01/10/2006 - City Council Special~~`
AGENDA
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
JANUARY 10, 2005
5:30 PM
EAGAN ROOM-EAGAN MUNICIPAL CENTER
I. ROLL CALL AND AGENDA ADOPTION
II. VISITORS TO BE HEARD
j III. REVIEW RECOMMENDATION OF THE ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION (EDC) RE: ROLE/CHARGE
OF THE EDC
P ~~ IV. STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN UPDATE
6:30-JOINT MEETING WITH THE ADVISORY PARKS AND
RECREATION COMMISSION
~ (~ V. 2006 PARKS AND RECREATION CIP
i ~ VI. REVIEW CASCADE BAY EXPANSION OPPORTUNITY
VII. OTHER BUSINESS
VIII. ADJOURN
Agenda Information Memo
January 10, 2005 Eagan City Council Workshop
III. REVIEW RECOMII~NDATION OF THE ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT COlVIIVIISSION (EDC) RE: ROLE/CHARGE OF
THE EDC
DIRECTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
To receive arequest/recommendation by the Economic Development Commission
regarding its current and future purpose and responsibilities and to provide direction for
the continuation, modification or discontinuation of the Commission.
FACTS:
As City Council is aware, the Council and Economic Development Commission have
discussed the Commission's role and responsibilities at a number of times in its history.
Following the most recent discussion in which a subcommittee of the Commission met
with Mayor Geagan, acting as the Council liaison, in the winter of 2004, the roles for the
Commission that were defined related to updates to the City's public financing assistance
policies and communications activities both with existing businesses and business
prospects. The Commission formed Committees to address those goals and progress was
made on some of them, but the Commission continued to raise concerns regarding the
significance of the work they were doing.
One of the matters that was noted is that the City Council's decision to form an Economic
Development Authority, made up of the City Council members, has resulted in many of
the more substantial issues -consideration of public financing assistance, review and
approval of redevelopment programs, etc. -being addressed in that forum rather than
before the EDC.
At the time of the Council interviews of Commission members last spring, the issue of
the role of the EDC came up again and the Council asked Mayor Geagan, as the
Commission liaison to meet with the EDC Chair and Vice Chair to discuss the matter
fiuther. In August of 2005, that meeting was held and, on its basis, Chair Zoberi and
Vice Chair (rilbert asked that an item regarding the future of the Commission be placed
on an EDC agenda for discussion by the full Commission.
The outcome of that discussion is reflected in the Commission minutes and staff memo
that is included in the attachments. Tl~e Commission acted to suspend its meetings until
such time as the City Council establisies "specific, clear products or outcomes with time
tables that would support the economic development initiatives of the City." While it
was not part of the motion, the Commission discussion suggested that if no such specific
products are defined, the Council may wish to discontinue the Commission in its current
form.
Agenda Information Memo Page 2
January 10, 2005 Eagan City Council Workshop
ATTAC)EEVIENTS:
• Background memo from Chair Zoberi to Commission on page ~_
• Staff memo regazding previous discussions of EDA and EDC responsibilities on
Pie
• Minutes of October 3, 2005 EDC meeting on pages ~ through
• Staff memo to the City Council and EDC overviewing the Commission action, its
request for Council direction and possible options for economic development
policy input if the Commission is disbanded on pages through ~~
• Corres dente between staff and Chair Zoberi regazdin the summary memo on
page ~~
Future of the Economic Development Commission
Background Discussion by Chair Zoberi
EDC was formed as a part of Star City initiative of the State of Minnesota.
Cities that completed the application process, established economic development goals,
received technical assistance from the State Department of Trade and Economic
Development. The status of being a star City provided opportunities in attracting new
business and industry; it also gave communities' leader's opportunities in training and
networking with other Star Cities. Under the Minnesota Star City program, a city is
recognized for its leadership in working with local businesses to ensure continued
growth. Typically, Star Cities have a centralized downtown business district and an
aggressive industrial park program.
Eagan's Economic Development Commission played an important role during the
development of business and industry. However in 1999-2000, EDA (Economic
Development Authority) was formed. EDA was basically the Mayor and City Council
wearing different hats.
In 2000 there was a joint meeting of EDA and EDC. Shortly thereafter all the functions
of EDC were taken over by EDA rendering EDC useless.
Current role of EDC has been to receive updates on the development in the city; it is not
involved in the strategic planning or business growth in the city. Members of EDC
continue to feel frustrated with the lack of involvement. Nadim Zoberi and Wayne
Gilbert met with Mayor Geagan on August 19, 2005 to discuss the future of EDC.
They jointly concluded that the current City Council (EDA) will not transfer any
authority to EDC making it a useless body. Nine very intelligent people waste
approximately 3 hours per month, the staff spends time in preparing for meetings, there is
a cable individual who records the proceeding, a city staff takes notes during the meeting
and in the end all we receive is an update. If EDC was a department in a private business
it would have been eliminated three years ago.
It was decided to put this matter in front of the EDC members for a discussion and a
recommendation to the city council that either EDA authority be given to the EDC or the
Economic Development Commission be eliminated.
Jon,
I believe I have assembled the complete paper/formal meeting record on this question. I do not
have knowledge of any other informal meetings/conversations to the extent that any took place.
I have the material for the following dates:
1. March of 2000 the EDA was formed. This was done to facilitate buying the land
for Central Park and the related financing. It was not directly an economic
development or redevelopment initiative.
2. April 2003 a Joint Special City Council Workshop with the Advisory Planning and
Economic Development Commissions was held. The minutes of that meeting
reflect that the City Council discussed the opportunity of the EDC serving as the
EDA. The Council directed that staff prepare a draft agreement designating the
EDC as the EDA, and also prepare a report showing the potential outcomes of
the decision and process to be taken.
3. May 16, 2003 Additional Information Memo includes information with respect to
the composition of the City's EDA noting the exploratory interest of the City
Council to designate the EDC as the EDA and that the item be placed on the
first workshop in June for discussion. The material was prepared by City
Attorney Dougherty and noted some important public policy issues.
4. June 10, 2003 the meeting minutes stated that the City Council discussed the
EDA's authority and by consensus decided to retain these authorities by
continuing to serve as the EDA.
After formation of the EDA in 2000 for the above stated purpose, the issue of redevelopment
including Northeast Eagan and Cedar Grove became more prominent and complicated the roles
of the two groups. However, I do not think anything was ever taken away form the EDC or was
any significant authority extended for the EDC to play amajor/defined role in the redevelopment
process.
I did a word search on the City Council minutes for 2000, 2001 and 2002 and found no reference
to the type of meeting noted by Wayne and Nadim in their memo as having taken place in 2000.
Thanks,
Gene
Gene VanOverbeke
Director of Administrative Services
Phone: 651-675-5016
Fax: 651-675-5012
gvanoverbeke@cityofeagan.com
MINUTES OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
Eagan, Minnesota
October 3, 2005
The Eagan Economic Development Commission meeting was held on Monday, October
3rd, 2005 at 5:30 p.m. Members present were Bilal Murad, Ken Koch, Kim Feller, Maggie
Jensen, Nadim Zoberi, Patricia Todd, Terry Creegan, and Wayne Gilbert. Members absent
were Leslie Bromley, Rata. Hasan. Also present were Director of Community
Development Jon Hohenstein, City Planner Mike Ridley, Community Development/GIS
Specialist Erik Slettedahl, and Recording Secretary Jen Hildebrandt.
ROLL CALL AND ADOPTION OF AGENDA
Chair Zoberi called the meeting to order and recognized a quorum. Maggie Jensen moved.
Ken Koch seconded to adopt the agenda. The motion carried.
APPROVAL OF NIINUTES
Maggie Jensen moved. Ken Koch seconded to approve the August 8, 2005 minutes. The
motion carried.
VISITORS TO BE HEARD
There were no Visitors To Be Heard at this time.
OLD BUSINESS
There was no Old Business at this time.
NEW BUSINESS
A. Discussion of Future of Economic Development Commission
Chair Zoberi began the discussion with a history of the EDC. He stated when the EDC was
first initiated, it had a very prominent role as part of the Star City of Eagan. In 2000 The
EDA, made up of City Council members wearing different hats, was formed. That year,
the EDA and EDC had a joint meeting which seemed to be very effective. Since that
time, defining the role of the EDC has gotten more and more difficult. Chair Zoberi
continued with a brief description of how 3 metropolitan area communities Economic
Development Commissions act within their community.
City of Woodbury
The 7 member EDC acts as a coordinating body for economic development financing
matters for the City of Woodbury. This includes management of the revolving loans
program called the Woodbury Growth Fund. The EDC reviews tax increment financing
proposals brought to the city as well as financing of proposed major public projects.
The Commission recommends policies and programs to the city council and works with
the city as an economic development consultant helping the City Council and staff promote
the city, attract economic growth and develop and retain business in the community.
City of Shoreview
The EDC is an advisory group to the elected officials of the City of Shoreview. Their
commission is to acquaint themselves with the broad planning principles used in the
development of the comprehensive plan and bring to the city a view from the business
community ,recognizing that business retention and economic development are significant
elements in a quality community. The EDC will assist the city, working with and through
the staff, in defining city strengths and weaknesses. Efforts are focused on developing the
available vacant land within the city consistent with the comprehensive plan.
City of Savage
The Savage EDC consists of 7 members and 2 alternates. The Commission advises the
City Council in all issues related to the development of the economic growth of the
community, including recruitment of new business and industry retention and expansion.
Chair Zoberi reiterated that these are some of the EDC responsibilities in other cities. He
stressed that in his opinion, if the City of Eagan were a business, the EDC would probably
be a body that would be eliminated.
Each of the other EDC members followed Chair Zoberi with their personal comments,
which would be followed by open discussion.
Member Gilbert stated at outset that it is a good thing that a body such as the EDC
consider its place in the overall governance of the city and not be afraid to ask the question
whether or not the function is needed. Is it performing to its maximum capacity?
He voiced concern that the EDC looks more like an informational group, receiving reports
and considering them. But in terms of meaningful participation in the role of economic
development, it seems as though the Commission has had less and less over the years.
Member Gilbert used the Technology Working Group, on which he sits as an alternate, for
example. This is a very vibrant group made up of top community professionals and staff.
This group is considering a proposal regarding the cities communication infrastructure.
This is critically important as we move into the new era of electronic communications.
Yet, none of that has been filtered through this commission other than having one of our
members sit in the group to represent the EDC and report back on the groups activities. If
something as important as that doesn't initiate in the EDC, then perhaps this Commission's
time has passed "If we had not met over the past couple of years, would anybody have
noticed :'" Gilbert asked.
Member Todd questioned if chair Zoberi and member Gilbert initiated or facilitated the
meeting with Mayor Geagan and if the Mayor had any opinion on the matter. Member
Gilbert res~onded that chair Zoberi and he requested the meeting, which was held on
August 19 , 2005. He continued that the Mayor was very candid and stated he and the
Council are looking to the EDC for advice on how to proceed, however he did not see the
2
EDC assuming the functions of the EDA. Member Todd stated that what the EDC is
providing should be of as much value as what it is receiving and that she does not feel that
is the case. Member Todd is in favor of evaluating the value of the EDC and how to
proceed. She is willing to continue, but suggested it may make sense to discontinue.
Member Jensen questioned what prompted this discussion now because this is not a new
situation. Chair Zoberi stated that although this has been an ongoing issue, it has never
really been discussed. He acknowledged the time the members/staff were putting into these
meetings with little outcome which is not necessarily well spent city money.
In reference to the Cedarvale Shopping Center where the contract could not be signed, the
EDC should have been up to its "eyeballs" in this discussion. However, we had no role.
Member Gilbert continued stating the City Council asked the Mayor to be the liaison
between them and the EDC. Having heard that, Chair Zoberi and Member Gilbert decided
now would be a good time to address the concerns with Mayor Geagan.
Member Jensen stated that she understands and to an extent agrees with everything
previous members stated. On the other hand, she understands why the City Council wants
to retain the EDA authority. It is tax dollars and that authority perhaps should be in the
hands of elected representatives. Jensen stated she would hate to see Eagan be without an
EDC and she is not sure if she is in favor of it being disbanded. However, she questioned if
we azen't the EDA and we aren't the Planning Commission, what is the role of the EDC?
If we are an advisory body, what are we to be advising on? If the City Council can not or
will not answer these questions, then perhaps we should disband.
Member Koch agreed with Member Jensen and commented that there are some things that
are for the greater good and there have been some valuable things that have come out of
the EDC. Policy review activities have been fairly valuable for the city and have been
undertaken by the EDC. However, agreeing with Chair Zoberi's previous "business
world" comment that rating the performance of the EDC would be difficult.
Member Feller again agreed with all previous members stating as growth occurs in cities, a
lot of times commissions are left behind and aren't modernized or changed. They don't
evolve at the same pace as City Councils. She raised the question of visiting neighboring
city EDC meetings to see if they had been through similaz struggles and how they
addressed them.
Member Koch noted that the City of Eagan is more re-development/council driven and
each community is different.
Member Creegan acknowledged having the least amount of knowledge about the issues
because he is a new member. Creegan senses the commission is a gatherer of inr."ormation.
There isn't really output that makes a significant statement or creates a change in the
community to "hang your hat on". In having reviewed minutes from meetings prior to his
commission, Member Creegan commented the minutes basically all said the same thing.
Someone brings in a report and they aze thanked. The EDC reviews the report and collects
information from staff. Members then go off to their sub-committee meetings. Each
meeting basically does the same thing. "If I am going to continue to be involved, I need to
feel what I am doing has an active role in the community." "If we are going to be a
resource, I'm ready. But I'm not sure if that is what I need to be here for," Creegan stated.
The Commission asked for staffls perspective on the discussion.
Director Hohenstein stated that it was important for the commission to have discussion
first before the staff comments. He went onto say that the EDA's authority to do reviews
of financing assistance, etcetera crystallizes the challenge concerning the EDC's role.
However, this has been an on-going struggle for many yeazs. A similaz discussion was had
with the mayor 1-1 '/z years ago. As a consequence of the decision to do most work in
committees, it has gotten to the point where the EDC meetings themselves are
presentations, committee reports, and not much more. He stated he understands the
feelings of the commission and wants everyone to feel they are making a valuable
contribution.
Director Hohenstein confirmed that the sounding boazd the City Council has looked to in
the past, may be different than the EDC as it is today. The City of Burnsville has an
Economic Growth Committee which is a combination of people appointed by the Chamber
of Commerce and people appointed by the city. They have feed back on a variety of
things. Eagan has never had to struggle to have strong economic development so we have
not staffed for it nor are we as aggressive as some other cities aze in mazketing or offering
incentives for it. Director Hohenstein then asked the Commission if there were any
questions.
Member Murad joined the discussion at 6:15 and added that he feels there have been some
extremely good ideas and significant motivation to do the right thing in the meetings he
has participated in. However, he stated he hasn't been there long enough to know the
workings of the system and it seems as though we need to generate more momentum in
trying to achieve the goal we aze talking about here. He admitted he hasn't seen much
happening in the 3 months he has been on the commission, so he asked how to channel the
ideas into actions.
Members Creegan & Todd and Director Hohenstein all addressed how there aze parameters
on the authority of the EDC. Given these parameters and resources that can be allocated to
the EDC, there is only so much that can be done as the EDC is not made up of elected
officials.
Member Koch reiterated that the City Council has provided this commission with a set of
goals, which are to review policies and provide recommendations and provide some sort of
business retention communication strategies and recommendations. We need to look at
ourselves and say yes that is what I agreed to sign on to and how can we make that
happen? Koch recommended reviewing some of those structures and bringing them back
to the full group where this 1 1/a hour session turns more into a working session. Some
tasks may be appropriate for sub groups but it would all be brought back to the full group
where the EDC is accountable for results.
4
Member Jensen questioned if the problem doesn't lay in the defmition the city council has
given the EDC. To review policy...what does that mean? Go through all their policies and
recommend changes? Is something broken they need fixed? Communication plan...do
you need a commission to do that? Maybe the City Council, in trying to give us a role, is
casting about and looking for something to put on a piece of paper and maybe we could
help them redefine what our role should be.
Chair Zoberi suggested giving City Council the option to decide if we exist and if so, in
what capacity. Member Jensen agreed and suggested coming up with a proposal for a new
role and if the Council likes it, they can accept it and if not, maybe it is time to disband this
group.
Member Gilbert suggested tossing it back to the City Council. What specific, important
role do you want us to play in the support of the city's economic development? Member
Creegan agreed.
Gilbert moved that the Commission ask the City Council to establish specific, cleaz
products or outcomes with time tables that would support the economic development
initiatives of the city. Until this information is received, the EDC suspends its monthly
meetings and subcommittee meetings.
Todd seconded the motion. All members voted in favor.
COMMITTEE REPORTS
A. Business Retention, Communications and Promotions
Member Todd deferred to Director Hohenstein, who spoke of the Chamber's Grow
Minnesota program. The idea was that when Ruthe Batulis scheduled a meeting with a
new business, she would contact the EDC and one of the members of the committee would
attend the meeting. We have not heard from her yet on that. If this commission continues,
maybe we want to consider taking a different approach and go back to direct business
contacts by Commission members as the Chamber program needs to cover all cities in the
NDCCC.
Communications Director has continued on the recommendations for the Economic
Development webpage. Tom Garrison provided background in the packet about how we
build our presence through the webpage. There have also been talks about taking steps
towazd at least one goal per committee meeting. If there aze further EDC meetings, there
would be continued discussions of the webpage and review of Tom Gazrison's comments.
B. Finance and Development Policy
Member Gilbert stated that at the last meeting, the Finance Committee continued the
discussion of the tax increment financing portion of the business assistant policy. There
aze currently two approaches: the one is to keep it general. Let individual applicants
develop circumstances of any given application. The second is to define more specific job
~r'
or wage goals than those that aze contained in the general business assistance policy. The
majority of the committee feels the policy should be general but staff wants to give the
opportunity to consider specific goals that might better improve the policies. It was
presented back to the staff to come up with specifics for the committee to look at and
consider.
STAFF REPORT
A. Redevelopment Area Status Report
Director Hohenstein referred members to the redevelopment district activity report. A new
deadline of 10/18 has been set to try and have a substantial complete agreement with
Schafer Richardson for the Cedaz Grove azea. The City continues to acquire properties in
the area and be contacted by property owners interested in selling different properties. The
most frequent questions from area property owners regard the phases are in and when they
can expect a change to occur. Short of having the agreement with Schafer Richardson
completed, these are hazd questions to answer. However, the Council has given the latitude
to say irrespective of the phase a property may be in, the City is prepared to purchase
property directly.
In other parts of the district, construction of River Ridge condos is continuing. The Nicols
Ridge town homes have come in for their second phase. The Schwans distribution facility
and Opus office showroom on the north side of 13, although not needing assistance from
TIF district, aze in the TIF district. Captured revenues from that increment will go towazd
the coronary redevelopment on the other side of hwy 13.
In Northeast Eagan, Grand Oaks Development office building will have their 1st tenant in
mid- October. Retail will follow from there and the bank is under construction.
TMI Coatings moved from northeast Eagan to its new location on Terminal Drive at the
end of September. We expect Grand Oak to go ahead with its next phase which will be
90,000 sq ft similar to its 100,000 sq ft sister building located on T.H.149.
The EDA has set a public hearing for consideration of a development agreement with the
McGough project on 35E and 494 on November 1st. This would also include the finding
that eminent domain may be necessary for consolidation of properties for the project.
Notices aze going out with that.
In Southeast Eagan along Biscayne Ave, LHB companies will be doing the substandard
review in that area looking for whether it can be defined as a redevelopment district.
B. Business Prospect Update
6
~Q
In terms of other activities and prospects, representatives of the City participated in the
opening of the John Deere facility in the Waters Office Park. In addition to Jake's City
Grille, Granite City Brewery recently opened and the Doolittles restaurant is also
expanding.
C. NDCCC Communications
Discussions continue.
D. Informative Items
Positively MN is a National/International marketing program coordinated by the
Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED). This gives an
opportunity to focus on some of the states activities in biosciences and medical technology.
The City of Eagan has put money into the budget to participate in the program in 2006, and
we have been attending some of the meetings.
Economic Development Association of Minnesota (EDAM) has released an outline of
activities from the 20051egislative session related to economic development authorities.
They are currently creating their policy initiatives for the upcoming legislative session.
November meeting not confirmed at this time. Hohenstein said he would not be surprise if
the City Council invited the EDC to a joint meeting as a step in the process of reviewing
the future of the Commission.
NEXT MEETING AND FUTURE AGENDA
A. Future Topics
There are no future topics scheduled at this time.
ADJOURNMENT
Chair Zoberi declared the meeting adjourned. The next meeting has no scheduled date and
will be determined when the City Council responds to the proposal of the EDC.
7
City of Ea~au demo
TO: TOM HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR
FROM: JON HOHENSTEIN, C011~IlVIUNTTY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
DATE: OCTOBER 6, 2005
SUBJECT: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION ROLE & FUTURE
As you are aware, for much of its history the Economic Development Commission has noised
questions concerning its role and functions on behalf of the City Council and the community. Since
the formation of the Economic Development Authority, it has been the perception of the
Commission that their role has been diminished because the more substantial economic development
policy issues and public financing assistance issues are handled by the EDA. While efforts were
made at a joint meeting of the Council and EDC in 2003 and through meetings with a Goals
Subcommittee of the Commission and Mayor Geagan as Commission liaison in 2004, some
members of the Commission have continued to express concern that their role is not a substantial
one.
This matter of the role and future need for the Commission came to a head again in the spring of
2005 during the interviews for appointment to the Commissions and again during a Council retreat at
which time Mayor Geagan was asked by the Council to meet with the Commission Chair and Vice
Chair to discuss the matter again. That meeting occurred in August. In follow up, Chair Zoberi and
Vice Chair Gilbert asked that the item be placed on the Commission agenda for its meeting on
October 3rd and the Commission discussed the matter at that tune.
While some Commission members indicated a belief that their work on updating public financing
policies and advising staff on the development of economic development communications was
worthwhile, the group did not see itself generating a substantial number of recommendations or
products for consideration by the City Council. They also talked about the narrowness of the
communications and policy recommendation role. The Commission minutes cover the issues raised
in greater detail.
On the basis of the discussion, the Commission voted to suspend its meetings until such time as the
City Council defines one or more specific roles for the group. While it was not part of the motion,
the discussion suggested that if no such role were to b;, defined, the Council may wish to discontinue
the Commission in its current form.
l~
Staff would appreciate the opportunity to discuss this matter further with the City Council as an
upcoming workshop or retreat topic. Options to consider include more clearly defining the
Commission role in its current form, discontinuing the Commission and relying on the EDA to
provide all economic development policy and action decisions, considering an alternative format for
an Economic Development Advisory Group focused primarily on economic development and
business retention communications, or other options that may arise out of the discussion by the City
Council.
In taking this action, the Commission acknowledged and staff agrees that it is worthwhile to
periodically revisit the purpose and need for Commissions within the organizational structure. While
the current shvcture and format may no longer serve the intended purpose, staff benefits by having a
sounding board for policy and communication items and it remains important to have formal and
informal structures by which the City's relationship with the business community is maintained and
strengthened. ff the Council concludes that it is appropriate to disband the current EDC and
incorporate certain activities within the EDA directly, it would still be worthwhile to discuss how
these other purposes can continue to be served
Please share this with the City Council and, if appropriate, place the item on an upcoming Council
workshop or retreat agenda. Please let me know if you have any questions in this regard.
cc: Economic Developmert Chair Zoberi
Economic Development Commission Members
~ Z.>
Thanks, Nadim. We will let you know when the Council will discuss it.
Jon
Jon Hohenstein
Community Development Director
City of Eagan
3830 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, MN 55122
651-675-5660
Fax 651-675-5694
ihohensteinCc'Dcityofeaoan.com
From: nzoberi@wmcast.net [mailto:nzoberi@rnmcast.net)
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2005 8:50 AM
To: Jon Hohenstein
Subject: Re: EDC Action - Memo to City Council
Jon
This is an excellent memo to Tom and it conveys the feelings of the commission
members.
Regards
Nadim
-------------- Original message --------------
One and All,
Attached is the memo communicating the Commission's action regarding its future to the
City Council. It was included in the Council's informative packets last weekend. City
Administrator Hedges and I have discussed placing the item on a Council workshop
agenda for discussion. To date, he has not identified a workshop date at which the item
will be scheduled. We will keep you posted. However the discussion goes, I would like
to thank you for your willingness to serve the community and your interest in continuing
to improve it.
Jon
Jon Hohenstein
Community Development Director
City of Eagan
3830 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, MN 55122
651-675-5660
Fax 651-675-5694
ihohensteinta'2cityofeagan.com
t~
Special Council Workshop
Agenda Memo
January 10, 2006
IV. STORM WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN UPDATE
DIRECTION FOR CONSIDERATION:
REVIEW AND COMMENT, DIRECT TO THE JANUARY 17
COUNCIL MEETING FOR FORMAL ACTION.
FACTS:
• 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.
ATTACHMENTS:
• Staff to distribute Stormwater Management Plan at workshop.
1~~
Agenda Memo
January 10, 2006 City Council Workshop
V. 2006 Parks and Recreation CIP.
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 CIP'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.
ATTACHMENTS:
• List of 2006 CIP projects, Page ~_.
• Activity Summary of 2005 Park Site Fund, Page ~g .
~'
CITY OF EAGAN
PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
2006 Capital Improvement Program
Location Pro'ect Descri tion Estimated Cost Notes
Patrick Ea an 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 ofplay 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 aneed/opportunity
Subtotals:
Projects $400,000
Potential Acquisitions $650,000
TOTAL $1,050,000
Revised 12/20/05
G:parks05/2006 CIP
l~
2005 PARK SITE FUND
ACTIVITY SUMMARY
Be innin Fund Balance 1/2005 $2,715,480
Revenues and Other Financing Sources:
State and County Grants
Park Dedication Fees
Interest
Other
$1,340,000
$650,000
$70,000
$10,000
Total Revenue and Financin Sources $2,070,000
TOTAL AVAILABLE $4,785,480
Expenditures:
Park Improvements
Land Acquisition
Committed Car over
$363,300
$2,080,000
$10,000
TOTAL 2005 EXPENDITURES $2,453,300
AVAILABLE FUNDS 1/2006 $2,332,180
(*) Figures are un-audited estimates
G:Parks 05/2005 ACTIVITY SUMMARY
~~
Agenda Memo
January 10, 2006 City Council Workshop
VI. Review Cascade Bay Expansion Opportunity.
FACTS:
^ Cascade Bay is entering its 8~' 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 F1owRider 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 details of this idea have not been presented to the APrC at this point pending the direction by the
City Council to pursue this further or look for other options.
^ The estimated cost for this project is $202,500. Included in the packet is a brief Performs that
illustrates the initial construction costs and expense/revenue projections and has been reviewed by
Director of Administrative Services VanOverbeke.
^ In addition to the Performs, a memo outlining the opportunities and challenges of this enhancement
is provided to identify some of the consideration that will need to be addressed before moving
forward with this project.
^ The plans will be shared with the Council to give a better perspective on where specifically this new
feature can be accommodated and to illustrate that it 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.
^ If the Council directs staff to move forward with this proposal, the course could be installed and
operational for the 2006 season.
ATTACHMENTS: ~~
• Memo and performs, Pages°'~-`~,C
It
City of EaQau Ncao
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 8th 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 F1owRider 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 a$er 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.
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
visitors. In addition the park could remain open after the water park closes at 8:30 p.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 a.m. - 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 a.m. - 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 astamp/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.
~i
Costs:
2006
Capital Costs:
Construction $200,000
Start-up 2,500
$202,500
Operational Cost Projections
Revenue Projections
• Punch cards for season pass holders
~270o x $20)
• Per round sales* (10,000/11,000 x $3)
• Concession sales
2006
$ 54,000
2007
Expense Projections:
• Additional seasonal staff
• Merchandise for resale
• Miscellaneous
• Advertising
• Additional utility costs
Summary of Projections:
$ 54,000
30,000 33,000
2,000 2,000
$ 86,000 $ 89,000
$ 9,000 $ 9,500
750 1,000
1,000 1,500
1,500 1,500
1,000 1,000
$ 13,250 $ 14,500
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.
~a