11/05/1992 - Advisory Parks & Recreation Commission
MEMORANDUM
TO: ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATIONAND NATURAL RESOURCE COMMISSION
FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
DATE: NOVEMBER 4, 1992
RE: NOVEMBER 5, 1992, COMMISSION MEETING
The regular meeting of the Advisory Parks, Recreation and Natural Resource Commission will
be Thursday evening beginning at 7:00 p.m. Because of the Tuesday election, the Council
Meeting was moved to Thursday evening. Consequently, the Advisory Commission will be
meeting in the employee lunchroom area, lower level.
You will notice by the size of the packet and the agenda, that the Commission has a very busy
evening in front of them. In addition, the City Council has responded to the Commission's
request for a joint meeting; now scheduled for Tuesday, November 10, at 6:00 p.m. to meet with
the Council in regards to the oak wilt problem and Park Systems Plan. If there are other items
the Commission would like to review with the Council, it would be appropriate that this be put
on the agenda for the Commission to discuss.
Old Business
Under old business, there are two items deserving your specific attention. The first is JP69, the
Diffley/Daniel Drive parcel. Staff met with three of the neighbors on Monday evening to review
what it is they wish to see in a proposed park that they are requesting. Their request is for
playground equipment and hard surface court. No other amenities were identified, however, the
Commission may wish to consider the incorporation of a parking area, as concerns for traffic were
also expressed. Attached is a memorandum reviewing this issue. The second item under old
business is Park Service Area 36E and parkland acquisition for this service section. Again a
memorandum has been prepared covering this particular item.
Park Naming
Staff is requesting that this item be deferred to the December meeting. Former Commission
member, Richard Carroll, has agreed to help with that park naming. Because of the press of
business in the department, staff has simply not had time to coordinate with Mr. Carroll and
members of the Commission an opportunity to discuss potential park names.
New Business
Under new business, the first item is the annual review of parks dedication recommendations to
the City Council. This is followed by the proposed 1993 Fees and Charges memorandum. The
Advisory Commission will have to make recommendations on both of these items to the City
Council at this or certainly at the December meeting. Also attached as item 3 under new business
is the Capital Improvements Program proposed for parks.
Item 4 is a grant application and amendment to the Comprehensive Trails Plan within the City.
Staff has already submitted a grant application on the authorization of the City Council. Review
by the Advisory Commission is still appropriate.
Item 5 is the Park Systems Plan study. This item has been submitted for action by the Advisory
Commission. Staff does not intend to make a presentation in regards to this item other than a
few brief remarks covering the key issues discussed last week.
Parks Development
Under Parks Development, Landscape Architect/Parks Planner, Steve Sullivan will update the
Advisory Commission on the Blackhawk Park progress. The progress has been severely hampered
by the recent snows, but there is some hope that work can continue if warm weather should
return.
Water Ouality
Under Water Quality, Rich Brasch is asking for a Blackhawk Park design modification for the
purposes of being able to off load a weed cutter to Blackhawk Lake. It would be appropriate for
the Advisory Commission to review this proposed modification and make a recommendation for
approval.
There are several items under other business and reports for the Commission to discuss including
the Department Happenings. As mentioned earlier, it would also be appropriate for the
Commission to discuss which items it wishes to place on a joint Commission-Council agenda.
As always, if you are unable to attend we would appreciate your notifying Cherryl before the
meeting.
Respectfully submitted,
Ken Vraa,
Director of Parks and Recreation
KV/dj
COMM!SSIONNOVCOVER MEM
(7c .
AGENDA
ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
Thursday, November 5, 1992
7:00 PM
Eagan Municipal Center
A. 7:00 P.M. Regular Meeting - Eagan Municipal Center
B. Call to Order and Pledge of Allegiance
C. Approval of Agenda
D. Approval of Minutes of Regular Meeting of October 1, 1992
F. Visitors to be Heard
G. Consent Agenda
(1) Preliminary Plat - Toby Stevens
(2) Town Ctr 70 13th Add. - McDonald's Corporation
H. Development Proposals
(1) Wenzel Addition - Wensmann Realty
1. Old Business
(1) Pond JP-69 - Diffley/Daniel Parcel
(2) Park Service Area 36E
(3) Park Naming
J. New Business
(1) Parks/Trails Dediction Review
(2) Proposed 1993 Fees and Charges
(3) CIP
(4) ISTEA Grant Application/Policy on Trailways
(5) Park System Plan Study
K. Parks Development
(1) Blackhawk Park Update
L. Water Quality
(1) Blackhawk Park Design Modification
M. Other Business and Reports
(1) Minnesota Relief Grant Project/Lexington Square
(2) Department Happenings
N. Round Table
0. Adjournment
Subject to Approval
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF
ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
EAGAN, MINNESOTA
OCTOBER 1, 1992
A regular meeting of the Advisory Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission was called
to order at 7:00 p.m. on Thursday, October 1, 1992 with the following Commission Members present: Ted
Billy, Jonathan Widem, Kevin Knight, Dan Mooradian and Lee Markell. Commission Members Erin Ipsen,
Deborah Johnson and Jack Johnson were not present. Staff present included Ken Vraa, Director of Parks and
Recreation; Stephen Sullivan, Landscape Architect/Park Planer; Dorothy Peterson Superintendent of Recreation;
John VonDeLinde, Parks Superintendent; Tom Schuster, City Forester; Dave Running, Intern and Cherryl Mesko,
Secretary.
AGENDA
Kevin Knight moved, Dan Mooradian seconded with all members voting in favor to accept the agenda
as presented.
MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 3, 1992
Page 5, Paragraph 7, last sentence should read, ".....achieve the goals as set forth....". Ted Billy
moved, Kevin Knight seconded with all members voting in favor to accept the minutes as amended.
CONSENT AGENDA
After review of the park and trail dedication issues by Park Planer Stephen Sullivan and review of the
water quality issues by Water Resources Coordinator Rich Brasch, Ted Billy moved, Dan Mooradian seconded
the motion to make the following recommendations to the City Council. All members voted in favor.
1. Waiver of Plat - Leo Mogel. Existing residential units involved in platting are not subject to
Parks or Trails Dedication. This development should be subject to a cash dedicate to meet
water quality requirements.
2. Preliminary Plat - Toby Stevens. This proposal be subject to a cash parks dedication and cash
trails dedication. This proposal should be subject to a cash dedication to meet water quality
requirements.
3. Town Ctr 70 14th Add. - Eagan Tower Office Bldg Ptnrshp. This proposal be subject to a
cash parks dedication and cash trails dedication. This proposal should be subject to a cash
dedication to meet water quality requirements. That portion of the proposed development
contained within Lot 1, Block 1 should be subject to a cash dedication requirement to meet
water quality standards. The cash dedication associated with Outlot A will be charged when
it is replatted for development at a future date. In addition, filling or draining of the existing
wetland on-site should be exempt from regulation under the Wetlands Conservation Act.
4. Town Ctr 100 11th Add. - Eagan Heights Commercial. This parcel is responsible for the
construction of a 6 foot wide concrete sidewalk along O'Leary Lane. This parcel shall meet
its water quality treatment requirement by payment of a cash dedication for the .57 acre parcel
designated as Lot 1,Block 1. Outlot A will be charged when it is replatted for future
development at a later date.
Advisory Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission
Minutes of October 1, 1992 Meeting
Page 2
WENZEL ADDITION - WENSMANN REALTY
Parks Planner Sullivan introduced this item reminding the Commission that they had reviewed this
parcel as a component of a Park Service Area #21 study and had also reviewed a site plan at the September
3,1992 meeting. At the September meeting it was noted that the developer was proposing significant site plan
changes to those previously submitted and it was agreed that the revised site plan would be brought before the
Commission at the October 1 meeting. Three recommendations the Commission made in September included
the developer providing a revised site plan showing the preservation of the oak stand at the northwest edge of
the pond, the provision for required recreational open space and the potential for providing a trail encircling
the pond.
Steve continued that new revisions to the development were brought to the attention of Parks and
Recreation staff at 4 p.. m. today (October 1). One of the major changes proposed is the downzoning from 161
to 126 units consisting of single family, quads and townhomes. The new site plan shows single family lots on
the north and northwest side of the pond, quads on the west side and townhomes on the southeast side of the
site. The pond is located south and east of the single family lots. Steve noted that this site plan shows that
oaks at the northwest edge of the pond will be saved as the Commission had requested. Steve noted that the
recommendations being made are based on the premise that staff will have the opportunity of reviewing this
plat during the platting and grading phase.
Mr. Sullivan added that the Commission reviewed the parks dedication for this park service area
previously and had determined that it would be appropriate to wait until it has been determined what will be
developed on the Bieter property west of this site. The development of that site will determine if parkland is
needed to service this PSA and, if so, what size it will need to be.
Regarding the pedestrian circulation to the school the developer is providing a 25 foot easement within
the northeast corridor. Steve suggested the City install the trail but that it be benched in by the developer.
Steve continued that the woodland resources circling the pond, on the north property line and in the southeast
corner of the site will all be preserved. The issue of open recreational space changes due to the downsizing
of the development. The idea of a common space or open play area is one that the developer has indicated
he will comply with. Again, this is an issue that can be addressed once more information is made available
to staff.
Water Resources Coordinator Brasch reviewed the water quality issues for this site noting that this
development lies in drainage basin B, a short distance up drainage from Blackhawk Lake. Runoff from the
proposed development will eventually reach Blackhawk Lake and, if not treated, would degrade it's quality.
Pond BP-4, which is contained on this site, had changes made to reduce nutrient loading associated with storm
water runoff to Heine Pond. In 1979 an outlet was installed at an elevation that caused water to back up far
into the relative flat inlet pipe between BP-4 and Heine Pond contributing to excessive nutrient loading and
water quality degradation in Heine Pond. After review by the City's engineering consultant and City staff the
best option appears to be to lower the elevation of the control structure in Pond BP-4 and drop the normal
water elevation by about 3.2 feet in BP-4. The cost for this change is anticipated at approximately $30,000
with an annual operating cost of approximately $3-4,000.
Advisory Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission
Minutes of October 1, 1992 Meeting
Page 3
Mr. Brasch continued that the larger issue appears to be the wetland impact on this site. There are
three wetlands which encompass a total of about 4.72 acres. The largest is a Type 5 open water wetland with
a Type 1 bottomland wooded fringe and is associated with Pond BP-4 with a size of approximately 4.45 acres
in surface area and is in a significantly degraded condition. The second wetland is a .02 acre Type 2 wet
meadow near the northeastern edge of the first wetland. The third wetland is in the north central portion of
the site, northwest of the Deerwood Elementary parking lot that encompasses approximately. 25 acres of Type
1 bottomland forest and is severely impacted by the school. Rich continued that staff has recommended that
Pond BP-4 be excavated to create an additional 2.4 acre-feet of storage. This excavation plan would need to
be approved by City Staff. Staff is also recommending approval of the proposed wetland replacement plan,
contingent on submission of a final wetlands impact and mitigation report and compliance with the
requirements of the Wetland Conservation Act.
Mr. Rob Bater of Westwood Professional Services addressed the Commission noting that the wetlands
have been staked in the field. Lee Markell noted that limits are placed on the developer not to infringe into
the wetland but wondered if the same type of limitations existed for homeowners. Mr. Bater responded that
perhaps restrictive covenants could be established restricting building pads within the wetland area. Another
suggestion was to place monuments to identify the limits of a building pad so as not to disrupt the wetland.
Mr. Wensmann noted that this would be acceptable to him.
Lee Markell asked if there could be an easement around the pond to provide for a trail. Mr.
Wensmann explained that that area was anticipated to be common area but questioned the appropriateness of
having a trail along the back lots of the single family homes and he wasn't quite sure how title would be
handled if this option was pursued. Steve Sullivan explained some of the options may be showing this as an
outlot, by providing an easement or have this part of the property as association owned. Mr. Wensmann
continued that he was supportive of providing a trail along a portion of the pond, however, he was
apprehensive of placing the trail along the back lots of the single family lots. Mr. Wensmann also shared his
concern for the maintenance of this trail.
Lee Markel) explained that the trail around the pond would be an excellent amenity for the
neighborhood and asked that this issue be considered. He also commended Mr. Wensmann for the change
made in the downzoning of this site. In response to a question regarding timing for development, Mr.
Wensmann stated that it appears marketing won't begin until January, 1993 with construction beginning some
time in the spring of 1993. Mr. Markell stated that he finds it difficult to respond to this development until he
has an opportunity to see the grading and landscaping plan to better determine what the actual development
will look like and what it's impact will be on park needs and water quality. Lee suggested that no decisions
be made until the Commission have an opportunity to better review the changes that have only recently come
to the attention of Parks and Recreation staff.
Mr. Wensmann indicated his understanding of the Commission's need to review the changes being
proposed. He did ask for direction regarding trail access to the school noting that in a review of this
development with Planning staff it had been recommended that there be two access trails provided from the
development to the school. Steve Sullivan responded that staff would review this issue with Planning.
Lee Markell noted that wetland replacement was not cheap and asked if the developer had looked at
retaining walls as an option. Mr. Barter explained that in a previous plat retaining walls were shown and there
is a possibility of bringing that option back into the current proposal. Kevin Knight asked if there would be any
value in asking the developer to provide a site by site plan to provide for tree preservation. Steve Sullivan
explained that there is always a benefit to providing lot specific information and that could be looked at once
the grading plan is done. Mr. Wensmann indicated his approval of providing lot specific information if the
Commission so desires.
7.
Advisory Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission
Minutes of October 1, 1992 Meeting
Page 4
After further discussion, Lee Markell moved, Ted Billy seconded with all members voting in favor to
table this issue until the Commission sees a rough grading plan and a woodland resource preservation plan.
WEST PUBLISHING 6TH ADDITION - WEST PUBLISHING
Stephen Sullivan introduced this item noting that separate applications had been submitted requesting
the rezoning of approximately 2.2 acres from Light Industrial to Planned Development and a preliminary
platting of 4.7 acres. Steve continued that the preliminary plat incorporates a 2.2 acre Lembke 1st Addition
parcel with an existing 2.5 acre parcel which is within West Publishing Planned Development. It was noted
that the site is currently being graded for a future office/warehouse. Mr. Sullivan concluded that the
Commission would need to review and make recommendations regarding parks and trails dedication
obligations along with reviewing the impact to the woodland resource. Steve added that the 2.5 acre parcel
within the West Publishing Planned Development has fulfilled its parks dedication but the 2.2 Lembke parcel
is obligated to a cash parks dedication. Both sites have been assessed for the existing trail along Wescott Road
and are not obligated to a cash trails dedication.
Water Resources Coordinator Brasch explained that this light industrial development consists of future
offices and a warehouse on 4.7 acres located in the southeast one quarter of Section 13 on Wescott Road.
Rich continued that the development is located on drainage basin G with run-off from the site eventually
reaching Bur Oak Pond (Class II indirect contact recreation water body) after traveling along several intervening
storm water basins. Rich noted that Bur Oak Pond is the highest valued lake in the drainage.
Mr. Brasch continued that the developer has expressed a desire to meet the site's water quality
requirement by excavating in Pond GP-4 to create sufficient wet pond volume to meet treatment standards for
the development. Pond GP-4 is 1.3 acres in area and is currently a dry extended detention basin located just
east of the proposed plat on property owned by West Publishing. Based on an impervious coverage figure of
75% for the site, Rich explained that a wet pond with approximately 1 acre-foot in volume and a minimum
depth of 3 feet would be necessary to meet these treatment requirements.
The developer has indicated that this site will contain no impervious area in the immediate future and
is requesting that the plat approval be conditioned to allow a reconsideration of wet pond size requirements
when a building permit is requested to authorize those improvements. Rich explained that the wet volume of
the pond would then be revised to reflect the actual impervious coverage of the site and the pond constructed
when improvements are made to the site. The land will still be zoned to allow light industrial use and will
likely be used for an office and/or warehouse complex and possibly loading/parking facilities at some time in
the future.
Mr. Steve Bryant addressed the Commission stating that he had met with staff and concurs with their
recommendations regarding this proposed development.
After further discussion, Ted Billy moved, Kevin Knight seconded with all members voting in favor to
make the following recommendations to the City Council regarding West Publishing 6th Addition:
1. That the 2.2 acre Lembke 1st Addition parcel be subject to a cash parks dedication.
2. That the developer meet water quality requirements for the proposed development by creating
wet volume in Pond GP-4. The wet pond will be 1 acre-foot in volume and a minimum of
3 feet in average depth. These figures should be reviewed and revised based on actual
impervious figures for the site at the time any building permit is issued for the site. Excavation
of the pond must be completed prior to construction of any impervious surfaces on the site.
Advisory Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission
Minutes of October 1, 1992 Meeting
Page 5
UPDATE ON OAK WILT WORKSHOP
Director Vraa introduced this item and asked Commission Members if they had any questions from the
special workshop held on September 17th. If there were no questions Mr. Vraa asked if the Commission would
like to pursue a joint meeting with the City Council to further evaluate the situation and look at steps that could
be made in implementing a program of oak wilt suppression and abatement within the City.
Kevin Knight thanked staff for the follow-up memo and indicated it very clearly reviewed the issues
discussed and recommended that the next step would be to set up a joint meeting with the City Council. Mr.
Billy concurred with Mr. Knight's suggestion and noted his concern with the magnitude of the problem and felt
this issue should be addressed as soon as possible. He suggested that by hiring a part-time tree inspector in
1993 and conducting an aerial survey to better understand the location and extent of oak wilt disease the City
will be better prepared to identify specific areas where suppression and abatement can occur. Lee Markell
agreed with the importance of aerial photography showing the hot spots of the disease but suggested that this
be done on an annual basis. Dan Mooradian suggested that by hiring a part-time tree inspector in 1993 this
may be beneficial in obtaining grant dollars in subsequent years. John VonDeLinde added that it may be
possible to fund the part-time position by the City in 1993 with the anticipation that state grant dollars may be
available in 1994.
Mr. Vraa indicated that he would contact City Administrator Hedges and attempt to set up a joint
workshop with the City Council to review this issue.
POND JP-69 - STORM WATER RETENTION - DIFFLEY/DANIEL PARCEL
Director Vraa introduced this item and reviewed the background for the Commission. He noted that
this parcel of land was acquired by the City as part of the HUD acquisition when the city needed to acquire
the Lexington/Diffley land parcel. HUD required that the city also acquire this particular parcel in addition to
Lexington/Diffley site, as one purchase. With development of the property west of Daniel drive now underway,
storm water will be directed towards this parcel. Storm sewer and ponding easement had already been
obtained by the city prior to its acquisition, but no final design was completed for the ponding area. Ken
continued that with the plans completed for County Road 30 and its impact on this land, staff has now begun
the process of designing the pond limits for storm water on this parcel. It was also noted that when this parcel
was acquired it was the intention of the City Council to downzone it to single family so that the property could
be re-sold to recoup the investment made in the parcel.
Mr. Vraa outlined four criteria that staff felt were important during this design portion which included
retaining as many trees as reasonably possible along the east property, providing the necessary volumetric water
retention and improve water quality, preservation of trees on the entire parcel and, finally, configuration for
eventual resale of the property for lot development to re-capture the investment. Ken noted that this issue was
being brought before the Commission to make them familiar with the project and to solicit additional
information/concerns from them.
In response to a question from Mr. Billy, Mr. Vraa responded that there are 8 lots on the site that front
on Daniel Drive. The City paid $18-19,000 per acre plus assessments for this land and would be looking at
selling for approximately $20-27,000 per acre. Mr. Vraa noted that adjacent homeowners have shown an
interest in acquiring some of the property primarily for the purpose of tree preservation. Ken continued that
although the sale of the property to the neighbors could be done, it may be difficult. The sale of the property
may have an injurious effect on the eventual development and platting of the property for residential
development. Mr. Vraa also indicated that after visiting the site it is clear that some of the homes have
encroached into this parcel with the development of their back yards and garden.
Advisory Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission
Minutes of October 1, 1992 Meeting
Page 6
Ted Billy asked if the parcel of land needed to be sold at all; he suggested leaving the property as
parkland indicating it would be a nice amenity to the neighborhood. Mr. Vraa responded that using this
property as parkland would be very limited based on the size of the pond on the site. Mr. Billy suggested
leaving the area natural as it is now and if, at a later date, there is a need to develop this parcel for park use
then it can be done.
Jim Johnson, representing City Engineering Consultant OSM, reviewed the site as it pertains to the
design of the storm water pond. He reviewed the treed areas noting which areas will be left as shown, i.e.
the softwoods area that backs up to Northview Meadows 2nd Addition and the mature oaks to the north and
west of the site. Jim continued that the normal water elevation is calculated at 946 with the high water level
calculated at 952. He also noted that 250 cu.ft./second would drain into the pond during a 100 year storm.
Kevin Knight asked if building pads were placed on these lots underthis proposal, would the trees need
to be removed. It was noted that most likely the trees would need to be removed in order to develop the 8
lots. There was discussion regarding a trail around the pond and Mr. Vraa noted that a trail could be placed
at the higher elevation near the top of the lots, however it would not be a pleasurable walk on the east side
of the pond since the trail would be too near the pond.
Mr. Knight asked where the nearest park was to this neighborhood. Mr. Vraa responded that
Northview Elementary School was the closest but the nearest neighborhood park would be Walnut Hill and
Trapp Farm Park, the closest community park. Mr. Billy commented that there appeared to be few places for
children to go and play and reiterated his preference for leaving the property as is.
Homeowner of Lot 3, Northview Meadows 2nd Addition addressed the Commission explaining his
initial intent was to purchase a portion of the land the City owns in order to preserve trees. He commented
that he was pleased to see that tree preservation was such a big consideration for this project and he liked the
idea of the ponding area being increased. The consensus of the neighborhood seems to be that they would
like to see the property remain as it is and perhaps at a later time add a few amenities for the children in the
neighborhood. He commented that there is no play area close to this neighborhood and is concerned because
there is no trail or sidewalk that can safely carry children to the nearby parks.
Homeowner of Lot 2, Northview Meadows 2nd Addition added that he wanted to see the property left
as it is and would prefer that the lots not be developed. His preference was to preserve the wooded areas and
have no bike trail or sidewalk.
Jonathan Widem asked what the intent was for this property at the time it was acquired by the City.
Mr. Vraa responded that because the land purchase was required as part of the acquisition of the
Lexington/Diff ley site it has always been the City Council's intention to sell the land to recoup some of the costs
expended for it's purchase. The question for the Commission, Mr. Vraa continued, seems to be whether or
not they would spend $140,000 to acquire this property as a park site today.
Mr. Billy reiterated his position that the property be kept as is and if there is a need to sell at a later
date then that option should be considered. He felt that selling the lots now and running into a possible use
for this property at a later date would be short-sighted. Mr. Knight suggested looking at potential public use
along with developing the site. He wanted to see more information regarding these options before
recommending any options.
Dan Mooradian identified three separate issues for consideration. Looking at a trail on the northern
wooded area, saving the trees behind Lots 1 and 2 and the possibility of excluding the development of the land
that abuts Lots 1 and 2.
~1.
Advisory Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission
Minutes of October 1, 1992 Meeting
Page 7
The residents present thanked the Commission for hearing their opinions and concerns and expressed
their appreciation for their input. Lee Markell thanked the neighbors for their input as well as their interest in
this project.
LAND USE REQUEST - LEXINGTON/DIFFLEY SITE
Director Vraa introduced this item as a request to allow the use of the Lexington/Diffley park land
parcel for a golf driving range for a period of 3 to 5 years. Ken continued that Mike King, owner and operator
of the Tee Time Golf Driving Range east of Lexington Avenue, is requesting that the City consider a portion
of the Lexington/Diffley site to be used for a golf driving range. The area Mr. King is targeting is south of the
water reservoir and west of the old gravel road previously known as Lexington Avenue. Ken continued that
the driving range would be approximately 300 yards long and approximately 350 feet wide at the tee area.
In addition there would be a small building to accommodate equipment as well as a miniature golf area. It was
noted that the timeline for development of the site as an athletic facility is undetermined at this time, however
in conjunction with the construction of County Road 30, Commission and Council has previously given
approval for potential development of all or a portion of the site to be used as a "balance" area for County Road
30. It is estimated that the construction of County Road 30 will require approximately 80,000 cu. yds of
common borrow and soil borings have indicated that the Lexington/Diffley site has an enormous amount of
granular material which is ideal for roadway construction. Another concern expressed to Mr. King is an access
to the site considering County Road 30 will be under construction in 1993. Another issue Mr. Vraa reminded
the Commission to consider is that Mr. King has asked for a five year lease period but would be willing to
consider three years.
Mike King addressed` the Commission providing them some further background along with a
presentation of how a golf driving range could be facilitated on the Lexington/Diffley site. Mr. King continued
that his preference would be to have a five to seven year lease so that the lease time will cover the costs of
development. He added that it was important to him that if the Commission and Council gave permission for
the golf range to be facilitated on, this site that he provide a good working relationship with the City in
anticipation that this would be a positive experience for everyone.
Ted Billy asked if soil would be removed from the entire site during the upgrading of Diffley Road by
the County. Mr. Vraa responded that the developer typically likes to use an area as small as possible when
doing this type of excavation. Lee Markell suggested that this would be a good area to incorporate and make
visible the water quality efforts the City has been implementing. Lee continued that it would be nice if the site
could be graded in exchange for fill needed by the County and if there is an opportunity for the driving range
to fit within these parameters he would be supportive.
Mr. Billy noting the crunch the City is experiencing for athletic facilities expressed his concern for the
site being tied up for 5-7 years. He suggested that the Commission stay focused on facilitating the need for
athletic facilities first before looking at expanding to a new venture. Dan Mooradian asked if it would be
incompatible to have a driving range developed at this site before softball fields are in. If it is not compatible
with the City's proposed use of this site, or if it is not feasible for the driving range to remain for a period of
time to make Mr. King's investment worthwhile then it should not be considered for development at this time.
Mr. Vraa responded that a five-year lease would be difficult to speculate about since the timing for the balance
of the site is currently unknown because of the funds necessary for development.
Mr. King added that he has been negotiating with another landowner regarding the feasibility of
locating the driving range on another site. He reiterated his interest in remaining within Eagan and would hope
the Commission would recommend pursuing this issue further so that a driving range could be made available
to residents.
Advisory Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission
Minutes of October 1,1992
Page 8
After further discussion Lee Markell moved that staff work with Mr. King to see if a golf driving range
could be a viable option on the Lexington/Diffley site as part of the Master Plan. Kevin Knight amended the
motion to include the first priority of the site to be the development of an athletic facility as soon as possible;
that staff work with the County to see if the grading can be accomplished as part of the Diffley Road upgrade;
that there be a clear understanding with Mr. King that staff will try to work with him to see if a driving range
is a viable option and if it is, the lease for such a facility would be limited to a maximum of 3 years with the
understanding that the lease may be terminated sooner if dollars are available for the development of the site
and that Mr. King assume the financial risk for this venture if it is approved. Dan Mooradian seconded the
motion with all members voting in favor.
Mr. King responded that a three year lease would not be long enough but if the Commission would
consider a longer lease there may be the option of turning the equipment over to the City once the five year
period has passed. Mr. King reiterated that a lease less than five years would not be realistic in order to recover
his costs of development and operation. Mr. King thanked the Commission for their consideration and stated
his interest in continuing to work with Mr. Vraa and staff to see if some options may still be available since he
did not want to close the doors on this idea.
CAPITAL FUNDS SOURCE COMPARISON SURVEY - DAVE RUNNING
Superintendent of Recreation Peterson introduced Dave Running who has been an intern in the Parks
and Recreation Department for the past 12 weeks. She explained that at the end of their internship with the
City, students are required to prepare a report and present it to the Advisory Commission. Mr. Running has
done his research on parks and recreation departments capital expenditures during the last three years.
Dave Running explained that the study he researched was in response to interest expressed in finding
out where other parks and recreation departments are receiving their capital outlay money in an effort to
generate new ideas on gaining new funds in the future. Dave continued that he collected data from 10 parks
and recreation departments in the Twin Cities area; first through a cover letter and followed by an interview
with the 10 departments. Dave then reviewed the interview questions and hypothesis that were constructed
to help in the research.
Hypothesis # 1 was that larger parks and recreation departments, those having over 20 employees, will
spend more money on capital expenditures than smaller parks and recreation department, those having less
than 20 employees. Hypothesis *2 was that thirty percent f the parks and recreation departments questioned
would have received a grant within the last three fiscal years. Hypothesis *3 was that fifty percent of the parks
and recreation departments questioned have received parks and/or trails dedications monies from developers.
Mr. Running then reviewed the statement of funds and sources noting that many of the funds sources
are relatively the same but with a little difference in their name. Some of the more unique funds sources
included West St. Paul who receives $85,000/year from their interest income fund, Eden Prairie is paying for
a new ice arena by way of a lease/purchase program and Inver Grove Heights receives money from their Land
Fill Abaitment Fund at a rate of $1.00 per dump into the local land fill.
Ted Billy thanked Dave for an excellent report and commented on the value of this information for the
future.
41 .
Advisory Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission
Minutes of October 1, 1992 Meeting
Page 9
PARK NAMING
Director Vraa introduced this item bringing the Commission's attention to the letterfrom Shawn Hunter
regarding the possible naming of the Lexington/Diffley park site. Ken suggested that the Commission's Park
Naming sub-committee plan to meet to recommend names for Lexington/Diffley and Manor Lake park sites.
Ted Billy reminded the Commission they had agreed that all members would serve on this sub-committee and
suggested that they meet prior to the November commission meeting. It was suggested that Dick Carroll be
contacted to see if he would be willing to do some research into the history of these sites to help with the park
naming process. Mr. Vraa indicated he would get in touch with Mr. Carroll and set a date for the park naming
sub-committee.
BLACKHAWK PARK UPDATE
Park Planner Sullivan explained that the construction work for Blackhawk Park began on September
8 and at this time 80% of the trails and parking lot area has been cleared and grubbed. Steve added that earth
moving work began on September 21 with staff doing the construction staking and inspections. It is hoped that
the preliminary work will be completed this fall.
PHASE 11 - SCHWANZ LAKE GRANT PROPOSAUFISH LAKE GRANT PROPOSALS
Water Resources Coordinator Brasch introduced this item as grant proposals for submission to the
Pollution Control Agency's Clean Water Partnership Program. The deadline for the grant submission is October
29, 1992 and a recommendation by the Commission is being sought before proceeding for approval by the City
Council. The first grant is for the implementation phase of the Schwanz Lake project in which staff has
reviewed with the Commission the diagnostic/ feasibility and implementation plan components (Phase I). Rich
continued that an Executive Summary for Phase 1 and a budget summary for Phase 2 are attached. The PCA
has not completed its technical review of the project report, but periodic communication with the reviewers
indicates no major problems at this time. The funding for the Schwanz Lake project will be a combination of
grant, in-kind, and local cash. The dollars anticipated from MPCA would be $139,018.
The second grant application is for a Phase 1 assessment of Fish Lake that will involve a modification
of last year's application for Fish and Blackhawk Lakes. Mr. Brasch stated that the study will begin this fall and
if the City if fortunate enough to receive the grant for studies that will be a plus; if not, staff will proceed to
the Phase II, 1994 implementation. It is anticipated that the total project costs will be $96,500.
After further discussion, Ted Billy moved, Dan Mooradian seconded with all members voting in favor
to recommend the approval of Clean Water Partnership Grant Applications for Schwanz Lake and Fish Lake.
WETLANDS TASK FORCE MEETING
Mr. Brasch reviewed the summary of the Wetlands Task Force Meeting held on September 23
highlighting the main points of the presentation by Paul Krauss on Chanhassen's wetlands protection efforts.
Rich also reviewed the results of the meeting and the input by Commission members present.
Advisory Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission
Minutes of October 1, 1992
Page 10
DEPARTMENT HAPPENINGS - PARKS MAINTENANCE/RECREATION UPDATE
Recreation Happenings were incorporated in a video presentation which was shared with the
Commission outlining some of the activities at various parks as well as recreation highlights. Superintendent
of Parks VonDeLinde reviewed some of the work projects completed and procedures underway by the
maintenance staff including Northview tennis courts, Captain Dodd playground construction, Rahn athletic
dugouts, monthly playground inspections, aerification of parks and repair of a watermain break on the south
side of Northview soccer fields. John also commented on the busy September for the Forestry Division with
the replacement of trees and replacement of wood mulch in various parks.
Superintendent of Recreation Peterson reviewed the active use of Northview soccer fields with the
extensive use by Dakota Middle School and EAA; the extensive use of Northview tennis courts by both Dakota
Hills Middle and Eagan High Schools; adult volleyball, football and fall softball; introduction of in-line skating
and a visit to the Tiny Tots program.
ROUND TABLE
Kevin Knight asked if a date could be set to begin the review process for the Parks Master Plan. After
checking schedules, October 28, 5:30 p.m. at the Central Maintenance Facility was determined to be the
meeting date and time. A notice will be sent to all members prior to the meeting and the length of the meeting
will be planned for 1.5 - 2 hours.
With no further business to conduct, Lee Markell moved, Jonathan Widem seconded with all members
voting in favor to adjourn the meeting. The meeting was adjourned at 11:00 p.m.
a
Secretary Date
/7 .
MEMORANDUM
TO: ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
COMMISSION
FROM: STEPHEN SULLIVAN, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT/PARKS PLANNER
DATE: NOVEMBER 3,1992
RE: CONSENT AGENDA - NOVEMBER 5, 1992
1. PRELIMINARY PLAT - TOBY STEVENS
A Preliminary Plat consisting of one lot on approximately one acre of previously
zoned R-1 (Single Family) land located on the SE side of Wuthering Heights Road in
the SE 1 /4 of Section 18.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
The Advisory Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission made their
recommendations regarding parks and trails dedication requirements at their
October 1,1992 meeting.
2. PRELIMINARY PLAT - TOWN CENTRE 70 13TH ADDITION/MCDONALD'S
Separate applications have been submitted requesting a Preliminary Plat of one
approximate .84 acre lot and one Outlot and a Conditional Use Permit to allow a
Class II restaurant in a CSC (Community Shopping Center) district along the west side
of Town Centre Drive in the NW 1/4 of Section 15.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1. The proposal be subject to a cash parks dedication.
2. The proposal be subject to a cash trails dedication.
SS:cm
MEMO TO: ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION, AND NATURAL RESOURCES
COMMISSION
FROM: RICH BRASCH, WATER RESOURCES COORDINATOR
DATE: OCTOBER 29, 1992
SUBJECT: UPDATE ON WATER QUALITY REQUIREMENTS FOR STEVENS
ADDITION-TOBY STEVENS (CONSENT AGENDA)
BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS
At its October 1, 1992 meeting, the Commission reviewed a
preliminary plat application for one lot of approximately .75 acres
to be used for development of a single-family residence. The
parcel is located on the southeast side of Wuthering Heights Rd. in
the SE1/4 of Section 18. The owner has since elected to split the
parcel into two lots. As such, the intensity of development is
higher and the water quality requirements will increase somewhat.
As noted in the previous write-up, the site is too small to
accommodate on-site ponding so a cash dedication in lieu of ponding
is still recommended. This recommendation is made because
development of the site will alter runoff quality and quantity
characteristics of the site by increasing impervious coverage. The
amount of cash dedication is estimated at $541.
As before, there are no wetlands protection issues associated with
this plat.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
The development should be subject to a cash dedication to meet
water quality standards.
Rich Brasch
Water Resources Coordinator
(7.
MEMO TO: ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION, AND NATURAL RESOURCES
COMMISSION
FROM: RICH BRASCH, WATER RESOURCES COORDINATOR
DATE: OCTOBER 29, 1992
SUBJECT: WATER QUALITY REQUIREMENTS FOR TOWNE CENTRE 70 TWELFTH
ADDITION- MCDONALDS (CONSENT AGENDA)
PROPOSAL
This preliminary plat application consists of one lot and one
outlot on approximately 2.58 acres located in the NW 1/4 of Section
15 on Town Centre Drive (Figure 1). Lot 1 Block 1 is .84 acres in
area and will be used for a McDonald's Restaurant.
FOR COMMISSION REVIEW
The commission will need to review and make a recommendation
regarding whether the development should be subject to a ponding
requirement or cash dedication to meet water quality standards as
set by the City in its water quality management plan.
WATER QUALITY ANALYSIS
This proposed development is located in Drainage Basin J and will
generate runoff that will discharge to Pond JP-68, a small sediment
basin northwest of the intersection of Duckwood and Denmark
Avenues. JP-68 in turn discharges to Fish Lake, a Class 1 direct
contact recreation water body.
Because the site is too small to accommodate an on-site detention
pond and there are other opportunities down drainage to treat the
water before it reaches Fish Lake, a water quality cash dedication
in lieu of on-site ponding will be recommended. The amount of the
cash dedication is estimated at approximately $8,100 and will cover
only the .84 acres of Lot 1 Block 1. Water quality requirements
for Outlot A will be established when that parcel is platted for
development at a future date.
WETLANDS PROTECTION
There are no wetland protection issues associated with this
development.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
This development should be subject to a cash dedication to meet
water quality standards. The cash dedication will apply only to
Lot 1 Block 1. Water quality requirements for Outlot A will be
defined at a future date.
Rich Brasch
Water Resources Coordinator
I`Y~ J~ ~..L-
;:E
FIGiJRE 1 IACR
si - y D-a \ H ; I
h
CL Vi
- I I II
~fl T - - / A. 1..
• 3 /
d C , LL
r. 41 SCHOO 12' 4. aft
-17 AFL
08 L . 111 rA
PAR I
P- .2 L E
CP-9 R.L. ° CL
CL. V JaH c-i 3~.
PPS"
'S RY
-o I COACHMAN P-9. PARK
CP. 11 / OAKS CL.VI C 141
aO 4 T CHMA I L&-4
C-c t
LA • !i
K ~qa Wi pprl -27
15' CP-3 D VI
'-b p Asr * CL. VI P-5
ACH AN j
FOX PARK
UNISYS
24 P-1 RIDGE s v it
NQ 1~~%~ - 6 DP-
C L.
01M S JCL.
.
_ Ali. a9.Q. , ?iES A V
N0. 1 L V I /
JOHNSON CL. VI A ER / 3 11 SURf%EY H SA 4
p
2ND A Ott '~n PLAN
TO
Location of Proposed
TOWN
C
Ppp C P -12 i 1+1 Development N CENTRE I
CL. VII Pt~eLIC V 2nd .I H 70 SE00 60I
RKS
\ ~O~ ` SLOG ROY OAK 51
,pry CP 6 36' co CI TH TOWN CE
CL. 70 FIRST
JI
0v Y IVI 27„ T~z JP-66).
R P I `f D - -t
ENOF
91. K
OITK~1
-3 K Fi
L.S.
24"
V BP-1.2
CL. V11
JP-5
BP- CITY BLACKHARA. 27` HALL C I
Al"M EM PARK
BF- 2q~, JP•
C Cl
°Z/• E
2 - li
P- e-}o CL. II -49
• V
-S 4 b I ON
MEMORANDUM
TO: ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCE
COMMISSION
FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
DATE: NOVEMBER 4, 1992
RE: JP-69 DANIEL DRIVE/DIFFLEY ROAD PARCEL
Issue
The Advisory Commission is asked to review and make recommendations approving,
rejecting or modifying the development of a storm water retention pond identified as JP-69,
located within a 5.6 acre, city owned parcel at the intersection of Daniel Drive and Diffley
Road. In consideration that the pond consumes only a portion of the subject parcel, the
Commission is also requested to make a recommendation regarding the intended use of the
remaining portion of the property. Staff has prepared several scenarios for Commission's
consideration regarding the potential use for this property.
Background
The subject parcel was acquired by the City from Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
as a residual property with the Lexington/Diffley Athletic Site purchase. Originally, the
parcel was approximately 7.2 acres costing the City approximately $19,100.00 per acre plus
all associated pending assessments. Total acreage has now been reduced to approximately
5.6 acres as a result of giving road right-a-way for both Daniel Drive and County Road 30.
Also, a large portion of the site is within the storm water ponding easement which was in
place at the time of the acquisition.
Since this acquisition, the surrounding area has been developing at a rapid pace. With the
construction of Daniel Drive, utilities were installed for storm sewer with drainage being
directed to the ponding area. In addition, sewer and water services were stubbed to five
potential residential properties within the parcel.
With the proposed upgrading of County Road 30, additional developmental influences are
being placed on the parcel. The primary influence is the need for an improved storm water
pond. Working with the city's consulting engineer four criteria were established for
configuration of the pond. The first criteria being to retain as many trees as reasonably
possible along the east residential property line. Second, to provide the necessary storm and
wet volumes. Third, maximizing the preservation of trees on the entire site. Four, a
configuration which would provide for the greatest opportunities for use of the residual
property; including potential residential development. Based on these four general criteria,
a preliminary design was prepared and presented to the Advisory Commission at their
October meeting.
At the meeting, the Commission reviewed an informational memo and had the opportunity
to discuss concerns with several attending residents. The residents again expressed their
desires for a parcel that preserves a majority of the trees. They also inquired whether a
portion of the property could be purchased by the abutting home owners. Lastly they
expressed their preference for utilizing the parcel for parks purpose instead of residential
lots. Residents stated that the current parks are too far away or not safely accessible. The
Commission then requested the staff to meet with the residents and that this item be
returned at their November meeting.
On Monday, November 2, staff met with three residents representing two adjacent
properties. The residents had contacted approximately 12 neighbors informing them of the
meeting. The following are concerns expressed at that meeting:
1. The preferred use of the land should be for preservation of the trees with a
small area along Daniel Drive being used for a developed park. The park
should include playground equipment and a hard court. Preferably, no
residential lots should be placed within the property. One resident in
attendance suggested a revision to this no residential development preference.
This scenario simply omitted a few residential lots for the park and provided
for residential development of the remaining property abutting Daniel Drive.
2. A loop pedestrian wayside trail be placed at the oak knoll connecting to the
proposed bituminous trail along County Road 30.
3. The City consider selling a portion of the property to the abutting
homeowners should there be interest.
4. Pedestrian circulation be evaluated and modified to promote safe and
effective linkage to the City parks and schools. This included a re-evaluation
of the Daniel Drive trail which was proposed but eliminated at the request of
residents two years ago.
The group also discussed other park amenities which were not seen as being
necessary elements in this proposed park area. Concern was expressed for
safe pedestrian traffic along Daniel Drive. High traffic volumes on Daniel
Drive to Diffley raise concerns as to roadway width, striping and signage.
Ponding Area
Since the October meeting, staff has re-reviewed the grading for the proposed pond area.
(See Figure #1) There have been no substantial changes to this design. It preserves a
significant amount of trees on the east side adjacent to the residential properties. The
proposed pond area is approximately 1.5 acres with a normal water elevation at 946. The
high water elevation will be at a 952. The pond bottom will be at an elevation of 943 which
leaves 3 feet of water in the pond. This wet volume promotes water quality and provides for
an aesthetic pond. In reviewing the pond design, the pond meets the storm water volumetric
needs and promotes effective water quality while preserving the greatest number of
significant trees on the site. Lastly, this design provides for residual development of the
remaining property either as single family lots and/or as park.
Issue #1/For Commission Action/Ponding Area
It would be appropriate for the Commission to make a recommendation concerning design
for this pond. Motion should be approved/disapproved the preferred pond layout.
Residual Land Use
The second issue before the Advisory Commission is determining what to do with the
residual portion of this property. As previously mentioned, the preferred use suggested by
the residents is for preservation for the trees on this property and that it be used for a
developed park.
Analyzing this request, it is clear that the site could accommodate a hard court and play
equipment area without significant disruption to the resource. In addition, the site could
accommodate a relatively small, five to seven stall parking lot if felt necessary. (See Figure
#2) The cost for these additional amenities would be approximately $25,000.00 for play
equipment, $3,000.00 to $5,000.00 for a hard court and $10,000.00 for a parking lot.
Grading and site restoration including minor landscaping would be $4,000.00 to $8,000.00.
The total estimate including the mentioned facilities could range from $42,000.00 to
$48,000.00.
Park Service Area Study
The subject parcel is located within the north central edge of Park Service Area 26. (See
Figure #3) The Park Service Area limits include all the residential property west of Dodd
Road, south of County Road 30, north of County Road 32, and east of County Road 43.
The PSA limits were expanded with the rezoning from C.S.C. to single family as a result of
the Lexington Points Additions. The Park Service Area is served by Walnut Hill Park and
Trapp Farm Park. The entire park service population, including the subject parcel and
neighborhood is within 3/4 miles of these two parks. Staff estimates that the build out
population would be approximately 4,700. The Park Systems Plan's standard for service by
a neighborhood park is 2,000 to 5,000 residents.
The Advisory Parks and Recreation Commission reviewed the Lexington Point 8th
residential subdivision, which included a rezoning from commercial to residential. The
Commission reviewed impacts on the park service area and concluded that no additional
park land was necessary to meet the increase residential development.
Discussion-Review
The neighborhood's request for a park area will provide for additional preservation within
the subject parcel. A nearby park would provide greater accessibility to the immediate
neighborhood which has identified approximately 50 children on Curry Trail alone.
In contrast, the Park Systems Plans and past Commission's actions have not endorsed vest
pocket parks in park service areas where adequate park facilities have been designated and
developed. The residents request also supports preservation of open space, as expressed in
the design criteria for the parcel. However, the City acquired this property, not for the
purposes of parks but as a residual property with the Lexington/Diffley site. The parcel
continues to maintain an R-1 zoning and not a park classification or public facilities. The
rezoning from multi-family to R-1 took effect shortly after the property had been acquired
by the City.
As it relates to play equipment, an alternative playground is at Northview Elementary
School immediately north of this parcel. Commission members may recall that the City of
Eagan participated in the development of this playground area. This included its installation
as a facility meeting the needs of new residents. Clearly, the high volumes of traffic on
County Road 30 make access difficult to this playground equipment and athletic field
amenities at Northfield Elementary. A major playground has recently been installed at
Trapp Farm Park. This playground is approximately 1/2 mile from the subject parcel.
Walnut Hill Park is approximately 3/4 of a mile from this parcel. These two parks provide
ancillary facilities that also meet other recreational needs.
Discussions with the Engineering Department with regards to the upgrading of County Road
30, will be an installation of a semaphore on Braddock and County Road 30. While not
reducing traffic loads, it will provide a safe access across County Road 30 to Northview
Elementary School. This could be further enhanced by a crosswalk with pedestrian activated
lights in the future.
The residents had also requested that either a loop trail or spur trail be placed in the treed
open space area immediately adjacent to Diffley Road north of the pond. Staff finds that
this is feasible with only minor disruption to the site. It appears that the residents in
attendance also prefer that the site be kept very natural rather than a maintained turf area.
The trail would have to penetrate into the site rather than being immediately parallel to the
proposed trail on Diffley. Assuming that this remains essentially a trail and bench/picnic
table design, staff is projecting costs to be between $2,500-3,000.
LOT SALES
Development of the residual land for sale of eight single family lots is another alternative.
Staff believes that the five southerly lots of the eight would sell for no less than $30,000.
The three remaining lots would sell for less, given their location and proximity to the
intersection of Diffley and Daniel Drive. Sale of the lots would recoup the investment the
Park Site Fund which was used to originally acquire this property. Clearly, with construction
of the single family homes would result in additional loss of the woodlands resource
currently on this residual property.
An alternative to the sale of eight lots is the sale of a lesser number, reserving several of
the lots for park use. This could be seen as something of a compromised position. It is
logical that a park area would be located southerly leaving lots less desirable and lowest in
returned revenues.
The Commission may consider the following scenario in determining the value of this
potential parkland improvement. Would the City seek to acquire three lots, at a cost of $90-
100,000 and invest an additional $35-45,000 in facility development to create a mini park at
this location. If this were the case, then the Commission should also give consideration to
other areas within the Park Service Area which have equivalent circumstance. The logical
extension of this discussion extends to other park service areas beyond PSA #26.
Hold Parcel for Future Consideration
Still another alternative is the "wait and see" approach. A recommendation could be made
to have the city keep the property and its current zoning as R-1; deferring a decision based
on future information and need.
This might permit "time" to help determine what is the best use of the land. Time also has
the affect of "clouding" issues. There is a risk that individuals will conclude that since the
property is owned by the city and has a storm water pond on it, that the property is zoned
"Parks" and not R-1. People may incorrectly assume the property will be used for parks and
be upset if the property is ultimately developed. C~6
Another concern is that the property, if it is to be ultimately be developed for lots, can best
be done now. That is, the property can be properly graded and utilities installed for the
three remaining lots currently with the pond's construction. This would significantly reduce
costs associated with lot development.
Issue #2/For Commission Action/Alternatives for Residual Property
The Commission should review and make recommendations pertaining to the use of residual
portion of this property. The following recommendations are for Commission consideration:
1. Recommend the sale of residual property for lot development.
or
2. Apportion the residual portion for residential lot development reserving the
remainder for parks use.
or
3. Retain all the residual property for parks use.
or
4. Retain the property, do not change zoning classification from R-1 thus
reserving the opportunity to review the parcel and parkland needs at a later
date.
KV/dj
COMMISSIONDAN-DIFF.MEM
OC
AREA CALCULATIONS
VW 1. Ful
(APPROX.)
SITE AREA 5.6 ACRES
PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL AREA 2.0 ACRES
PROPOSED POND AREA 1.5 ACRES
POST DEVELOPMENT WOODLAND AREA 1.6 ACRES
NON WOODED PRESERVATION AREA .05 ACRES Q
ti!
DIFFLEY ROAD
• a
.Iq tH 215 ?U 111 I f L.A. xrg5 -
r r r E1L
r r
LI.I! /crow / i i WO.z
NTFt1(I EW MEAD WS 2ND( ADD I T I ~f za
4 IL
2
^ \ , ~ he ! / , _ +i j J ~.r a l'..cv lv~ a (•w~) • w~a° ^ ` . a 9
/ ~ • <..rv lY4a . AftD.Jw;
~ ~ 1 •O ~ a _ ~rr
o z [
75
C8
1 ` ,w)
I I '
v •s v e ti
i ~ 1 t
DIFFLEY ROAD - \ g;:;
I :,S t ~s 4. w. Enos i i
33s N~tTF~Y~IEWMEAD WS 2N A001T(0J
TPf~i y. .3 UPT
wAe
• ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .,.ms's.....
7rown By: Drawing Title
~0 ' FT~p-}L cq~1C,~r
Dote: c oc a C P. ,•A.. J* Flom «o.
}
•i
Jf~
-122
1s
- -rt- ~!V i.r -"LY"~`:'1.: '!:n . n-sr+r~!t!r.':..::?'nr-q` h[ . . - r: S' ,t'~(R r7. • ,r.~r.
' - to I (P (V a t.~c=~lD~ ~Tb
13,
28
29
30
Drown BY: rp Drowing Title
"SUM No.
Dote: cV J6
MEMORANDUM
TO: ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
COMMISSION
FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
DATE: OCTOBER 30, 1992
RE: PARK SERVICE SECTION 36-E
Background
In February of 1992, the Advisory Commission made a recommendation to the City Council,
during the review of the Weston Hills Preliminary Plat, that the City seek park land in the
south 1/2 of this park service section. The City Council approved that recommendation and
direction was given to staff to begin the search for a park in that area.
One of the parcels identified as a potential park is owned by a Mr. Jay Carroll of Chicago,
Illinois. Staff made contact by letter with Mr. Carroll in regards to his interest for selling
this parcel. Water Resource Coordinator, Rich Brasch, also reviewed the site for wetlands
and to determine the impact, if any, on the site. In addition, staff had obtained the services
of a consultant appraiser, for determining a preliminary valuation of the parcel. The parcel
is 6 acres in size. (See attachments)
The property adjacent to Mr. Carroll is owned by Mr. Neary. Mr. Neary owns 19 acres,
which also includes his home. Mr. Neary has been attempting to sell his property the last
several months, and has spoken to staff about a potential sale of all or a portion of his
property to the city for parks purposes. Until this time, staff has been focusing primarily on
the Carroll parcel.
Issue
Staff is seeking consensus of opinion or direction in regards to whether the City should
proceed with trying to acquire park land for this park service area; there appears to be
several options.
1. Acquire Mr. Carroll's land.
2. Obtain the back (south) portion of Mr. Neary's land.
3. Wait for development; acquire land by dedication.
4. Look for what's best, acquire through condemnation if necessary.
5. Determine that park land is no an absolute necessity and not propose park
acquisition at this time.
6. Other.
Discussion
There are many issues for discussion pertaining to park acquisition within this service area.
Amongst the issues is the timing. Clearly, there is no immediate need to acquire a park
within this park service section, given the relatively undeveloped characteristics and lack of
a service population at this time. However, this should not prohibit the commission from
being proactive in reviewing the need and location for a potential park for the future. Cost
of land is not likely to go down.
Mr. Carroll's 6 acre parcel has access via a private road and not a public street. This is of
some concern when thinking about its development as a public park.
There is also concern for any property (or any parcel) acquired by the city which may be
landlocked. That is, acquisition of a portion of the Neary parcel, which does not have access
by even a private road, takes on a risk and an assumption that road access will eventually
occur.
Recalling that the department is looking for park acreage in the 4 to 6 acre category, it
would take a land holding of 40 to 60 acres before such a park dedication would occur.
Currently, the largest single holding is that of Mr. Neary's. At 20 acres, a 10% dedication
would only provide 2 acres. If this scenario should occur, it is obvious that the city would
still have need to acquire additional land. This additional land may have to be acquired
either through purchase and/or another dedication.
Another possibility is a developer acquiring more than just the Neary parcel and developing
all parcels simultaneously. This would ease the responsibility for the department for
acquiring property through purchase, and be able to obtain the park through dedication in
its entirety. Access via public road can also be resolved that that time.
As previously mentioned, the Commission need not make a determination at this point,
however, it should give consideration as to how it believes staff should proceed. It is staff's
opinion that it might be desirable at this point and time for staff to begin to develop
preliminary park sketch plans in areas that seem logical for parks development to occur.
This park development might occur adjacent to or on separate land ownership parcels,
recognizing that dedication may come from more than one land owner.
Obviously, the issue still remains whether park section 36-E should ultimately have a park.
As you recall from the earlier study, this neighborhood service section, based on current
park system standards, will be right on the edge of needing a park. That is, it may only
marginally have enough people to warrant construction of a park.
For Commission Action
Provide general discussion and consensus to staff concerning what directions it should take.
KV/dj
DL4PRNR36E.MEM
TO: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR
PARKS AND RECREATION
FROM: RICH BRASCH
WATER RESOURCES COORDINATOR
RE: WETLANDS INVENTORY FOR 6-ACRE PARCEL IN PARK SERVICE AREA
36E
DATE: OCTOBER 22, 1992
As per your request, the following is a summary of my preliminary
investigation of the extent of wetland coverage on the fore-
mentioned parcel. The parcel is located in the SE 1/4 of Section 36
in southeast Eagan and is approximately 6 acres in area. At this
point, I have only roughly located the wetlands on a plat map
(Attachment 1) but have neither staked them in the field nor tied
them into existing features with a survey. Thus, the wetland
acreage figures mentioned below are very approximate.
Based on my field visit on August 13, 1992, it appears that there
are three wetland areas on the site. Two are located in the
northern one-third of the site and are divided by a berm that looks
as if it was used for an access road at one time. The wetland in
the northeast corner of the site is a Type 1 seasonally flooded
basin with a very small Type 4 wetland near the center. Dominant
vegetation at the site includes reed canary grass, golden rod,
black willow, and an occasional silver maple. Hummocks are evident
over much of the area, indicating periodic inundation. I've
estimated the total area of this wetland at about .4 acres.
The wetland in the northwest corner of the site is also a Type 1
seasonally flooded basin. Dominant plant species in this wetland
include silver and red maple and golden rod. The area covered by
tree canopy-perhaps half the area of the wetland- is pretty much
free of ground litter and the tree trunks are buttressed, again
indicating periodic inundation. The wetland area is estimated at
about .5 acres.
The third wetland is also a Type 1 and lies in the central portion
of the site in an area dominated by red and silver maples of
between 2 inches and 15 inches in diameter. It was difficult to
determine the eastern extent of this wetland, but reasonable
minimum and maximum sizes for the wetland are .4 and .9 acres,
respectively.
A reasonable estimate of the total area of wetland on the site is
between 1.3 and 1.8 acres. Each of these wetlands is isolated from
other drainages because of road embankments to the north and east
and higher ground to the south and west. Their primary value
appears to be for wildlife habitat.
As we have discussed previously, these wetlands would be subject to
regulation under the Wetlands Conservation Act. I am not sure of
the extent to which filling or draining of the wetlands could be
avoided or minimized if the site is purchased for park use.
However, if filling and/or draining were to occur, replacement of
the affected area would be required. If the wetlands impacts
occurred prior to July 1, 1993, the replacement ratio would be 1:1.
After this date, the replacement ratio increases to at least 2:1.
I hope this information will suffice for the near-term decisions
that must be made for this site. If you need additional information
or would like me to do a more detailed field delineation and value
analysis, please let me know.
Rich Brasch
Water Resources Coordinator
cc. John VonDeLinde
4
y .,4, ~ s situ'
Attachment 1
' ^ R a:1t ~af~}~~-•~sanra ° '"`t~ ~ r~ sr ~ " 3.t. y,'; `Y . v.~
' f9" •~1`+ + , b• wig ? ~~I4`"" ~ s~ e y _ ' f r ' ".-Tn V
f.
r
CARSON
nr e. iilf• , COUNTY*-3UAVErpp
OAkOTA
Z0llNtY M144t3
[ e)s Ot
PART OF
021-75 X .
I
013-76 o
016-76
• - - • 'X r /
WIT
W + 40 ~'h. t
Np }ice
.,r 017-76
P.S.A. 36E ACQUISITION STUDY
H R 23'u
7 7:7,
is ~ i , ~ . • -
• y 'r a J411E5 rJAGosl
-CAP
; t ~r • . - ::PKnPOi ( Q~l 6 r o!4 ? 6
ff
Il• iwirs LE Y".N.G
tj-' f7
- 1'u-TrYro
L r y c 5%.~.......-
EV'
oil 9s I, ~M TT:
I. t, I a u ,.I
r r; r yy ;'t~1 I ; c i
'Mi teor~ eeA'P•;'Ii o ~i a'''-' l
ofe I\\\\_
Ili O 1 1, 'r' r'
/ • 1 I ~ i i 11 , -
? L - -L•`_ %_t-- mac'-=----- w
~~J r
MEMORANDUM
TO: ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL
RESOURCE COMMISSION
FROM: STEPHEN SULLIVAN, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT/PARKS PLANNER
DATE: NOVEMBER 26,1991
RE: PARK SERVICE AREA 36E
PARKS NEEDS STUDY
Background
An application has been received by the City of Eagan for the platting of 136 single family
units on 63.64 acres. The Weston Hills preliminary plat is located south of Cliff Road and
east of State Highway #3.
The parcel is within Park Service Area
36E. The development activity with the Ot E
platting request for the Weston Hills
Subdivision facilitates the need for a parks
study of Park Service Area 36E. The
study process is intended to be separated
into two parts: The first study phase is the::
Commission's determination whether a park is needed within Park Service Area
36E. This evaluation will take place at the i , • f W
December 5 Advisory Parks, Recreation f , • , . z
and Natural Resources Commission / .
meeting. • ,
Figure #1 Area Location Map
Staff will provide the Commission with the following information for their evaluation.
1. Eagan Parks Standards
2. Park Service Area Demographics
3. Comparison to other Park Service Areas
4. Typical Service Area needs
5. Site Location
6. Typical Facility Programs
7. Cooperative Community Park Scenario
a
Park Service Area 36E
November 26, 1991
Page 2
If the Commission recommends the need for parkland acquisition within Park Service Area
36E, staff will then proceed with the second phase of the parkland study. This phase will
identify a specific site or sites for parkland acquisition. The Commission would evaluate
potential parkland acquisitions at the January 9 Advisory Parks, Recreation and Natural
Resources Commission meeting. Staff would provide the Commission with the following
information for their evaluation:
1. Site Specific Parkland Acquisition Alternatives
2. Service Area Efficiencies
3. Development Efficiencies
4. Site Attributes
5. Facility Program Potential
6. Acquisition Process & Timeframe
Comprehensive Parks System Plan
In 1982 the City of Eagan adopted a Comprehensive Park System Plan. This working
document provides the framework for development, acquisition, funding and parkland
standards for Eagan's Park System. Since its inception, this document has been the basis
for all planning efforts within Eagan's park system. This report will rely on the proven
strength of the Comprehensive Parks Systems Plan.
The Comprehensive Parks
System Plan identifies six (6)
planning districts. The
districts are based on a
fA)
geographic population
_ ,o
context which overlay •.4
several neighborhood park
service areas. This districts
provide the basis for -
equitable distribution of V
parkland and facilities
within the City of Eagan.
The study area is located
within Planning District #5.
f ` STUDY ARE
32w - aAw~
Figure 2 Park Planning Districts
Park Service Area 36E
November 26, 1991
Page 3
The Comprehensive Parks Systems Plan further distills the City of Eagan into 38
Neighborhood Park Service Areas. The intent of this "designation" is to meet recreation
needs within a neighborhood park which is accessible and within reasonable proximity to all
residents in Eagan. This study is located within Neighborhood Park Service Area #36E
which is not currently served by any park. The Comprehensive Parks Systems Plan does not
specifically recommend a parkland acquisition with Park Service Area #36E but mentions
the potential of a joint development park between the cities of Eagan and Inver.Grove
Heights. . y _ 1 c
C:b
A , Al
f
, / I J _ of .
.i tt ~ G
. r 9
low
J_ iio_
doft ow
girwwi/
Figure #3 Neighborhood Park Service Areas
The Park System Plan as a result of "Specialization" has developed classifications and
corresponding standards. These parkland classifications are as follows:
1. Mini-Park 2. Community Park 7. Special Use Park
2. Neighborhood Park S. Linear Park 8. -School Park
3. Community Athletic Field 6. Historic Park 9. Regional Park
Park Service Area #36E
November 26, 1991
Page 4
The scope of this report will focus on the classifications and standards in regards to the need
for either a mini-park or neighborhood park. A "mini-park" is defined as a park for local
recreation which is not large enough to be a complete Neighborhood Park. The mini-park
may either serve a smaller service area or provide only a limited number of facilities. The
site must be usable for its intended purpose and is not intended to be a "catch all"
classification. The typical mini-park provides very limited and basic facilities such as play
equipment or an open field games area. Several mini-parks within a Park Service Area
could collectively be considered as a Neighborhood Park if each of the Mini-Parks contained
one or more of the necessary components of a complete Neighborhood Park. Ideally, a city
would have no mini-parks. They are only provided when there is a park need in an area
which cannot be fulfilled in any other way.
A "neighborhood park" is defined as a park designed primarily for local, recreational
activities on a park service area basis. Neighborhood parks are the basic unit and will be
the most common type of park in the system. Facilities provided in the basic neighborhood
park are a 250' x 250' open field game area, paved hard courts games area and trails, play
equipment facilities for preschool and elementary age children and a passive or natural area.
Optional facilities which may be found here are improved balifields, soccer fields, tennis
courts, hockey and skating rinks and parking. The optimal service area is usually within 1/2
mile radius and should not extend beyond major access barriers. A neighborhood park must
be a minimum of 4 acres but is typically 8 to 12 acres.
COMPO• USE SERVICE SITE SITE SITE
'v'E,T AREA ATTRIBUTES LOCATION
Mani Park Serves a concentrated Services a Size Some Portion High density
population, specific age small vanes Of the site must neighborhood
(Cit., juns- group, or provides only service but be suitable for $ where
diction or limited facilities on a area, usable the specific we typical private
private) local basis. Typically wuaDy less area $ which required yards do not
mini parks provide only than 1/4 typically the site. assist. May be
one or two basic mae I to 4 in locations
facilities such as play radius, acres. such as
equipment, open Said population apartment
Ames area, or a than served is steps,
trail. at least townhouse
500 developments
,residents. or
commercial
centers.
Neighbor, Area for Jp jj Optional Ten Tbysicgrapby AooassibIe to
hood Park recreational activities Service acre suited for untended
ELL: such as a 2S0' s 250' area is Mini- bum service area.
Ground open Said games area, usually mum; is development. More active
paved hard courts within a typically Some natural parts and
(City jutu• pies area, trawls, ploy 112 mile 2O to 12 amenities are better access
diction) equipment for preschool radius. was desirable but so collector
and elementary age Service but may not required. MeeM.
children and a passive should not be as mum have at
or natural area. satend large as least 80' of
Ontjnnal faNities may beyond 20 frontage on a
include improved major acres. public street.
ball5elds, soccer fields, barriers to
tennis courts, hockey access.
rinks, skating rinks and 2,000 to
parting facilities. 5,000
population
served.
Figure *4 Park Standards
Park Service Area #36E
November 26, 1991
Page 5
Inventory/Analysis
The Park Service Area is comprised of interim type land uses. The 64 acre Weston Hills
parcel is located within the northern 1/3 of the Park Service Area and is characterized by
a farmstead and pasture. The southern half of the Park Service Area is comprised of other
farmsteads, 5-10 acre single family lots, a 40 acre tree farm and an 8 acre light industrial plat
called Halley's 1st Addition. The Comprehensive Land Use Plan designates D-1 residential
(0-3 units per acre) for the entire geographic Park Service Area. The developmental
timeframe is uncertain but with the extension of roads and trunk utilities via the Weston
Hills Subdivision will facilitate the developmental potential of the adjacent parcels.
The current population of Park Service Area #36E is estimated at approximately 30-50
residents. The buildout population of the Park Service Area based on 100% development
to D-1 residential is 1287 residents. The following is a comparative sampling of buildout
populations for other Park Service Areas:
Park Service Area Buildout Population
# 2 Lexington Park 324
# 3 Country Home Park 249
#20 Blackhawk Park 1537
#24 Captain Dodd Park 1221
#31E Kettle Park 495
#34 Ohmann Park 792
#36W Manor Lake Addition 1251
#36E Study Area 1287
Figure #5 Park Service Area Buildout Comparisons
This demographic information indicates that Park Service Areas of similar buildout
population typically support parks of varying classifications.
Park Service Area 36E is approximately I mile in length in a north/south orientation and
varies from 1/8 mile to 1/2 mile in width along the east to west axis. The geometric
configuration does not accommodate the service standards of a V. mile radius for a mini-
park. The '/2 mile radius standard for a neighborhood park serves a majority of the Park
Service Area when located centrally.
4I.
Park Service Area #36E
November 26, 1991
Page 6
Based on this central orientation providing the greatest service coverage and the
Commission's recommendation of park need, staff would concentrate the acquisition study
within this defined area. A joint community park scenario may reorient the study area
easterly covering the potential service population within Inver Grove Heights.
+r ,
r` ~11J
ty
V ~.w
Mw fri/~ ~
1/4 MILE RADIUS
P. A. #36E
Figure #6 Service Area Coverage
The review of similar Park Service Areas in comparison to 36E concludes parks with a range
in facility programs, site attributes and acreage. Typically, all parks meet facility program
and standards of a mini-park as outlined within Figure #4. Other similar Park Service Areas
such as 31E, which is served by Kettle Park, provide a host of facilities, site attributes and
acreage characteristic of neighborhood park standards. These differences do not show
inconsistencies of the Comprehensive Parks Systems Plan as much as individual parks
exceeding basic standards through opportunistic and effective planning. The typical park
characteristic for Park Service Area 36E may have a facility program including a playground,
hardcourt, open play area, trails, picnic area, passive area and Parking lot.
The acreage range of similar Park Service Areas range from 3 - 7 acres. The acreage and
facility program for a park within Park Service Area #36E would change with the joint
community park scenario. Increased user population would typically increase facility types
and level of design. Acreage requirement may also increase dependent upon the revised
facility program and projected level of use.
Park Service Area #36E
November 26, 1991
Page 7
The City's Comprehensive Guide Plan, completed in the early 1980's concluded that "...this
area can best be planned with the adjacent area in Inver Grove Heights...A joint agreement
between the cities should be developed at that time with a jointly planned parks facility."
The Inver Grove Heights Park Department has been contacted and is currently evaluating
the potential of a shared park. This scenario, although foreign to Eagan, has been
undertaken successfully by several communities within the Twin Cities Metropolitan area.
Eagan staff will be working with Inver Grove Heights in determining the viability of a joint
park. The timeframe for this evaluation is intended to dovetail with the site selection phase
of the study if deemed necessary by the Commission.
Cash
The Commission may also want to consider or review the alternative of accepting a cash
dedication (136 x 700 - 95,200) and to utilize those proceeds to enhance the parks
opportunities in Park Service Section 36-W. This area is within the 1/2 mile radius, but is
separated by'a major transportation barrier.
mma
The platting application of Weston Hills Subdivision facilitates the need for a study of Park
Service Area #36E. The study process is separated into 2 parts with the first being the
determination of whether a park is needed within Park Service Area 36E and the second
phase being the selection of an appropriate park site. The Comprehensive Parks System
Plan suggests the possibility of a joint park with Inver Grove Heights. This scenario is
currently being reviewed by both Cities.
The buildout population of Park Service Area #36E exceeds minimum standards of a mini-
park classification. Typically, existing Park Service Areas of similar demographics to Park
Service Area 36E are served by parks ranging in classification from mini-parks to
neighborhood parks. The Advisory Parks, Recreation and Natural Resource Commission
will need to evaluate and make recommendations whether a park is needed within Park
Service Area 36E.
For Commission Action
The Advisory Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission may consider the
following recommendations:
1. A park is needed within Park Service Area #36E. Staff should begin identifying
potential park sites.
2. No park is needed within Park Service Area 36E. Park needs can be adequately met
with an enhanced park in #36W.
3. The City should rely on. Inver Grove Heights to provide any needed park amenities.
SS/nh A'
MEMORANDUM
TO: ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
DATE: OCTOBER 28, 1992
RE: 1992 PARKS AND TRAILS DEDICATION REVIEW
Advisory Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission annually reviews the parks dedication
formula for possible adjustment and for recommendation to the City Council. This review is typically
done during this time period each year, with a recommendation that when adopted becomes effective
on January 1.
History
Provided for you is a history of dedication fees from 1989 through 1992. You will note that the fees
for 1992 remain consistent with 1991 as the Commission recommended n4 adjustments between the
two years. Staff would like to remind the Commission that individual cash dedication fees are based
on "land value equivalence". That is, the Commission actually determines the land values each year
for each different category of land use. You will note that land values have been determined first in
the chart, with the individual unit fees following.
Also attached for your review is a survey that was completed in 1991 of several metropolitan
communities. Notice that each community seems to have a somewhat different approach
determination of their dedication fees. Because this survey is dated staff contacted adjacent
communities to determine what their perception is in regards to area-wide land values and any
adjustments that communities may be planning between 1992-93.
Eden Prairie indicates that they will not be seeking an increase in fees for 1993. They will remain
at $840.00 for all residential units. Commercial values remain the same. Plymouth is seeking an
increase in the 1993 residential rate, which is currently $860.00 per unit. Plymouth has not had an
increase since 1986. The Plymouth staff recognized that residential land values have increased slightly
each year over the last several years and feel that there is a need to bring their fees for residential
units up to date. Plymouth reports that their commercial and industrial values have remained
consistent or even slightly down and therefore they will not be seeking an adjustment in the
commercial/industrial dedication.
Lakeville, which is currently $550.00 a unit for parks dedication and $150.00 for trail dedication
predicts an increase in 1993. Lakeville's justification for the rate increase is based on the fact that
they have not had an adjustment since 1985. They also report considerable park construction cost
increase needs within their park system.
Maple Grove land values are determined by the assessor. They have not had an increase in 1991 or
1992, and at this time it is unknown whether there will be an adjustment for 1993.
Rosemount previously set their land values at $12,000.00 and receive 4% of the land value times the
density to determine their parks dedication. Rosemount is considering an adjustment in the
percentage from 4% to 5%, but is not looking to change the land value adjustment.
4-5.
Discussion
The Commission has also reviewed Eagan land sales to help determine the value of vane'
classifications of property for park dedication fees. This is tempered by the recognition that land sal.
are often influenced by many factors such as the topography, the land area that is usable for
residential or commercial construction purposes, etc. Most recent, and most notable sales within
Eagan have been the Westin Hills Plat and the Lakeview Additions. It is reported that these sales
were at $12,500.00/acre; but with both having significant portion used for ponding and/or lake.
It has also been reported that ISD #196, in acquiring the land for Glacier Hills Elementary School
on Wescott Road, paid $30,000.00 an acre. This property has a higher value because of accessibility
of utilities and a major street access already in place.
Wide fluctuations in land values have always been difficult for the Commission to deal with in the
past. Consequently, adjustments have always been conservative as increases have been implemented
over the years. Residential construction has been relatively rapid in Eagan over the past year despite
a relatively sluggish national economy. Obviously lower interest rates and a large lot inventory within
Eagan has led to the strong construction activity.
The Commission may wish to take a hard look at adjustments for 1993. Given the relatively slow
national economy and lack of development activity with new residential plats. Staff believes that it
would be difficult to justify any increase for commercial and industrial; as well as multiple/apartment
dwellings.
The Commission may wish to also consider a recommendation, as a separate motion, to utilize
consultant services during calendar year 1993 to do a review and analysis of undeveloped properti
which remain in the community, to determine their values. This appraisal process will have greatc_
reliability and provide a strong basis for determination of land values. This would obviously be
preferred to an after the fact "sale", which may be influenced by any number of factors not necessarily
related to the value of the property.
Summation
There does not appear to be a wide-spread escalation of land values in the metropolitan area.
Relatively few local sales makes land value determination difficult for the purpose of adjusting
dedication fees. Commercial property values remain "flat" ' or even slightly down. The use of an
appraiser to review values for undeveloped parcels may be helpful in determining values for 1994
dedication fees.
For Commission Action
To review the parks and trail dedication fees for 1993, making recommendation to the City Council.
for any adjustments in land values dedication fee for 1993.
KV/dj
DIAPRNRDED.FEE
N 1
SURVEY OF PARK DEDICATION RATES
SEPTEMBER 1991
CITY POPULATION LAND CASH COM/IND
Andover 15,193 0 - 3 Units/Acre = 10% $400.00/Unit Land 10%
Over 3 Units/Acre, add 2% for each
additional dweling.
Apple 35,000 10% 10% based on Land: 5%
Valley $20,000/acre Cash: 5% based
$20,000 Acre
Blaine 39,900 Based on Units/Acre SF: $395/Unit Land 3%
0 - 1 = 5% Dup: $338/Unit Cash: 3% Value
2 - 3 = 10% Th/Q:$293/Unit of undeveloped
4 - 5 = 12% Apt..$248/Unit land
6 - 7 = 14% MH: $305/Unit
8 - 12= 16%
13- 16= 18%
For each unit over 16, add 0.5
Brooklyn 56,000 10% 10% of Land: 5%
Park Fair Market Cash: 4% of
Value Fair Market
Value
Burnsville 51,000 10 Acres per 1,000 Residents Formula: Land 5% of land or
Dedication Req'd cash equiv-
X Average cost/ lent
acres=park dedi-
cation funds due
HISTORI 'FEES
1991/1992 LAND VALUE 1991/1992 PER UNIT FEE 1990 1989 1988
SINGLE FAMILY $16,330.00 $700.00 $685.00 $525.00 $492.00
DUPLEX $18,630.00 $621.00 $600.00 $488.00 $462.00
MULTIPLE $21,735.00 $553.00 $535.00 $414.00 $394.00
APARTMENTS $23,805.00 $559.00 $545.00 $427.00 $404.00
COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL $.055/$2,396/ACRE $.055 $.05 $.05
TRAIL/RESIDENTIAL $100.00 $100.00 N/A N/A
TRAIL/COMMERCIAL $854.00 $854.00 N/A N/A
DIFEEHIST.TBL
Champlin 16,829 10% 10% of value
undeveloped land
Chanhassen 11,700 10% SF$500/Unit Land: 10%
Trail $167/Unit Cash: $2500/
Multi $440/Unit Acre+$833/.
Trail $146/Unit Acre for Trail
Coon Rapids 52,000 SF 2.5 Units/Acre = 10% SF $389/Unit. Land:
TH 7 Units/Acre = 14% DU $326/Unit 1. Commercial
Apt 16 Units/Acre = 18% TH $286/Unit 3%
MH $291/Unit 2. Industrial
Apt $238/Unit 5%
Cash:$11,521 Ac
Cottage 23,000 10% in Ri and R2 zoned districts SF $450/Unit
Grove in other residentially zoned All other dwellings
subdivisions the amount of land $120/bedroom
dedicated shall be determined by the Cash for recreational
planned population of the subdiv- facilities in addition
ision, using the the ratio of one to land:
acre of land per 75 persons SF $150/Unit. All
other Units = $40/Bedroom
Eagaii 48,000 SF10% SF $700.00 .055/SF=$2395/
TH 11-12% Dup $621.00 Acre
Apts. 13 - 14% TH $553.00
Apts. $559.00
Eden 40,800 10% $800/Unit $825/Acre
Prairie
Golden 21,000 $450/Unit 10% land or
Valley value of
undeveloped
land
Inver 23,000 10% $400/Unit $2178/Acre in
Grove in MUSA MUSA
Heights $240/Unit out- $600/Acre out-
side MUSA side MUSA
Maple 40,000 10% $638/Unit Land: 7-1/2%
Grove Cash:
1.Commercial
$3,064/Acre
2.Industrial
$2,058/Acre
Maplewood 31,000 An amount equal to the value of the SF $459 Cash: 7% of
cash donation required Duplex $729 market value
TH $364.50 of the land
MH $337.50
Apts:
1. 3-4 units/build
2.7 x $135 x # Units
2. 5 or more units 1.9 x
$135 x # Units
Moundsview 13,000 At the discretion of the City Council 0 - 2 Units/Acre 10% of the
$100/Acre land or an
2.1-3 Units/acre equivalent of
$150/Acre cash
3.1-4 Units/Acre
$200/Acre
4.1-5 Units/Acre
$250/Acre
Moundsview cont.
Over 5 Units/Acre
= 10% Cash or land
dedication
New 24,000 10% 10% of property None
Brighton value after
platting
Plymouth 50,889 10% based on 2 units/acre $860/Unit Land: 10%
if higher density, following formula Cash: $3500/
is used: Acre
Density - 2 + 1 0= of dedication
'required
Roseville 34,000 10% $500/SF Lot Land: 5%
$400/Th or DU Cash: 4% of
$350/MF with the value of
3 or more the unimproved
units land or $4500/
Acre, whichever
is less
Shakopee 11,739 10% $400/single Land: 10%
family Unit Cash: $1500/
$338/Unit for per acre
bldgs contain-
ing 2 - 3
dwelling units
$312.50/Unit for bldgs,
containing 4 - 6
dwelling units
$250/Unit for bldgs.
containing more than
6 dwelling units
Shoreview 25,000 10% Based on the market 10%
value of the land:
0-2 Units/Acre 4%
2-3 Units/Acre 5%
3-4 Units/Acre 6%
4-5 Units/Acre 7%
5.1 + Units/Acre 10%
Woodbury 21,000 10% $600 SF $1200/Acre for
$400 All other industrial
units $1500/Acre for
Commercial
$1800/Acre for
Office
Lakeville 107. $550 Per Unit+ CommlInd
$150 Per Unit 5% of
Trail land value
TSADMINS,PKDEDSUV(1/5)
MEMORANDUM
TO: ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION
FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
DOROTHY PETERSON, SUPERINTENDENT OF RECREATION
DATE: OCTOBER 26, 1992
RE: FEES AND CHARGES
FACILITY USE FEES
-------------------------------------------7-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Background:
Attached for the Commission's information is a copy of the Department's listing of categories of facilities
and facility users. This listing was adopted by the Commission several years ago. Other public agencies,
such as Community Education departments, have developed similar categorizations to ensure that
management of facilities has a logical basis.
Also attached is the listing of the fees charged by the Department in 1992. Revenue generated through
September 30, 1992, totals:
Athletic Field Rent $ 7,784.00
Park Shelter Building Rent $10,731.00
In addition, the administrative and maintenance fees from the Department's adult sport leagues accounted
for another $35,000.00 in revenue for the city. The revenues generated by these facility management fees
represent 19.5% of recreation revenue.
Program registration fees vary, are dynamic and are not included among the departments' fees and charges
listing.
Issues:
Staff are not proposing fee increases for 1993. The rates charged in 1992 are in line with neighboring
communities and are acceptable to the user of a facility or service.
Four new fees and charges are proposed for 1993.
The issues are:
Should the city charge minimal fees to youth travel soccer teams?
Should the city charge minimal fees to youth travel hockey teams?
Should the city run the concessions for adult outside tournaments held at Northview
Athletic?
Should the city charge youth baseball and softball tournaments, run at Northview Athletic,
a minimum of $100.00/day for use of the concession room?
Discussion:
Youth Travel Soccer: The summer travel soccer season begins with tryouts during the first week in Api'
Although some teams begin practice soon after April 15, the Department receives an "official" schedui _
of practice and games that designate a mid-May start. The season continues through the end of July,
followed by a district tournament or two that carry field use into the first week in August. The
Department moves goals into place, marks and stripes the fields, for the first time, by mid-May. The
travel soccer season, then, is minimally twelve (12) weeks in duration.
In 1992, travel soccer used seven (7) fields for games and practice. The typical frequency for re-striping
is 10 days.
Each field was striped 9 times during the summer.
Six (6) gallons of marking paint are required per field each time.
A gallon of field marking paint costs $3.58.
Materials for striping soccer fields for the youth travel program cost: $1,353.24.
The minimum fee charged per team for youth travel baseball and softball is $60.00. Using the same per
team rate, the twenty (20) travel soccer teams would provide $1,200.00 in revenue; almost equal to the
cost of field marking paint.
Additional service from the Department to the youth travel soccer program includes mowing twice a week
and opening and closing restrooms daily, including week-ends when applicable.
Staff is not proposing to charge a fee to bantam or fall in-house soccer programs. The departmen
longstanding direction has been to provide service to beginner and in-house youth sports.
Youth Travel Hockey: The winter outdoor skating season, most typically is eight (8) weeks long.
Currently, no revenue is generated by outdoor skating facilities. The philosophy of previous Commissions
and City Councils has been to provide the community with a skating season, free of charge. Maintaining
the ice and supervising the warming shelters is labor intensive. For example, 23% of the Departments'
recreational seasonal staff budget is reserved for the warming shelter staff.
During the winter of 1991-92, youth hockey utilized 52 hours per week of outdoor ice time at city facilities.
The number of hours are anticipated to increase to at least 58 this winter as the Association has three (3)
more teams than a year ago.
The primary facilities capable of handling team practice and public skating simultaneously are: Bridle
Ridge, Goat Hill, Quarry, Rahn and Sky Hill. Department programs such as broomball leagues utilize
these facilities also. Scheduling is tight, the shelters absorb dirt and grime from heavy traffic, and pressure
to clear rinks is a daily occurrence regardless of the weather.
Youth hockey has, in essence, an in-house and travel leagues. The youngest teams, mini-mites and mites,
are in-house. The primary thrust is instruction, games are among Eagan teams only. Practices occur on
outdoor ice in Eagan, games are played indoors. The mite level holds an outdoor tournament at Rahn
for which fees are charged.
Squirts, Pee Wees and Bantams are travel hockey teams. They play in a MAHA district against teal..,.
from other communities. These teams practice on city outdoor ice, play games and hold some practices
indoors and participate in week-end tournaments throughout the state. The format for travel hockey is
similar to travel soccer.
In keeping with the Department's practice toward travel baseball and softball and as proposed for travel
soccer, staff recommends that the Commission consider that a $60.00 per team fee be charged to travel
hockey teams, commencing with the 1993-94 season.
Adult Softball /Outside Tournaments at Northview Athletic: Five (5) outside adult softball tournaments
were held at Northview Athletic during the summer of 1992. The potential revenue to the city, were the
department to run the concessions for these tournaments, is in the neighborhood of $2,500.00 to $3,000.00.
Staff's experience is that these outside tournaments are frequently poorly organized. If access to the
concession room is gained by virtue of their recruiting a local team to run the concession, inexperienced
personnel have been known to not clean the equipment, not scrub the floor, sell city product!
Staff recommends that the city, in order to abide by the state license requirements and to increase
revenue, provide concessions for outside adult tournaments.
Youth Softball and Baseball Tournaments at Northview Athletic: The Department practice has been that
for youth softball and baseball tournaments held at Northview Athletic, one of two arrangements for
concessions occur.
1. The city provides concessions. A typical example is for Eagan High School events. Net revenue
is shared with the school.
or, 2. A youth organization, such as travel baseball, uses the concession room space.
Concessions at tournaments do generate revenue. The pragmatic question is should not the city share in
the benefit from this concession revenue? The philosophical inquiry settles on should the city exempt
youth organizations from sharing concession revenue?
Staff recommends a minimum share of $100.00 per day from youth tournaments that use the concession
room at Northview Athletic.
For Commission Action:
It is appropriate that the Commission provide a recommendation regarding the three (3) proposed new
fees and the suggested change in practice. It may wish to invite representation of youth soccer and youth
hockey to confer with the Commission in regards to the impact of these fees.
DP/dj
DIFEES2.MEM
PARKS AND RECREATION
FEES AND CHARGES
OCTOBER 23, 1992
Categories of Facilities:
Class A Baseball: Fully fenced fields, in an athletic complex and/or high school
complex
Softball: Fully fenced fields, in an athletic complex and/or high school
complex
Hockey: Shelter building, two hockey rinks
Tennis: Four or more courts, may be lighted
Soccer: Full size, two or more fields, shelter building
Class B Ballfields: Ag lime infield, no mound, open outfield, in a neighborhood
park or school site
Baseball: Ag lime base paths, mounds, open outfield, at a school site
Hockey: One hockey rink, small shelter
Tennis: Two courts
Soccer: Full size, two fields or less, portable restroom
Class C Ballfield: Grass infield, facility not programmed
Hockey: One hockey rink, warming house or trailer
Tennis: One court
Soccer: One field, 240' x 180' or smaller
Categories of Users:
1. Park and Recreation Department Programs
1.1 Adult sport leagues: eligibility is based on "live or work" in the city.
Department Staff directs and administers the leagues (softball, hockey, tennis,
football)
a. Use class A facility
1.2 Youth programs: skating lessons, speedskating, tennis lessons and camps
a. Use Class A and B facilities
1.3 Adult programs: Tennis lessons, skating lessons
a. Use Class A and B facilities
2. Eagan High School, Dakota Hills Middle School Co-Curricular Activities
a. Use Class A and B facilities
FEES AND CHARGES
3. Youth Athletic Association Programs
3.1 In-house leagues, Eagan Athletic Association, Eagan Hockey Association
a. Use Class B facilities
3.2 Travel leagues, Eagan Athletic Association, Eagan Hockey Association
a. Use Class .A and B facilities
3.3 Independent, Require 70% Eagan youth; Bluejays, Legion, VFW
a. Use Class A facilities
3.4 Rosemount Area Athletic Association, Mend-Eagan Athletic Association
a. Use Class B facilities
3.5 4H, Scouts, etc.
a. Use Class B facilities
4. Private Organization Programs
4.1 Church Youth Leagues
a. Use Class A or B facilities
4.2 Church Adult Leagues
a. Use Class A or B facilities
4.3 Corporate Leagues: Unisys, Rosemount Inc., Volvo Tennis
a. Use Class A facilities
4.4 Independent Teams: Burnet Realty, KC's
a. Use Class A or B facilities
4.5 Challenge Games
a. Space available A or B facilities
4.6 Private Lesson Programs
a. Class A or B facilities
5. Select Teams
5.1 Youth Olympic Development
a. Use Class A or B facilities
5.2 Adult; recreational league soccer, for example
a. Use Class A or B facilities
4 7.
FEES AND CHARGES
CHANGE
Proposed Fees and Charges: PROPOSED
1992 1993
1. Parks and Recreation Department Programs
1.1a Adult Sport Leagues (softball)
a. Administrative fee/team $50.00
b. Field light fee/team 25.00
c. Maintenance fee/team 50.00
d. Facility improvement fee/one time fee 25.00
e. Outside player fee/player 25.00
f. All other direct costs varies
1.1b Adult Sport Leagues (minor sports)
a. Administration fee 60.00
b. All direct costs varies
1.2 Youth Programs
a. Direct costs varies
1.3 Adult Programs
a. Direct costs varies
2. Eagan High School, Dakota Hills Middle School
a. Curricular No Fees
b. Co-curricular/field preparation $10.00
3. Youth Athletic Association Programs
3.1 In-house
a. Field drag, line soccer, clear & flood rinks No Fees
3.2 Travel Leagues
a. Minimal fees
1) Baseball, softball/team $60.00
2) *Soccer No Fee $60.00
3) *Hockey No Fee $60.00
3.3 Independent
a. Reduced fees
1) Baseball $150-$300.00
3.4 RAAA, Mend-Eagan
a. Subject to available space No Fees
3.5 4-H, Scouts
a. Subject to available space No Fees
FEES AND CHARGES
PROPOSED
1992 1993
4. Private Organization Programs
4.1 Church Youth Leagues
a. Softball/team, league run on city facilities $50.00
b. Softball $15.00/game, league uses 20.00
one city facility on weekly basis
4.2 Church Adult Leagues
a. Softball/game, league uses one 25.00
city facility on a weekly basis
b. Maximum season length 12 weeks
4.3 Corporate Leagues
a. Broomball/team, maximum season 6 weeks 50.00
b. Tennis/court/hour, maximum season 12 weeks 2.00
c. Softball/team, fall field space, 100.00
maximum season 8 weeks
d. Soccer/team maximum season 10 weeks 50.00
4.4 Independent Teams
a. Softball/game on Class A facility 25.00
4.5 Challenge Games
a. Softball/one time block/ $25.00/$50.00
two time blocks
4.6 Private Lesson Programs
a. Tennis/court/hour $ 2.00
b. Soccer/field day 35.00
5. Select Teams
5.1 Youth Olympic Development
a. Soccer/game, maximum season, 12 weeks $20.00
5.2 Adult League
a. Soccer/game, maximum season, 12 weeks $25.00
Tournaments
Adult Softball: field/day $50.00
building fee 50.00
hour/lights 25.00
damage deposit 150.00
Liability Insurance, $600,000, city an additional insured
Licensed Concession Room at Northview City Run
Adult Soccer: field/day 50.00
Liability Insurance
FEES AND CHARGES
Tournaments continued:
CHANGE.
PROPOSED
1992 1993
Adult Tennis: 2 courts/day $50.00
Liability Insurance
Adult Broomball: rink/day $50.00
lights/hour 25.00
shelter fee 50.00
Liability Insurance
Youth Tournaments:
In-House Sports on Class A sites:reduced fee $35.00
field/day
Travel Sports: baseball, soccer, softball
& hockey
Reduced rate field/day $35.00
lights/hour 25.00
Liability Insurance
Licensed concession room at Northview City Run OR $100.00/
day
DP/dj
DIFEES-DORFRM
MEMORANDUM
TO: ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCE
COMMISSION
FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
DATE: NOVEMBER 2, 1992
RE: CIP 1993-1997
Background
The City Council is reviewing the five year Capital Improvements Program for updating and
possible amendment. Staff has prepared a draft CIP document for parks and for submission
to the Advisory Commission and then to the City Council.
Issue
The issue before the Advisory Commission is a recommendation to the City Council to
adopt the draft CIP program for the Parks and Recreation Department.
Discussion
The CIP document for parks is a working guideline for staff and the city in terms of
identification of both projects and priorities.
The problems with this CIP, both in its preparation and in its implementation, is that there
is not sufficient dollars to carry out the needs as identified. The question then is it not
better to only identify projects when money is available to carry out the work?
Staff has taken the position that since this is a draft document, and since the CIP is really
less of a mandate/budget to actually carry out the work (ie. it's a planning document) it
becomes important to show all the work that is necessary. Items shown in the CIP, if
funding is not available, will not get completed and will either be pushed back further into
future years, will get eliminated, or a method determined to increase revenues the revenue
to allow this work to be completed.
The CIP gets more and more difficult each year to develop for two primary reasons: 1.
Because we do not have all the dollars that are necessary to complete the projects and 2.
The age of the Park Systems Plan is such that an established list of priorities is not as clear
as it was several years ago. Nevertheless, staff has made an attempt to identify capital
projects in the park system that might occur in the next five years; or where obvious
demands for development of a park must be considered.
For Commission Action
To review the CIP document; to make additions or subtractions as may be appropriate. The
Commission is requested to then submit the document to the City Council.
KV/dj
DICIP93-97.MEM /n
LOCATION ACQUISITION SITE PLAY EQUIPMENT SHELTERS UTILITY/ PARKING LANDSCAPING DESIGN/ TOTALS
revised 1992 PREPERATION EQUIPMENT LIGHTING TRAILS ENGINERING
aszxxsxxxsxaa:sa:sassxssaessxszassxxsaxxsssxzsxxzaxaasxsxsxaxszsxrxxssxxzaxsaxaxxasxassasxaxxsxxazxasxx:xxaxazxasxs=ssaxxsasssxxxsxasxxsxxzxxssxs
RIVER HILLS 0
CINNAMON 0
RAHN
RAHN ATH
0
4,000 2,000 6,000
CEDAR POND 0
CARNELIAN 2,000 2,000
PERIDOT PATH 0
W00DHAVEN
0
BLACKHAWK 180,000 50,000 45,000 150,000 25,000 20,000 470,000
QUARRY
0
PILOT KNOB 0
HIGHVIEW
C. HOME
0
MOOSHINE
0
0
LEXINGTON 0
BURR OAKS
O'LEARY
0
0
FISH LAKE 10,000 10,000
WESCOTT STATION 18,000 20,000 20,000 2,000 60,000
BERRY PATCH 0
KEHNE/McCARTHY 0
CARLSON LAKE 0
OAK CHASE
0
CLEARWATER 0
RAVINE
GOAT HILL
0
8,000 8,000
WALNUT HILL
LAKESIDE
0
EVERGREEN
0
RIDGECLIFF
0
0
WALDEN
SLATERS ACRES
0
0
MEADOWLANDS
SKY HILL
0
2,000 2,000
HEINE POND 0
SOUTH OAKS
0
WINDCREST 0
MUELLIER FARM 0
KETTLE
0
OHMANN
BRIDLE RIDGE 0
)ERING WALK
Mumma_
DOWNING 2,000 2,000
PARK SECT 21 0
PARK SECT 18 0
MANOR LAKE 50,000 5,000 55,000
NORTHVIEW/HIGH SCHOOL 0
NORTHVIEW 20,000 20,000
ATHLETIC SITE #3 15,000 15,000
THOMAS LAKE 2,000 2,000
PAT EAGAN
TRAPP FARM
0
20,000 20,000
CAPTAIN DODD 18,000 3,000 21,000
TOTALS $50,000 $195,000 $36,000 $87,000 $20,000 $69,000 $150,000 $49,000 $37,000 $693,000
LOCATION ACQUISITION SITE PLAY EQUIPMENT SHELTERS UTILITY/ PARKING LANDSCAPING DESIGN/ TOTALS
YR1993 PREPERATION EQUIPMENT LIGHTING TRAILS ENGINERING
axesxsssaxassszsssxszxaszsasssxasazssxxsasssasxssxsxxx_ xzxxsxs=sxxaxssxxxaasxaxxaxsssxsxasxxxxsxsxxxzxsssa:asaasasxxszsssxxasasaxx:xssaxsxazxxxs
RIVER HILLS 0
CINNAMON
0
RAHN 5,000 15,000 15,000 3,000 38,000
RAHN ATH 0
CEDAR POND 0
CARNELIAN
0
PERIDOT PATH 15,000 18,000 5,000 2,000 40,000
W000HAVEN 10,000 25,000 5,000 40,000
BLACKHAWK 25,000 25,000 50,000
QUARRY
0
PILOT KNOB 0
HIGHVIEW 0
C. HOME 0
MOOSHINE 50,000 50,000
LEXINGTON 25,000
25,000
BURR OAKS 3,000 22,000 8,000 1,000 10,000 4,000 48,000
O'LEARY
0
FISH LAKE
0
WESCOTT STATION 0
BERRY PATCH 0
KEHNE/mcCARTHY 0
CARLSON LAKE ' 0
OAK CHASE
0
CLEARWATER
0
RAVINE 0
GOAT HILL 3,000 3,000
WALNUT HILL 0
LAKESIDE
0
EVERGREEN 2,500 2,500
RIDGECLIFF 35,000 35,000
WALDEN
0
SLATERS ACRES 0
MEADOWLANDS 0
SKY HILL 5,000 10,000 8,000 23,000
HEINE POND 12,000
SOUTH OAKS 12,000
0
WINDCREST 0
MUELLIER FARM 0
KETTLE
0
ONMANN
0
BRIDLE RIDGE
0
MDERING WALK
DOWNING 3,000 8,000 2,000 13,000
PARK SECT 21 0
PARK SECT 18 0
MANOR LAKE 5,000 25,000 3,000 33,000
NORTHVIEW/HIGH SCHOOL 0
NORTHVIEW 10,000 25,000 35,000
ATHLETIC SITE #3 200,000 125,000 50,000 45,000 20,000 440,000
THOMAS LAKE 0
PAT EAGAN 0
TRAPP FARM 18,000 18,000
CAPTAIN DODD 10,000 1,000 11,000
SERVICE 36E 80,000 80,000
TOTALS $130,000 $208,000 $47,000 $190,000 $153,000 $76,000 $44,000 $113,500 $35,000 $996,500
LOCATION ACQUISITION SITE PLAY EQUIPMENT SHELTERS UTILITY/ PARKING LANDSCAPING DESIGN/ TOTALS
YR1994 PREPERATION EQUIPMENT LIGHTING TRAILS ENGINERING
xs xsasxszsxxssszaxsszxsxssssxx-s--z-~ a a_-z--__-_-_-_s-x----__--sxas-_-s- sx-------------s----xsxxxss----_sssxsxxzssxsaxazxxsxxaxazxazxxsaxsxx
RIVER HILLS 0
CINNAMON 0
RAHN
0
RAHN ATH 0
CEDAR POND 15,000 15,000
CARNELIAN 5,000 5,000
PERIDOT PATH 0
WOODHAVEN
0
BLACKHAWK 225,000 25,000 15,000 20,000 285,000
QUARRY
0
PILOT KNOB 3,000 3,000
HIGHVIEW 3,000 3,000
C. HOME 2,500
MOOSHINE 2,500
0
LEXINGTON
0
BURR OAKS
0
O'LEARY 4,000 4,000
FISH LAKE
0
WESCOTT STATION 0
BERRY PATCH 0
KEHNE/McCARTHY 0
CARLSON LAKE 0
OAK CHASE 0
CLEARWATER
5,000 5,000
RAVINE
0
GOAT HILL 5,000 5,000
WALNUT HILL 0
LAKESIDE 0
EVERGREEN 0
RIDGECLIFF 7,500 7,500
WALDEN 80,000 80,000
SLATERS ACRES 0
MEADOWLANDS 0
SKY HILL
0
HEINE POND 18,000 18,000
SOUTH OAKS 0
WINDCREST 50,000 50,000
MUELLIER FARM 2,500
KETTLE 2,500
18,000 18,000
OHMANN 0
BRIDLE RIDGE
' 0
WAND WALK 25,000 50,000 5,000 80,000
DOWNING
0
PARK SECT 21 0
PARK SECT 18
0
MANOR LAKE 18,000 8,000 3,000 5,000 8,000 2,000 44,000
NORTHVIEW/HIGH SCHOOL 0
NORTHVIEW 18,000 18,000
ATHLETIC SITE #3 100,000 145,000 100,000 35,000 10,000 390,000
THOMAS LAKE 18,000 18,000
PAT EAGAN 0
TRAPP FARM
0
CAPTAIN DODD 2,500 2,500
Section 36e
0
TOTALS $130,000 $125,000 $18,000 $8,000 $297,000 $195,500 $155,000 $90,500 $37,000 $1,056,000
LOCATION ACQUISITION SITE PLAY EQUIPMENT SHELTERS UTILITY/ PARKING LANDSCAPING DESIGN/ TOTALS
YR1995 PREPERATION EQUIPMENT LIGHTING TRAILS ENGINERING
sxszsssssza:saxaaxaaassssasxaxzsasssasasszexsxsssxxsxsssssaxsssszssxxsxaaasssssxssxxssxxxsxsssszxxssxxszsaxsxxssaasssxszsassxazsxxzsxxsxsssssasa
RIVER HILLS 0
CINNAMON
0
RAHN
0
RAHN ATH
0
CEDAR POND 10,000
CARNELIAN 10,000
0
PERIDOT PATH 0
WOODHAVEN
0
BLACKHAWK
0
QUARRY
0
PILOT KNOB 0
HIGHVIEW
0
C. HOME 3,000 3,000 15,000 21,000
MOOSHINE 50,000 25,000 5,000 5,000 85,000
LEXINGTON
0
BURR OAKS
0
O'LEARY
0
FISH LAKE
0
WESCOTT STATION 0
BERRY PATCH
0
KEHNE/McCARTHY 0
CARLSON LAKE 0
OAK CHASE
0
CLEARWATER
0
RAVINE
0
GOAT HILL 75,000 75,000
WALNUT HILL 0
LAKESIDE
0
EVERGREEN 18,000
RIDGECLIFF 18,000
0
WALDEN 50,000 10,000 10,000 70,000
SLATERS ACRES 18,000 18,000
MEADOWLANDS 7,000 7,000
SKY HILL
0
HEINE POND
0
SOUTH OAKS
0
WINDCREST 50,000 10,000 45,000 25,000 20,000 150,000
MUELLIER FARM 20,000 5,000 20,000 5,000 5,000 55,000
KETTLE
0
OHMANN
0
BRIDLE RIDGE 0
WANDERING WALK 0
DOWNING
0
PARK SECT 21 0
PARK SECT 18 0
MANOR LAKE
0
NORTHVIEW/HIGH SCHOOL 0
NORTHVIEW
0
ATHLETIC SITE 03 35,000 45,000 165,000 18,000 263,000
THOMAS LAKE 0
PAT EAGAN
0.
TRAPP FARM
0
Capt. Dodd 0
Section 36e 0
TOTALS $0 $170,000 $56,000 $57,000 $258,000 $23,000 $115,000 $35,000 $58,000 $772,000
LOCATION ACQUISITION SITE PLAY EQUIPMENT SHELTERS UTILITY/ PARKING LANDSCAPING DESIGN/ TOTALS
yr 1996 PREPERATION EQUIPMENT LIGHTING TRAILS ENGINERING
aaaxzsxxa:s:sasssssaxssasxsszssszsassassaxzssxxasxxsxxsxxxxxxsaxsxxsxxsassassxxxaxxaaxxaxasxsxasxssxaxssxxaaxxsasxxxxaxaxxaxxsssxxxss:xaxasssxsax
RIVER HILLS 0
CINNAMON 0
RAHN 0
RAHN ATH 25,000 20,000 30,000 125,000 200,000
CEDAR POND 0
CARNELIAN 0
PERIDOT PATH 0
W00DHAVEN 15,000 15,000
BLACKHAWK 0
QUARRY 0
PILOT KNOB 0
HIGHVIEW 0
C. HOME 0
MOOSHINE 20,000 10,000 30,000
LEXINGTON 0
BURR OAKS 0
O'LEARY 0
FISH LAKE 0
WESCOTT STATION 0
BERRY PATCH 0
KEHNE/McCARTHY 100,000 100,000
O CARLSON LAKE 0
OAK CHASE 18,000 18,000
CLEARWATER 0
RAVINE 25,000 25,000
GOAT HILL 0
WALNUT HILL 0
LAKESIDE 0
EVERGREEN 0
RIDGECLIFF 0
WALDEN 20,000 20,000 22,000 3,000 10,000 3,000 78,000
SLATERS ACRES 0
MEADOWLANDS 0
SKY HILL 0
HEINE POND 0
SOUTH OAKS 0
WINDCREST 0
NUELLIER FARM 0
KETTLE 0
OHMANN 125,000 125,000
BRIDLE RIDGE n
DERING WALK 45,000 10,0 30,000 5,000 90
O Q 00 O O O O O 0 O O O O pO
g G O 0 O O
N k O ri
fm -
N In
IA
pp pp M
0 0 Q 0
O N
O
O
O
`Q N
N
O O O 0
O O O 0
0 vi
N
Q O
O
N 0
O
O
O
vO
O
0
N
r r
O 0
O O
IA I
s
V
y
00 .O-. y y
.I
N W \ y Z b~-
W J < W W u J< t p ~Tj
y y S i W y UU''W a J O =
~L ~L `O p~pp~~ p~p~~ W ~sj aii r aqa~. yam,
d d Z Z Z i I- p I- H U y
LOCATION ACQUISITION SITE PLAY EQUIPMENT SHELTERS UTILITY/ PARKING LANDSCAPING DESIGN/ TOTALS
YR 1997 PREPERATION EQUIPMENT LIGHTING TRAILS ENGINERING
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz=zzzzz=zzzzzzzz=zzzz=zzz=zzzzzzz=zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzizzzz
RIVER HILLS 25,000 25,000
CINNAMON
0
RAHN
0
RAHN ATH 125,000 5,000 5,000 135,000
CEDAR POND
0
CARNELIAN 0
PERIDOT PATH 25,000 25,000
W00DHAVEN 0
BLACKHAWK 75,000 250,000 25,000 25,000 375,000
QUARRY
0
PILOT KNOB 0
HIGHVIEW 35,000 35,000
C. HOME 35,000 35,000
MODSHINE 100,000 15,000 15,000 35,000 35,000 40,000 10,000 12,000 262,000
LEXINGTON 20,000 5,000 5,000 30,000
BURR OAKS 0
O'LEARY
0
FISH LAKE 0
WESCOTT STATION 0
BERRY PATCH 0
KEHNE HOUSE 65,000 10,000 50,000 18,000 143,000
CARLSON LAKE 0
OAK CHASE
0
CLEARWATER 25,000 2,000 27,000
RAVINE 5,000 5,000 10,000
GOAT HILL 25,000 25,000
WALNUT HILL 25,000 25,000
LAKESIDE
0
EVERGREEN
0
RIDGECLIFF 25,000 25,000
WALDEN
0
SLATERS ACRES 0
MEADOWLANDS 0
SKY HILL 0
HEINE POND 0
SOUTH OAKS 0
WINDCREST 0
MUELLIER FARM 10,000 10,000 20,000
KETTLE
0
OHMANN 65,000 65,000
BRIDLE RIDGE 0
ERING WALK
S
DDOWNING 75,000 15,000 90,000
PARK SECT 21 50,000 75,000 15,000 140,000
PARK SECT 18 50,000 50,000
Manor Lake 0
NORTHVIEW/HIGH SCHOOL 55,000 55,000
NORTHVIEW
0
ATHLETIC SITE 03 0
THOMAS LAKE 0
PAT EAGAN
0
TRAPP FARM 0
TRAILS 0
Capt. Dodd
0
Section 36e 75,000
75,000
TOTALS $100,000 $435,000 $210,000 $15,000 $350,000 $315,000 $105,000 $45,000 $97,000 1,672,000
ACQUISITION SITE PLAY EQUIPMENT SHELTERS UTILITY/ PARKING LANDSCAPING DESIGN/ TOTALS
PREPERATION EQUIPMENT LIGHTING TRAILS ENGINERING
s¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦a¦¦¦s¦a¦r¦¦¦:s¦¦ss¦ssss¦¦ss¦¦¦¦¦s¦¦¦¦¦s¦¦¦¦sss¦a¦s ¦¦¦sssa¦¦¦¦a¦s¦s¦¦sa¦¦sas¦s¦¦s¦sss¦¦p¦¦
Grand total
RIVER HILLS 0 0 25,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 25,000
CINNAMON 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
RAHN 0 0 0 5,000 15,000 15,000 0 0 3,000 38,000
RAHN ATN 0 25,000 20,000 4,000 30,000 252,000 0 5,000 5,000 341,000
CEDAR POND 0 0 0 0 0 25,000 0 0 0 25,000
CARNELIAN 0 0 0 2,000 0 0 0 5,000 0 7,000
PERIDOT PATH 0 0 25,000 15,000 0 0 18,000 5,000 2,000 65,000
WOODHAVEN 0 0 15,000 10,000 25,000 5,000 0 0 0 55,000
BLACKHAWK 0 255,000 25,000 50,000 475,000 70,000 150,000 90,000 65,000 1,180,000
QUARRY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PILOT KNOB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,000 0 3,000
HIGNVIEW 0 0 35,000 0 0 0 0 3,000 0 38,000
C. NONE 0 0 13,000 0 0 5,500 15,000 0 0 33,500
MOONSHINE 50,000 150,000 35,000 25,000 35,000 35,000 65,000 15,000 17,000 427,000
LEXINGTON 0 20,000 0 0 25,000 0 0 5,000 5,000 55,000
BURR OAKS 0 3,000 22,000 8,000 0 0 1,000 10,000 4,000 48,000
O'LEARY 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4,000 0 4,000
FISH LAKE 0 10,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10,000
WESCOTT STATION 0 0 18,000 20,000 0 0 0 20,000 2,000 60,000
BERRY PATCH 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
KEHNE HOUSE 0 0 0 0 165,000 10,000 50,000 0 18,000 243,000
_S CARLSON LAKE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
OAK CHASE 0 0 18,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 18,000
CLEARWATER 0 0 0 0 0 25,000 0 5,000 2,000 32,000
RAVINE 0 5,000 0 0 0 0 30,000 0 0 35,000
GOAT HILL 0 0 25,000 8,000 75,000 3,000 0 5,000 0 116,000
WALNUT HILL 0 0 25,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 25,000
LAKESIDE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
EVERGREEN 0 0 18,000 0 0 0 0 2,500 0 20,500
RIDGECLIFF 0 0 25,000 0 35,000 0 0 7,500 0 67,500
WALDEN 80,000 50,000 20,000 20,000 22,000 3,000 10,000 10,000 13,000 228,000
SLATERS ACRES 0 0 0 0 18,000 0 0 0 0 18,000
MEADOWLANDS 0 0 0 7,000 0 0 0 0 0 7,000
SKY HILL 0 0 0 5,000 10,000 2,000 0 8,000 0 25,000
HEINE POND 0 0 0 12,000 18,000 0 0 0 0 30,000
SOUTH OAKS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
WINDCREST 50,000 50,000 0 0 0 10,000 45,000 25,000 20,000 200,000
MUELLIER FARM 0 30,000 0 5,000 0 2,500 30,000 5,000 5,000 77,500
KETTLE 0 0 0 0 18,000 0 0 0 0 18,000
OHNANN 0 0 0 0 0 190,000 0 0 0 190,000
BRIDLE RIDGE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
"'""ERING WALK 0 70,000 0 10,000 0 0 80,000 5,000 5,000 170,000
ING 0 75,000 0 0 3,000 0 10,000 17,000 105,
raRK SECT 21 100,000 75,000 0 0 0 0 0 0 15,000 190,
pt In
Oa Q O O Q O Q O Q Q O p N
g g g g 8 W_
•
W
o Q o o Q Q Q o Q Q o Q~
05 205NN 205205 'rj$
O Q O O Q O Q O O O O p f J V
pa pg g ppg, ~ j
r O
O
88 o
8 8 8 8 8
O O O O O O 8 O
$
M N N~ ~ r N fV y
M P J i7
r r
~ - r 7 J M
p W
o`o 0 0 0 0 0 0 1000
4 cr Mf g ~ N
• H
O Q O Q Q O O O~ Q O O~i_
gO Ogg A M M p8 js*
~ ~ Of o
Ogg 0 0 8 0 0 0$ O S
O O O
4 Y1 M1
M r r 1ff j
W
O fjt a O O Q O cc
Q ~ _ t N
N
252Soooooooo~ Q
S M
to
i
MI M
W W_ V ~ CC O
N J H H t
N
s
f_ r H ! ~ GC 4 V `t
0 t ?d FV N O
MEMO TO: EAGAN ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION, AND NATURAL
RESOURCES COMMISSION
KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
FROM: JOHN K. VONDELINDE, SUPERINTENDENT OF PARKS
DATE: OCTOBER 22, 1992
SUBJECT: ISTEA GRANT FUNDING FOR MUNICIPAL TRAILS EXPANSION
On the following pages is a copy of a memorandum that was presented to the Eagan City
Council on September 20, 1992. The memorandum requested authorization of the Council
to proceed with an application to the Metropolitan Council for federal grant funding for the
expansion of certain trailways within the City of Eagan. As noted in the report, the City will
be seeking funds under the Federal Intermodal Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) for
the construction of new trails in four different geographic locations in the community. More
specifically, these trails would provide access to the Minnesota River Valley, access to the
Town Center area, trails along Highway 149 connecting to the proposed YMCA site, and
a trails connection between Walnut Hill and Trapp Farm Parks. The total project cost is
estimated at $478,700 of which 80% would be cost shared through the Federal ISTEA
Grant.
Unfortunately, there was not adequate time to bring this item before the APRNRC and still
meet the grant submittal deadline of November 2nd. Out of courtesy to the Commission,
though, we would still like to have your review and input on the proposed application as
well as the concept of amending the City's trails system plan to include the trails along
Highway 149 and Town Center Drive as depicted on the enclosed maps.
Since the City Council has already given their approval for submission of the application and
authorized the corresponding changes to the trail system plan, it would be appropriate for
the Co 'ssion to entertain a motion to retroactively ratify the recommendations contained
within t rep rt.
Jo yin X. onDeLinde
S erintendent of Parks
JKV/cm
Attachment
cc: Tom Hedges, City Administrator
Tom Colbert, Director of Public Works
30wp:advparks.296
MEMO TO: EAGAN CITY COUNCIL
TOM HEDGES, CITY ADMINISTRATOR
FROM: TOM COLBERT, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
JOHN VONDELINDE, SUPERINTENDENT OF PARKS
DATE: OCTOBER 14, 1992
SUBJECT: ISTEA GRANT FUNDING FOR MUNICIPAL TRAILS EXPANSION
The purpose of this memorandum is to request council authorization to submit an application
to the Metropolitan Council, to secure matching federal funds for the expansion of City
walkway and biking trails. Additionally, this memorandum requests minor modifications to the
City's Trails System Guide Plan to ensure grant eligibility for all of the new trail segments
proposed.
BACKGROUND
In 1991, the United States Congress passed the Federal Intermodel Transportation Efficiency
Act, also known as "ISTEA". Under this act, Federal Surface Transportation Funds are being
made available to local units of government for bikeway and walkway development projects.
The Metropolitan Council has been assigned responsibility for administrating ISTEA grant
funds in the seven-county metro area. A total of $1.5 million is currently available to local
units of government.
Facilities eligible to receive matching funds include bicycle "lanes", paths for bicyclists or
pedestrians, traffic control devices, shelters and parking facilities for bicycles. All funded
facilities must be of a permanent nature and maintained in perpetuity by the grant applicant.
Costs not eligible for grant funding include right-of-way acquisition costs, engineering and
design services, drainage projects, fences and landscaping. Ordinary sidewalk construction is
also not eligible.
Under the program ranking criteria, projects which address the following needs will be assigned
a priority ranking:
• Provide access to activity centers (shopping center, education complex, etc.)
• Implement a locally adopted bike or pedestrian plan
• Correct known or potential safety hazards
• Provide an interface with other transportation modes
• Form a continuous system of similar trails
• Remove or eliminate natural or manmade barriers to biking or walking
• Provide a travel alternative on or parallel to congested roads or highways
The ISTEA program offers a very favorable, 80% federal cost share against a 20% local match
for all eligible costs under the project. The only other financial requirement is that the total
project cost must exceed $25,000, but be less than $500,000 to be eligible. Applications must be
received by the Metropolitan Council no later than November 2, 1992; construction contracts
must be awarded no later than December 31, 1993.
GRANT PROJECT PROPOSAL
Staff is proposing that the City's ISTEA application be broken into four major components.
Each of these components addresses individual pedestrian transportation needs within different
geographical locations of the community.
1) Fort Snelling State Park Trail Access
The City was recently informed that the Department of Natural Resources will be
installing a permanent multi-purpose trail corridor along the Minnesota River (on the
Eagan side) beginning in 1993. This will be part of the State/Federal Trail which
will extend from Fort Snelling and southerly along the Minnesota River Valley.
Under the ISTEA program, the City proposes to provide a pedestrian link between
the City's trails system and the DNR's new park trail corridor. As the Council knows,
this is a project which the City has envisioned for many years. It would provide a
unique opportunity for the recreating public to gain direct access to the pristine
Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge and State trail. The project would also
provide "missing" trail segments within several neighborhood areas providing residents
with convenient trails access into the Minnesota Valley (see Exhibit A).
The total estimated cost of developing this component of the grant project is
$140,000. Steep side slopes in certain areas may also require the installation of
retaining walls prior to the construction of a trail along Beau-D-Rue Drive. In
addition, the City may need to acquire additional trail easement along sections of
Beau-D-Rue and Nichols Roads. The anticipated costs of acquiring these easements
is in the range of $7,000.
2) Town Centre Area Access
This component of the project proposes the installation of a hard surface trail along
Town Centre Drive between Duckwood Drive and Lexington Avenue. This new trail
would provide a safe and convenient pedestrian access route for employees within the
Town Centre area as well as residents from surrounding neighborhoods. The
addition of a trail along the south side of Duckwood Drive between Denmark
Avenue and Lexington Avenue would also enhance accessibility for bicyclists and
pedestrians from the Lexington Place, St. Francis Woods and Duckwood Trail
developments. (See Exhibit B)
`11.
The total costs for implementing this component of the project is estimated at
$154,500. This represents a somewhat higher than the average trail construction cost
due to the probable need for easements, retaining wall construction, grading and
installation of curb cuts along the Town Centre Drive segment. Retaining walls are
considered an eligible facility, however, and could be cost-shared on an 80/20 basis.
3) Highway 149/YMCA Access
This component proposes the installation of a trailway on the west side of State
Highway 149 between Westcott Road and Oppenheimer Drive and on the east side
of 149 between the Burr Oak Hills development and Oppenheimer Drive. In
addition, short segments of trail would be added to the north and south sides of
Westcott Road between Dodd Road and Highway 149 - completing the existing
trailway system along Westcott Road. The primary goal in adding these trail
segments would be to provide direct pedestrian access to the proposed YMCA
facility, enhance leisure recreation opportunities for employees of local businesses,
and to expand trail opportunities for the general public (Exhibit C).
The construction of a trail along Highway 149 would require a long-term lease or
right-of-way agreement from the Minnesota Department of Transportation with on-
going trails maintenance costs to be assumed by the City. With regard to a trails link
between Yankee Doodle Road and the 149 trail, it is assumed that Dakota County
will be letting bids for the improvement of Yankee Doodle Road beginning in 1994.
That construction will likely include the installation of trailways on both sides of the
County Highway and, for that reason, would not be included under the City's ISTEA
Grants Proposal.
The total cost for completing this component is estimated at $122,000. At this point,
it does not appear that any significant grading or retaining wall work would be
necessary to complete these trails.
4) Walnut Hill to Trapp Farm Park Trails Connection
This component of the grant would request funding for the installation of a
bituminous trails connection between Walnut Hill Park and Trapp Farm Park. This
trails link has long been identified in the comprehensive park system's guide plan and
would essentially complete the development of a hard surface trail under the NSP
Highline Corridor between Rahn Park and Dodd Road. The trail would serve to
enhance usership between these two popular City parks, as well as providing direct
pedestrian links into the Lexington Square neighborhood (Exhibit D).
Total construction costs are estimated at $45,200. Since the City already owns a 200-
foot wide corridor through this area no additional easements would be required.
b .
PROJECT FINANCING
A preliminary cost estimate for the ISTEA Grant Proposal is included in attached Exhibit E. A
breakout of costs is provided for each of the components included within the project. As noted
under the cost summary, the total trails expansion costs is estimated at $478,700. Of this,
$466,700 is eligible for federal ISTEA cost sharing. Taking this into account, the City's share of
grant eligible costs would be $93,340. In addition, the City would need to assume costs for
associated trails easements which are roughly estimated at $12,000. The City's financial
obligation for the entire project would be in the range of $100,000. In other words, for every $1
invested by the City, approximately $3.4 would be returned in the form of federal grant funds.
In terms of generating the City's matching portion, approximately $9,000 would be taken from
the Park Site Fund - for financing the Highline Trail improvements. The balance of the City's
cost sharing - about $96,300 - would be generated through the City's Trails Dedication Account.
In both cases, the opportunity exists to reduce the City's "cash" obligation by using City forces in
the construction or installation of the trails and/or retaining walls. Conceivably, City equipment
and maintenance personnel could assist with placement and compaction of the aggregate base,
paving operations and site restoration. Other work crews, such as the County's Sentencing to
Service Program or Twin Cities Tree Trust could also be a viable source for constructing
concrete or wood retaining wall systems. Therefore, the City's actual out-of-pocket expense
could be considerably less than the $100,000 matching portion.
TRAILS PLAN AMENDMENT
As noted earlier, in order to be eligible for funding, any trails identified within the City's grant
proposal must be included on an overall trails systems guide plan. As a result, it would be
necessary to add those trail sections along State Highway 149 and Town Centre Drive to the
existing Trail Systems Plan. All of the other trail segments included within the grant proposal
are already identified on the existing systems plan.
FOR COUNCIL ACTION
Staff is requesting that the City Council approve, deny or modify an application to the
Metropolitan Council for Federal cost sharing of trail expansion under the ISTEA Program and
that approval be given to modify the existing Trail Systems Plan to include the development of
trails along State Highway 149 and Town Centre Drive as identified in this report.
JKV/sb
Attachments
30wp:istea.288
(Exhibit E)
PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE
FOR
"ISTEA" GRANT PROPOSAL
1992
1. Minnesota River Valley Access
A. Nichols Rd. Trail (Rahn Park)
• 600 lin. ft. @ $15.00 = $ 9,000
Sub-total = $ 9,000
B. Beau-d-Rue Drive Trail
• 3,900 lin. ft. @ $15.00 = 58,500
• Retaining Walls/Grading = 20,000
• Trail Easements = 5.000
Sub-total = $ 83,500
C. Nichols Rd. Trail (DNR link)
• 3,500 lin. ft. @ $15.00 = 52,500
• Trail Easements = 2.000
Sub-total = $ 54,500
Total Costs = $147.000
2. Town Centre Trails Access
A. Town Centre Drive (Duckwood to Denmark)
• 2,500 lin. ft. @ $15.00 = $ 37,500
• Retaining Walls/Grading = 30,000
• Trail Easements = 000
Sub-total = $ 72,500
B. Town Centre Drive (Yankee Doodle to Lexington Ave.)
• 3,000 lin. ft. @ $12.00 = $ 36,000
• Retaining Walls/Grading = 10,000
Sub-total = $ 46,000
C. Duckwood Drive (Denmark To Lexington Ave.)
• 3,000 lin. ft. @ $12.00 = $ 36,000
Sub-total = $ 36,000
Total Costs = $154.500
3. State Highway 149 Trail
A. S.H. 149 Trail (Wescott Rd. to Rolling Hills Dr.)
• 8,100 lin. ft. @ $15.00 = $121,500
• Trails easement (agreement
w/State) = N/C
Sub-total = $121,500
B. Wescott Rd. Trails (Dodd Rd. to 149)
• 700lin. ft. @ $15.00 = $10.500
Sub-total = $ 10,500
Total Costs = $132.000
4. Highline Trail Connection
A. Walnut Hill Park to trapp Farm Park
• 2,100 lin. ft. @ $12.00 = $ 25,200
• Retaining walls/grading = 20.000
Total Costs = $ 45.200
Costs Summary
Total Trails Expansion Costs = $478,700
Grant Eligible Costs = 466,700
• Federal ISTEA Cost Sharing
@ 80% = 373,360
• City Share @ 20% = 93,340
Non-eligible Costs (City assumes) = 12,000
Total City Expenses = 105,340
City Share Financing
Park Site Fund (Highline Trail) = 9,040
Trails Dedication Account (All others) = 96,300
Total City Cost Sharing = $ 10, .33 0
30wp:erhibite
MEMORANDUM
TO: ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES
,,II COMMISSION
)CJ/FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS AND RECREATION
DATE: OCTOBER 29, 1992
RE: PARK SYSTEMS PLAN UPDATING
Background
The Advisory Commission recently held a workshop session in which staff reviewed the
values and benefits of the Park Systems Plan; as well as emerging shortcomings of a plan
that is rapidly becoming outdated because of the rapid growth and development within the
community and Eagan's parks.
Issue
The issue before the Advisory Parks, Recreation and Natural Resource Commission is
whether or not a recommendation to the City Council should be made for the city to
develop a new Park Systems Plan which would update necessary components of the existing
plan; and to expand upon areas not previously developed.
For Discussion
The development of a Park Systems Plan, if it is to become an effective document,
encompasses the process of analyzing, discussing and then setting various goals, policies and
objectives. Systems plans are proactive to the needs of the community in the near term and
in the future. While the current systems plan is seriously outdated because of the
community's growth, many portions of it are still relevant today. A review and
reconfirmation of those goals, policies and objectives developed several years ago, which are
still valid, is important. Other policies and procedures may be seen as being in conflict with
the future direction or "wide of the mark" from that what is now envisioned as being more
important , effective and efficient in the park system.
The development of a park system is not without its cost. In addition to the cost of a
consultant for their services, the additional time commitments of the Parks and Recreation
staff-which might otherwise be directed towards parks development, improvement or better
management techniques-there is also the time commitment of the Advisory Commission as
they deal with an additional workload to their schedule.
The cost range for a Park Systems Plan could be from $40,000.00 to $50,000.00, but this is
just a projection. A firm number can be developed once a scope of services is prepared.
That scope of services is now envisioned to occur after the City Council has indicated their
desire to move ahead with a new Park Systems Plan.
For Commission Action
To recommend to the City Council that a major revision to the existing Park Systems Plan
be undertaken and that the financing for this plan come from the park site development
fund. Further, that the Commission, in seeking approval to develop a systems plan,
recognizes the need for the Commission to develop a scope of services for the consultant
before Requests For Proposals are solicited.
KV/dj
DIAPRNRPKS.MEM
y
TO: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR
PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
FROM: RICH BRASCH
WATER RESOURCES COORDINATOR
RE: BLACKHAWK PARK CONSTRUCTION MODIFICATIONS TO ENHANCE
MANAGEMENT OF BLACKHAWK LAKE.
DATE: OCTOBER 29, 1992
As we discussed and agreed on Tuesday, Steve Sullivan and I will
pursue slight grading modifications on either side of the south
boardwalk abutment to provide accesses to both the east and west
basins of the lake for weed harvestors and other aquatic management
equipment. As you'll recall, we have discussed these options in
the past but wanted to postpone a decision on any final
modifications until after we developed a better feel for the layout
of the site.
By creating these access areas, we provide for ourselves more
options to implement in-lake management measures including, but not
limited to, vegetative management to remove nutrients and chemical
nutrient inactivation. In addition, we limit the disturbance
necessary to create these features to one area immediately around
the boardwalk. The estimated cost of the work is not expected to
exceed $4,000 and would be covered by ear-marked water quality
improvement funds.
Please let me know if you have any questions or need more
information. Thanks.
Rich Brasch
Water Resources Coordinator
cc. Steve Sullivan
John VonDeLinde
ADVISORY PARKS, RECREATION & NATURAL RESOURCE COMMISSION
DEPARTMENT HAPPENINGS
1.*« The attempt to provide the opportunity to create relationships between children at Northview Elementary and Eagan
Seniors is progressing. The school has extended an invitation to the Eagan Seniors Group to a luncheon on November
10. Residents from the new senior housing are included. Interested seniors will have the opportunity to sign up for
various time commitments and alternate activities following the lunch. City staff involvement will virtually end at that
point except for calling on the youth for musical entertainment from time to time.
2.*,, The first Eagan Seniors' regular meeting to be held at the senior housing community room will occur on November
24.
3.*K Minnesota Men's Bandy has approached the city to schedule games on the Lexington/Diffley bandy rink. Working
around the Department's Bandy School, it appears that the request can be handled. Some revenue will be generated
for the city.
4.*< Beginning January 1, the city's new cash management system through LOGIS will streamline the department's
handling of registration receipts. Less staff time will be spent reconciling accounts as the system will do that.
5.*« The Dakota Civic Theatre's first production FANTASTICS is in rehearsal for its November 13 opening. Renovations
in the theatre have begin...the risers for seating are being built. Donated time and materials are important to the
theatre at this juncture of its development.
6.*<< NYSCA Coaches' Clinics for ice ringette will be held on Saturday November 7, 1992. This program requires NYSCA
certification of its coaches. The numbers are small, only 14 coaches. Perhaps some of the basketball coaches who
missed the October clinics will augment the group.
7.*« Thirty (30) youth participated in the Babysitting/Latchkey clinic on October 24. The Women's Fire Auxiliary
coordinates the speakers and has been instrumental in developing the curriculum. The latchkey portion has been
incorporated just in the last year.
8.*« All Eagan Athletic Association fall programs have completed their seasons on city facilities. The soccer in-house
program is concerned about the scarcity of knowledgeable coaches. The quality of the program is influenced by this
weakness. The department is not in a position to assist other than providing a library of video tapes which has been
done.
9.*« A revised edition of the department's trails brochure is about ready to go to the printer. All of the work has been
done in-house.
10.*« Staff will be attending the MRPA State Conference in Rochester November 18-20. The South of the River
Communities will showcase the "Who Done It?" Volksmarch at the Hall of Ideas.
11.* < Recreation staff will be absorbed in planning winter programs for the next several weeks. The newsletter write-ups
are but the first step!
12.*« The Tiny Tots program went on a field trip to the Dodge Nature Center Apple Orchard on October 26 and 27
followed by a picnic at Trapp Farm Park. The children learned about how a tree grows and produces apples. They
were able to pick an apple and watch how apple cider is made and then taste the fresh apple cider. Of course, apple
tasting occurred all along the tour. The highlight for many was riding the school bus. Many of the adult chaperones
had not been to Trapp Farm before and commented on what a beautiful park it is.
13.*« Eagan Parks and Recreation Department sponsored a rollerskating and pizza party trip on October 16. A day of
games and pizza at Circus followed by an afternoon of rollerskating at Skateville provided students a fun time on their
day off from school.
14.*« The volleyball leagues are well under way. Many teams are in the running for first and second places in the various
leagues so competition is heating up.
15.*« Winter programs are in the planning stages. Volunteers are needed for the North Pole Calling program which i
be held from 6:00 - 8:00 p.m. on December 9 and 10, 1992. This program is always a fun way to share your holid -
spirit with the youth of Eagan.
16.*« Wednesday and Thursday 5-man Basketball Leagues are filled and begin play November 11 and 12. Wednesday 3-
Man Basketball is also filled and begins play November 11. We have turned away approximately eight 5-man teams
and six 3-man teams. We are limited to the gym space available within area schools. Games are at Dakota Hills
Middle School and elementary gyms.
17.*« Seven-Man Touch Football ended play October 28. Seven teams competed at Goat Hill Park in the baseball outfield.
Hoffman Development took first place honors.
18.*« Applications are coming in for Winter Recreation Leaders. Interviews will take place November 12 through
December 7. Approximately 30 positions are available, staffing the twelve warming shelters at the skating and tubing
sites. Many more applications are needed.
19.*« The Halloween Spook Trail was held Friday, October 30, at 'Thomas Lake Park. More than 700 youth and 300
parents hiked through the haunted woods around the pavilion. This was the biggest and best trail ever. Decent
weather along with moving the event off of Halloween helped contribute to the large numbers. The Eagan Jaycees
donated money and volunteers to the trail. Ten community members also volunteered.
20.*« The Forestry Division had a very productive month in October. Work was completed on the planting of replacement
trees in city parks. Staff also placed protective tree wrap on more than 3,000 trees, mulched shrub beds and trees
in most of the parks, and split over four cords of firewood in preparation for the winter season.
21.*K Work continued on upgrades to the high school baseball field under a joint project between the city and school district
staff. A new infield was cut, dugouts and warning tracks installed, and a wood construction fence was completed on
most of the outfield. The Dakota Electric Association and County Sentencing to Service programs assisted in tb'
project.
22.*« A concrete sidewalk was installed at Clearwater Park joining the parking lot to the existing park shelter building. A
new park bench was also installed at Thomas Lake Park replacing one that had been damaged during the fall
sealcoating operation.
23.*« Concrete slabs were poured for the bleachers on Field #7 at Northview Park. This now completes the installation
of 18 bleacher pads at the three athletic sites during the past two years.
24.*« Two new dugouts were completed at the Rahn Athletic major league field in early October. Scott Eppen and Gary
Skogstad are credited with doing an excellent job on this project.
25.*« Work got under way on the construction of a new sun shelter at Northview Park. The shelter will be located between
the pond and park playground. At the preparation of this "HAPPENINGS" the subgrade preparation was completed
and concrete columns were being poured. Construction of the floor and roof system will follow. It is hoped that this
project can be completed prior to the winter season.
26.*« A third lighting pole was installed on the sledding hill at Trapp Farm Park. This pole, which is located at the bottom
of the hill, will help to illuminate the site and provide for a safer sledding experience.
27.*« In October the transition into the winter maintenance program got under way. Tennis nets were removed from all
of the neighborhood fields with the exception of Northview, Sky Hill and Rahn Parks. Preparations were made for
the sledding season with the mowing and installation of fence at the Trapp Farm sledding facility. All of the city's
athletic field irrigation systems were blown out and seasonal shelter buildings winterized. Testing, aiming and lamp
replacement on all hockey and skating rink sites was also conducted. Portable docks were removed at Trapp Farm,
Thomas Lake, and Fish Lake Parks. Clearwater Parks and the Lexington/Diffley site were graded for pleasure rink
flooding this coming winter.
28.* < Turf management activities continued through the month of October. These included late season fertilization of
turf areas, seeding of soccer fields sites, and aerification and fertilization of several athletic fields.
29.*« In an effort to enhance public safety and to reduce the city's risk exposure, an additional lower railing was added to
the fishing pier at Fish Lake Park and to the retaining wall railing at South Oaks Park.
30.*« A new course of timbers were added to the playgrounds at Sky Hill and Quarry Parks to better contain the surface
absorption material.
31.*« Superintendent of Parks John VonDeLinde has been appointed to the State's Outdoor Recreation Planning Advisory
Commission. This group of professional and lay people from throughout the state will be overseeing development
of the 1995-1999 State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan. This plan is important to local governments not
only from the perspective of affecting legislative issues on recreation, but in establishing the ranking criteria for the
outdoor recreation grants program to counties and municipalities. John will serve in this capacity until the plan is
completed in late 1993.
*City Council - November 5, 1992 «Commission - November 5, 1992
commission/happen.nov
X11.
SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY PLAT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
TOWN CENTRE 70 13TH ADDITION
APPLICANT: MCDONALD'S CORPORATION
LOCATION: NW 1/4 SECTION 15
EXISTING ZONING: CSC (COMMUNITY SHOPPING CENTER)
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: OCTOBER 27, 1992
DATE OF REPORT: OCTOBER 19, 1992
COMPILED BY: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
APPLICATION SUMMARY: Separate applications have been submitted requesting. a
Preliminary Plat of one approximate .84 acre lot and one Outlot and a Conditional Use
Permit to allow a Class II restaurant in a CSC (Community Shopping Center) district along
the west side of Town Centre Drive in the NW 1/4 of Section 15.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS: The Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW)
prepared for the Town Centre 70th Addition (June 1986) analyzed approximately 530,000
sq. ft. of miscellaneous retail commercial/other commercial uses. Approximately 332,066 sq.
ft. have been built to date. The proposed 2,000 sq. ft. Class II restaurant brings the total
built and proposed square footage for Town Centre 70 to 347,666 sq. ft. As such, the
proposed development is within the allotted square footage analyzed in the E.A.W.
Indirect Source Permit #86-11 (September 1988) for Town Centre 70 allows 3,485 parking
spaces. Approximately 2,146 parking spaces have been developed to date. There have been
82 spaces approved with Town Centre 70 14th Addition and this proposal contains 36, for
a total of 2,264 spaces. As such, the proposed number of parking spaces is within the
allowed limit of the ISP.
EXISTING CONDITIONS: The proposed Town Centre 70 13th Addition is located west
of Town Centre Drive, north of Town Centre 70 10th Addition Mermaid Car Wash, east of
I-35E, and south of a vacant unplatted parcel. The zoning surrounding the proposed plat
is CSC and the Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan designates this area as CSC which is
consistent with that plan. -
SITE PLAN: The site plan shows a 3,526 sq. ft. McDonald's restaurant on a 36,538 (.84
acre) lot. McDonald's has four types (sizes) of buildings. This is one of their ' smaller
restaurants, seating 75. The single story, brick building has a drive-thru located on the south
side. A drive-thru is planned for this location implementing a face-to-face concept where
patrons give their menu selections directly to an employee and not at a menu board. Fred
l3
Reynolds, McDonald's Corporation, represented to staff they anticipate approximately 55-
58% of the business at this site will come from the drive-thru.
Thirty-six parking spaces have been provided; all are 10' x 20' with the exception of the two
handicap spaces which are 8' x 20'. The number and size of parking spaces meets City
requirements.
As proposed, the detached trash enclosure located in the NW corner of the site is not
consistent with established City standards whereby the trash/recycling enclosure is located
within the building or attached to the building and made of the same building materials.
The pylon sign location is in conformance with the Town Centre Pylon Sign Agreement and
will not exceed 125 sq. ft. or 27' in height. Four directional signs indicating entrances and
exits are located on each side of the two access points. Building signage is shown on the
facia (displaying "McDonald's") on the east side of the building and window logos with the
golden arches and the word "McDonald's" on the north and south side. No building signage
is proposed for the west side of the building facing I-35E.
The site is served by two access points along Town Centre Drive and the parking wraps
around the building. It is the intention of the applicant for the site to function with one-way
traffic.
The entrance for the site would be the 24' wide north access point and exiting would occur
from the south 34' access point. The drive aisle on the west and south sides range from 18'-
23 respectively, and do not meet the City's standard of 24'. The applicant was made aware
of the City's requirement at the development review committee meeting and chose not to
submit revised plans showing the drive aisle in conformance.
The landscaping plan does not show any landscaping along the south property line. Staff
is recommending evergreens be placed alternately between the deciduous trees on the south
property line. The north property line is also lacking adequate landscaping and shall be
required to provide landscaping. The final landscaping plan shall be submitted on a grading
plan showing the continuous berming along I-35E.
This plat was submitted for review by the City's Traffic Consultants, Short, Elliott,
Hendrickson. The following pages describe their review.
MEMORANDUM
A
IWNEERS ¦ ARCHITECTS • PLANNERS 3535 VADNAIS CENTER DRIVE, ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA 55110 612 490-2000
TO: Mr. Jim Sturm, City of Eagan
FROM: Cindy Gray, AICP, Transportation Planner
DATE: October 19, 1992
RE: Eagan, Minnesota -
McDonalds Town Center Drive
SEH File No. 89040
As you requested, we have reviewed the proposed site plan for the McDonalds fast food
restaurant along Town Center Drive in Eagan. The purpose of our review is to identify
any transportation concerns related to on-site circulation, drive-thru design, parking,
direct access, and driveway location and design. The concerns are listed below.
Drive-thru Design
• Regardless of where the customers park on the site, they must walk between
vehicles parked in the drive-thru lane to get to a building entrance. This is not a
desirable situation, especially in a restaurant where many of the customers are
families with small children. Also, patrons using the handicap parking spaces will
need to walk between the queued vehicles in the drive-thru during peak times.
• During the peak hours of the restaurant, it would not be unusual to see four to six
cars queued behind the vehicle parked at the menu board. The vehicles at the end
of the line will end up waiting in the entry driveway itself. This will leave only
approximately 12 feet available for other drivers to pull into the site enroute to the
parking area. If drivers choose to use the drive-thru lane regardless of the fact that
it is queued as far as the driveway, they may choose to wait in the street or partially
in the driveway. This could block the flow of traffic on Town Center Drive.
• The fourth vehicle stacked behind the menu board will block access to and from
the handicap parking spaces.
Parking
• The paved area behind the McDonalds building is approximately 48 feet. Ten to 12
feet of this space will be frequently be occupied by drivers at the menu board. This
leaves approximately 36 to 38 feet available for the parking spaces and drive aisle.
In order to function smoothly, this area generally needs to be approximately 42 to
45 feet wide, comprised of 20-foot parking spaces and a 22- to 25-foot drive aisle.
Larger vehicles, such as vans and longer automobiles and pickups, will not be able
to pull into or back out of the spaces along the rear of the site when there is a
vehicle at the menu board. When the drive-thru is not being used, the employees
inside the building may frequently be signaled that there is someone sitting at the
SHORT ELLIOTT ST. PAUL, CHIPPEWA FALLS,
HENDRICKSON INC. MINNESOTA WISCONSIN
Mr. Jim Sturm
October 19,1992
Page 2
menu board because drivers pulling out of these parking spaces will drive over the
detector loop at the menu board.
• It will be somewhat difficult for vehicles parked along the north side of the site to
see behind them when pulling out of their parking spaces due to the angle of the
parking row.
Access
• Drivers frequently disregard on-site signage regarding one-way driveways. This is
cause for concern at the north driveway where vehicles stacked behind the menu
board could easily extend out to the driveway throat. Under these circumstances,
a driver exiting the site at this location would be forced into using the north
(inbound) side of the driveway. This could temporarily block vehicles on Town
Center Drive from entering the site.
• Over half of the radius for the north driveway extends beyond the property line.
This seems inappropriate as it will have impact on the adjacent site.
• Optimally the southerly driveway should be placed a greater distance from the
driveway to the Mermaid Car Wash (such as 50 feet). This would help avoid
confusion. Drivers exiting the site may have a difficult time anticipating the
movements of vehicles in the Mermaid Car Wash driveway. Furthermore, drivers
exiting the site will have difficulty anticipating whether or not cars signalling a
turn are planning to enter the McDonalds driveway or the Mermaid Car Wash
driveway.
Truck Circulation
• If semi-truck deliveries occur during restaurant hours when the parking spaces
and the drive-thru are occupied, it will be extremely difficult for the truck to
maneuver around the site. The truck would either need to back into or out of the
site rather than ciruclating around the building. Also, truck deliveries made during
restaurant hours would block access to and from parking spaces.
CRG:Ilc
j (O•
GRADING/DRAINAGE/EROSION CONTROL: The existing terrain of the site is fairly flat
with no trees. A limited amount of grading will be needed to prepare this site for
development. The preliminary grading plan shows construction of a berm along the westerly
property line to provide a buffer to Interstate 35E. The maximum cuts on this site are 2',
and the maximum fills are 3'. The preliminary drainage plan shows extending a public
storm sewer system that has been stubbed from the Mermaid Carwash site through this
development. The storm sewer will also be extended into the proposed parking lot to drain
this site. This development shall provide a storm sewer stub to the north property line to
serve the future development on Outlot A of Town Centre 70 13th Addition. The drainage
of the proposed parking lot shall slope to the proposed concrete curb and gutter and then
to the proposed storm sewer. The drainage to the concrete curb and gutter will eliminate
bituminous swales in the proposed parking lot. The storm sewer system that will drain this
site eventually drains to Pond JP-66 which is a pond on the City's Comprehensive Storm
Water Management Plan. Pond JP-66 is a sedimentation basin located in the northwest
corner of Denmark Avenue and Duckwood Drive.
The development will be responsible for installing and maintaining erosion control measures
in accordance with the City's Erosion/Sediment Control Manual Standards.
WATER QUALITY: This proposed development is located in Drainage Basin J and will
generate runoff that will discharge to Pond JP-66, a small sediment basin northwest of the
intersection of Duckwood and Denmark Avenues. JP-66 in turn discharges to Fish Lake,
a Class I direct contact recreation lake.
Because the site is too small to accommodate an on-site detention pond and there are other
opportunities down-drainage to treat the water before it reaches Fish Lake, a water quality
cash dedication in lieu of on-site ponding will be recommended. The amount of the cash
dedication is estimated at approximately $8,100 and will cover only the .84 acres of Lot 1,
Block 1. Water quality requirements for Outlot A will be established when that parcel is
platted for development at a future date.
There are no wetlands protection issues associated with this development.
These recommendations are subject to approval by the Advisory Parks, Recreation, and
Natural Resources Commission at its November meeting.
UTILITIES: Sanitary sewer with sufficient depth and capacity is readily available to serve
this site from Town Centre Drive. The preliminary utility plan shows constructing a 6"
sewer service line out to the existing 8" line in Town Centre Drive. The sewer connection
will require the removal and replacement of Town Centre Drive. The 6" service line shall
enter the manhole in Town Centre Drive at the bottom of the manhole, or the developer
shall provide an outside drop for the 6" line to connect to the new manhole.
Water main of sufficient pressure and capacity is readily available to serve this site from an
existing 8" water main in Town Centre Drive. The water main layout for this site shall
provide for a 4" or 6" DIP water line rather than a 2" copper line as shown on the
preliminary utility plan. The 4" or 6" water line shall connect to the existing hydrant located
along the west edge of Town Centre Drive or to the existing 8" water main in Town Centre
Drive. An existing hydrant located in the center of the site on the west side of Town Centre
Drive shall provide adequate fire protection to this development.
STREETS/ACCESS/CIRCULATION: Street access for the proposed development will be
provided from Town Centre Drive which runs along the east property line of this site. The
preliminary site plans shows two driveway accesses to be constructed out onto Town Centre
Drive. The centerline of the south driveway access will be located 80' north of the existing
driveway opening that serves the Mermaid Car Wash development to the south and the
WalMart development to the east. The north driveway access to this development will be
110' south of the existing driveway opening that serves the Town Centre shopping center and
Dougherty's restaurant.
As shown on the preliminary site plan, the development shall provide concrete aprons for
the driveway openings onto Town Centre Drive. The proposed parking lot shall be
constructed with concrete curb and gutter and bituminous surfacing.
RIGHT-OF-WAY/EASEMENTS/PERMITS: This development will be responsible for
dedicating a drainage and utility easement over the proposed storm sewer that will be
constructed in the boulevard of Town Centre Drive. Also, this development shall vacate an
existing drainage and utility easement that crosses through this site prior to final plat
approval.
The developer will be responsible for ensuring that all regulatory agency permits (MPCA,
MWCC, MN Dept. of Health, etc., are acquired prior to final plat approval.
FINANCIAL OBLIGATION - Town Centre 70 13th Addition
Based upon the study of the financial obligations collected in the past and the uses proposed
for the property, the following charges are proposed. The charges are computed using the
City's existing fee schedule and connections proposed to be made to the City's utility system
based on the submitted plans.
Improvement Use Rate Quantity Amount
None so
The parcel proposed for platting into Town Centre 70th Addition has levied assessments
totaling $21,320.01 outstanding. The outstanding assessments will be pro-rated to the
succeeding parcels using an area basis.
CONDITIONS OF PRELBUNARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR TOWN CENTRE 70 13TH
ADDITION
1. These standard conditions of plat approval as adopted by Council action on July
10, 1990 shall be complied with:
Al, B1, B2, Cl, C2, C4, C5, D1, El, Fl, Gi, and H1
2. The site shall be irrigated.
3. All rooftop mechanical equipment shall be screened from view at each property
line.
4. The trash/recycling containers shall be located within the building or in an
enclosure large enough to accommodate recycling bins attached to the building
made of the identical building material.
5. All signage shall be subject to Sign Code requirements and a one-time fee of $2.50
per square foot.
6. The landscape plan shall be submitted on the approved grading plan.
7. Continuous berming is required along I-35E.
8. Additional overstory trees and shrub planting materials shall be provided along the
north and south property lines and shall be approved by the City Planner.
9. Brick building material shall be required on all sides of the building and shall
remain unpainted and left in a natural state.
10. A minimum drive aisle width of 24' shall be maintained.
11. The developer shall add a storm sewer stub to serve the future development to the
north of Outlot A of Town Centre 70 13th Addition.
12. The development shall design the parking lot to drain to the concrete curb and
gutter and then to the proposed storm sewer to avoid bituminous swales in the
parking lot.
13. This development will be responsible for constructing a concrete apron and valley
gutter at the driveway openings to Town Centre Drive.
STANDARD CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL
A. Financial Obligations
1. This development shall accept its additional financial
obligations as defined in the staff's report in
accordance with the final plat dimensions and the rates
in effect at the time of final plat approval.
B. Easements and Rights-of-Way
1. This development shall dedicate 10' drainage and utility
easements centered over all common lot lines and adjacent
to private property or public right-of-way.
2. This development shall dedicate, provide, or financially
guarantee the acquisition costs of additional drainage,
ponding, and utility easements as required by the
alignment, depth, and storage capacity of all required
public utilities and streets located beyond the
boundaries of this plat or outside of dedicated public
right-of-way as necessary to service this development or
accommodate it.
3. This development shall dedicate all public right-of-way
and temporary slope easements for ultimate development
of adjacent roadways as required by the appropriate
jurisdictional agency.
4. This development shall dedicate adequate drainage and
ponding easements to incorporate the required high water
elevation necessitated by City storm water storage volume
requirements.
C. Plans and Specifications
1. All public streets and utilities necessary to provide
service to this development shall be designed by a
registered professional engineer in accordance with City
codes, engineering standards, guidelines and policies.
2. A detailed grading, drainage, erosion, and sediment
control plan must be prepared in accordance with current
City standards prior to final plat approval.
3. This development shall insure that all temporary dead end
public streets shall have a cul-de-sac constructed in
accordance with City engineering standards.
/C; f'
STA2:DARD CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL
PAGE TWO
4. A detailed landscape plan shall be submitted on the
proposed grading plan. The financial guarantee shall be
included in the Development Contract and not be released
until one year after the date of installation.
5. All internal public and private streets shall be
constructed within the required right-of-way in
accordance with City Code and engineering standards.
D. Public Improvements
1. If any public improvements are to be installed under a
City contract, the appropriate project must be approved
at a formal public hearing by Council action prior to
final plat approval.
E. Permits
1. This development shall be responsible for the acquisition
of all regulatory agency permits in the time frame
required by the affected agency..
F. Parks and Trails Dedication
1. This development shall fulfill its parks dedication
requirements as recommended by the Advisory Parks and
Recreation Commission and approved by Council action.
G. water Ouality Dedication
1. This development shall be responsible for providing a
cash dedication in addition to/in lieu of ponding
requirements in accordance with the criteria identified
in the City's Water-Quality Management Plan.
H. Other
1. All standard platting and zoning conditions shall'be
adhered to unless specifically granted a variance by
Council action.
Advisory Planning Commission City Council
Approved: August 25, 1987 September 15, 1987
Revised: July 10, 1990
plataprv.con
LTS #2
4 ,J? ~ J ~ \1 I
I .,..-J, _ _I_O_•Z~=h~ e, Ott--
-
- I--~ _ _ - ~ - ' - - _ _ o weta
v Z
ARK
7 1,
I Am m,
14
p (S'/i/
•li r~-_-~ Jas • r• s'ue'
P Ar h r /jf~ ~ i•j I'K
Nt
~ Q S Y
rARI 111•
7777 ~ '-4 ~
M~. r DES. I' it
1 ? ) O Ir' N 1'~ ,
~r 99
h 1
• M 1
:Ir
07
I ,R P.. TURN CENTRE TO EL YENif A®a tIAV
If 'f 'A
A
1 , a
PI ''I 1 nunm A tWalMart .
1' r ~ a ~ - ham; ~
old A-CA
nrl A r L
r h r ~ ~ 11 ' ~ Ill. ~ N ~ .!N
11„~ I v ' ,iq rrh x.li' r:r" 71.5 r 1 i r
Ills
~ . r • r7 Ar. v. Sler~. !t7 . S ~ #
V
cF.r;•rc .rK exrrrr,l en In „e-
DAKOTA COUNTY SURVEY AND LAND I
t Z
S ; -
so a • s° o~: p g•-• Mpr•s
Zvi ZI:
zs a= :E
C.%^x
G v • o::°o
[ fill LJ
Via.. H1H \ z
110 0
it.
4!* cc I(zz
-w•p 1 .••9 uw-.v r 1'
M>rl+] 1106WI? 41u.K F14 111D11{b V.aV C u 0a~ 0 1
C,i1~ODrN1 aJ YI~i M aM TTK •MI x0yvailr0~ 5.01vM•a. , L 6 t C ~N
'LLI4vrGf rDibi A YWOM ,MI LI LMlav?CI6 OMI W-vq SYY
• • N•a rra-n..•
.•no L ..+..?s Y
~,NItWV My YN•tf N17tl
t ¦ 7J j, ji , s j'- xa i ti e' y33343 ; ` w
!j FS.¦s?=t( ! }~t j. 62 t~. ,t. i ~ « n ~ y't ~1 'y y_ `y{ ~ i
a~ ~ g
[t;~ !c a a~ III Y
! , ti,! 11 3 } ! ! ! ~ ! aj~, 3 ¦ E• ? 9= ~ 1 1 =
i ttFii t f,
l sal !i i!djt~ ;i3 !1 as
! l te~l3i~i s 11;;;}= ¦ Y
?
i • ¦
ILLS
F
poa. : y CK_ did
i!R Z ~ k rI3 ~ 1 ~
~i V L s it! o ff
U qq b 1 J
` '4 Boa 99 -d- ? /
01
L Taq 2 '
• 1
LWJ
3 \
0
o Gi
04
Z" Z -1 Z
1 i f ! _ f~Fi ! _ !1s { is sii Zj s~ tZ= I
s-
s1
F; 1 "1 3 'f~q
1H!!d1I1 t ; Faf}a
it 3s .1 11 1j 3? it Nil n. a1 1131 U
is
i~3 ca$ t. Z
O
Ic
O
s° d
cc M
Y
B i~t $ W
Z
~4 ~lil~ t
~ t fir'. ` ! 'O
all A-C
1 ~ -
s , 344:
it-if
n3 i .
C. JN
d
IlILIJI 11 181a
U if i
xv Ib x~ ig b a S d
b i aCCCa jI 6666 ~ $ • Z
,aa ~ Qb ~ O
~j~~Jy` a? 6Y~~~ j Q
a J ~a``a 6 b K~Ri~ ' ~ C1
L •`a l'lj a`a3 SRS
a 3
a$E ;v• ••a : p~
oil,
$ _ i ot-f
$~a t$ i i S~ • \ ~j
- ~tlP, r~R , i r i f
it I
Ssa¢a
/V
V1053NNI" 'NV)3 awr "roo ;...ao ..u rsv
u;
«.q .,.o.g „a] soli aoa+r uuwa 3NI80 3M1N33 NMOL
aeig.ioaaw axw Nir~ '(vs~~.~ IIb,fV ~r~J ~1
:its 01@l;ai4 F!#
nle I I c s I I
/s~e~uawn~g; ookkk S"3111 31v,311, z
0
w
I LU
U o
~ -1
z
4
~ .
W W
11 11-M
s z
P. - Q
ui E Q 9 U a- `10
> N YL W
Q w if] Ili ? d I
u
oO i
LV.
U. LL 3 i N ui 103 i-w
(j) ^r
- ~t
"dN
oI so
t r R oil
Its Cz
cc
d
12 10
Cliff
44
R~ ~ ' ~ ~ Ott I
'~`q -
sF
SITE
838.3.
855.4
A DP-26 48' 7 L.S.-7
87. 876.
30" C -h 878. 8 878. 14 M 3 3 D
4e" pP.-20 D-p.. b+
C9 9010
15 00-23 904.2
P-T
8930 8 8
12
i.0 9916 a 82:2
-r_ 884.2 t . ,
ES~~ Tr ;''4 q
r- j p
UP
JP-66 89p22 9't
3T1.0 if p- 25
880.02.5,
J-d pp
JP-67.1 ;a 893.0
844.()
gg ggg 8958
846.5 876.0 JP-6T $3.~ 89 /.rJ
JP-2 8,610 871.0 JF -.G2.1
44.0.
51.5 JP-a47. Lij k. 69f.8
Jii 5 841.2. J i 900.0
s g54`
12*
JP-4 J-c JP-II
844.0
O 846.5 8300
i. _ .,ter JP 4
JP-5 J-~ 890.71
823.8 895.7
ti 834.0
•W S 48r.
r ` /
JP-10
BP-29 820.8
830.0 f N
809.7
818.0 ig a \y J - f
J -6
BP-28818.9
B-o 86 830.0 JP-49
868.0 818.1
48" B-b 830.0
jp-q qd'
0- 36 rJP-35.1 818.7 4
FIGURE No. 17
STORM SEWER LAYOUT PO DM AREA' LEGIM
MAP .TO.rNtwER.t..i.m.1 now NEWER. (p--,a M, -
NORM EFT .TAMN (oAtlYy)
WOW LFT .TAT.... ..O." . . . . , . . O
STORM FORCE MAN
CITY OF MAJOR DIYi.ION
POND NORMAL WATER LEVEL . . . . . . . 900.0
POND ION WATER LEVEL . . . . . . . . 900.0
E A G A N 116- OVERLAND DRANAOE ROUTE . . . . . . . .
SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY PLAT
(STEVENS ADDITION)
APPLICANT: TOBY STEVENS
LOCATION: SE 1/4 OF SECTION 18
EXISTING ZONING: R-1 (SINGLE FAMILY)
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: OCTOBER 27, 1992
DATE OF REPORT: OCTOBER 15, 1992
COMPILED BY: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
APPLICATION SUMMARY: An application has been submitted requesting a Preliminary
Plat of approximately 3/4 acre for two single family lots on previously-zoned single family
land along Wuthering Heights Road. The City's Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan
designates this site and the entire area between the Chicago Northwestern Railroad and
State Highway #13 as Industrial.
EXISTING CONDITIONS: The 45,880 sq. ft. parcel is located north of Silver Bell Road
along Wuthering Heights Road, south and east of the Seneca Waste Water Treatment Plant,
and west of Silver Bell Apartments. The surrounding land uses are Single Family and
Industrial to the north and unplatted Single Family (R-1) to the south and west. East of this
site are the Silver Bell Apartments zoned R-4 (Multiple).
BACKGROUND: The applicant attended the Advisory Planning Commission meeting on
September 22, 1992 for public hearing and received a recommendation for approval of his
original one lot plan and was scheduled for the October 8, 1992 City Council meeting.
However, in a letter submitted September 30, 1992, Mr. Stevens requested his initial plat of
one lot be withdrawn from the October 8, 1992 City Council meeting agenda so that he may
submit a revised plat of two lots.
PROPOSAL: The revised proposal now includes two lots - Lot 1, Block 1, is 16,500 sq. ft.
and Lot 2, Block 1, is 19,695 sq. ft. Both meet the R-1 minimum size and width
requirements and will take access from Wuthering Heights Road.
PARKS & RECREATION: Parks & Recreation staff recommend a cash parks dedication
and a cash trails dedication for this plat.
GRADING/DRAINAGE/EROSION CONTROL: The existing gravel street which is along
the west property line of this two-lot subdivision has a gradual slope to the north. The
drainage from the front yard area of the proposed lots shall be directed to the street and
the drainage from the backyard area will be directed to the north through a swale along the
rear lot line.
The gravel street currently does not have a public storm sewer system to handle the surface
water runoff. Drainage from the lots in this area generally slopes in a northerly direction
by overland flow. The future upgrading of Wuthering Heights Road will require the
construction of storm sewer to drain the area.
During the construction of the proposed houses, the builder will be responsible for grading
and restoration of the lots and providing erosion control.
WATER QUALITY AND WETLAND PROTECTION: This .75 acre two lot single family
subdivision is located in Drainage Basin A. Since the site is too small to accommodate on-
site ponding, staff will recommend a cash dedication in lieu of ponding. The amount of cash
dedication is estimated at $550.
There are no wetland issues associated with this plat.
This recommendation is subject to approval by the Advisory Parks, Recreation, and Natural
Resources Commission.
UTILITIES: Sanitary sewer and water main service of adequate depth and capacity is
readily available to serve the proposed lots. An 8" sanitary sewer line and 6" water main
was constructed in Wuthering Heights Road in the early 1980's. A 4" sanitary sewer and 1"
water service was provided to Lot 1 when the sewer and water in the street was constructed.
New sewer and water services will be required for Lot 2. There is a hydrant in the
northeast corner of Lot 1 and a hydrant in the southwest comer of Lot 2 that will provide
adequate fire protection for this area.
STREETS/ACCESS/CIRCULATION: Access to the proposed lots is currently available
from Wuthering Heights Road, a privately maintained street easement that runs along the
west edge of the development. The existing gravel surface street connects to Silver Bell
Road approximately 400 feet south of the proposed lots. The existing roadway does not
meet City Code requirements for providing access to newly platted residential property.
RIGHTS-OF-WAY/PERMITS/EASEMENTS: This development shall dedicate all right-of-
way and easements necessary for Wuthering Heights Road. Also, a 20 foot drainage and
utility easement shall be dedicated over the existing 8" sanitary sewer line that runs along
the south property line of proposed Lot 2. The existing 8" line shall be field located and the
20 foot easement shall be centered over the sewer line.
~f.
CONDITIONS OF PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR STEVENS ADDITION
1. These standard conditions of plat approval as adopted by Council action on July
10, 1990 shall be complied with:
A1,B1,B2,B3,Ci,C2,C5,Di,El,Fl,G1,andHi
2. Development on this plat shall be consistent with all R-1 setbacks and maximum
lot coverage regulations.
3. All applicable City Codes and requirements shall be adhered to.
4. A 20' drainage and utility easement shall be dedicated over the enter of the
existing 8: sanitary sewer line that is located along the south property line of
proposed Lot 2.
5. A 25' wide half right-of-way is required for Wuthering Heights Road.
FINANCIAL OBLIGATION - Stevens Addition
Based upon the study of the financial obligations collected in the past and the uses proposed
for the property, the following charges are proposed. The charges are computed using the
City's existing fee schedule and connections proposed to be made to the City's utility system
based on the submitted plans.
Improvement Use Rate Quantity Amount
Storm Sewer Trunk S.F. $.068/sq ft 36,195 sq ft $2,461
Sanitary Sewer S.F. $720/lot 1 lot 720
Trunk
Water Trunk S.F. $750/lot 1 lot 750
$3.931
1'
STANDARD CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL
A. ri-nancial obligations
1. This development shall accept its additional financial
obligations as defined in the staff's report in
accordance with the final plat dimensions and the rates
in effect at the time of final plat approval.
B. Easements and Rights-of-way
1. This development shall dedicate 10' drainage and utility
easements centered over all common lot lines and adjacent
to private property or public right-of-way.
2. This development shall dedicate, provide, or financially
guarantee the acquisition costs of additional drainage,
ponding, and utility easements as required by the
alignment, depth, and storage capacity of all required
public utilities and streets located beyond the
boundaries of this plat or outside of dedicated public
right-of-way as necessary to service this development or
accommodate it.
3. This development shall dedicate all public right-of-way
and temporary slope easements for ultimate development
of adjacent roadways as required by the appropriate
jurisdictional agency.
4. This development shall dedicate adequate drainage and
ponding easements to incorporate the required high water
elevation necessitated by City storm water storage volume
requirements.
C. Plans and Specifications
1. All public streets and utilities necessary to provide
service to this development shall be designed by a
registered professional engineer in accordance with City
codes, engineering standards, guidelines and policies.
2. A detailed grading, drainage, erosion, and sediment
control plan must be prepared in accordance with current
City standards prior to final plat approval.
3. This development shall insure that all temporary dead end
public streets shall have a cul-de-sac constructed in
accordance with City engineering standards.
STANDARD CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL
PAGE TWO
4. A detailed landscape plan shall be submitted on the
proposed grading plan.. The financial guarantee shall be
included in the Development Contract and not be released
until one year after the date of installation.
5. All internal public and private streets shall be
constructed within the required right-of-way in
accordance with City Code and engineering standards.
D. Public Improvements
1. If any public improvements are to be installed under a
City contract, the appropriate project must be approved
at a formal public hearing by Council action prior to
final plat approval.
E. Permits
1. This development shall be responsible for the acquisition
of all regulatory agency permits in the time frame
required by the affected agency..
F. Parks and Trails Dedication
1. This development shall fulfill its parks dedication
requirements as recommended by the Advisory Parks and
Recreation Commission and approved by Council action.
G. water Ouality Dedication
1. This development shall be responsible for providing a
cash dedication in addition to/in lieu of ponding
requirements in accordance with .the criteria identified
in the City's Water-Quality Management Plan.
E. Other
1. All standard platting and zoning. conditions shall 'be
.adhered to unless specifically granted a variance by
Council action.
Advisory Planning Commission City Council
Approved: August 25, 1987 September 15, 1987
Revised: July 10. 1990
plataprv.con -
LTS #2
1r~ ,
_ - 1 1
...............'1 I.1 1 - . ? ~ f / / /
\ ~~1 • 1: \ I ?\111\\\\h\\\\. \ J 1' ~L • IJ
/ Nl
N N,
1 , / X \ e \ \ \ N\\y\' \ \ 1
j--- T-- _i---\ / ~ \ \ / as
71
>Ile
f9o
30
g 1 / \ ~ Y--fit
OIL
i~~ I, L~'~ 141i
lb %L t Y
QY,_6f'
DELMAR H. SCHWANZ
LMC sNwsy0a$. ew.
Nr. u.r. L -V nr sr. a wrrr
14750 SOUTH ROBERT TRAIL ROSEMOUNT. MINNESOTA 5S0!4 614/423-1750
SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE
Preliminary Plat: STEVENS ADDTTTON
Owner-Developer: Nancy and Toby Stevens
Scale: 1 inch - 50 feet
Description: All that part of Government Lot 7,
Section 18, Township 27, Range 23 described as
follows: Commencing at a point 551.8 feet East
and 272.35 feet North of the southwest corner /
of Government Lot 7, Section 10, Township 27.
Range 237 thence East and parallel to the south
line of said Government Lot 7 a distance of 190 /
feet, thence North and parallel to the west line
of said Government Lot 7 a distance of 321.11 feet,
thence Southwesterly a distance of 248.03 feet to
a point that is 551.8 feet East and 434.16 feet Is/ V
North of the southwest corner thereof, thence
South and parallel to the west line of said /
Government Lot 7 a distance of 161.18 feet to e
the place of beginning, 8'
T'~nn O L )
Area: Gross Area 45,880 square feet /
Lot 1 16,500 square feet Y
Lot 2 19.695 square feet t 4,1
Street 9.685 square feet t ~a G/
Existing Zoning R-1 Single family residential / i , ~i~(r 'll OI l
Proposed Zoning Same ? g J Q,
/ / 1 I /}VJ
Notes: Area is served by City Sanitary y
sewer and water . There is an existing
service for Lot 2. New services requir d / Ir \ !
for Lot /,77- z fv
Road is currently an easement road
and has a gravel surface. C~
1,f 2i - aA~?a6E y uric/~7yr~~
Prepared By: Delmar R. Schwanx Land Surveyors Inc.
14750 South Robert Trail
Rosemount, NN 55068 ~0 h ~j I1 \ l
Tel. 423-1769
/OT 2 0
1Vnu7y oar. 1134-219,
Ji) *A
I
1 ~
4
I
r: r'. /.4. 72 V. rZ 31'I 12
~cs.2 7J 2 /k,' GD ) 'T ./OT 7
1 hereby as.0*y 1M111J4 sunny. plmn. or /p0n was REVISED an under my 49 way ui* W
pewrW by me
w
Ihal e s red a me Rp1s1lslsn0 Land snA aun sya vnEw 14, IA. less M Ihe SIaN M MNr.esae r Y/ cA.~ 1~
Dated 07-30-92 0mN• khwau
,Arrle6a16 N6u51.JIea No. l54S
Revised 10-02-92
Rrrr'Vtf]CCT - 5 1992
DELMAR H. SCHWANZ
/MID ato"PO.a .Ic
eg48..5 i o... W n. eer.I w.-w
14750 SOUTH ROBERT TRAIL ROSEMOUNT. MINNESOTA 55058 9120423•I758
SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE
Preliminary Plat: STEVENS ADDITION
Owner-Developer: Nancy and Toby Stevens
Scale: 1 inch - 50 feet
Description: All that part of Government Lot 7,
Section 18. Township 27, Range 23 described as
follows: Commencing at a point 551.8 feet East
and 272.35 feet north of the southwest corner
of Government Lot 7, Section 18, township 27,
Range 231 thence East and parallel to the south
line of said Government Lot 7 a distance of 190
feet, thence North and parallel to the west line
of said Government Lot 7 a distance of 321.11 feet,
thence Southwesterly a distance of 248.03 feet to
a point that is 551.8 feet East and 434.16 feet 1S : ~J
North of the southwest corner thereof. thence 7 \ 1 C/
South and parallel to the vest line of said 3 _ ~U
Government Lot 7 a distance of 161.38 feet to
the place of beginning, / e9^4R' :
Area: Gross Area 45,880 square feet t C d h i'•~•• /
Lot 1 16,500 square feet i ti••••••'•
Lot 2 19,695 square feet t ~ {,7~' ..X.
Street 9.685 square feet t ~o (0 ~•%%~~;;'•~;%;~.%~X:5
Existing Zoning R-1 Single family residential .;Z'•~~'
Proposed Zoning Same Notes: Area is served by City sanitary ;%%~~,~%~J~~;.,~%,:~,~%,%~~%%•~•~~~%~~~~~.5.
g TS \ 1
sewer and water. There is an existin X
service for Lot 2• New services requic / ~ -
for Lot h . f~3'i~:~:•~
y :Sin
Road is currently an easement road
and has a gravel surface.
Prepared By: Delmar R. Schwartz Land Surveyors Inc. I :::,••t.•,•:~
f;'s
14750 South Robert Trail ~ 9 Y ,~~~Q;~;~~:::;:%::%;•:
Rosemount, MN 55068 •',9,:;:;:; %::ti•: •::•::;:•:{•:::•:ti%• I
Tel. 423-1769{4;••'• ,
. kA
FINANCIAL OBLIGATION
LEGEND
%
ti0 zs
.
Sanitary Sewer Trunk -
Water Trunk N
Storm Sewer Trunk
ti
I ~
~
Fem. /4- T2 ?V 'i I
i/
1
1c~,'l .L/4i G~U'i loT 7
I M.abr e.rsh MM "We sum". Man. or repo"
r
Pnar.a army er under m7 dM4n eww .Na +end I
Inn I .m . avh Ra0ia1a Urq Sunayar unOm
le L / ~
.awe a IN. wm e+ Mwm.aa r
07-30-92 Oa mu, K Scheme
Dana 1Mmi5Ma Ra_YYMIan hN. ie15
Revised 10-02-92
RcCr-NtDOCT - 5 1992
SUBJECT: REZONING & PRELIMINARY PLAT
WENZEL ADDITION
APPLICANT: WENSMANN REALTY
LOCATION: SE 1/4 OF SECTION 21
EXISTING ZONING: AGRICULTURAL
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: OCTOBER 27, 1992
DATE OF REPORT: OCTOBER 16, 1992
COMPILED BY: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
APPLICATION SUMMARY: Separate applications have been submitted requesting a
Rezoning of approximately 40 Agricultural zoned acres to PD (Planned Development) and
a Preliminary Plat of 126 units located north of Diffley Road in the SE 1/4 of Section 21.
The Comprehensive Guide Plan designates this area as D-II (0-6 units/acre).
LOCATION: The site is located along the north side of Diffley Road (County Road 30),
south of Deerwood Elementary School and the new middle school, west of Knob Hill
Townhomes and Deerwood Ponds addition, and east of the Bieter Company property. The
surrounding zoning districts are: Public Facilities to the north, Planned Development Single
Family and Townhouse to the east, Park and Planned Development townhomes across
Diffley Road to the south, and Agricultural to the west. The March 1991 Comprehensive
Land Use Guide Plan designates this 40 acres as D-II, Mixed Residential (0-6 units/acre).
EXISTING CONDITIONS: Currently, there is one home located near the southeast corner
of the property that will be removed as a result of this project. West of this home is a pond
surrounded by a mixture of mature deciduous trees extending as far south as Diffley Road.
West of the pond is a gently-rolling open grassy site. The existing homestead takes its access
from Diffley Road.
BACKGROUND: When this item first appeared before the August 25, 1992 Advisory
Planning Commission meeting, the project had 181 units on 37.9 acres for a total density of
4.77 units/acre with a variety of housing types: single family, duplex, and cluster homes.
Due to concerns raised by residents and Planning Commission members, the proposal was
continued until the September meeting. The four major concerns were:
overall density of the project.
• one access onto Diffley Road.
the number of children this project will bring in and the impact it will
have on nearby schools.
the overall impact on the environment.
The applicant made revisions to that plan, completely removing the cluster-type houses and
replacing them with 40 quad homes and 36 townhome units, for a net loss of 38 units. The
duplex units were replaced with 34 single level townhome units, for an increase of 20 units.
The single family lots were reduced by one lot and the townhomes on the east side were
reduced by 1. The total number of units was 161 and the overall density was reduced by .53
units/acre from 4.77 to 4.24.
This proposal then was presented to the Advisory Planning Commission on September 22,
1992 where it was continued again for the following reasons:
1. A trailway to the school on the northwest corner of the site needs to be developed.
2. Resolve the access point issue so that the private street on the east portion of the
site be corrected to the north/south public street (a "Y" type access). The private
street on the east portion of the site shall be disconnected to the east/west public
street.
3. Lower the density.
4. The development of more single family housing is encouraged.
PROPOSAL: The latest proposal is still a mixture of residential uses. The plan now
includes 31 single family homes--an increase of 14, 35 townhouse units--a decrease of 69
units, and an increase of 20 in the number of quadrominiums. This results in an overall net
reduction in units of 35 to 126. The overall density for the entire scope of the project is 3.3
units/acre. This is a reduction of 1.47 units/acre from the original plan and .94 units/acre
from the second plan.
COMMENTS: The single family portion of this plat has now been extended to the western
edge of the plat along the north property line, as well as south to Diffley Road on the
western side of the pond. Access to these lots is provided by an east/west public street from
the east (Cashell Glen Road) which cul-de-sacs at the west property line. Access is also
provided to the single family lots by a north/south public street from Diffley Road. All of
the lots meet, or exceed minimum lot size and width requirements. Density for Blocks 3,
4, and 5 is 2.26 units/acre. A 20' wide public path easement has been located in the extreme
northeast corner of the site abutting Lot 9, Block 4. Another 30' wide public path easement
has been proposed between Lot 5, Block 3, and Lot 1, Block 4. Both provide access to the
school property to the north. ,
The western portion of the site contains 60 quadrominiums on 12.9 acres. The 15 buildings
consist of four units per building; each single level unit is 1,387 sq. ft., having two-car
garages, and are brick and aluminum sided. They are served by two east/west private streets
which take access from the north/south public access, and a private north/south street.
None of the quadrominiums take direct access to the public north/south street. Thirty-four
additional guest parking spaces have been added throughout the quad homes. The density
of Blocks 1 and 2 is 4.65 units/acre.
0
The 35 townhomes east of the pond remain the same style as previously submitted. The
original plan submitted showed the private cul-de-sac taking access from the south. The
developer's second plan proposes the cul-de-sac to come from the north off Cashell Glen
Road. Now, due to opposition, the developer has proposed the access from the south again.
The approximate 1,000' cul-de-sac will require a Variance to the maximum 500' cul-de-sac
length. Sixteen additional guest parking spaces have been provided along the private street.
The density for Block 6 is 3.09 units/acre.
Homeowners Associations shall be established for all multi-family areas. Both multi-family.
exteriors meet, or exceed the City's requirements set forth in Subd. 6H-Exterior Building
Finish-stating that at least 50% of any exterior finish shall consist of a combination of
materials which are non-combustible, non-degradable, and maintenance-free. The landscape
plan shows a good mixture of understory deciduous trees, as well as evergreens. The
applicant is preserving some of the existing vegetation around the pond which includes many
mature trees.
PARKS & RECREATION: The Advisory Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources
Commission reviewed this plat at their September meeting and gave the following
recommendations:
• The proposal is subject to a cash parks dedication.
The proposal is subject to a cash trails dedication.
The developer grade an 8' wide pad to the Deerwood School property within
the trailway easement. The developer coordinate the alignment, grading, and
sequencing with the school district.
° The site plan preserve the oak stand at the NW edge of the pond.
The developer provide a tree protection plan for City review and approval prior
to Final Plat.
• The site plan provide 28,800 sq. ft. of recreational open space.
GRADING/DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL: The 30 acre site contains a mixture
of open fields and wooded areas and a 2 acre pond (Pond BP-4) located in the center of the
site. The preliminary grading plan shows that a majority of the site will be disturbed by the
site grading. However, the existing trees around Pond BP-4 are proposed to be saved and
also a row of trees along the north property line are shown to be saved. The grading for
the site will require a maximum cut of 18' and a maximum fill of 12'. A small amount of
grading will occur off the site beyond the northwest comer of the site on the Deerwood
Middle School Addition development.
Any existing wells or septic systems on this site shall be abandoned prior to the grading of
this site according to City and Dakota County requirements. Locations of the wells and
septic systems shall be shown on the final grading plan.
The drainage from this site will be directed to Pond BP-4 which is a designated pond in the
City's Stormwater Management Plan. In addition to the direct drainage of approximately
70 acres that drains to BP-4 an additional 3,700 acres drains to the pond. On the south end
of BP-4 a 42" storm sewer line drains into the pond as well as a 36" line that drains Diffley
Road. The City currently has an outlet for Pond BP-4 with a controlled elevation of 874.2.
Because of the difference in elevations of the outlet compared to the invert of the 42" line
entering the pond, the City is studying how to revise the storm sewer in this area to lower
the normal water level of the pond to closer match the invert elevation of the 42" line. By
lowering the normal water level of Pond BP-4, it would allow the 42" line to drain more
effectively into the pond and eliminate some maintenance problems that the City is now
incurring.
The grading and drainage plan shall include a storm sewer line along the east/west public
street to the west property line of this site. The storm sewer line is needed to provide
drainage for approximately an 8.3 acre area of future development west of this site.
The development will be responsible for installing and maintaining erosion control measures
in accordance with the City's Erosion/Sediment Control Manual Standards. Pond BP-4 and
the trees around the pond shall be protected from grading and erosion activities.
WATER QUALITY AND WETLANDS PROTECTION: This development lies in Drainage
B, a short distance upstream from Blackhawk Lake. Blackhawk Lake is designated a Class
I water body and is intended to have water of sufficient high quality to support direct
contact recreation. Runoff from the proposed development will eventually reach Blackhawk
Lake and, if not treated, would degrade its quality.
Staff will recommend that this developer provide an additional 2.4 acre-feet of excavated
wet pond volume in Pond BP-4. It has not yet been decided whether the City will require
a cash dedication from the developer, then do the work itself, or whether the developer will
be requested to do the work. The City is also considering the possibility of using water
quality dedication funds to further enhance the ability of Pond BP-4 to treat stormwater.
In addition, the City will lower the elevation of the control structure for Pond BP-4 and drop
the normal water level in the pond by about 3.2 feet. This project would be done as a
public improvement project by the City using City funds and would alleviate a problem that
causes a back-up of poor quality water into Heine Pond (Pond BP-5). Heine Pond is one
of six Class I lakes in the City and has experienced severe degradation in water quality this
year because of this problem.
There are several wetlands on-site which are subject to regulation under the Wetland
Conservation Act. The developer is currently preparing a report that inventories and
assesses prospective impacts to these wetlands, and outlines what measures will be taken to
avoid and minimize these impacts. It will also discuss any replacement requests. City staff
will review the report and present their recommendations to the Parks, Recreation and
Natural Resources Commission on November 5.
These recommendations are subject to the approval of the Advisory Parks, Recreation and
Natural Resources Commission.
UTILITIES: Sanitary sewer service is available to serve this site from an 8" line on Diffley
Road or from an existing 27" trunk sewer on the east side of the property. The preliminary
utility plan shows connecting to the 8" line on Diffley Road at the public street connection
opposite Heine Court. Also, a connection is shown to the 27" line in two locations. One
location is to serve the private street area in the southeast corner of the site and another
location is in the northeast corner of the site at the intersection of Cashell Glen in the
Deerwood Ponds Addition. As shown on the preliminary utility plan, sanitary sewer shall
be stubbed to the west property line in the east/west public street to serve the future
development of property to the west of this site.
Watermain of sufficient size, pressure and capacity is readily available to serve this
development from an existing 12" watermain on Diffley Road, from an existing 6" watermain
along the east property line in the development of Knob Hill of Eagan, from a 6" watermain
in Cashell Glen, and from an 8" watermain in the Deerwood Elementary School site. The
watermain layout shall include a looping system fed by the City's Intermediate Pressure
Zone watermains. As shown on the preliminary utility plans, the watermain layout shall
include an 8" stub in the northeast corner of the site that will connect to the existing 8"
watermain provided by the Deerwood Elementary School.
STREETS/ACCESS/CIRCULATION: Access to this site is proposed in two locations. The
site plan shows connecting to Diffley Road (Dakota County Road 30) opposite Heine Court
with a public street that will run in a northerly direction. The preliminary site plan also
shows connecting to Cashell Glen which is a street in the Deerwood Ponds development in
the northeast portion of the site. The preliminary site plan shows a stub street with a
permanent cul-de-sac at the west property line of the site. If development occurs to the
west in the future, the cul-de-sac would be removed and the street extended to the west.
A 5.
The townhouse units along the east side of Pond BP-4 are proposed to be served with a
private street that will head northerly and connect into the public street along the south side
of Pond BP-4. The townhouse and quadriminium units along the west side of Pond BP-4
will be served by private streets that will connect to the north-south public street.
The north/south public street from Diffley Road up to the east/west public street shall be
a 36' wide street. The east/west public street from Cashell Glen to the north/south public
street shall be a 32' wide street. The private streets shall be designed according to the City
Code requirements with bituminous surfacing and concrete curb and gutter.
EASEMENTS/RIGHT-OF-WAY/PERMITS: The final plat shall dedicate a permanent
drainage and utility easement over Pond BP-4 up to its designated high water level. The
sanitary sewer and watermains that will be provided to serve the quadriminium cluster
housing units and townhouse units in the private street areas shall have permanent drainage
and utility easements dedicated over the main lines. A permanent right-of-way shall be
dedicated by the developer over the cul-de-sac along the west property line of the site. The
east/west public street and the north/south public street shall have 60' of right-of-way
dedicated over the streets.
The development will be responsible for ensuring that all regulatory agency permits (MPCA,
Minnesota Department of Health, MWCC, Minnesota DNR, Dakota County Highway
Department, Corps of Engineers, etc.) are obtained prior to final plat approval.
FINANCIAL OBLIGATION - Wenzel Addition
Based upon the study of the financial obligations collected in the past and the uses proposed
for the property, the following charges are proposed. The charges are computed using the
City's existing fee schedule and connections proposed to be made to the City's utility system
based on the submitted plans.
Improvement Use Rate Quantity Amount
Lateral Benefit S.F. 17.25/ff 1,887.68 ff $32,562
Sanitary Sewer
Lateral Benefit S.F. 25.25/ff 1,315.16 ff 33,208
Water
Lateral Benefit S.F. 20.30/ff 594.01 ff 12,058
Storm Sewer
Storm Sewer Trunk M.F. .018/S.F. 561,924 S.F. 10.115
Total 43
There are levied assessments with an unpaid balance $50,104.77 which will be allocated to the
newly oriented parcels. In addition, there is approximately $115,264 of Green Acres postponed
installments that will become due when this parcel, or its successor parcels, are no longer
eligible for Green Acres status.
PRELIMINARY PLAT CONDITIONS FOR WENZEL ADDITION
1. These standard conditions of plat approval as adopted by Council action on July
19, 1990 shall be complied with:
Al,B1,B2,B3,B4,C1,C2,C3,C4,C5,Dl,El,Fl,G1,andHi
2. Snow fencing shall be installed around the trees located near the pond to ensure
tree preservation during grading and construction. The snow fence will be
inspected prior to issuance of any grading permit.
3. All plant material shall meet City minimum standards.
4. Boulevard trees shall be allowed T' from back of curb on single family lots.
5. Existing well and septic systems shall be removed and inspected by proper
agencies.
6. Homeowners and condominium associations shall be formed and declaration of
covenants shall be provided to the City prior to Final Plat.
7. A storm sewer stub that will be designed to drain 8.3 acres shall be provided at
the west property line of the site in the east/west public street.
8. 8" sanitary sewer and 8" watermain shall be stubbed to the west property line of
the site at the east/west public street.
9. The watermain layout shall include the extension, of an 8" line in the northeast
corner of the site that will connect to an existing 8" watermain stub provided
through the Deerwood Elementary School site.
10. The east/west public street and the north/south public street shall have 60' of right-
of-way dedicated.
0
STANDARD CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL
A. Financial obligations
1. This development shall accept its additional financial
obligations as defined in the staff's report in
accordance with the final plat dimensions and the rates
in effect at the time of final plat approval.
B. Basements and Rights-of-Way
1. This development shall dedicate 10' drainage and utility
easements centered over all common lot lines and adjacent
to private property or public right-of-way.
2. This development shall dedicate, provide,. or financially
guarantee the acquisition costs of additional drainage,
ponding, and utility easements as required by the
alignrent, depth, and storage capacity of all required
public utilities and streets located beyond the.
boundaries of this plat or outside of dedicated public
right-of-way as necessary to service this development or
accommodate it.
3. This development shall dedicate all public right-of-way
and temporary slope easements for ultimate development
of adjacent roadways as required by the appropriate
jurisdictional agency.
4. This development shall dedicate adequate drainage and
ponding easements to incorporate the required high water
elevation necessitated by City storm water storage volume
requirements.
C. Plans and Specifications
1. All public streets and utilities necessary to provide
service to this development shall be designed by a
registered professional engineer in accordance with City
codes, engineering standards, guidelines and policies.
2. A detailed grading, drainage, erosion, and sediment
control plan must be prepared in accordance with current
City standards prior-to final plat approval.
3. This development shall insure that all temporary dead end
public streets shall have a cul-de-sac constructed in
accordance with City engineering standards.
STAf:DARD CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL
PAGE TWO
4. A detailed landscape plan shall be submitted on the
proposed grading plan. The financial guarantee shall be
included in the Development Contract and not be released
until one year after the date of installation.
5. All internal public and private streets shall be
constructed within the required right-of-way in
accordance with City Code and engineering standards.
D. Public Improvements
1. If any public improvements are to be installed under a
City contract, the appropriate project must be approved
at a formal public hearing by Council action prior to
final plat approval.
E. Permits
1. This development shall be responsible for the acquisition
of all regulatory agency permits in the time frame
required by the affected agency.
F. Parks and Trails Dedication
1. This development shall fulfill its parks dedication
requirements as recommended by the Advisory Parks and
Recreation Commission and approved by council action.
G. Water duality Dedication
1. This development shall be responsible for providing a
cash dedication in addition to/in lieu of ponding
requirements in accordance with. the criteria identified
in the City's Water-Quality Management Plan.
H. other
1. All standard platting and toning conditions shali'be
adhered to unless specifically granted a variance by
Council action.
Advisory Planning Commission City Council
Approved: August 25, 1987 September 15, 1987
Revised: July 10, 1990
plataprv.con
LTS N2
/
Wenzel Additon
sal'
• ?s "
J''' X000 ; r e
000
41
lee,
J• ICI r ~ ~ r
sctm)ol
'~~1-i • IS 1 , r if
I 1 ( A N A 1.' j ~Z c~~ • L7 1
Ilk
j .r :,,~fl.~.~ j \ 7~ ~,1 • L~' . t Ds •~r i
f r ~
DNlley Rood
Elm
ta~ S ~ t if•Iti
•w Tfut In
i
F ~ ~ r
m t 1
S , r t t t t t.
~ K, a s « ! IJ._
11? : t
•
S J L <
Ift
o f
~ •cr ss s. s. ~ ~
Lli
•
•
j } M sf ~ ~ I
job%ja
x •••+ws.•ti 0 0
. , ! L t ! ! Q Z i } eo U
.w f 2 • + • 4 0
All Ia s It>> ~yv w + L L o
tavA% J ~ s 7 0
"ITS 1%
A.
~,re~ : tee e• f1
12
ts-secc ' f2 I I :uN
Sw wee ~ ~~r 121 /69
?p1
r" A,
i6i 24.N 12 lei ~ h RR
33.0 16 • = 356 79.3 1 4c
L I T I !~-1 172
1 eM x07.0 164 1
159 i ID 1 f
9-.3/ •f : _ -
Jsz;.0
Il 19-49'.
c~ $.1
76e/e6.0 16• • ;
• Q TM--V45 158 ~ c 7 J
~r7 R i ' DTI --f
: Nei ....T.i
L 71.1/92.0
~s' 1 101.0 1 ~?-:v+
R U'IU'Y &W 11~ 17 687
4..
`qT /84.0 12¦~.~~ T40WS LAXE
157 PAP K
168 tS. 1
SITE
LEGEND'
Existing Trunk Water Main O Point Designations btermedlate Level
Pressure Zone
Proposed Trunk Water Main Pressure Zone Boundary
Existing Lateral Water Main 0-0- Existing Pressure Reducing Station
Proposed Lateral Water Main ww*n- Proposed Pressure Reducing Station
Existing Storage Reservoir Pressure Reducing Station Control Elevations
0--- Proposed Storage Reservoir Residual Pressure p.s.l I Static Pressure p.si •
FIGURE No. 8
Water Distribution System
Iw ws~ .urraV ro orrwwmo¦ ru¦
CITY OF
EAGAN
, 61
S ~8136.4~ rjI 48" 8b 1 ti ,
N
JP=37 BP-3 8'f2.0 b•,872.7
,Y 889 9 tE876,o
a P7 35 9B.2 r sc,xJa e:E L
908.0 y J 'T- ,lP-46,.
320.2 874~L
BP-25 BP-4
~i e N` B-S 924.0 1 874. P-2
k TJ ' 1 8 $ 927.2 It 886. 8Z:1
2 "1 4 86~: G~ ~35.
5
B~5.1 ! ;°L'.;~` -'8360
B42
~ C. ! A -So 900:0 . ,
9200. Tc~ .i? -a 9
°o _ 8 BR 17
09.8 2;
r8.1 I a -_QQ7 - 4.tP-4
p BP-23 I C.a?~~ "N.:.;~• B9? _ _ _ -840.
931.3 - ' 9P-I 848.C
-BP-9 9323 Tr," 86129L C b •
892.0};
91 t.3
BP-G'a C.;,r
9/0. ca/ L 1
911i::'
:s.E v s5 1 `
9.0 8=e P-15
gggg 4x
IF17 8P-18. '
B 20.0
SITE
LEGEND
FOICINO AREAS . . . . . . . . . . . . .
STORM SEWERS (salstY+3) . . . . . . .
STORM SEWERS (Frooo..m . . . . . . . . .
STORM LIFT STATION (.alstMr3) . . . . . . . •
STORM LNT STATION (poioosm . . . . . . . 0
STORM FORCE MARI ? ? ?
MAJOR DIVISION rra
POND NORMAL WATER LEVEL. . . . . 900.0
POND MON WATER LEVEL . . . . . . . . . #OO.O
OVERLAND ORAINASE ROUTE = =a==a
FIGURE No. 17
STORM SEWER LAYOUT
MAP .
CITY OF /
EAGAN
ii
co
ZZI
NN NNNI~ININNNNNNNIII NM NNNNNNIMN gM1111W11w
- - - - . - - - - - - - }tiv,:;:v.':i~iri~rX:+,'• ' : ' : 'v:;:; j' : i;,r,'ii•,r.,'';,''vwww,•,xv{{:ir•: ;:,w,s # ww; 1
y yy,,
110 • - ~'.7•.
;t' 1 1.1.1
i en 1 t•~ : .•r
Ili ? :~:~,1,~'.•,F:; . ' • '
1 J N~ r , z e
• 1 r 1
• • -ef N N N 1f , f
dill
i wl Y 0 s f M ' w N
j 1 •0 a. i
a• ~ O
Maw." 1 lgt•if •MM ::Nj•: :fir::~:~.•:.;:•:'r:~ .~Y 1 Ir-
•
l
ti:% f s o
61
1 . 1 • , of
b -
O
10
DA OTA
Assisting the community
and people challenged by disabilities
to live and work together.
Board of Directors
Barbara Kilbourne/Chairman
Kathleen Jefferson/Secretary November 4, 1992
Kenneth Bjerk
Thomas Cowley
Eagan Park Board
Hank nk Halvorson n Paul Hauge
William Jettison
Stan Krinsky FROM: Kathy Pengelly and Susan Szczukowski
George Moudry
Stephen Rogness
Susan Sisola
Janice Smith RE: Use of Quarry Park Building
William Wray
Community Resource Committee
Greetings! Beginning on November 23, 1992, Dakota, Inc. will be
Leslie Bifulk Arnold
Duane Harves remodeling our Apple Valley site. This project will be taking place
Thomas Hunt
Howard Knutson through December 23, 1992. At this time we are looking for
Kenneth LaCroix temporary spaces in which to carry out our programming. We are
William Newberg
Galen Pate attempting to divide our clients up into small groups of four with one
Palmer Peterson
,nsteng staff person per group. If possible, we would like to use your Quarry
Roekel, M.D.
Gwen Weaver Park building for one of these small groups.
Ray Wheeler
Albert Woodward The hours we would need access to this building would be 9:30 a. m. to
President 1:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. This would enable us to use this
George A. Moudry. M.S.W.. M.A. building as a "home base" for folks. While using the building we will
be sure to keep it in good condition by doing daily light maintenance.
Dakota. Inc. is a private Following our use, we will do a deep clean of the building free of
non-profit corporation charge. In doing this deep clean we will use Eagan Park's guidelines.
We realize the building will only be available to us through December
18 due to school vacations.
Thank you so much for your.time and consideration. As always, we
enjoy working with all of you involved in the Eagan Parks System.
We will look forward to hearing from you.
0104PF
Dakota, Inc.
680 O'Neill Drive
Eagan. MN 55121
5121454-2732
F,ai 612;454.3174