09/03/1987 - Advisory Parks & Recreation Commission
" .p®
P. w
3-
. Call to tier and _ _ ll
C. (_.a
w ~
2. - an
D. Pr:
. - ,..won
c
E. 0
. ente_ r _
. of co poneta
2. i'
F. a I-,.
1. Pr, -or Patri
2. v, E Llity of props
G. Park _ ,3p nt
2.
Iw
2w
a m -
3.
S h - /
. LI icy
w _
J.
MO TO: A VI -ARKS RECREATION CO1_._'
FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS & RECREATION
DATE: SEPTEMBER 1, 1987
RE: COMMISSION MEETING - SEPTEMBER , 1
Co issior (."s `1 t at :30 P.M. for a tour of c
ejects. 3si6 l will be visitir.: rthview Ath1
as 'ark. 'the regular Cc T will
th of the agenda a-,4 -at;n-
xnder rrC
rr °
st al l p- the Advisc
n 9 ,y center.
s, altl
wt a
th previous sites viewer', will be preset t- - by t
Pl< Arch'.t ct.
tems Bi, f whit
bark by C - . -
`on. The see l
M --nerty for puolbl, 'cL-A A
l C ce the Adv1 r qa' nn nn tllp hnnd fill
a t` ar len t _
~Jisory _ ion o
r
tae fin-1
it is r a y
a 1988 a list d a, @relim' n
review and it '.union. These `t :ms will be
a finalized list completed perhaps in November.
"Other & Re - , there are five
dis assion with ory C sior.
" Iways, L- are to attet' >ur
6-lar me c ,,zfi__'I a '.o the of.--', au" ,app e
Respectfully ibmitted,
L r o ar t
KV/J_J
t
A
was cal le' r z : ,
Porter, C g a-acaa 1,aLly Cara 11, LlJA aU aag c~uwi. g
and Alt c ted that they woulc be unavail~ ' ] c v,
pr( ent w; s the Director of Parks and Re( -tion, at E :s
rlLandscape Architect, Steve Sulliv, Parks S•- tent, John
Vos ; i,inde .
A .ao by Thurston Y 11
favor, the a4 l1a was approv-1.
.T )JULY , 1987
With a by Carroll _ r --°.th all in favor, the m-' ntn the July , ffi7
C qa- Martin noted t , ^a Commission's p" L the
park tot, ° ng the Commis < 11 O'Leary Park it ly
pleasing, ncng how difficult t'ie p rc 1®was in designing b C with.
c
The folk r~ S'
a motion by Saes, s t 'y R. ts, a: al
Commission approved rec a- Lion to the City Gc L t
1. B.B.D. 2ond Addition - That this plat be s' a :c ted to a east
requ` , consistent with the City's commercial /industrial -s'
,
for a trailway on C c an Road.
2. Stoney "at t ~ at this n 1 d
regi s al
alon ea dera
con on e t Otltn side Doraer
Blac,'.,h :ill- ~d.
1
3. Harveys F'a_ hia u- ,
requiremen the new'y Ltei _ ;s,
conservatii vent to ' ed G.. _.v --utri_,
prohibitin Dval of t , and c r t of any c M
structures.
4. Cutters Ridge Addition - Lat this plat be -u~ c t^
requirement for the lots c and for a bit t l ra c
Knob Road.
_Q r
Parl-s Planner /Landscape A --hitect, "ul"
hirtr-y „9 ,-1- M-r-- La`i plattir- 'he hi -1
rel. t "d• y Parrs aid ation C
basec` -ion's rE iiations a U
es d the -3 , Mr.
i iJ1
a erty id wis'- 9d to sure that he could de glop i
existing property o the north. Mr. Middlemi3t stated tha-
park to it's curry ' location - wt,- tde f--
to the south an ` --t, as wa _ ' y by tk
van Sull' van r9 vm _
optio ' d t n ,
by Mr. ua:.st, t W~
the five 110 1' u al' a o
piece. After additic _al c t' by ~Sull v Mrs
that he has an investment '-i the project ant' C
what would be a landlocked parcel -dv- 1-hn _
explain utilities would come from tt t
the sc - nd west parcels, Che '
prs _ . W"r4 Saes questioned
lots c -a the site. t,__® Carroll _wz
poter.ti-- acquisition e ndditio__... t--
topography the site. ere othc c is by '
Staff resp, C i t a4 a question on , ding, Mr. Sulliv,
that A' wo- _d be responsible "or grading the par]
und---,tin ux W Mr. Sullivan expl- rpd that staff s-a n
pro_( 1' native approach as a ` - ~iise to the c "
T sug i 1 '
C pa l _,E,
pare it would not e as, a F ,e .l_ . ,
sac. If on the otherhand, at the o the fourth phE an acCE _ from the
south or west had not been achiev 1, the road would go through the park
severing the pa-1,1and.
_
Member Masin >ned at 1 for pr,
and the r
respond
signi _ _ o r
on to e )I t' then )u1 t aroxin t 'y h-° ae
2
`.ced via this al-de-sac and roadway. tly, fi
x would be r,s__- 1. Mr. Middlemist cot c
fo^ the City, b-_t .-:s reluctant to let go o
development prof Chairman Martin state'
to occur withou'a cu'--de-sac® F stated he cc it
for the deve' c c'n c' G
explain tI-- r s u
Commissions ll,
developer, Live proposes by "f b :st sc a
to d er "Thurston stated t` 'id nc
ti L - toper and the City, hope °
Y _ ld u ed in order to pr_ ,1 to riding
CI all that the developer oordi
regarding the enl c-it of the easement or
po =d road; it ap- - d tk
of the r .d. M . '.hat It _ i Witt
Commission, that the plan culd be ac4 ,.able if v, C
willing to do the improvements to the z radius
developer had to go through the park show c his plan, the C
outlots as provided. After a 'ditional a : an on ,
seconded by Carroll, with all k -s votin _ i ,
recd er,4 4 to the City Coun
1„ D provide a pat -J
t through 3rd
24 F' ,q 1 decitcation of an additional 5 acres would be do
P°° >n determination c" the access to tY Holtz 1
c tion of the 2' .f through the ' o a pi
3® That a land dr i„ ;--in will be made „Ith plattir.
known r ioltz F 1
4. T? a contrc'. 4es be strictly adhered to.
5. A D- Ay on Cliff oa' be provided
6. The developer be responsible for grading and seedir i
with the City' standards within the first phase of dev
7. The ro Ii -t be modified to the east of the park, rc n
incz pond,
TIS ID ADD .1
`t , S' ve "ull`
to thv ~r
before
apartment Ildin, the `.J' y 1 _posinv
o^ are< >nts, ar ;ment dwellers, pedest '
ch wil ind the - tractive to cux-b sit-
l pined _ :,ie road cor cion to O'Leary F_ rk, pro
11 area. He continue i explaining the proposes d
3
of the trail, and signage. There were several que 1
members. One question regarded the high watt and i
Questions wes al s a: ' to t c "
and type of r .
tour o tx_ _ ,
ite. There `i c t
It of this pond, due to roximity to "'L
of c . a ,ace in the p k s . Mr. Porter c
Ifoi Ion presented, r b- paying f _ r
questi_led if the City , s -t etting a t
Doodle. Chairman Mart: ate' ild n,
t' p :s tal c Lt
c us of the Commission was to reafff li
mo r >n by Kubik, seconded by Carroll, ind voting ir.. x ,
Ad,. l_sory Commission - 'firmed . it's ---"-r -,ion to regw__ w w w_
dedication in it's ent$ v for the F C_,J °tddition.
Director of Parks and Recreation, Ken ~aa, stated t.
with Mr. William Morris, represe&.'ng Decistor9 'a-sources, T-,
survt y of the community. He stat i that -)l s curve
appro i ely 400 ri t+' ? ' tl pl - e Lt Lrvey woi
pho w c
t L.L tC _
a
Mr. Vraa then di LC various ways in which
formatted, timeframe, costs, etc. He stated that th(- was
of shelf life to the survey and i the Commission rprn -end t- ,
the issue of when the survey is conducted would b t
with the strong support for a Community Center,
t- 7 to help dev ` se the archi`
-1-ition. , 'i-ar, if tb--
.id tha t b citi L
wer -ral questions Advi:
_c' e•_.ie ne( " to bid t~ survey. Mr. Vraa responded t'
best o to seek proposals f m various sorb hies, be----
nnt Ya a hi.iding proved-e. r. Kubik nlco r ,s~a9 i~ I
r .zl ° s would bF ive to -,it e°
. He went < stag
c t Lre costs. Th
o.-der to fine
1 r decisions. Rog
pr ide additional information prior to t` t l
consultant to wDr°:c on the project. There wE s r Ll
Advisory Membrr roarding the value an' 1 r t
rather than ..e.i ' - longer. Chairman M< 1 tha"_
3 th other coat : .hies to decide 'ch the - to
t nation ' rought back to
t ThE C Sion could tr
o see the
boxL, k regu
4
st; ;d that he d d not f e is ne :e , that
is of th, sic rectil. to the staff.
L_ S
Director of Part- and Recreation a_. hitee z
C _.l' Ivan, updated the C X
t ~Pn building, par i t.
..r rioted that the
courts it
'Is rec as a result c f° t C L L
place U1 Qou ui3 here.
U _L v .zltur
compl _ _ _ la-----
_ ar a °a art a-or
art at b yen $285,00 and "570,000 -.d the I
In response to Mr. Sames question r(,- ''n
tr E~ market ')il i some objects wer
n, ( =c. s available Thy
1 '_h , -ts would h v -
t _ f dine
1 J
The Director then briefly revi€ a 7 ,
-1 ti- the City Admin' --frator -or n'
" major items inn l, lpr1, n; 1
~c ,apital eq, c. . E
I Cor recre king.
- l
k d for a 112 __c -a _-on per
A
A. or the comiiia:. y. Mr. Vraa t' s cs G
o cc '.ties concerns the amount o :'it a :11-
-nit the 9vey for the City of Eagan conclud, d the least nur
and part-time staff + valents for Antained acres.
I
U plant
Cori-.i ~h~ 1 1t. of , 1+ _ l t Trapp Farms
dal Various ri c it 't ' Ltven to Co iE ,
CORE m„ , - 6
,t >ndent -de stag h
Grant ii y, 1986, i ould provi°
for loc i - v ci^ ent by , a.ion and cav.. , u
t 'hey had Lved i d tha' Gnd Bchw[
`,00 ~3nm T._ ----d the ortable sys'
,a __-_d L. -y the t c -T aural "--sources fo ° t
ter quality. There we °e aver stions by the Advi e
' _ ng the structure. Mr. VonDe-,f Kplaii
today are not I- b` ° 1 s~
o-,t of us are l "r,
' E -ial expla ° lis r 1
lue and benefit of this Bens.
Director of Parks and r , V ,
Cr mission --event m
)nc 'i lo of
have a tion sin 'iar t .
11 pr:) more information to i Lsory C "
-C-1 t- review specific i
rm Vraa explained that C' °nan M bin and Mr. 11 ie
gan Athletic Association, -onf' c '
- )c-i tion a.r i p.
- Ana
,ly 1 tr °
on n I, of F" and C'
Commissioi '--.t they had dis
appee d the County was will ~ -e
statpi that the home would be : ib-l--- to t'--e
star- of various materials a;, .d equip it items e s
th7 the park, as there wou".d be no access onto Cliff c
{ . Martin then asked i- C ~ission members had any c
.M _Id be expressed at t'-
There be no additional items, a motion by Bar-,-. >y
Porter, with all members voting in favor, the Advisory C >f
August 6, 1987 was adjourned at 9;50 P.M.
Date ar°
6
s 37
41 4 1 tl r
olloW za items are pi and _
w to thc. C1 _1.
1. Dodd ion
(7) lots on three (3) acres, abutting tht, aide of
d ition
T h__ '___is plat by gnhject to a
2. C
J 1-1 - - Car C_ _ Center within U.- -l f f
G_ de 1--
T
lL - be snh i to a
with the City's Co l ~ Indust 1
3. Ga" ' Cliff Plaza Adr i:
A pr,-_ ased rezoning of ti--five (25) acres t _
for a preliminary plat fo one (1) lot of 4.4 a
to a
the Ci s C P )l y
r--,l along 61 thu wu fur KV/bls
TO: ADVISORY PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION
FROM., KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS & RECREATION
DATE: SEPTEMBER 1, 1987
RE: CLIFF LAKE GALLERIA - A.GAN HILL
1 ~ rhed ---tme"t ket w r w
lop liff U C all.er °
ncerning z till ?.U®D
provides f dedic< - > ® (_1
"my 24 -
g Y 170 ac the dev :'_s "ak t
l
indi torhood park 1 r
"
act it cat'(
co_ e w
Staff oncerns and i _th this development for C ,
fol" ° -
A. I r- - - t n Rahn Road and us
E. T it n _e proposed it.
C. T a'
D.
` e a
E. to th t' 1 'ing and cc Ution,
tPr mitililil4tV Z L;J 1jupaut, or if aLL ;&Liative of F. U dscap: ; of the site ®
C. is the be t solution for with tk -1 sliver of
_ side c" Ral
1 t( City _.1.
- e t ----rage there review u..- the Plar
1°ir with the v t and to help the C
;e >e of concern.
Respectfully submitued,
Director of Parks anon
KVljs
CITY xGN
n'rUB E L : t IxC1NN. ) .3,fVEILJIML'ftiT AT1_ENi'ME_'C,`_'r aRE 1I'--
)AMENDMENT, PRELIMINARY PLAT (CLIFF 11-11-11KE
GALLERIA AND TOWERS)
zT.ON: SW 1/4, SECTION 29 s Nt.., QUADRANT OF RAHN
AND CLIFF ROADS)
EXISTING ZONING: L,AGAN HILLS WEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
(CSC:, RB, Lily AND HIGH DENSITY RESIDEN-
TIAL DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: AUGUST 25, 1987
DATE OF REPORT: AUGUST 17, 1907
REPORTED BY: PIANNTNG AND ENGINEERING
1. P01q! NG DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS.
A preliminary plat application has been submitted to the City of
EaaTan b,,7 the Hoffman Development Company (.Ry n/,-To f.rL-3.In Joint
Venture) f n strip shopping enter consisting of 325,000 uq.a.a:_e
feet of retail uses situated on approximately 33.8 acres. Lots
1, 2, ~ are proposed f•-, a 114,300 yi" -ems Store;
72,000 fl 1. . unidentified grocer; and a 110,000 s.f. strip center
for miscellaneous tenants respectively. Specific uses have not
been Henri f x.e Lor Jut l ats , 3,, and C, thou h the applicant
proposes combined development of 28,700 a f he applicant.
specifically seeks preliminary plat and site plan an approval for
Lots 1, 2, and 3; and Outiots A, B, and C.
~a`ik~s;;~ on information
submitted by the ~ applicant, i appears that
a f oqV r h:3z ive Lana:? U. Guide Amendment and Planned Development
Amendment will be required in -ad it:i_?uaT°n to t l;e Preliminary Plat.
A. Panned D a e opnent`. Amendment is required to place the proposed
site p-)1ag'n in conformance with the e Planned Development "Lund Use"
exhibit. Staff believes this ai. b i.L:rves 1'his Planned 1t4EaT~~.1. i'QpLlic'.T:t Amendment con-
stitutes a "?"ezon ...,;.q" sl£,c...#. i.nse of the iJ"3.++,."rn;.. isf °`ncy in land
between the Planned Development and site plan. Each of them,-`
issues will be explored in greater detail.
1
The enclosed Planning De partE°iient report s.Cfics.].d£'r the Loll y+ inq
topics:
scope and background of proposal;
relationship of proposal to environmental review,
relationship of proposal with the .}-'lt?s'1a`le Develop-
ment relationship of proposal. with -the CcmqDrj2L,,-rsj_,,,,:~
potential Can lof'f site impacts of proposal;
The enclosed Engineering Department report considers the follow-
ing grading/drainage/erosion control;
utilities;
traffic; easements/permits/rights-of-way;
assessments.
The Planning Department report focuses on the conceptual issues
o eIzv1_ron-mcntall. review, proposal consiste3-icy with Planned
Development Agreement, and proposal confo'a~. ti2iCAE: with Co m,,,-)re
LeG-i-
f-,_i ye, a n uide Plalk goals and policies. The Planning
DC=_`part ""lent is uncomfortable with conducting a specific site plan
review of this proposal until the aforementioned issues have been
En-
gineering Department, however, has conducted a preliminary review
of the site plan relative. to grading, utilities, traffic, and
assessments. 't
`ll2{' fiT"3<~l cr,`1T^ap`=?nE;nt of this rc'pss'.?<t is a ",`lll,?T?itlcary"
of findings made by the Planning and Engineering Departments.
As mentioned, the applicant seeks preliminary plat and site plan
approval for a 325,000 s.f. strip shopping center consisting of
Lots 1, 2, and s an Out.l_o ts3 A, B, <aI°tC1 C. An "overall develop-
ment D and E 4Pxp<z_=c consist of 34.5 and 26.1 :acres respectively. Ac-
cording t this "development concept" submitted by the applicant,
Outlot D is proposed for 420,000 s.f. of office, hotel, and
retail alses (.1utlo E is proposed for approxinatoly 375 units of
high density residential uses. Preiiiiiinary plat approval_ is
sought by the applicant for Outl of s D and 1" n infrastructure
2
w r.. t-L3
and roz.7.dwa'rp .l"'cTtpr1~r'eme~ti., are requested supp `_it~'C~~ ~~wat."_en.". i1_l.
development: €~~t the area. rarea. Site plan ip"a~a:CJ,P<3.~ $ is not
however,
requested for Outlets D and ET_. >.5s -prc-.=po 1.n a :..:12ra. l.e project in 1 i rt o tl:
"overall opr ,,,ent C'o3"t€:'.e_t. 13 t.-al C?111t3erf",ia3 df,'.`y"F3lCJtMe t'`;
commer-
£~','.~j i'1 1..}[~,t ,
cial development ~ i Wa~., ~ )3r. retail ,a°0
_include: 400,000
sH s hotel; and . 210,000 w* .f of office uses. The proposal aisc.
i t
of "e
T'~ .~..?a~.,?t_. .7a .J units of _E~~h density residential .usesa '~~hie V e,.
t a_s. approval o the strip shopping center site plan and prelimi-
nary plat :us be predicated on consideration of implications as-
sociated with the conceptual development plan.
The Cliff Lake G,`c' li. e" i3" and Towers; ~ is 3 major er-,),ployment a.,,-,d retail opportunity. The magnitude of th7-s development has caused
staff to investigate the relationship frt.a 1 , _-s rC:~~i~sa,.l _ ipi 7 '~taa t'..,
~ ~ on -
F
review .
L".r regulated by 4.~.~ €Environmental
Ql.i cS.s l °.r Yz
Board .:a the ts. aZ'tned DF'vF'.lC,3pt;??;;*?"it Agreement bE:^t'c<E?.E'n the City ,-.,q..
and Eagan ~,r-€t:..a" xl,`.i.fman Development Company. Each of these issues will
be discussed Y
Based a preliminary information SllbxPtit x
by the ippl.:1C'ant, 1=C3W£?' er, it appears that an _Envi,ronr,,,ent;.-_,,l
As e. ssu,ent e_7r;'Zsh1ret,, 'fanned Development Ai:leIfdai.ent iathzv con-
stitutes °
7 E,m T l T a Iad m ltZ _ PlzA n-
Amendment are required,
'findings ~ The cxp (1_:ant. .~E~Ia'~.~'¢3"1t.s that C~e.T"tain < of t he c1~~fi.+'E1,en 3 n
are open to interpretation. parts
If the applicant wishes to
raise concerns with any of the points presented herein, written
documentation q-)of such h t,. or1~~er~a..~ ~°..hoE_~ld be C'ea^f
2(~d for review by
An Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) dated May 4€~ 1982 was
s
prepared by the developer (as represented by Dunn and Curry Real
~_~i.ly i.L}.L yCy West Planned
Jf. ~,F..... r 3 Management, Inc.) for . i,: .~u<i{3C~ Hills De 'xe1C'[)Me: n t~ 'This 1EA'O analyzed E! 1i ,p AE_^,. and ;r. various residential
development on "~„~~~..~.i's facilities CA. ions environ-
mental components. Specifically, the EAW considered the impact
of 3,27S housing units; 2€ 0, 000 to 300,000 square feet of CioTI";lE er-°'
:aE~~ development; €
c.8,356 a-* ~CJ a-`3,~_ parking stalls, 6r556 and x.,800 for
res_~d4~ S,'t ~I. and coF:Eriercia i :'Lse`a respectively, 41,000 Avera je
Daily Trips (ADT's), 21,000 and 20,000 ADT's for residential and
commercial uses respectively; demand tv `a4'a tEar ( 1. F 1 ?{j
€i/ a:E j "ay) e and so.z_I_d waste ;";t.nf.;'Y"cttion o 6,600 tons/year for
residential uses (no commercial gt`"-'.YIerfltion was considered).
The applicant has indicated that he May, 1982 EAW is sufficient
to meet current state laws and adequately addressed impacts that
the proposed Cliff Lake GaI_le r.z a and Towers will have on public
facilities/services _
and environmental C:t~mrr-.)l"t`'1?'t..a q Specifically,
titled,
the iapplicant has submitted a _ap kd.,- ( yy pp,, { r^a r^ 7 ~J7"~
3--~ t.) R 0 i Z '9
~i T 1 ON `S 1 t'4 t# ~'9 T, $'K u i T Y 3~N 1.3
f
b ; r
t,f' 7'1 S„e T~''7-.y3 q L-3 i 'k ...^w,.? Y m_^ ^y 7' ~^t _
.5'y,,
4'4L k,~1 tat
expressly argues the 745,00 s. f., commercial an 375 ',:nit high
deEZeJ _A.. y residential components of the Cliff ~Sa. lie.L i4.t. and
.
Towers is c:onsiste.nt. Eia.d;= the Mcayr 1982 EA*''d.f
Staff believes he May, 1982 ,AW was ::`u =:,-i" t t.e a'I et ub lg
a.t d environmental standards b{sf''.€d on information available to the
applicant and the City of Eagan i 1982. The 962 d czW € pears
insufficient, ~'i a ' _insufficient, insufficient, however, to meet the City's currert needs and to
conform with. current ;state environmental review laws. Without
5g-t..i:`"''~t detail, this-conclusion (is based on the following observa-
tions i.-~a~o~~...y,b-ern..ing '~`•.ahe 1€82 Eagan an Hills ~§~E.~s5... ~'~l i:1.n:~'ed Development
t,AWm
Ire 3.I'T-E!M7 .,&...P.,- _ ai IT s3 R ~ E ~ 8~ 9, I.
~.,tn h~.a m f~~~. ,~.z ~,t f,_: m~~~~ L. s','4~:5 ~f,L e p {i r~':'(.a.
-
for a 385 acre predominately residential planned development and
not a 95 acre commercial and residential development;
EAW IS, ~ z e~ 7 r 'T,,39-LT? The document ova,--;
prep'a<<Y°ec:d on the_6as ur pt a on of z3 € redo nate <x residential
development. Little attention i givse-n to pe i^ onma
impacts;
= € ECT 1 "Icy _ The document was
prepared on the basis of aggregate commercial square feet (not to
exceed 300,000 s . f ) with no consideration of a specific project;
prepared on the assumption of 200, 000 C,. t. 3100, 0001 square feet of
commercial € see with impervious surfaces covering approximately
42 percent of the property (approximately 0 °e ~
r x percent percent in the com-
mercial area). While specifics of the proposal are not avail-
able, it appears that total development of the Cliff Lake ~al-
leria and Towers will be 745,000 s.f. of commercial uses and 375
units of high density residential uses;
® aAa a T,a °,JFa 9a ^G. 1" ~A § 'F', JU i,. 2 a MOO.Li.k'sTO.i,+. S qnAW . Given
what is dinc`+h`n about._ the proposal, it appears to constitute a man-
datory ? AW pursuant to Minnesota Rules 4410 W 4. 00, sub p14 part
A 3 R Failure to initiate further enviroilT_i?ndval review may eri;-
ose the City of Eagan to legal action by the Minnesota Environ-
mental QaZs4A:1.t Board (or by other parties);
o THE g'°5 ~^p 3''... ~^q IS NOT 'b,.a9"~ 'a'+_.. g°a ISf..._,i ~a. i:t a.r `x .C".kd:aid..l~
A
AND ~~m ~ ' rR .k P'S Based YY*3?.v ._7 Y t.~ 3 -.Y... ~hr ,f !S 2
'f^
s.:w ..S..V7^s _ .i ~1SE V I .K g~.: ~i C F. ..i IN ~~'Z..~e,~.bwhat (`s I1..~1t~} n about ~~d~`+,. ~e
~~L op
~3 va C.~.
«Y"ad on rec within ~d3e realm of environmental review, thca
°
a
t
project is not consistent with the C1t'rt'k., ge_1pr<<h€ i rivP_Land_ p<<E
,'ul e i I a 1,. Environmental re.v'Ac=_w may not be e° ;eni _a_a? in all
cases where a development Pl<"ed3o._al is inconsistent with the,
4
AY The Cliff Lake Getix.d.leY` d a and Towers is o1.
£~t,~ a,~
' ~
scale aIl;a, size, h,_sw€ vf.`ra that tS"].e inconsistency daetw€'<'27 t.....
= z
dC-"$ve.lopment pl~.:os- , ne ..-.s i a.G..,~'.._ the
city's
need for further environmental review.
Two Y critical issues surround h determination _ o
;i .oTez_i~_ environmental review is .I'equir.rd fo.E." a 1'?rtRd7od',ai. such Cliff Lake Galleria and Towers. Tive first -is;
whether sahl
a~
proposal w.'_(_l constitute a "phased" or .';cti,onx i,.-,.
proposal appears to be a "phased" action assuming the applicant
anticipates all phases of construction to commence within the
term of h Planned Development A f3:e£'iClent. Based on 7'ifo1"esta cn,
provided to date by the applicant, it appears that all phases ot
the proposal considered as one project will exceed he ,,,cl f `'v
~iikCta J
a"s.
EArr category t 300,000 square tent of commercial development for
second class cities (~,TJ Rules 4410.4300).
The pi"s p .>a cannot be segmented or s.tructured to avoid the
responsibility of additional erivironmental review. Minnesota
4410.1700, subp9, states that "phased actions
considered ,Sias.~~e project...." A "phased action" is defined
"two or more projects ?:anra:.'.:['t. ken by the same pi"r1pC,se that a C...'-
determines:
21. will have environmental effects on the same
geographic Aea;
(certain to da e undertaken ,~--.~c`-. ,:7a l.iE:.r..t
Wally over . ta:L` are substantially
a 1.1xi(~.ted period of t3_me;
p. collectively have the potential to have significant
effects" environmental
(Minnesqtq,Eules 4410.0200, subp 60).
Based an information submitted in support o the proposal, it ap-
pears g
~~Earss the dE°-r,°~_~~~3Jime`_nt will be €ip hased" and consequentially should
be considered as one project tor the ptirpose of enva rormkientai
review,
Planning staff believes the e proposal constitutes C.B. "phased" ac-
tion fi:.8r three reasons. 'd'h fir is that the applicant requests
infrastructure n roadway improvements for the entire Cliff Lake
Gc::°t. I. e,a `,.f. a aI``d. Towers area, aT4:.€ not Just t the strip shopping center
o
~.~"x"ea. speopo: y the developer has submitted an indirect Source
Permit application to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency that
requests a permit to construct / million feet of clink 1€`'3n
The MGM refers to the responsible governmental unit that 1.;
1.."F sp'ev%n 2.. 9..f .i. t', €.l verifying Q.,h~.:. acctY..b a1.iY of E:3I £v-I..-f ..1. Li eLA. 4, C.d J.. dl_i S.. LL.-
tie t..:s and complying with x_ I JiroTt2iEen tl- r va.ew Yij"ot~s_,~ses J i a
z
,
u manner" (714,~m~
n 3_ 4410.0400 subp.
2)
. Ilie City of
t',:lsdan is the ti.C.,tf for sa- commercial and residential . proposal _-uc la
as Cliff Lake Galleria and Towers,
5
call uses by the year 1991. (The discrepancy between the En-
direct Source Permit application and lT;ate:Y_`ial, a:p2ibai'ritted to the
City of Eagan ray exist because the applicant ec nt revised
their proposal). -iy ~ the applicant has € b fitted a Traffic
_impact Analysis to the C tea of Eagan that considers the implica-
tions 'a two scenarios: a 1.2 million square foot commercial
gp',rti'ijc-ct; and a 745,000 ;tea. . of commercial uses and 375 units o
CE1;-sh density r>->.sident.€al uses.
The second critical issue the concerning need for additional en-
vironmental review is whet'her the current proposal can be con-
strued a,,:; a "project" that is similar in nature to the one
analyzed in the May, 1982 cl,A 9 No additional environi-kiental
review is required-if the proposal is deemed to be similar in na-
ture to the "project" anal`!:?£:'d in the 1982 EAW, Additional en-
vironmental review is required, however, it he City of Eagan
s
deter,riEines the proposal, is tsat similar to he EAW "project
Based on information submitted to date by they applicant, it a y-
arse that the proposal is not similar in nature to the "project''
analyzed A the 1982 EAW. The 1.98EAW ?.ntici,. a?v.ed comi.ierc.ial
uses not to '.XC:ee 300,000 square feet, The proposal is 2 nowl
1/2 times greater than that analyzed in the 1982 EAIKP2:opC;;:ae
parking stalls are double those anticipated in the 1982 EAW. T&_
traffic analysis, as reviewed b the City's Transportation con-
sultant, is 7_n(~o?.*cl°s'a'3:.LvF? as a ~o comparison Daily of Average Trips
(ADT' s )
An EE?W was prepared in 1982 for the 335 acre Eagan
Hills West Planned D~'~vf'_LC?d`>T1."iti?I"t. Variables included to this E TW
included: 3,278 housing units; 200,000 to 300,000 square feet o
c'o.m.z` ercia. .
uses; 8 t 356 parking stalls; and 41,000 lAverag Daily
Trips
The applicant has submitted a four page document
that contends the 1982 EAW is sufficient to meet current analyti-
cal needs and conforms with € T?viS";3nI;teI°€ta review rules;
Planning staff believes the 1982 EAW is inadequate
relative to the proposal for the following reasons: the 1`_ 82 EK,4
x ; not si.tea "Land Use," or project specific; did not anticipate
proposa..l. density, and is within the mandatory EAW category; and
the proposal 4 consistent with the City's Qojp h I J Ttv' Land
aa 3_~
}
_ ~'x`~C:A.T_ ti;~I2al env.f_rC,tnii.en?.al.. review rYppec'i2`s to be
required beca4 e ,(inn - ot }C L.€) ~ 70t9 prohibits the
"phasing" of a project. Further, the proposal is not similar to
the "project" as t,9ef.1.I:!£''d in the 1982 EW.
6
s ~
As a sit' f~€~t _-~T'E~_e of f these findII q_ y staff believes the May, 19_. T
n
°~l~.x` prepared
for .~:.I'i,. Eagan Hills West Planned Dl?'ueL.::1p:?tEt1t is in-
sufficient to fully and completely omcompletely address the potential _bm~3.~,'si~a-"
t
"project" ~.k~e proposal appears inconsistent
_ 3V.~.,,...C"~ . >e._j"i `rl -as analyzed,,,
3.ytk.-¢.
in the 1982 EAW. Therefore, staff suggests the City Council anc!
prepara-
tion of an Environmental As;-;F__.s1XiE"'nt Worksheet because state
prohibits ~->a~~ C~~-,a,~i1;t3 of , project and d w because sbecause the proposal C
_
not similar in sxat1r,,--,, to s,_,1e "project" as dc.ii2ie in the 1912
EA W,
RELATIONSHIP Or PPPqjj_YITH THE d_he Eagan Hills Wes Planned Development Agrc:-'k n..en was entered
into on Ek p5. _I. _3 g 1979 between the City of E~aC_9c:3. , and Dunn ar.',...4.
r
C_`"~~,~`~-y Real Estate Management, ~.i.nt . af-tT_31q iz1- t'.hEy interest of
Cliff Road Properties, inc. This Planned Development Agreement
controls the development of approximately 384 acres with the com-
ap-
proximately 6$4 acres. (The 68 r^`e tv omzreI`cia.: C'i)f:,pz_i"iE=ia
the ~ acre
t-~'!~_ ~._a Cliff Lakew Total i.>"QC't:1 available _;1 f;C:7'.:1'4".':'r's
cial development is the subsequent 53 acres).
il-
lustrated in exhibit D outlines permitted uses in the commercial,
~q
ara_.c:
. f (please refer b_ °
~a4 Exhibit a_
4~ the enclosed exe~l_~.~ Lei.) di~~,ldf.r.r'a
the Cliff Lake G a.~. e L: I.. a and . Towers area into t v dC distinct
r\
districts: high density residential situated north o f the
4_'.ia.;-3t`we.s"t street and so(--'dt.h of the NS P easement (where the high,
density residential serves as a bszff+`.:',r to the low and Paed<_1.1m i..dc.en
sity residential units north of the project area); and the com
I:set_c a- 3.l area which 1_:3 ofticlal-[ y designated cs 7 b---1.b r3arl high,
density resYdential.
West "
A copy of the r , ~,z l€~SIT`1 ~sH,.~...~`uY ~'a~.=~f-. Planned
Development Agreement . is
s enclosed for City Council and Planning Commission consideration.
Following are the foundational components of the Planned Develop-
ment
S='~tj e The City of Eagan has agreed
to ca~°s~~}}`t`tv plats ti1c;1t are "reasonably consistir'I"t" d,+,rithi the ex-
hibits "
i_C~13~'s+„d 3..?`i the Planned Development AC;%'ti"'f?mt}nt n The exhibits
are considered an integral component of the Planned Development
Agreement
subject to and interpretation. UnII'2c l c n(J P_..ailll:.E.ng Commission will need to de E.,."I" ir-e wheth-or
the proposal is consistent . with i._il n £?xh J_b-..... s~ as .l..C ,,,nd in,
Planned Development Agreement;
in the event the superimposed,
Planned Deuyz'lc;rmen i',. G, t.%nLin is removed the underlying zoning S
prt ,F:1:i. . '1he tknde ly'_I6<t7 zoning or that portion : the Plan nevi
Development that is situated youth of the NSP easea ent an north
of Clif Road is c sc and R-4. The IR- 4 ,s located r, ~--ie
northwest and northeast corners of his area. The s:.sc c of p3="_ se
the remaining portion of the site
C ~1. n 3gc-. The developer is required t,
submit f- 1... H Ca ..5., plan" . for the cs4.,- -rb-t. S area as shown in 1 ex-
hibit 1) "no i~~eCity of Eagan € rfor y'~o any platting construc-
tion a lit. the tine of "plan" submittal the allocation of
"permitted and conditional" i&`ses within the c ms's b- l°:~ ad ~
area stall
be "reasonably defined" with subsequent developnent being in
reasonable conformance with said uses.
A review of th-e proposal submitted by ihe applicant appears to
ia.dicate that a Planned Development G`mend;r.ent will. be required.
Becaiuse of the nature of inconsistencies, staff believes th"e
Planned Development Amendment includes a change in land use and
as a consequence constitutes a rezoning,
-Fol'Llowing is, a. general list of incon~'~-,istc-_-~ncies between the
Planned Development Agreement and the conceptual development plan
submitted by he applicant for the Cliff [..,cake Galleria and Towers
area This analysis 1 based on comparing exhibit t1he
proposal. Exhibit D was selected for this comparison because it
constitutes the Planned Development "land USES Mhibi t" and be-_
cause it is frequently referenced in., the. Agreement C oncerS° inc'
€-oihx!c.at.LoS<eal issues. The 1ncsjt`is1ste?-1cie'' S i'vl.`Ea 2, t h
grocery stare located on Lot 2 is a commercial USE! in an are a
designated high density residential, This discrepancy, if <a-p-
prC}`fT4'3d,r wCS'tl.i.d c:onstltute cz change in land Li;::>eA Based upon pY_e_-
v3o`s,ls administrative practices, this and use change wsililC1 essen-
tially constitute ;a reZC:%ning (please refer to this reports last
exhibit); bit) 7 c=and, 2. the east/west connector roadway alignment ap-
pears inconsistent with exhibit G, pursuant .}to section S. This
section of the Ai ~"~e=z?iifL''`~ai_- states in part that "app oval o a final
plat shall permit access to major thoroughfares only as shown on
exhibit G. ¢ & . as
An ancillary issue related to fulfillment o Planned Dever oopment
requirements is whether the "overall development concept" submit-
tal is of sufficient detail to constitute a:i "plan." Pursuant to
section 17 of the Eagan Hills West Planned Development Agreement,
the applicant is required to sAubIi1i to he i I_t'3% of Eagan an over-,
all plan for the area labelled csc--er - lb and high density in ex-
hibit 1) prior to any platting or construction. The applicant has
submitted one (1) ex .obit (please refer enclosed ter l)
that illustrates in a general fashion anticipated land uses and.
subsequent square feet for those areas adjacent to the proposed
strip a_
shopping exhibit, however, does S2C c'C~i<'~.a__Y'.
sufficient information or detail c:`.So ning t.;catc?nti al land uses
and subsequent Cpl?i"re feet, loci". coverage, pF'rC:en impervious sur-
f aces s internal circulation, l.nq[ress! `g .`";s points, 'sit
tr ans pt r tat:zon plan, anticipated landscape plan, anticipated
building lt"',t_`.c:,t_i.n and form, existing topography, and anticipated
sb ape ain treatment of the groun a 'As a consequence of t1nese
deficiencies, the conceptual plan as submitted by the applican,:_
g
may not. constitute a "I) Iea?7 " aS required by section 17 o ('".he
z _
Ea.'a. an Ht.~.I..;_ adt:`.st Planned Development Agreement.
jpmmarv of P1 n4r.p4__Peve'1 A en It
The Eagan H_1_l..L,.s West P.LaS`lIied Dc-_vE-`.lo}.72iatc'r%t A[.a.T'eeT:;f-,£s¢.-
'pia;. £''t" te ja into on April 3 r 1979 between the C?_t'r' of Eagan, and
Dunin aind Curry Real Estate e
Inc. The Cliff Lake Gal-
leria aind E'.~c* J.s Proposed for that port--ion of the Planned,
DeVe.4.opt=,en t that lies south f' t gry e < t and north o'f
Cliff Road;
Exhibit D o the Planned Development Agreement i.1 "
lti, t,.;i.tes Ke L.1s,`.=ati!._'>n of allowable €.aiT;.d -uses. z'1t'i"`_.uaa;t to ex-
hibit 1) the proposal is d ; rte -a Ln w distinct. areas. high
aen,,sJ_t'p% ru=`,>_zs.1r_}I4tial situated north of the et?,st .pest street and
°`..>oth o the NSP easement; and the commercial area which is offi-
cially designated csc-rb-lb and high density residential;
A review of the Planned Development Agreement and
accompanying exhibits appears to Jindicate < cax .1?t?r..Y1:1si"tt~ t{
the Agreement is required. This Amendment is required to address
inconsistencies between .he, nAgre ',n6='nt and the proposal w 1
respect to conflicting land lsse and major thoroughfare access
points;
z
Pursuant
Inc) section 17 of ta L e F c- c:;jan IS i..LL s West
Planned Development Agree;ittt-'nt y the applicant is required to sub-
mit
t.s rb"° f.b and € ht.gh density residential in exhibit D. The e;r"-
rllbit, „,ubmiEt.ted b the developer lacks, L.-i f_ircie_!''at detail. arnd
scope concerning land uses,
sCY;Ia#rE} footage, and design charac-
teristics to constitute a~ "plan" pursuant
to section 17;
As a consequence Of thEISEI inconsistencies, staff suggests that
the City C',oaa.I?t;il and Planning Commission consider the potential
need for negotiations ;ifs-nth the applicant ClOuCerning preparation
4e./.L an amendment 4..o the Planned Development Agreement. it is sOS .
~ V.t
is ~S'
= o
e.,_ a these negotiations the City of Eagan be sensitive
to the land use, ya environmental, , t1. , facility and
ser~ icep and site design issues Z.des raised by t.,.h~.? proposal.
N.-
The proposal appears to be inconsistent with h
adopted in 1983 and with the prop(._-..,_,4 dian
Amendment" dated January, 1987. As a tt.o?„a"->F"'qi.ZC`T'Ice,, staff believes
it appropriate to process an at7:ehldmen to the City's Land g
9
Plan. This procedure, however, is more of a formality concerning
this matter since the 1 JaE 1; ° t t sg Ste- . 12 p expressly states that Planned
.
Development Agreements prevail .s- n the %`'vtint of conflicting docu--
men tss .
tional A proposal of the scale and size of Cliff 1--ilke Gi-Ill-eria and
bpi _L 0 `.s.'<^e.z`; s can b an as:;F.'`t t) tine City o Eagan i.. k terms of addi-
tax baset C:Jr°Gv1ding necessary retail services, n creat-
ing both temporary and permanent employment opportunities. These
assets, however, can be quickly negated if proposal on ' /off s-:-te
impacts are not fully assessed, mitigative measures identified,
and k;_'.` nt. g rlcy plan developed..
This section of the staff report outlines the general on ' /off site
impacts that may be anticipated with the Cliff Lake Gal ter is and
Towers proposal The following outline does not attempt to be
inclusive, rather. it outlines he salient issues that have been
identified to date. The assistance ob- -a -
r~_g:~oS~dt,_l and state
agencies through the environmental review process would be valu-
able in compiling a complete _l-:gst of on/off site impacts.
Following is a list of potential on/off site concerns generated
by the Cliff lake Galleria and Towers:
The site will require extensive grading, an-d
removal of trees in order to construct the project, particularly
the retail t:oiepoIaent to be situated on ints 1 , 2, and 3 o FiE- s
and an undetermined, though ostensibly high percent of impervious
surfaces will create impacts related to stormwater runoff, water
quality, and erosion control. Because of these issues, the City
of Eaclan's S or< inO MF33`aageI11ent Ordinance may aToply to this
development proposal;
A development o this scale and size may have
an impact on the city and regional transportation system. in
particular the City may wish to c`"atis1der the potential transpor-
tation impacts on Cliff, R<ahn g Bi 3ckhawke and Di f l y roads and
pay close attention to the capacity levels of the 1-35E and Cliff
Road interchange. To date, the applicant has submitted a traffic
impact analysis date July, 1°:x87 m The
The City's transportation con-
sultant has reviewed this report and other material. Concerns
appear to exist: regarding aa,s`>t.f,_,ptions relative to trip dist:ri am-
tion, background traffic, consideration of adjacent 11-and uses,
1i1b=egL. tint trip generation, r'zn lack of detail concerning future
roadway improvement and design. Specific concerns appear to ex-
ist regarding project internal circulation;
Police and Fire Dopartments are aware of the
proposal and have given cursory cons derat-ion to potential 1 a-
paictsa Both I e=arn tints believe the proposal will have a paten--
10
ta.al iI-1pi$c an ability to provide services, Neither Department,
however, has had an opportunity to specifically measure such all
impact;
The proposal may have T.td C3 spec.'1f.x..(.; y t11rip.,lC.rx1
unrMated impacts on the City's Park and R-:~=O-at_ion Lm.
First, Rahn park is located adjacent to the project site and is
r the s
~,r°~Twil~- rLsc'c~, da3".nC~ talitm::1e;i for a ei"aboF_..i-1,.:tod activ-;~ ies and
softball da.aAAea",t® it is not uncommon S»ri..}r softball participants and
spectators x . } ~.Q
C... d,~ pC'1~'1<~ . on t~';sxaaa Road, , particularly duz...I_i7.g late after-
noon and evening hours. When 'ind i satin Roads needs to be ex-
panded, the softball facilities "parking areall would encroached upon upon and thereby severely impact the utility of „_1,
Park.
A second Sr s YY rftr~ { ~@~'"t.lE.
. ?s:~~C.:~- on ~.-Lf:.,. z??a-0.a}is ,_y.:JtC".d,- ~ i A_d? i~ery 3.~A S to la..n.ii
dedication in areas yet to receive Knal plat approval. Pursuant
to section t) and exhibits C and F i the Eagan H I_ _t s West
Planned Development Agreement the applicant is; to dedicate c r`"_
r 1 r..i~t ~.3 ° 3 ! property City of . Eagan for F 1
the L
portions the x
''`f "public parks, trail das?m:1tsy or ">`p.. b-sa. _.awater holding areas".
The applicant fails to show approximately 16 acrc.s, of Outll.ot E
that appears to be an agreed upon area for park dedication,
` The proposal may have unique impacts cui adjacent
7 facilities. :z+~..lh.o~~'? 1 School facilities of particular
~71 a..~ t .L.. ~c... 6.G l:~.r interest .and Lake
Elementary. Potential impacts related -to these facilities, in
varying degrees, include: increased traffic, that pi'Lay conflict
..i.ict
with pedestrian and bus movements; proximity of site to
«
playground areas; attraction of school children to eta.p. i.
fa a. x. 4_e.s and social interaction between school children and
shopping center patrons.
Social impact o the proposal also appears to be
significant 3_sss,der particularly to neighborhoods located adjaceY"S
° Potential to the include: personal safety and privcac y, chc8a1.hes in physical en
attrac-
tiveness, ar& pedestrian (particularly school. esig€=< people)
mobility,
The proposal. may have impacts, on stormwater
runoff, erosion control, and water quality;
The proposal I7?<3.Ki have impacts o the city and,
regional transportation system;
The proposal may have an i_~!s?a.f",t on the Police and
z
d
Fire Departments ability to deliver public safety services;
x.
The proposal may have impacts on the City's park
and recreational system;
The proposal -miay have impacts on area school
facilities;
The proposal ulay have social impacts relative to
p.r4`'.'3onal safety 'sn d privacy, physical environment, and pedestrian
mobility.
S MA
The Cliff Lake Gaileria and Towers As proposed as an enploynnent
and retail opportunity for the citizens o Eagan. The reed ex-
ists, however, to fully analyze the proposals potential impacts,
per-
tinent issues in the near future. The purpose of this report bas
been to provide policy-makers with a tool and/or framework that
identifies potential impact issues.
This section o the Cliff Lake C a.Ll:"ri a and `1"o,',erg, staff report
has; addressed _
q =sueU regarding the proposals relationship with
the Eagan Hills West Planned Development Agreement, potential
need for environmental review, relation e City's S L V w,F 1,11 ~ u i d e, Z~ ~ qT °s n d potential on/off site ~ impacts. I~
addition to identifying potential on/off site impacts, staff
recommends that the City Council and Planning Commission make a
determination r.eg arc inq the consistency o and/or need for
r'la?1ne Development Amendment and preparation of an Environmentai
Assessment Worksheet.
1. <2
11. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS
! the nwfKi and west. providinq maximum l 1 diffarentials
devolopment is yonarally open farm land draining to tAe northeast.
0 a - 500' from the edge of Pond AP-11 (Cliff Lake)
surf r' drain W re is ly into this water r, a T,-, a C1 1 tT " t n 1. Ri z nor ? L _ ,"i C € _ Road. Howe i the
J -
15' 20' inniomm t!ui existing alevation of
-
,.~.adx t i 2p the a: i.l n:.:i plan for hE_' initial - first
,
a
ti
~ 000" ~ Road,
7 "t.. L ~ of R..z1L? Road From t,~ ~ if c ~':.",..,t... ~.~-~,f-_Io.r..
r e C , mE I of these out lots Q 3 1 re.r i ] it , s ; A I Want a= r `_1 du
and l o s s of _ _ nq v _ _a 'd ;.:7 n . The o z V 3 t, on r"
ad j cacen t. ho Ci i Ff Road and tile southbound 1-35E exit ramp in LV-~
,
i L ~
i i_. , r 1 ~s'- J ` - ~ r re.~:_a. ; r'- the _1 t . > _ a , ,'1 L i n of r''. _ai _ i- is . uzp
t
-a chive Toper has verb a 1. ly :hWicated a -n
'..1~
Mention to expand l tio existing ,pis 1. n§. .bt in
snutknnst .oL U:_ t_.,d construct :.i now sedimentation € d on the _ J
side of C 1 fa haka
"~~lr '~-.a! it 1_1%_q r,__ ~i is 1r''~r:;Ti.
developer's statement. _ nt; -.-.€lu' . "
in addressing thn issues necessary t..:-- a,-1111-,-vj the first phasc
3evelopment to proceed.
This f-x t' f. V p h n;: proposes O v discharge the roof c..', , r-ai. , o
Urectly into CliEf take with the Unylinq lack servica roaA aroumi
tAe eastcrn edqn of the Willing being conveyei via a storm sewer
_
X71. inii ~J i~r L> iIan _~lt?_ proposed future _ea €_en._, __or %ona
pricr to 1sc,. ini o CH U s 6.: ties „r majority y 9 nq Wt
system and ,_.';t_ ._`t" _i to the _1arE 3. di r ac t _ ,i. ,.t`:3 Pond AP-24 instead of
u_1 t °:'..T it through ail n..5 AP-25 adjacent W Rahn Road in accordance
with _ Comprehensive Storm Sewer ?_clz1. The drainage plan hJYC3T7o
to reduco Lbs sLorm wator storage capacity of Pond AP-25 aaJacent V-)
Rahn Road the master p l a n a jui i „z i< s of 22.0 7, ~ feet
" . , . ) r x.1 p e ' 2. 5 °rf} f oef. T h i s wo'...5 _"A require .-e OI:S fi- ni-
northern Woo oE Phis property. The qrajina plan is incomplete in,
addressing deveLopment and . eS of fonds AP-22, AP-23 aWi
sar :4 i_ i. eco.. sst ( the first jq?:. sFs and ia. L_LIa xthe [,~p ._r. ? sm The storm sewer Y3: _ pia proposed
_
t` z-
~e : f _ 3 e. z)L ~ 1~ inc : ~sxp_z e 1. a _i so 'I r ~ i~- . ~.~~i t_,~"
their e : ions, in umm it _F a u ? m e 1
'vp a tJti:.^ lt.
K .;_>:?'i ..C sediment _1c.roL plans s€bhmt tLer_ r, ,!i T b zip lWi..io__ is
COI), s: O;3 i.7n and c:limeTit _w` rcH plan N_otil be prepara,-i
I
. and general L. iC.arf _ c of the C-ai_tiT of .,?g;_i> i
following x.A',.<? YqL,1 1':i l "c:.(1t.`
and x"..__e comments and concerns of the Dakota C ~''z. n t Sail & 4'4a`:eir
Conservation District as identified in their report y a ed hereto.
While ' the developer ii-',;7 expressed _a e_n4 to .ias ,.-a,ai...._ the e impact -i z.
xs development to the water quality of Cliff Lake Mrough the
e
e_ii ~.xA~,J..-~.Ci of _~'l.-s~.l.<xg and construction of new sedimentation "?as1.n r
h, `P l_ be i5 'r v a ar ",E constriactin! i k __'Y _jr= rd`ith C ,,r
criteria to ensure their effectiveness of minimizing the negative
impact of he witc., quality in Cl3 E Lake
I as Trunk sanitary sewer of sufficient p T+.z n ep k-
handle th first prase and ultimate development if ta_ s property is
7.m..aed atF= I a l o n g the western (K':i n road) and nortf"l:'_ n
a
t I 1S.3 f ..i (=t h__. i- Zi e t1 ;3. sei l e'"1 t,% boundary of this i.`.r Ci t3 v oI e[ Sanitary
sewer lateral extensions and individual - service e_, are ?dequa >l y7
the t`_i Ta
proposed to service eY.isri first r development ease i J!LIt~ ~nt s
x,e B and C adjacent . to Cliff and Rahn Road.
Water service for this development presently . does not exist. I t
_ u_k `,,;P 2, main fr-ola the
will re. "C r_ the installation of a 16"
existing stub on a J t.:h. c r : a. !'i ti Road north of I `J . u to . the e existing I s1 " of 2
trunk main _ e~ L the L > .T_ F` r sL 4~ t.~ . ~ ~ ;L ff and !Rahn Road. lk 12
.
trunk T.aa.A_ must L. also be interconnected to t the existing ~~n..''
diameter
located in Beaver Dam Road SZi% .i Lane. ii'_i ;°i.~. 1.
lateral extensions and individual service lines necessary to service
the ?1 a e° c en-el i~3.te~:t~ a ,jatIn ;.3 A. r B ii,:1 first z, ~.a i,_, are adequately
,°1
provided for. With . the 1_-EiSi~a7 lc1' ~Lt;~'' of these
a Is ~ c. t f:: .Y" ma-..n adequate si.epp X' and pressure 'E'ki.1..1 be ,,.T;a- ble to
s e r v lc e 6. '.1 ' . Ei a ~ ~.i..L r .7 p i a s e =1 1 i d Li...e.. _ C1 c Vii. t e3 d. _ ~ r o i; ii :D { L 1 s
proposal.
TRAFFIC: rah Cr ai.E_i c repo r3, p r et; a c_'{_ b y ieD EY < Ll e y i 01
<
.j
irlt.~, cons i E-',i"<.tio i p;;r'L ion of the i i cto- J area i;a al eturm,,1.,'2i
traffic generation and ,-')T-,s-t-F!~Gut ion impacts on the adjacent existing
roadway network. Apparent inconsistencies reqarding assumptions for
the distz iV.'°_ ,.on of traffic nee,.- to be x ,,1 _he r to
analyze the iT,p%tti on jlc:ck}scSwr= tif'7:3_y ;-a'ca.t,i wocd.=i, Cliff N.,.aCtg D1ffi e'{,
Road and their related intersections with each other.
The e development's traffic report assumes a 21 growth factor for
"background" t_ra~i{ic in evaluating this development's impacts on the
local ~ road . network system. This is st n L I . C. a` lr below the 8-10?,
factor necessary when not, performing a detailed analysis of this
development's z_uLur e phases and adjacent vacant property tra if i
_,c Tti__' .'iaL traffic
C.rx<c'I" i KoI"iw This dai? l3_ significantly n..,.ec.s£` the 1
impacts ,-l(_. v~ c<i as{ analysis should performed : 1~'Al
or xr *-liF' a a_ x3 i3
_ _
i !,_f.;_r=fir ,o<<i ,><1..,;.'_, R,li'Ti ?CS_.c:t and I.,c',"iaFti`.. Road 7 iiz t:'1e tI~ .'%t7l,~,E~;=1
.i ll _ t, l:~.y r street with Rahn Road and i j.5_a `S, : i a"'V
' `
Road intersections. present report c < ._s the majority its
concern only on the Cliff - R_.aCa intersection vaT Rahn and diackhawk
w
Roads.
lei e s h_l e of the p . po Ct pha sing of his development should be
more defined in in determining the `ea'_"' ~FL)1lsty y of C li.i `1 l
' _a1C#"°iT_
> ?C a'.r 11 ca n er e:_y ;,n tar a U c 7' 's s i n L 1Ta ._i i
14
channel Witon, etc. Because s._ s.''ri::1 of 7. _x _I'2'„ _ 1p3..nr ,a.Ert`-~", W L1 r e v _ I
- -,z s _ :r.Ce n., a~.y c .li via y 1>a k a1,t, ~'i, 1 .J11"111,111. i t 1Po..)u,
la1 to i_o•'a the _ x ; =Cir;:_'.1 ch.,_u { Lf 3l .E a pp ri),1t 1,:_Le
Year :ai_jA .i. mp o1 i'''ii;r.? programs of both ..I. r. City and County.
ire ti nary review by i,h... Dakota Coon Plat Commission indicates
that o access w i l l be allowed from Cliff Road.
for
lCMIMCYW,? tile Strn!W_
p required
t } ~l
F e{' sssa ✓ t lwad1_ that is ;,rte it ~ l.! ._i?a_..
development S the 9 acres. No iI ldJ_ l 4 n. n;: right-of-way - 1 We
_S P __C .,7-L.'v" c, r e51 .a,--:T_~""dk '-Ta E't Cn' _ i b.._ Ro dcl e '`v'.., `v gat.. a s
. lBoa d' been ;cqu.. ice". r yr M_ DO r.1: !ir the construction 5E.
y
s or.aa aq easements will be , _t_li < f£3r all Jtl:;-3.n r areas ,ls',(`s='£
wh _._u , xc e water ru,naa:llFine generate,! b,,,, th-4 first
'sue E quf.o<, with Altura ph a 5 n
evaluated by ?'tv~ L s` fYV dek-a _ plans. r_t i Ila 1 a 1 S :7
easements wi 1 1 be requi red f or a! 1 sanitary sewer, stnrm sewer anr~
e
iding
on 3n 4 it✓ to the e City's trunk z. c[lt. t ZT" sfi _ r ".m1
P t: r !owing e q,t a.tor y 3LlF- n e'w r' 1 be required 1
. '1rti'ay Il:'.i'.rtment. .JNR..
this proposed development: N.Iii"OT,F County d'-
,-I- y" , ~ -
t:'?) e 3 E'Lf± v~1 Y 7 'access
"a.. l s_
s, L c" 1 F s ( C 1 , f E "3
E S £ ~ i:1 i' `7 w i l l b required - from NOSY' for any construction work
Located within their 200' hi - y1 E ne power easement along the norther-ni
boundary of this development,
AS S E S z 3 bl I N T 13 ~ Trunk area sanitary sewer and water ate_.. main T i v>, F? r~_
E : . v , under Project #14 at both the .i. s f d_ a a... a? s :i
` . 1 /
s., d ~ _ 1 ~',.s--` rates. The .i .~d 1 f' ri _E_ storm sewer and . s`_ I_ t, W_
improvement.s for Rahn Road was assessed aL a rpsidential rate under
Project 180. ' % ! a t., "i wk Road street i j y.. ovem _ < i_ s were pr e v l' a , i
assessed at a multiple ie.s>_r :t?_tf 3~ rat under Project 311
il~ 5 become ~ 1 iiJ1. h t aj~ i...~_
The . ,.__.,i v, ;.t
__J._. _r_ _;r_..~5 G!e_lty~.. assessments _
this development if approved:
ITEM Q)TY RATE AMOUNT PROJECT
Lateral RoneFit 1,175' 05.08'ff 023,720 64
a Erom Trunk Sanitary
Sewer Bohn w., Surfacing 1,50w
Upgrade
Cliff Road Upgrade 636.67' 92.761/ff 59,058 Futar.,2
Trailways CLIH & 2 -L1 r! 12.40/ff 27,425 , l t _
Ra.,.. ROW)
~ 't
Trunk Area PYaf eL 0.74 ac 1,920/ac € 1,414 W._.
Upgrade
Trunk Aroa Worm 1,472,764 sf 0.075/sf 116,348 Future
Sewer
TOs_ ~AL PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS ~ $293,360'
K! C . t r i_ a! ! ?_t ''a t? i_. ' r , V i a a _ Ci i s L _e e ; L 'f S 11
cl3ssifications based an 1987 rates.
All final assessment obligations would be oi-', the rates An.
efEect at the time of final plat approval ana quantities contained,
within the final plat application documents,
in w< C,'. i t1.. , Ws development sY1 a Ll be responsible _ o : its
pfoJ,_'_' _iat.afic sal_Lae of any Major improvements to the overall
transportation network system necessitated by either the Eirst phase
or ultimate development of this property.
16
CONDITIONS: CLIFF LAKE GALLERIA
a This deveLopmcnt shall comply wiLh the most rocant rvquirement,,--~
o standard approval conditions of adn-atal 4y Council-
action.
r .
nomis to Cliff Me, Pnn , is AP-22, AP!23 and AP-2-1,
in addWon to Pond AP-L!O AP-25 (Rahn RoaW
t a ;v - 1 . y y ti- y r; a to C o
p
requirements,
3. The retaininq wall design must bw propared in accordance wjt~,
:4. A specific detailed T a quality water provocAon of Pon;! AP-11
must be - ^ by the City prior to any construction activiL',,'
Witintion.
w .r'a \ a r3 ) i7. to the e C ° " p f i r-. I z s , v n'":' . sewer management pins.
lE P,,pac an.. Lys m L b pe r ` o gum,
E_ v_a_ f. E _ <;-F_ the ultimate ro3 _ _ :a L C° r s erits T` r . E -i? re6 i Ai`L the
a u L phased development of a p rov_a by the Ci v and . the County.
i a T h i s a - e i_ op e n ` _ s h a l l be r e p o . 7 s i i ) e r its s proportionate
share of any major thor0LVg11far`C
this deveiopmentManning DsparLment conditions are not subnitwA herein.
17
iii. PLANNING ND ENGI ` SERI g DEPARTMENT
T9 iT was prepared in 1982 for the 385 acre Eagarn Hills West . Planned De*,xr el. f.? p-,-: i eI?"v 4 Variables included . in 6 this s - T'f
included: 3,278 housing units; 200,000 to 300,000 square feet o
commercial uses; 8,356 parking stalls; and 41,000 Average Daily
Trips,
The applicant has submitted a four page docu-ment
hc`t."C ' cb o rteT1t.`ds the . 1992 EAW is sufficient to meet current analyti-
cal y environmental ii d needs and conforms with review rules;
E9 Planning staff believes the ~~{"98.G ) j ~'Sl 1~~i. l.Y~ ~ .n. AiJ inadequate,
r lat mare o the prop a to the following reasons: the 1982 `i'
is t:€{.'-t site, "Land Use," or project specific; did not anticipate
proposal density, and is within the mandatory EAW category; and
the proposal is not consistent with the City's Copprehensive-Land
Use Guidg_Plan;
Additional envi_roniileistal. review c ;'}~_1£,a to e
rer~ui eC. )E: 3tls e tl?.71T e iota I-Zi (-,s 44 f.0. 17 00 p i'o h i b t s `IIe
aapha sing" of a project. Further, the proposal is not similar to
the seproj ect" as defined in the 1982 EAW
` The Eagan Hills West Planned Development Agreement
was entered into on April , 1979 between the City o Eagan, and
Dunn and Curry Reel Estate Mt2€`1i:2gE'mc',n $ Inc.. The Cliff Lake Gal
1e iaa and Towers -i proposed for that portion of the Planned
Development that lies south, of the C'%Sk ease~,nent and north of
Cliff Road;
Exhibit D of the Planned Development Agreement il-
lustrates the 1C)c`_".c„_t_I-CFCs of allowable laisv% ti v,c'?sa Pui"sL1sIxt to ex-
hibit TD she proposal is divided into two distinct areas: hisg
density residential situated north of tae east , west street and
south of he NSP easement; and the commercial area ?i
tyiL.h is `_7i_fi
c_eiall y designated c`s~~-rb-lb and high density residential;
A review of the Planned Development
$.an Agreement and
accompanying exhibits appears to indicate h,,-EY L. an a.m,,encchl-,ent to
the Agreement is x"er:t11red- This Amendment a Zyeu-3.44 t address
j-t inconsistencies bet.90ell the Agreement i r "tea e proposal with
respect to conflicting land uses and major thoroughfare accass
18
Point- These inconsistencies are of st,i.cIft a- nature <;a to ccln-
Pursuant to section 17 of the 'Eaqan I-Ii.-Ils West,
sub-
mit to ;h City o , Qfdan an overall plan tor t h(,-, area labeIMI
c c b-.lb and hl.gi'x d.'1i:aitr" , e.,:,'zC€..n:°.1..~_ in exhibit D. The e~s~'71'i~;"~
n
con-
_ <
cerning __Land uses, square footage, and design characteristics to
r
constitute ..3
a": "plan" pursuant r'~
- : . to section
I,, Potential on/off jpdl-~
TE : e proposal 's a aE have impacts oi.,, _'s i1 r11 watee
runo.ff, erosion control, and lv,,ater quality. Further, this,
proposal wi-1-1- ne-,cessitate significant revisiion,,_~ to the City's,
Comprehensive Storm a~~:'`~1dE"T:" €?lf~.z~., ~`'l~~iz;-; submitted to C~.a:£? regard-
ing r
_x.T,g er__,>_i.Cil; and sediment c€^+i,tvi_."' , dra1.I ageF ";_zld grading in
e
sufficient
and 1.ncCzYIplea t" to Mew :;.3a.,_tr'_ct.,,E~/2^i 4.7 _ any F1rti~~_~ of
the pgip; a
it appears as though this proposal nAy be served
with t-_: ilx .:_nt utilities with respect t3 tz t nk sanitary i 'vier and water service;
The proposal r. l. y
may a~`EI impacts ~ C. ~.7a{? '..~..a.0...i u.iii~.
regional ~ ~ '.~.Y_i€_ ~.~t_ ~C t~..c~~._~_oi system. The City's transportation con-
sultant ,",u`--~a~° has co,.a_E'$..n_> a°C" Y,ardLn``€ assumptions relative to trip dis-
tribution, back c_j?°oiind tratf~.a cons ?de`."aW.on of adI j a.,,O_-t i.andi
uses, subsequent trip C ~'_n ation, and lack of detail concernin(j
future roadway improvements and design;
r z proposal may h.ave an ..`iui€,:2._:k, on on the Folice and
Fire Departments . ability : tv:,.3 deliver r public c safety services;
The proposal may have impacts t;.; on t.?,le .is.. y's pa.
R
tion of park land;
ThEl proposal may have F` i1"(paa_ f`e orl area school
facilities relative to proximity of project to school sites, and
interaction of school children with shopping center patrons;
The proposal may have social- rf-lative Ito
personal ;5h=i 1`.y and privacy, physical environment, and pedestrian
`..''his p.$."t"7tJf3.,tal W1..l require easements ..and rights-
of-way E 3 a 1. ir j Rah i Road, the e a" t and
}-s. orZ`Tw t.er n tom,?"'' ta respectively. Permits w;i l_I be required, MNDO T's Dclkot_ County zt.,t"5~14~ ay i- ~'g~~3?;~t?~c'n r N t
P
Corp r 1 - C~., and nthe eta"`ii of Engineers;
_ Thi." proposal will be i°esc'cnisible for ap-
proximately $298,360 4:3~~ assessments. . assessment obliga-
tions ~5 on n t he .1_ paces in 'o^~eeffect ~2.c`~3:_~a ..i_ ~5~.,. e of f_L.a1.a TH'tE.sL. be b4b.~e -tine a l,_3 oS_ l
.
ap-
plication documents. Fu "'SheC°a this development shall be respon-
sible S_'6,x_ its proportionate ,-sht<_3'°._ o ss'niv major roadway iT['; ro4re-°°
' i nts to the overall transportation network system necessitated
either c_hF_ first phase or Ll].a.€'iT.tat. t.eve".tf mt'.: t °,=?w tgzis
property.
20
T.S Nfi..lAFM CONI PI R,NIS OF P Laa`W a~:.Ps".1.CJp`trW,
A. A m S A N
_a. m This : ; v Cl t shall _ ' . . c . opa , 1. l" ± C A K - a _ ei
accordanca with tho firiai piat divensions an,! tine rate'~in of foci at tho ADo of f inal plDt vpprokvi 1.
B. Easements and Vii. .7.u at.. _.o'f,._.t'fav
1. This development h l 1 dedicate 10e .a a i- . e aril utility
easements cc:'nrt_" _`d over a'. common lC'i" ll;i£ ,?.n_, adjacent
to private pr5perty or public right-of-way.
2. i development shall 1 ' i .at,', r provide, or K a Ll
-i L tr C c.:-, its por _._Ol, r-' 11:.1 - a the si 'r1
c~ of
additions! E: r
as re;~ i -
-tea. i ~ ._.:_r-. .d A_ i.. i.:. I. _`-9
. i~'.1.~i, i.. depth, a,l
~ aci ty of all , LX u . , " I?_1 b - . ,..c utilities an,,
3
t,...." 1 ~.it_ f -Jer. c,? t_"Ci p.,.. LiC.', right-of-way as necessary i'.._.
service ,1 development,
3. This development shall ApOicate oil! public right-of-way
and temprrary slope easomonts for ultimate aevelopment of
adjacciA roadways as required by the appropriate
jurisdictional aqency.
4. ThI. s v~1.=11. 1
elevation pon3ing oasoments to incorporate Llh.,e high water
`
requicements.
C. 111ans and Soccification.-
1 ° -
;nib y _ti, °._~:t~ ._a and I' i .t t _ es T~'C~_. v~.ctry to ..'JViC1'ei
this t t>
A essC- { ) is d by
to ?_v ed professional e 7 er in accordance with CA,,,
approved by t aff ?r?„.: t Einti plat approval.
:JL. .i ? 13Lr _:ui>t he Tai.'p_. o:7 in n_ with r_n_,
_ arC and approved ta prior to final pla~:.
approvai3. This dnvelopment ha _ insure fi,.i__i° all i_,.i_1iY ) ,r d~ad ana
put! i ` streets ::o- ,srw0 with City t i qin, t. Yr _sg t; ,,i__a_ ri „ lip s&nnjtLuj 011 tjv-~
s
proponod s,
L lA 111 It J r~ - quarant an - -
into 1 t in the Doveial)mant Cant t, nnt I
-
nt..' ono year after the date of 1. i al 1 3ti ,
CONDITIONS :~`}a
elt`lAl'diryt:tiC'i 'OF x: ~ .b TY,3I?4
O`4 L
PAGE TVO
5. All internal Iniblic and r
constr---ictod within the rcmjuired right-of-way i n,
accordance with City design standards.
D. Public Imurovements
1 . if any public imRrovements are to be installed under a
City contract, the appropriate project must b approve,-3
by Ccuncil action prior to final plat approvaE
E. Permits
1. This development shall be responsible i
'i r for acquisition
the all regulatory agency p mt! s 1Z7. cn ..gym :._aaree
required by the Mected agency,
F, Parks Dedication
1® This development shall wulatol._ its; Inarks dedication
requirements as recommended by the Adivisc-.-cy Parks and
Recreation Commission and approved by Council action.
G Other
. All standard
platting
_ and zoning conditions shall be
adhered
to unless r,. w ca_ ] . _ L :3 r-t_ `:~fes r. Z. 5a.i 1. _C. c"is
Council actionAdvisory Planning Commission City Council
Approved:
Revised-
DAKOTA COUNTY SOIL AND, WATER
CONSERVATION DI` FFRICT
Farmington Professional Building
821 Third Street
Farmington. MN 55024
Phone: (612) 463-8626
* a l
August 13, 1987
_ -To: Mike Foextsch
City of-Eagan
10 1
From: Barb McCarthy
Dakota County SWCD
Re: Cliff Lake Galleria Preliminary Plat Review.
Background.
A Grading, Drainage, and Erosion Control Plan was
with the Preliminary Plat.
Soil and Water Resources Review
Soil Resources
The major soil types on the prc, ~,i~.. Y~ x~=
sandy loam soils, the Kingsley -;.ht nv:u:s-;;cez: soil
complex, and the Emmert gravelly sandy loE -a soils. These
soils, except for the Spencer soils, are all well-drained to
droughty and well-suited to the proposed use.
Numerous depressions on-site have soils high in organic
matter and high seasonal water tables, including the Spencer
and Quam soils. These soils can have sc-asonal high water
tables 2 ft above to 1 ft below the cxi,;king ground
Topsoil can be 3 to 4 feet deep. Enclc>>d on the
topographic map are the approximate boundaries of wet soil
types likely to occur on the site.
Recommendations:
Soil borings should be done by a geotechnical firm to
determine the suitability of soils on site for the pro;_-c
use and corrective work required.
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
Water Resources
A portion of the proposed development drains into Cliff Lake
(AP-11). The District recently hired John Earten, a
limnologist, to assist communities in water quality issues.
Several phosphorus models were evaluated by John to
determine the potential impact of this development on the
water quality of Cliff Lake.
The models indicate that the proposed development (the
Target store, Tenant Shops, SuperValue Store and parking lot
on the west side of Cliff Lake) would increase the nutrient
load to Cliff Lake.- The Vollenweider model predicts an in-
lake phosphorus concentration increase of approximately 4%
and an in-lake algae increase of approximately 6% as a
result of this phase of the development. The completion of
the entire proposed development would result in an estimated
increase of approximately 10% and 15% respectively for the
in-lake phosphorus and algae concentrations according to the
phosphorus models.
Recommendations:
There appears to be a number of options available to reduce
the negative impact of the development on the quality of
Cliff Lake. Stormwater detention basins adjacent to the
site could be designed to retain roof drain and parking lot
runoff water until it could be released to the stormsewer
system. This would prevent increased nutrient loading to
Cliff Lake. Alternatively, the basins could be designed to
trap sediments and also assimilate nutrients. Previous
studies have shown that a three day residence time for storm
water in a wetland will remove approximately 70% of the
phosphorus load.
Redesigning AP-42 to increase the detention time to three
days would also significantly reduce nutrient loading to
Cliff Lake from a major portion of the watershed. our model
indicates this would result in a significant improvement in
the water quality of Cliff Lake.
Erosion and Sediment Control Plan Review
An incomplete Erosion and Sediment Control (E&SC) Plan was
submitted with the Preliminary Plat. The E&SC Plan should
follow the "Submittal Requirements" and "General Criteria"
provided by the City of Eagan. (see enclosure)
During rough grading and the building phase, sediment should
be prevented from entering Cliff Lake by direct surface
runoff or via the stormsewer system. Adequately designed
sediment basins should be constructed to contain sediment
on-site and to prevent sediment from entering Cliff Lake.
We recommend that grading of the site occur in at least 2
phases and that each phase is seeded and mulched before
progressing onto the next phase for rough grading.
We recommend that a minimum 20 ft buffer strip of natural
vegetation be maintained around Cliff Lake to serve a a
"back-up system" to filter sediments from surface
(sheet flows). Fill should be placed along Clit' y.
first step in the grading operation. The fil' OU
be maintained so that surface runoff will temp„_ Ali "id,
behind this fill.
We recommend that immediately after rough grading, all
disturbed areas are seeded and mulched with a temporary
vegetative cover.
Attachment A identifies specific E&SC measures neeio-~d E`c=r
this site.
Recommended Action:
We recommend that the Preliminary Plat be approved but that
an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan which meets the
"General Criteria", including both a site map and narrative,
be submitted and approved by SWCD staff before a grad,~jr;
permit is issued or Final Plat approval.
cc: Westwood Planning and Engineering
Korsonsky Krank Erickson Architects, Inc.
Ryan Construction Company, Inc.
The Hoffman Development Group
Attachment A
EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN REVIEW
Cliff Lake Galleria
1. We highly recommend that the rough grading of the site
be phased. After each phase is completed, it should be
seeded and mulched before progressing to the next
phase.
. A limited amount of grading is shown between Cliff Lake
and the Tenant Shops attached to the Target Store. The
limits of clearing, grubbing, and grading need to be
identified on the E&SC plan along with the proposed
grades along Cliff Lake.
3. We recommend that fill be placed along Cliff Lake as a
first step in the grading operation. This fill must be
maintained so as to provide a temporary area for
ponding surface runoff behind the fill slope during
rough grading.
4. Specifications for seeding and mulching the site should
be included in the plan, as identified on the
"Submittal Requirements". We recommend that all
disturbed areas be seeded and mulched within 1 week
after rough grading. (GC-1 and GC-2)
5. The site map should identify an ingress and egress
point for the site. A rock construction entrance pad
will be necessary at ingress and egress points to
minimize tracking of mud by vehicles onto paved
surfaces. (GC-12)
. Silt curtain must be properly installed before any land
disturbance occurs. A detail drawing for the
installation of the silt curtain should also be
included on the plan. (GC-4)
7. The re-vegetation of all areas disturbed by utility
construction must be addressed in the plan. (GC-11)
8. Maintenance of erosion and sediment control measures
during and after rough grading should be included in
the plan. (GC-14)
9. The company responsible for maintaining and removing
all erosion and sediment control practices should be
included in the plan. (GC-13)
10. Storm sewer inlet filters may be needed around catch
basins to prevent sediment movement into pond areas.
(CC-9)
11. All storm sewers outletting into waterbodies should be
adequately protected to prevent scouring from occurring at
the outlet. (GC-8)
12. Identify on the plan where topsoil will be stockr°-'
Topsoil can be strategically stockpiled to prevent secsir it
from entering wetlands and adjacent property.
13. Include construction schedules for rough grading,
installing utilities, re-vegetating the site, building
construction, curb and gutter, and blacktopping. These
schedules impact erosion and sediment control requirements.
14. Identify how erosion control will be handled during t,
building phase of development.
Mca'nRANDUM
__VCR :ZS 6 ARCHITECTS N PLANNERS
< '2 EAST LITTLE CANADA ROAD, St PAUL, MINNESOTA 551 17
612 484-0272
TO: TOM COLBERT - EAGAN CITY ENGINEER/PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
FROM: BOB BYERS - SEH TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER
DATE: AUGUST 12, 1987
SUBJECT: TRAFFIC SITE IMPACT REVIEW
CLIFF LA GALLERIA RETAIL CENTER
CLIFF ROAD (CR-32) AT RAHN ROAD
SEH FILE: 88006-32
SUMMARY
The study and evaluation completed by the developer to date has
only addressed a portion of the affected area and has not been
very definitive regarding future years. It is our belief that
the evaluation should be based on a total situation as best can
be estimated for the years 1990 and 1995. This total situation
needs to include adjacent vacant parcels, nearby development
under construction and some consideration of future development
patterns. Current and future roadway improvement plans from the
city and Dakota County need to be matched to all development
phasing to identity any operational deficiencies and when these
deficiencies might occur.- While operations in 1990 appear
satisfactory, we foresee problems occuring sometime between 1990
and 1995.
A considerable amount of detail is needed regarding the proposed
design of the east-west collector street and Rahn Road. if
modifications are needed to other adjacent roadways, these should
be described and their required timing should be noted.
The developer will need some assistance from the city in
determining future probable land use intensities and overall
traffic growth patterns. The city can also facilitate any
required coordination with Dakota County.
The developer and the traffic consultant have been very
cooperative throughout the process. We feel that most of our
comments can be addressed in an expedient manner without unduly
delaying their project. However, some increased coordination
with the city and Dakota County will be needed to adequately
address all concerns.
SHORT ELLIOT ST PAUL, CHIPPEWA FALLS,
HENDRICKSON INC. MtNNESOTA WISCONSIN
BASIS OF REVIEW
The following information was provided bl je% 1 for our
comments:
- Cliff Lake Center Traffic Report
July 1987, Barton-Aschman Associates, Inc.
Memo from Barton-Aschman to SEH
August , 1987 - Revised Trip Generation Information
- Preliminary Site Plans - August 7,
We also reviewed any available t ' ng
Dakota County and compared th, a raffic r c,w t to
those used in previous traffic studies performed is~ an»
We have a number of concerns relating to traffic. Some
have not been addressed, while other need either -i- fu:c ex
expansion or clarification. Our comments are pr-s bi _ a; '3elou.
TRIP GENERATION/DISTRIBUTION
The traffic report presented two development scenarios. Scenario
I was a generalized concept with an intense retail use component.
Scenario II was more specific regarding the actual proposed tl.se::=;
(discount store, grocery, etc.). The development proposal wh°..r,1
is under review by the city is similar to Scenario IT t>1-7_-`h
first phase being the retail portion and the second fu",ure
including the office, Galleria/Learning Center, anc
uses.
The traffic report compares Scenario I to Scenario II anti
concludes Scenario I represents the worst case situation. Th
may not be true. Considerations of trip gener tiosl
characteristics, interaction of trips between site uses and PC->I.L<
hour directional imbalances need to be further clarified t
adequately compare the two scenarios.
The developer has modified the npt'
intensity of the future Phase II uzt since t- re orb
was completed. It is critical that future lLnd u- ~ su:~4 ~ c;ns
be as realistic as possible and this change needs fu,_ t'er,
evaluation by the city. The issue of future land uses is
discussed further in a following section.
We have reviewed the anticipated distribution of 1 -'Co t:he
surrounding area. There are some inco,,.,.7,tencies
assumptions, those of other traff.~_c .ad o r -at
regarding the pattern of future deve-'L',r Thin 43-,e ~1
ip-
further investigation. We would antic'
highe pz-~rcei'i
of trips to use Blackhawk Road to/from the north and i 1,i, hi
percentage to/from the east on Cliff Road. We feel the 't--raffic
report assumes an unduly high percentage of trips to us- -35E
to/from the south.
We agree with the percentage of trips forecast to use Rahn Road
to the north. The traffic increase in itself should not require
any major upgrading of the street except for possible flaring for
turn lanes at Diffley Road. However, although Rahn Road will
operate satisfactorily, there will be a significant increase in
traffic which will be very perceptible to the neighborhood. Also
if other potential development is factored in, some operational
problems may surface.
BACKGROUND TRAFFIC
We feel that the assumptions related to overall future traffic
growth may be the most important factor when evaluating the needs
for roadway improvements. The traffic report assumes a 2% growth
per year on Cliff Road. Cliff Road is experiencing growth rates
far in excess of this figure and the rate will probably increase.
We are personally aware of enough imminent development which
could justify growth rates in the 8%-10% range. While 1990
volumes probably won't be greatly impacted by a higher assumed
growth, 1995 would change dramatically.
As currently presented, no accounting has been made for adjacent
land development or for other development projects which are
currently under construction. The developer should incorporate
some level of traffic increase for these activities before
evaluating future intersection operations. The city may have to
provide assistance in identifying the development projects
underway and some realistic intensity of development for
undeveloped adjacent parcels.
STUDY LIMITS
The traffic report concentrated its operations analysis towards
intersections on Cliff Road between Rahn Road and Blackhawk Road.
However, we believe that other intersections should also be
included in the evaluations:
Rahn Road and Diffley Road
- Blackhawk Road and Diffley Road
- Blackhawk Road and the proposed east-west collector
street
- Rahn Road and the proposed east-west collector
As mentioned above, the city may have to provide assistance in
determining background future traffic growth on Diffley Road and
Blackhawk Road.
ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS
The traffic study and site plans do not adequately at°..ress the
scheduling relationships between the development phasing nd
staged roadway improvements. Planned Dakota County zc
improvements are not fully described for this area.
A right-in access to the site from Cliff Road
however its need and timing is not fully &)f-. .,um w Th,
plan does not show allowances for the addition 3c eF, r-
the future, yet it still appears to be under
Dakota County has a number of concerns relating to any rksquired
improvements on Cliff Road and Diffley Road. These concerns are
not documented nor are they addressed in the traffic ~;tudy. T'-
current Dakota County capital improvement -roaram d(:):
include Rahn Road and Diffley Road nor d in apossible ultimate improvemen 5 needed at f ar~.-- Cli f
Road. Clearly the county Ica -y~stem will be uy th.iti
development and these impac° ,:s, roed to be addresz,k_-_; .
ROADWA'Y' DESIGN
Information regarding the proposed geometrics, chap izat_ ol?"
lane arrangements and roadway/lane widths is pretty r,. ;C ; i-P I e t
Where we have been given information such as at-
Cliff Road, the proposed design appears inc q« xte. r2.
area where a considerable amount of detail i n c. ec on U .e
plan.
As with the discussion of -roadway improvements, more detail is
needed regarding the adequacy of existing traffic controls and
the phasing of county or city additions in the future. Of
particular concern is the operation of the existing 4-way stop at
Rahn Road and Diffley Road.
Considerable thought has been given by the developL,r':. F 47
consultant regarding the driveway access locations all'_ Rahn
We concur that the first access should be as far north as
possible. Unfortunately we do not have all the traffic data to
justify its placement. Also the property owner opposite the site
has some access concerns which need to be resolved soon.
It is possible that interim designs could
improvements phased in as develornnent occurs.
appears willing to install tempo.-a-ry signal equipr~l<ent u't
Road and Cliff Road if they know that a perm-rielt- Ajnal
installation now might need modifications within a few years.
Again, the whole area must be studied to determine what kind of
design life the improvements will have.
~_..4
~ ; z ¢ C <y lA i ( 4 BADE LA.
14 q aR ~.~.~p:n,,, Ar~,R
RA Y. _ l N ~A~~wrvrvss ~
BEY~RO CDRAt, L=3 _ THHYH DIFFLEI -CA
Gxn V TERM
3 /
~ ~I s J\ TRAawAY
DR
RNER Rrt ~ a ~V $ ~ WO ~
PARR oo
' CE AR QI~„ t}«: \ ~ CANI 5 .YX. ~
RrWE C R _ '
LOCATION nNAA10N _
AA K "MGAD4'MCAMJ 1 - v
CA PARK
l C
~J~ u
WAUN~
R' :CK RY
CHER Hilo
Si tCKORY
~ SAFAI
-41 4 /Y/ P'te' swat eiv
~ 3 ~ix i( IP ~fTT' ~ Y I~ ~~~_r '➢~j
~~RR((~~''''??I a
RAHN 4 J -n $ ~1 4 px LA _
a N.arx;t l3 V~PE4/U q ~t 'E'sENda waY J ~r
9999-- -Jffl Wtf/ I:/Ji 2p ~t ! l~ < - / pvT
~"I LA. ~ J LaN R - i ~t+~
P1 -
i- tg,NE PC 12-S, 'T c
4 2- NNE M t3- JAaiST PL 'x
C 3- WO Pi' N-MARp U..- PT.
u C++.11 ANA PT !S-TRAVERSE PT R CiRS / 5- MESiEAp PY IB- SORREL PY
RT PT
8-rSAGE PT IT RIRTA PT
I , } (.n 1 T- AdWBEL4 PT. 8 LISTA
!B H -
8- 6GEN PT ORFEPo P2
I S - i \ - N 7I Ry
J- R -4
f K mac
ZONING
! fs
R-2
A
iii A ~ Rg
E ~
P ~f
} p G r ~~77
!
w R-III fl {
\J " t
Npp ~jj r.f ,~,3 .
I n
LAND USE MAP
M t ~ f
sD J f Mca
FEB. 1980
R~I~t. `
4IJ1.~
I~ (k
R-11 NB
4~° -5 "1 I P u
ar
r C 5Y F {
~,N 1E
B-i
4 «
/l
« R- I
R-1,- 7
'R-11 IMP=
PQ ~ t S ~ tnN PE}HMI QCIT ~v
F V'I•K i b +
amw,~ y
r^ t
F t ~ ,ta n f
'Al
LAN U A
P
~2t ii
JAN. 1987
al
\~"'~i;
mul"l, 17 k Eir - L.. B
D, illy
-4 'T <P
^~s I 1
r y u~~
f
~r
a} :i
P q ii
li
IA ~ ~ ],,1~ r yA~ '
C
111 ~ 1 ~ ~l~x
A to Mc~n
-J ~ { IVY ~.~".•y = i
} r
\ s
A
1 CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY
RECEIVED 9$
A JOINT VENTURE:
[s (1~p(it company CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY
c-l-as / UUtion & " KORSUNSKY KRA'NK ERCKSON WESTWOOD PLANNI
MAH~..®rA Ate.......... THE HOFF AN DEVEL NT GROUP ARCiurECTS INC. ENGBNEER,NG COMP,
PROJECT DATA
e«, SQUARE
FOOTAGE
TARGET 114,3008 .
TENANT SHOPS 116000 SF.
ER N tU 82 oo0 SF
j NU RStL ~XP-N) 10,IXM SF.
POND i OLMOIS 28, too S.S.
444 TOTAL AREA 288,300 SF.
- wvn,a ru.w -
TOTAL AREA WJ
CLIFF LAKE C..jj l1 1 I OUTLOTS + nASE
I ^ ..j EXPANS)ON .ruw 325." SF.
00 -
CMS PARKWO REQ ARERIENTS. 6 STALLS PER 1600 SF,
i
c aLqLo"a FRONDED - RFOt,4ErH
awn 1 SAPS 1474 STALLS 1432 STALLS
ftlTU$ E OiRLOTS 212 Si ALTS 144 STALLS
t4 I TEt ANT SHOP
64.004 SF, _ / i•/
TARGET j
d F 9SS 114.50 SF. 'i-•^-
e7s CARS TENANT I
L Q U I •ee,aoD SF,
FUTURE
O(JnOT
a ~11 CARS
ro
MURE s') K1N °
/
(,om ~~F; 1111 ~ ~ L 's
iE
CARS
: CARS x
.tq.e
SLIPER
8FF.. U p l i~I I I I I
-IJTURE
- 'L 1i1111L1111111J~-11L MrTLOTS F~rTTnE CxmoTS>
(SCF,E iAIIC DESIGN LAYOLff CktYk
0 2s ao Lou
FEDERAL LAN
RAHN PARK
f
n
E
E SITE PLAN
(
t itl ttUlA--
L"' °F TM sfl ti.o. z...... THE ROFFMAN OE1 LOPMENT GROUP -id4CKSON 'EST
HfTC.T~i INL.. IC CO. Ah"'
A 1,
1 I~ { Ili
: II
i• i `
t ~
V;
i vvy
f~ ~ 4 y ~ ^ ~ C'~, ~ LEG•L OFSLNn IrOM-
4 I ~s• ,~Va Ana -
6
t t i {
I 15 Q it
_ _ I _ • 1 O ~ i I I to ~ ,
F _i L 1 - r - ~ _ _ ~ ~ k i i k ~ #t ti:'~'f~~`"'.y-i,,---~•e!'
- u: - , - '
Fooy Va 01
A X_ ; /ENi'URE :
t
construction copaay PRELIMINARY PLAT
- &
" ■ ff„~>• +«~a A~a,,.® THE HOFFMAN DEVELOP GROUP KORSU SKY KRANK,E a saw WESTWOOD PLANNING
a
ARCHrTECTS WC, ENGOPoAA; COMPANY
F
CLIFF LAKE
7.
i
rf"
L 902
("Z
f
IL 903
a'
EL.. 844
i
F
e
A LINAGE
I MLN i'e y ERC , R L PLAN '
y HE HOEFMAI DE' 1 _F 'ENT GROUP KORSUNSKV KRAt M N WE5TWOO A
os o w ,r.,c..F_a.ais4 I HE INC. ENGNEERIF CO,.
1 s
• V.Y• CLIFF LAKE
w
U ----TTiTT1T1T1T~ - , 1(TITITTTilTI1~
UiUf
w
1 L1111llllill-
A Q
- - -
/ ~`111ll 111.1111(1 t
RAHN ROAD
0 ?b 60 106
i
A
10
A JC <T VENTURE r UTILITYe PL
construction (1 company & KORSONSKY KRANK ERICKSON WESTWOOD PLANNING a _
tiM .Q*- ........o THE HOFFMAN DEVELOPMENT GROUP ARCHITECTS INC. ENGINEERING COMPANY
T-T- BOW
.z-. o--
4 tl:
LAKE
7j
A
-
.."'.,--BEAVER DAMiRDAD~
_ _ ~ ~-Ilrn~-emu ~I
'°t 4_'_.-._=---•-•. A4 yam.-_^» .1-
3E : b,.
StP~s ^i' INFRASTRUCTURE N
of ,ti.~+ ao cawdl Uqa,~ KORSUNSKY KRANK ERICKSON WESTWOOD PLANNING 6
THE HOFF AN L_.'ELOPMENT GROUP ARCWTECTS INC. ENGINEERING COMPANY
-
{
Pond
CLIFF LAKE i
• :eat - t>setn
j'
tJ`" w .
40 v r
L
}
I )
~ 444111 ~
~II~T_ 11llllll111111 O`
I c?
11,11-1 lilt, H14, I
r, ;
_
----"~-KAHN ROAO
i 1
A
4
I
JOINT VENTURE : LANDSCAPE PLAN
cc ccticc co p ay & 1 KORSUNSKY KRANK ERICKSON WESTWOOO PLANNING &
THE HOFFMAN DEVELOPMENT GROUP ARCHITECTS INC. ENGINEERING COMPANY
o i
V~v
i
-A 1 1
COMMERCIAL'
°ALuRLA ,I
EA3EVENT
MOTEL
CUFF LAKE
h..~ E: _ISTINGj ry~~
Uf' 3HBORHOOD
i Pxht Proposed roN® Proposed M
hhh...'y~ I ExtstktgSidewalk Lim Trail Amenity
Paved VIII / cc-
Trap l r- OvF or - Lake
,ok Aman1ty
U
TENANT SHOPS
AVER DAM ROAD T
Proposed Trap TAWIET - ».n,
MULTIPLE
RESIDENTIAL OMMERCIj . 1 -b a Extst►t Commercial
Development
i ~ JJJ Di14;iiliNlt._ _.p rerun a~nou c- FIJ7
o ao tas aw
RAf t t ROAD I
Ratio Park
((11 _ }p }t}i( OVERAL', .C' 4E CONCEPT
1 Y& Itl Utli:.d KORSUNSKYKRANI, Ef..- _j - WESTWOOD PLANNrNG S t
nP «ti.... a, & °i HE HOFFMAN lll . ':OPMENT GROUP ARCHfTECTS WC. ENGINEERING COMPANY
LEGEND
a MUW
CLIFF LAKE L1 i(n~ ~
r
H-1 EE 17
ti.
IIIIIili ~lii~li U ~ 1 ~ } r ~ 111
~~I{flffl#I~II--= = r
_Iq
p~~ (l1 L1111111111111L______-_ __l7 r
---~-"""`"~11llL1111L111 I I LL l l i i l l
c---- / RAHN ROAD Y
0 25 60 lw
I~ I
A Jt [TURgyE _ Ltt; tNG PLAN
j construction company ~ v KOA"SKY KRANK ERICKSON WESTWOOOPLANNING 6 -
9 o, Maw ..a,, ..,tea THE HOFF AN DEVELOPMENT GROUP ARCHITECTS Dr ENGWEERING COMPANY
I 1TTT1 l
CLIFF LAKE
IT- 4t
t
0
r ,
0 25 So
.
` JC PURE F. n p: '90N PLAN
T,~r~aa cap
on 7 E l ~a.~ ,rean~ni Ll 41 KORSUNSKY KRANK ! Gr;t WESTWOOD PLANNING &
za THE HOFF AN DEVE ~'F juN GROUP ARCHITECTS INC. ENGINEERING COMPANY
CLIFF LAKE
y
t ~
1-7
1 (1i11111ll1ll11f11_ t~
I
~ ~-x'"11 L1.1111ll11111111 __il ~ 1
-21
- RAHN ROAD -
-a
o as so eoo
i
SIGN LOCATION PLAN
t
I A JO.-AT V ; •TURE:
y
py SIGN coNSU_TAxrs IN
~4. s construction Qil KORSONSKY KRANK ERICKSON WESTWOOD PLANNING a
aK Mrroti®ao,. e~coAP~a.raa THE HOFFMAN DEVELOPMENT GROUP ARCHITECTS ttIC. ENGINEERING COMPANY
lull (D
m(a, - pmt a R
q, kmh~
l 111 ll] ~ 1~~ llllll'!._ l~1~1111!„~Sl1,1111 ll~l ill l I?'~~~ i D 1I1111111II ' °o
y _a
J- . f_
l~lf~lf(il llllll I ~
4
PARYIµ D10RAOE lLExAYtON1 ~ ~
ssia t 2 m8 -0'
ENANT DIONME CONDTRUC11- -TAIL
t it a FF-FS? ING PYLON SIGNAGE
_ ruY a .,+.,toe
t{ 5 W com Pram on aOlacanf Nraaf
,.-ANTS eg Imcafbn
V PRO.'
y mn 1298 21'0- holght
} 9 Y+ .r vm I0 Pgian
t st i„xi
g
s s a PTtena I., Ouflffa
FREESTD 'OUND SIGNAGE
CITY AL
{ o/ algn ar®s
PROJk: wM Dlgf, - Iaaa Ilan Y M.
`
BUILDIN -
CITY A- 20% .1 5900. IX tit~0a
-r,~sma+,uu,s - ~ - mwev~mre. 2D%otb99~9m~ t20; «
' I 1 2A,f{DO' a 4120a
r PROD. y
P M • 11 J a9ua,a IooUga
-NTRANCE ObN
50ENT~M:AT ION MON EESTANOUq ann I
SA1 t
t KSON
'a ° & THE HOFFMAN DLVY LOFMENT GROUP
WAscaped
890° tower u: x"° C berm
e
~xY
1
t-a9a°
%
Key pim I - 2 314 c v iMOCks (4181
i lllV..!!!llffffff
A
. fox ridge Gott exiatktg
947 n-d exla&v trees wwc grat18910°-
.,rw.r ~ r.ur,d 1 (
era' w~ ....,rdx
bow +ro; _ - - 84~ ~ 898
r a(1,730`1
r s
e °
limx6caped
path, a9a'
exisliv
pWW wk»Y yin troea (efwx ari0pe
908' 918°
-899°
fi°R `¢rv .
j + ar< cxy aoc¢¢ (1,6 107
t
SBCttat C
y
A JOINT VENTURE: SITE SECTION
Y t tion comb di g ,
o~ M<M~®.o= N= & THE HOFFMAN DEVELOPMENT GROUP AArsRc cTSINC. a3icKSOfa wEW4NEERING asrwt COWANY
a
_
, IT1 11 ~TTT~IC
1 SUPER VAW
Ell 771-1---
r .o o...~... ,
® n .
4
}TARGET i 1 1 I
} 1
TARGET
BUILDING
}
s
A PLAN
Stfi J6 K, ,N KY KaANK WESTWO00 f it RING
THE HOFFMAN VhLOPMENT GROUP ARCHITECTS INC. ENCANE,
t
QTARGET
6 TARGET a,n u.. 7 TARGET -
wniq,M. cur u.. e~_--_- .n ¢II..C.a. NaLe...lllt Wien .nA
1
-'I et rYJ
9
Ir 'T
10 SUPER YALU
r.
11 SI-FER VALU 12 SUPER vAUr
BUILDING ELEVATIONS
71-7-7
t
i
6.1 6
A TUBE: - 41 Y PLAN
construction company KORSUNSKY KRANK ERICKSON wESTWDOO ING 5
THE HOFFMAN DEVELOPMENT GROUP ARCHITECTS INC. ENGINEERING COMPANY
- _ fi~finl~l.~ l I ~ TIrmTItTTid~lllil(1PtTt7Tilfis~~{t,t(itJ~i,i ~~p~,IT~ Illll~. - ~1~I~~~~~II
o L llllR llllllll ll ~J
PrA!
(
A
. a ;
SEMI W7AL P0OF .
I ~ ( 1
~tl411k / ~I~~I' STUCCO
~ - ~ ~ VIII t i w4~! fit.A1ID ttE A
[tn
I~~IIl1~ 1fl(I118~1~11~1t~1~I~~~ (If~lfl lll~~iiZfll "',~1i111111[If~(1 -
11 e
s L
1~=
- f FACE Ett3K% ALL STORE FOOK
®
f
! nittit~mli IV ~
d
C
PARTIAL E".,..
Jt
- ff
d>. +aullu t K€iANK ERICKSON XSO P-
THE HOFFMAN DEVL' OPMENT GROUP ARC c_ s uuac. `
ac.
8P-35 FQ52
i f 9oe.o 1
f~
AP-4iN.d,_,,' 1, hK~P 920?
° R A'v QB$ 3 9P 25
690.6
ey 9240
9272
8806
E 1 0
886
~ - is
5 a ~ _ 7.I 24
HP
- i --AP-57 _k - -
tt ~
pp 9180,
A f ~T
P -7 i5- 294C / 9232,
- 989.2 AP-28
\,l c>39 ~J
o.
9100 v
f
l''r~ 8P-23
s.
FP-9 rrv 9323 Q Tr+ ;°.B
8,6
tAP 4 A 3: 8620
a _ 910.0
U: _,TY
t e 9441~S~V~ 6 a
_ N 986 7 L.S.-3116
AP-49
'f 8817 . , ~,-h ,".ci C 71..
' n p ti . _ 889 p : • C `
5° s l M'~v. J F T
Li f - j 886.a
AP 10 -1,„-JAP-I3
908.2 m ' J \P- _
91 f
914.0 //~912.1 f j 1
AP 44 R= f, 319.3
915.9 s. 10
t 9180 A-ee_ ~2 . A0
l6
- U 2 9*
2
AP QI " n +~l
A P 45, 8
8
9 6~ nP 17 Lr;4
a
_ AP-41;
945x, w ,rrr► i
948. u P /
C "
l
sAP 17. 1~ _59
926.0 DAKOTA. COUNTY PARK 89
q4 .a 840 ?..A-ry o.p L P 3"-v
`~~'S9 y 880
`'C"~ t♦
AP-33
~
9800 W
~ se53 - ~ ~ s $ ~ ` LP-2
A-zz
APPLE LEA`
i A
FIG. *1
city of eagan STORM SEWER fC I
stan
proven : plate r
PUBLIC
'WORKS
==`-s DEPARTIVIENT1 MASTER PLAN
CLIFF L,-' 7
18" -
l;
12"
05490 L,33/7 c. -l„ 807/ 0
HIGH
a y #
SCHOOL 46 5/7 C i fi°~ P 16"
R R.
^6 Of 72.0 ;
U?IC
w
(n - I-- TEST 6" -
ENTER
1 ; bZ.Sl56A 226 1970
2z7 ~
1 ~
W~WWI. 8` 23 000 223
„
8I,
1
8 r "24~8Fn1
i ,
jh- j7,
i S 8„
e DAKOTA COUNTY PARK LL
18"~st
4 M.G, 1
STORAG
i GROUND
H.W.L. 1150 f 1
t
1_ R 23 W
226
I 25.8/33.0 _ - i
1
1
APPLE VALLEY ~
On,
SUBJECT
PARCEL
FIGR
PUBLIC
` WORKS
m I
MASTER PLAN
N ~ ' DEPARTME__J.........
;
CLIFF 1-k C, 'LEW A
r ` G ss-tJ-----
r'+ era ex3 ~r~d f
K ry
v
a W- H £
C- K
Q
4 JUN 0,1
r'
W-I
W - ['Ili
W-N
-7
=ec
18
cS? ii
4 t~ ~Nfit' 15 P -
_
t 412
W-U
W - S
21 a
t
CQUNTY
pA
R,
1 4U
r'. APPLE VA L L,' --'Y
FIG. +2
city an stand,
approved: plate
PUBLIC SANITARY SEWER ARKS
MASTER PLAN
DEPARTMENT]
n.
of Fagon -
CRY
012-51
I HIGH i -r LINE TRAIL ! f
`a
S tz ~ ~
~a 00-51
Q
9+•
012-50
•
•
10 4
00
p
F~
a • PARGEL .1 ,
x
.0 4a
PAACEL 40
f
LATERAL BENEFIT 'ro SA'-- ~Y S E-.1/ 517 5 ft)
TRUNK WATER L IL E (.74 Ac)
standard
approved a plate
PUBLIC
OR
QE.PA TMEN
r 14
eRr 0
HIGH $ LINE p
a j(
{ POND « q
!s Q
F YID!
Y _
I ~ oa•a~ I
•
•
O \
•
•
i• 41
0
012-50 Itltlt --'r-'- ` ~ ~
® \ V /Z,
~7
• POND o C
•
cl «
w
PARCEL 46 Q
V • .a
• y PARCEL 40
LO ar
•.••«.•.•id AIL AY (221^ ft)
j 1 ^ of eagan ~ hI ! DA Fc hC(1500 ft) stand
r-- .0 plate
PUBLIC
I RS CLIFF ROAD UPGRADE (634 ft)
DE PART E T
HIHLIE TRAIL
HIGH DENSITY HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
Z
z
m RESIDENTIAL
v
1f F
1n r I R€~ „ „ CSC-L -R
HI DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
4
JA
r
- ` LAKE
I€ ~
let
Ett.tf t
3 { 2 (y}
CLIFF ROAD
r
EAGAN HILLS WEST
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
CITY OF EAGAN
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
THIS PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, made and entered into this 3rd day of April ,
1979, by and between the CITY OF EAGAN, Dakota County, Minnesota, (Eagan) and CLIFF
ROAD PROPERTIES, INC., with address at 21 Harrison Avenue North, Hopkins, Minnesota
55343 (Owner) and DUNN & CURRY REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT, INC., with address at 4940 Viking
Drive, Edina, Minnesota 55435 (Developer).
W I T N E S S E T H:
WHEREAS, Developer proposes a Planned Development in Eagan to be known as Eagan
Hills West (the Development) more particularly described in Exhibits attached hereto
and incorporated herein by reference (the Exhibits), containing three hundred eighty-
four (384) acres of land more or less, said land legally described in Exhibit "A" (The
Subject Land); and
WHEREAS, Developer and Owner have agreed that Developer may proceed with the
Development and the terms of this Agreement; and
WHEREAS, it is the intention of Developer to proceed with the Development whereby
the Subject Land will be subdivided pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 505 and
462, and the Subdivision Ordinance of Eagan providing for the platting of land and to
obtain final approval from Eagan for plats as the Development progresses;
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby agreed by and between the parties hereto as follows:
1.) Development - Owner intends to: have Developer develop the Subject Land
substantially in accordance with the general plans shown on the Exhibits and Eagan agrees
to permit the Development subject to obtaining final approval for each plat of the
Development from Eagan before proceeding with any work on said plat, unless otherwise
agreed to by Eagan. Plats reasonably consistent with the Exhibits shall be approved
by Eagan. In the event that the agreement between the Owner and Developer relating
to the development of the Subject Land is terminated, and this Agreement has not been
terminated, then wherever Developer is designated herein Owner shall, upon written notice
to Eagan, be automatically substituted to and for Developer and be subject to all
obligations, conditions, requirements and provisions of Developer, and be entitled to
all rights and benefits herein relating to Developer.
2.) Exhibits - The Exhibits attached hereto, incorporated herein by reference
and made a part of this Agreement are:
Exhibit "A" - Legal Description
Exhibit "B" - Sketch Plan
Exhibit "C" - Parks, Wetlands and Circulation Plan
Exhibit "D" - Land Use Plan
Exhibit "E" - Zoning Map
a
Exhibit "F" - Dedicated Areas Requirements and Credit
Exhibit "C" - Street Access Map
Exhibit "H" - Density Chart (Eagan Ordinance 52.07, Subd. 5B)
Exhibit "I" - Eagan Zoning Ordinance
Exhibit "J" - Staging Plan
3.) Approval by Eagan - Eagan hereby approves the Development as shown in the
Exhibits; provided, however, that insofar as the Exhibits may vary from the written
terms of this Agreement, said written terms shall govern.
4.) Term of Planned Development - Developer represents that it intends to complete
the Development within fifteen (15) years from the date hereof, so long as Eagan grants
timely approval of each plat of the Development. Eagan limits its approval to said
fifteen (15) year period; provided, however, Developer may request two (2) five (5)
year extension periods of this Agreement by submitting a written request tc 3 on
or before one hundred eighty (180) days of the anniversary date of this
occurring at the expiration of the initial fifteen (15) year term and the five
(5) year extension. Eagan may approve or deny, in its sole discretion, by e
majority vote of all members of the City Council and without a public hearing, the
requested five (5) year extensions.
5.) Rezoning - On or before December 31, 1978, Eagan agrees to rezone the Subject
Land to Planned Development District pursuant to the current Eagan Ordinance . 52,
as amended to August 17, 1976, attached hereto as Exhibit "I'", governing Pla7
Development Districts. Such rezoning shall be supplemental to the present zG of
the Subject Land now in effect as evidenced by the zoning map which is attach hereto
as Exhibit "E". Any removal of the superimposed Planned Development District zoning
or termination of this Agreement shall automatically result in the Subject Land being
zoned only as the present zoning classification as shown on Exhibit "E".
6.) Density - Density of housing units (Units) in the Development shall be as
more particularly shown in Exhibit "D"; provided, however, that the following specific
conditions shall apply with respect to density:
(01) Three thousand two hundred seventy-eight (3,278) Units shall be allowed in
the Development;
(02) Units in "high density" areas as identified on Exhibit "D" shall not exceed
maximum densities now permitted under the Zoning Ordinance No. 52.07y Subd. 5B
(Density Chart), shown on Exhibit "H"; and
(03) Subject Land east of proposed I-35E shall not exceed six (6) Units per acre.
The number of units specified in this paragraph is a maximum; less density shall be
permitted in Developer's sole discretion.
7.) Major Street Dedications - Owner and Developer agree to dedicate as part of
each plat all streets within such plat; provided, however, that no dedication shall
be made for rights of way for contemplated Interstate Highway I-35E, its access ramps
or the rerouting of Blackhawk Road. The width of major thoroughfares within each plat
shall be as shown on the Eagan Major Street Plan dated January, 1976. Dedication shall
be made for streets within a plat upon recording of the final plat. Eagan's approval
of a final plat shall include an assumption of the public duty to maintain the dedicated
street or streets when construction is completed and accepted according to plans approved
2.
by Eagan. At the time of final plat approval, Developer shall dedicate such part of
the Subject Land as necessary to provide the following widths for that portion of the
following major thoroughfares lying within the approved plat:
(01) County Road #30 - - - - - - - 100'
(02) County Road #32 - - - - - - - 150'
(03) Rahn Road - - - - - - - 80'
(04) Internal Collector Streets - - - - - - - 80'
(05) Blackhawk Road - - - - - - - 100'
In the event any of the above major thoroughfares abut land not subject to this
Agreement, the Developer shall only dedicate one-half of the necessary right-of-way
to provide the above-stated widths. Street widths not described above shall comply
with applicable provisions of the Eagan Subdivision Ordinance at the time of approval
of the appropriate preliminary plat.
Eagan, Owner and Developer acknowledge that the streets identified in (02) and
(05) of this section specify widths in excess of that required of standard minor streets
or that necessary to provide reasonable ingress and egress to the lot owners and users
of the particular subdivisions within Eagan Hills West (Excess Width); the Excess Width
is fifty (50) feet as to (02) and twenty (20) feet as to (05) of this section.
Eagan agrees to provide written certification to Owner and Developer at the time
of final plat approval that the Excess Width is required for governmental purposes and
that specifies the fair market value of the land within the Excess Width.
8.) Major and Minor Street Access - Developer shall have access to major
thoroughfares abutting platted lands as agreed upon between the parties at the time
of each plat. Approval of a final plat shall permit access to major thoroughfares only
as shown on Exhibit "G" or, in the alternative, the Developer shall deliver to Eagan
recordable covenants restricting access for the particular plat to those locations shown
on Exhibit "G". However, if subsequent events, particularly development on the opposite
sides of said major thoroughfares, indicate that additional accesses are advisable based
on sound planning practice, Eagan agrees to reasonably consider Developer's application
for said additional access. ,
9.) Assessments - The parties mutually agree that all public improvements required
and installed by Eagan related to the Development shall be assessed pursuant to Chapter
429 of Minnesota State Statutes.
10.) Park, Trail and Pond Dedication - Developer and Owner will dedicate to Eagan
at the time of final plat approval certain parts of the Subject Land as public parks,
trail easements or storm water holding areas (collectively, Dedicated Areas). The
Dedicated Areas are shown generally on Exhibit "C". The total acreage of Dedicated
Areas, manner of dedication and credit given pursuant to Eagan ordinances for required
dedication are specified on Exhibit "F". Developer and Owner will make such dedication
for lands included within a plat at the time of final plat approval by Eagan. If the
dedication made at the time of final plat approval exceeds the dedication requirements
of Eagan Ordinances for a particular plat, then the Developer shall receive credit for
such excess dedication to satisfy dedication requirements for subsequent plats.
3.
11.) Sidewalks - Concrete sidewalks, in such widths and in such location as required
by the applicable ordinance of Eagan in effect at the time of final plat approval, shall
be constructed for lands within a plat contemporaneously with the improvement of streets
ithin the plat and be assessable to Developer. Eagan will consider reasonable
exceptions to sidewalks as a plat is presented, and decisions as to said exceptions
shall be within the reasonable discretion of Eagan.
12.) Street Lights - Developer agrees to provide and Eagan agrees to accept a street
lighting system for each plat pursuant to the applicable ordinance in effect at the
time of a final plat approval.
13.) Building Setbacks - Building setbacks shall be those established by the
Zoning Ordinance in effect at the time of final plat approval, except that the follo'..ilg
deviations shall be permitted:
(01) Setbacks along all public streets, except major thoroughfares, shall be at
least thirty (30) feet from the abutting right-of-way line except where topography
or the location of existing trees require a lesser setback, in which case the
setback may be reduced upon written authorization of the Building Inspector to
twenty (20) feet. Any additional setback of less than twenty (20) feet shall
require the approval of the Eagan City Council.
(02) Sideyard setbacks may be reduced to a minimum of tln , (3) the Building
Inspector under conditions contained in 13 (01) provid d t_ :~1c a z. r,., ,111 i of fifteen
(15) feet is maintained between adjoining (structures). Any sideyard setbacks
of less than three (3) feet shall require the approval of the Eagan City Council.
14.) Preservation of Trees - Developer agrees to comply with Eagan ordinances
rrently in effect related to preservation of trees and specifically will exercise
_easonable efforts in residential areas to save mature, undiseased trees on the Subject
Land which do not have to be removed for reasonable installation of boil<'.tin.:; streets,
sidewalks, utilities or drainage improvements and construction activities r.zi-Iced
thereto. Developer agrees to mark trees to be saved over six (6) inches in clijimc-er
as measured at a point two (2) feet above grade that are adjacent to construction areas
with a red band prior to any excavation, and to protect such trees by snow fences or
other suitable enclosures and notify Eagan when the enclosures are completed prior to
any excavation, if required by Eagan. Eagan recognizes that development of those areas
designated for non-residential use on Exhibit "D" will require extensive grading, filling
and removal of trees. All diseased trees shall be removed according to City ordinance
requirements.
15.) Retaining Walls - Parts of the Subject Land are very uneven with respect to
topography and it is generally the intent of both Eagan and Developer to reasonably
retain the existing topography consistent with normal construction practices and
necessities and Developer agrees to build retaining walls pursuant to reasonable requests
of Eagan as the development progresses.
16.) Screening - Coincidental with the submission of each plat for final al-%>=oval,
Developer shall submit a landscape and screening plan for any rew~id,,-, J~J lots
a side yard or rear yard abutting a major or minor arterial or toll cur street. Lagan
may require reasonable landscaping and screening of said lots abuttrg on such p~,Dlic
streets at the expense of Developer and where said screening is required, it shall be
a part of the Developer's Agreement required by Eagan for the plat.
4.
17.) Commercial Overall Plan - As required by the Eagan Zoning Ordinance,
specifically Section 52.07, Subdivision 11 B1, prior to any platting or construction
in the Commercial csc-rb-lb area on Exhibit "D", the Developer will present an overall
plan for said area. The allocation within the area to uses permitted and conditionall,
permitted within zoning district csc-rb-lb as described in the Eagan Zoning Ordinance
shall be reasonably defined at that time and development of each area shall reasonably
be in accordance with those uses.
18.) Developer's Interest in Property - Developer hereby warrants and represents
to Eagan, as inducement to Eagan's entering into this Agreement, that Developer has
an interest in the Subject Land as a developer and Owner, by executing this Agreement,
acknowledges and consents to Developer entering into this Agreement.
19.) Compliance with City Ordinances - Developer and Owner agree to comply with
all Eagan City Council Ordinances consistent with this Planned Development Agreement
which may affect the Development.
20.) Buffer Area - The Developer shall submit to Eagan for approval prior to the
final approval of each plat bordering existing single family development North of County
Road r#30, a detailed plan for buffering and landscaping the setback area between the
single family and the non-single family area.
21.) Notices - Whenever in this Agreement it shall be required or permitted that
notice or demand be given or served by either party to this Agreement to or on the other
party, such notice or demand shall be delivered personally or mailed by United States
mail to the addresses hereinafter set forth by certified mail (return receipt requested).
Such notice or demand shall be deemed timely given when delivered personally or when
deposited in the mail in accordance with the above. Notice sent by one party shall
be sent to the other two (2) parties. The addresses of the parties hereto are as
follows, until changed by notice given as above:
If to the City, at: City of Eagan
3795 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, Minnesota 55122
If to the Developer, at: Dunn & Curry Real Estate Management, Inc.
Attn: Rodney D. Hardy, Vice President
4940 Viking Drive, Pentagon Office Park
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55435
If to the Owner, at: Cliff Road Properties, Inc.
21 Harrison Avenue North
Hopkins, Minnesota 55343
22.) Binding Agreement - This Agreement shall be binding upon the Owner and
Developer, their successors and assigns and upon the City of Eagan until terminated.
The rights and remedies granted to Eagan herein shall be enforceable only by Eagan and
not by other persons or parties.
5.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agroci;a,z:t is of the day
and year first above written.
CITY OF EAGAN
By: _
Lea Htfrphy," iayor
' Attest: Alyce
DEVELOPER:
DUNN & URR REAL ESTATE MANAGEMENT,
By :
Its: r
O17NER :
CLIFF `-OADROPERTILS,~,~
By:
_
its:
6.
dcs;cn:02:304-04
EAGAN HILLS WEST
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AGREPTENT
EXHIBIT A
1. The East Half of the Northwest Quarter (El/2 of NW1/4) of Sec. 29, T27, R 23, except
the North 459.5 feet of the West 401.77 feet thereof.
2. And also all that part of the West Half of the Northeast Quarter (WI/2 of NE1/4) of
said Section 29 lying West of the Centerline of Blackhawk Road as now established,
except that part thereof described as follows: Commencing at a point on the North
line of Sec. 29, T.27, R 23, 244.5 feet east of the Northwest corner of the North-
east 1/4 of said section; thence southerly at an angle to the right of 91°-46' a
distance of 478.15 feet along the center line of the town road (Blackhawk Road) to
the actual point of beginning; thence at an angle to the left of 4°-53' a distance
of 136 feet along the centerline of said town road; thence west parallel to the _
North line of said Northeast 1/4 of said Section 29 a distance of 160 feet; thence
Northerly and parallel to the centerline of said town road a distance of 136 feet;
thence East and parallel to the North line of said Northeast 1/4 of said Section
29, a distance of 160 feet to the point of beginning.
3. The West Half of the Northwest Quarter (Wl/2 of NW1/4), except the North 459.5 feet
of the East 601.77 thereof.
4. The West half of the Southwest Quarter (Wl/2 of SW1/4) all in Section 29, T 27, R 23
according to the Government Survey thereof.
5. The South 30 acres of the Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter.
6. & 7. The Northeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter; and the North twenty acres (2'
of the Southeast Quarter of the Southwest Quarter (SE1/4 of SW1/4); and the South
30 acres of the Southeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter (SE1/4 of NW1/4), all
in Sec 29, T 27, R 23 according to the Government survey thereof; Excepting, however,
from the above described tracts of-.land, the following:
A. All that part of the Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter (SW1/4 of NE1/4)
of Section Twenty-nine (29), Township Twenty-seven (27), Range Twenty-three (23),
described as follows: Commencing at a point on the North line of the South 30
acres of said Quarter Quarter (1/4 1/4) Section, where said line intersects with
the center of the town road; thence East 426.2 feet, thence South 220 feet,
thence West 423 feet to the center of said tom road. Thence Northerly along the
center of said road 220 feet, more or less, to the place of beginning containing
2.09 acres, more or less, according to the Government survey thereof.
B. Commencing at a point on the East and West quarter line of Section Twenty-nine
(29), Township Twenty-seven North (27N), of Range Twenty-three West (23W), which
is in the center of the road adjacent to the North and South quarter line of
Section Twenty-nine (29), Township Twenty-seven North (27N), Range Twenty-three
West (23W); thence North 208.708 feet through the center of this road; thence
East 208.708 feet; thence South 208.708 feet to the East and West quarter line
of above described section; thence West 208.708 feet along the east and west
quarter line to the point of beginning.
C. A tract of land in the East Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section Tcaenty-nine
(29), Township Twenty-seven North (27N), Range Twenty-three West (23W), Dakota
County, Minnesota described as follows: Commencing at the Southeast corner
of said East Half of the Southwest Quarter (E 1/2 of SW 1/4) and running thence
northerly along the east line thereof a distance of 1346.2 feet; thence de-
flecting left at an angle of 88°15' a distance of 765.3 "eet to *-i,~ point of
beginning; thence deflecting left at an angle of 57°03'''" a diet a of 213.8
feet; thence deflecting right at an angle of 90° a di; of 210 meet; thence
deflecting right at an angle of 90° a distance of 300 feet; thence deflecting
right at an angle of 90° a distance of 210 feet; thence deflecting right at an
angle of 90° a distance of 86.2 feet to the point of beginning.
D. Together with an easement for ingress and egress over and across a strip of
land 20 feet in width which has a centerline described as follows:. Commencing
17
at the southeast corner of said East Half of the Southwest Quar- (
' 1/2 of
SW 1/4) and running thence north along the east line thereof ? r of
1346.2 feet to the point of beginning of the centerline to b thence
deflecting left at an angle of 88°15' a distance of 765.35 feet ter-
minating for the purpose of this description. The north and south lin s of said
20 foot easement are to be extended or shortened to intersect the east line of
said East Half of the Southwest Quarter (E 1/2 of SW 1/4) and the westerly line
of afore described tract.
E. That part of the Southwest 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 29, 27,
Range 23, described as follows:
Commencing at the southwest corner of said Southwest 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4;
thence northerly along the west line of said southwest 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4
a distance of 383.50 feet to the actual point of beginning; thence easterly
deflecting to the right 90 degrees a distance of 218.00 feet; thence northerly
deflecting to the left 90 degrees a distance of 210.00 feet; thence westerly
deflecting to the left 90 degrees a distance of 218.00 feet to said we,t. line;
thence southerly along said west line 210.00 feet to the point of be<„~^r'J-1-.
8. The South Half of the Southwest Quarter (Sl/2 of SW1/4) of Section Twenty (20)
Township Twenty-seven (27), Range Twenty-three (23) except that part described as
follows: Beginning at the Southwest corner of said Section Twenty (20), thence
East along the South line of said section, 589.20 feet; thence North at an angle to
the left of 90 degrees, 578.61 feet, thence Northwesterly at an angle to the left of
61°36'08" a distance of 675.77 feet to a point on the West line of said Section, ,
900 feet North of the point of beginning; thence South along said West line 900 feet
to the point of beginning; and also Excepting that part of Said South Half cn S.-sth
West Quarter platted as Eagan on the Green.
,
r Y Y
~f . arm ® _ t t f - ^ 1
r t t 1 z ` f f 1 '.t.. -
~ ~ 1 8 abtyaea, I _ " ! / m 1 i a ° ' e. .wk'- • ' a
~j r + ` 1~P `t t y •t. t a ~Y r i, ~ j .,.a .."„e -.....,~f~/ 'F i•','K` d
Y " Y - ~ . ~ ~i1~ \t r 4 ~ {r It l~ / a" ♦ a /
; ~ rlr' t~`\-~._ i f "~;mw .v:. 1 t~ Fta. >a y~l+~.~`\-✓1 , y/.+°~rt~ 'f_
i , ..r. 1r r\~"~ `°l, y..~,,., , r`4A~ j t`... f .y° ~"r~ r~-+ ~ .-i.%^,~-'•~,~~f y. _
1{'.
m t t , ° C'3`s.~ , 1 t ~ ~ t.. `*-^r ft\"""~ til.`s,l aC. j
a L ' 4\. ' ,T- ~ . U t' _ i x,,- , ~ , `"'f r i0+.-~_ \`e ` S \ ,;.,'1' 0. ti
`ifs p.
t , ! •f `"r\ µ 1Y~=°-'i\ I " ~ . L t -1 t'~'"~.,.'~ p t l~ h ~ t i ~ 8~--f
r c Rd 130-_
' s ' r"`^--' $ t t -~.c °y Y '•s"-~'. tr t .Y i -k ~ i ~ -
7C[~~j~~eI,:t~ i -t ~ e.v ../ia/.--.•- 1 t „t h_8 r 1ff Q. i ~ - ~a. ,er
' __"i e`er u ®Wm t t!°--F I p`- e\.. 1~ . ~ S° °V {
~ ~.-J`.f g. t ' .-""R. i. L t _a, •:•h~~~ ~ a 1 ~ ~ rn a i ~ .-j4~°`: \ ~t
j -e ,r ft e 'i l ~ ~1 1 \y;°.....,'~3 i- ~ • F \~.e _ r.'` ® _ \ Nl~f -I a"
r.
~"'°?°'~'i .6 f F : \ r 4-/ ` ~ : Jl ~ ` r t r' ~ t i z~ 1 = f r' 1 ~S.-:4.%"' -s,,,., - ~"r f
a r t ! 'i
17011
~ /'t'. i i_ ~ ~g fn~ y~~~~~ \t 9 1M1.1}~ t
/,,,~"(4 y ~~'...yefr~A
PCC '
rn.t '7%
1. d /r
t t / 7r1 f lJ f 6- e : `."_._J t .Y 1 t i ,ice f _ r'°" .•^.t"r~ t 8.
Qtj 7'
t
.j
m.d Y$ 1 t r. ' . \ % % - i 6a. i } l (ti'1 • -G1T a}; r
r '
a i
~~--~~--7~_." / f ~ F'` ` 't. ~a r ~ `r ~"`'i.J.,3 ails " ~ ~ ~~1 p ~ J~•' # )\`~l'1! - ~yi`~^„~Y `
c d _ 9 f _J~L" ',4 e3 ,-~..c.. P • T r -r- _f°Nor Geern__S4ates Pawer Co r';, 1_
Al 'f
r ° t S' l,L: 'V"`,a'v , Y -~'~,3. -a t g - 1 I y,~' A 'I•-'-li ry
to
N i ° ~..:1 r ~ ~-r~ t~ °V~~ ~ ~ f~i 1 } ,/rte n _ ..,:+."o }
_ i f t Pf~ ~ I 3'_` .;.mow-~._~°~' -°.a°`\t;1 i .A -tik• ~r ~~V r~~~5~~"., ,-4-~ ~ ~r}
4. : at i '\r„ rY - •q r-s.. F \ r -r,7._,`~°....a +
& a- :t ~ rtf~ i}~.1_`, , ~ ^xt r ° aJ aa. a•` m} P1 y e C13•~"°
+•i f ~ ~ Y ~t t r^y, -f'^+ - a ~1 B ig , - ~ !-»i. ~ 4 a ° -
X ~ \q 5 t[[[\...►►►~1± y ~ R °g + it & $ tt ~
t v
i
j \ 1 11 8 g g = 4
.e i P of
a 4l :g ~ ,d r \ \ t = \.y r- 1, t;;'
j, 1 a t Pit' Lake q t rr e t.' a w S\ ✓ w
~t ~ t ~'+k 1•--~'~ \ tel. ~ Mme} f ° awr ,a _ ~ r r,~~. tl !i r . .a "'lJ
+ j. , I ~ r r 1'e•.. ~ i ~ bpi i 1 ~ 1 i ' l j ,~i~~' r 1 ` a !
/ r
77-
{ifs }
I i i r I S
,^t Dcttut d Cunt' Curtatrttttlin' C +
Planned Unit Development 1> ! rf p =Low Density Resid. ~ Park /Open Space
C v'' o , s c ...r ta..Y ¢.r.r. tw. .k re w I- 1 Medium pffi Trails ~ w «
p'..~ 4acp V;+ Y.°p D-%-MRO+n.. rP, ~rN1. °?435 .0.A I High « « ®mud, niINiNYnNn' 'nillnnnY%4
nnnn IIINInIPniYt n~i~.vpiptni
5d, Pu,
!VT
1 i
~`Jr ~ d r""'\-^--a._.._ C,. a l/ ~e ~ Xy qr~ ! ~ m t ry~ri( ! ~.f• }/f +f <
A' d 4 P'~ E. r ^ ~ ~ d ~ ~B l~.t Sf ~~l"uC~,..g ge ay. R- d\ ~+...m° # a M I T - f •
r% 9 P Il....^'....- t .i ~ d ''X } ~,r \..,~x-_st- ~ Fo ,a! 3 ~c ' ' ~ 4x°/ i ~ L ~ .y ~ .
d Y.: !
tiw e, l 1
• 1
density
h! c
y q+ !
7.~1',=~.
t
i ~.c deed,,- ; y t \ b
T/ ! 3. t i }t° ° - L T" LL C
A
t
i
k low densrfiy_ 'i J,
`2-4u/aC nij
31
; ' ! } ~ ,,-✓/,i.. ti ~ ~ ` fie„ e ae. ~ i Y 1\' r~P e.a ~i., 6
tjl~
CC
3d.d
,
*
j s r r ~
4-9
j,-'°T-- eP y a •"-x t ----!i ° ttla.'i° - sr - S { fir;
LIA
C~ ; v a 1 } ~ } A m t t; x P t {
Itt 60/a
25
i
. JJJlIl 4 ° f 1. _
fyM
VOi't}'+d. rl Gr
E I- - ~ •i•; j.m _m'.'e+r+rm k;'dK ~ _ rw°*F• ~ ~ , r ~ _ _ ~ _ i._...-t
w ;t/f~ ` illxs €i ~r a~ ~Fd~ s r f ~d i{. NI { r,
l r~ ti l2.~,~ ,..g t
it Y,y r
r - h n, 06nsit ;`i64j#e! i >t 1 ly .4.=-} M i,.r - :a, • r
P 12~t6$ c (J • ( _ g. ' ' iJt E}~~^~\ a/ ;r e'.»;' ~ }.ujyf~ r„'L ^ ~ <a . f
y. ! ® `f _ = a - $ f7 'il t'al! purpose 1 S
t.
trail
S•9 1, _ / i ° ~ ' ~ q4~_ 6 w _
\ r \Y
Silk-' ~d y t •.J~~.•.(
y fit. fY' 1 P' f~•`~ d\ y+a
...Y m A„` e -_.'i;-rod /'✓'F' i-; i e \ i } P-,~d
r .
pppe
d y i a 4.-.Y` p Zi ;,1 .may \i r a
ttttFF 1Sq
A Umvi c4 Cum- Currvnun(nE 1 11111 1 r' Wa' a
(3ircuric-I'Licin Plan
nneed Unit Mao--atop rtanrt
- •A ;ACTIVE PARK .P=PASStVE P. w
} . Dunn a C..+x Pa a ¢.+«c« ra., . bna Total Park & 0;>en Space Credited 32.6 ac.
cros'~.•w^-s,t«.®:.:>w. :-:•ra♦ Wetlands a.:: • - ~v ~dxi~~"}`""M1°ua+uwlret
1-0R Buffer ' t
° aEa. 'a„ : a ` :.~ei"'`1 ,v✓ r,i<. '^~,R ( ,.i ~4 f ra
1 ,espaxan 1!°,-•• ® r e. r ( ~'1 { 4: ~iSQ_Bttltec .y• ° fat( of ~ a
hiah ° ~ \ ~ ~.-''0i/ ~ Y a. ~ I fa' t ~ e. `rf 1 f r e t ~ ~ ~~„t.~7,~ i
i t"""- • e _ ~ ~ I ~ i ~:.;,.~~3 `^t. a• f 1 1 f`r.,' y - . F.k ~"-,f~ F• , t"'*" j
1 i ~ { ; -•r--• , t ►
I ~ ♦``''~."4r;'`~.r-- ~ ~t , 25 ~'-U laC.__~ ~t ;.t /•7, _ V r (:,.~•s ~ .la» t•f -t r
I ~ ~ 1.ti J r1i~ ° - it 1 ti~/,' I ~ i a~( .4 _yr rI „r t _ ~ ~ f tSa-• '
0 i :;t eu 1 ! Y )
t
t I } ~,c txxe t i..,, f,r''' . y`0.. } / ~ 4 y} l r r 1 / ® Q0..• - t\\~ °.x r^ ~
i ~ i a n,_,.r ~ ( ~ / 2 f-^«,t-~ ~ ~ "1... ~ , r-•~^~ r~~ I a t `f a, ~ .r r ~ r"~. t - r `di
«...g. _'`g. "a_ _`t.-,-~',-(- =•6t . s?~-k„O - ; y `.S~ i .~`_`._..:e:if . it C) J~" _ ~~aa ~ e"'.°. f~..~ t
- • is r ~ t t ` , Y _ l~+
7'.~.I i
4
- 1... r i`rY"^-t 1 J~' _ °E~,` gr '1, a { XZ ' . '-t .°n-••-^ a j~ > r~_
C-
1 ` / C./ f" ~ P'~ \ t *1 ~ 8er'i $ Cg h ;'a" 'l ~ '°'1 i AT rya•.+'°. f
~ s • { , t ...q s ~ t 1 ''mod `t~ (4. sn^" -J L
1 'r (V.,,,..~ l~~% 1.v k . f,{°`:iy`~\~~~~ i 1~ -,1 1~ .,(~'..-°'7 "x ,u f \~'._t l.._'L 'V~_"3•l I :~'f. F4,
t' 7
2 4 WaC Vl l ~ ~lC ~ l,Y ~ r1 ~`a~~t , , ~ a" e ` ~ f `y"....,r~ '+a ~ ~ L,,, ~
~ e - F 1 a r'-'' ?~.-~/e ~~f ~ ~ ,}~f ~ ~ ~ e t_ ~A~'"••,d~`r t ~ F 9 ~ ~ a j ~1\ (.,r s'."`-~`t 2
~N c °a.. tF < }`tt~/~.`':^.~~ ,:~``i".ml aB~i I -`Y 4+~ fj~`y~\\..,,:t,. .rim..,.,/,,,..,. t
---f
+ Y txied-lien
Y 1 ' med derv,
° 1 4 72 ulac--! t 9 J 2 ulac
+rTL(3
i tz~ S •-a- ~'7..._: ..--""i" to r 4-9
e5~ a e vrj r,,,{:t••..,~ Ft j , ulaC' ~t' $ ' P , { ]fr t•~
%
4~6 u jaG'.
power Ca /,,r-_ - -
~F
v
ttF ! 2 r i" a _.....,,f r r r;.%,// 1f j ..ice /fry
t2 r t
i taC a ¢ t_~~b~ Fa / (ral 1 •j
r• i°,. ' r,r' a. 'i
i' h -c _ .f/' 'rr.^ yf f.~ _ „r~ tr, ar
i,lit~qhdfrn •y 14' T ~r 1 JC r + -'tr~ `L *^'~TM •ri
A 1[-16ulac / s' r C3.
J9 h'qh: den -4
E Y,, i
A Dwai cK Curn' Curnrnunin
rf .13f ~yc r'Cg~' F `t i U Ran
~ I L tQ~'~`
"ltanned Unit Development
f`~`~ y pvnp, 6 (tea arsY Rwwd Httw64 Mwnwy®mvnf. BraC. s o ~
~ e"!s:.~xg :..e'P sw •Pj?in., d-4:-uv. '^4]S YIIIIq x~txltrYlfM Ix1~~9~
,lae. 14
' r
EXHIBIT F
to
EAGAN HILLS WEST PLANNED. DEVI;1 _1cIEIJT 6'R. :=~,dT
dated April 3 1979
Dedicated Areas Requirements and Credit
Eagan Hills West
(Dedicated Areas are described by reference to Exhibit C, Eagan Hills West Planned
Development Agreement, dated ril , 1979)
Dedicated Area Acreage Dedicated Park Pe+li t io-l r r".,.
1.~ Northern States Power 12.12acres 6.06ac•es
Co. Easement
2. Passive Park (Pp) 5.67a 5.67a
3. Northern Natural Gas 2.2a 1.1a
Co. Easement
4. Park and Wetland B 4.68a 4.68x+
.61a .30a
6. Active Park (Pa) 13.49a 13.49a
7. Trail (0' wide) 0.86a 0.86a
8. Area South of Trail within 0.44a 0.44a
Northern State Power Co.,
Easement contiguous with
Wetland C
TOTAL 40.07acres 32.60acres
The Dedicated Areas shall be dedicated at the time of final plat approval containing
each parcel of the land to be dedicated to Eagan pursuant to Section 10 of the Eagan
Hills West Planned Development Agreement dated Argil 3 1979. It shall be
dedicated by so stating on a final plat, conveyance by quit claim deed or the granting
of an easement, at Eagan's discretion. Developer, at its expense, shall provide an
abstract of title or owner's duplicate certificate of title for any portion of Dedicated
Area conveyed by deed.
Dedicated Area 1 shall be dedicated on or before the recording with the Dakota
County Recorder of the plat of Meadowlands First Addition. As to those portions of
4 r
\ ,"°'.'"°.._T. T T .......~..a=®--•---' ter' ai Po;l,rll C! ~
01
Tq,
r r -*s r t Q_ r 4
R4 E~ '.fr s\ t
to sk
24
R4
n 7 e
<44 I _ 1. Rl _ G 1
T-e
j- t
111. { 24 - 1 tD . . i 4."' ►o F ".r .
10
n m t~c "rt,,, {
c z -R:.. PD
I.._~ ~ - A'•.,? ~d ,fie J} I Ra ~ ~
~`e" Q
J:T
,
4
C- I
west
al i,
:t Z~
_ ~_:..,~,-x;` t "'ate„r:`~c ~i. t; ,..T." _....___i~ ROSEMOUN5
APPLE l VALLE' V` V
20NING LEGEND
ZONING MAP
a CITY OF EAGAN ; r
C=am
Ctp: „
Dedicated Area 1 which may be affected by the location .ar r;A >c_=tion by acquisition
or condemnation of Interstate Highway I-35E or Blackhawk Road, such dedication shall
itially be in the form of a temporary easement, which shall terminate upon the
expiration of a period of five (5) years, completion of the aforesaid acq~r?n or
condemnation or termination of the Eagan Hills West Planned DevelopmeW
whichever occurs first. Said temporary easement shall be replaced by a conveyance of
fee title as to those portions not acquired or condemned for Interstate Highway 1-35E
or Blackhawk Road. A portion ®f Dedicated Area 1 shall contain a reservation for the
right-of-way crossing for proposed Beaverdam Road.
Except as otherwise mutually agreed in writing, Eagan shad
of no lands subject to this Agreement other than the Dedicated Areas speci-Fied in this
Exhibit F to the Eagan Hills West Planned Development Agreement dated April 3 r
1979.
Developer: Dunn and Curry Real City of
Atateana went, c.
By Leo Murphy, ay,~'r
Owner: C iff Road Properties, Inc.
All
By: By: ; . _
It Alyce B lke, C1 X,
~cr
t t'., . r\ T~ . _ a l 1 4 w jev6 ..,„°.a _ 4 ! ° `"'r I JJ . ' ° • ..g5~ i _
r C s, Dewy gn ! , s. ro. mt cSQ P atfac : i ! rk*~ ° a p a P i J
f r~ l 1 t{ E / 9 Pa P°p~ f \ ~i~{ r
f m.~ e --4
y a - / ! \ . } - j j a t' ~ ' 1 -w. y . = Ta~P .~,1 j
had din f 1 ;I <r TE r( .
} a°^ ~.U7ac_ i ! J( A 4 r> . tirr ~ ~ ! f# f ✓ to °.e f,
°y~j 7~a f e r,• --°z. r ,f"d f~J+' ,~y m .1
_ ~ _ _ r ~ s . ` j y --1 / / > I s a (4 ~ . (l s 1 + «f t ~e~t .+t : ~ ` Ptf j 4 e j •~-r>
t -t ' b i ~ ~ ~ ~ r0 4 . : 1 ,i r-' RI [""t --^°3~.,,. j R I ~ ~ .r+'"' z ~z f r„•
1 C:~";,,- .,,1`.,° !\~~1~`} ~L~ a .~T \ r R of \\l~\ t'°~'• L s+ ,e• a ` .
47
N j r !
- ! I p r 1` " +/yea ty1{! p~ ..t7?t jc> t;.{(J
j"r e e_... 9_PSa Rd a?1J s''.v~ °it+r iti- }
f
7, r-
. '1 "°t ® 4 s• t.' ,'.a ! dC~ : / ;"'t~ -}t P t .,I pj;i
} t.- v,y 1 i 1 r~r } t48_ 4 -fl T'10
! V1 pi fJ ' f 1. ~..1 1.yA r 4 0
d®ey-
t.. i JOVV de{i
i- i• $ ' s 1 + 1 1 r J t~~ y' i ^ '1 ' ,,1 _ t ' 1
~ CC ®
-
_ ! ~ 1 / ♦ r 1 r'L lfFf =4 .t ~1 } i ~ .~"APr? - LY °~'.:R•"•-'.".~ 'a. ~ _ .~^C 1~ i
i
1 ° t ea / _ mad den t ~.rned'den
1_ 9-72u/ac 9-12u/ac
..._.L f U. ~r
1r !r „;Y 1„.,_._.,._.._...,_ "1• ..•3' R R A_9
Z77,~~ u/a,,-' ~ \ `r
~11_ rJ 0~. ~ f~~H t/ ` ,~5. d t lEt'. 1' r ~ x':41 + ~ ~~~~•1~:.• 1 !,~a
~1~~ '4'r'-' ~".+.P;~-~ >r~ r~-"F'4::~s•c.~s"` P^-- s~•\•i k •.,a 1+ t'° -e `,79
Ez TI;
~~~(~'~~~:.,,y"` 5, \ T
ti s ^ ,(F~ c Northern States Paver C® ° e {
F \ ` X-.~-'"~ "'Z.. tl f 1 ( y__- YJI (r _ ._7.'.r
+ 1
-
high
I rts P {j~,I
C ® a • ^,f ~ l .12°~1.6.~°a-.vc ~ r d E g -~y~ ~ I tf. t - ~ e'<. P,a r:. ~p•°R
( °C X _
[ 8' ~ 1~ - V^'... Y tf?U ~r t$ [4'! Y~ r'~'1~~,}y> d _ 'T i
1: i + t' r \t 12\...~ t I,. ~~a d`c. P'r. a - p"~'t$ al t•-,d"~o- oaf. 7 fm'eP~
fl Cj ,P* CJ1'• { LJ r it t f r n
121] 6 en/ a4 L1-. P 1: ~"-~-~°w Pl r ..^"+i• ` SY,~e
R t' w® j' ~ f ~l i 1:- ~ f•« 1 i, `ar.d*+'1.4L. . .
big
IT` klz
R `.F~ '.1 tt '1..
1.y~•y~,l ,i\Pa,,R,a., \_,~"a.;%. i 1 i - j ! I -.t
1 Y At5,4- 0se(-p' 'L P ~~.y \~p". ,r .y'"r'"`® 9l ' \ ~ `e J~•I P ~
` ~/iP d• !r R 1 1 `t a ~t~,
F _ > v ix rN r{--•.^N> - r _L i i^ 1 R ~°,•r,
~;a-disc#..~~~~~ ~~a~ R ~ g,~.`" ''~'•P_ r-7. x hiEiT
9 /)unit sC C~IIRrt C,,u~,cutin j 7
L Access
Stree} WEST
A 1-1ar,-'^,-d Untt ev--lop arcs ~t®
Main access points on ina)or roads a+.
L , r,-,. w c.,.f.s rtZa
y .j`~ .c.c vla.,p (h•Iw ls"p+*.. nr.,., ao+aF ::sn° Ma`-...w' ~
~r
EAOAN HILLS WK'S
PLANNED DEVELOPMEM
B. MINIMUM AREA REQUIREMENTS FOR MULTIPLE DWELLINGS
NUMBER OF
STORIES NUMBER OF BEDRC"
Efficiency 1-Bedroom 2-Bedroom 3-Bedroom
One Story 3,960 (11)* 4,355**(10) 4,840 (9) 8,270 .(5
® 3,090 (14) 3,350 (13) 5,445 ~(8)
Two Story 2.920 :(15)
Three Story 2,720 (16) 2,900 (15) 3,100 (14) 4,360 (10)
tore 2,180 (20) 2,200 (19) 2 560 (1B) 3,630 (12)
r our S
Five Story 1,900 (22) 2,075 (21) 2,180 (20) 3,090 (141
1,800 (23) 1,900 (22) 2,720 (16)
Six Story 1,700 (24)
units per acre
Square feet of land per ur.it
Ali mi. ;mum required lot areas st.rted above shall I-nt it fljdtt_ ,Ljblic st-eets.
g
-31-
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Chairman Charles Hall and Members of the Eagan
Advisory Planning Commission
FROM: Larkin, Hoffman, Daly & Lindgren, Ltd.
DATE: August 22, 1987
RE: Cliff Lake Galleria
The City Planning and Engineering Departments rel..- their
staff report on the Cliff Lake Galleria proposal (th- Proposal)
to the members of the Advisory Planning Commission, the
developers and the public yesterday, August 21, 1987. The
Proposal will be heard by the Planning Commission on August 25,
1987.
This memorandum has been prepared and is delivered tothe
members of the Planning Commission to address the i
in the staff report. We will, of course, be at tlza Plai~iii~~
Commission meeting to present the Proposal and'answ,-.
questions. However, many of the issues raised by staff are
highly technical. We felt it would be helpful for Planning
Commission members to have our response to these issues in
writing, prior to the meeting.
Because timing is critical for this Proposal, we will be asl.ing
the Planning Commission to complete its review and forwar(-ti!,
Proposal to the City Council as soon as is practicable.
THE PROPOSAL
The request before the Planning Commission is for preliminary
plat approval of a 325,000 square foot shopping center located
on approximately 32.8 acres of land in the southwest corner of
the Eagan Hills West Planned Development. The Proposal
represents a portion of the commercial component of the Eagan
Hills West Planned Development.
Planning Department staff properly defines the request and the
Proposal in the very first paragraph of the staff report.
However, the remainder of the staff report analyzes a project
which is not before the Planning Commission at this time. The
L.A,w :rte, HOFFMA.-> DA-LX Zz I:a_ l s .
staff review, and its conclusions that the Hill,
environmental assessment worksheet, the Eagan Hills West
Planned Develo-pment Agreement, and the City of Eagan
Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan must be amended, is
predicated on a 745,000 square foot project. This is not the
Proposal before the Planning Commission at this time.
The Proposal before the Planning Commission is for a 32`-,000
square foot shopping center in the Eagan Hills West Pl 3,,_',
Development. At staff's request, and because the Plain,-<
Development Agreement for Eagan Hills West appears to rEcuire
it, we have shown a conceptual plan for the remainder of the
commercial component of Eagan Hills West. This plan
contemplates development of up to a total of 420,000 square
feet of mixed uses. However, no approvals are sought for
anything other than the 325,000 square foot shopping center.
This is the only proposal before the Planning Commission. The
conceptual plans for future development are provided only to
assist the City in designing and planning for roadways,
infrastructure, etc.
The decisions which the Planning Commission reaches with
respect to the staff's suggestions must be made in'light of the
Proposal before the Planning Commission--a 325,000 square foot
shopping center--and must recognize that the Proposal is a
component of the Eagan Hills West Planned Development and is,
therefore, governed by the documents creating and defining
Eagan Hills West rather than by the development controls which
would apply to a free-standing project.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
An environmental assessment worksheet (EAW) was prepared for
the Eagan Hills West Planned Development in 1982. This EAW
analyzed and addressed the entire Eagan Hills West Planned
Development, defined in the EAW as including 67 acres of
commercial development.
The staff report concludes that a new EAW must be prepared for
the Proposal. This conclusion is based on staff's
interpretation of several sections of the current Environmental
Quality Board (EQB) Environmental Review Rules, including
sections related to mandatory EAW categories and "phased" or
"related" actions.
2.
I AM,CTN, HOFFMAN, LALY (IS: L-M.
However, the :Proposal is expressly exempt from the current EQB
Rules, including the rules cited by staff. Section 4410.0300,
subpart 2 of the current EQB Rules provides:
[The rules] shall apply to projects fcr- l c"t
environmental review has not been initi-, to
their effective date. For any project f,)c
environmental review has been initiated by s., f_,I
of a citizens petition, environmental assessment
worksheet, environmental impact statement preparauion
notice, or environmental impact statement to the EQB
prior to the effective date, all governmental
decisions that may be required for that projec
be acted upon in accord with prior rules.
Therefore, the need for a new EAW must be evaluated under the
prior EQB rules. The prior rules do not address specifically
when a supplemental or new EAW will be required. However, they
do address this issue with respect to an environmental impact
statement (EIS), as follows:
Subsequent EIS. When an EIS has been prepared on an
action, no additional EIS need be prepared on the
action unless changes in the action are proposed which
will involve ne5w and potentially significant
environmental-'effects-not considered in the previous
EIS,. (6 MCAR Section 3.025F.1) (Emphasis added.)
In the absence of a specific standard for EAWs, this st::zdard
must be applied to the question of when a new EAW will h
required. Under this standard, no EAW is rec"aired fot
Proposal before the Planning Commission bec ill'. L
does not represent a ch:an~ in the Eagan Hilo
Development, which change Involves "new and potenrl
significant environmental 4ffects not considered" in thu 1`::32
EAW.
The 1982 EAW analyzed a 385-acre planned development which
included approximately 67 acres of commercial development or
the south end of the PD. The Proposal before the 1 anninq
Commission is for 325,000 square feet of retail loc.r
on only 32.8 acres of the 67 in the southwest corner of the
Eagan Hills West Planned Development. No change is proposea co
the project analyzed in the EAW.
The 1982 EAW analyzed a planned development estimated to
include a total of 8,356 parking spaces, to generate
3.
approximately 41,000 vehicular traffic
cover a total of 42% of the Planned Devely nt i.h r .
surface. The Proposal before the Planning
build-out of the entire Planned Development, will d:esul, in a
total number of parking spaces of approximately 6,795; total
vehicular traffic trips per day of approximately 28,594; and a
total average impervious surface for the entire Planned
Development of approximately 32%. These potential
environmental effects are well within the thresholds anal,_
in the 1982 EAW.
There is simply no change in the project anal in th '
EAW; nor are there any new and potentially significant
environmental effects not considered in the 1982 EAW. The 1982
EAW was a 33-page document. It analyzed and considered all
potential significant environmental effects related to
development of the Eagan Hills West Planned Development,
including all potential environmental effects related to
development of approximately 67 acres of the Planned
Development for commercial purposes.
The discussion on pages 3 through 7 of the staff report
analyzes the environmental review of the Proposal under the
wrong EQB Rules. An EAW which covers the Proposal before th
Planning Commission has been prepared. Under the applicab'
EQB Rules, there is no requirement, nor any need, to do a n.
EAW.
The EQB is certainly not going to commence any 1,r,l ~,tE_on a
a result of the application of its own rules, nor c:; d any
other party successfully challenge this result. In tact, the
only potential complainant would be the developer--if a new was required--because the developer has the right under the
current EQB Rules to have all governmental decisions that may
be required for the project acted upon in accord with the prior
EQB rules, which do not require a new EAW.
THE EAGAN HT IJ WEST I`, ~NNED AC
The Eagan Hills West Planned Development Agreement is
to the staff report. This Agreement is a contract between th=
City of Eagan and the owners and developers of Eagan Hills
West. It confers certain rights and responsibilities on both
parties and is binding on each of them, including the City.
The Planned Development Agreement must be read carefully, aii
it must be interpreted in light of common sense and the
4.
of the parties at the time it was entered into. Section 1 of
the Planned Development Agreement states, in part:
1) Development - Owner intends to have Developer
develop the Subject Land substantially in
accordance with the qen ral, plans shown on t~
Exhibits and Eagan ac to permit the
Develc -ii:3r nt subject t r <<. ping find ~Pt
for each plat of the from
before proceeding with any work on saki:' ,
unless otherwise agreed to by Eagan. P1.1t
reasonably consistent with the Exhibits sY Ll be
approved by Eagan. (Emphasis added.)
The exhibits attached to the Agreement are intended,
language of the Agreement itself, to be "general r?1
specific development constraints. These general
forth general areas for uses, r intersections, _tc, -
specific locations. This is clear from the Agreement itselt
which includes exhibits which vary in detail from each other
(compare Exhibits B, D, and E), and from the subsequent
implementation of the Agreement. Development of the Eagan
Hills West Planned Development to date has not strictly
complied with any of the specific exhibits to the Ac
but has been "reasonably consistent" with the "genes
set forth in one or more of the exhibits.
Planning staff concludes that the Planned Development
must be amended, and that this amendment will be a rezunin~,,,
because.
1. The location of the proposed Super s
partially in an area designated in so? ~.:.exhibits for high-density residenLi 1;
2. The new east/west ,nr:Uctor roadway b~ Black
Hawk and Rahn Roads does not follow the pz , M >e
location designated in some of the exhibit:,.
However, staff errs in selecting one or two exhibits f1-<,, tie
Planned Development Agreement and taking the position thli :11
development within the 385-acre Planned Dev<`lopment
rigidly conform to these exhibits. This >if:ion J
to the terms of the Development Agreement, 'sigh w
exhibits as "general plans," and to the history oL Hi,,,
implementation of the Planned Development Agreement.
5.
L<~ za s ~ v -I cal 41_ I ALY Lj-ND0R , I L z~,
Staff acknowledges that the Planned Development Agreement
contemplates approximately 68 acres of commercial developm::it,
located south of the east/west connector street. The Prc~;-:,li
before the Planning Commission envisions a total of 6f' "f
commercial development located south of the east/west ct >r
street.
The Proposal before the Planning Commission will locate the
east/west connector street closer to the alignment contemplated
in Exhibit B to the Planned Development Agreement than to that
shown in Exhibits D and G. However, nothing in the Planar.;
Development Agreement suggests that development of the t;,_-
Hills West Planned Development must strictly comply with
Exhibit D and, therefore, expressly violate Exhibit
Exhibit B cannot be read out of the Planned Dev L
Agreement. These exhibits are general plans. A ~;;,_=opal
reasonably consistent with any of the exhibits must be approved
by the City as a matter of contract law.
Staff's suggestion that the Proposal before the Planning
Commission, which is consistent with Exhibit B to the p"
Development Agreement and with staff's interpretati(1r,
total commercial acreage contemplated by the Devel:E 1
Agreement, would require "rezoning" is particularly r~;:zl.ng.
As the staff report notes, the entire area south of tiie the NSP
easement, with the exception of the northwest and northeast
corners, is zoned Community Shopping Center (CSC). (See the
zoning map attached to the staff report.) The CSC-zoned land
includes the entire 68 acres suggested in the Proposal for
commercial development, including the Super Value site.
The Planned Development Agreement overlays the exist A i
It does not "rezone" anything. It merely provides "general
plans" for development within the Planned Development. The
land retains its underlying zoning--in this case CSC--
established over 15 years ago and never changed. If the City's
intent at the time of signing the Planned Development Acr nt
had been to rezone any portion of the Eagan Hills West 1~1< -l
Development, including the CSC land south of the NSP ea: ,
it could have done so. However, it did not. The CSC z<
remained where it was and is today. The development as
proposed, which is consistent with Exhibit B to the Planned
Development Agreement and with the underlying zoning, must be
approved under the terms of the Development Agreement and by
law.
6.
L RHINN> HO1--FN1A--N, DAIX LIN D+GIZEN, LTD.
The same principles apply to the staff's insistence
proposed east/west roadway may only intersect Rah the
location shown on a particular exhibit to the
Development Agreement. This "street access" plan i~., like all
of the exhibits to the Planned Development Agreement, a general
plan. It provides for a certain number of access points onto
major roadways. It does not mean that a proposal which is
consistent with Exhibit B to the Agreement, is consistent with
the underlying zoning, and is consistent with the gt -
acreages contemplated in the Planned Development rt -t must
be denied because access onto one roadway is not lc; t''J!
exactly as shown.
This point is borne out by the history of the implementation of
the Planned Development Agreement. Several roads not shown on
Exhibit G do access directly onto Black Hawk Road and have been
approved within the existing Planned Development Agreement,
without requiring an amendment thereto.
Finally, staff's suggestion that the Plarrn. ? )=velopment
Agreement requires more detailed plans tl. --emitted with
respect to future development outside of the :-rea for which
approval is being sought is contrary to common sense. The
Proposal before the Planning Commission is for a 325,000 square
foot shopping center. No approvals are being sought for
anything else. Concept plans are shown, as required by the
Planned Development Agreement, indicating potential loca`i-
far further commercial development, general uses, ma
sizes, maximum impervious surface, etc. These plans
in sufficient detail to allow planning for roads and
infrastructure. No purpose would be served by preparing
detailed plans at this time for this speculative development.
To do so would be a waste of the developer's time to prepare
such plans and the City's time to review them.
The Planned Development Agreement does not requir- n :,'meat.
The Proposal before the Planning Ct~umission is
consistent with one or more of ra1 plans .:t us
exhibits to the.Planned Develop: 1, t e~~ment. V.e C! t., is
obligated by the Agreement, whicl is contract between the
parties to approve the Proposal.
COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE GUIDE PLAN
The Proposal before the Planning Commission is not icons
with the City's Comprehensive Land Use Guide Plan ,-ill r
require an amendment to that Plan, for two reasons.
7.
L1-Fz ,~r-ti, HOT'FMAN, D,~_Ly LI-DGRE- , Lr:i>.
First, the Land Use Plan element o rhk- C =rehensive Guide
Plan specifically recognizes that "_i~ , ..:any instances
where planned developments show higt° den-ities or more
extensive commercial development than that proposed under .1
Guide Plan. The Guide Plan goes on to state that then( ioc
necessarily considered conflicts between the zoning an( t .
Comprehensive Plan; that development is permitted to oc°-i- as
specified in the Planned Development Agreement, z;. e
Comprehensive Plan should not be interpret r. . .he
City is going to undertake revisions of t' _'laru,~d
Development Agreements. (See attached phoLocv-y c,i_ X-6
from the Comprehensive Guide Plan.)
Second, the Proposal before the Planning Commission, a 325,+W;
square foot shopping center located in the southwest corner
the Eagan Hills West Planned Development, is entirely
consistent with the City's current Land Use Guide Th
Proposal is located entirely within the esj,-,~..;
on the January 1987-Land Use Plan. No Land Use Guid elan
amendment would be required even if the Proposal were not part
of a Planned Development.
Finally, to the extent that the Guide Plan is inconsistent with
the underlying zoning of the site, by state law, the zoning
prevails.
POTENTIAL IMPACTS
On pages 10 through 12 of the staff report staff lists a
of potential impacts of the Proposal. Once again, it is
important that these impacts be analyzed and considered in
light of the Proposal before the Planning Commission, and the
terms of the Planned Development Agreement which governs the
City's action on this Proposal.
Grading
The Proposal will require extensive grading and some rE M_-„< l of
trees. However, the City expressly recognized in Sectioli 14 of
the Planned Development Agreement that development in are.:
designated for non-residential use will require extensive
grading, filling, and removal of trees.
Nevertheless, every effort has been made t e~..
possible. The plan which you will review
the preservation of existing vegetation around Clit,( L.,-i-.c
the preservation of a number of existing trees located
8.
throughout the site by means of tree wells, berms, and other
techniques.
With respect to impervious surfaces, development of ili _1-t
Planned Development, including the Propr ~7 an,'
plan for development of the rest of the
Planned Development, will result in a tot ?l
of approximately 32%, 10% less than estimated in the EAW.
Storm water runoff, water quality, and erosion control will all
be managed as required by City and other regulatory agencies.
Eagan's Shoreline Management Ordinance does not ipply to t;I,
Proposal because the Ordinance expressly provic?
developments approved prior to the <ioption o
Ordinance shall not be subject to t l:~, density,
impervious surface coverage, or h,vigI,t standa-,_ ~2_r ,~'Aished in
the Ordinance {Section 11.21, subd. 8C}.. Neverthele=is, the
entire 68-acre commercial portion of the Planned Development
will, in fact, comply with these performance standards set
forth in the Shoreland Ordinance.
Traffic
The developer has submitted a 7 , athy traffic ! ---:ot t to the
City which analyzed two develapiient scenarios for the
commercial component of the Eagan Hills West Planned
Development, including one scenario substantially more intense
than now proposed. All potential transportation and traLfic
impacts can be managed even under the largest scale sc-- -.io.
The Proposal is ideally situated at the intersection c and
Cliff Road for high traffic-generating uses. Theca= tl
difficulty making traffic and transportatio
the developer will continue to work with the i.t- ail,l i~
transportation consultant regarding specific design deiuails.
Police and Fire
The developer will, of course, work with the police and fire
departments to coordinate service to the shopping center.
Parks
The Proposal will not encroach on the on-street softball
parking for Rahn Park. There will no need to restrict on--
street parking on Rahn Road. The Proposal provides more than
adequate parking for customer use, particularly during the
summer months when retail traffic is low. There will be no
impact on the utility of Rahn Park.
9.
17
L,,r.I lN', DAL : LINK DGEZEE N wl:rD.
With respect to park dedications in the arpa )F Outlot P
noted above, no approvals are SOUJh'. witl, to Ou-1 w
When a proposal is put forth for of Outlot
will, of course, include dedication of tht° appropriat nt
of park land in order to comply with the total park lcn_
dedication requirements set forth in the Planned Develo,.,.ent
Agreement.
Schools
The Proposal will have no impacts on Metcalf Junior Rig-,.
Thomas Fake Elementary Schools, both of which are 1,..ated
several miles from the Proposal. With respect to ..in
Elementary School, the traffic report prepared for the Prl~ l
indicates a minimal amount of increased traffic north o. thil,
Proposal on Rahn Road. Furthermore, all Eagan students at S .:11,n
Elementary School who walk to school live west of Rahn Road,
do the majority of students bussed to the school.
Social Impacts
Planning staff has postulated a number of potential "social
impacts" from the Proposal. In considering these issues, the
Planning Commission must keep in mind that the zoning of this
site, the Planned Development Agreement and the City's
Comprehensive Plan have contemplated this type of use for this
site for over 15 years. These issues, while they should t be
ignored, were resolved when the City enterer', inte i con'
obligating itself to approve this type o nt o:,
site.
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT ISSUES
Grading/Drainage/Erosion Control
The grading and drainage plans currently before the , ng , , .-i., i
staff address many of the issues set forth in the
For instance, it is no longer propo t.o c ~c~..~za
drainage directly into Cliff Lake; and it i 0
construct a new storm water holding pc)nd on ti~~~ V~'sst 'd(_ ;f
Cliff Lake to protect the quality of the water in Cliff Lake.
With respect to the erosion and sediment control plans, we note
that the soil and water conservation district has recommended
that the preliminary plat be approved and that more detailed
plans be worked out between the developers and the respective
governmental agencies before a grading permit is issued or
final plat approval granted.
1a.
LAxKrte, IlOr FMA , DALY LIN L)GR E\, L F)~
utilities
There are no problems or issues related to utilities for the
:Proposal.
Traffic
As noted above, detailed traffic analysi:> has been
and will be refined as requested by th, ff.
Easement/Permits/Rights-of-Way
All necessary easements and permits will be obtained by the
developer and rights-of-way as required by the Planned
Development Agreement will be dedicated.
RELATED ISSUES
This concludes our responses to the issues raised in th_ r
report. In addition to these issues, a number of question:; r;
concerns about the Proposal have been brought to our attention
in recent weeks through neighborhood flyers, petitions, and
gossip. Following are responses to some of the statements made
by opponents to the Proposal which have come to our attention.
Rahn Road
The traffic analysis prepared by our consultant and confi
by the City's consultant, Short, Elliott, Hendrickson,
concludes that a very minimal amount of traffic generated b,
the Proposal will travel north on Rahn Road. Rahn Road north
of the new east/west connector street will remain a resid-ntial
street, with slightly increased traffic levels. It will :i,;t be
a major access to the Proposal. The developer wil' cec, -
commitments from Super Value and Target to the e t
trucks are to travel north of the east/west connE -or s i on
Rahn Road. The developer will also support a City initiative
to prohibit trucks on Rahn Road north of that point.
Beaver Dam Road
The Planned Development Agreement calls for Beaver Dam F a
be connected to the east/west connector street. -,E, de. r
does not see a need for this connection and, ur' the war
believes it n- ;:-ry, will not the connection. if " }.e
decision is mad not to connect heaver Dam Road to the
east/west connector street, the developer will bear the cost of
11.
removing the existing stub end of Beaver Dam Road and returning
it to green space.
Increased Noise, Activity, Exhaust Fumes
The Proposal is located nearly 1,000 feet from t-ht
existing residential property. The nor~Tern peb 1 the
site will be heavily bermed and land=cz° ~,J to eliminate any
views of the site and to reduce any pot,ntial noise impacts.
All truck docks will be screened with berming, heavy
landscaping, and in some instances, screenwalls. In additin
the developer will be developing approximately 25 acres
residential development north of the Proposal, be'
proposed shopping center and the existing i.denti<:l a
north of the NSP easement. We will discus these dei.all:,
further at the Planning Commission meeting.
ProertY~ues
It is the experience throughout the metropolitan area that
high-quality commercial development does not adversely aff t
the values of neighboring residential uses, particul.,~!,_, „
residential uses are three to five blocks distant ite
and will experience very little increased traffic. -;.v
principals of Hoffman Development Group and their immacdi
family have purchased their own homes and a number of
investment properties immediately to the north of the Proposal,
and in the surrounding area. They own a total of 10
residential units in this area with a total investment of
nearly a million dollars. They, therefore, have a vested
interest in protecting neighborhood property values.
Regional or Center
Some have sugg:3ted that the Proposal should more appropriately
be zoned as a regional shopping center, because of the Target
store. This would not be appropriate for two reasons. First,
one store does not a regional shopping center make. This
entire shopping center will have 325,000 square feet with 20 to
30 shops. The size is consistent with all generally accepte,
guidelines for community shopping centers, including the
Land Institute Guidelines and the City of Eagan's. Regional
shopping centers measure their square feet in millions and
their shops by the hundreds.
Second, a single Target store does not draw from a regional
population vase. Target has 20 stores in the metropolitan
12.
currently and is building more. The principal draw area for
each store is approximately one to three miles.
CONCLUSION
The Proposal before the Planning Commission is for a 325,000
square foot shopping center. The proposed shopping cent,--r will
be of benefit to the growing City of Eagan. It will pr)v` de
retail services for which there is an overwhelming nf_>~-,; :,nd
demand. The last proposal before the City for a TIi°et. store
was supported by a petition signed by over 600
The proposed shopping center will be extraordinarily attractive
and will be an asset to the City. Particular attention has
been paid to protecting and incorporating Cliff Lake as an
amenity for the shopping center. The shopping center is unique
in that it has no "back" side, The lake side of the center is
treated architecturally like a front and will present n
attractive appearance from Cliff Lake. In addition, i,
trees will be preserved to the maximum extent possi-,
extensive replacement trees and vegetation will be prc,v1"A,,1.
We have worked closely with staff over the past several weeks
and months on many site design issues and have made numerous
changes in responses to requests from the staff. A partial
listing of these changes is set forth in the attached letter
which we submitted to the City with our revised plans. A great
deal of attention has been paid to the aesthetics crud site
design aspects of this Proposal. Gd_ are proud to rs^cnt the
shopping center as currently prod- d to the Plarin
Commission.
This Proposal is entirely consistent with the last 15 years of
planning for this site. It is consistent with the underlying
CSC zoning, adopted some 15 years ago; with the Eagan Hills
West Planned Development Agreement, signed over eight years
ago; with the Eagan Hills West Environment,l Assessment
Worksheet, completed five years ago; and wi h the City's
adopted Comprehensive Land Use Plan, adoi'-,,d in January oi:
year. The Proposal requires no change to t`;e Planned
Development Agreement, Comprehensive Plan, or the City Zoning
ordinance.
What is proposed is what has always been planned for thi:- site.
The City has a contractual obligation, once the requi,-~ }]~S
for preliminary and final plat review have been met, to
the Proposal. The developer has invested millions of
13.
I_ o r DALY & LTNDGRE , LTD.
over the years in reliance on this contr-o
such things as takes, assessments, park de('ic-at'( n:i, sti .;yet
dedications, excess right-of-way dedications, and other costs.
We will be happy to answer any questions on the issues rail-d
in this memorandum or on the Proposal at the Planning
Commission meeting. We thank you in advance for your pat=
and diligence in carefully evaluating this Proposal and
guidelines which govern its approval.
14.
PKD: AOl
r
I `
a:
H. Relationship Between Compreh~~? i_%'u C,..i z~ elan ~~r~:
In the implementation of the Eagan Comprehensive Guide Plan,
the City does not expect to initiate a rezoning of all the
areas where a conflict may exist between Comprehen: -ire
Plan Land Use proposals and existing zoning. T1-h,
isolated instances where a rezoning may be City to resolve a land use conflict that is ci z
affecting land values. These would be the exc`1 -i4
than the norm.
The City of Eagan has executed several Planned Development
Agreements over the past several years. There are
ces where the Planned Developments show higher den;i"'<<-
more extensive commercial development than that
the Comprehensive Guide Plan. These G__ ~sidered conflicts between zoning anc- 'rather, they are viewed as current tre_ds and
of development patterns that the City expects to occur. has shown that some of the Planned Development proposals may
be unrealistic in terms of density and rate of development.
However, the development is permitted to occur as specified
in the Planned Development Agreements. Adjustments may occur
as the final development plans for the various rlannt,': Deve-Loi)-
ments are approved by the City. This is expcUt~--_1 I ,1,1,
to be the pattern and the Comprehensive Plan 1 ~r .,e
interpreted to mean that the City is going to "ids -e-
visions of these Planned Development Agreements.
In any instance, the Eagan Comprehensive Guide Plan shouly~
viewed as a guide as described herein and in other Sectlt,,-
of this Comprehensive Plan. It is expected to be
by the Planning Commission during the next dec-r? Ttiie
in their deliberations with pr~sr:: owners .~~and in planning for municipal servic-'-,, to 'o-Jected growth of the City.
a~
ADVISORY PAPVS & R CRL.. _ ,Tr)N
KEN VRAA, D Wit,~OR OF PA _
AUGIT"
S m
zonin
i-4 Multiple ® pls [Sists
s.st o;,
f
am wn, ai
th e s,z-,,E i s .iow pooC'eed tai
ly a t®
C
wool
e to cash
c
to
KVfbls
SUBJECT: REZOMING, PRELIMIUARY PLAT
T RA NCIS WOOD 6TH ADDITION)
APPLICANT: RICEARD 7ya ASSOCIATES
LOCATION: SE 1/4 SECTION 15
EXISTING ZONING: R-4 (MULTIPLE)
ELVVE OF PUBLIC HEARING: AUGUST 25, 1985
DATE OF Asa R`&; AUGUST 10, 19S5
REPORTED BY: PLANNING & ENGINEERING
SfPPL 1 AasTf nq _ _
u o ..~asr.. applications have Men , I . ~ _ t.' ' esst71 ? tb
R-4 (Multiple)
acres to '-°°L. (single Family) and n
- Preliminary Plat for th2 St. Prancis Wood 6th Addition. This plat
consists ot 34 Lots south of Duckwood Drive and cast of other St.
Francis Townhouse _
Wood `o~E Additions. ti i proposal is consistent t A t
This
tha ? "S
a i. ' r Land Use Phan t_ . a desiqnates 1 area D-11 (0-6
EXISTING 9
_ n.
variety OE trees o topography. ` hr e`
J
d t r areas
add , ec ° C. 3 t alf v to the _ tea? ("1 n is extremely su0nd for uppec bracket housinq. The undeveloped agricultural land
to
Lhe south is designated U-1 (03 Units/Acre) in the January 1987
Land Use Plan,.
in 1994. there was r. town ~ fr3j t r[ i jrl
constructed. Access to these units are thcough a private drive and
with ate.;.e,_a-_`` . p)ic~,
s on Lexington and ;_1,,C. ;.wt? oC;Y® _`i';t DL.. .ek'Jo:)d iiC nes,
to
be a proposed public street; i_}lat. .Gk': od Trail on north side i'J
Duckwood ofFset properly according to not City ordinances.
new plat should require
lining `e street, o 3 proper
offset distance.
ca proposed street will be looped from :.11-E k,t t.)o: Drive to s.a ea F. n o'r?.
Avenue and , i have ) cu .l-d;.:a :,R c.~ connecting to it on the west. T r e
~
-will i
cul-de-sacs ~ ad„=~a center islands for plantings >.aL=rra_'Lar La U'r1o,,.e
at Chatterton Ponds. 11,11 lo? meet R-1 tiI cl 7 ti _ m' + s di and vary An
size Erom 14,000 SF to 45,000 SF
GRAD r t")~ JT
4 .s - .a. s'#F.;3~,~.f.b_~1~ g~ pff L~d„ ~'y
._~~~h~ ~ .~e~I~''} !'2 AZLIz,§2 The wading plan for the p1`_ o' t -_i..,j
addresses mostly street . .z. g. A limiced amount .
c
. adi, a is proposed u6,_.+ .st'..° try, the S-. _ _ , t;. o, ay adjacent to
_i _ oi.. n,_h Lots , 1. . _ 13 ? o L..
t}~~ )sed' ` t r "
requirements.
Urainage an this site in proposed to Le conveyed ej Kher directly c;':
indirectly into Pond 3P-65. t aSal..t jP"? F in d< s Y ponding area
,
t i.` City of uz r.k `.1 e'mr ii en [ Yu m Spwer Guida. The specitic
in sign or the storm Power .-GR and drainage requirements will N`:
necessary serve the site. An incomplete erosion ....:t._d sediment control t t submitted
7 s.
~ plat " application. an item of
y a t . ~ 1 sediment oI entering Pond JP-65 which in turn drain._~~
Wt o Hurley pctk S8 e i, if 1 ° erosion and sediment control f measures
needed _
required to be maintained during rough grading and the home building
phasnUIVII&TIES: Water and sanitary sewer to this si to hav- been
` 7
I i n a by the developer for z. natal. Y_ 's_ a. o under EPA) t_'
improvement contract. The public improvement mu.nt b ordered in by
Council action prior to final plat approval,
C
locations. a
across from Falcon Way. The proposed access Location is subject to
t~ requirements _ as outlined
in the c't F_ C, a, . l;' C! 1,-1 t. t. er rU ,1
Countv Highway Department. The second access location is proposed
at Abbey Way just south of Duckwood Drive. Additional riqht-of-way
is needed s.a before 7 connection can .he Ydem he existing Abbey
Way access to D ,.k c, s , l o o a D r i v e is required . to be moved west to line up
with
Trail . _ the north side of r' i`. t. I'd rJ i_ od Drive. The acqui-
sition of the ad.;3tiC3,1a5 rigs:: a1__wa;T needed to _ej_ve this develop-
ment shall become the responsibility of the development,
ASSE,SSIMEwrs: The proposed parcel was previously assessed for starm,
trunk, sewer trunk, sanitary sewer n
The parcel is subject to the posuible additional assesoments which
will, ~ ~ i.~.'~:~`r-
,..?.~'z. under pr_.ti.;met number 917.
of installation of the requircd public utilities to serve the sit~-_,
_7 i, tia t. _ S a i , [ _ 1. i a S i b .i- ' y re,-,_1
z. t r"'
in addition No the a-..,seS` _.1t::''ia w. i; . will id....i
i~r t ; ~.t. a. the
r ~ - f fuasibility report, the evelou sri t nad is s po Y Or the v- , ]
lateral benefit at the rate uf $i2.47 per front foot for thE! 370
feet of frontago along Duckwood Drive. The existing trontage an,-,
the proposed r<. equate ate to a total proposed a3sess. ez < I. of
$4,613.9.l
using A final assessment amount will be determined
rates in eftect
at the time of -i .,_t.:i plat approval and naL Pi. dimensions and 1s,.
CONDITTONS: ST FRANCIS WOODS (MI ADDITION
E A l l . ,S Snd s_t. pla4 f 1.nq condMons shall he adhered W.
The a F g
s ~3. cul-de-sac islands ;k~.: 3 i . he I'; 3 '1t..-'ii.:iZ1.C !rev vt t: h n,
A
sf _r ~lc__~i Et~U t_y t4 m°~mf ,1 it t f rC'(('. 11 ~T )1~
1hp i ; - _ f - i...;r a
a
Vn , ' Pm' t- necessary
100PIton Avenue access appmahn Falcon Any,
,j Th in d ev a 1 c)pma ;I L njj 11 1, also toomply with tho most recent
by Council 5 The ,e development ~ .:.f2L;_ it~ responsible tar 3i acquirinq ! ? _
6__ v a - _
, to v
t
S.B7AN3_J,1.~~RD CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL
A. Assessments
m his development shall accept its additional - e_ n,~
~ Ovations , - as defined ~ ,.T. S e s. 1
in ♦ ~ 1.
s report
-f accordance z Y - ' final plat d->_mc s_.: ,a.s e c,
t11 a t "
B. Easements and Riqhts-of-Wav
.1. This development shall dedicate 10' drainaqe and utility
easements centered over aW commo" lot lines and adjacent
to private prOperty or public riqhL-M-way.
2. This development shall dedicate, provido, or financially
__11ara ci ,t. F e if...s proportionate
cS e of T_ i x e ? C.: C.. u , 7..._. _
' costs of additional d_ ai ? `Y o_ ds - C7 d utility
anci
f
t ?e a xdo _es o this
outside of dedicated public right-of-way as necessary to,
service Mis development.
This _a _ d p ra? shall dedicate al! ptdniin right-of-way
and temporary slope easements for ultimate development of
.,s .i. r`._Y;,.. roadways as r+ r „ i~ c?. c! by tl.i x yi p pi. iatfv
, . This development
s h a l l dedicate adequate drainage and
pnnjing easements to incorrarnLe Lhe required high water
elevation necessitated by City storm water storace volume
requirements.
C. Plans --d "pecificatUns
! ' l " t ° streets -,--o this deveinpa"ant shall be deshjncd by a
rogistered professional Pnqineer in accordance with City
approved s t a f f prior to final plat approval.
. detailed r ~ sediment-,
ar5t t - :c'S erosion, control, plan must be prepared in a c - r 1 _ w._ current.
City approved standards and by staff prior to final plat.
approval,
This v vo1 r m._ t. shall insure that all l temporary a...aC;. ..:Ai:
public streets shall have a -J'n
ac anc e with My engineering standards.
9 p! an sha 1 •
r , be submi tted on the
proposed -°1 u±nq plain .t'a ppr W by _af A. or to the
f i.t_i1 1) 1 a_ ppi r o v a ti.
_ Tz1 f,,..<air.S ,-is to t_ t,; ,1-.
included iii` the =~t' J6 ( oi ide E ,..o€ ,(,¢~#_.._t ~ ?
until on year aftcr the date of installation,
?
NW
STANDARD CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL
PAGE ,,g
c'o("L"tr Led with in
acccrdance with City design stawnrlsD. Public lmnrovement,;
y
i
City
contract, h project -
i
hy Council action Puler Lo tinal plau approval.
E, permit-,
4
.L.m ..1 e~-~ e:F a_.:Se1~j.. .5.a:~.Ll be responsible for the acquisition
of a
cAb_.. _C g:JLatoL ' agency permits in t[;_' tz-..e 1ra'c'
requircd by the affected agency.
F. Parks Dedication,
requirements as recommended b,,,, "'?ark-c; ar"d
nRecroaLicn " Commission and approved Council action.
G 0thte r.
ni,
..e. m .i'_ - t c'. Ii J'.:S C..l a7 i. ,_7! i. -t. i. a (i J CJ p l 1 it s c I;. G 1. , , tl . ~ .z ~ i,: E•
Council acoian.
Advisory Planning Commission City Cti -eatciJ..
Approved.
Revised:
r` Y
' GARY N. EVENSO , R,L. .
DA I V'-"I TA uuUNTY c
SURVEY DEPARTMENT
7300 WEST 147th STREET, SUITE #300 APPLE VALLEY, MILAN: 'r1A i 4
r
August 12, 1987
City of Eagan
3830 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, N 55122
Att: Dale Runkle, City Planner
RE: ST. FRANCIS WOOD 6TH ADDITION
Dear Mr. Runkle:
The Dakota County Plat Commission met on August 10, 1987, to
consider the preliminary plat of T. FRANCIS WOOD 6TH ADDITION.
Said plat is adjacent to CO. RD. 43 and is, therefore, subject
to the Dakota County Contiguous Plat Ordinance.
This is a replat of Outlot D of ST FRANCIS `e4'00D P' AE)I) IT `T N
Outlot D contains restricted access along its enti gthh WAtip
Co. Rd. #43. This preliminary plat now requesi.s an s, to C`o.
Rd. #43 opposite Falcon Way to the east. Letter (fa April 10,
1987, from Thomas Colbert explains the property oc-vrtership
situation and why this new access point is being proposed.
Present access to the Condominium development is loca'-~d
approximately 300 feet north. For the new access point tc
allowed, the County Board will have to release the dedic
restrictive access. The Plat Commission's " comme vit-.i_on is arl ~
to release the restriction without the p a 300
north being closed and restriction of acc, dec.
County.
The Plat Commission concurs with Mr. Colbert's opinion that this
new access will be a much more desirable location from an
engineering and safety situation. The location of Falcon Way
meets the spacing standards for a possible future t:~affic light
location. The present Condominium development could -1y zoute
its access to this new road as shown on the preliminc a y !ans.
If the developer could obtain the necessary agreements with the
Condominium owners, the Plat Commission will recommend approval
of this plat. County staff feels this will create a much safer
intersection. Present situation with offset intersections will
provide difficulty for left turns. With the greater volume of
traffic predicted for Lexington Avenue, the problem will worsen
with time. This is an excellent opportunity to the
situation.
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER
If the developer is successful with the change in access, the
latest plan showing an island at this entrance will not be
recommended. The lanes should align opposite the lanes in Falcon
Way to eliminate conflicts with opposing left turning traffic.
The plan should be resubmitted with the changes. No additional
right of way is required. Present plats show 60 feet dedicated.
No work shall commence in the County right of way until a permit
is obtained from the County Highway Department.
Sincerely yours,
Gary H. Stevenson
Dakota County Surveyor
Plat Commission Secretary
cc: Probe Engineering
Dave Everds, County Highway Engineer
Tom Swanson, Permits Technician
Tom Colbert, Public Works Director
Richard Land Associates
GHS:vf
~ a t cj(~
n~ ' III
-w.. ~
i i
tR ~ a
Pdt
i I
i
p 1
CPO ROA
'yin°~ l _ I F2 + ~
A
I
f a gg t HILL
3 GOt
E#~
SOUR:
Tti; by "r.7 d
~'i
51 ,
13 1' 56
_J I---~- DRIVE
t DUCKWOOD
TR
All 1 rr 3
` 5T' f'HA.Wi:.t },~lh'k~°.~ ? 1 $ T ' .✓an
/1 p* ~y Y a } p I
s oar ~ ® I :j i_- - T1 ! ~ tk: I W 4
Sj}. 'may, ~ 6GAlE '-104'
< LEGAL DESCRIPTION
OUTIOT D, AT. FAA-8 W000 81N ADDITf ,
W OTA COUNTY, YeaNE9Oin
ORAVNA A 4
ILtT YM` 1'. EY H ~ ~ SJ J ~ 1 ~ a')`J uw iqt nYwrt
f ~
~ Y . ~ u ( t ~ 3 ~ 1 , r ~ ~ \ \ n s. sa„gi..«,ar c«..u« e,.
Q
\ t\' ~i I
14
x ( a ` ~ aY ~M cNAmsts Ptm
24 26
a
AT. T-T-Tl
1 -y-SITE comsutil.0 ENOfNee RS PRELIMINARY PLAT r Ev »En SO
1 «..u u„err r
«...u0 sr
tyia KRNNtR5 -4 111M0 fU,MtYORS 110(',",„',"n r:~a'✓:F
ENGIINCE p ST. FRANCIS WOOD 6TH ADDITION RICHAR_ AND ASSOCIATES 1
a+
COMP INC. m~ Ya.53 -10H 664M FPWY.
e ♦sx EAQAM YNNE80TA
t NMD tK.. $TRt$l, ,tAM3Yill[, YIMNLtDTA 33337 PN i)T°3PW
Eirc. !
i
pp ,
atx3l
i~t~EZs$ _ ~t1N3RY
d
~ k kk
a E W _ S Cl
Ot
i ~
m t
s.
4 E_. i 1 R G a ~ I
'~Snr Ml1.YY ,o R~ 1 ~ o .
01
u
s F
-pDUCKWC300
jj r I
4//
{ 1 ~%1 s x tt
17
~,y <
~EAL_4N WAY
1 :T[ !
:TT
~C!$k t°"sa[saxa ,aan< PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN vaEr ca: ~al [i
xa .
wafax LAND No l uau,roas RICH D A850CIATEE
-1 vINIE1
ST. FRANCIS WOOD 6TH ADDITION
_ eau sae cnwr.
+ UOMPh..., INC. AP a /f E40Tf fe{20
l' u,v'I~ naaav EAQAM V..NEfflYA w
D04 W7 914• ,MM. MMNfYill[. MlNNC[OYA 43337 M {ii•i®0a .ev s oxa
TO- ADVTgnRV PAPVR Z
D 1DC . C [d, ION
0.,
whie 11 enter into
questin ° - =dimes t An
Obvis A sF
1 bi-- Urn f°. _ h1 u w.u ~v
-d
: 'h _
y, that a scenic er 1i
t to.
J'vur.-LIIiy, i.ia w LILIV CIVIat-Vpl-La(;e erosivj,.L control o uc Strickl. ca u~
V/b1s
-
'f g.
.a.,3 T: Ty a A M~:°..~~~~R~fi_<.UT, P.iis.~...,1..MAR S. £.~.L aS_~,if u,~LAR.I1'°„86,°A,.A-
(iFLt%as_F .k''g~K 1: ~..yIyUx a?.qc~, .x£<41k~`~~ lRFS.. _8_f yaF*"3:\'
APPLICANT: <RL.~'l.U ...y1e ~~S.~.a CM
SE s rd ~ SECTION ~'Y m. el
LOCATION: n.~1 NE ~a F
W _t;IOM -2_
EXISTING aG..MIG: ^®3 & R-4 WITHIN UE BLx's„uiHA, K PARX P.M
DATE O Y PUBLIC 32ARING: AUGUST 25, 19S7
M 02 REPORT: Ak_ s- 12, 1907
R,.202. k +aD BY: _ > e..YasNI<eG
Sir.: a.§ n _..~a!'10 74 A ).t., - .,..t." has eQ tt d requesting ..s.
e i L rtlz - 1 x, . li a,t'!._ thy 31a,w sE ,d a sa ~.i i. Addition. This plat
ningle family lots on 27.2 acres designated R-III anA
1 r
"v ii.,1_aa ..._,i _,~.wt. se~> tea.M Planned D__ menc> An Amendment W1
p7
k r - ~~x~i avi t_ .'a -~7 c.. <vr il,.. be a. a,e ...a ELI , ~'_o',ve,-a,}~i p no at,t ont nt. tk'}
T987 Kand Use Plan will bo roquired since that pln~,,
0 3
Y 5.t
J b F s F'§"S K ?A _ F', Currently the site is e , a i.; h-. j „r A,, pp land
usos are: _ to a.__e ilsE-, B! a s,.!,d Park to the south, h' pe~ dia Stoney Point Addition also Wins ropt s 'od b F x oL b
r Corp. to tV.
't
or h and ;.a
c 1 zoned and ,a_f e'1 by i ;,z.. a F ~p.,. o t he we st that i .A 1
be oubmitted for Prot L Wainary Plat review by the City in the near
Glen '
. M .J. ..~...CF Ta_.e3~ _ 3
n .'S,~~. A Ki3rj )a
Future
_1 a c du. ous hardwood trans n_ are ,j the e r . _ Y , st
o
portivul of we vita. - - and MUST? PMAS Will
,
eliminate most 1. - of these e,a_ .e; - hut ~ .iw. 3-s the only ,:2sib_I.
location to access this Parcel CIL !arid. Another large mass
j} ra
. r.;... t oaks c_;3 the tt., > property 0, the south a wil.,, not M
distnMed
with immature trse and grassland. The site is buttered from E
a _an form and will not he as visually impacted by the Erceway as
One might '.CL,
ri h z WCOP Og MM.q Ft.._~ it single accoss matching the one in
` to
i _ a . .7 Point 4a nor= and Er ow t) -e ?i`> Hills Mad will these lots and a connoction to Lna west haa been providod. This w=,,
_
cooperatively yra.... s Sienna Corp. Those two plats t_~ will share
;1
l _ r 500'.
1 ; z s ~ . t. z ; of Street , is k , . Longer
than 500'T he T `t will he built -t in two pKasus w c . ra phase aiomj
the proposed Alackhawk Man 3rd Addition. Three or four buildars ace
bantb _,'Zt::: a, ( sot, e , sue , by ,1°in_a set of covenants. The Arii _
may range From $135,000-$250,000, ? tp2- Bice. ,:.g in value as you movc'
.:1 0U 1. S m
_
The 7 in
: lots cz,,4 x€ size from 12,500 S`a~ to 19,000 ~s't_ averaging 1c ,-,_7fi.~
ST. Al _ R- "o t t o n '1. r a ,_a a k - n in a i n g_ iE . and no i i._. .e { I
lo?_ variances ha1 been r -ut__ 2s a Tr grins donsity K the plat
1.93 t .fin u_
U"` DI 0a DF F ACE EROSION p a TR'. L: Extensive grading is r2qUired in
suitable house pads. Strcot grades meet City requirements and have
two 3r was maximum 8: it l "sm Careful , .,fi r _ be require-1
i_.1 ?I< r.L iCA 17= _F ``L L i s l t
lots arO Pansposed Lo hand Le the runoff ,
no -7 lua . .
a" °
~lo line d . b., s ti l a
Storm
~ L. =.1 13, ~L -1hc. o,,!,_- T . a e m A,a o _ _ n ti l." F ~ r 1:' S C,`J _
.x 1_aa°? Mus or. y l..cst ,rte y of 50o 3C. _a. ii. 7on. _tA. the
proposed k wk Glen S 3rd Addition. The C cT o_, e::". .ot S ,`4 C"i
Stract F is rpouir2d to provide the naeded capacity for the runoff
.
l~ 1
L.-.s_ _t--.:- by he s J . . „ :..',T l > `ij ' ;i , (3-en
r
1 x .1
+ _c. _ This will enable °...ht. storm . sewer discharge fr..i'' the aa. _ u-
` b carried k 2L,ackhawk Lake as ose - into the lake raMeL:
Chan "°oo
An '
~~n ,ate-_ .vim .,-e erosion and selimem cano-roil plan was -
b...' rva_ i].._ Service spc.cit_ caLl L ..,s Niala An ann. r ?ti`u[ a C A. e_.. _
a r <._Ya t~~b',~~ a.^°e before t.. Ate gra i,e t_7 c._ r._x r.. a from Ki,~
S A2 Should be ix._r_
_o1 into t v, basin rather than . __P.. 131aC.i._z.C..,z
Lake directly. Staff hiqhly recommends thin this basin be retained
durinq both rough orMiml am] the homo building t .a TIv...a z ;k Sanitary sewer s.s z° e 1 e for this area is provided
33" diameter trunn sanitary sower which Hows thrAnLosh the proposed,
davelopmonA. The existing Lrun% sanitary sewer is adequately sizer-i
F- a d r- s
i-. o- 1,--i L
r,, iit.Ft~ ~ j. vls s r a 1:1 Y _b o _1 _ bf to I :fie X,.. ?;"_w T he
,
portions of the i `''t i s h, : a 'u L n i _ ':r trunk into public right-of--way.
s~rr e t_C _ crime L a end w 1 1 a1 ow f or ' ^ s a'ri ch a
affecLed by the existing trunk sanitary sewer easements across thsol
the f . _'I. e i. s, , J ll- Q y of h::1 v'_ n: f these oxi _ ! , +g : -L t : i. s vacated.
Care wi L y to bw exercised jurinq the °
the existing trunk sanitary sewer : . z ,
-1 'r 1 _ _ , h7 L 1 re n ~kk an _ ,.,7 w a _ c . S -
G les will n
to meet thc
Water service will be provided . by lateral _ water mains _.onCl_ _ ,d to
i3
the 6" diameter trunk main in Mackhawk Hills Road. The development
"t- is Y o _ _ os Z i':T of properly a r. within th~
a-F._ 1t.
. J Ie,utm Water pressure in excess of _i f. be prx_._'3 nt ut.
Gy 1t Lowest lots ,car aR ~ ouaes on Clean A _s must r._
/ACCESS/ C1 r sr
addition this . E.' provided. This will be Llin connection :(..:2°
..~_1 The
. c,1 ;.~-1- 1 ~'i. f 1 Mad. future or' t c__ t _ . _ through _ r ..r . M
, 3rd Addition the , west planned to provide -
second connection to Blaukhawk Hills Road. The existing topography,
e , T:
s-c
HA Ls Row connection to Y&Lrni Drive -Caj onto Yahoo Dnodle Rn3d.
Street is , _ A,~~ ~ ~ C`. with 1 0_ 1al t'_ 1 _ yid 3 s,'" ~ . ° i`' t" : 11. iaddition.
011-00--sac Streets shonn with 50
n,.__ _ u.._ _ L On in a ,..di;?z_ with C.1 tck,3 _Ci ia_s 3 _...a
C~ ,ne
~
- _ , . storm s b , t.__ : : 3 Y f _ 1 i ,cw..j° an A water main _ 3 t . . . . and T
p.._ k del ,t Von along , a_i _ti ,3w4 Lake. The Cove __.n is ni. c,._
J.
. o ,Jha. C; his c: ve ,.Ca e,.: t in conjunction with the Proposed Cv l ,-i~~
dedication Fnr proposed Street F occurs.
. i C± n..; y permits shall . _ i - v t " i° d in _ timely . i„ ni l er.
All - _ qL..1 o_.v
s i.. C 1 by t : _ _ . t._ . ' e 1 c y4
ez.sS~3 I<axt. 7 .1 _ a r. joraynisod _ - f 0-r
n tary sewer trunk uI ii' e4Z e trunk. The fol. lowilly
PROJ I DESCRIPTION USEAGE QTY RATE AMT
0 f f 15.061/cf
4`A Wator S- 27.2 ac. 1,250/ac, 00
TOTAL PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS m .w s w ~ 97,101
A! L final assa.,. T:ant ohl1 g1;_ s_OI;.;'_ A s_ L be c_ .d t livea JPt on r';a ,
,P] ( at J_a 1 i.,~r5i and La__ 01 _f t i} of i"--3 L p
t>rJvC. ,
i
1
2. V3rtapuos Q]' [.I 1!f'- P! rCt 'Lr as 1d p lip excess (if 400
shall Via approved,
Mnytrwrlion roncinq Phil] bu installud DO inks 26, 27,
-
29, ind .307 - V q t lie qr,"i i an,
5_ v. i,._n t _ha, accept t
on 1 W;; as aT .ova in the ha If rF_,_a_._ _n o co an , WE,.,
the final plat 3imensions aid the rahos in WEnct aL the
of i1~e final plat approval,
s I G o V-, ~ c--n- t h _a 1 C 7 e i. i a to 1 J d _ a , a q C-' a r j. W L t _
_ '1 i property Q_ public _x (.-r, i7 x
- - -
4 ~
-
e - and in accord,111ce with Citv
'
;e.. r':T s,- r._ a~ tti1 ia c 1j s _b. =~~a and approved <J _ z}=~ r
Knal plat approval.
9. Mis development- be responsible for pyoviding adequate
easements for We storm sewer 0012t into SlackhRwk Lako.
JO. This development shall ~ be responsible -for We acquisition of
all regulatory agency i-'3"n1i_,., in a K:'A o frame ? eNuts _ o~ by ,_h..
a
r
r _
e
~ ,
~.r - i're s .v RC _ s. on cr!G a s s a.. on a ,i~W ` -?y j S.;v__d by CiO
M ncil.
shall 13- This Anvelopment the
r
E 3rd A di t ..._a
14- T s -
3ina n_in a &i_.__1t7' inn basin designed in Accordance w L'.
, Soil - Sarvice -
lN,
o-
~r
Z,.
K 1
J- 7,
WArER
TREATMENT -
FAGLdTY
PUt. t~
SURY
1 J R, F' 4 as t, t5 ~r
i ~
f I
q 1 n r
t ~ + ~ f ~f 1"' ` ~~'u
pv P6
7 7-2 (F J j {
SLA
f
, 1
' 1 X f / P ~ _tt ~ `i
--~lr V4~ 5l~; q
~ e~
x .
ww x
® ®f PLANNED I LOP ENT
EAGAN MINNESOTA
i
a 1977 PUO CONTRACT UPDATEO FOR 1-35E RIGHT OF WAY
j R®z NOVEMBER 1985
/ j ®6
f J Eng7n~7 RW.
®'"I L
7 1
i ; I•
;23.4 ac.;' R-1 . Single Family 12 u/ac) .
7 R-4 7 8-3 1 4`l R-2 . Mixed Residential (3-6 u/ac)
I l R-3 Mixed Residential (6r 12 u/ac)
1 711.2 ac.
I R-4 Multi-family ® (12+ u/ac )
i c
!t R-1 N.B. Neighborhood Business
Lilacknawk Lake C G.B. General Business
7 1 °°^7 C.S.C. 40mmunit Sh0
slacknawk Pa7k71 8 a,o s. C/'B/ i ; Y PPin9 Center
i«' 5 is ti p Park
i i 15.4 ac I / ;4R-3 0
r r y fJ fr sac c NORTH
! 10. 6 'a _ _r' r ff ® i
rN R-3 i 0 400 9001.1. 1r4 mile
i i
4.4 ac 21 ac
4.4 ac
Onarwood Dr.
~'i :1 r' 8 R r t''
LAND USI I
DEDICATED PARK ND
DEVELOPED AREAS
_ 7~I Biack twk Mille •ad r
- legend
Location Map
qj)y 't 4 Kf arr..i R/W tin.
Y kl' ~ L4 ~ ' }a
r 7 , :u ~r a Y!~ a j, s ( ~'t c vroc...s e.n,. r a...r
c3 a ~c .oo ti
,s
Ci
tl!
I ..G w w.in
l „ a t r s z'~ ~~t 55122
It
{{ji ~ i -i+$ i~ i ~ +cooo ~ t {){}y "~°c rr ~ ~ ~ a.` ~ ~ y~C•~, ,^tt ~ :r c..ro.r tin. _ _
t l ~'i V', III 7 ~ i 11 ~ M1 `21 ~ +oo
y 11t a r, , Legal Description
22-
14
dz
54 2
a t. Site Data
r Total Lot Area -
27.2 Acres
S'---..t and RtW Area
5.2 Acres
i_
_-F T, Area
-77
32.4 Acres
t
Lots 64 Lots
2s \ 24_t ~s Available
%
Sr but -12,500 S.F.
o m
.t Lot 39.000 S.F.
Average Lot Size
18,500 s. F.
`k< ° .R y Existing Zoning aiackhawk P.t1.D.tR-11t $ R-IV
CitY Land Use Plan----_. R t d R-11
41
gF Proposad Use
E R-1
Density `
Total Land -
88 t.98 Lots/Acre
~S 8 ake Less R/W _2.35 LotatACre
a
BIR '<haU R-
I-IT
1 .
cv
} I xis ~VA' nx ~ i ~ ~ •p~~. ~ j ~ti B x ~ I
ca ~
i t2 a ° ~ s iw i i a
v ! 4\\ ~ ~ r SS i ~ ; ?
l ~ a m i 9
% ~ a.~ y F I ~8 88i S
r
b
_ 2222 q 1
it ro «®g
- osio
a w sz
J wl I a
x
U
M.0-H 39C eEeisae;uf a i
t t flk F z ~ ~hd( ~l, ° H~ Jib j / - .
11 r' .7 {II ~ ~ i~
/F I h
"I fr~,'
4r ~
'V dAlNJilit](Tt"vCIJ4. NA-IF NMIIT,'Iyly i'0
4{ 4 ~
r
~ r
Q 'a
Y
f
MEMORANDUM
TO: ADVISORY PARKS & RECREATION COMMISSION
FRO : KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS & RECREATION
DA : AUGUST 25, 1987
SUBJECT: COMMUNITY CENTER - OUTLINE OF PROGRAM COMPONENTS
The Community Center Study process has listed the desirability o~~~~.f
at least preliminarily, an outline of the program components fc>
ments which might be included in the Communi`,,- Center. f'«_'~ a
"first draft" of those program elements/( tents -e
will/must be a revisions/reductions, additiOLio Lnd a re_ _ .u 'c is
Gymnasium: Pool Racketball
Basketball Open swim Adult League
Volleyball Learn to swim L( ons P ;ram
Gymnastics Lap swi:11..s;-%ng I
Aerobics Swim c
Floor Hockey Swim C1~1)0 ass
Badminton Synchronized swim -?:12;3
Dance Swim/Diving meets
Open Gym activities Adaptive Swim programs
League Play
Shows/displays
_ 1 _
I.e-ague
y l
at.
e 'd® n. y l
Sc I 'call
v
8
S
y ,~'f ~ e ,yam
E - Private & Public
"vent
s
'id Practices"
Art d 'r Pi
ncr
a
® I - it
5 m
T
COQ
* O
Play Area
3- w
rc a
an be en
p -,r) hp.x , ' }Cap rpflni
to
stead 'o
this ee , the 1
x l~. y a u~ t- t- Ci',y C -W-1
r ~ s®
_ 3
AA, D 'OR OF
As
tive T :l in s
-hed i ;tE 27th,
g
o a k a
of thu lilts, ' Led m
6o} Lon su ay. i
1 east would he qu(
v dJ,
any wri ;
new 1nf _ - 1,
shoul.f
n-t to L
nt t ho: a 1 t i r a L
.
4W-
August 27, 1987
Mr. Kenneth Vraa
Park and Recreation Director
Eagan City Hall
3830 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, Minnesota 55122
Dear Mr. Vraa;
Decision Resources, Ltd., is pleased to present this survey
research proposal to the City of Eagan. I am certain that DRL
can provide you with the information you seek in both a cost-
effective and timely manner.
W1J-*UGC OF - RESE ARCH:
This Recreational Attitudes Survey would assess both the
attitudes and needs of Eagan residents. The survey instrument
would contain a number of distinct sections. P°r4. c-f the
questionnaire would be a "recreational lifestyle" a__=_
series of questions on the recreational pursuits caf Ec; tr,
residents. In the past, other citic,- have found the citi;n
profiles which c.',,i be established extrrrnr,ly useful for long r allge
planning pur.:o - Another section of the questionnaire o,nu d
examine recreational program and park us<3ge. This would include
a program and facilities evaluation to pinpoint both strengths
and weaknesses in the current mix of offerings. A third section
would explicitly assess attitudes toward a Com^-unity R,ncrrntion
Center. In other suburbs, this part of the qu tioni,air~- has
contained questions about support and opposition, willinr< o
pay for construction and operation, and faci1 Desired
inclusion. Normally, the questionnaire concluo - with a >,zF
of demographic queries to measure any differences among group- of
citizens for example, between new-comers and long-t;ime
residents, "sections of the city, age, or income.
The precise topics to be included in the survey would b
specified by the City; the discussion above is simply meant to
indicate the general format of similar residential irveys.
Several cities have included questions about of:hr-r i< -`acing
the community, such as development policies, bu~i(jf- ~ :,F t4ji hies,
and city services. As I mentioned in our discussion:, :itizens
are very willing to discuss local issues and, unlike other types
of studies, we have found the greatest challenge is expeditiously
moving through the questionnaire, rather than maintaining the
interest of the respondent!
3128 lean Court Minneapolis, Minnesota 55416 (612) 920-0337
a
FJWO-4-
Decision sion Resources, Ltd., proposes to conduct a telephone survey
of 400 randomly selected households in Eagan. A random sample of
this size would provide results projectable to the entire city
within 5.0 percent in 95 out of 100 case,. The-- iestionq,--Ai.re
would be composed of both c lo- d-eori~7,d q~ r i c,- i ch
respondents choose from a set of _i.; « r? fpryI c„:c : ,1 giat r
in which top-of-the--mind replies ar(- h ,t,r ~ ast•t_s'1 r_t hT
conducted by DRL trained and supervi,,,--d p-rsonnel. t)e company
is proud of the fact that the average length of employment of the
DRL phoners is five years; most of the phoners who would be
involved in this project have been with the Company for seven
years. The employment stability of our phoners is unique in e
industry, and provides our clients with the most sophisti,
and proven corps of interviewers available in the region.
The computer analysis will be conducted thi-n~_i h the PRL remote
job entry facility to the University of Min a-,nta CYF;sR system,
insuring both access to the most current statistical analysis
programs and confidentiality of the data set.
The City of Eagan will be presented with two bound copies of the
final report, highlighting all the major findings of the } .
DRL will also speak to any major diffrr~,n-,s and similaritic,
with the other recently completed =_ut=t--~;" n quality of life-
studies undertaken for Shoreview, R,;, i'le, Bloomin=-;tcr~,
Plymouth, and Inver Grove Heights. The fi,.-1 report is comp,
of a written commentary on the findings and their implications
and all computer generated cross-tabulations. In addition, „tie
findings will be presented by me at meetings with the staff, the
Park and Recreation Commission, and/or the City Council.
Let me speak to one fear that generally arises in r1ral2- itf
any market and survey research firm. Too many ~zr~ry r
users report being left with volumes of under ipherab ` c- Ja t i ~ , ; r s
to make relevant for policy prescriptions on their own. If you
were to talk with any of our current and former city clients, you
would find that this is definitely not the case with DRL. The
principals of the company are willing to spend as much time as
necessary with staff, commissions, and city officials to develop
and refine the policy implications of th-, analysis. In
we have presented findings at working s- -ion-, f
discussion meetings, and given form l;ic~~,. tc t:1~G
public. The extent of DRL involvement in an'' • t _r , pc~, tainirg
to the survey or its implications is jointly d~t=rmined pith the
client.
5 - F' OF ' '_!-P .SECT
The components of the research project and our ~-t i..M rd time line
are outlined below:
1. One or two planning meetings with the Commission, staff, and
other interested parties to establish the topics for the
questionnaire. This activity is to be completed within five days
of the initiation of the contract.
2. Structuring of questions and final approval of f > rvey
instrument. These activities to be completed withia r ti:s of
the initiation of the contract.
3. Pre-testing and, if needed, approval of resulting revisions.
This activity to be completed within twelve days of the initia-
tion of the contract.
4. Telephone interviewing occurs. The phoning is to be
completed within sixteen days of the contract initiation.
. Computer analysis and preparation of the written report. All
analytical analysis and commentary will be available within
twenty-eight days of contract initiation.
6. Meeting with staff to explain and discuss survey results. In
the past this meeting has been formatted as a work sessic)n, but
the structure is left up to the client. This prpl urinary
discussion can be arranged at a time convenient for ilh'u-' City
staff after completion and delivery of the written analyris.
7. Meeting with the Commission and/or City Council and staff to
explain and discuss the results of the survey. This final
discussion and strategy session can be arranged at a time
convenient for the Commission and/or Council members and staff
after delivery and circulation of the written report.
8. On-going telephone conversations and meetings to discuss the
survey findings and their implications..
RESEARCH L
Dr. William D. Morris, President of Decision ces, Ctd.,
will act as Principal Investigator for the study and will work
closely with the staff in developing a r liable SU;-,e,t=y iT! trument
and deducing policy relevant conclus->_a .
Ms. Diane Traxler, Vice President of Decision Resources, Std.,
will serve as Project Director and will oversee all phases of the
research.
F"W79JECT COSTS
The overall cost of a 400 randomly seler_tf-
survey of sixty question units length wc~~l~3 h-, '~6, , ,-h
additional question unit beyond sixty would co,t $60.00. The
sample size of 400 will permit the results to be broken down into
subgroups of interest, such as location of residence, longevity,
occupation, age, and so forth. Prior surv ys for cities have run
between sixty and one-hundred fo-ty nue +ion units, with no
difficulty in disconnections bec, ~ -'ionnaire length.
Company policy requires fifty percent of the total cost prior to
the commencement of any interviewing, the remainder would be due
at the time of the delivery of the bound written reports.
1 hope this proposal sufficiently covers th- r ref th
Eagan Recreational Attitudes Study. if you questions, please feel free to contact me.
Find-relv,
4
William D. Morri-;, Ph.D.
President
WDM:bbk
encls.
P At+-, 4-n For The City 0"
a
l
I
R
4 r
MEMO TO: ADVISORY PARKS RECREATION C TSSION
FROM: KEN RAA, DIREC_ O F S
DATE: SEPTEMBER 1, 19,'
RE: POSS BLr -I ND ACQUISITION
I 'c
Will eth ~r= T n ns three si nalp f nmi.
Ad ` t t 3. These is
Lee a ct to
,,l in
Williams Br+ tiers may b >6 v r
price, tt e c a lest' _
renreqpni-.: (r the
> a nrk
a C' r 1 no
fully o aban;itted,
-U-on
KVljs
l
, 1987
f in, end i 3
1 "3` s 7 ro
The pP t
Y the c1 d c° c p ~ f
reflected in the bu('
,7 ``'4-itl i 1
ind
r k e
contr art
t
w
c-h park 4 '
n,p S, alll V*
w d to -Lion p but q tim 0 out t
-100,00U, A
1. B
n t., do thi
lsc _
L nd ULI
e °
= is l" It
t! C
4e
,m
e 3 n`
5 r "n Lake Parr requires some specific site plans before
gin.
ally rt of the bor t Reimbur t of 1
Lue suff iuient fund to l :ate rema ark aui.a -L/Itz:u .LSI
-i rs a ea
1
s , 1
are near comb', r s iv
c 1 prof A been
e C% to be au, U ail f' Uia~ a a u
be , A
1. w l y
Z
-ed on t the
was ove' 1 f" s
t 'tion of th, 1
the impact
,E toad. F'ur
Lelds out of p"
4. Lake WO] Y 1987<
5. d, wlands - Lnstall big of d88Y o
to folk to th(
. =1o n
9.
7. °.ff Sha e l e,
8 _ /Blue - field - )verlc in 188 c _
9. ti - v 1e, '
10. m 1king an i
'°p done LA
11. - 1988 for turf imr
qr r_
1 S® m- Tennis 1 ,-,.a11
Gtion show g Sloe' 1 1
e eom -1 1 1 of °87.
13. - Additional dia -A4ng 't - m ~s
14. L - > 1 of the a
3 D t oontraetea Lt ror i-.1®
15» - Or_-inal work intended to grad
® L ium amou , n now h( >f
'.owing,,, kr*
to work
16s 1
17. Pond
18 > tt Station - n 187-188. rg t
19. _ sr City
)11 cation i
Please -
t a`.ng s par'
ndividue '
ted o:
n fl 8-I -
z r cl _ c p°E a~ .
"ul t- ww y C i .a uMt _ l.._ 1
fiel.ds and fa ~ s the Ci';y- will require in t?
' 1 1
W-1, C c :arks -it ion
KVljs
i
c
EST, WORK &
1984 1985 1986 1987 TOTAL BUDGET BAL. CONTRACTS 87
GENERAL 550 26,183 29,484 64,130 19,572 139,369 139,`' 0 139,369
GOAT HILL 551 4,164 250,355 192,891 6,578 453,988 505,000 (51,''12) 17,000 (34,012)
RAH 552 102,620 147,895 165,114 7,032 422,661 407,000 15,c-1 0 15,661
NORTHVIEW 553 125,153 21,846 65,151 9,545 221,695 281,000 (59,305) 142,971 83,666
TRAPP FARM 554 8,803 206,015 203,078 18,018 435,914 390,000 45,914 36,000 81,914
TRAILS 555 0 80,000 (80,000) 0 (80,000)
BLUE CROSS 556 1,806 126,210 9,810 137,826 289,000 (151,174) 186,483 35,309
BURR OAK 557 8,151 257 8,408 100,000 (91,592) 0 (91,592)
CARLSON LAKE 558 47 47 246,000 (45,953) 0 (245,953)
CARNELIAN 559 61 8,717 8,578 77,000 (68,422) 104,399 35,977
QUARRY 560 3,563 114 92,723 2,240 98,646 219,000 (120,354) 121,389 1,035
CEDAR PC 561 12 269 281 30,000 (29,7'o)) 0 (29,719)
COUNTR" 562 1,515 8,665 36 10,216 21,000 ( 0 (10,784)
CINNAMC,.. 563 10,296 32 2,058 1,, 13,588 10,000 3, 1 0 3,588
O'LEARY 564 123 210 21,067 628,371 270,000 (241,6:9) 114,236 (127,393)
EVERGREEN 565 10,681 8,460 1, "1 21,072 34,000 (12,928) 0 (12,928)
FISH LAK 566 46,380 1,511 8, 56,551 72,000 (15,449) 15,000 (449)
HIGHVI T,. 567 8,300 3,029 11,329
75,000 (6 3 671) 0 (63,671)
HEINE PC,',-.-, 568 18 18 50,000 0~f2) 0 (49,982)
LAKESIDE 569 304 , 7,693 50,000 g3)07) 42,073 (234)
LEXINGTO 570 6'561 1,971 g
l- ~C...,~. ~ ,532 30,000 211P, ~3) (21,468)
571 7, 106 92,387 1., 113,918 120,000 5,6 (433)
C CH..S 572 , 10,104 19,054 10,000 0 9,054
PEF'IODT 573 8, 0 401 20,720 30,071 10,000 2 1 J 20,071
PILOT KN 574 123 40,583 2,11: 45,342 153,000 0 (107,658)
RIDS 575 45,215 16,996 2,(i: 79,72 151,000 -73) 22,407 (48,866)
PTSrr 576 6,,- '30 2,358 8,8; 10,')00
(1' 1) 0 (1,121)
S K 577 4,789 4698 5330 64,300 3,572 (7,334)
11 ; 578 3' D ! 0 (91964)
57 , 0 ; ; rl ~0 0
2,330 12,9 1,~ 0
17 0
502 1,908 t 4 0 72)
A I-, j Z 583 4,115,853 17,L,_ 2, 1 . 12~)2 14,293 ( .5 •l, , t 584 239 6, o 0 f , 167,552
13,814
6, 41 ' 70 1 10
370,306 >4 1,615,655 149,340 , _ = y )0 (1,4`_, 1, - t~ , 8)
CONT 87 1 BUILDINGS TENNIS HOCKEY LI PLAY EQU LANDSCAPE IRRIGATION TAL
GENERAL
GOAT HILL 5,000 12,000 17,000
RAHN 0
NORTHVIEW 127,971 15,000 142,971
TRAPP FARM 36,000 36,000
TRAILS 0
BLUE CROSS 101,589 33,894 8,000 38,000 15,000 10,000 186,483
BURR OAK 0
CARLSON LAKE 0
CARNELIAN 44,369 32,E 5 1,085 4,000 12,000 10,000 104,399
QUARRY 70,e . 8,000 18,000 15,000 10,000 121,389
CEDAR POND 0
COUNTRY HOME 0
CINNAMON 0
O'LEARY 91,663 22,573 114,236
EVERGREEN 0
ISH LAKE 15,000 15,000
°~,i~PTZ4I EW 0
POND 0
`~KESIDE 31,539 534 5,000 42,073
LF-7INGTON O
-3WLAND 5,649 5,649
CHASE 0
?IODT 0
PILOT KNOB 0
_.IDGECLIFF 22,407
22,407
w• YTLLJ
" - =AKS 3,572 3,572
'"rT STATION 0
EN 0
0
0
,ILL 1', 2,689 14, 3
LAKE 167,552 1E7,
54 4 - 1,089
21j, 93,492 2 , 36,000 5? '~~,J 27, ~.3 1,063,657
'i..
r:,
i,
g
9 ~
F r
i _~y,.
~ ,e~
ay f
~ 5..,
~ `
~
~ ~ ~,_.p
e y
k ~2 4
k ` w
~.w,
_ ,
w. ~
~.~R
~i -e_
~ ~ ~ ~
„e,.
~ ,
` 4
! ~ If
~ ~
~
f
t
f _ ~ ~ i
~ x ~
e ,
~
r
re, ;
m~
r j ~ k
m~
-
a
, f e
z t~ I
'-'b..
; i ~
_ rW
y '
- ",X
, _ . i
a
a ~
tl ~
. ~ 1
-
ff'o-
:7
1 , fl
RAHN:
-
3 >oftball fields; 1 fe C
ih 11 with restroom, utiliti
One baseball field > ad to
a
,
L 2
1' _`ieldll ' 3
r ~-l trail, I dcourt ~r
an aarkin lot.
m • -
cS Cr F.'4 m
C STION
Z.?laU-
1 _llfield/Overlay Soccer;
hardcourt.
cur t ,
_>c d
{ ) Opp ,
ity l:
1 _r mink, Trails, field - Overlay
-y r 9katin6, :w Pl j 9 t
z r" ird.
ld/Soceer Overlay, Trails,
Open 'c"-y, Tr-'_l, Lake access, Play Equipment, i 1~ ur°t.
C 2 air, c curt,
1 1 ;ld, He e Opp - _ , Bu'_"
fie" free One Soccer»alli ;
- t, Trail } - ~
- . C eld, Soccer f ielt_ Y, f'1 w
v ----..nined
r
Lvot determined
)87
1'
r ball t or ~ 1 And 1 < can
Df ball - 3 And
o~
® 2
~r -By 3
Q _
m
1
3
ay - 7
AS OF
_l or
E .1
1 - 3
8
~8
7
- 1"4ields, 1 S c eld
1
1 Foo
1 of` y field
f'bball 'fields
1 Tr,
1 11
- --Ids
- 3 1l_ ' '3
va aaaacztTlC?r7 Ma.aii vuver ~aa a a \ 191 d _ As
1 (191)
1 1
yr
4
1e-in a
1
Woodhaven Beryl 1 Ballri a `Deerwoo (196)
1 Mirni oc 1
an Gold 11
1
1
BlL a' 1 1
Winks
Quarry 1 Ballfield
1 Soccer
Hockey P~
r 1 >p
1 )ccer , .
's.
1 >p
1 Soccer
Lexington 1 ,
1
5 Softball
-1 " tic 2 Soccer
o-'- Chase 1 Mini Soccp
Hill 1 j
1 v
fill 1 Ballf ield
1 Soccer
Sov4-1- Oaks 1 MI-i Soccer
R1 "fable
".°.ff 1 ",field
"oce
1 -
Not
Pilot Knob 1 Hockey Rink
Well Site 1 Hockey Rink
t
4 _ 2
e3
9
>c a 7 + 10 Mini Soccer f
3
TO: 'A PARKS RP
~0 7EDGES, CITY f - T
VRAA, DIRECTOR 0 P
19, 1987
ARCHI ' '
c
,h-ltb
'his ti _ f
y y a irly Larch or April
in Oct
T1 t firs o" -i , 9
t(- , E e Inns and cut,
stru s %1 Farm, G, Lt Hill P~
tended to inc- design work for lian Par'
he zs e) , a? a . s 11 shelter a a "ni
u a c
a 'hefo"
1. The a_ _te( _ firm has done an l-iry job
have S at ben th i in on time, and Witt' or der
2. 2 -_:1 of =r
f , C`
8, l
r
4. The i' ing c the ; o j at he been superio
during ',le construction I° o
The final product, the bu.ldi,n itself, et W
function, and a ti
sa the architectural r off, a
6m "-Lew" d--- r
.als,x sta,
® Conti 3tion wi' f'
,e®
m' firm i^
thin
f( -r i'.tecAtural s - ,
negotiated price i-gs within reason.
t t
Ls a
--s f
" a:LldinL,, P v 1 c ~'U4 t b_
r
11
turn
the ow 1 U~ 1w u1
Vlbls
t
AD: h, REOR;, y
KE-- Dl_.. Or. C
18, 19E
ATHLETIC FIE w
> basic ohjec _ves@
The fir= ° was to dt-termin,a Yr e tabli,-
invol ,thlet ° >n in th(
a
ro c pl
That an
>a s and agencies w:
Ir. Martin, and tb
of the community,
use li
o
_,000 _ a 1 er tl-
A m C
c e
_t t-
3e{ late th( u
L for everyone isure t
~t a t ire rE,.. i.._
c ' ngr to cc f _ ;r facil'
m
c
_.a
i
s
"
Eagan Athletic Association
Field Needs
Page 2
®t 11 would -ovide the Ci')r with data e ,
F sr c s of the C 13 yowl
~r L
F ®reati ° C
and types of p-c s It red, cr then I n
motion" plan.
lo field d faeil` allot ,
r n
do : in ac
fa(*] _ a~ 1^t
anC Dt t 3ed, o' e f,
versa. These are the types c to
Ily. c
a few of kie Assoc
In conclusion, it is ra- ' °7ed by bni-h inn
additional facilities -eeded fo youth ~
cilities can not take II ce on a
x quired for planning; A
on could/should b at
l , it t .hat t Cation s
g -h-
it wi"
T the c - city and high schoc r.
VIbls
cc: H , '"ity C_.__,ic. " Members
'®l, > iation
Dorotl° - Peterson, P sor
i