Loading...
4625 Dodd RdEAGAN TOWNSHIP BUILDING PERMIT Owner l?un""d`d'?" Address (present) ............... '-?..... °`.°?•"? : 4e . ....... ............ Builder ..--??•?t'rx-•......?...... °.:?..? .................... Address _7A:.6 a DESCRIPTION N° 2858 Eagan Township Town Hall Dale ---- ?--.... _ 7.. Stories To Be Used For Front Depth Heigh! Est. Cos! Permit Fee Remarks l A?s •S"7J sneer, noaa or omer wescrrpnon or Locanon I Lot I tsloca I Aaauron or Tract This permit does not authorise the use of streets, roads, alleys or sidewalks nor does it give the owner or his agent the right to create any situation which is a nuisance or which presents a hazard to the health, safety, convenience and general welfare to anyone in the community. THIS PERMIT MUST BE KEPT ON 'THE PREMISE WHILE THE WORK IS IN PROGRESS. This is to certify, chat.....(.- e.. 1•r.-- .^...^..... --........ ...... ? ........has permission to erect a....°........-........... .•• ......... . ........ -.._upos the above described premise subject to the provisions of the Building Ordinance for Ea X, Townlflip adopted April 11, 1955. ............. ........ Per ........................................ Chairman of Tnwn Board Building Inspector O?'- 5P 7 440-488f REQUEST FOR ELECTRICAL INSPECTION g 151 Minnesota State Board of Electricity 1821 University Ave., Rm. S-128. St. Paul, MN 55114 Phone (612) 642-0800 Home Duplex Apt. Bld . Ether: New Addn R Commercial Industrial Farm emod epair Air Cond. Htg. Equi Water Htr. Loud Mgmt. Other: Dryer Range Elec. Heat Tem . Service "X" above the?work covered by this request. Enter remarks in this space and a, the back of the white copy only. Calculote Inspection Fee - This Inspection Request will not be accepted without the correct fee: Other Fee p Service Entrance Size Fee # Circuits/Feeders Fee Mobile Home Park Stall 0 to 200 Amps 0 to 100 Amps Street Ug./Traffic Sig. Above 200_Am s 100_Amps Transformer/Generator INSPECTOR'S USE ONLY . l? OTA Sign/Outline Ug. Xfmr. ? y , Alarm/Remote Control Swimming Pool here t I ins cubed herein on Yne dines and c Irrigation Boom Ho"gM Hole Special Inspection Investigative Fee Fiool THIS INSTALLATION MAY BE ORDERED DISCONNECTED IF NOT COMPLETED WITHIN 18 MO THS. 3 '1 OFFICE USE ONLY This request void 18 months from validation dote /, 9p;rin ed in his bV$ox. . o3?c IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII?DJ7?IBc>75 ??IIIIIII?? IIIII a ? , I III `//J * 0 4 4 0 4 8 8 5 PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE y7L/ Requ I t 1 Rough in inspection required? es ? No ll h h Inspection Other Than Rough-In: ? Ready Now ill Call D d 1 (You must ca t e inspectorw e ate Rea y: I, licensed contractor ? owner hereby request inspection of the above electrical work at: Job Address (Street, Be., Route No I City Zip Code /p? ? V ,l 1 Secti n No. Township Name or No. Range No. Fire No. wry v Oceupont • Phone Na - 1 8 Power Supplier Elecmc Contractor (Canpany Namel Contractor Dcenu No. ? Master Gc. No. (Phnr Elect Only) c g Mailing Address (Contractor Performing Install - n( Aut nixed Sigrwmre (Co "actor or Owner Performing Innallarian( Phone No. l - CQ EB-00001 -11 8/96 STATE ARD COPY - SEE MTRUCTIONS ON BACK OF YELLOW COPY SPECIAL ASSESSMENT SEARCH SUMMARY AS OF : 06/17/1 996 PROPERTY ID: 10-03600-027-25 SEE COMMENTS S/A# ASSESSMENT DESCRIPT. YEAR TM RATE TOTAL ANN. PRIN. PAYOFF CD 100815 S-TRK 1983 15 10.0000 0.00 0 .00 0.00 CL 101835 STREET 515 1989 03 9.0000 1097.25 0 .00 0.00 PP 101867 WTK 520 1989 15 9.0000 1100.00 0 .00 0.00 PP 102457 WLTK 635 1993 15 6.5000 103.33 0 .00 0.00 CL 102636 WLTK 635 (2457) 1994 14 6.5000 1310.15 93 .58 1122.99 ------ SUMMARY OF LEVIED 1310.15 93 .58 1122.99 ****** 1996 P&I CERTIFIED 172.66 ------ SUMMARY OF DEFERRED 0.00 ------ SUMMARY OF CLOSED 2300.58 ------ PENDING ESTIMATE 0.00 Press ENTER; or F1, F4, F5, F7, F8 Main Prev 2 72 Next S/A Go To Exit Menu Page CN Page COMMENTS Legend 15:26 CAPS CITY OF EAGAN 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota 55122-1897 (612) 681-4675 i SITE ADDRESS: ? .1 t 1 r,N . PERMIT SUBTYPE: III . t ' I POOF 1 N?i INSPECTION RECORD PERMIT TYPE: Permit Number: 7 Date Issued: APPLICANT: t r. 1 .' 1 r• K r? h !.. 1 TYPE OF WORK: III "I 1 I1'1 i ON t,urr r?r?rj w, /."1 /96 [t(iNA{ It kFPA1R s l OPM tIAMAGE--Nt1 Ff F Permit No. Permit Holder Date Telephone M ELECTRIC PLUMBING HVAC Inspection Date Insp. Comments FOOTINGS FOUND FRAMING ROOFING ROUGH PLUMBING PLBG AIR TEST ROUGH HEATING GAS SVC TEST INSUL GYP BOARD FIREPLACE FIREPLACE AIR TEST FINAL PLBG FINAL HTG ORSAT TEST BLDG FINAL - BSMT R.I. i BSMT FINAL DECK FTG DECK FINAL CITY OF EAGAN 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota 55123 (612) 681-4675 SITE ADDRESS: PERMIT SUBTYPE: !lit N4, F INSPECTION RECORD PERMIT TYPE: Permit Number: Date Issued: 10 ray r APPLICANT- ;00i it I .' I TYPE OF WORK: 11WAI Ro:. ,I 1l N1 II 1111 I 1 11 1 H Ei Permit No. Permit Holder Date Telephone # S/W PLUMBING HVAC ELECTRIC ELECTRIC Inspection Date Insp. Comments Footings l Foundation Framing Roofing Rough Pibg. Rough Htg. isul. Fireplace Final Htg. Orsat Test Final Plbg. Plbg. Inspector - Notify Plumber Const. Meter EngrJPlan Bldg. Final Deck Fig. Deck Final g /f 9S~ Well Pr. Disp. CITY OF EAGAN Remarks ,15Z,QT?k4 Lot 027 Blk 25 Parcel 10 03600 027 25 Street 4625 TYr7d RnaA State Ewan. MN 55123 Improvement Date Amount Annual Years Payment Receipt I Date GRADING SAN SEW TRUNK SEWER LATERAL WATERMAIN WATER LATERAL WATER AREA STORM SEW TRK STORM SEW LAT CURB & GUTTER SIDEWALK STREET LIGHT J jICF-8 (Rn. 9/93) Statement or Claim and Summons Tl v J ?0 Plaintiff +I Defendant sl STATEMENT OF CLAIM DO NOr WRITE BELOW THIS LINE SUMMONS NOTICE OF HEARING FAILURE TO APPEAR State of Minnesota Conciliation Court COUNTY JUDICIAL DISTRICT CASE NO. F1 K S ONE ?ffll i on.1ld D Tohr1-_u_',--- t- -r1ci __J - -- ---- -- Rt . 2 Box 214F Plaintiff Rt. 2 Box 214F Lake Park, MN 56554 `2 Lake Park, MN 56554 Telephone: 21'-53?-3513 Telephone: 218-532-1523 VS Vs City o Lasan :J Municipal Center -'- Defendant 02 _-'- -?---------.._- -----,_??_.-...-- ZIP .__?...._?.-_ `_°.v.-?---------'--------------Z?---------- -- -- .a an tutu 55122 Name` on a 1 d f). John-son & Patricia J. cil-f Me being duly sworn says that: s/he is the above named plaintiff/plaintiff's attorney; each defendant listed above is at least 18 years old; is not now in the Military Services; defendant *I is a resident of Dakota County, State ofM-ilInes ota ; defendant #2 is a resident of County, State of ; and alleges that the defendant(s) is (are) indebted to the plaintiff (s) in the amount of 51.605.10 plus $ 25.00 filing fee, totaling $1.630.10 plus disbursements, by reason of the following FACTS: Plaintiffs pre,,aileci in a special assessment appeal which anEnded t?,Ifs -;ate • ziteral assessment against their former homestead at 4625 Dodd Road, Eagal., (Tessmer et, al. v. City of Fagato Civil File No. C5-93-10032.) The city ci F-igan amended the assessment roll consistent with the court's determination, ti)e benefit received. There was no appeal, and the landowners' jLtti;_}:{ant against the city for costs and disbursements has been satisfies?. N r. Johnson recentl was transferred y by his employer to Lake Park, AL?nr)est. t. At the request of the mortgagee the buyer of the Johnson' property asked ti-a? the property be hkoked up to city water as a condition of sale. At closing... the title company required an escrow to cover the hook-up installation. lie city charged the contractor a lateral benefit water fee in the amount of $1,605.10, as a condition to receiving the permit. The fee has been >ing the sellers' escrow- 11-.e. fee charged: is- equivalel assess ,ient for the same benef it and is contrary to 1< ta. NOTARY STAMP OR COURT SEAL SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO THE ABOVE STATEMENT OF CLAIM IS TRUE AND BEFORE ME ON: CORRECT TO THE BEST OF KNOWLEDGE r V - 7 r-r / L-)7I id, ot --yJ M SIGNATURE &)-l-P- J t ' la ,? 7 7 4S L% SIGN URE THE STATE OF MINNESOTA TO THE ABOVE NAMED DEFENDANT YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED to appear at the hearing of the above entitled case at ,-J' 1J rn, on 5 TIM - , at DATE PLACE Dated: - `' Court Administrator/Deputy: ` Failure of defendant to appear at the hearing may result in a default judgment being entered for the plaintiff, and failure of the plaintiff to appear may result in dismissal of the action or a default judgment being entered in favor of the defendant on any counterclaim that has been asserted. n n rn m z 0 DEFENDANT'S COPY-READ REVERSE SIDE FOR IMPORTANT INSTRUCTIONS A. • INSTRUCTIONS • Failure of- defendant to' apoes, a the hearing may result in a default judgment being entered for the plaintiff, and failure of the plaintiff to appear may result in dismissal of the action or a default judgment being entered in favor of the defendant on any counterclaim that has been asserted. • All correspondence and inquiries should be addressed to the Conciliation Court. • Continuances: Only the Judge may change the date for trial of a case. All parties will be notified by the Court of any new (late set for trial. The Court in its discretion may assess costs of not to exceed $0.00, either absolute or conditional, to the other party as a con- dition of granting an order for a continuance of any case. • Counterclaims: The defendant may, if he or she has a claim against the plaintiff which is within the jurisdiction of the Court, file it with the Court not less than five days (exclusive of Saturdays, Sundays and holidays) before the trial date, upon payment of a filing fee, The Court will then notify the plaintiff of any such claim. Both the claim and counterclaim will be tried at the same time. If the counterclaim exceeds the jurisdictional limit of the Conciliation Court,-see Minnesota General Rules of Practice for the District Courts, Rule 510. • Evidence: Each party should bring to the trial all witnesses and exhibits, including repair bills and estimates, deemed necessary to prove his or her case. Upon request, the Court will issue subpoenas requiring witnesses to appear. • Trials: After hearing the evidence, the Judge will either make a ruling or take the case under advisement for later decision. The parties will be notified by mail of the Judge's decision. If a party changes his or her address, the Court must be notified. • If the parties agree on a settlement prior to trial, each party who has made a claim or counterclaim shall promptly advise the Court in writing that the claim or counterclaim has been settled and that it may be dismissed. Permit # IT 1 `1 Receipt Date: fi% - a a oI d CITY OF EAGAN V JJ ?t 2002 SEWER AND WATER CONNECTION AND AVAILABILITY?GHARGESye•rt? EXISTING RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY ST t^J r 1 w ?`tiB? Address 1 (. -D--cS Do rU o?L Property Owner Telephone # Plumber Date1 of Inquiry Y OVA OWr? ?C) C) 0 Sewer . r, Coy OFFICE Uffi,bN, Yjk ?5 r IVIA PRV required b U NA_ City NA County R-O-W P_ itt\\ Water Lateral charge @ $23.35/ff Trunk @ $945/connection City SAC MC/ES SAC Receipt # , Date Septic abandonment Permit Fee State Surcharge ?!i Total c/ ? a,j I) will I?rope•?i oulnP ill'o 44LA $ Cl) q ateral charge @ $23.60/ff 6-,of brQ-vl? Trunk @ $985/connection 100.00 \a° Water supply & storage 1,200.00 9 Receipt # , Dai Treatment plant, 50.00 Permit Fee 50.00 State Surcharge .50 PI ng permit reqAthp1b ter meter to beacquired t JY0o.5 0 (Total / CV t_ 4-v s?5n t,,)r,,ze 7-e y w dai ti? Sewer and Water. IPJ? Qd aV 4O °Y 7 D ?'? ?/d f?f 7•S/? Sewer latera large @ $23.35/ff Water lateral ch e @ $23.60/ff Sewer trunk @ $9 connection Water trunk @ $985/ nection City SAC MC/ES SAC Receipt # D e - Water supply & storage Receipt # Date Treatment plant Septic abando ent Permit Fee Plumbing permit required water meter to be acquired with plbg permit 100.00 1,200.00 880.00 540.00 50.00 100.00 .50 880.00 540.00 50.00 .50 cc: Carolyn Krech, Finance Department WAIVER OF HEARING NO. 658 City Project 751R WAIVER OF RIGHTS TO OBJECT TO SPECIAL ASSESSMENT I/We hereby request and authorize the City of Eagan, MN (Dakota County) to assess up to the maximum estimated total amount for the following connection and availability charges for the following described property owned by me/us: --- Property Identification Number 10-03600-027-25 Legal Description NOV 0 7 2002 EAGAN Part of the Northwest Quarter Commencing the Northeast Corner, West on tlie'iVbYth`Ltt Pl9f?ffT*5A1ith 0 Degrees 15 Minutes 0 Seconds, West 450.80 Feet, East 234.52 Feet to the Beginning, Continue East 289.88 Feet, North 25 Degrees 02 Minutes, West 209.15 Feet, South 83 Degrees OMinutes 22 Seconds, West 202.89 Feet South 164.80 Feet to Beginning, Township 27 and Range 23, City of Eagan, County of Dakota, Minnesota for the following improvements constructed under City Project 751R. These assessments will be certified to the County, thirty (30) days after the adoption of the assessment roll for the noted project. Said assessments have been preliminarily estimated at: IMPROVEMENT QUANTITY Rate. AMOUNT Sanitary Sewer Lateral 204 F.F. Unknown 4 inch Sanitary Sewer Service l Ea Unknown TOTAL $12,850.00 The assessments will be spread for the same term, at the same interest rate, and will be assessed using the same improvement rates as other as other similarly situated parcels with Project 751R. You may pay any portion of these special assessments without interest for a period of thirty (30) days after the adoption of these assessments by the City Council. Payment can be made at the Eagan Municipal Center. If you pay after the thirty (30) day period, interest will be charged from the signing date to December 3151 of the current year. The undersigned, for themselves, their heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns, hereby consent to the assessment of these improvements and further, hereby waive notice of any and all hearings necessary, and waive objections to any technical defects in any proceedings related to these assessments, and further waive the right to object to or arI m t hese assessments o thisagreem Dated: ? Z' _q s F er: Jason W. Gri STATE OF MINNESOTA) )ss. COUNTY OF DAKOTA) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this c T ?ay of A/ r. v e A ?- c r , 2002, by Jason W. Griggs .nA-C,. Ke ) JANICEV 11ELLNER K? VOTARY "S"c INNESOTA 5 Y MV COMMUSIO9 EXPIPES 1.31-2005 Notary Public •MN?'vMHY' ? WAIVER OF HEARING NO. 670 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AUTHORIZATION FOR UNPAID PERMIT FEES I/We hereby request and authorize the City of Eagan, MN (Dakota County) to assess the following described property owned by me/us: 10-03600-027-25 Legal Description Part of the Northwest Quarter Commencing the Northeast Corner, West on the North Line 1118.52 Ft, South 0 Degrees 15 Minutes 0 Seconds, West 450.80 Feet, East 234.52 Feet to the Beginning, Continue East 289.88 Feet, North 25 Degrees 02 Minutes, West 209.15 Feet, South 83 Degrees OMinutes 22 Seconds, West 202.89 Feet South 164.80 Feet to Beginning, Township 27 and Range 23, City of Eagan, County of Dakota, Minnesota for the following unpaid permit fees(s): Item City SAC MCES SAC Septic abandonment Sewer permit and surcharge Use Quantity Rate Amount S. F. 1 ea. 100.00 ea. 100.00 S. F. 1 ea. 1,200.00 ea. 1,200.00 S. F. 1 ea. 50.00 50.00 S. F. 1 ea. 50.50 50.50 Total $1,400.50 to be spread for a term of 5 years at an annual interest rate of 5.5% against any remaining unpaid balances. You may pay any portion of these special assessments within thirty (30) days of signing the Waiver without interest at the Eagan Municipal Center. If you pay after the thirty (30) day period, interest will be charged from the signing date to December 31" of the current year. The undersigned, for themselves, their heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns, hereby consent to the assessment of these unpaid permit fees, and further, hereby waive notice of any and all hearings necessary, and waive objections to any technical defects in any proceedings related to these assessments, and further waive the right to object to or appeal from these assessments made pursuant to this agreement. Dated: Notary J o W. Griggs Fee Owner ARIE DALEBLIC-MINNESOTA LTAR on Expires Jan. 312005 WAIVER OF HEARING NO. 658 City Project 751R WAIVER OF RIGHTS TO OBJECT TO SPECIAL ASSESSMENT I/We hereby request and authorize the City of Eagan, MN (Dakota County) to assess up to the maximum estimated total amount for the following connection and availability charges for the following described property owned by me/us: RECEIVED Property Identification Number 10-03600-027-25 NOV 0 7 2002 Legal Description EAGAN Part of the Northwest Quarter Commencing the Northeast Corner, West on t&'i+?Ytn`Y,tN??pp??????tJ4Pl9§F TMW1th 0 Degrees 15 Minutes 0 Seconds, West 450.80 Feet, East 234.52 Feet to the Beginning, Continue East 289.88 Feet, North 25 Degrees 02 Minutes, West 209.15 Feet, South 83 Degrees OMinutes 22 Seconds, West 202.89 Feet South 164.80 Feet to Beginning, Township 27 and Range 23, City of Eagan, County of Dakota, Minnesota for the following improvements constructed under City Project 751R. These assessments will be certified to the County, thirty (30) days after the adoption of the assessment roll for the noted project. Said assessments have been preliminarily estimated at: IMPROVEMENT OUANTITY Rate AMOUNT Sanitary Sewer Lateral 204 F.F. Unknown 4 inch Sanitary Sewer Service 1 Ea Unknown TOTAL $12,850.00 The assessments will be spread for the same term, at the same interest rate, and will be assessed using the same improvement rates as other as other similarly situated parcels with Project 751R. You may pay any portion of these special assessments without interest for a period of thirty (30) days after the adoption of these assessments by the City Council. Payment can be made at the Eagan Municipal Center. If you pay after the thirty (30) day period, interest will be charged from the signing date to December 3 of the current year. The undersigned, for themselves, their heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns, hereby consent to the assessment of these improvements and further, hereby waive notice of any and all hearings necessary, and waive objections to any technical defects in any proceedings related to these assessments, and further waive the right to object to or appeal m these assessments made p It to this aaggreeme Dated: 1-;? 1p[ dd r Fe er: Jason W. Gri STATE OF MINNESOTA) )ss. COUNTY OF DAKOTA) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ?Y ?ay of iV r, v t ?n L e L, 2002, by Jason W. Griggs l c' t t.. WI xe JANICEW. KELLNER NO N MINNESOTA MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 131@005 Notary Public sNN ° YMUYtHIT UAIA JT51tM OWNER NAME AND ADDRESS INQUIRY CURR 302 PROPERTY ID Owner Change Date NEXT 10-03600-027-25 03/30/1998 4625 DODD RD LAST NAME FIRST M CORP TAXPAY ADDR Owner: GRIGGS JASON W N Y Y Addrl: 4625 DODD RD Addr2: EAGAN MN 55123-2110 Addr3: Addr4: Owner: Addrl: Addr2: Addr3: Addr4: Owner: Addrl: Addr2: Addr3: Addr4: Owner: Addrl: Addr2: Addr3: Addr4: Type PID: press ENTER: or F1. F2. F5. F8 L BL CITY VSE ONLY RECEIPT #: 5 q J ?5 q SUED. I? - Djobd - oc` 7- C?5 DATE: 1996 PLUMBING PERMIT (RESIDENTIAL) CITY OF EAGAN 3830 PILOT KNOB RD EAGAN, MN 55122 (612) 681-4675 Please complete for: ? single family dwellings ? townhomes and condos when permits are required for each unit FIXTURES Shower EACH 3.00 x Water Closet 3.00 x Bath Tub 3.00 is Lavatory 3.00 x Kitchen Sink 3.00 x Laundry Tray 3.00 ;c Hot Tub/Spa 3.00 sc Water Heater 3.00 x Floor Drain 3.00 x Gas Piping Outlet " minimum - 1 3.00 x Rough Openings 1.50 x Water Softener 5.00 x Private Disposal " Dakota Cty. license 65.00 (new and refurbished systems) U.G. Sprinkler " home under const. 3.00 Alterations " to existing 20.00 Water Turn Around 20.00 STATE SURCHARGE TOTAL NDL TOTAL Q/L 1 00 .50 olG •,S? SITE ADDRESS: DDOV Jr/-) OWNER INSTALLER NAME: IAIF/6/Z ?? F'yc'# ? Q STREET ADDRESS: 440 G1 rff Pb CITY: E-A-glfwv STATE: ZIP: S', 57X-3 PHONE #: (C??) ys Y 36" bivNATIII't ? - t Lot Plat CITY OF EAGAN 1996 SEWER & WATER CONNECTION CHARGES EXISTING RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY Sewer connection Date previous Receipt # -?--i Account deposi Sewer permit & Subtotal * Plumbing rm Tap charge (SAC) paid & surcharge $,1;000.00 15.00 50.50 $ 1,065.50 Date 07 / 10/96 Receipt # 60731 Water connection charges Water availability charge (WAC) Date previously paid Receipt # Account deposit Water permit & surcharge Water meter Treatment plant 20.50 Subtotal * Plumbing-permit & surcharge Tap Total Sewer & water connection Sewer availability charge (SAC) 1,000.00 Date previo ly paid Receipt # Water availabili c arge (WAC) 760.00 Date previously pa Receipt Account deposit i 30.00 Sewer & water permit and surncharge 100.50 Water meter 107.00 Treatment plant / 396.00 Subtotal $2,393.50 * Plumbing permit & surcharge 20.50 Tap(s) $ 760.00 15.00 50.50 107.00 n nTJCLT $1,328.50 20.50 51,328.50 * A plumbing permit is also required. It will be issued only to a plumber licensed with the City or to ?he homeowner if he is actually doing the work. 4 utI. O Nkl - 3 e --------------------------------------------- -- ----- ----------------- r"" aN) 3 OFFICE USE ONLY Property owner JASON aRTGns (PROSPF.CTTyF. OwNF.R) PRV VC-5 water available Address 4625 DODD RD No. of taps -!;ewer NA Phone no. 681- 1457 rMsessmentsx/?OS, /9 , h IQ4 Plumber DAKOTA PT.ac Waiver i f 0%, J/ cR3 ?3Q Blk PID # 10-0.1600-097-91 Sewer/water permit # 28220 i LARRYS.SEVERSON JAMES F. SHELDON MICHAEL G. DOUGHERTY• MICHAEL E. MOLENDA RECEIVED Q 2 4Qgr December 31, 1996 SEVERSON9 SHELDONq DOUGHERTY & MOLENDA, P.A. A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION ATTORNEYS AT LAW SUITE 600 7300 WEST 147TH STREET APPLE VALLEY, MINNESOTA 55124-7538 (612) 432-3136 LOREN M. SOLFEST SHARON K. HILLS ROBERT B. BAUER CHRISTOPHER A. GROVE SHARI L. STERUD GERALD(JUD) E. DELOSS TELEFAX NUMBER 432-3780 Jill Johnson Sholts Rowland, Mertensotto & Sholts, P.A. 1100 West Seventh Street St. Paul MN 55102-3897 Re: Ronald D. Johnson, et. al. v. City of Eagan Court File No. CX-96-010333 Z I? pp17 Our File No. 206-14500 = O2-7 z s Dear Ms. Johnson: Enclosed herewith and hereby personally served upon you, please find the following: 1. Notice of Motion and Motion; 2. Defendant's Memorandum of Law in Support of It's Motion for Summary Judgment; and 3. Proposed Order Granting Summary Judgment in Favor of City of Eagan. If you should have any questions, please give me a call. Re e y yours, p Sharon K. Hills Assistant Eagan City Attorney SKH/wkt Enc. INDIVIDUAL ATTORNEYS ALSO LICENSED IN IOWA OR WISCONSIN -CERTIFIED REAL PROPERTY LAW SPECIALIST, MS9.A LARRY S. SEVERSON JAMES F. SHELDON MICHAEL G. DOUGHERTY- MICHAEL E. MOLENDA December 31, 1996 SUITE 600 7300 WEST 147TH STREET APPLE VALLEY, MINNESOTA 55124-7538 (612) 432-3136 TELEFAX NUMBER 432-3780 Dakota County Government Center Clerk of Court 1560 West Highway 55 Hastings MN 55033 Re: Ronald D. Johnson, et. al. v. City of Eagan Court File No. CX-96-010333 Our File No. 206-14500 Dear Clerk of Court: Enclosed for filing please find the following: Notice of Motion and Motion; REC V D " 02 1996 LOREN M. SOLFEST SHARON K. HILLS ROBERT B. BAUER CHRISTOPHER A. GROVE SHARI L. STERUD GERALD(JUD) E. DELOSS 2. Defendant's Memorandum of Law in Support of it's Summary Judgment; Order Granting Summary Judgment in Favor of City of Eagan; and 4. Affidavit of Personal Service. In accordance with the City's Motion, please schedule a hearing on the special term calendar on January 16, 1997 at 9:00 a.m. If you should have any questions, please give me a call. Respectfully yours, aron K. Hills Assistant Eagan City Attorney SKH/wkt Enc. SEVERSON, SHELDON, DOUGHERTY & MOLENDA9 P.A. A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION ATTORNEYS AT LAW INDIVIDUAL ATTORNEYS ALSO LICENSED IN IOWA OR WISCONSIN -CERTIFIED REAL PROPERTY LAW SPECIALIST. MSRA STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF DAKOTA Ronald D. Johnson and Patricia J. Johnson, Plaintiffs, V. DISTRICT COURT FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT Case Type 1: Appeal from Conciliation Court Court File No. CX-96-010333 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION City of Eagan, a Minnesota municipal corporation , Defendant. TO: Ronald D. Johnson and Patricia J. Johnson and their attorney, Jill Johnson-Sholts, 1100 West 7th Street, St. Paul, Minnesota 55102-3897. PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on the 16th day of January 1997 at 9:00 a.m., or as soon thereafter as counsel can be heard, by the special term judge at the Dakota County Judicial Center, 1560 West Highway 55, in the City of Hastings, County of Dakota, State of Minnesota, the Defendant City of Eagan will move the court for an Order as follows: 1. Granting summary judgment in favor of the City of Eagan, the above- named Defendant, and against Ronald D. and Patricia J. Johnson, the above-named Plaintiffs, pursuant to Rule 56 of the Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure. 2. Dismissing the Amended Complaint filed by Ronald D. and Patricia J. Johnson, the above-named Plaintiffs, on the ground that the pleading and the relief sought 1 therein is outside the scope of the conciliation court action from which this pending appeal arises. 3. Requiring the above-named Plaintiffs to pay Defendant's reasonable attorney fees and costs incurred in connection with these proceedings. 4. For further and other relief as the Court deems fair and equitable. SAID MOTION is based upon the Plaintiffs Conciliation Court complaint, amended complaint and arguments of counsel, together with all pleadings, records and files herein. YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT all responsive pleadings shall be served and mailed to or filed with the court administrator no later than five days prior to the scheduled hearing. The court may, in its discretion, disregard any responsive pleadings served or filed with the court administrator less than five days prior to such hearing in ruling on the motion or matter in question. Dated: 12 - 3 (-,jro SEVERSON,SHELDON,DOUGHERTY & MOLENDA, P.A. By: Sharon K. Hills, 4202496 James F. Sheldon, 9100092 Attorneys for Defendants 7300 West 147th Street, Suite 600 Apple Valley, MN 55124 (612) 432-3136 2 The undersigned hereby acknowledges that costs, disbursements and reasonable attorney and witness fees may be awarded to the party against whom the allegations in this pleading are asserted pursuant to Minn. Stat. §549.21, Subd. 2. SEVERSON, SHELDON, DOUGHERTY & MOLENDA, P.A. By: Sharon K. Hills, 9202496 James F. Sheldon, #100092 Attorneys for Defendants 7300 West 147th Street, Suite 600 Apple Valley, MN 55124 (612) 432-3136 3 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF DAKOTA Ronald D. Johnson and Patricia J. Johnson, Plaintiffs, V. DISTRICT COURT FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT Case Type 1: Appeal from Conciliation Court Court File No. CX-96-010333 ORDER AND JUDGMENT FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF CITY OF EAGAN City of Eagan, a Minnesota municipal corporation , Defendant. The above-entitled matter came on for hearing on the 16th day of January 1997, before the Honorable Judge of District Court, at the Dakota County Judicial Center, 1560 West Highway 55, in the City of Hastings, County of Dakota, State of Minnesota. The Plaintiffs appeared through their attorney, Jill Johnson-Sholts; the Defendant appeared through its attorney, Sharon K. Hills, Assistant Eagan City Attorney. Based on the files, records, pleadings and proceedings herein, in addition to arguments of counsel, the Court makes the following: ORDER 1. The City of Eagan's Motion for Summary Judgment is hereby GRANTED. 2. Summary judgment shall be hereby entered in favor of the Defendant, City of Eagan, and against the Plaintiffs, Ronald D. and Patricia J. Johnson. 3. The Court hereby adopts and incorporates as a part hereof the City of Eagan's Memorandum of Law filed in support of its Motion for Summary Judgment. JUDGMENT LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY. Dated: , 1996. BY THE COURT: Judge of District Court I hereby certify that the above Order constitutes the Judgment and Decree of this Court. DECREE ENTERED AND JUDGMENT ROLL FILED THIS day of . 1996. BY THE COURT: DISTRICT COURT ADMINISTRATOR Deputy I STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF DAKOTA FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT Case Type 1: Appeal from Conciliation Court Court File No. CX-96-010333 Ronald D. Johnson and Patricia J. Johnson, Plaintiffs, V. City of Eagan, a Minnesota municipal corporation, Defendant. DEFENDANT'S MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF IT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT INTRODUCTION This memorandum is submitted in support of the Defendant City of Eagan's Motion for Summary Judgment. For the reasons discussed below, the imposition of a water connection charge on land where assessments were previously levied and partially voided is permissible when connections with the utility improvements are made and thus, the City of Eagan is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. STATEMENT OF ISSUE Is imposition of water connection charges on land for which assessments for the utility improvement was previously levied and partially voided permissible when connection with the improvement is made? STATEMENT OF MOTION DOCUMENTS The City of Eagan's Motion for Summary Judgment is supported by Plaintiffs' Conciliation Court Complaint, dated September 30, 1996; Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint in this matter, dated December 20, 1996; and the Findings, Conclusions, Order for Judgment and Judgment filed in the Plaintiffs assessment appeal on November 10, 1994 (Tessmer, et. al. v. City of Eagan, File No. C5-93-10032)("Assessment Appeal Order"). The Plaintiffs' Conciliation Court Complaint and the Assessment Appeal Order are attached to Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint filed in this pending conciliation court appeal matter. STATEMENT OF FACTS On August 4, 1992, the City of Eagan approved Public Improvement No. 635("the project") for the construction of sanitary sewer, water main, storm sewer and street improvements. Specifically, the project included the construction of an 8-inch trunk water main on Dodd Road from Cliff Road to the south plat line of Lakeview Trail Addition. The Plaintiffs, who owned and occupied property abutting the improvement at the time the final trunk water assessment roll was entered on October 19, 1993, were assessed $2,508.00. See Assessment Appeal Order. The Plaintiffs appealed the public improvement assessment and the district court, Judge William F. Thuet presiding, concluded that the water lateral assessment levied by the City against the Plaintiffs' property exceeded the benefit rendered therefrom. The 2 Court concluded that the Plaintiffs' property received a benefit of $1,550.00 for the water lateral improvement and ordered the City to reduce the assessment accordingly. See Assessment Appeal Order. Earlier this year, the Plaintiffs sold their property to a third property who required as a condition of sale that the property be connected to municipal water. The City of Eagan imposed $1,605.10 as and for the water connection charge. At the closing on the sale of the Plaintiffs' property, the title company required the Plaintiffs to remit $1,605.10 to be placed into escrow for the payment of the connection charges which was ultimately paid to the City of Eagan. See Plaintiffs Conciliation Court Complaint and Amended Complaint in this appeal proceeding. On September 30, 1996, the Plaintiffs filed a Conciliation Court Complaint against the City of Eagan in which the Plaintiffs challenged the City's imposition of the water connection charge against the property. The Conciliation Court, Judge Duane R. Harves presiding, entered judgment in favor of the Plaintiffs and ordered the City of Eagan to refund the water connection charge of $1,605.10, plus fees and disbursements of $35.00. See Dakota County Conciliation Court File No. F6-96-575. The City of Eagan appealed Judge Harves' Conciliation Court Order resulting in this present pending case. ARGUMENT The pleadings, together with all records and files herewith, establish that there is no genuine issue of any material fact and that the City of Eagan is entitled to judgment as a matter of law on the grounds that the City may impose water connection charges on land for which assessments for the water utility improvement was previously voided. A municipality is authorized to impose a water connection charge for property against which prior assessments for the utility improvements were levied and voided. Minn. Stat. §444.075, Subd. 3; Crown Cork and Seal Company. Inc. v. City of Lakeville, 313 N.W.2d 196 (Minn. 1981); and Nordgxen v. City of Maplewood, 326 N.W.2d 640 (Minn. 1982). Minn. Stat. §444.075, Subd. 3, clearly grants to municipalities the authority to impose various sewer and water charges "[t]o pay for the construction, reconstruction, repair, enlargement, improvement, or other obtainment or the maintenance, operation and use ..." of municipal water and sewer facilities. Crown Cork, 313 N.W.2d at 198 (quoting Minn. Stat. §444.075, Subd. 3). As the Supreme Court in Crown Cork explained: The statute speaks of three types of sewer and water charges; the City has the authority to impose "just and equitable charges for the use and for the availability of such facilities and for connections therewith * * *. " 313 N.W.2d at 198 (emphasis not added). The Minnesota Supreme Court explicitly held that the City's discretionary authority to impose a use, availability and connection charge, either separately or a combination thereof, to finance municipal sewer and water facilities 4 is clearly granted in Minn. Stat. §444.075, Subd. 3. The Court interpreted the language of §444.075, Subd. 3, as merely setting forth "permissible methods of calculating connection charges, i.e. connection charges may be set by reference to the actual cost of connection as well as by reference to assessments paid by the connecting property, or, 'in the discretion of the governing body,' by any other method, as long as the connection charge is, in the language of the statute, 'just and equitable.' " Crown Cork, 313 N.W.2d at 201 (emphasis not added). The Supreme Court concluded that its interpretation "allows local government maximum flexibility in financing municipal sewer and water services," specifically noting that a connection charge is not an assessment pursuant to §444.075, Subd. 4, and thus, the issue of benefit is irrelevant. 313 N.W.2d at 201. One year after the Supreme Court's decision in Crown Cork, the Court reaffirmed that decision in Nordgren v. City of Maplewood. 326 N.W.2d 640 (Minn. 1982). The essential facts in Nordgren are of significance to the issues presented in this Motion for Summary Judgment. In Nord en, the City assessed the property owner's undeveloped lots for water and sewer system improvements. The property owner appealed the assessments and the trial court reduced the assessments on three lots and voided the assessments on three others. The City did not appeal the trial court's decision and reduce the assessments accordingly. Subsequently, the property owner attempted to develop a lot and the City charged $4,202.00 as connection charges for hooking up to the water and sewer mains. When the City originally levied its assessments, this lot was assessed in the 5 amount of $6,914.00, which was entirely voided by the court in the challenge to the assessment. The district court in Nordgren like the conciliation court in this case, ordered the City to refund the cash connection charge to the property owner and held that the City was reimposing a charge already prohibited by the court and thereby undermining the property owner's successful appeal of the assessment. The Minnesota Supreme Court, however, reversed the district court's order and held: The levying of the connection charge in this case is authorized by Minn. Stat. §444.045. * * * As we noted in Crown Cork, connection charges are not assessments and may be imposed on top of prior assessments. Thus, the City here could properly impose a connection charge on land for which assessments were voided, so long as the charge is just and equitable as the statute requires. The April 1979 order voided assessments because there was no benefit to the land. Crown Cork held that the benefit to the land is not material to the different and separately authorized connection charge. Thus imposition of a connection charge on land where assessments were voided is permissible when the landowners make connection with the improvements. 326 N.W.2d at 642 (emphasis added). The holding in Nordgren is dispositive of the present case before this Court. In fact, the facts in Nordgren are identical to the facts in this case. Like the property owners in Nordgren, the Plaintiffs in this case were assessed for water lateral improvements, successfully appealed the assessment, and upon the subsequent connection to the municipal water mains, the City of Eagan imposed a connection charge of $1,605.10. As in Nordgren. the imposition of connection charges on top of prior assessments for the construction of the utility by the City of Eagan is permissible. 6 Accordingly, as a matter of law pursuant to the Minnesota Supreme Court decisions in Crown Cork and Nordaren the City of Eagan undisputedly has the authority to impose a water connection charge on land for which assessments for the utility improvement was previously levied and paid.. CONCLUSION For the reasons stated herein, the City of Eagan is entitled to judgment summarily as a matter of law and thus, it respectfully requests the Court to enter judgment in favor of the City of Eagan and against the plaintiffs. Dated: SEVERSON, SHELDON, DOUGHERTY & MOLENDA, P.A. tti v. By: Sharon K. Hills, #202496 James F. Sheldon, #100092 Attorneys for Defendants 7300 West 147th Street, Suite 600 Apple Valley, MN 55124 (612) 432-3136 7 PERMIT CITY OF EAGAN 3830 Pilot Knob Road PERMIT TYPE: B U I L D I N G Eagan, Minnesota 55122-1897 Permit Number: 0 2 7 6 7 9 (612) 681-4675 Date Issued: 05123/96 SITE ADDRESS: 4625 DODD RD LOT: 27 BLOCK: 25 SECTION 36 P.T.N.: 10-03600-027-25 DESCRIPTION: STORM DAMAGE-NO FEE M;F 9A wy? 1 n Parmit Type A ?u?t# ,??k Type REPAIR s ,9Yt'ktk Ct15e v 434 ALT. RESIDENTIAL AUFSjE ?3S3 22 ^3fi P? j£ g2t„ 4® 6 '21- ir" A & la REMARKS: FEE SUMMARY: CONTRACTOR: OWNER: - Applicant - JOHNSON RONALD 4625 0000 RD EAGAN MN 55123 (612)688-6513 ISSUED BY, IGNATURE= I CITY OF EAGAN 3830 PILOT KNOB RD - 55122 ?pg (t}?1: , f( Llq 1996 BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION (RESIDENTIAL) oo ?_ 681-4675 New Construction Requirements Re d 9Reoair Requirements ? 3 registered site surveys ? 2 copies of plan ? 2 copies of plans (include beam & window sizes; poured fnd. design; etc.) ? 2 site surveys (exterior additions & decks) ? 1 energy calculations ? 1 energy calculations for heated additions ? 3 copies of tree preservation plan if lot platted after 7/1/93 required: _ Yes _ No r^ r DATE: CONSTRUCTION COST'. DESCRIPTION OF WORK: I1h ITTOL "ft k2lf -"' rnC? . C-11A4. STREET ADDRESS: `t ops c\ 7A LOT _L2?- BLOCK SUBD./P.I.D. #: PROPERTY OWNER CONTRACTOR ARCHITECT! ENGINEER Name: Jdnn'QY)n ?nC4?C? Phone #: WT FM61 Street Address: City: ??t 1.9 7 State: Company: C:?!Se\R- Street Address: City: Company: Name: Street Address: City: Sewer & water licensed plumber: change are requested once permit is issued. Registration #: State: Zip: Penalty applies when address change and lot 1 hereby acknowledge that I have read this application and state that the information is correct and agree to comply with all applicable State of Minnesota Statutes and City of Eagan Ordinances. Signature of Applicant: OFFICE USE ONLY Certificates of Survey Received State: Zip:ss(a?? Phone #: License I Phone Zip: Yes No Tree Preservation Plan Received Yes No 1146/95 16:26 E9C.PN FITS FHC -> C I T' HHLL N0.0?0 P082/y.,:, MEMORANDUM ' v fj?N//J? TO: Tom ColberS Director of Public Works FROM: City Attorucyls Office DATE: November 2, 1995 RE: Prior Assessments and Subsequent Utility Connection Charges Our File No. 206-7304 In accordance with your recent request, our office examined the issue of whether the City of Eagan may impose utility connection charges on land against which assessments have been previously levied for the construction of the utilities. Specifically, this office understands that this issue arises under your department's consideration of the following hypothetical scenario: In 1990, a parcel of land was assessed a tank area charge for sanitary sewer. In connection with an assessment appeal, the amount of the assessment was reduced to a lesser figure. A number of years later, that same property seeks a utility connection permit in order to hook-up to the sanitary sewer system. Based on the foregoing scenario, you requested an advisory opinion on the following issues: 1. Does the City have the authority to impose a connection charge on tap of the prior aC£mm=t? 2. If so, what may the City impose as the connection charge: a. The current rate as set forth by City Council resolution? b• The current rate as set forth by City Council resolution, less the assessment previously paid? c. The difference between the property's original a-ank area assessment and its actual proportionate cost of the tnmL• area improvement? The City has the authority to impose connection charges on property against which assessments for the utility improvements have been previously levied. Minn. Stat. §444.075, Subd. 3; Crown Cork & Seal Comt?aav Inc v City ofI akeville 313 N.W1d 1% (Minn. 1981); and cNordereu v. City of Maplewood 326 N.W.2d 640 (Minn. 1982). R-96% 612 681 4300 11-06-96 04:24PY P002 Ot36 11106/95 16:27 EJ%RN `f-CE rrrC ->• C1TY 4P NO. 070 P003/0W Minn. Stet. §444.075, Subd. 3, grants to municipalities the authority to impose various sewer and water charges "[t]o pay for the construction, reconstrac ion, repair, enlargement improvement, or other obtainment and the maintenance, operation and use..." of municipal water and sewer facilities. As the Minnesota Supreme Court in Crown Cork explained: The statute speaks of three types of sewer and water charges; the City has the authority to impose "just and equitable charges for the use and for the availability of such facilities and for connections therewith * * *." 313 N.W.2d at 198 (emphasis not added). The Minnesota Supreme Court explicitly held that the City's discretionary authority to impose a use, rmilability and connection charge, either separately or a combination thereof, to finance municipal sewer and water facilities is clearly granted in §444.075, Subd. 3. The essential facts in Crown Cork are of significance to the issues presented in this memorandum. In 1992, Crown Cork purchase property in the Airlake Industrial Park in the City of Lakeville. At the time of the purchase, the property was improved with an industrial building used for the assembly of mobile homes and was already serviced by city sewer and water. The City project which brought sewer and water to the property had been fully assessed. The previous owners had connected to the municipal sewage and water facilities and paid assessments and connection charges for such hook-ups. In 1977, Crown Cork installed a canning manufacturing operation which required more water and produced more sewage and in tarn required the installation of larger service lines to be connected to the municipal facilities. The City of Lakeville levied a connection charge of $147,415.00. 545,200.00 of the connection charge represented the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission's SAC charges levied upon the City. The remaining portion of the connection charges, 5102,215.00, constituted the City's own c mectim charge. The formula for calculating the City sewer and water connection charge was patterned after the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission's formula for its SAC charge. Crown Cork argued that its property is exempt from connection charges because it has been previously assessed sewer and water trait charges. It was not disputed that the previous owner of the property paid four connection charges and the City credited Crown Cork for those four previous connection charges. The Supreme Court rejected Crown Cork's argument that any portion of a connection charge which exceeds the actual cost of making or supervising the connection to the facility ma only be "fixed by reference to the portion of the cost thereof which has been paid by assessincra of the premises to be connected, in comparison with other premises * * * " The Court interpreted the above-quoted language from §444.075, Subd. 3, as merely setting forth "permissible methods of calculating connection charges, ie. connection charges My be set by reference to the actual cost of connearou as well as by referetme to assessments paid by the connecting property, or, 'in the discretion of the governing body', 2-9654 5:2 581 43:_ 04:24PM P003 #34 11/06/95 16:27 EPacN M"CE FaC -* CITY MHLL NO. TM P004/065 by any other method, as long as the connection charge is, in the language of the statute, just and equitable! n 313 N.W.2d at 201 (emphasis not added). The Supreme Court concluded that its interpretation "allows local government maximum tle)dbility in fiaancin$ municipal sewer and water services' • *."313 N.W.2d at 201. One year after the Supreme Court's decision m Crown Corte the Court rcaffumed its decision in Nordgen v City of M lewood. 326 N.W.2d 640 (Minn. 1982). In o ge the City assessed the property owncs undeveloped lots for water and sewer system improvements. The property owner appealed the assessments and the trial court reduced the assessments on three lots and voided the assessments an three others. The City did not appeal the trial court's decision and reduced the assessments accordingly. Subsequently, the property owner attempted to develop a lot and the City charged $4,202.00 as connection charges for hooking up to the water and sewer mains. When the City originally levied its assessments, this lot was assessed in the amount of 56,914.00, which was entirely voided by the Court in the challenge to the assessment. The district court in Norderen ordered the City to refund the cash connection charge to the property owner and held that the City was reimposing a charge already prohibited by the Court and thereby undermining the property owner's successful appeal of the assessment. The Minnesota Supreme Court, reversed the district court's order. The levying of the connection charge in this case is authorized by Minn. Stat. §444.075. 0 • • As we noted in Crown Cork. connection charges are W assessments and may be imposed pn too ofprior asse ss ments. Thus, the City here could properly impose a connection charge on the land for which assessments were voided, so long as the charge is just and equitable as the statute requires. The April 1979 order voided assessments because there was no benefit to the land. Crown Cork held that the benefit to the land is not material to the different and separately authorized connection charge. Thus, imposition of a connection charge on land where assessments were voided is permissible when the landowners make connection with the improvements. 326 N. W.2d at 642 (emphasis added). The Court noted, however, that the imposition of a connection charge would be impermissible if it were imposed discriminatorily, or if the charge was not just and equitable. 326 N.W.2d at 642. Finally, it is noteworthy to point out the Court's observation that "without an ordinance or resolution showing adoption of a standard charge imposed for all connections for sewer and water services, it is impossible to ascertain whether the charge imposed varied from that imposed on others." 326 N.W.2d at 642. Thus, the formal enactment of either an ordinance or a resolution describing a connection charge is necessary, 326 N.W.2d at 642. E-96% 512 521 4300 !I-O5-95 04:24PM P004 7;34 11/36/95 16.28 EAGA MICE FAC a CITY HALL NO.OW P065/065 i Applying the Mmaesota Supreme Court's decision in Nor and Crown Cade the following may be concluded; 1. The City may impose a connection charge for property against with prior assessments for the utilities were levied; 2. The connection charge must nut be imposed discriminatorily, ie. the charge smut also he levied against other similarly situated property owners; 3. The amount of the connection charge has no relation to the amount of benefit to the land as a result of the atiRW improvements and may be in excess of the actual benefit and the actual cost of connection; and i 4. Connection charges may be determined by: (1) reference to the portion of the cost of connection which has been paid by assessment of the premises to be connected in comparison with other premises; (2) by reference to the actual cost of connection; and (3) the cost of malting or supervising the comuxtion. ! SKH/wJa H-96% 4 612 681 4300 11-06-95 04:24PM P005 434 S 3.05 otherwise acted for and authorized in w by the owner and the c t, as agent for the own nd consented ??? -- --- to by the City of n, Minnesota. T ity may collect - ? the same in a civil ac or, in the ernative and at the option of the City, other, a provided in this • ( C ®? Subdivision. a ' 3 G ® S B. Each such ount is hereby made a lien u on th i p e prem ses served. accounts which are more 0 ("_G_G O 1 than forty-five days due when authorized by 00 41 C 70 C ? resolution of the Cou be certi d b the City Clerk- ' ? - Treasurer of the C of Eagan, Minn ta, to the County ® 0 e 0 Q Auditor, and the y Clerk-Treasurer in certifying shall ' • r--^-© ! specify the a t thereof, the descriptio f the premises served, an a name of the owner thereof. a amount so certifie all be extended by the Auditor on tax rolls ??_ - -- --? agai uch premises in the same manner as other es, and c cted by the County Treasurer, and paid to City ,• ong with other taxes. - Source: Ordinance No. 30, 2nd Series Effective Date: 6-6-86 SEC. 3.06. WATER CONNECTION AND AVAILABILITY CRARGE. Surd. 1. Purpose of Funds Derived and Allocation of Revenue. The purpose of all funds derived is to pay for all or part of the construction, reconstruction, repair, enlargement, improvement or other obtainment and the maintenance, operation and use of the water utility as established by the City. All revenues derived from the fee shall be credited to the appropriate water fund. Subd. 2. Water Utility Fee. A water utility fee for connection and availability of the water facilities shall be determined by resolution of the Council and shall be just and equitable. A charge for the connection and availability of water service may be imposed for all premises abutting on streets or other places where municipal water service is located, whether or not connected to it. A charge for the availability and connection to the water service may, in the discretion of the Council, be fixed by reference to the portion of the cost which has been paid by assessment of the premises. Subd. 3. Adjustments. The Council may adopt, by resolution, policies and standards for the adjustment of the 0 0 0 8 0 Ca fee for parcels. Such adjustments shall not be made ret ti l i04 GG00i roac ve y. • • (.. Q 0 . Subd. 4. Exemptions. Public rights-of-way are 104-1 v © Q exempt from the fee. C, - 0 G_ ® Subd. 5. Billings. Bills for charges for the fee 04 . C O 0 j 1 shall be made by the Finance Department. All bills shall-be a bl h •0t? C?00 ya p e at t e office of the Finance Director. 0 `, - 0 0 1 42 (6-15-90) 5 3.06 Subd. 6. Recalculation of Pees. If a property owner or person responsible for paying the fee questions the correctness of such charge, that person may have the 10 • C, determination of the charge recomputed within six months of • 0 ( C C a 4 mailing, by submitting to the Public works Director a written request for the recomputation. 1049 GC• • (_ E1-C © 4 Subd. 7. Collections. A21 fees are due on the 0 t due date specified by the City for the respective account and shall be delinquent 15 days thereafter. It is the duty a 0 (; a (l 0 ( of the City to endeavor to promptly collect delinquent ?.-.? 0 0 accounts, and in all cases where satisfactory- arrangements _ for payments have not been made, all such delinquent 0 accounts shall be certified to the City Clerk who shall prepare an assessment of the delinquent accounts against the property served or to be served. To each account, there shall be added a certification charge (preparation . for certification of taxes of delinquent accounts) in the amount provided for by Council resolution. This assessment roll shall be delivered to the Council for adoption on or before October 1 of each year. Such action may be optional or subsequent to taking legal action to collect delinquent accounts. Source: Ordinance No. 90, 2nd Series Effective Date: 10-27-89 C. 3.07. STORK WATER DRAINAGE COHHBCTIOH AVAIr.An MAarre. 1. Storm Water Drainage Utilit A storm water drainage ility for the City is hereb stablished. The municipal s m sewer system shall perated as a public utility pu uant to Minnesota totes, Section 444.075, from which venue will be d ed subject to the provisions of this Cha r and to M' esota Statutes. The storm water drainage uta 'ty will a part of the Public Work Department and under a istration of the Public Works Director. Subd. 2. Purpos f s Derived and Allocation of Revenue. The purpos f all fu derived is to pay for all or part o£ the c ruction, r nstruction, repair, enlargement, impr ment or other tainment and the maintenance, oper n and use of the at sewer utility as established by City. All revenues de ed from the fee shall be credi to the appropriate storm a r fund. 0 0 ® G C 3. Storm Sewer Utility Pee. D • t ® 00C000; A. A storm sewer utility fee for action an vailability of the storm sewer facilities s 11 be Bed, C a c)4 ermined by resolution of the Council and shall b just • • C_- c) Q 0 ?? d equitable. A charge for the connection and availab 'ty /ell a©©4 a 0 0 C 0 Q 0 42-1 (6-15-91) bit.0Q0Q 196 Minn. 313 NORTH WESTERN REPORTER, 2d SERIES CROWN CORK & SEAL COMPANY, INC., etc., Appellant, V. CITY- OF LAKEVILLE, etc., Respondent Nos. 61327, 51573. Supreme Court of Minnesota. Dec. 11, 1931. 1. Municipal Corporations 1-712 City had authority to pass on to users of municipal sewer facilities metropolitan waste control commission sewer availability charges paid by city, recouping its costs by imposing use, availability- and/or connection charges, by means of special assessments, or by taxation. H.S.A. §§ 115.46, 429.011 et seq., 444.075, subds. 3, 4, 473.519, 473.521, subd. 3. Company brought action for declarato- ry relief, alleging that city's sewer and 'w'ater connection charge was not authorized by statute or by city council resolutions. that charge was unreasonable, arbitrary and capricious, and that charge amounted to assessment of property which had been previously assessed. On motions for sum- mary judgment, the District Court, Dakota County, Robert Breunig, d., granted sum- mar; Judgment in favor of aty, and compa- ny appealed. The Supreme Court, Todd, J., held that! (1) city had authority to pass on to users of municipal sewer facilities Met..-o- politan waste control commission sewer avaiiability charges paid by city; (2) city administrator was authorized to impose connection charge upon company, the previ- ous owner of whose property paid four con- nection charges, based upon new schedule of sewer and water unit charges in city maoiution. notwithstanding resolution pro- vision. that rates were to be used "for a parcei of property or structure which has not been previously assessed the ' ' ' unit charges"; and (3) where formula used by city to calculate sewer an(.' water connec- tion c,narge was not disputed, cost estimates used by city in determining unit charges for sewer and water were also undisputed, com- pany did not question accuraev of its own daily sewer and water use estimated by city, and company's claim that charge im- posed was "unreasonable, arbitrary and ca- pricious" amounted to little more than con- ciusory allegation, company- had failed to raise anr issues of fact bearing upon rea- sonabieness of charge and therefore was properly held liable for it. Affirmed. 2. Municipal Corporations C-712 Municipalities are statutorily required to impose use or availability charges on all recipients of waste treatment services in order to pay current costs allocated by met- ropolitan waste control commission under statute, including reserve capacity alloca- tion, or sewer availability charge. M.S_A. §§ 444.075, subd. 3, 473.317, 473.517, subds. 3. 4, 473.519. 3. Municipal Corporations X712 Waters and Water Courses x203(6) Under municipal resolution providing that new sewer and water availability rates are to the used for any connection permits issued after the above dates for a parcel of property or structure which has not been previously assessed the • ' • unit charges," only property owner exempt from paying newly enacted sewer and water unit charges upon issuance of connection permit would be owner of property which had been previously assessed the new unit charges scheduled in the resolution. 4, Municipal Corporations X712 Waters and Water Courses x203(6) City administrator was authorized to impose connection charge upon company, the previous owner of whose property paid four connection charges, based upon new schedule of sewer and water unit charges in city resolution, notwithstanding resolution provision that rates were to be used "for a parcel of property or structure. which has not been previously assessed the ' unit charges." 6. Municipal Corporations X712 Waters and Water Courses 0203(6) Statutory !anguage regarding sewer and water correction charges imposed by CROWN CORK & SEAL CO. v. CITY OF LAKEVILLE 'Minn. 197 Cite as M Wt.. 3 13 N.W.3d 196 municipalities, to the effect that charges James R. Keating, Faribault, for appel- for connection to facilities may be fixed by lant. reference to portion of cost thereof which Grannis, Grannis, Campbell & Farreii and has been paid by assessment of premises to Roger N. Knutson, So. St. Paul, for respon- connected in comparison with other be premises as well as cost of making or super- dent. vising connection, evidences effort by legis- Stanley G. Peskar, League of Minnesota lature to merely set forth permissible meth- Cities, SL Paul, Holmes & Graven, David L. ods of calculating connection charges, i.e., Graven and Larry M. Wertheim. Metropoli. connection charges may be set by reference tan Waste Control Commn., Minneapolis. to actual cost of connection as well as by reference to assessments paid by connecting for amicus curiae. property or, in discretion of governing body, by any other method, as long as connection Considered and decided by the tourt er charge is "just and equitable." M.S.A. bane without oral argument. § 444.075, subds. 3, 4. 6. Municipal Corporations X712 TODD, Justice. Waters and Water Courses x203(6) Where formula used by city to calcu- late sewer and water connection charge was not disputed, cost estimates used by city in determining unit charges for sewer and water were aiso undisputed, company did not question accuracy of its own daily sewer and water use estimated by city, and com- pany's claim that charge imposed was "un- reasonable, arbitrary and capricious" amounted to little more than conclusory allegation, company had failed to raise any issues of fact bearing upon reasonableness of sewer and water charge imposed by city and therefore was properly held liable for charge. Svllabus by the Court 1. The City of Lakeville has authority to pass on to users of municipal sewer facil- ities M.W.C.C. sewer availability charges paid by the City. 2. The City of Lakeville has discre- tionary authority to impose any combina- tion of use, availability and connection charges to finance municipal sewer and water facilities. 3. A connection charge may be set by reference to cost of making and supervising the connection, or, in the discretion of the City, by any other method, as long as the charge is just and equitable. 4. The record does not support claim that trial court erred by disposing of the case without trial. Crown Cork & Seal Company, Inc. (Crown) purchased industrial property in Lakeville which it converted to a can manu- facturing plant. The previous owners had connected to the municipal sewage and water facilities and paid assessment; and connection charges for such hookups. Crown's operation required increased sewer and water capacities so they constructed larger service lines to be connected to the municipal facilities. Lakeville levied a con- nection charge of $147,415. Crown brought action for declaratory relief alleging that the charge was not authorized by statute or by city council resolutions, that the charge was unreasonable, arbitrary and capricious, and that the charge amounted to an assess- ment of property which had previously been assessed. Both parties moved for summary judgment and the trial court granted sum- mary judgment in favor of Lakeville. Crown appealed. We affirm. The essential facts of this litigation are not in dispute. In 1972, Crown purchased property in the Airlake Industrial Park in the City of Lakeville. At the time of the purchase, the property was improved with an industrial building used for the assembly of mobile homes, and was already serviced by city sewer and water. The city projects which brought sewer and water to the prop- erty had been fully assessed. In 1977, Crown installed a can manufacturing opera- { 1 198 Minn. 313 NORTH WESTERN REPORTER. 2d SERIES tion in the building which required more water and produced more sewage. To facil- itate the increased flow, Crown installed a new 6-inch water lire to supplement the 4-inch line already in place, and replaced the existing 4-inch sewer line with a 6-inch line. In April of 1978 the CLv contacted Crown requesting payment of approximate- ly $590,000 for a "connection charge." The Citv subsequently allowed Crown time to reduce its water use and discharge, and after monitoring Crown's use and discharge during 1975 recalculated the connection charge to be $147,415. The $147,415 charge is calculated by ref- erence to water supplied and water dis- charged. S45-9o0 of the charge represents a "sewer availability charge" (SAC), levied upon the City by the 1letropoiitan Waste Controi Commission which the City now wishes to pass on to Crown in the form of a connection charge. Under the M.W.C-C. formula, one SAC unit charge of 3400 is imposed for every 274 gallons of daily sewage flow discharged by a facility within the City. Crown's estimated sewage flow is 31,055 gallons/day, or 113 SAC units (31.055 - 274 = 113). The 3400 M.W.C.C. unit charge multiplied by the 113 unit Crown discharged resulted in the 545,200 charge to the City of Lakeville. SAC charges are used by the M.W.C.C. to defray the cost of reserve sewer capacity for met- ropoiitan sewage treatment plants and in- terceptors. The remaining portion of the $147,415 charge to Crown constitutes the City's own connection charge. The formuia for calcu- lating the City's sewer and water connec- tion charge is patterned after the M.W.C. C.'s formula for is SAC charge: one City sewer and water unit charge is imposed for ever: estimated 214 gallons of daily flow. Crown uses approximately 65,000 gallons of water each day, 31,055 of which are dis- charged into the City's sewer system. Crown was charged for 113 sewer units and 127.7 water units. Funds generated by city connection charges are deposited in the City's sewer and water fund, ws:nich is used to pay for completion of the core compo- nents of the City's sewer and water sys- tems, including trunks, oversizing, wells, storage facilities, booster stations and force mains. The City's "unit charges" are revised by the City Council from time to time to re- flect current construction costs. Both the cost of completing the system and the num- ber of future connections to the system have been estimated. The estimated cost to complete the Lakeville system and to pay the existing deficit in the City's sewer and water fund is approximately $10,000,000. Based upon the latest unit connection charges passed by the City in 1977, approxi- mately 9,569 unit connections (one unit equaling 274 gallons of discharged sewage) will be needed in the next 20 years to pay for the system. The issues Presented are: 1. May a city pass on to a user SAC charges levied against the Municipality by 11.W.C.C.1 2. May a city use a unit charge for establishing connection charges to its mu- nicipal sewer and water facilities" 3. Are there disputed factual issues which preclude the entry of summary judg- ment? 1. Nlinn.Stat. 444.075, subd. 3 grants to municipalities the authority to impose vari- ous sewer and water charges "[f]or the pur- pose of paying for the construction, recon- struction, repair, enlargement, improve- ment, or other obtainment and the mainte- nance, operation and use" of municial water and seiner facilities. The statute speaks of three types of sewer and water charges: the City has the authority to impose "just and equitable charges for the use and for the availability- of such facilities and for connections therewith " [emphasis added]. With regard to use charges, § 444.- 075, subd. 3 provides: Charges made for service directly ren- dered shall be a; nearly as possible pro- portionate to the cost of furnishing the same, and sewer charges may be fixed on the basis of water consumed, or by refer- ence to a reasonable classification of the CROWN CORK & SEAL CO. v. CITY OF LAKEVILLE Minn. 199 Cite u Minn, 313 N.W. 1 % types of premises to which service is fur- share of the current costs allocated to the nished, or by reference to the quantity, unit by the commission [M.W.C.C.] under pollution qualities and difficulty of dis- section 473517 ' ' posal of sewage produced or on an other , y equitable basis Including, but without Minn.Stat. § 473.521, subd. 3 (1980) further limitation, any combination of those re- provides that: " ferred to above. To accomplish any dur: imposed on it by t Th t " the council or commission, the governing e s a ute provides that minimum" charges for th il bili body of every government unit in the e ava a ty of water and " metropolitan area may exercise the pow. sewer facilities may be imposed for all ers granted any municipality by chapters premises abutting on streets or other places 117, 412, 429, 475, sections 11546 444.075 where municipal ' water mains or sew- , , and 471.59." (emnhasis added) ers are located, whrher or not connected The Cit th f i [hereto." Finally, with regard to connec- y ere ore qu te cieariv has the authority t tion charges, § 44-4.075, subd. 3 provides: o pass on to users of municipal "Charges for connection to the faciliti sewer faciiities M.W.C.C. sewer availability es may in the discretion of the governing charges paid by the City The City may body be fixed by reference to the ortion recoup these costs by imposing use, availa- bili p ty and/or connection charges authorized of the cost thereo' which has been paid by 444.07,5, by means of special assessments by assessment of 'he premises to be con- under chanter 429 and § 444 075 subd 4 or nected, in comparison with other premis- . , . . by taxation under Minn.Stat. § 115 46 es, as well as the cost of making or super- . (1950). vising the connection." [1] The focus of Crown's a In this case M.W.C.C. imposed a charge of rgi:ment can b 535,200 against Lakeville under its SAC for- est be understood by first identifying mula. Lakeville sought to pass this charge those issues which Crown does not raise. on to Crown as part of the connection Crown does not question the Cit 's di y scre- charge. We agree with the trial court that tionarv authority to impose any combina- this procedure is authorized by the applica- tion of use, availability and connection ble Minnesota Statutes but we Rio not find charges to finance municipal sewer and , our decision in City of Brooklyn Center v water facilities. That authority is quite . :Metropolitan Council, 306 Minn. 309 243 clearly granted in the very first sentence of , N.W.2d 102 (1975) to be dispositive In that § 444.075, subd. 3. Nor does Crown chal- . case this court held that the Metropolitan lenge the formula utilized by the M.W.C.C. Waste Control Commission's sewer availa- in arriving at the M.W-C.C. sewer availabili- bility charge fulfilled the statutory di- ty charge levied upon the City; that formu- rective that local governmental units pay Is was upheld by this court in Citv of Brookl C the costs for unused metropolitan system yn enter v, lfetropolitan Council, 306 Minn. 309, 243 N.W?d 102 (1975) Fi capacity in proportion to the amounts of h . - suc capacity reserved for each governmen- nally, Crown does not question the authori- tal unit. 306 Minn. at 317, 243 -i W 2d at tv of the City to recoup from users of . . 108. The case did not deal with the issue of municipal sewer faciiities M.W.CC. sewer how a local governmental unit might pass availability charges paid by the Citv. Minn. St t M.W.C.C. sewer availability charges on to a . § 473.519 (1980) provides, in pertinent local users of municipal sewer facilities part: . The Court mentioned the possibility that a Each local government unit shall adopt a municipality would choose to do so: system of charges for the use and availa- "[S]o far as we can determine the unit bility of the metropolitan disposal system , [newer availability] charge is within the which will assure that each recipient of capacity of the actual users to pay, should waste treatment services within or served the municipality elect to pass on the cost by the unit will pay its proportionate attributed to it by SAC." I {;r 11; ?I I r ?!t j ' i i ,r iii 200 Minn. 313 NORTH WESTERN REPORTER, 2d SERIES 306 Minn. at 318, 243 N.W 2d at 109 [em- phasis added]. [21 The question with respect to the SAC portion of the charge imposed upon Crown is whether the statutory scheme al- lows a municipality to simply turn around and pass the SAC charge on to local sewer users. Minn.Stat. § 473.519 {1978) provides: "Each local government unit shall adopt a 3t5tem of charges !or the use and avail- ability of the metropolitan disposal Sys- tam which will assure that each recipient of waste treatment services within or served by the unit will pay is proportion- ate share of the current costs allocated to the unit by the commission under section 473.517 ' ' [emphasis added]. Under this provision munici_oalities such as the City of Lakeville are statutorily re- quired to impose use or availability charges on all recipients of waste treatment services in order to pay the current costs allocated under § 473.517, which include the reserve capacity allocation, or SAC charge, under section 473.517 subdivisions 3 and 4. The SAC portion of the charge imposed upon Crown is a charge for the "availability" of metro waste facilities, and therefore, even if § 444.075• subd. 3 does not authorize the imposition of connection charges to pay SAC allocations, an availability charge is authorized by § 473.519. 2. Having concluded that .&45,200 was properly charged to Crown m pass through SAC charges, we must then consider the validity of the remaining charge of $102,215 as a municipal connection charge. Crown argues that the connection charge imposed upon the company in this case was not authorized by the Lakeville City Council. The City Administrator imposed the connec- tion charge pursuant to authority purport- edly granted by City Resolution 77-43, enti- tled "Resolution Establishing Special As- sessment Unit and Area Charges." Resolu- tion 77-43 provides, in relevant part: WHEREAS, the revenue from sewer area, water unit and sewer unit charges are used to retire bonds issued to finance the sewer and water trunk system, and WHEREAS, the rate structure has not been increased since June 3, 1974, and WHEREAS, an increase in the area and unit charges are necessary to pursue the financial stability of the trunk fund. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RE- SOLVED, the following rates shall be- come effective on the dates as shown on the rate schedule below. SEWER AND WATER AVAILABILITY RATE SCHEDULE 6/:: c- vvae vI/? :.yep xWer .nucharga saan/aere sam/.rR 53r0/.? r>ep/.<,. St'?'t?Vn,: ChC(gf S.•11%)/Un,C S:ISS/Yni[ {i'IS/uCiC L4EO/YNC K'amr un4 charge Sapp/una SSpO/unit 5560/unit S6eS/unit 1. The above rates are to be used for any assessments levied, or for any con- nection permits issued after the above dates for a parcel of property or structure which has not been previously assessed the area or unit charges." Crown argues the resolution expressly ex- empts from its operation property which has previously been assessed sewer and water unit charges. It is undisputed that the previous owner of the property paid four connection charges, and that Crown was given credit for these four previous connection charges. [3, 41 The Court is faced with the prob- lem of interpreting paragraph 1 of the reso- lution, which provides that "[tjhe above rates are to be used for any ' ' ' connec- tion permits issued after the above dates for a parcel of property or structure which has not been previously assessed the unit charges." Unfortunately, there are no City Council minutes in the record which reflect upon the intended meaning of para- graph 1 of the resolution. One interpreta- tion of the resolution would be that given it by Crown: the rates set forth in the resolu- tion are not to be charged when a connec- tion permit is issued for property for which a connection charge has previously been paid. If this interpretation is adopted, it would follow that the City Administrator was not authorized by Resolution 77-43 to impose a connection charge upon Crown as connection charges had previously been paid for the property. The problem with Crown's interpretation is that the resolution does not by its language purport to exempt CROWN CORK & SEAL CO. Y. CITY OF LAKEVILLE Minn. 201 Cite as, Mt.. a la N. WSd IM property for which "a" or "any" connection charges may be set by reference to the charge has previously been paid. A more actual cost of connection as well as by ref. plausible interpretation of the resolution erence to assessments paid by the connect- would be that given it by the City: the only ing property, or, "in the discretion of the property owner exempt from paying the governing body", by any other method, as newly enacted sewer and water unit long as the connection charge is, in the charges upon the issuance of a connection language of the statute, "just and equita- permit would be the owner of property ble." This interpretation allows local which has "been previously assessed the ` • government maximum flexibility in fmane- unit charges", the words "the unit charges" ing municipal sewer and water services and being a reference by the Cit Council to the is consistent with the statutory scheme y new unit charges scheduled in the resolu- adopted by the legislature. tion. It follows that the City Administra- [6) 3. Crown argues that factual issues for was authorized to impose a connection concerning the reasonableness of the charge upon Crown based upon the new charges, the lack of benefit to the propertv schedule of sewer and water unit charges in and the confiscatory nature of the charge Resolution 77,48, remained for trial. The existence of any Citing to the language of § 444.075, subd. benefit to Crown's property would only be 3, Crown argues that any portion of a con- material if in fact the charge in question nection charge which exceeds the actual was a special assessment imposed pursuant cost of making or supervising the connec- to llinn.Stat. § 444.075, subd. 4. The tion to the facility may only be "fixed by charge is obviously not a special assessment. reference to the portion of the cost thereof Crown's claim that the charge is "unreason- which has been paid by assessment of the able, arbitrary and capricious" amounts to premises to be connected, in comparison little more than -a conclusory allegation in with other premises • ," the complaint. The formula used by the City ,o caiculate the connection charge is If we interpret the above-quoted portion not disputed. The cost estimates used by of § 414.075, subd. 3 as an attempt by the the City in determining the unit charges for legislature to limit the method of actually sewer and water are also undisputed. calculating connection charges, i.e. that any Crown does not question the accuracy of its part of a connection charge exceeding the own daily sewer and water use estimated actual cost of connection must be fixed by by the City. Crown recites no other disput- reference to the portion of the cost of the ed issues of fact which bear upon the rea- facility paid by assessment of the premises sonableness of the connection charge in being connected, then Crown's position is question. This Court has held a "party well-taken- The connection charge imposed cannot preserve his right to a trial on the upon Crown was certainly in excess of the merits merely by referring to unverified actual cost of supervising the installation of and conclusory allegations in his pleading a new 6-inch water line and replacement of ..'I Rosrall v. Provost, 279 Minn. 119, an existing 4-inch sewer line with a 6-inch 124, 155 N-W.2d 900, 904 (1968). Accord, line. The City estimated Crown's daily Erickson v. General United Life fns. Co., water use and sewage discharge, translated ?56 \.W.2d 255 (Minn-1977). The record that use and discharge into "water units" simply does not support Crown's claim that and "sewer units", and then multiplied the the trial court erred by disposing of this number of sewer and water units by "unit case without trial. charges", $500/water unit, 3385/sewer unit. Affirmed. [5) However, we interpret the above- quoted language from § 444.075, subd. 3 as w evidencing an effort by the legislature to 0 5 NE"xUeBEe SYSIFN merely set forth permissible methods of cal- T culating connection charges, i.e. connection ?a J-0 ? , T ?1n2 04(k(-?,e We ,. ? ff I oJT_' ? C Ov C i \iLl- O; LOW1 I C- c?l0.vg es e c,p vj h-e S 1 -e e -(-a r- .l 4c) -Ti V,.\- C142 p CL i o -T 4 khe C i5 LOv?eCt Ctr¢ 4-K & 1 S vkc J . UCF-9 (SCAO 6194) Mv and N.Lim of JW,m FteiotiR rt Defevdrv n OWER FOR n?O ct. , con cu JUDGMENT Nonce os Juacn?r Ta trr wluomeHr I,. f State of Minnesota Conciliation Court COUNTY DAKOTA JUDICIAL S6-96-575 CAsENO. NAME AND ADDRESS NAME AND ADDREss RONALD D. JOHNSON PATRICIA J. JOHNSON R. #2 - BOX 214F PWaie R. t2 - BOA 214F LAKE PARK, MN. 56554 ZIP LAKE PARR, MN. 56554 ZIP NAME AND ADDRESS NAME AND ADDRESS CITY OE EAGAN MUNICIiW. CENTER n 30 PILOT KNOB ROAD ZF z8 EAGAN, Y-1N. 55122 Appearances: X Plaintiff ? Defendant ? Neither Party ? Contested ? Default Upon evidence received, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: rcc F is entitled to judgment against P T for the sum of $ plus fees of $ , disbursements of $ Z6 '2f and conditional costs of _ $ for a total of $ 144!D "/ & ? judgment shall be entered in favor of (without damages). ? 's claim is dismissed without prejudice. ? 's claim is dismissed with prejudice. ? shall immediately return to the and that the Sheriff of the county in which the property is located is authorized and directed to effect repossession of such property according to M.S. § 491A.01 subd.5, and tutu the property over to ? Other / ? Memo j / Dated: NOVEt2ER 15, 1996 Judge: M-/AC JUDGMENT is hereby declared and entered as stated in the Court's Order for Judgment set forth above, and the judgment shall become finally effective on the daze specified in the notice of judgment set forth, below._ Dated: NOVEKRFR 1R_ 799fi . Court Administrator/Deputy: ZIA ad THE PARTIES ARE HEREBY notified that Judgment has been emend w indicated above, but a Judgment is stayed by law until DECEMBER 1-4 4.30 p.m. (to allow time for an appeal/removal if desired). ATE TIME THE PARTIES ARE FURTHER NOTIFIED that if the cause is removed to district court and the removing patty does not prevail as provided in Rule 524 of the Minnesota Cmneral Rules of Practice for the District Courts, the opposing parry will be awarded $50 as costs. - - Dated: NOVEl1BER 18. 199fi Court AdministramrJDeputy: - - I certify that the above is a correct transcript of the Judgment entered by this Court. - - , . Dated: _., ,... ........ court Administrator/Deputy: DEFENDANTS COPY- READ REVERSE SIDE FOR iIOP0 i I M®.OmR.Frw. 514 0 N M I ' city of eagan July 29, 1996 W. Stuart Weierke 4675 Dodd Road Eagan, MN 55123 RE: PARCEL NO. 030-26 WATERMAIN CONNECTION INFORMATION Dear Mr. Weierke: THOMAS EGAN Mayor PATRICIA AWADA SHAWN HUNTER SANDRA A. MASIN THEODORE WACHTER Council Members THOMAS HEDGES City Administrator 5. J. VAN OVERBEKE City Clerk The week of June 28, you requested information regarding costs associated with connection to the City's watermain system along Dodd Road. You questioned the charges calculated for Parcel I.D. No. 027-25 (4625 Dodd Road) and Parcel No. 030-26 (4675 Dodd Road). Following is a summary of the information that you requested based on current 1996 rates: ITEM PARCEL NO. 027-25 PARCEL NO. 030-26 Proposed WM Assessment $2,508.00 $2,244.00 District Court Determination $1,550.00 $1,000.00 WM Lateral Benefit Connection Charge $1,665.10 $2,083.77 Area Connection Charge $ 0.00 m $ 845.00(2) Permit Fees(3) $1,349.00 $1,349.00 Total $4,564.10 $5,277.77 (u Previously paid Area Connection charge. Z) A Per Lot Charge - if Parcel is split in the future an additional connection charge would be collected. (3) Permit Fees for water connection only. I trust this information satisfies your request. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at 681-4646 or Jerry Wobschall at 681-4624. Sincerer erl C Michael P. Foertsch, P.E./L.S. eRAs.". City Engineer MPF/cb cc: Tom Pepper, Assistant Finance Director Tom Colbert, Director of Public Works Jerry Wobschall, Consultant MUNICIPAL CENTER 3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD EAGAN, MINNESOTA 55122-1897 PHONE: (612) 681-4600 FAX: (612) 681-4612 TDD: (612) 454-8535 THE LONE OAK TREE THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer MAINTENANCE FACILITY 3501 COACHMAN POINT EAGAN, MINNESOTA 55122 PHONE: (612) 681-4300 FAX: (612) 681 4360 TDD: (612) 454-8535 s? BEACKMAR AND REHM ATTORNEYS AT LAW 202 FIRST BURNSVILLE STATE BANK BUILDING 301 WEST BURNSVILLE PARKWAY BURNSVILLE, MINNESOTA 55337 June 1, 1983 THOMAS J. BLACKMAR ERIC S. REHM Ms. Ann Goers City of Eagan 3795 Pilot Knob Road P. 0. Box 21 199 Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Re: Section 3ti, 025 25 Parcel C#11_0-03_6-00 025 25 Owner: Weierke (Guardianship`) Our File No. B-9354 L Dear Ms. Goers: TELEPHONE (612) 8967050 This will confirm our telephone conversation of this morning, relating to the pending assessment for sanitary sewer trunk, as set forth in your special assess- ment search of May 17, 1983; a copy of which is enclosed for reference. I advised you that a portion of the subject property has now been sold. The portion which has been sold contains the homestead and approximately one acre surrounding it and represents, by far, the greater portion of the total value of the original parcel. This conveyance has been, or will be recorded shortly. Our concern is to make sure that this new sub-parcel is broken out prior to the preparation and approval of the assessment role which you indicated was to be presented to the Eagan City Council in July, 1983. It is my understanding that you will be able to divide the pending assessment between these two parcels, so that each will fairly be exposed to only its pro rata share of the original es- timated assessment of $2,241.00. I am enclosing a copy of the Deed which was used to convey the homestead and the surrounding one acre; please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. If possible, please contact me at the above address once you have been able to properly break out the subject property with the respective amounts due for this pending assessment. Thank you very much. Very truly yours, ?ya,vrsl.?j Thomas J. Blackmar Attorney at Law TJB:kl cc: Sharon Baldwin Encl. ra=dtvoF 3795 PILOT KNOB ROAD. P.O. BOX 21199 EAGAN. MINNESOTA 55121 PHONE: (612) 454-8100 DATE: March 17, 1983 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT SEARCH Chicago Title Ins. Co. 4820 West 77th Street Edina, MN 55435 BEA BLOMOUIST Mayor THOMAS FLAN JAMES A. SMITH JERRY THOMAS THEODORE WACHTER COun fl Memt s THOMAS HEDGES Oily Ad] .i ,dt7 EUGENE VAN OVERBRE Gty Ole* RE: Section 36, 025 25 4625 Dodd Road, Eagan, MN 55123 `Parcel # 10 03600 025 25 Enclosed herein is the search which you requested made on the above described property. Kind of Improvement Runs Beginning Original Amount Balance Due NONE I further certify that according to the records of said office, the following improve- ments are contemplated or pending after having been approved, and are now in the process of planning or completion. Kind of Improvement A proximate date of Completion Approcimate cost sanitary Sewer Trunk Sun-Imer of 1983 $2241,00 WAIVER: Neither the City of Eagan nor its employees guarantees the accuracy of the above in- formation which was requested by the person or persons indicated. Nor does the City or its employees assume any liability for the correctness thereof. In consideration for the supplying of the indicated information in the above form, and for all other consideration of any nature whatsoever, any claim against the City or its employees rising there from is hereby expressly waived. Levied assessments to be paid to the County Treasurer at Hastings, MN. 55033 Very truly yo rs, THE LONE OAK TREE ...THE SYMBOL AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY PERMIT 4CITY OF EAGAN 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota 55123 (612) 681-4675 PERMIT TYPE: BUILDING Permit Number: 023952 Date Issued: 06/23/94 SITE ADDRESS: P.I.N.: 10-03600-027-25 4625 DODD RD LOT: 27 BLOCK: 25 SECTION 36 g ab wo H DESCRIPTION: Building Building 04, _ REMARKS: FEE SUMMARY- Base Fee Surcharge Total Fee $30.00 $.50 `$30.50 CONTRACTOR: OWNER: - JOHNSON 4625 DO EAGAN (612)888-4121 Applicant - ORNALD DD RD NN 55123 I hereby acknowledge that I have read this information is correct and agree to comply Statutes and City of Eagan Ordinances. APPLICANT/PERMITEE SIGNATURE rmit Type DECK rk Type NEW application and state that the with all applicable state of Min. ISSUED B :SIGNATURE _J CITY OF EAGAN, 1994 BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION] 681-4675) A I n q ,341; 1 SINGLE & MULTI-FAMILY 2 sets of plans, 3 registere T e , c py of energy calcs. JUN 18 199y COMMERCIAL 2 sets of architectural & st uctural plans, 1 t of specifications, 1 copy of en "-"'" "'"""' Penalty applies: 1) when permit is typed, but not picked up by last working day of month in which request is made, 2) address is changed or 3) lot change is requested once permit is issued. Date h / Z24/_ / 5Y Valuation of work , Site Address: A Z5- a STREET SUITE # Tenant Name: (commercial only) LOT BLOCK SUED., t J ?p __P-I.D. # Description of work: The applicant is: ,Owner ? Contractor ? Other (Describe) Name o_N ?oNa J Phone &Vt - &5.13 Property LAST FIRST WK g89-Lj)2 Owner Address D'5'1c( C-Yr e/op STREET STE # City Each State evi ^-j -zip SS-) Z'3 Company Phone Contractor Address License # Exp. City State Zip Company Phone Architect/ Engineer Name Registration # Address City State Zip Sewer & water licensed plumber Processing time for sewer & water permits is two days once area has been approved. I hereby acknowledge that I have read this application and state that the information is correct and agree to comply with all applicable State of Minnesota Statutes and City of Eagan Ordinances. Signature of Applicant: Lnop? BUILDING PERMIT TYPE ? 01 Foundation ? 02 SF Dwg. ? 03 SF Addition ? 04 SF Porch ? 05 SF Misc. WORK TYPE 31 New ? 32 Addition OFFICE USE ONLY ? 06 Duplex ? 07 4-Plex ? 08 8-Plex' ? 09 12-Plea ? 10 Multi. Add'1. ? 33 Alterations ? 34 Repair ? 11 Apt./Lodging ? 12 Multi. Misc. ? 13 Garage/Accessory ? 14 Fireplace P-15 Deck ? 35 Tenant Finish ? 36 Move GENERAL INFORMATION Const. (Actual) (Allowable) UBC Occupancy Zoning # of Stories Length Depth APPROVALS Planning Engineering REQUIRED INSPECTIONS ? Site ? Wallboard Basement sq. ft. 1st F1. sq. ft. 2nd F1. sq. ft. Sq. Ft. total Footprint Sq. ft. On-site well On-site sewage Building Variance Footing ® Final ? Framing ? Draintile _L T ? Insulation ? Fireplace Permit Fee Surcharge Plan Review License MWCC SAC City SAC Water Conn. Water Meter Acct. Deposit S/W Permit S/W Surcharge Treatment P1. Road Unit Park Ded. Trails Ded. Copies Other Total: valuation: 01 1k, IL t ? 16 Basement Finish ? 17 Swim Pool ? 18 Comm./Ind. ? 19 Comm./Ind. Misc. ? 20 Public Facility ? 21 Miscellaneous ? 37 Demolish MWCC System City Water PRV Required Booster Pump Fire Sprinkler Census Code SAC Code Census Bldg Census Unit Assessments SAC % SAC Units Survey fc Roger W*Xeexe ?y oo I T'` 1 l7 ?- "7 DEIMAR K SCMWANZ uuM wflvsvw 048104FOO WIMP LM/ N TM /4M N MM"U" am - MTH M14T W. - MDX M MoNM W' NMMMWA MIe1 N,MM eq a? 17N -" Il19.52 BURVIVORI T1/:CATI ` NKTN ?itlr 14 w1/0 • B ,R Ns Coe Nw1ld ` aft - T s7 N- R a3w, U-T}7"'t MW oe 0 (0 p dpa o? d a \ p • z see, Y? ?( f00Ha IR°N m `0 PI PC 441 odo" d lie 1 ? - - EA6T Z?, gg , . ' •3 ?'?? ? I hereby certify that this is s true and correct representation of a survey of the boundaries of: 16W That part of the Northwest Quarter of section 36, Township 27, Range 230 Dakota County,'Ninnopots described as follows, Commencing at.the northeast corner of said Northwest Quarter; thence North 89 degrees 41 minutes 50 • seconds West (assumed bearing) along the north line thereof a distance of 1118.52 feet; thence South 00 degrees 15 minutes 00 seconds West a distance of 450.80 feet; thence on a bearing of Bast a distance of 234.52 feet to the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence continuing on a bearing of Bast a distance of 289.88 feet; thence North 25 degrees 02 minutes 00 seconds West a distance of 209.15 feet] thence South 83 degrees 00 vdnutes 22 seconds West a distance of 202.89 feet; thence on a bearing of South a distance of 164.80 feet-to the point of beginning. SubJect•to a road easement for Dodd Road. As surveyed by me this 25th day of June, wM,°eaTA TIOM wo. sps/ )X ??ivlo 2000 BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION (RESIDENTIAL) CITY OF EAGAN 3830 PILOT KNOB RD - 55122 651-681-4675 Iq?, ?( New Construction Reaulremenh CO I?oc? -a q-0t 3 registered site surveys stowing sq. M. of lot, sq. h. of house and gp roofed areas (20% maximum lot coverage allowed 2 copies of plans (show beam ?t window sizes; poured Ind. design; etc.) 1 set of energy calculations n 3 copies of tre reservai on pion If lot platted after 7/1/93 DATE: O? DESCRIPTION OF WORK: "LA STREET ADDRESS. Z/`/ LOT:._ 1 BLOCK: _ SUBO./P.I.D. C ) f PROPERTY OWNER CONTRACTOR ARCHITECT/ ENGINEER 2 copies of plan 1 set of energy calculations for heated additions 1 site survey for exterior additions tt: decks CONSTRUCTION COST: a o vi 36 Name: 6r `ASS?Ll-,?, Phone#: `??s First _ n city State: AAw Zip: 5 =? Street Address: 1?16 ?1-s 006 Company: Phone #: (area code) Street Address: License # Exp. City State: Company: Name: Telephone #: ( Sheet Address: Registration #: City State: Sewedwater licensed plumber (if installing sewerlwater)'. Phone #: Zip: Zip: I hereby acknowledge that I have read this application, state that the Information is care d agree to comply with all applicable State of Minnesota Stalules and City of Eagan Ordinances. , Signature of Applicant OFFICE USE ONLY Certificates of Survey Received Yes No Tree Preservation Plan Received Yes No Not Required 2019-1.1mlted warranty Deed. Form No. 19 ml""ota 'Uniform Cunvoyanelna Blanks (1031) ' Individual to Jaurt Tenanl. Y TbW 3nbenturt, Blade this........... 2.61h .................day of............ MaY......................................... ........, behucrn....Sharon„F_r.,.,Baldwin, _.as Gu.ard a.n,of__Reinhold...R,,.__We.ierke.,....a.,.wi_dowP..---........._._......... ._...... M.....i..n...n.....e..s..o....t....a ..........................., Party ............ of the County of...... Dakota ...........rk .......E.- ..S eh ....i......._....a......nd ............. J.....ul...i,e A¢nd. State, Sausu/s'._er of the first part, and .......... Ma................................................. .......................................................... _........ ...... .............................. _................. ............. .......... ..................................... ....................... ................. ............ _................... _......._....................................... ....................... ......... of the County of pakOia Minnes ._•..._,,.,,. parties of the second part. .......... ........ _ ........................................................... rend State of...............................o........ta ............. , Witntggeth, That the said part Y....._.......of lite first part, in consideration a the sum of........ .._ .............. _llne•.Dol ,1 _ar and other .... good_.a.nd___valuabl.g..... .5.i_d. ra_t.1.4.n....(_$..1...0.Q.).....c.-.-.-.- .-r...volL,tlt.?, io........ her .......... in hand paid by the avid parties of the second part, the receipt whereof is hereby ack owl- edged, do..... es.her•rhy Grant, Bu,-gain, Roll, and Convey unto the said parties of the second part, us joint tenants and nut as tenants in ronrra nt, their arei.gus, the survivor of said parties, and the heirs anal assigns of the survivor, Forever, all the tract......... or- parcel ......... of land lying and being in the County of ............. l)akota............. .......... ..............___..._and State of .1finnesota, described as follows, to-wit: That part of the Northwest Quarter of Section 36, Township 27, Range 23, Dakota Countv, Minnesota described as follows: Commencing at the northeast corner of said Northwest Quarter; thence North 89 degrees 41 minutes 50 seconds West (assumed bearing) along the north line thereof a distance of 1118.52 feet; thence South 00 degrees 15 minutes 00 seconds West a distance of 450.80 feet; thence on a hearing of Fast a distance of 23A.52 feet to the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence continuing on a bearing of East a distance of 289.88 feet; thence North 25 degrees 02 minutes 00 seconds West a distance of 209.15 feet; thence South 83 degrees 00 minutes 22 seconds West a distance of 202.39 feet; thence on a bearing of South a distance of 164.80 feet to the point of beginning. Subject to a road easement for Dodd Road. State Deed Tax Due Hereon: $ TO J?aUe anb to JbOlb the dame. To,ether with all the hereditatnaris iend appartenauees thcrculdo belonging or in anywise appertau,in6, to the said parties of the second part, their assigns, the survivor of said parties, and the heirs and assigns of the survivor, Forcver, the said parties of the second part taking as joint tenants atul not as tenants in coinnion. And the said ........Sh.a.ron...E.....l1d.l.dw.in...... as....... ................................... l,ua ri a n._o.f._R:i, mho 1.d... R..... W.e.l.ark.e.....d.._wi d0eter., ........................................................................ . ........................................ _.. _.... _...............................-.............................................. _.. ... .........._.........._..........__..................... .... ......... .... ........ part.Y............................... of tine /ir•.;l part, for..h_e.r..5.e1f......h.er....... I............. heirs, executors and administrators, do covenant with the said partic< of the .scrond part, their assigns, the survivor of said parties, anal' the, heirs and assigns of the, sur•r•iror•, that ..... ...S.he...... ..... hd.S............. ..not made, done, executed, or suffered an.y art or thing whatseeve• IehCIThy the above described premises or any part thereof, now or at any time, hereafter, shall or may be imperiled, charged, or encumbered in any mariner whatsoever ..................................... ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... ......................a.nd the, title to t4 above granted premises, against all persons lawfully claiming the same from, through or under ..................................... except items, if any, hereinbefore mentioned ............. the said part..Y...... of the first part will, Warrant and Defend. 3n'Megtimonp Mbereot, The said part.,y__.... ............. of the first part ha...S.......... hereunto set........... her.... hand......... the day and year first above written. In Presence of ` 1 Sharon E Baldwn?._fuardian...of .............. .......... Reinhold R. Weierke btate of Ainneool.4, County of....... DAKQTA................... .................... On this....... --_2kth.......--_--•--.- .................. dart of ...... NY -.......... _...... .._.............. ... ._ ., 19.83...., before me, a---- ------ No.Lary-Pu.b1..1 G_ .......................-.--........._..........--.---.--...within and for said County, personally appeared ........... Shern.n..L...13a.1.dw.i.n....as..S.tsar..i.an...a.f..-R.?inhQ.l.d_R.....Ws ..a_.wJ.dawer_ ................ .............. to me known to be the person ................ described in, and who executed the foregoing instrument, ........... OLS-Glardia.13 .............. _-............ ........................ ..... .... and acknowledged that ........ .S..he............. executed 03- Note) the same aa... her, _, f as Guardian ...._.._....._...... tea act and deed...._._......_........._.._.........._............_.... ®"Now Notary Public ...... ......... ....................... County, Minn. Afy commission expires ................ -_............................. , 19........... NOTEt The blank Ilan tnarked --S" Note" are for use when the Instrument Is executed by an attorney lit fact. THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: Thomas J. Blackmar BLACKMAR AND REHM Attorneys at Law' 202 First Burnsvile State Bank Bldg. 301 West Burnsville Parkway Burnsville, Minnesota 55337 (612) 890-7050 TAX STATEMENTS FOR THE REAL PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS INSTRUMENT SHOULD BE SENT TO: Mark E. Sieh and Julie A. Sausser 4625 Dodd Road South Eagan, Minnesota 55122 THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: Name Address W In I LLl 0 c ae Z C a o 8 ?= A F Tax statements for real Property described in this instrument should be sent to: ress 1 , Fi a' ? .3G p ! ? I 1: f i R v i q' 1 ' d a o N I I i • e? U ITS O?? ?. 4) I I ? J i 1 U O I Aq ' I C I M d tl Q ti i? PERMIT City of Eagan Permit Type:Plumbing Permit Number:EA150741 Date Issued:07/23/2018 Permit Category:ePermit Site Address: 4625 Dodd Rd Lot:000 Block: 025 Addition: Section 36 PID:10-03600-25-027 Use: Description: Sub Type:Residential Work Type:Replace Description:Water Heater Meter Size Meter Type Manufacturer Serial Number Remote Number Line Size Comments:Please call Building Inspections at (651) 675-5675 to schedule a final inspection. Allow an 18" minimum radius clearance to the water meter from all appliances (i.e. furnace, water heater, water softener). Fee Summary:PL - Permit Fee (WS &/or WH)$59.00 0801.4087 Surcharge-Fixed $1.00 9001.2195 $60.00 Total: I hereby acknowledge that I have read this application and state that the information is correct and agree to comply with all applicable State of Minnesota Statutes and City of Eagan Ordinances. Contractor:Owner:- Applicant - Brian Bann 4625 Dodd Rd Eagan MN 55123 Minneapolis St. Paul Plumbing Heating Air 640 Grand Ave St. Paul MN 55105 (651) 228-9200 Applicant/Permitee: Signature Issued By: Signature PERMIT City of Eagan . Permit Type: Building ;, ,► Permit Number: EA154686 Eagan,3830 , t Knob Rd , , MN 55122 Date Issued: 04/05/2019 (651)675-5675 www.ci.eagan.nm.us Site Address: 4625 Dodd Rd Lot: 000 Block: 025 Addition: Section 36 PID: 10-03600-25-027 Use: Rudolph Comm.&Care Description: Sub Type: Commercial/Industrial Construction Type: Work Type: Day Care Inspection Description: Adult foster care Census Code: - Occupancy: Zoning: Square Feet: 0 Comments: LuAnn Larson 612-346-8747 Fee Summary: Day Care Inspection $50.00 1221.4216 Total: $50.00 Contractor: Owner: - Applicant - Truestone Properties LLC 12400 Princeton Ave Ste B Savage MN 55378 I hereby acknowledge that I have read this application and state that the information is correct and agree to comply with all applicable State of Minnesota Statutes and City of Eagan Ordinances. Applicant/Permitee: Signature Issued By: Signature PERMIT City of Eagan Permit Type: Building 3830 Pilot Knob Rd ',,t, E Permit Number: EA161106 Eagan,MN 55122 --- - -� g Date Issued: 05/05/2020 (651)675-5675 www.ci.eagan.mn.us Site Address: 4625 Dodd Rd Lot: 000 Block: 025 Addition: Section 36 PID: 10-03600-25-027 Use: Description: Sub Type: Single Fam Construction Type: Work Type: Day Care Inspection Description: Adult Foster Care Census Code: 434-Residential Additions,Alterations Occupancy: Zoning: Square Feet: 0 Comments: Ken Galloway 651-707-4369 Fee Summary: Day Care Inspection $50.00 1221.4216 Total: $50.00 Contractor: Owner: - Applicant - Truestone Properties LLC 12400 Princeton Ave Ste B Savage MN 55378 I hereby acknowledge that I have read this application and state that the information is correct and agree to comply with all applicable State of Minnesota Statutes and City of Eagan Ordinances. Applicant/Permitee: Signature Issued By: Signature