreement ("Development Agreement") relating to Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 dated April 1, 2004, with Seller concerning the development of the Property and adjacent properties ("Adjacent Property"); and WHEREAS, Seller is willing to sell the Property to Buyer and Buyer is willing to acquire the Property all upon the terms and conditions contained in the Development Agreement and this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree as follows: 1. PURCHASE PRICE. The purchase price for the Property shall be IS " ("Purchase Price"). 2. PAYMENT OF PURCHASE PRICE. The Purchase Price shall be paid by the Buyer in cash or certified funds on the Date of Closing, as defined in Paragraph 8 herein. 3. TITLE EVIDENCE. Within thirty (30) days after execution of this Agreement, Buyer shall obtain, at Buyer's expense, a title insurance commitment for an owner's title insurance policy from the Title Company (the "Commitment" and/or the "Title Evidence") including proper searches covering bankruptcies, state and federal tax liens, judgment, unpaid taxes, assessments and pending assessments. The Buyer hereby acknowledges that the Seller will convey fee title to the Property subject to easements, encumbrances, covenants, conditions and restrictions of record, if any ("Permitted Encumbrances"). Buyer shall be allowed ten (10) days after receipt of such Commitment for examination and the making of any objections to the marketability of the title other than the Permitted Encumbrances, such objections to be made in writing or deemed waived. 3X, 4. TITLE INSURANCE. If any objections are so made, Seller shall have the option to cure the defect within thirty (30) days after notice from Buyer ("Cure Period"), or Seller may provide notice to Buyer that Seller has elected not to cure the defect. In the event that the defect has not been cured within the Cure Period, Buyer shall have. the option of (a) accepting title as it then stands and waiving Buyer's objections to title and proceed to closing; or (b) terminating this Agreement within five (5) days after expiration of the Cure Period. 5. REAL ESTATE TAxEs. Real estate taxes for all years prior to the year of closing shall be Seller's responsibility. Real estate taxes due and payable in the year of closing shall be Buyer's responsibility. Buyer shall be responsible for real estate taxes in all years subsequent to closing. Buyer shall be responsible for any deferred real estate taxes (i.e. Green Acres taxes for the property, which shall be paid at closing). 6. SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS. Buyer shall be responsible for and shall assume any pending or levied special assessments against the Property. 7. WELL DISCLOSURE/SEPTIC SYSTEMS DISCLOSURE/DEMOLITION COSTS. Buyer shall be responsible for any and all costs related to any well(s) on the Property as well as any and all costs associated with the removal and remediation of any septic systems. Buyer shall also be responsible for any and all costs relating to the demolition of any structure on the Property. In the event that Seller has, prior to the date of closing, incurred costs to seal/cap any well; remove any septic system; or demolish any structure on the Property, Buyer must reimburse Seller for such costs at the closing. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the City agrees that all actions undertaken by it for any such sealing/capping, removal and/or demolition, is subject to the competitive bidding statute and will be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder. 8. CLOSING. The closing shall take place on or before the date which is ninety (90) days subsequent to the Effective Date ("Date of Closing") at a place designated by Seller in Dakota County, time being of the essence. 9. OBLIGATION OF PARTIES AT CLOSING. At the closing between Buyer and Seller with respect to the Property: a. Seller shall: i. Execute and deliver a Quit Claim Deed conveying insurable fee title to the Buyer subject to easements, encumbrances, covenants, conditions and restrictions of record, if any, together with the terms and conditions of the repurchase agreement as set forth on Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated herein ("Repurchase Agreement"). 2 J Buyer acknowledges that the Repurchase Agreement must be recorded prior to any mortgage that Buyer takes against the Property and further that such mortgage must contain a clause that permits the Seller to acquire the Property at the price stated in the Purchase Agreement free and clear of any mortgage encumbrance. This provision shall survive the closing of this transaction and the delivery of any deed. ii. Execute and deliver the Repurchase Agreement in the form and text of Exhibit "B;" iii. Execute and deliver such other documents as may be reasonably required by Buyer to effectuate the sale and transfer of the Property. b. Buyer shall: i. Make the necessary payments of the Purchase Price required under paragraph 2 of this Agreement as well as any costs incurred by Seller under paragraph 7 of this Agreement; ii. Pay all recording fees and charges relating to the filing of the Quit Claim Deed; iii. Pay the title insurance premiums and the closing fee charged by the title company, if any; iv. Pay the state deed tax; V. Pay all costs relating to the updating of the Abstract of Title and the issuance of any title commitment or endorsements thereof; vi. Execute and deliver to Seller the Repurchase Agreement in the form and text of Exhibit "B"; vii. Execute and deliver such other documents as may be reasonably required by Seller to effectuate the sale and transfer of the Property; 10. REPRESENTATIONS, WARRANTIES AND COVENANTS OF SELLER. Seller makes no representations or warranties, whether express or implied, oral or written, concerning the condition of the Property or any improvements thereon. Buyer has undertaken all necessary due diligence, including any and all environmental tests Buyer deems reasonably necessary to satisfy itself as to the physical condition of the Property and any improvements 3 3 ay thereon. Buyer is purchasing the Property "As-Is" with all faults. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Seller shall deliver to Buyer, within fifteen (15) days of the date hereof, all third party generated "due diligence" documentation in Seller's possession or control. Notwithstanding anything contained herein to the contrary, Seller makes the following representations and warranties: i. Authori . Seller has the requisite power and authority to enter into and perform this Agreement and those Seller's Closing Documents to be signed by it; such documents have been duly executed and delivered; such execution, delivery and performance by Seller of such documents do not conflict with or result in a violation of any judgment, order, or decree of any court or arbiter to which Seller is a party; such documents are valid and binding obligations of Seller, and are enforceable in accordance with their terms. ii. Rights of Others to Purchase Property. Seller has not entered into any other contracts for the sale of the Property, nor are there any rights of first refusal or options to purchase the Property or any other rights of others that might prevent the consummation of the Agreement. iii. Agreements. There are no leases, oral or written, affecting the Property or any part thereof, nor any other right, title or interest in or to the Property granted to any other individual or entity and Seller covenants to deliver possession at Closing free of all tenancies, occupancies, or other rights, titles or interest, except as otherwise set forth in this Agreement. 11. NOTICES. All notices and demands given or required to be given by any party hereto to any other party shall be deemed to have been properly given if and when delivered in person, the next business day after being sent by reputable overnight commercial courier (e.g. U.P.S or Federal Express) or sent by facsimile (with verification of receipt) or three (3) business days after having been deposited in any U.S. Postal Service and sent by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows (or sent to such other address as any party shall specify to the other party pursuant to the provisions of this Section): To the Buyer: U.S. Home Corporation 935 East Wayzata Boulevard Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 Attention: Lee Johnson, Steve Grohoski, Mark Petersen 4 3o2.s With a copy to: Brett A. Perry, Esq. Messerli & Kramer, P.A. 1800 Fifth Street Towers, 150 South Fifth Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 To the Seller: Eagan Economic Development Authority Attn: Jon Hohenstein, Community Development Director 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 With a Copy to: Robert B. Bauer, City Attorney Severson, Sheldon, Dougherty & Molenda, P.A. 7300 West 147th Street, Suite 600 Apple Valley, Minnesota 55124 12. HEADINGS. The headings contained herein are for the purposes of convenience only and are not intended to define or limit the contents of such section or paragraph. 13. GOVERNING LAw. This Agreement shall be deemed to be a contract under the State of Minnesota and for all purposes shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of such state. 14. HEIRS, SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS. The terms, conditions and covenants shall extend to, be binding upon, and inure to the benefit of the respective heirs, successors and assigns of the parties hereto. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Buyer shall not be permitted to assign this Agreement or any of Buyer's rights or obligations hereunder without Seller's prior written consent, which may be granted or withheld in Seller's sole and absolute discretion. 15. DEFAULT. a. Seller's Remedies. If Buyer shall fail to consummate this Agreement for any reason, Seller, as its sole and exclusive remedy, may terminate this Agreement. b. Buyer's Remedies. If Seller shall fail to consummate this Agreement for any reason, Buyer, as its sole and exclusive remedy, may terminate this Agreement. 16. COMMISSION. Seller represents to Buyer that Seller has not engaged, and Buyer represents to Seller that Buyer has not engaged, any broker or agent in connection with the entering into of this Agreement, the sale or purchase of the Property, or the consummation of the transactions contemplated herein. 5 ~a~ 17.1 NATURE OF CONDITIONS. Buyer and Seller understand that in order for Buyer to proceed with development of the Property and closing the transaction contemplated by this Agreement, the following conditions must be satisfied on or before sixty (60) days after the date of this Agreement ("Condition Date") or other date as set forth below: i. The Corporate Investment Committee of Lennar Corporation shall have approved this Agreement and the transactions contemplated hereby in this Agreement in writing by the Condition Date. ii. On or before the Condition Date, Buyer shall have received, at Buyer's costs, a satisfactory environmental assessment of the Property stating that the Property is free from hazardous materials and is in compliance with all applicable federal, state and local environmental, health and safety laws and regulations. iii. On or before the Condition Date, Buyer shall have received, at Buyer's cost, soil test reports in form and substance satisfactory to Buyer stating that the soil conditions will permit the construction of residential dwellings without special footings. iv. On or before the Closing Date, there shall have not been any conditions or restrictions placed on the development of the Property as contemplated by this Agreement, by federal, state, City, city, county or municipal bodies, laws, regulations or ordinances, which would cause a delay in development of the Property or delay in obtaining a building permit or certificate of occupancy, and which Seller has not satisfied or otherwise cured so as to prevent such delay. V. On or before the Condition Date, Buyer shall have received, at Buyer's cost, assurances satisfactory to Buyer to the effect that development of the Property will not be impaired by any archeological limitations or restrictions. vi. On or before the Condition Date, at Buyer's expense, Buyer shall have procured a boundary survey of the Property (the "Survey"), acceptable to Buyer, determined in Buyer's sole discretion, prepared by a duly licensed land surveyor licensed in Minnesota and chosen by Buyer. The Survey shall comply with ALTA survey requirements. 17.2 FAILURE OF CONDITIONS. If any of the conditions set forth in Section 17.1 shall not have been satisfied by the Condition Date, then Buyer shall have the right to terminate this Agreement and, in the event Buyer does so terminate this Agreement, this Agreement shall become null and void. 6 The conditions contained in Section 17.1 are for the exclusive benefit of the Buyer. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have executed this Agreement this day of , 2005. BUYER: SELLER: U.S. HOME CORPORATION, a Delaware EAGAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT corporation AUTHORITY, a Minnesota body politic and corporate By: By: (print name) Pat Geagan Its: Its: President By: Thomas L. Hedges Its: Executive Director 7 EXHIBIT "A" Legal Description PROPERTY DESCRIPTION Parcel Number Legal Description Parcel I That part of the NE of Section 19, Township 27, Range 23, described as follows: Beginning at a point on the South line of said NE ''/4, said point being 998.13 feet East of the center of said Section 19, thence Northwesterly at an angle of 55134' to said 1/4 line 558.58 feet to the center of the Old Sibley Highway as now used, thence Northeasterly along the centerline of said road 130 feet, thence Southeasterly and parallel with the first described line to a point on the South line of said NE '/4, said point being 156.7 feet East of the point of beginning, thence 156.7 feet West to the point of beginning. Parcel II Lot 1, Block 1, BEAU D RUE DRIVE PLAT, according to the recorded plat. Parcel III That part of the Northeast Quarter of Section 19, Township 27, Range 23, described as follows: Beginning at a point on the South line of said Northeast Quarter, said point being 1155.73 feet East of the center of said Section 19, thence Northwesterly at an angle of 55 degrees, 34 minutes to the South line of said Northeast Quarter to the centerline of the Old Sibley Highway as now used, thence Northeasterly along the centerline of said road 120 feet, thence Southeasterly and parallel with the first described line 624.2 feet, thence Southerly to a point on the South line of said Northeast Quarter, said point being 98.5 feet East of the point of beginning, thence west along said quarter line 98.5 feet to the point of beginning, Dakota County, Minnesota according to the Government Survey thereof. Parcel IV Lot 2, BEAU D RUE DRIVE PLAT, Dakota County, Minnesota. 8 3=2~ EXHIBIT "B" REPURCHASE AGREEMENT This Agreement is made and entered into this day of , 20_, by and between the EAGAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, a Minnesota body politic and corporate ("EDA"), and U.S. HOME CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation ("Developer") (collectively the "Parties"). WHEREAS, EDA and Developer have entered into a Purchase Agreement, dated , 20, ("Purchase Agreement") relating to the sale and purchase of a parcel of land situated in Dakota County, Minnesota, and legally described as follows: (the "Property"); and WHEREAS, the Parties entered into a Amended and Restated Development Agreement relating to Tax Increment Financing District No. 1 dated April 1, 2004 (the "Development Agreement") whereby the Parties agreed that Developer may purchase from EDA property adjacent to and to be incorporated into the development known as Nicols Ridge (the "Development"); and NOW, THEREFORE, in further consideration of this conveyance and in furtherance of the understanding between the parties, Developer hereby grants to EDA the following option to repurchase the Property ("Repurchase Agreement"); Section 1. REPURCHASE: If, within thirty (30) months from the date Developer purchases the Property, Developer has not commenced the construction of the Improvements as defined in Section 1(1), 3.6 and 3.7 of the Development Agreement, on the Property ("Improvements") EDA may, at its option, repurchase the Property for a purchase price of $ less the amount of any liens or claims against the Property resulting from action by the Developer. EDA may exercise this option to repurchase by giving written notice to Developer within thirty (30) days of the expiration of the period(s) specified above. Upon receiving the repurchase price in cash from EDA, Developer shall convey to EDA good and 330 marketable title to the Propert y by limited warranty deed, free and clear of any encumbrances placed or suffered thereon by Developer. In the event that Developer fails or refuses to remove such encumbrances, EDA shall be permitted to remove such encumbrances at Developer's sole cost and expense. Developer hereby agrees to indemnify EDA from any and all liabilities, expenses and costs incurred (including but not limited to reasonable attorney's fees) arising out of or related to the removal of such encumbrances. Section 2. RELEASE: If written notice of option exercise is not timely given to Developer by EDA or if Developer, within thirty (30) months from the date Developer purchases the Property, or should Developer commence construction of the Improvements on the Property within said time period, this option to repurchase shall terminate absolutely and EDA shall upon Developer request, execute and deliver to Developer a release of this repurchase right in recordable form. Section 3. SALE OF PROPERTY: Developer hereby acknowledges and agrees that Developer shall not sell, or transfer title to all or any portion of the Property within thirty (30) months from the date of Developer's purchase of the Property without the prior written consent of EDA, or the execution and delivery of a release of the repurchase right set forth herein. Any purported conveyance or transfer of title without the prior written consent of EDA shall be null and void. Section 4. NOTICE: All notices, demands and requests required or permitted to be given under this Agreement must be in writing and shall be deemed to have been properly given or served either by personal delivery or by depositing the same in the United States Mail, addressed to EDA or to Developer, as the case may be, prepaid and registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, at the following addresses: To the Developer: U.S. Home Corporation 935 Wayzata Boulevard Wayzata, Minnesota 55391 Attention: Lee Johnson, Steve Grohoski, Mark Petersen With a copy to: Brett A. Perry, Esq. Messerli & Kramer, P.A. 1800 Fifth Street Towers, 150 South Fifth Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 To EDA: Eagan Economic Development Authority Attn: Jon Hohenstein, Community Development Director 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 With a Copy to: Robert B. Bauer, City Attorney Severson, Sheldon, Dougherty & Molenda, P.A. 7300 West 147th Street, Suite 600 Apple Valley, Minnesota 55124 231 Rejection or other refusal to accept, or the inability to deliver because of changed address of which no notice was given, shall be deemed to be receipt of the notice, demand or request. Either party shall have the right from time to time and at any time upon at least ten (10) days' written notice thereof, to change their respective addresses and each shall have the right to specify as its address any other address within the United States of America. Section 5. MISCELLANEOUS. The provisions of this Agreement are intended in each instance to be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the signatories hereto, to the successors and assigns of Developer who become owners of the Property and to the successors and assigns of EDA to whom the right, title and interest herein is specifically assigned. Either party may record this instrument in the appropriate real estate records. Section 6. COUNTERPARTS. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts and each such duly executed counterpart shall be of the same validity, force and effect as the original. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this instrument to be executed as of the day and year first above written. DEVELOPER U.S. HOME CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation By: (print name) Its: STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me, a notary pubic, this day of , 2005, by , the of U.S. HOME CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation, on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public 33va-, EDA EAGAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, a Minnesota body politic and corporate By: Pat Geagan Its: President By: Thomas L. Hedges Its: Executive Director STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ss. COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me, a notary public, this day of , 2005, by Pat Geagan and Thomas L. Hedges, the President and Executive Director of Eagan Economic Development Authority, a Minnesota body politic and corporate, on behalf of the body. Notary Public THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: SEVERSON, SHELDON, DOUGHERTY & MOLENDA, P.A. 7300 West 147th Street, Suite 600 Apple Valley, MN 55124 (952) 432-3136 333 EXHIBIT "A" PROPERTY DESCRIPTION Parcel Number Legal Description Parcel I That part of the NE of Section 19, Township 27, Range 23, described as follows: Beginning at a point on the South line of said NE said point being 998.13 feet East of the center of said Section 19, thence Northwesterly at an angle of 55°34' to said'/, line 558.58 feet to the center of the Old Sibley Highway as now used, thence Northeasterly along the centerline of said road 130 feet, thence Southeasterly and parallel with the first described line to a point on the South line of said NE 1/4, said point being 156.7 feet East of the point of beginning, thence 156.7 feet West to the point of beginning. Parcel II Lot 1, Block 1, BEAU D RUE DRIVE PLAT, according to the recorded plat. Parcel III That part of the Northeast Quarter of Section 19, Township 27, Range 23, described as follows: Beginning at a point on the South line of said Northeast Quarter, said point being 1155.73 feet East of the center of said Section 19, thence Northwesterly at an angle of 55 degrees, 34 minutes to the South line of said Northeast Quarter to the centerline of the Old Sibley Highway as now used, thence Northeasterly along the centerline of said road 120 feet, thence Southeasterly and parallel with the first described line 624.2 feet, thence Southerly to a point on the South line of said Northeast Quarter, said point being 98.5 feet East of the point of beginning, thence west along said quarter line 98.5 feet to the point of beginning, Dakota County, Minnesota according to the Government Survey thereof. Parcel IV Lot 2, BEAU D RUE DRIVE PLAT, Dakota County, Minnesota. 33y Agenda Information Memo January 17, 2005 Eagan Economic Development Authority Meeting F. OTHER BUSINESS 1. ORGANIZATIONAL BUSINESS a. Election of Officers ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To elect/appoint officers of the Eagan Economic Development Authority. FACTS: • As a part of its annual organizational business, the EDA elects its officers and appoints its Executive Director and Secretary/Deputy Director. • In 2005, the officers of the Authority were as follows: President: Pat Geagan Vice President: Peggy Carlson Treasurer: Mike Maguire Executive Director: City Administrator Tom Hedges Secretary/Deputy Executive Director: Community Development Director Jon Hohenstein b. 2005 Meeting Schedule - No Action Necessary FACTS: • Under its bylaws, the Eagan Economic Development Authority's regular meetings are scheduled to coincide with the regular meetings of the City Council. • At its meeting of December 1, 2003, the EDA confirmed the meeting schedule defined in the bylaws and adopted a mechanism by which the Authority may cancel such meetings as a part of the adoption of the City Council agenda if no EDA business is in order on that date. Staff is recommending that this schedule and process continue for 2006. c. Single Action for EDA and Council Resolutions - No Action Necessary FACTS: • In 2004, the City Council also adopted a process by which the actions that are required to be taken by both the City Council and the EDA can be accomplished through a single motion. Under this process, the Council meeting remains in session (does not recess) when the EDA meeting is convened. For each business item that requires an action by both the EDA and the Council, two resolutions are included in the background and one motion by the Council, also hearing the item as the EDA, approves both resolutions. At the completion of the EDA Business items, the EDA meeting is adjourned and the remainder of the Council meeting is completed. 335~ Agenda Information Memo Eagan Economic Development Authority Meeting January 17, 2006 G. ADJOURNMENT ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To adjourn the Economic Development Commission meeting. 336 401~ City of EaRane~o TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCILMEMBERS FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: JANUARY 13, 2006 SUBJECT: ACTING MAYOR Mayor Geagan has posed a series of questions for the City Attorney to address regarding scenarios in which the City Council would appoint a Mayor's replacement and how that relates the action before the Council on Tuesday evening to appoint an Acting Mayor. The City Attorney has prepared a series of questions and various scenarios in a memorandum which is attached for Council review and consideration. Thomas L. Hedges City Administrator SEVERSON, SHELDON, DOUGHERTY & MOLENDA, P.A. TO: Tom Hedges, City Administrator FROM: Michael G. Dougherty, City Attorney DATE: January 12, 2006 RE: Acting Mayor Pursuant to your request, I have reviewed the implication of certain action taken by the City Council with respect to the acting mayor position. In order to give a full response to the issues, I believe that it is best to provide an example of how the processes may work. Council Make-up Council Member Adams (term expires in 2006) Council Member Baker (term expires in 2008) Council Member Capp (term expires in 2008) Council Member Duffy (term expires in 2006) Mayor Eagan (term expires in 2006) January 17, 2006 A council member is required to be chosen as the Acting Mayor. Council Member Baker is chosen. April 1, 2006 Mayor Eagan resigns. Question 1. Does the Council need to choose someone to fill the vacancy created by the Mayor's resignation? Answer. Yes. Minn. Stat. 412.02 Question 2. Can Mayor Eagan participate in the vote to choose a replacement? Answer. No. Minn. Stat. 415.15 Question 3. Does the Mayor's replacement need to be an existing council member? Answer. No. Council Members Baker and Capp declared their desire to be selected as Mayor. April 15, 2006 Council considers mayoral appointment. Council Members Adams, Baker, and Capp are nominated for appointment. Council Member Adams does not wish to become Mayor. Council Member Adams must decline the nomination when it is made, and does so. The nominations of Council Members Baker and Capp being duly made and seconded, a vote is then taken on the appointment. Having been nominated to become a candidate for mayor, without declining, Council Members Baker and Capp are prohibited from voting on the appointment. Minn. Stat. 471.46. Only Council Members Adams and Duffy may vote on the mayor's appointment. Scenario 1. Council Members Adams and Duffy vote for Baker. Result: Council Member Baker becomes the mayor and the Council is required to replace the vacated council position and to further appoint a new acting mayor. Scenario 2. Council Member Adams votes for Baker and Council Member Duffy votes for Capp. Result: Due to a tie vote, Council Member Baker, as acting mayor, is required to make the appointment. However, Council Member Baker cannot appoint himself mayor. Minn. Stat. 471.46 Scenario 3. Council Member Adams votes for Council Member Baker, and Council Member Duffy abstains. Result: A majority vote is required to elect Baker and thus a replacement has not occurred. April 15, 2006 As Acting mayor, Council Member Baker appoints Council Member Adams as mayor. Since the appointment occurred, when less than two years remain in the mayoral term, Adams serves as mayor until the qualification of a successor by the election in November Council Member Adams' seat is now vacant. The Council is required to appoint a replacement. Similar to the vote for mayor, if there is a tie vote in the council, Mayor Adams shall make the appointment. Since Adams' Council term expires in 2006, the appointee serves until the qualification of a successor by the election in November. OR April 15, 2006 As Acting Mayor, Council Member Baker appoints Council Member Capp as mayor. Council Member Capp's seat is vacant. The Council is required to appoint a replacement. Similar to the vote for mayor, if there is a tie vote in the council, Mayor Capp shall make the appointment. Since Capp's Council term expires in 2008, a special election, for a two year council term is required in November. The appointee serves until the qualification of a successor by the election in November. OR April 15, 2006 Council Member Baker, as acting mayor, foresees a tie in the vote for the mayoral replacement, and hoping to be appointed mayor by Adams, resigns as Acting Mayor and supports Adams as Acting Mayor. There is no provision in the statute that allows for council member to resign as Acting Mayor but to retain the seat on the council. Moreover, even if Baker were able to resign, Baker would be prohibited from participating in the vote for a replacement. I hope this clarifies some of the issues surrounding the Acting Mayor position and if you have any questions please call.