Loading...
3030 Poppler LaneCITY OF EAGAN Remarks Addition Popplers HOifl@St,e3d Lot 3 Blk ? Parcel Owner Street 3030 Poppler Lane State Eagan,r?v 55121 ?-??:? : Improvement Date Amount Annual Years Payment Receipt Date STREET SURF. STREET RESTOR. GRADING 5AN SEW TRUNK 1 p• SEWER LATERAL WATERMAIN YVATER LATERAL 20 WATER AREA STORM SEW TRK STORM SEW LAT CURB & GUTTER SIDEWALK STREET LIGHT WATER CONN. 26 BUILOING PER. sac 200.00 3399 4-7-71 K 4 4 LARRY S. SEVERSON MICHAEL G. DOUGHERTY* MICHAEL E. MOLENDA$ LOAEN M.SOLFEST*$ CHARLES C. HALBERG SHARON K. HILLS DAVID L. KNUTSON ROBERT B. BAUER CHRISTOPHER A. GROVE April 27, 2001 Mr_ Llarry Poppler ? 3034PopglerLane) /agan, Minnesota 55121 SUITE 600 7300 WEST 147TH STREET APPLE VALLEY, M[NNBSOTA 55124-7580 (952) 432-3136 TELEFAX NUMBER (952) 432-3780 Re: Eagan Public Improvement Project No. 636R Dear Mr. Poppler: TERRENCE A. MERRiTT$ MARY B. RANNELLS SUSAN L. MORROW RICHARD G. STULZ MATTHEW R. ZAHN OFCOUNSEL IAMES F. SHELDON Tom Hedges asked that I provide a response to your letter of January 15, 2001. Some of your questions have been responded to in earlier communications; however, let me attempt to delineate each question raised in your last letter with a specific answer. 1. Who determines which neighborhood receives a fair way to determine "improved value" (from the project) and what neighborhood does not? The City Councii determines the improved value resulting from a project. On any given project in any given neighborhood, the Council determines what information it needs to determine a fair method of assessment. Any method chosen by the Council to spread the cost of the project is assumed to be fair so long as it approximates the benefit received by the properties and the method of calculating the assessments is uniformly applied to similarly situated properties. 2. If the process is biased and subjective, (by doing some professional appraisals and others not) then is everyone receiving an equal protection under the law? The City's assessment process is not biased or subjective. Each project is a stand-alone endeavor and may bear little or no resemblance to other projects. In large part, this is due to the "special benefiY" that each project provides to particular parcels, and the circumstances that dictate the need for the project. As noted in my earlier correspondence, equal protection issues would rarely be associated with multiple projects in multiple neighborhoods. Only to the extent that similarly situated properties were treated differently in the same assessable project, could there be an argument for the denial of equal protection. Whether the Council uses appraisals in the assistance of detennining benefit in certain instances has no relationship to other projects. There is no mandate on when a council must.use appraisals. While I believe the above answers each of the questions posed in your letter of January 15, 2001, there are other issues in your letter, which I will briefly address. SEVERSON, SHELDONg DOUGHERTY & MOLENDA, P.A. A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1C INDIVII]UAI. ATTORNEYS A1,S0 UCENSED IN IOWA AND WISCONSIN #QUAI.IFlED NEUTRAL UNDER RULE 114 OPTHE MINNESOTA GENF,RAL RULES OF PRACTICE "CERI'IF1F.D REAL PROVERTY LAW SVECIAL[ST, MSBA k 4 First, the City Attorney can only advise the Council on a reassessment if the original assessment is invalid for any reason. In my review of the materials associated with Project 636I, I fail to find any evidence to suggest thatthe assessment is invalid. Next, as to the purview of the City Council, I am unaware of a situation as you referenced, wherein the Council has undertaken reassessments, particularly in a situation to correct a"so- called mistake" Sve years after the event. Of significant concern in this area is that to the extent the City issued general bonds to pay for the costs of the improvement, the Council could not forgive the special assessments without the consent of fhe bondholders. Finally, in an answer to your rhetorical question, the ends rarely, if ever, justify the means. But your question suggests that the City failed to properly notify and give due consideration to the issues of the existing properties on Poppler Lane. However, the facts indicate that the exact opposite is true. Notice was given to the property owners with respect to the assessments which included the right of the property owners to contest the levy. The notice provided to you from the City set forth the statutory requirements that you as a resident needed to take in order to contest the assessment. In fact, prior to adoption, the issue oF benefit was directed to the public works committee for consideration of the benefit issue following a discussion with the residents on Poppler Lane. The public works committee recommended a reduction in the proposed assessment which reduced amount was then accepted and adopted by the City Council. Each property owner who may be subject to an assessment is given the same statutory notice of their right to contest the assessment. Each property owner has the same ability to redress any wrong they believe is associated with the assessment through the statutorily created process. The City did not create the very short timeline for your decision. This timeframe was created by the State legislature in an attempt to balance the interest of the property owner against the interest of the residents in the City, the City finances and any potential bondholders. Would someone be denied equal protection under the law if you were granted more time and ability to contest the assessments than someone else? This is not cavalier, but rather an expression of the City's need to undertake the steps dictated by the State statute in levying the assessment. Again, while. you may not agree with the answer, the policy reviewed by Mr. Malkerson is unlike the situation involved in the upgrade of Poppler Lane: Poppier Lane was not a City driven project, but was rather an upgrade as the result of a development. The assessment levied against your property, and the method chosen by the City to establish the assessment was reasonable in light of the circumstances. If you would like any further explanation of the matters contained herein, I would be happy to speak with you. I can be reached at (952) 432-3136. Cordially, G. cc: v'I'om Ae-dges, C6ity Administrator Tom Colbert, Public Works Director . ` EAGAN TOWNSHtP BUILDING PERMIT owoa= -- .?.?+.....-w?.....<..-.:?...... .esv'-... Address (Preseni) ...xL..Y....jea Buildez ..-.............^-.-`-:.....-..._ ...................-----.... Addrass -°°°„c!......-°.,........................ .....................°-....__----------- DESCRIPTION N° 2161 Eagan Townahip Town Hall Dale _I/."_?t!?.-.6.7---............. Stozies To Be Used For Fron! Deplh Heighi Esl. Cos! Permit Fee Remarks ' .C? •-- _O ?_ -?41 ,-G LOCATION This permit daes not au2horiza !he use of slreels, roads. alleys or sidewalks nor doas it give the owner or his ageni the righ! !o cseafe anq siluation which is a nuisanee or which psesenls a hazerd !o the heal2h, safefq, conveaienee and geaeral weltare fo anpone in the eommunifp. THIS PERMIT MUST BE ygEP ON TFIE PREMISE WHILE THE WORK IS IN PROG SS. .. . ..?.:} .:....._...... ...f.??` ..._ poa This Ss So eerfify, lhai...d.?..... .----------.! .... ... ........has Permission So ereef a. . the above deacribed premise suLjec provisioas of the Suilding Ordiaanee tor EagaK Townshi adopied April 11, 1955. ................... ...... ?............<........._??.......--- ........................ . ........'-- - . ............_--'- . . - ............. Par Chairma of Tnwn Soard Suitding ?nspecior a • G'. _V E- 331 - 33 - o ? M N? J 0 / ? ?' ??? TO: HONORABLE MAYORAND C1TY FROM: CTTY ADNIINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: DECEMBER 29,1999 SUBJECT: CORRESPONDENCE FROM LARRY POPPLER The City Administrator has received several letters of correspondence from Larry Poppler raising questions about the City's assessment policy. The City Administrator prepazed a response to each of Mr. Poppler's letters. Enclosed on page Z is a copy of the most recent letter from Larry Poppler requesting additional clarification pert aining to questions he had previously raised regazding the special assessment policy. The City Administrator wiil contact Mr. Poppler to arrange a meeting with him in an effort to provide additional clarification to ]ris questions. City Administrator ? ,. 12-29-99 Thomas Hedges City Administrator City of Eagan Dear W. Hedges, I received your letter dated 12-23-99, however, I'm coafiised. Please clarify the following: 1) Yow letter states: `°1'here are many different methods of calculating and levying special assessments recognized and permitted by state law. It is perfectly perarissible to levy a different assessment for similar types of public improvements in differem neighborhoods within the community." However: On 24-99 the Pub6c Works Director put together a memo regarding "Assessment Policy Issues." It is a Sve page signed report put together for a council workshop done on 2-9-99. It contains the following : "While the law gives great discretion to the legislative authority of city councils in calculating assessment obligadons, it narrowly defines the process and sets some very specific criteria that must be met. There are two major yardsticks: 1) all like pieces of property must be assessed in a similar manner; and, 2) the assessment cannot exceed the value benefit accrued by the improvement." Also, prior to this quote it reads "The city was challenged in court with a small number of various formal assessment appeals. The court rulings indicated that modificarions were needed to the existing formal policy to provide continuity and the equity of process required by law." Since these two statements seem to run contrary to each other, wlvch one is conect and follows the law? Please provide a compiete copy of the governing State Statute. 2) As requested before please provide a list of those neighborhoods that were treated as ours. That is: when one side of the street is fully developed with city services and street maintained for over 20 years that the property on the developed side pays the same assessmem (per lot equivalent) as the opposite side that was undeveloped. If the answer is none then identify that fact. Sincerely, Larry Poppler cc: Council Members ` 12-29-99 Thomas Hedges City Administrator City of Eagan Deaz Mr. Hedges, I received your letter dated 12-23-99, however, I'm confused. Please clarify the following: 1) Your letter states: "There are many different methods of calculating and levying special assessments recognized and permitted by state law. It is perfectly permissible to levy a different assessment for similar types of public improvements in different neighborhoods within the community." However: On 2-4-99 the Public Works Director put together a memo regarding "Assessment Policy Issues." It is a five page signed report put together for a council workshop done on 2-9-99. It contains the following : "While the law gives great discretion to the legislative authority of city councils in calculating assessment obligations, it nanowly defines the process and sets some very specific criteria that must be met. There aze two major yardsticks: 1) all like pieces of property must be assessed in a similaz manner; and, 2) the assessment cannot exceed the value benefit accrued by the improvement." Also, prior to this quote it reads "The city was challenged in couR with a small number of various formal assessment appeals. T'he court rulings indicated that modifications were needed to the existing formal policy to provide continuity and the equity of process required by law." Since these two statements seem to run contrary to each other, which one is conect and follows the law? Please provide a complete copy of the governing State Statute. 2) As requested before please provide a list of those neighborhoods that were treated as ours. That is: when one side of the street is futly developed with city services and street maintained for over 20 years that the property on the developed side pays the same assessment (per lot equivalent) as the opposite side that was undeveloped. If the answer is none then identify that fact. Si itpler cc: Council Members . . Distribution: From: Tom Colbert \?/ Tom Hedges, City Administrator ?\ ? ? Russ Matthys, City Engineer ? Arnie Erhart, Street/Equipment Maintenance ? Wayne Schwanz, Utility Maintenance ? Judy Jenkins, Engineering Secretary ? X Review 8a Comment For Your Information ? For 3ignature File Proceed Appropriately ? Retu d _4,7 _ Distribute To: Date: / Z-7i'7 ? Tom Stnxve, P.W. Coordinator ? Ken Vraa, Parks & Recreation ? Kent Thorkelson, Police ? Gene VanOverbeke, Finance ? Mike Ridley, Senior Planner S `a-c*? • ??c^.?-?P ? ??.ti. ?C?-v 't"?L?C.L`Y1-2?1.?/ S? _ . ^ , / GFOAMS/Dismbuuon am ?6 l city oF eagen PATRICIA E. AWADA Mayor PAULBAKKEN BEA BIOMQUIST PEGGY A. CARLSON SANDRA A. MASIN Council Members December 27, 1999 THOMAS HEDGES City Administrotor Mr. Larry Poppler 3030 Po ler Lane nN ovEasEKE J. c pp l c e Eagan, MN. 55121 Re: Project 636R, Poppler Lane Dear Mr. Poppler, Most recently on Dec. 23, I sent you a letter responding to an inquiry of Oct. 12 regarding your special assessment. This letter will be in response to another letter dated Dec. 10. As I indicated in my eazlier response, an assessment is not based on whether a property owner is a developer or not. All lots of the same zoning must be assessed equally for similar improvements. However, we do require developers to waive their rights to object and appeal the final assessment far the public improvements that are requirements of the subdivision approval process. All other properiy owners retain their full rights to object and appeal any portion of related special assessments. You had exercised such a right when you (and others) objected to the assessment when it was presented at the Final Assessment Puhlic Hearing held on Nov. 19, 1996. As a result of that objection, the issue was referred to the City's Public Works Committee (PWC). They met with you on Dec. 3, 1996 to specifically review your assessments and objections in detail. The PWC reviewed your individual issues and subsequently recommended an adjushnent to your proposed assessments that came within $48 of your requested amount. On Dec. 16, 1996, the City Council reviewed the background information and the PWC's recommendation and subsequently adopted the revised assessment roll. You (but not the developer) still retained the right to further appeal this reduced assessment to the District Court, if you so chose. With no fm-ther action being taken by you within the prescribed time frame, it was assumed that the final agreed upon amount adopted on Dec. 16, 1996 was acceptable. MUNIqPAL CEN7ER 3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD EAGAN. MINNESOTA 55122-1897 PHONE: (651) 681 -4600 FAX: (651) 681-4612 TDD'. (651) 454-8535 THE LONE OAK TREE THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNIN Equal OpporTUnity Employer www.cltyofeagan.com MAINTENANCE FACILRV 3501 COACHMAN POIM EAGAN, MINNESOTA 55122 PHONE: (651) 681-4300 FfJ(:(651)681-4360 TDD: (651) 454-8535 In your letter of Dea 10, you offered a suggestion to revise your assessment to that which was levied for the Country Home Heights Addition due to its proximity and sunilarity. As I mentioned earlier, every neighborhood and their related improvements are unique. The City does not have a set standazd chazge for various street nnprovements. Every one is different. On Sept. 7, 1999, the City Council again reviewed your concerns and subsequently passed a motion rejecting your request for reconsideration of an assessment reduction. Based on that action, I am not able to provide any other relief to you. However, if you have any further questions, please call me at anytime. Sincerely, Thomas L. Hedges City Administrator TLH/tac Cc: Tom Colbert, Director of Public Works GTACAetters/Poppler ADMINISTRATION X Tom Colbert, Public Works Holly Duffy, Adminisuation Kent Therkelsen, Police Jamie Verbrugge, Administration Craig 7ensen, Fire Mazia Karels, Administrative Secretary Doug & Mike; Comm. Dev. Joanna Foote, Recycling/Comm. Coordinator Gene VanOverbeke, Finance Kristi Peterson, IT Ken Vraa, Pazks & Recreation Mike Reazdon, Cable Jim Sheldon, City Attorney Po ?0%3? ?? t ? c. C_G . r?.?.?a • tZho ? . ? Thomas Hedges City Administrator City of Eagan Deaz Mr. Hedges, 12-10-99 As per our conversation on 12-9-99, I am asking for an objective outlook on a very subjective view of how Project 636R was assessed. Lets look at the facts: The standard used to assess our street is invalid. Your correspondence is troe and runs contrary to the standazd that the 3 council members used in their decision. You state that we (myself, Peter Poppler and the Ekblads) aze not developers. Yet the 3 councii members voted as if we were. Also, you provided no information (when requested ) to show any precedent for their incorrect assumption (of treating all property owners in one neighborhood as developers). Consequently, there is a problem. Suggestion: One answer is to place our neighborhood in the same category as Country Home Heights as they aze adjacent and very sicnilar. Country Home Heights was assessed $4,000 per lot equivalent ours at $8,500 (however without interest for 5 years). How about using the $4,000 base and calculatittg a current interest assumption for the 3 years for our neighborhood7 That figure then could be paid within a 45 day period. Enclosed is a history of street reconstruction assessments put together by the city. The chart shows that ours is way out of line. It is over eight times higher than the lowest and over twice that of the next highest. My suggestion still puts tlris on the higher end but still in line with a comparable neighborhood ie: Country Home Heights. I am anxious to heaz of your response. Si el , o er cc: Council Members i , Date: 12-10-99 Timeline: Fall 1999 regazding a reconsideration of Project 636R From: Larry Poppler Sept. 70'-The city council voted 3 to 2 denying any reconsideration for the_street storm sewer assessment Project 636R. The three council members voted that way because the Mayor stated that I was a developer. Council member Carlson voted that she did not want to change a decision of a prior council and set a precedent. Sept. 91"-I requested the city to prove that I was a developer a(ong with the adjacent neighbors (the Ekblads and Pete Poppler). It was also requested, "When one side of a street is already platted (with city services for over 30 years with the street maintained for over 20 years) that the property owners of the original addition are assessed the same as the current developed plat?." Oct. 12-The city administrator responded that myself, the Ekblads and Pete Poppler were not developers. He also provided information that the council did approve special reconsideration of an assessment done by a prior council ( on another project approved the same year as Project 636R). Oct. 18'h - I requested again to provide a list of those neighborhoods that were treated with the same assumption as ours. Nov. 22°"-Received a voice message from the city administrator that he is tuming my request over to he Pubtic Works Director and would recommend a meeting. Nov.22'4 - I wrote a letter confirming his message. Dec. 9m-I discussed with the ciry administrator the fact that my request for that information was still not received. Communicated with him that denial of information or delays could be in violation of the Data Practices Act. I briefly communicated my suggestion on this issue. He recommended that I send him a letter on my suggestions. cc: Council Members 1 - j . • ? v a.? Stteet Reconstruedon Assessment FLstorv Si 1AD SION 3T?A$ ASSESSET) AS$,,IRSSED - (Pre-existing (No pro-exist. Curb) Curb) 1. Cedaz Grove 3,4.3,6 & 9 1993 $1,500 $2,000 2. Wildemess Rtm 1,2,3 8c 4 1994 $1,828 ae 3:-' C9arUzove7.8.10& I1 1994 $1,3(X) .. na `- -= 4. BlaekhawkRd. 1995 $1,500 $3,500 5. Oelund Timberline Add. 1996 $2,225 $3,225 _ 6. Poppler Laae 1996 ne $8,545 7. Blackhawk Fiills Add 1996 ns $3115 $. Mellard Park 3r° Add. 1996 $2,549 . na g. MallardPark,Wooflgate2md 1997 $1,736 na 10. Oak Chase 1,2,3,4 & 5 1998 $1,907 na 11. Oak Poad Add. 1998 na $1.000 12. McTCa Add. 1998 na $2,500 13. Valley View Plateau 1999 na $2,400 14. Counhy Home Heighta 1999 na $4,000 L? I,V 411?dtVoFaagan PATRICIA E. AWADA Moyor PAULBAKKEN December 23 1999 BEA BLOMQUIST > PEGGYA, CARLSON SANDRA A. MASIN Mr. Larry Poppler Councif Members 3030 Poppler Lane THOMAS HEDGES Eagan, 11IN. 55121 Ciry ndministrotor . E. J. VAN OVERBEKE Ciiy Clerk Re: Project 636R, Poppler Lane Dear Mr. Poppler, I am in receipt of your letter dated Oct. 18, 1999 acknowledging my previous response to you on Oct. 12. In your most recent letter, you requested additional clarification on questions that were previously raised. I appreciate your specific itemization of those questions and am happy to respond. 1) Where doesiit state that when one side of a street that is already platted (with city services for over 30 years with street maintained by the city for over 20 years) that the property owners of the original addition are assessed the same as the current developed plat? (as if they were the fee owners and receive the beneft of the 2nd plat). Answer: Special Assessment legislation and court rulings have determined that several basic premises must be satisfied for special assessments. One of them is: "The assessment must be uniform upon the same class of property". In other words, all single family zoned property must be assessed at the same rate and method. That was the case in Project 636R, Poppler Lane street Improvements. That is why your property was assessed the same as the newly created single family lots of the Poppler 2"d Addition. 2) Has this been done before? Council Member Bakken stated "that he could not find any indication of malfeasance on the part of the previaus Council." Answer: Tlus has been the standard procedure of all of Eagan's assessable projects. 3) What is the underlining PURPOSE to allow misrepresented and misleading information to pass judgement on an important issue as this? My father was the only fee owner of the platted property of the 2"d Addition. The public was again mislead when Council Member Carlson stated she "she did not support changing the action of a previous Council and added that doing so would cause many problems." As we all know, Mr. Naorsyhokry was involved in a setNement agreement which did change the arrangements from the previous council. MUNICIPAL CENTER 3830 PILOi KNOB ROAD fAGAN. AMNNESOTA 35722-i897 PHONE: (651) 681-4600 FA1(:(651)681-4G12 TDD: (651) 45e1-8535 THE LONE OAK TREE THE SVMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWiH IN OUR COMMUN77Y Equol Opportunily Employer www.cityofeagan.com MAIN7ENANCE FACILItt 3501 COACHMAN POINT EAGAN. MINNESOTA 55122 PHONE . (651) 681 d300 FAX:(651)681-4360 TDD:(651)454-8535 t Iq Thomas Hedges City Administrator City of Eagan Dear Mr. Hedges, 12-10-99 As per our conversation on 12-9-99, I am asking for an objective outlook on a very subjective view of how Project 636R was assessed. Lets look at the facts: The standard used to assess our street is invalid. Your correspondence is true and runs contrary to the standazd that the 3 council members used in their decision. You state that we (myself, Peter Poppler and the Ekblads) aze not developers. Yet the 3 council members voted as if we were. Also, you provided no information (when requested ) to show any precedent for their incorrect assumption (of treating all property owners in one neighborhood as developers). Consequently, there is a problem. Suggestion: One answer is to place our neighborhood in the same category as Country Home Heights as they aze adjacent and very similaz. Country Home Heights was assessed $4,000 per lot equivalent ours at $8,500 (however without interest for 5 years). How about using the $4,000 base and calculating a cuttent interest assumption for the 3 yeazs for our neighborhood? That figure then couid be paid within a 45 day period. Enclosed is a history of street reconstruction assessments put together by the city. The chart shows that ours is way out of line. It is over eight times higher than the lowest and over twice that of the next highest. My suggestion still puts this on the higher end but still in line with a compuable neighborhood ie: Country Home Heights. I am anxious to heaz of your response. V Si el , o er cc: Council Members y J(j " P ? • / N ( ? s C ?f f ? ? rc,p C v ? ?C ? l ? ? INSIDE 3M PosGlt note7 A Jesse Verrtura ecUon fl??j h 'Ynaoh tln oqmb ftm, ot Olsh? Whet would you put In a MlnnUit?.9iat tha state Is Ilke at Ne tum of the mlllannlum? 5esuggeth a sentance or two oi e?llanaUon. You cen etnell your.ideas s4;? yqulsOplonosrprqs.oom or write W Tlme Cepsule Na;?. ?. . Paul Plonear PresB; 348 Cedar St., St P$ylI • ?_r ) U B U R B A N WEDNESDAY, DECEM9ER S. 1888 G . .. . 1 '. 4V . i ...:.. ...... ' '. . ' ' , i?+. lii ? {!vi ? qV"111' . I? DAKOTACOUNTY ---?-.,,-r-- -.. Court; P1?Opert!/ 'taXes _ ? miscalculated fior' sorrie $US1rie.S5 OWileTS ITIa ? ']°mv°d: w anoui 4.6 ` DETAILS }? " penent un valuaUpn fAany 001nniOrCi above that: Addtfionel , pu reimbursed for overtaxing ;-l rpnertias +n ft' s" o'°P°M °'"""' ; . ro?,? W? ?a,.at ?;??an ane ASHLEY H. 6RANT Assxwho raFSS ?' ? Dakota countleo u ? But the Cauatiei ; !?ro ?Od ?s ot yusln?s pmpertq owneT ce?s 1n taxed huareds ot taz• +, Ls than the espsrceM nwn , tab ' Hennepin and Dakota cnuntlea may get payers at ?1.8 perq4at, reimbureemeata Eor overpayment in propee- for the w6ola v*lua ??8 ' accmdlu6 ? . ty taiea from' 1987 to 1898 becduee ot clet• t(o0. fcal errors, t6e, Court o! Appeels taled. 'lawsuit. That'g Aa average ot i2.8pR;i081??i_ P??':;.ta7?Pa9?" ?u ycam were jained in the decision. At ' ovucLerges.. n. Ran da11 said the Hennep by Dakota aod $eo?pin coimties. Ultl 3-1 ude?cls?io? t , lp, ProP9?Y: tAxpaYen statewlde cou?d be , County, iaPdownera could recover mo atfetEed "tiy 'the court's acUon li 'slmilgr fmm the COuatY if theY could prove a aseesemgpi mistakes occurred iu other c ' el? ??,•.. ,° ', Retlted'4pd6e Daniel F. Foley, who eet p rnnomemial property owner was to PaY on , diseented. He dieagreed wi 5 parcent an the 8rat $100,000 of a . -? TAXEB cormrvueeor+BB piece ot P?'oP?9. wltLin a rnudy. 'Ph0 rate :: .. , ..' 'TAXES ?. ??Y. T? ?,??? ?t w, The appeals court upheld that owaera of commercial peoperty, • CONiINUEO RiOM SB ?ft and e°las&acti0u request is ligt the classiflcatioa as elt6qa, ezpected W follow for up W 600 non-pret(rred or preferred. Pre= t6e gi?ounda on whicp e Saapayer Dakota County praperty ownere ferred meaas the lower rate oR could cLalleoge paymenta who contend they were over- the Sret $100,000 M laad .•?i Becauae the deciston was aplit charged. said Weir ISwyer. KeiW If the cese ianY appealed. IY wlll) and because of the far-reachiag Simons of Hopkius. r¢Wiv W the dlstrlM courfs. "• ?' potential, Jay Stesseo, 6ead of the The Hennepin Count3' case hu The tax ayers who tiled tL4., ? Dakota Caunty attomey's civil been certified as a class action ?awauit sald thelr property t?s' deciaion, said he would recom- that likely invoLves about 1,800 statements do oot include the? mend an appeal and belleves Hen- ProP?Y owners, Simons sald. Sew informalion needed to determin@` nep?n County will, tao. eral otLer rnunfies are Ukely to i The first case involves Dakota fWlow suit, he said. whether the taz is correct becau6e County reaident Harold C6ristiaa Fietm¢p1n County officials char- the bill is a compilaNon of several? In April 1988, the Dakota CountY acterized the over•biltiug, when it fil,$library,dfiseal disnpar[ty ciaty, Dislnct Court ordered judgment of ??'i'ed, as an error in classifica- • S2,504 Eor C6riatian, including tion of the commercial-lndustria? °tbu Um ,. ?. _ .....;.a....o..t:..:?.`??+:;__ Tom From: TSIVAD@aol.com Sent: Thursday, December 09, 1999 7:42 PM To: daryle.lee.petersen@medtronic,com; george_kubik@fws.gov; Ken Vraa; Gregg Hove Cc: lee.markell@dnr.state.mn.us; Tom Hedges; terry.davis@stpaul.com Subject: TonighYs APC Workshop Meeting - Good News! Hello, Just thought 1'd let you know that the APC agreed with our proposal and a joint work group will be formed, subject to formal Council action (I believe). Lee was there as well. We'll brief the entire Commission on the 16th, but basically the joint work group will be composed of four members (2 from APrC {Carla Heil & Meg Tilley} and 2 from APC {TBD by our Commission}) and 2 citizens {Lee Markell and Larry ?(whose terms are expiring from APrC & APC respectively have volunteered)}. Thanks Lee! The first meeting of the joint work group is tentatively scheduled for tfie 2nd Tuesday of each month beginning with Tuesday, January 11th. ThaYs all for now. Congrats to our Study Group! Terry ? nJOJ ? 11-22-99 Thomas Hedges City Administrator City of Eagan Dear Mr. Hedges, I received your message on my answering machine that you gave my requested information to the Public Works Director. I also took note that you wiii get back to me for a face to face meeting when you have all your material together. I am looking fonvazd to that meeting. It is a real injustice to mislabel people as developers when they are in fact not (as you agreed in your letter dated 10-12-99). My pursuit of this issue is really about doing t6e right thing and equal protection. I am looking forward to hearing from you soon. ;;t ler All1V111V 1S.1 KA 11U1N . Tom Colbert, Public Works Holly Duffy, Administration Pat Geagan, Police Jamie Verbrugge, Administration Craig Jensen, Fire Maria Karels, Administrative Secretary Doug & Mike, Comm. Dev. Joanna Foote, RecyclinglComm. Coordinator Gene VanOverbeke, Finance Kristi Peterson, IT Ken Vraa, Pazks & Recreation Mike Reardon, Cable Jim Sheldon, City Attorney 1t 10? ? or,?c I ro ?? 4 I DATE: 10-14-99 TO: Michael Hatch, State Attorney General FROM: Larry Poppler, Eagan Resident Recently, I filed an eleven page report to the State Auditors' Office regazding the City of Eagan not being responsive to the law with regazd to special assessments. The law specifically requires by State Statute: ? Continuity and Equiry of Process. ? There must be a benefit to the property assessed. ? The property value increase must match the amount of the assessment. ? The properry owners must be given proper notice of any public hearings on their property. This all seems fair and democratic but this doesn't happen in Eagan. Eagan is a statutory city isn't it? Consider the following as evidence, the "Country Joe" lawsuit and others regazding undue discrimination as enclosed. When citizens need to hire unnecessary and costly legal defenses because of dysfunctional, abusive and subjective policies; then the city needs a higher govemment regulator(s) to enforce the required statute. Isn't that the case? To help you understand where I'm coming from please review the letters sent to the State Auditors Office dated 9-16-99 and a letter sent to the City of Eagan concerning my own individual situation. I have not received the requested response from the city. After tracking this for some time there seems to be a pattem of abuse to those with less influence, elderly and those less likely to object. In one instance 2]ong time resident property home owners were assessed almost $6,000 each when the city widened street and put in curbs. The project was only around 200 feet in length. The city wanted a better access to an ice arena adjacem to these homes. The improvement benefited the community as a whole for a better access to the azena. Again, it looks like the city violated the State Statute, the citizens can easily prove a lack of benefit for the $6,000 assessment. They must spent part of retirement funds to defend something so obvious. Some people just end up paying and that is what the city counts on. The city's process in many of these neighborhood assessments is not the intent of the State Statutes. In another instance, the Bolder Ridge neighborhood, the townhouse residents were not given individual notices that is also required under the statute. Recently, the League of Ciries hired an attorney to defend 3 council members who allegedly violated the Data Privacy Law. Also, met and discussed city business privately to allegedly violate the Open Meeting Law. The core problem evolves discrunination and not following the rules. I have provided enough evidence to show that the problem is chronic and ongoing. Are there any other cities that have this problem? How are you going to deal with this? How can ordinary citizens seek justice for discrunination and misrepresentation? I am azixious for your response. pws-J?il'l,? T0: Thomas Hedges 9-24-99 City Administrator, City of Eagan , FROM Larry Poppler RE: Request Information & Response 'Ihis leuer is in respam to the city council meatin8 held Sept. 7° 1999 wLich demied any recaosideratian for the assassmant of Project. 636R. 7Le main ream for the above rejgdian by 3 of the S council members was that the Mayor statad that I was a dmlopar Sor that project. Pleasa provido proof that it is a matter of fact and tLat I am the Eee oMmar of the 31ots tLat malce up the addipon that was platted. Also, Prove that the PropertY ovmars lacated m 1310 Lane Oak Rd and 3070 Poppler Dr. are also deWopers. I was simPlY 8ivm the respons?bilkY °f bei08 8sp°kesma° for eldedy parmts (without fioancisl ccasidera4on) to coordinate the plattiog of simply 2 additimal lots an an ocisting city mainamed atraot. If you camot wane up with the raquestad Proof then: Whera daes it. state dtat whm me aide of a street that is already plattsd (with citY services for ovar 30 years wifh street maiatained bY the city for ovar 20 yoars) that the PraPertY awnerc of the oripW additim are assassed the saroe as tlto curreot daveloped p1att7 (as if ihey ware the fea owners and raceive the bmeft of the 2i° platt) In May ofthis yesr, the cowwil resffirmad duR they would nat dhange the assessmart policy. However, if Y+w? aPPly the sane ctandard snrrcW1din8 the Plattin8 in Vallay Plateau Addition with Mr. Noorysholcry, than those surmundin8 PIapaKY owners Would bo essessed widi the eama moasure as ffie "develaper„, Mr. NooryshokrY• BY not acsessing the aurroundin8 ProPutY owneIS, the council did by that actim cLaoge the assessment Po1ic7• Ca°se9umtlY, m a rimi4ir ciwatiou we PaY the full aseessmaot wRhwrt citY P?cqMa°• Also. Crnqicil Membar Cadam added dut her rejectioa vate is not to set a precedmt of people ar neighborhoods comin8 back later. I can understand tlw coacem, howaver, tha perimeters of Valley Platesu Project tl663 were origiuslly establist?ed fmm ihe prior cwmcil. Yet, awst racmtly, as indicated 'm the sttacLed city minutes of August 3id 1999, a sadanot ageammt was made. In other wotds, a appears tlw the council did make sonne adJusnneuts. I also requed e copY °f dw agrawAt. for a laog time. I am Lastty, somaone cann?mted tbat this Project issue has bem 8m8 an nat tha me draggng this out. It would ba ia the best iNerest W cloar this msttar uP. My posit,im is that U?e city has no grounds and caonot Prove callin8 me and those mm4oned "davelopers". I am requesting that you a8aia lenew this siWatiar sud for a serious adjusnumt. 9-16-99 Judith Dutct?er State Auditor State of Minnesota Dear Ms. Dutcter, It has been over 2 months since my report to you asking for a serious investigation into the City of Eagan's AssessmeM Practices. That report provided several exhibits of how the city's practices are not with cortinuity az?d equity of process as required by State tnandates. After attending several council meetings to gather data and meeting with individuala, I have also discovered that the inconsistent Practices overHow iato the commm'cial areas es well. Please note that after a council meeting, a long time resideat explained how the city is Uying to condemn or somehow acquire a part of 6is smaU propert}+ so t6at a new devdopmeat would have another street access. He then went on to state that their origiaal street would be reconatructed in the process thus encumbering an assessment. He must hire an attomey to defend his rights. What is also unnervin$ is that it sPPear$ to be a very similer situation that happened at Valley View Plateau. Neighborhood (in 1992) when We O'Heam's were forced to pay legal fces to defend their rights not to be assessed. (attachod is a copy of that niliag as previously providad) Also, tlvs summer a council member who was malcing recommendaUons of scrapPing the old inconsistent system is being sent material which could be viewed as harassing or threatening in nature. Since it was done throug6 the mail the postal inepectors are working on this. Enclosed are news srticles oa this topic. Additionally, I am told that someone filed a complaint with the Minnesota League of Cides stating that 3 council members met privately to discuss city matters and poasibly violated the (State maz?dated) open mceting laws. If a local government body forces its citizens to continually seek legal help or court action to defend their rights then the situation is out of control. The sad result is that it preys on those that do not have the power or fwancial strength to defend thmselves. Many give up and pay the ill-gotten assessmerns. I believe that the controlling players do not want to recognize the problem and feel that the extra money is worth h even with its corniPted natus'e. I am anxioua to reviaw your findings end resulta. sinmeay yours, - Larcy Poppler Eagan cicizen 6514548906 cc: Mpls. Star & Tribune St Paul Fioneer Press ligh Yi i read th4 wrt opinlon Mne, iW ? ww.couRs tate.mn.us/ dnlons/sc/ ureM/ !971000. m1 . : :'..??.•:1'1:i' :.S .'',-.. L''?':.?"y:?(i•:<`n: •??'. ,. .,? V I - . 1, Iu waa aaawnps w pryVtl The, case datea' 6ack to 1992 when the city •:: erties t6a! Ls ?Ilg fge ryag ?ggjtjlMl?@I? ,,..'4,:authorized a,pubiic improvemenf,project t6at , reduced bY tl?e ?i included ttie'coostruction of a,water-main in ;. ,;The;Jobnso? AMYSNERMAN srAMwnrtm lbdd Road.The.Johnaoav challenged Weir i2,506 court' wWch m .. assessment.In Dakota• Countq Distrfct Court in : The clty then'1 '1884.:The.cau?t.ldwered the asscvsment to $1,550. wLich slded wl The dty o! E$gan spent 0,t5Y, ln? atComey'e'•r , because the amount outweighed the benefit, -the case to'W fees to fight refunding a i1,805 water?coonection ?>?accordinj to a recap In thq Supreme Court oplo-: 'sided with the' I ... chazge to residenta ..- : `" :. ion writtea by.Justice James Gilbert :. .. ,.:• '- But Giiberf i And the c1ty !osl.the flght Qet, 1 wheo the'i•; . in 1998,,t6e Johnsons dectded to conaect to' :lowercourfa,'s Mtnneaota Supreme Court ruled that Eagan ,.dty.water. Eagan c6arged the Johusona a stan- . wrongly charged Ronald and PatrlMa Johnson ?'. dard cronnection Oerge of $1,328.50 and a"later- • = - ? EAGAIV/ City argued fee T CONfINUED FpOM 1C was a special aa9essment "It has nee? troposea aLgmdminetoruy as a way to subvert the November 1994 rnurt order and is not just and equitable," Gilbert wrote. Eagan argued the fee was not dtscrimioatory because other proEr ertiea paid the tull cost of the impmvement, either through the initial assessment or the laterat benefit water fee. So the question is w6y would the city apend several tdousaQd over the feel "W6en the concilIatioa court ruled agaioat the connection chazge it raised a question for the citq of can we c6arge coonectiou c6arges; ' said Tom Hedges, Eagan's city admiNstretor. The City Council directed the city attorney, Tim Sheldoa, to take the, case to district court. Hedges said. As a msult of the case, Sheldon 6as suggested that Eagan write an ordinance eaplaining charges res(- dents must pay when they coonect to dly water, Hedges said. Amy Snerman covers Eegen, Inver Grova Heights and Rosemount. She can be e" ot;1;605: T6e dty charged israter fee`;only to those prop. iatd asaessmenta that were ? _ ,.. :hallenged if fu conciliation ed,t6e dty to teGiud the cost. "6e case,to t6e.districi court, Sagan. T?,:Tohnaom ihea toot ourt af Appeals,` which again p+eed wit6 tbe deeLvions o[ the ng that the lateral beneCit [ee ` AGAN t:ormrruEO aN 2C ? was legal ? , reacnad at I aeAenmaneaonsswesp.eom or at (651)228,2174. How to remh the sadh suburban team ¦ Don WyaK, senlar editor for suburban coverage, 228-5473, ' email: dwyattQpioneerpress.com ¦ JennHer Ehrl?ch, reporter covering Dakota County growth and - development, 228-2171, e-mail: Jehrlich@pioneerpress.com • ¦ Jennffer MoMenamin, reporter covering Dakota County public safery/govemment, 228-2172, e-mail: jmcmenaminftioneerpress.com ¦ Amy Sherman, reporter covering Eagan, Rosemount and Inver Grove Haights, 2282174, email: asherman@pioneerpress.com ¦ Gka Sitaramlah, reportBr cavering education, 228-2175, e-mail: gsitaramlah@qoneerpress.com ¦ Ka Vang, reporter covering Lakeville and Apple Valley, 228-2173, emall: kvang@ploneerpress.com ? • Mika Fermoyle, reporter covering prep sport$, 228-5512, email: mfermoyle@ploneerpfess.com ¦ Tlm Carer, news clerk, 228-2178, o-mall: tcarey@ploneerpress.com ¦ On the Web:.www.ploneerplan6tcom/neighborhoods ¦ AdveRlsing: 1(athl Johnson, 228-2104; Chrls Boys, 228-5350 ¦ Subscribar advceate: Sandra Hammer, 228-5192 r? ¦ SubscFlbar advacata: Sandro Nammco. «..-.--- FROM: THOMAS A COLBERT, DII2ECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS DATE: SEPTEMBER 2,1999 SUB.TECT: PROJECT 636R, POPPLER LANE REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ASSESSMENT LARRYPOPPLER Recently, Mr. Poppler has again approached the City Council requesting reconsideration of the special assessment that was levied for the above-referenced project against his property located at 3030 Poppler Lane. Before the Council agreed to give further consideration to this request, they directed staff to provide a summary and history of the issues for the edification of the new Councilmembers. This memo provides that information. BACKGROUND Project 636 provided for the reconstruction and upgrade of Poppler Lane located south af Lone Oak Road beriveen Pilot Knob and Eagandale Boulevard. It also included lateral storm sewer and miscellaneous sewer and water service improvements. This project originally began in 1992 when the City Council received a petition from the developer of the Poppler Homesteads No. 2 Addition (Lawrence G. Poppler). That original project was subsequently cancelled by Council action due to the inability of the developer to complete the final plat process due to legal description conflicts. In November, 1995, the City Council received a new petition to revise and update the previous public improvement and, on 7anuary 16, 1496, approved Project 636R (Revised) deferring the assessments for 5 years. In April, 1996, the City Council approved the final plat for Poppler Homestead No. 2 Addition. The developer waived objection to the proposed assessments associated with the public improvements for the 3 newly created lots located along the west side of Poppler Lane. Mc Larry Poppler's homestead (3030 Poppler Lane) was an existing parcel outside of the newly created subdivision and not covered by the waiver. The public improvement was subsequently constructed under Contract 96-05 during the 1996 construction season. ISSUE At the time of the final assessment hearing held on November 19, 1996, Mr. Larry Poppler, along with his brother Pete and father/developer Lawrence G. Poppler, all submitted written objections to the proposed final assessments. Mr. Larry Poppler questioned the excessive amount of the final assessments and the appropriateness of including the construction costs associated with locating existing utility services and other overall engineering costs. The amount of the proposed final assessment for Larry Poppler exceeded the feasibiliry report estimate by approximately 19.7% ($9,516 vs. $7,947). Subsequently, the City Council referred the issue to the Public Works Committee. Page 2 RESPONSE On Decemher 3, 1996, the Public Works Committee, consisting of Councilmember Ted Wachter (Chair) and Councilmember Pat Awada, met with Larry P. Poppler, Lawrence G. Poppler (and their spouses) and their personalrepresentative, Vince Kennedy. Larry Poppler wanted to have the total assessable improvement cost ($9,297) reduced by $6,877. The Public Works Committee agreed to reduce the final assessable costs by $3,869. After some addirional credits provided by a revised financial accounting, the final assessment to Mr. Poppler's lot was $8,545.48 which was $48.48 more than Mr. Poppler's request of $8,497 per lot. The revised final assessment roll based on the Public Works Committee recommendations was subsequently adopted on December 16, 1996. There was no appeal to the levied assessment. A copy of the minutes from that meering aze attached. Mr. Poppler has continued to submit requests for reconsideration of his assessments by way of correspondence dated April 29, 1998, May 6, 1999 and July 29, 1999. On January 14, 1997, and again on Mazch 24, 1998, the City Council formally discussed Mr. Poppler's requests and provided responses that there would be no further consideration by the Ciry Council. T'he last correspondence from the City to Mr. Poppler was from Councilmember Ted Wachter as Chair of the Public Works Committee dated March 30, 1998 (copy attached). Also enclosed is a summary of the various assessment rates associated with this project. RECONSIDERATION REQUfiST Mr. Poppler confinues to believe that his assessment should be further reduced similar to the reductions provided to other existing residenrial properties where public improvements were recently installed (i.e., Country Home Heights, and Oak Pond Addition). To date, there have been no fewer than 13 letters submitted by Mr. Poppler over 3'h yeazs with 11 responses and/or reports prepared by City staff addressing these issues. (Most recent 7-29-99 letter attached.) The Ciry Council should determine whether they want to give further consideration to Mr. Poppler's request or to reaffirm past Council positions. If they want to give further consideration, they should provide direction to staff regarding the proper venue (i.e., Council agenda, Public Works Committee, staff ineetings, etc.). Respectfu y submitted, irector of Public Works TAC/jj Attachment: 12-16-96 Minutes Letter Dated 330-98 Assessment Rates Letter Dated 7-29-99 00464 EAGAN CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES; DECEMBER 16. 1996 PAGE B 'i)SWA0%?YYJ?9. MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING REVENUE REFUNDING BONDS WOODRIDGE APARTMENT PROJECT City Administrator Hedges provided a brief overview on this item. Councilmember Wachter moved, Councilmember Awada seconded a motion to close the public hearing and wntinue this item to the January 21, 1997 City Council meeting. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 CERTIFICATION OF 1997 PROPERTY TAX LEVY, INCLUDING CITY, TRANSIT AND SPECIAL SERVICES DISTRICT 96.115 City Administrator Hedges gave an averview on this item. Mayor Egan noted that there was significant discussion at the last Council meeting regarding this item. Councilmember Hunter moved, Councilmember Masin seconded a motion to approve the resolution certifying the 1997 Payable Property Tax Levy. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 APPROVAL OF 1997 GENERAL FUND BUDGET, 1997 ENTERPRISE FUND BUDGETS, IMClUDING WATER, SANITARY SEWER, STREETLIGHTING, STORM DRAINAGE/ WATER QUALITY AND CIVIC ARENA City Administrator Hedges gave an overview on this item. He noted that copies of the draft budget are available for public inspection at any time and the budget will be placed at the public library for review atter they are bound in final form. Councilmember Hunter moved, Councilmember Wachter seconded a motion to approve the 1997 General Fund Budget and 1997 Enterprise Fund Budgets, including Water, Sanitary Sewer, Streetlighting, Storm DrainagelWater Quality and Civic Arena. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 APPROVAL OF 1997•2001 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, INCLUDING PART 1(GENERAL GOVERNMENT FACILITIES), PART II (VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT) AND PART III (INFRASTRUCTURE) EXCIUDING PARKS Ciry Administrator Hedges gave an overview on this Rem. Councilmember Awada moved to approve this item with the understanding that there is still a debate over the cost of the Fire Administretion building. Councilmember Awada moved, Councilmember Masin seconded a motion to approve the 1997- 2001 Capitai Improvement Program, including Part I(General Govemment), PaR II (Vehicles and Equipment) and Part III (Infrastructure) excluding Parks. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 PROJECT 636R, FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL (POPPLER LANE - STREET IMP.) City Administrator Hedges gave an overview on this item. Director of Public Works Coibert noted that there has been a lot of discussion and background information provided on this item and therefore did not present a formal staff report. Mayor Egan commended Councilmembers Awada and Wachter, who O(t4G5 EA(ilW CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES; DECEMBER 16, 1996 ? PAC3E 7 Serve on the Public Works Committee, tor their work and recommendation. Councilmember Masin asked for Garification on Mr. Poppler's last letter in regard to the duplication of a process by the engineering firm and whether this had been discussed in the meeting with the Public Works Committee members. Councilmember Awada stated that the duplication may have oaurced and that was taken into aaount in their decision.' Councilmember Wachter mentioned that Larry Poppler had asked whether or not he could come before the Council this evening. Cauncilmember Wachter told Mr. Poppler that he would have that opportunity if he so desired. Larry Poppier, 3030 Pappler Lane, addressed the Ciry Councii and noted that he drafted a letter stating his concems and recommendations following the Public Works Committee meeting. He asked if the terms being recommended are the same as those agreed upon on January 16, 1996. Mayor Egan noted that to his knowledge the terms are the same. Mr. Poppler reiterated many of the objections and concems he expressed at the public hearing, which were also addressed during the Public Works Committee meeting. Councilmember Wachter stated that the objections were already discussed at the Public Works Committee meeting. Mayor Egan added that the Council is aware of every aspect regarding Mr. Poppiers arguments. He further added that the Council had rece'rvetl a memo from staff containing the Poppler proposal and the revised Public Works Committee recommendatlon, which is further refined by reductions that the Public Warks Department staff found would be possible due to good unit costs. He noted that the modified recommendation is within $48.48 of Mr. Poppler's proposal. Mr. Poppler stated that he was unaware that the numbers were that close. Councilmember Wachter said that the Public Works Committee's recommendaGon was further modified because of suaessful nego6ations with the contractor. Mayor Egan stated that this process has been fair and he commended Councilmembers Wachter and Awada and staff for their work in regard to this assessment. ColbeR clarified that the assessment will be deferced for five years and then spread over a period of seven years. Councilmember Hunter moved, Counci(member Wachter seconded a mo6on to receive the Public Works Committee recommendation and approve the final assessment roil for Project 636R (Poppler Lane - Street Improvements) as modified on December 13, 1996 and certiTy the roll to Dakota County for Collection to begin with taxes payable in the year 2002. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 PLAMNED DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT/PYLON SIGN - CSM CORPORATION City Administretor Hedges gave an overview on this-item. Senior Planner Freese gave a staff report noGng the revisions being proposed by CSM Corporation. Steve Dubbs, representing CSM Corporation, addressed the Council and said he feels that a good compromise was reached. Counciimember Masin asked why the variance to the signage was granted to the Green Miil Restaurant. Freese indicated the issue was with the second sign which was the PD Amendment for the sign on Rahncliff Court and RahnGiff Road. She said that typicaliy a second pylon sign is not allowed. She further said that Green Mill needed to have visibility from Cliff Road in order to meet MnOOTs requirement ro allow them to have signage for their restaurant placed on the freeway sign. Councilmember Hunter stated that it is obvidus from the study that staff condutted that this is consistent with past practice. He further stated that since the Council banned additional biliboards, they have been cohsistent in showing some flexibility with signage next to the freeway. Councilmember Masin noted that this sign will be visible without granting the variance and if the Council grants the variance to this business other businesses wilt likely follow suit. Mayor Egan said that only one sign is being requested, which will serve a dual purpose. Mr. Dubbs stated that the reason they are requesting the additional height is because of the topogrephy of the property which results in limited visibility at the originai location. ? Councilmember Masin commented that she is cautious about granting a larger sign. Councilmember Hunter reiterated that the difference is that there are two uses being proposed for one sign. 7 city oF eagan THOMASEGAN MayOr March 30, 1998 PATRICIA AWADA BEA BLOM9UIST SANDRA A. MASIN THEODORE WACHTER MR LARRY POPPLER Council Memben 3030 POPPLER LANE THOMAS HEDGES EAGANMN 55121-1318 ClryAdminisfrotw PIZDT ? 3 Gle. E. J. VAN OVERBEKE Dear Mr. Poppler: atvc+etk City Adminisirator Hedges shared your letter of Mazch 17 with the City Council at their Special Workshop Session on March 24. All Counciimembers clearly recall all the issues associated with your special assessment and the extensive consideration that was previously given during numerous City Council and Public Works Committee meetings. On December 3, 1996, the Public Works Committee met for 1'/: hours to review in detail all the issues and concems you had with the proposed assessments. The Public Works Committee agreed with certain points and recommended that the City Council reduce the proposed final assessments. On December 9, 1996, you submitted a letter stating your request to have the assessments reduced for each lot to a maximum of $8,487. On December 16, 1996, the City Council received the Public Works Committee's recommendation and subsequently approved the final assessment amount of $8,545.45 per lot, which was only $48.40 more than your written request. In addition, the City Council has deferred this assessment for 5 years. After recalling and discussing all of these issues at our Workshop Session last Tuesday, there was a total consensus of the City Council to not give further consideration to any additional requests regazding reducing or adjusting a final assessment which was approved with your agreement over 15 months ago. The City can't consider reopening previously adopted final assessments based on what a proposed assessment may be for some other subdivision. They are all different and are all considered on their own merits. As Chairman of the Public Works Committee, the City Council requested that I in£orm you of the Council's decision not to give further consideration to your request. Sincerely, Ted Wachter Councilmember & Public Works Chair Cc: M yor & City Council c/o Thomas L. Hedges, City Administrator m Colbert, Director of Public Works MUNICIPAL CENTER 3870 PI101 KNOB I70AD EAGAN.MINNESOTA 55122-1897 PHONE', (612) 681-4600 FA%: (612) 681-4612 TDD: (612) 454-9535 THE LONE OAK TREE THE SVMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWfH IN OUR COMMUNIN Equol Opportunity Employer MAINTENANCE FACLLIN 3501 COACHMAN POINT EAGAN. MINNESOTA 55122 PHONE: (612) 68 1'd300 FAX'. (612) 681 •d360 TDD: (612) 454-8535 PROJECT 636R POPPLER LANE FINAL ASSESSMENTS FEASIBILITY REPT (F.R,) FINAL ASSMT ROLL (F.A.R.) PUPPLER PROPOSAL P.W. CMTE RECOMMENDATION RVSD F[NAL ASSMT ROLL RVSD F.A.R. WITH P.W. CMTE RECOM. UTILITY SERVICES (S LOTS) TOTAL S12 440.00 $3 656.31 $366.30 $2 978.15 $3 702.94 S3 024.78 PER LOT 2,488.00 731.26 73.26 595.63 740.59 604.96 STREET (9 LOTS) TOTAL $71520.00 $85 640.74 $76 473.00 $82 450.26 $80 099.81 $76 909.33 PER LOT 794700 9,515.64 8 497.00 9161.14 989999 8 545.48 PROJECT 636R TOTAL $83 960.00 $89 297.05 $76 839.30 $85 428.41 $83 802.75 $79 934.11 PER L,OT WITH SERVICES 10,435.00 10,246.90 8,570.26 9,756.77 9,640.57 9,150.44 PER LOT W/OUT SERVICES 7,947.00 9,515.64 8,497.00 9,161.14 8,899.98 8,545.48 C:ccpkwaoci6.plu 1z•u-s6 N v, I ?l T C c ,zl/Owo Thomas Hedges Ciry Administrator Eagan, MN. Dear Mr. Hedges, 7-29-99 The purpose of this letter is to follow-up on our recent phone conversarion and to request that the city council reconsider the assessment aznount of our street• Let me give you the facts and circucnstances for this review. • LeMay Lake Addition to our east was rezoned to high density R4 apartments w?thout our imotvemecrt in that process. The city approved R4 next to R-1. At the time of construction, the aty was paid "Road Unit Fees" for each apartmem uait (wluch aznounted to around $50,000) The key point is that the City of Eagan benefited finaacially wh7e the R-1 property to the west was impacted significaatty with EQLTITY LOSS! . Pond DP-15 water shed easemem was donated by Lawrence and Aurelia Poppier. This easement serves a lazge part of the surrounding area for water dramage. . gevera1 yeacs earGer, Lawreace and Aurelix Poppler donated Iaad offLone Oak Road so that Egan avenue would come out straight ernerin8 Lone Oak Road. • Easemerns were donated to the city to correct the cit}+'s former Plannin8 of not enough footage for future repairs of its city services. . Another easeTnent was given to the city for more space to service a lift station on Lone Oak Road. G 36 ? THE C1TY OF EAGAN WAS GIVEN WHAT TfEY WANTED WHEN TFIEY NEEDID TT. Yet for that cooperation and generosity, the following actions and decisions were made by the City of Eagan. • We were told by the engineering daPartmeat that Country Hame Heights (our neighbors) would be treated in similu manner. Rural widtb end no curbs gets no city fundieg. The impression was made that there would be "Coatinuity and Equity of Process" which follows the State mandate for cities. Yet, a month later, the City Engineer declared that some city funding was needed for Country Home Hts. This is the same azea that fimnels iu water to the donated water draiaage easement of Pond DP-15. Then there was an unusually hngt? city funding for Courmy Home Ht. when the mayor at that time was in the process of selling Ivs home in that area The pourt is that if the standards applied to ow area were used in Country Home Hts., the mayor wou(d not have received as much for his home. • AL one of the council meetings for Couatry Home Hts., I questioned the differenc process and wac told thst we would receive a review and given fair treatmeat. That newer happened! It still goes that we were cherged excessively for eagineering fees (some of which were obvious duplications and excessiveness) and for a Fessibility Report. Public hearings were conducted for a street that was maintained end plowed by the city for 20 years, yec w+e were then told that no funding would be aven to private street. We were given that excuse but Towerview Project was not charged for a for a Feasibility Report when 2 or 3 of its residerns reQnested that a$' sav?ces be installed on that section of a privately maintained street• m? ???le treatment • Recently, the Oak Pond Addirion (off Cliff Road) was given for city funclia8 than the city normal "p°Gc)?'. To elaborate on the amount, our simpie street uPBrade was charged (per lot) more thaa the Oak Poed street with its city services (sanitary sewerlwater). The city went off its "policy?' aad funded about 50% of atl those se[vices• . The city even charged about $600 oa each vacant lot in ow neighborhood, to verify the services that they installed. Since the city had no records, it necessitated the verification but the cost was charged off to the vacant tot property ownei'. Oae cau comctly guess that the charge was made to the person(s) who Save the city w1at it waated when they nceded it. Now lets look at the facts and set aside any bias or political prejud?ces. The dt7' benefited by ita zoain8 Practices, im mement acqwsnons aud at the same time charged excessively on this project. What is disturbing is that the ciry hes funded so much to other areas az?d without visible beaefits as they received ia our area. I am requesting what was promised mont6s ago. And that is, a meeting to review the assessment on ttds project to cocrect some injust?ce. The citY in its reports stated that it tries to come close to follow the mandate of"Continuiry and FAuitY of Process". When one does some ia depth analysis as I Isave, the assessment cbazSe does not come close to being equitable• Tlvs request warrants Your immediate attention. Not doing the right thing rea11Y takes away from the positive features that the city is nying to estabiist?. SinW" ?yours, ? pplec ?OPP& s v Y _ city of eagan F'AX TRANSMITTAL ?ncen?w?` o U- o 3v-vU TO: FAX # 2 z3 - ?Z?4 S Al'TENTION P.,? .Qwo,'ae? COiVIPANY FROM: \ o w? y?2`aae5 Comments: F These are being transmitted as checked below: For approval x As requested For publication Foryouruse For review and comments High priority FAX #: Administration/Finance/Parks (612) 6814612 Community DevelopmenUEngineering (692) 6814694 Central Maintenance (612) 681-4360 OFFICE #: Municipal Center (612) 681-4600 Central Maintenance (612) 681-4300 TDD (612) 454-8535 Originals forwarded Originals not forwarded Note to Facsimile Ooerator: Please deliver this fax transmission to the above addressee. If you did not receive all of the pages in good condition, please contact us. Thank you. r? 3830 PILOT KNOB RD EAGAN, MINNESOTA 55122 DATE ?f 2.3l9 (. TIME l2'•3o P,r4,. # OF PAGES TO FOLLOW ? PHONE# 4-$11'y(* Ol THE LONE OAK TREE...THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY Equal OpportunitylAffirmative Action Employer 0 _ city of eagan TO: DOUG REID,_CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL ? FROM: DALE SCHOEPPNER, SENIOR INSPECTOR DATE: JULY 22, 1996 SUBJECT: 3070 POPPLER LANE i MEMO As you know, Larry Poppler has forwarded correspondence to Councilmember Awada inquiring on the following: 1) whether a building permit to build a garage at 3070 Poppler Lane has expired; and 2) if that garage is being used only as a residential garage. According to the Uniform Building Code, 5ection 106.4.4 a building permit is valid indefinitely as long as work is not abandoned for more than 180 days. The construction on this garage is slow, but is on-going, therefore the permit remains active. Mr. Ekblad cannot be forced to finish this project outside the parameters of the Building Code. When speaking with Mr. Ekblad, he advised me that the "brown coaY" will be applied to the stucco this fall. I spoke with Mike Ridley, Senior Planner, regarding the use of this garage for anything other than residential and he advised me that if, and when, commercial activity is noticed, zoning staff will investigate and act accordingly. The condition of this site has not changed since Tom Hedges' correspondence of June 21, 1996 to Larry Poppler. If you need further information, please let me know. Senior Inspector DSfjs 3070popp.ler r(A MEMORANDUM TO: Doug Reid, Chief Building Official FROM: Mike Dougherty, City Attorney DATE: December 17, 1996 RE: Completion of Buildings Under Building Permits Following the meeting with Lazry Poppler, our office reviewed the options available to the City with respect to requiring completion of a building. As you are aware, Mr. Poppler's neighbor was issued a building permit several years ago to construct a garage structure on his residential lot. To date, the exterior of the garage is uncompleted. Our understanding is that periodically the neighbor does some work on the structure. The construction of buildings within the City is governed by and subject to the Uniform Building Code ("UBC"). Under the UBC, the City is required to review the plans for a permit and upon such review to verify compliance with the UBC. Upon approval the City shall issue a building permit. Every building permit shall expire: (1) if the work authorized by the permit does not begin for 180 days after the permit is issued; or (2) if the work authorized by the permit is suspended or abandoned, at any time after the work is commenced for a period of 180 days. In the instant situation it is our understanding that the work has been propedy commenced, and the core issue is whether and under what circumstances can the City require completion of the building. The UBC does not contain any provision requiring that a building be completed by any specified date or time period. So long as work is being done without an interruption of 180 days, the building permit remains active under the UBC. Eagan does not have an ordinance requiring the completion of a building within any give time period, and it is my understanding that in your discussions with the State of Minnesota is that there may only be one community that has such a requirement. Assumingly, that may be due to the fact that there are existing nuisance laws which may become applicable if a building is deemed a health or safety problem should it not be timely completed. Presently, the building permit issued to Mr. Poppler's neighbor is still valid and would remain so unless he fails to perform any work on the property for the 180 days as required by the UBC. If you have any questions, please give me a call. MGD/wkC ca Tom Hedges, City Administrator Notes fram the 9-6-96 meeting with: Tom Hedges, City Administrator Mike Dougherty, City Attorney Mike Ridley, 5enior Planner Doug Reid, Chief Inspectoc Larry Poppler, Concerned Resident Everyone reviewed the report prepared by Larry Poppler. Tom Hedges mentioned that the city will enforce the Pilot Knob location for any commercial vehicle pazking viQlations. Mike Ridley mentioned that last year the violations were noted and the vehicles were rernoved. Larry Poppler asserted that it was for a very short time (one day or two) since it was watched by him also. nc no real follo -. All agreed that any truck or commercial vehicle traffic or pazking at UVtLJ ons would not be tolerated. It was mentioned that the Mr. Ekblad was working on the overhang last week. Larry Poppler injected that the overhang was completed last fall and nothing was performed outside since last fall when the gazage doors were installed. 'e _ ? show the completion of the overhang was done last year. Larry Poppler presented to everyone the logical assessment that the building is abandoned and why. Mr Ridley (or community development) had not done follow-up from last year (and perhaps yeazs past). There could be a perceived notion by the public that enforcement is meaningless. Consequently, do whatever pleases one individually seems to rule and an incongruous building was started. Mike Dougherty said that he will look into the code with regards to abandonment and what the city can do to have the outside completed for the interest of the community. This perhaps may occur next spring at the earliest (due to the weather and scheduling the stucco contractor). Everyone was in agreement that the incomplete "gazage" is a negative to the community. Lazry Poppler mentioned that it wou ' stinLeS.e?st of t_he city that the "garage" be completed at least on the outsid "It cannot be left undone indefimtTe?? All agreed that the concerns were valid with regard to such a business located in a residential neighborhood and the incomplete garage. ro ? e 9-12-96 Thomas Hedges City Administrator City of Eagan Dear Mr. Hedges, Thank you for the meeting on 5ept 6th and addressing the issues of enforcement and the garage abandonment. Enclosed are my notes from the meeting. I think we can agree that without keeping an eye on the ball, neighborhoods could be downgraded rapidly. Even though a very loose interpretation of keeping a permit active can be made, the project will be completed only when the city takes a serious and realistic view at what has not been done and why. Since the city has made a stand that the structure cannot be used for what it is structurally designed as,(ie:trucks and commercial vehicles traffic and parking not allowed) the useless function prompts one not to invest any more money. It would be in the best interest of the city and neighborhood to have the building completed. If it is left abandoned indefinitely, then review the issue why it was approved in the first place. The trucks and commercial vehicles aze still pazked at the Pilot Knob location and the oversized accessory building left undone at another location speaks for itself as a Community Development problem that was in fact DEVELOPED. I am looking forward to any solutions to resolve this issue. Keep me informed as to the status. cc: Mike Dougherty Parranto & Associates Eagan Small Business Association g 8-23-96 Thomas Egan Mayor City of Eagan Dear Mr. Egan, Thank you for your time over the phone yesterday. This is just to clarify the cit}rs position with regazds to abandonment of the Ekblad "garage". 7ust for the record, the building has not been worked on since last fall when the 14' overhead doors were installed. The outside remains as tarpaper with covered wire ready for the stucco agplication. The floor is still class 5 gravel as no cement truck powed the floor. The appGcation was originally granted in 1991. Commiurity development deterrrdned in 1995 that the project was abandoned and the project needed a renewal permit. Mr. Ridley states that "a permit holder can simply pound a few nails into a project every 179 days to keep a pemut active." That liberal imerpretation is justifying a scheme to defay full taxation on real properry. Your indication t6at the city will not do anything to enforce that completion coqcerns me. Why does Eagan have compliance officers? It seems to be a bad idea to ask other citizens, as you suggest, to cut a"deal" with the owner so as to encowage him to finish the project. It is equally unfau' to suggest that I am using the system for personal gain. On the contrary, Mr. Ekblad is using that accusarion as a method to get by with acting irrationally. It is in the pubGc interest to have any project finished so that the final product enhances the community and it pays its rightful FiJLL shaze of property tax. TT NST MAKES GOOD MANACsEMENT SENSE. Mr. Ridley admits that there is a violation of parldng commercial vehicles at the Pilot Knob location by Mr. Ekblad. As he states "currently working with the property owner to remove the commercial vehicle(s) from his property." Last year he made the same observation and statement, yet nothing was done. NST WHEN IS HE GOING TO DEAL WITH THAT ISStJE7 His actians or inaction's will indicate his level of fairness and object'svity foe Mr. Ekblads' other location. Every property owner is concerned about property vxlues and taxation and I'm swe that you understand my position. Community Development would certainly enhance it image by dealing with issues REALISTICALLY AND WITH REASONABLENESS. Respectfully yours, Larry Poppler cc: Council members Tom Hedges Mark Pazramo Eagan Small Business Associarion r• .z'-'?!'r^:^?'!?e++++t'? . .. . . . . . . • , . .. . .. ` CITYOFEAGAN ?f? " ;?:?n3 3830 Pilot Knob Road, P.O. Box 21-199, Eagan, MN 55721 t ' v BUILDING PERMIT PHONE:454-8100 + ' - I t Receipt # 1 _. I 7o be used for DETACAED CARAGE Est. Value f15'1 Date JUNE S , 1991 Site Address In?3 POPPLFR LAtiX Lot ?_ Block OL_ SeclSuh. ?pPI.ER ROM-STFJ D OFPICE USE ONLY Parcel No. omupa„cy Fees ZO" = Name MICHAEL EKEI.A1l/MARf 'k«"iO (?ual) Consl _ Bldg. Permil f162.00 3 Address 3455 EAGAHDALE PL fqnowamel - 7,50 ? EAGAN City Phone ?7-9&31 •olSloriea _ urchar e g Plan P i 105.00 Length 31_ ev ew . o ? Name EKBLAD M'TRNrT2NC DePih SAC Ciry i OC; u< Addre55 2850 Pi.lA7 lCNOS lti) S.F.iotai t}qg . ¢ City ?C'AN PhOnB 454-3113 S.F. FootpriMS SAC, MCWCC r On Sile Sewage _ Water Conn Fw Name OnSitaWetl _ WaterMeier Add!eS5 MWCCSystem _ <W City Phone Grywaier _ Accl.Depos't . PRV PeQUired _ S/W Permit I hereDy acknowlege that I have read this application and state that the Boosier Pump _ iMOrtnafion Is correct antl agree to comply wtth all applicable State ol yyy Surdiarge . M-nnesota Stames and Cily ot Eaga?Ortlinancep. Trealmenl PI Siqnature 61 Permftee "lz APGROVALS Roatl Unit _ A eui!ding aermit is issuetl to: EKEI.AD L'OtiYRA^vT1HC Planner - park Ded. on the expreas conCition that all work 51fa11 be Gone in accortlance with all C.ounai appli;able State ot Minnesota Stamtes and City of Eagan Ordinamces. gldg. pry, _ Copies Buiitling Ofticial _L t` !. . c • y? ?t_??,1 Variance _ TOTAL $274.50 VH20 MOTOR VEHICLE RECORD DISF'LAY TYF'E: F' KEY: YU35705 DQB: FILE1: FILE2: FLAG: f-'LATE: YU35705 STKR: T291250D EXP: 02 36 TAX: 90. VIN: F365F'FC1746 YR: 79 MK: FORll STYLE: TK SE COLOR: EMPTY WT: AXLES: MC ENG: CLASS: 41 FUEL: N LRST TRRNS: R DATE: S?1 :?7 95 NEW: TITLE: V365040Q?1 F'RINT: TFtF DATE: 12 28 84 ODOMETER: OWNER: EKE+LfaD MICHREL KENNETN DOB 01 13 1 ADDR: 2860 PIL07 KNOB RD iST SECURED PARTY: ADUR: DRTE OF LIEIV: LESSEEI: LESSEE2: LESSEE3: RllDR: INSP INDC: N P?.?4 j_ ERGRN REFUND SEIVT: ID ¢?7I0JI9J HELG 15:49:50 PROC RID: 9Q? R N DGER Q178 00 PREV PLT: WT334 RIES: SF1SE: 0090QiS? PR OWN: 2 PRTCH: 5026@2142? NR LIEN5: @ 95? ID: E214603465037 13 55121 RE ISSUE FLATE YEAR: DOE ID7/0JI9J VH20 VEHICLE F'RIOR OWNERS 15:49:56 RLATE NO: YU35705 VIN NO: F36SF'FC1746 PRt4 OWN: AbBOTT STEF'HEN JRMES DO&: 092163 PREV OWN: MCMULLEN TRNYFI JO 050464 TYTLE: U29804016 TRF DT: 091784 iaDDR: 2841 HIGHRIDGE TERRACE EXG: 0785 EAGRIV ------------- -- 19 55121 ---- --- -------------------- - ODOM: -------- 0012977 NA ------------- -- ---- ---- EKE+LAD MICHAEL -- -- KENNETH - 011352 0289@'3415 2860 PILOT KNOB RD 0785 ST F'AUL 19 55118 0000053 5-2-95 Doug Reid Licensing and Inspections City of Eagan RE: Expiration of building permit for separate garage for Mr. Mlichael K. Ekblad. The above person applied for a gazage permit over 3 years ago. It has been at least 2 years since any work has been done to finish this structure. I have read the ordinace on this and permits are issued for a 6 month period. Any renewal requires approval and permit fees. I am requesting that your department take a serious look at this. Listed below are some of the neighborhood concems. 1) Water runoff from the proposed building and surounding parldng azea on to the adjacent lot. 2) Commercial usage of the building. The owner already has a 3 car stall garage with a basement. (equivalent to 6 stall space) 3) Ingress and egress of commercial earth moving vetricles in a area zoned residential. 4) Excessive storage of excavating equipment outside of separate gazage. 5) Over 200 dump truck loads of fill were brought in without any permit or inspections by the city. Any other project in the city would have required permits, inspections and a landscape plan. Also enclosed is some documentarion sent in 1993 concerning the above issues. I would like to request a cease and disist as of now on any fiuther progress on this building. When a new permit is issued, nei borhood input should be involved with so , cou some serious r regazding its usage and purpose in the future. The p 't was tained on and for residenrial but has some potential applications for commercial usage. Larry Poppler cc: comm velopment ?? 5-11-95 Thomas Egan Mayor city of Eagan RE: Expiration of building pennit for separate garage for Mr. Mic,hael K. Ekblad The above person applied for a building permit for a detached garage on June Sth,1991, The ordinance for the permit allows 6 months completion or else a new permit with a fee must be renewed As mentioned in the enclosed material, worlc has not been done for over 2 years. The faotings and blocks were done in 1991. Nothiag was done since. My conc,ern is that there is already a 3 stall larp garap attached to the residence wirich has a basment for entering machinery on the east side. The cument garage is equivatent to a 6 car unit. It therokm seems Iogical that an additional detached garage has some potential applications for commercial usage. At this point, the people that issue the permits do not want to enforce the expiration issue on this permit. Why? Enclosed is a copy of the niles for this issue. Also, I w uest that in o?d? to u e? it, a careful review be done with appropiiate restrictions, mspmb'on,Na \ an water runoff issues addressed. , Larry Poppler 454-8906 Enclosed: Letter sent 5-2-95 Lettcr sent in 1993 Building permit Regulations ' city oF engan THOMAS EGAN Moyw May 10, 1995 PATRICW qWADA SHAWN HUN(ER SANORA A. MASIN Michael Ekblad THEOOORE WACHTER cauncuMorntm: 3070 Poppler Lane Eagan, Minnesota 55121 TFiOMAS HEDGES c;wAcnwm,a« E. J. VAN OVERBENE ciry Geit RE: Code Violation at 3070 Poppler Lane iv1r. Ekblad: The City of Eagan continually monitors health, safety, and aesthetic standards by monitoring land use requirements set by Cfty Code. Section 11.20, Subd. 5. A. does not altow outdoor storage of commercial trailers, buiiding materials, or equipment in residential districts. The commercial trailer and any building materials and equipment located on your property must be removed within ten (10) days of the date of this letter. Also, if work is to commence on the garage, a new building permit will be required since the project has heen inaciive for more than six months. Contact the Building Inspections Division to ohtain the permiL If you have any further questions regarding this matter, please call me at 681-4685. Thank you for your cooperation. ?in/ rery, ? Mike Ridley PI2^r,ing DivEsion poppler.307 MUNICIPAL CEXTER 7870 PILOT KNOB OOAO EAGAN, MINNESOIA 55122•1997 V'HONE: (012) 661•4000 fA%:(017) 6tll-4e12 IDD: (012) 454•U535 THE LONE OAK iREE THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH 1N OUR COMMUNITY Equal Opportunuy/AtnrmallvaACtlon Employer MAINTENANCE FACILITY 3501 COACHMAN POINf EAGAN. MINNESOIA 55175 PMONE: (017) 6411-.I300 fA%: (617) 681•4300 IDD: (612) 454•0515 \ r Ab?dtVoFaagan May 24, 1995 MR LARRY POPPLER 3030 POPPLER LANE EAGAN MN 55121 RE: EXPIRATION OF BUILDING PERMIT #19183 3070 POPPLER LANE uearLarry: THOMAS EGAN Moyor PATRICIA AWADA SHAWN HUNTER SANDRA A. MASIN THEODORE WACHTER CounCll Members THOMAS HEDGES Cify Atlministrotor E.J. VANOVERBEKE CBy Cled Your letter of May 11, 1995 expressed concern that the City of Eagan has not enforced the expiration date of building permit #19183 issued on June 5, 1991 to Michael Ekblad for construction of a detached garage on his property. For your information, I am attaching a copy of a letter dated May 10, 1995 to Michael Ekblad regarding this matter sent by Project Planner Mike Ridley. On May 23, 1995, a follow-up inspection by our Protective Inspections staff disclosed that no work has commenced at this site other than installation of a foundation. Follow-up inspections will be made at this site to insure that construction activity does not occur without the proper permits. Further concerns regarding this matter should be addressed to Chief Building Official Doug Reid at 3501 Coachman Pointe. Sincerely, \ `?'"` •, Tom Hedges City Administrator THfjs attach. cc: Doug Reid, Chief Building Official William Bruestle, Senior Inspector MUNICIPAI CENTER 3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD EAGAN, MINNESOiA 55122-1097 PHONE: (612) 681-4600 FAX:(612)6B1-4612 . iDD:(612)454-8535 THE LONE OAK TREE THE SYMBOL Of STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY Equal Opportunlty/Atflrmatlve Actlon Employer MAINTENANCE FACILITY 3501 COACHMAN POINT EAGAN, MINNESOiA 55122 PHONE: (612) 681-4300 FAX: (612) 681-4360 iDD: (612) 454-8535 ? aj( /e F/'cL r UArI ? ? ?.lii r ? ?P Ur ? ?,ti JPc- -5?? w/ ft-17 or a? P? ?- C4'V ?N??/i.. cnr:( <<-?, ./I1/J f ? ".?e'te? CU/l/l?=r? t /? ?/?a` ???i J 'e,??r?, -C) ? 6-7-95 =RECEPVED City of Eagan Community Develapment Attn: Mike Ridley RE: Outdoar storage of commercial trailers by Michael Ekblad I receivei a copy of your letter sent to Mr.Ekblad on May l Oth. For your records it is almost one month and the commercial traiter is still in outdoor storage in a residential district. This person may come up with a grade school excuse that he didn't receive notice or that he is being picked on. However, the real heart of the matter is that he wants to set a precedent so that eventually the_area will always allow ungaraged commercial trailers, building materials and equipment. Thank you for looking into this matter. ,?/ r1_ ? ?,? ? T//t c- cc: Doug Reid Tom Hedges Tom Egan ? 7-4-95 Mayor Thomas Egan City of Eagan, Mn. On 5-23-95 I met with Mr. Michael Ridley of the City Planning Department regarding some issues and concerns. Since some of these issues were not addressed, on 7-3-95 a follow-up meeting I asked some pointed questions concerning those issues and concerns. Mike Ridley just walked out of the room without allowing me to finish. I was left with a more accommodating building inspector. But some of the issues were not in his area. What's wrong with City Planning? Sincerely, Larry Poppler 3030 Poppler Ln. Eagan, Mn. 55121 cc: City Council Members - - ----- --- - -- - -;? - - ? _ - - - - P; -- - --? - -- - -------- ? _ - -- -- - - - -- -- - - •'? - .--- - - - - ---- ----- - - - - - - _ . _ ,!. - ---- --- ---- ? ?- ? g - - - ? ----- --- --- -- - - ' - - ; - --- --- ------ - --------rt 1? S ? ?---?-- =- -???-6 - ?- ? - -- - -- ---- a-- -?---?-? - ? ?- - by ? ?. c,c ._ ??; . i - - - -- - --- - - - ?-? 'F-a-- ?-- - - ? o ?,P ?-'.? . -- ----- -? - - ?-- . - - - - -- --- - - - - -- --- r . w?- - -- - - - ------ ----- ---- -- ?-- ---- < 2 Fi4'?b?o-? s-Fo-•? ? ?.r? o"- o.C -Q4 -- - - -- - _- - -- - -- ?----- ? U.? J3, - . --- -------------------- ----- -?? - - -- -rt--- ? -- -- - - --- - ----- • - ., ? ? i ,- - -- - - _ I ? I - -. - • - - - -- ---- - ?- ? ? - - - - -- - -- -- - ;. - - -- - -I-- - - - - - - - - _ ---- __ ___ _ __f ___ ___ _ __ _ _ _ _____ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ __ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ? ___ _ ___ ____ ___ ____ _ ?i,,- a5 ____ __ ?_ _ ___ _ __ __ __ __ _ __ __ : ????___ ___ _____ _ _ __._ __ ___ _ _ _ , _ _ _ __ _ _ _ - - I- - ? ?--` -? ? ?e °? e w l ? w ; 9?.. --?? ? c,?,? ? ?L..o ".,?. - - - - -- I \ ? ------ - -- - --. - - - - - -- - ? - - - - - -- -- _ ? . __ ? ` ,-^'? - - -?------- --- - --- - ----- - - - -. i ? , « - - - - -- - ''`'`_..? - - - - - - - - ? .- m.u.?9. b ? \c -?= ? - - - - - - - _ ?. -T1,?..? _ _ ??. ,,,,?.,t,.? . _ -?--? _ - - - _ _- - - -- - - - - - -- - - -- - - , - - -- ? ? ?. ct.:?.,?.?,..-. 91 ? ?.s ^?-- ? - - - -..-- - - ,? a,._ c.c) cs-? _ _ -- - - - - - . . - - `?° ? ? s ?' `? yvu.?-- - - O? . GU ? ?{ ,, - - - -- - J _ - - - -. . _ ?j-?--- - - -- -_?__._ _ _ --- -- - _. . - - ------ - --- -- ?.--- --- - ' - . .v _ _ - -- - --- - --- <... THOMAS EGAN Mayor PATRICIA A WADA SHAWN HUNTER SANDRA A. MASIN THEODORE WACHTER Council Memteis June 30, 1995 LARRY POPPLER 3030 POPPLER DRIVE EAGAN MN 55121 RE: 3070 Poppler Drive Dear Larry: THOMAS HED6ES Ciry Administrotor E.J. VANOVERBEKE Ciry Clerk Thank you for taking the time to meet with me on May 23, 1995, regazding the above referenced matter. As we discussed, I have reviewed City records and spoken with appropriate staff relating to the issues raised in your letter to Doug Reid dated May 2, 1995 (enclosed). I also met with Michael Ekblad regazding my letter to him dated May 10, 1995 (enclosed). The issues raised in your letter have been addressed as follows: S1orm water run o,{?/R/1 brought ro site. The building permit for 3070 Poppler Drive was reviewed by the City's Engineering and Protective Inspecrions Divisions in late May of 1991. Recently, an Engineerimg staff person again reviewed the suryey and made a s;te visit. Amnng other things, issuing a building permit requires review and analysis by the City Engineering Division of the proposed storm drainage pattern based on the existing and proposed elevarions provided on the Certificate of Survey. The Engineering Division believes the home was built as proposed and that storm drainage is adequate. Fill brought to the site to develop the property as depicted on the Certificate of Survey submitted for the building permit does not require a separate permit. Commercial use ofpropertv/commercial eguinmer.t storaQe As we discussed, Larry, commercial operations and commercial equipment storage are not allowed uses in the R-1 Zoning District. I have discussed this issue with the Mr. Ekblad and he has assured me that the trailer stored on his property is for his personal use and that there will be no commercial operations at this property (unless the business conforcns with the City's FIome Occuparion Ordinance or the Ciry has issued a permit for work on the site). 4b6idtV oF eagen MUNICIPAL CENTER 3830 PILOi KNOB ROAD EAGAN. MINNESOiA 55122•1897 PHONE: (612) 681-4600 FAX: (612) 681-4612 TOD:(612) 454-853 THE LONE OAKTREE THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNRY Equal OpportunitylAtflrmative Actlon Employer MAINTENANCE FACILITY 3501 COACHMAN POINT EAGAN. MINNESOTA 55122 PHONE: (612) 681•4300 FAX: (612) 681-4360 iOD: (612) 454-8535 ; Buildrngpermit The City has informed Mr. Ekblad that the building permit issued for the detached garage has to be renewed before any further work can commence on the garage (Mr. Ekblad renewed the building permit on June 26, 1995). As we discussed, Larry, at the building permit stage of development, the applicant is required to meet specific performance standards (e:g. setbacks) in order for the City to issue the building permit. The City cannot deny a building permit based on what the building ma,v or may not be used for. What the City can do, and has done in this case, is to make sure the properry owner is aware of uses that are permitted in a particular Zoning District. I believe this letter responds to all of your concems, Larry. If you have any questions please contact me. Thank you again for your time. . "`It Mike Ridley Planner cc: Tom Hedges, Ciry Administrator Doug Reid, Chief Building Official 5-2-95 Doug Reid Licensing and lnspecrions City of Eagan iv"ly 0 2 1995 RE: Expiration of building pemiit for separate garage for Mr. Mlichael K. Ekblad. The above person applied for a garage permit over 3 years ago. It has been at le,ast 2 years since any work has been done to Snish this structure. I have read the ord'mace on this and permits are issued for a 6 month period. Any renewal requires approval and permit fees. I am requesting t6at Your deparhnent take a serious look at tLis. Listed below are some of the neighborhood concerns. 1) Water nmoff &om the proposed building and surounding ParldnB mu on to the adjacent lot. " 2) Commercial usage of the bw'lding. The owner alm,ady Las a 3 car stall garage with a basement (equivalent to 6 stell sPace) 3) Ingress and egiess of commercial earth moving velucles in a area zoned residential. 4) Excessive storage of excavating equipment outside of separate prage. S) Over 200 dump truck loads of fill werc brought in without anY peamit or inspections by the city. Any other project in the city wonid have required Pennits, insPections and a landscape plan. Aiso enclosed is some documentation sent in 1993 cmoerning the above issues. I would h7ce to request a cease and disist of now fiuther progress on this building. When a new permit is ' orhaod input should be iuvolved with some remctions. Any other approach could have some setious problems regarding its usage and purpose in the future. The pecmit was obtained on and for residential but has some potendal applications for commercial usage. development ' city oF eagan THOMASE6AN May 10, 1995 Mayw . PAiRICIA AWADA SHAWN MUNTER , SANDRA A. MASIN MICF18@I EICI]IBd TNEODORE WACHTER 3070 Poppler Lane CouncAMembeis Eagan, Minnesota 55121 THOMAS HEDGES c???Aorfw,,,,,a . E.J. VqN OVERBEKE • City Cleh RE: Code ViolaBon at 3070 Poppler Lane Mr. Ekblad: The City of Eagan continually monitors health, satety, and aestheGc standards by monitoring land use requirements set by City Code. Sectlon 11.20, Subd. S. A. does not allow outdoor storage of commercial trailers, building materials, or equipment in residential districts. The commercial trailer and any building materials and equipment lacated on your property must be removed within ten (10) days of the date of this tetter. Also, ii work is to commence on the garage, a new buitding permit will be required since the project has been inactive for more than six months. Contact the Building Inspections Division to obtain the permit If you have any further questions regarding this matter, ptease call me at 681-4685. Thank you for your cooperation. n?elY, • Mike Ridley Planning Division poppler.307 ?.rw? ?.?n?CR 3870 PROT KNOB ROAO iHE IONE OAK TREE MAINTENANCE FACILRY EAGAN. MINNESOfA 55I22•I897 THE SYMBOI OF STRENGTM AND GROWiH IN OUR COMMUNITV 3501 COACNMAN POWI YHONE: (612) 601•4600 FAGAN, MINNESOTA 55172 FAX: oo: jaixj 681-461 EQucl Oppo'tunlty/AlnlmotWe Aetbn Employer PNONE: (014) OBIdJ00 fAX: (012) 081 •4]d0 IDD: (012) 454•tlS75 7-6-95 To City of Eagan: Tom Hedges City Administrator Tom Eagan Mayor Patricia Awada Council Member Shawn Hunter Council Member Sandra Masin Council Member Ted Wachter Council Member RE: Re-issue of detached garage permit to Michael K. Ekblad Is it "community development" ????????? ISSiJE: The Community Development Department reissued a pemut for a detached garage without allowing FLJLL DISCLOSURE AND CONSIDERATION to adjoining neighbors. This is not an ordinary building permit situarion as there are no other Rl residential locations that have ALL the following characteristics. 1) This location has a 3 stall garage attached to the house and now a 3 sta11 detached gazage for a total of 6 stalls ( the attached garage also has a basement ) 2) The detached 3 stall garage is a high profile 14 foot from floor to bottom of the rafters. It is accessible for dump truck type of velucles. 3) The permit was approved for a person who is in the business of using these vehicles i.e.: hauling dirt, excavating and snow plowing. (This alone would be enough for community planning to call a serious "time out" for some discussions) BASIS GIVEN BY MICHAEL RIDLEY FROM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FOR THE REISSUE AND THE WAY TI' WAS HANDLED: The homeowner identified to Mr. Ridley that the equipment was for personal use and the building will be used for storage. Mr.Ridley's response to the citizens in the neighborhood was that a "person can build a structure for storage. If the equipment were used for business, then the owner is out of compliance with the Rl zone. However, the enforcement would be hard to prove but it would be looked into." RESPONSE: Listed beluw are some very clear and solid reasons to question the purpose (for the permit)given by the property owner for his oversized garage. 1) The records show with the state that he owns a dump truck. The dump truck is painted to resemble a MnDot vehicle. Currently it is stored outside along with bobcat at 2860 Pilot Knob Rd. Enclosed is a copy of the that vehicle registration. He has a plow attachment for large area plowing. 2) The original garage permit dated 6-5-91 identifies "Ekblad Excavating" at 2860 Pilot Knob Rd. This document is filed with the city. 3) The dump truck with the plow attachment is used for winter plowing along with his 2 pickup trucks with plow attachments. This person has a plow route and the equipment is owned to make money. 4) I had a short opporiunity to visit with a more accommodating inspector on 7-3-95 and he showed me the architects plan for the garage. On the lower right hand corner "Ekblad Construction Co." is given along with the address of 3055 Eagandale Pl, Eagan, Mn. This where Mr.Ekblad resided before he moved. The architect name is Gene Lang Designs, 1887 Bell Rd. Eagan, 454-2899. This also is in possession of community development. 5) The above is hard evidence that Mr. Ekblad's credibility is in question and that was mentioned to Mr. Ridley. He also knew that Mr. Ekblad lost his teaching job due to not telling the truth for economic gam. NOW BEING INFORMED VERBALLY AND IN WRITING WOULD'T TT MAKE SENSE FOR MR RIDLEY AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TO GIVE CAREFUL ISSUE ANALYSIS??????? . ??- . ? ?6??f? ? ? TIME LINE May 2, 1995 Sent letter to Doug Reid chief building official May 9,1995 Called Mayor Tom Eagan May 11,1995 As per Mayor's request drafted new letter with enclosures. It took a call to the Mayor for Mr. Reid to react. May 10, 19951etter sent to Mr. Ekblad regarding expiration of original building permit and removing his trailer. From Mike Ridley May 23, 1995 met with Mr Ridley and discussed concerns. Mr Ridley didn't mention that a letter was sent to Mr. Ekblad. Which is an interesting note and very germane to that meeting. Mr. Ridley and I reviewed some issues and concerns also and he said that he would get back to me with some answers and a report on the issues addressed. I even gave him a picture as proof of expiration of the 6-5-91 permit. Why am I giving him evidence to show my case when he already sent the May l Oth letter out????? May 24th a city letter was drafted and sent conceming the May l Oth letter. June 26, 1995 City of Eagan granted new permit to Mr. Ekblad. June 30,1995 Semi-trailer was unloaded (premade walls and roof arches) from Ivanhoe, Mn. As I researched this also, that during the building season, it would take more than 4 days notice to order, make and deliver that type of material. Mr. Ekblad must have known weeks ahead of the June 26th date that the permit was to be renewed with no questions or hesitations. He also had to organize a crew and reserve a lift tractor to hoist the material during this busy season. After the semi-trailer came that afternoon it took until 4:00 pm to talk to Mr. Ridley over the phone. He said he allowed the permit because the building would be used for storage. Wouldn't it seem prudent on Mr. Ridley's part to inform the parties concerned (as this does affect the neighborhood) when he approved the permit. July 1,1995 Construction begins 13 hours July 2, 1995 Construction continues 13 hours July 3, 1995 Tried to meet with Mike Ridley but he walked out after not answering some questions. Mr Reid was offfor the day!!!!!!! Inspections were made and the building is appazently approved as work has continued. AN INTERESTING NOTE IS THAT THE GARAGE IS HIGHER THAN THE PRIMAKY HOME BUIL,DING AND ACCORDING TO CODE THAT SHOiJLDN'T BE. There is a zoning issue here. THE RESULTS DIIZECTED BY COMMUNTI'Y DEVELOPMENT ARE DISTURBING, BUT THE TIlVIE LINE OF EVENTS ARE EXTREMELY SUSPECT. Further evidence shows that on the architect's plan (which I first reviewed on 7-3-95) shows that its an oversized garage to house dump truck type vehicles. Now when one reviews the initial permit dated 6- 5-91 it gives a market value of $15,000. This garage is worth at least perhaps twice that figure. When asked how that figure was obtained, I was told that it was the NORMAL square foot cost for a residential type garage. When the public sees only that document, one is lead to believe that its' size fits in a residential neighborhood. Mr. Ekblad had a permit to put in a normal residential garage yet W. Reid's office was working off a an architect's plan that shows barn size dimensions. To elaborate further, the property owner received a permit fee probably based on the residential garage average square footage cost. When talking to Mike Ridley, he never gave a clue that this was an oversized garage capable of housing vehicles with commercial applications. HE MERELY INSISTED T'HAT TT WAS FOR APPROVED FOR STORAGE. Doug Reid just gave Mr. Ekblad a gift by charging only $275.00 by using normal residential garage permit fees. I doubt that there is any other struclure THIS S1ZE (being almost a 2 story house in height with almost 1,000 square foot of ground floor space) approved in this town for $275.00 bottom line fee. MR. RIDLEY SAID THAT THEY CANNOT ANTICIPATE WHAT THE PROPERTY OWNER MAY DO. BUT WHEN TT DOES HAPPEN (THE OWNER IS OUT OF COMPLIANCE FOR ZONING) THEN HE WII.,L REACT. However, that ATTITUDE GOES CONTRARY to the basic purpose of city planning, thoughtful community development and inspection process. Don't you make plans to head off undesirable events. Mr. Ridley's lack of city planning very likely created some long term neighborhood problems. Given the way this was handled and the land owner's credibility, I doubt that the building will be "merely used for storage" and give any enforcement attention. CLOSING STATEMENT The neighborhood was not given full disclosure and time to give thoughtful analysis to restrictions, water runoff, aesthetic concerns and other considerations. With the size of the building and its real application, the neighborhood especially the adjoining lot lost value. Any other building or person especially located in a commercial zone would have gone through some detailed planning, been realistic for it's purpose, and paid its rightful share of building permit fees (which includes such items as park dedication, environment fees etc.) Mr. Ekblad got by for just $275.00 without even an enforcement strategy. IS THIS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT OR IS TT "CITY " PLANNING??7???7??????7???????')') This deserves yow immediate attention. I would be glad to meet with anyone addressed in this letter at this site and will be available at 454-8906 Sincerely, Larry Poppler enclosures: Letters sent to city and received on the timeline of the report Material on record with the City of Eagan and State of Mn. 2-8-96 V TO: Commimity Development City Administrator Council Members FROM: Larry Poppler RE: Poppler Homesteads Addition 36 oa /C S 8 1/0 0 P,p? This correspondence is to put in perspective the simple and justifiable platting of 2 added lots on an existing platted street. Also, to communicate to you efficiently using your time as to how the process is moving along. Perspective: The city was approached (about 1 1/2 years prior to selling lot 6) to make 2 added lots and simplify my parents estate. Initially and on-going there were considerable amounts of "requirements", unjust extraction's and fees; some of which were not relevant to the specific platting. Lots 6, 5, 4, and 2 were not in the platting process and the city demonstrated them as liquid property. When lot 6 was consequently sold, the new owner obtained a faulty survey. Consequenfly this owner used that survey as an OPERATTVE to obshuct the completion of the platting process. All along Mr. L. G. Poppler's survey was in compliance with existing monumentation, city and county maps. Over the period of 5 years the city took a wrongful and unjust position of not approving the Platt due to that contentious boundary dispute (as a matter of policy). However, PUBLIC INT'EREST WAS IGNORED in this case when the faulty survey moves a platted, monumented street. Furthermore, lots 4& 5 were not really liquid because (even though these were not in the platting process) the city refused to release the "temporary" construction easement unless corrective permanent easements would be put in place. One person was to pay the price of a city engineering mistake made over 30 years ago. SUGGESTIONS AND RECOMIvfENDATION5: 1) Follow the map as originally platted by Mr. McGinley. It is rightful and in compliance with city feasibility reports and the county surveyor. Over the years efforts were made to accommodate Mr. Ekblad even by perhaps shi8ing a property line. No acceptance was made by him as his real aim is not a matter of an additional 10 to 17 feet. . 2) Make every effort to financially balance tUis whole affair. Mr. L. G. Poppler has incurred excessive development costs associated with this simple Platt. Included in this was ongoing city fees, meetings costs, legal counsel and redundant survey expenses because the city allowed itself to be one of Mr. Ekblad's operatives for his own personal agenda. The financial stress has done its toll. The following areas could be looked into to make the final results more palatable for everyone. A) Review again the cost of the road for efficiency to lower as much as possible the per lot assessment. As an example: perhaps the running foot cost of material and labor is based on a wider dimension than the smaller 24 foot width. Also make it a point to have this project added to other street upgrades for a lower unit cost. B) Is it really appropriate to assess more fees? The city will be getting a property owner to grant extra easement footage on a 30 year old mistake. Any fees to correct that error should not be felt by the person who is HELPING the city solve that civic problem. C) Have Community Development keep the ball rolling to avoid any misfires and further delays. Upon final approval by the Council its requested that the Platt be ready for submission to the County for its review and approval and the filing fees be done the same day. Lastly I would like to thank you for your current recognirion and attenrion to making this small Platt and Public Works conundrum come to a just and final conclusion. Sincerely, Lany Poppler CC: Gary Stevenson, county surveyor p Z /Q S8 ? o o d" 36 ?-c Apri13, 1996 Mayor Thomas Egan Councii Members Planning Department City of Eagan RE: Poppler Homesteads T'hank you for your approvals of the plat that has taken over 6 years to recognize. I would to rebut Mr. Ekblads' presentation and to reinforce your decision. First, this person vr.ll take felse assumptions ans3 haLf trudts to solidify his position. The State Board of 3urveyors has on staff a member of the Attomey Generals' office. The Boards only mandate is to determine and discipline an enant surveyor. It is a weak mandate but in most cases is eff'ective. Mr. Ekblads' surveyor was disciplined and fined twice, Mr. Popplers' was not. The Board was in communication with the County Surveyor as to its findings and results. The letter sent by Mr. Gary Stevenson of the County sums up the cnix of the matter. Secondly, we have tried to be accommodating and compromising for years but Mr. Ekblad was either requesting more extracrion's or ignored the efforts. His argument that he wanted this resalved earlier is absurd and simply not true. As an l lth hour effort he wanted to do some negotiating. THIS PERSON IS NOT SATISFIED UNTIL HE GETS ALL OR SOMETHING OF WHAT DOESNT BELONG TO HIM. Mr. Ekblads' intentions were to delay confuse and lastly to create doubt for whatever ultimate purpose he has in mind. YOU MADE THE RIGHT DECISION TO MOVE FORWARD ON THIS WITH APPROVALS. ANYTHING ELSE WOULD HAVE PLACED THIS IN A NEW DIMENSION FOR THE CITY. , oppter XI- y cc: Mr, Gary Stevenson, Dakota County Surveyor 3636 /?'??? 2 Z/1? - ??.?,.•?»=-?,.-,,...?.,?++.+:? . • . . ... . . CITY OF EAGAN +E? I c; _ 73 3830 Pilot Knob Road, P.O. 8ox 21-799, Eagan, MN 55121 PHONE:454-8100 + - , BUILDING PERMIT Receipt x To be used tor DETACPEO GARACE Est. value fl g, 000 Date ]UNE S i y 91 Site Address 010 POpPLFR LJ4ti8 Lot A Black 00 SeGSub. POPPLER ROICSiE, Parcel No. •' W Name Ml"HAEL EKELM/TSARY 3 Address 3055 EACANDALE PL ° CitY EAGAti Phone 687-9831 `o Name EkBiAD CQtdTRACTl?aG ;s Address 2850 P).lAT lCW)B RD ' City EAGAN Phone 454-3113 r W w Name 38 Address `a zW City Phone 1 nereby acknowiege thal 1 have read this application and state that the inbrmation is correct antl agree to rAmply with all applicable State ot M,nnesota Sta:uies and City ot Eagag-Ortlinances. Signature of Permitee -- r •? +? -? %'? A euiming Permit is issuetl to: EY,BS.AD CpN'[RA"Z1tJC on the express contlition that all work shall be Gane in accortlanee with all appli;able State ol Minnesota Statutes and City of Eagan Oriintnces. Building pHiCial Occupanty 2ating (nauaq Caist (AJbwaEle) • oi swries Length Deo+h S.F. Tofal S.F. Fooiqinta On Sile Sewage on siie wen MWCC Syslem Cify waier PRV Pequiretl BoosterWmp APPROVALS Planner Countil Bltlg. ON. Variance OFFICE USE ONIY 3CL_ 3.:? 49ko 4% Bltlq. Perrttit Surcharge plan Feview snc, cay SAC.MCWCC Water Conn Water Meler Acp. Deposit S/W Permit SAN Surcnarge Treatmenl PI Roatl Unit Park DeE. Copies TOTAL FEES t1R9_M 7.7V 105.00 $274.50 i 07/05/95 VH20 MOTOR VEHICLE RECORD DIS'PLAY HELP 15:49:50 TYPE: P KEY: YU35705 0O8: PRDC RID: 90 FILE1: FILE2: FLRG: SUSP N OPER 078 PLATE: YU35705 STKR: T291250D EXR: 02 96 TRX: 90.00 PREV PLT: NWT334 VIN; F365PFC1746 YR: 79 MK: FORll STYLE: TK SERIE S: &ASE: 009000 COLOR: EMF'7Y W7: RXLES: MC ENG: RR aWN: 2 CLASS: 41 FUEL: N LRST TRANS: R DATE: al 27 95 NEW: BATCH: 5026021422 TITLE: V36504001 RRINT: TRF DATE: 12 28 94 ODOMETER: NR LIENS: 0 OWNER: EKBLAP MICHREL KENNETH DOP 01 13 19 52 ID: E214603465037 ADOR: 2860 PILO7 KNOS RD iST SECURED FRRYY: WDDR: llRTE OF LIEN: INSP INDC: N LESSEEi: LESSEE2: LESSEE3: ADDR: VH2Qi PLATE P10: YU3570' F'REV OWN: R$ES07T STEF'HEN MCMULLEN TRNYA RDDR: 2841 HIGHRIDGE EAGRN EAGAN REFUND SENT: ID 19 55121 RE ISSUE PLATE YEAR: DOB 07I0JJ9J VEHICLE PRIOR OWNERS 15:49:56 ? VIN NQ: F36SF'FC1746 JAMES DI]P: 092163 CREV OWN: JU 050464 TITLE: U29804016 TRF DT: 091784 TERRACE EXP: 0785 19 55121 ODOM : 0012977 NA EKHLAD MICHAEL KENNETH 011352 028'3Q19415 2860 PILOT KNOH RD 0785 ST F'AUL 19 55118 0000053 ------------------------------------------------------------------ 5-2-95 Doug Reid Licensing and Inspections City of Eagan RE: Expirarion of building permit for separate gazage for Mr. Mlichael K. Ekblad. The above person applied for a garage permit over 3 years ago. It has been at least 2 years since any work has been done to finish this structure. I have read the ordinace on this and pernuts are issued for a 6 month period. Any renewal requires approval and permit fees. I am requesting that your deparhment take a serious look at this. Listed below aze some of the neighborhood concerns. 1) Water runofffrom the proposed building and surounding parking area on to the adjacent lot. 2) Commercial usage of the building. The owner already has a 3 car stall garage with a basement. (equivalent to 6 stall space) 3) Ingress and egress of commercial earth moving vehicles in a area zoned residential. 4) Excessive storage of excavating equipment outside of separate gazage. 5) Over 200 dump truck loads of fill were brought in without any pernut or inspections by the city. Any other project in the city would have required permits, inspections and a landscape plan. Also enclosed is some documentation sent in 1993 concerning the above issues. I would like to request a cease and disist as of now on any further progress on this building. When a new permit is issued, neighborhood input should be involved with some restrictions. Any other approach could have some serious problems regarding its usage and purpose in the future. The permit was obtained on and for residenrial but has some potenrial applications for commercial usage. Sincerely, Lany Poppler cc: commui*?Jvelopment 5-11-95 Thomas Egan Mayor city of Eagan RE: Expiration of building permit for separate garage for Mr. Michael K. Ekblad The above person applied far a building peimit for a detached gmge on June 5th,1991. The ordinance for die permit allows 6 manths completion or else a new permit with a fee mvst be renewed. As mentioned in the enclosed material, work has not been done for over 2 years. The footings and blocks were done in 1991. Nothing was done since. My concern is that thete is akeady a 3 stall large garage attached to the residence which has a basement for entering machinery on the east side. The cwrent garage is equivalent to a 6 car unit It therefone seems logical that an additional detached garage has some potential applications for commeicial usage. At this point, the people that issue the petmits do not want to enforce the expirarion issue on this permit. Why? Enclosed is a copy of the rules for this issue. Also, I would like to request that in otder to renew a permit, a carefiil review should be done with appropriate restrictions, inspectiam, landscape and water runoff issues addressed. Thank you for your attentian on this matter. Lany Poppler 4548906 Enclosed: Letter seat 5-2-95 Letter sent in 1993 Buiiding pennit Regulations 401161citVoFcagan THOMAS EGAN MOYOr May 10, 1995 PATRICIA qWADA SHAWN MUNfER SANDRA A. MASIN Michael Ekblad THEODORE WaCHTER cou„cu Mw,+ce,r; 3070 Poppler Lane Eagan, Minnesota 55121 THOMAS HEDGES cinAQMiiiW,wa E.J. VAN OVERBEKE Cily Clbrt RE: Code YolaUon at 3070 Poppler Lane Mr. Ekbfad: The City of Eagan continuaily monitors health, safery, and aesthetic standards by monitoring land use requirements set by Ctty Code. Section 11.20, Subd. 5. A. does not allow outdoor storage of commercial trailers, building materials, or equipment in residentiat districts. The commercial traiier and any building materiais and equipment located on your property must be removed within ten (10) days of the date of this ietter. Also, if work is to commence on the garage, a new building permit wiil be required s3nce the project has been inactive for more than six months. Contact the Buiiding Inspections Division to obtain the permit. !f you have any furtfier questions regarding this matter, please call me at 681-4685. Thank you for your cooperaGon. ?in?ely, ? jl.'. Mike Ridley Plzr,r;ing Divisior poppler.307 MUNICIPAL CENTER 3870 PI101 KN08 OOAD EAGAN, MWNESOIA 55122.1897 PHONE: (612)OB{•4epp FA%:(612)dU1-4612 ioa (e12) oya-esas THE IONE OAK TREE THE SYMBOL OF STRENGiFI AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNtN Equal Opponunlty)qfllrmatlva Acfbn Employer MAINiENANCE FACILITY 3501 COACNMAN POINf EAGAN, MINNESOfA 5S1Y! PXONE: (61 2) Otl I •4700 cAx: (e I2) en I•a]eo 1 DO: (012) 45641535 ? . 41?ldtV oF eagan May 24, 1995 MR LARRY POPPLER 3030 POPPLER LANE EAGAN MN 55121 THOMAS EGAN Mayor PATRICIA AWADA SHAWN HUNTER SANDRA A. MASIN THEODORE WACHTER Counell Members THOMAS HEDGES Ciry Atlminisfrafor RE: EXPIRATION OF BUILDING PERMIT #19183 E. J. VAN OVERBEKE Ciry Clerk 3070 POPPLER LANE vear Larry: Your letter of May 11, 1995 expressed concem that the C'ity of Eagan has not enforced the expiration date of building permit #19183 issued on June 5, 1991 to Michael Ekblad for construction of a detached garage on his property. For your information, I am attaching a copy of a letter dated May 10, 1995 to Michael Ekblad regarding this matter sent by Project Planner Mike Ridley. On May 23, 1995, a follow-up inspection by our Protective Inspections staff disclosed that no work has commenced at this site other than installation of a foundation. Follow-up inspections will be made at this site to insure that construction activity does not occur without the proper permits. Further concerns regarding this matter should be addressed to Chief Building Official Doug Reid at 3501 Coachman Pointe. Sincerely, Tom Hedges City Administrator TH/js attach. cc: Doug Reid, Chief Building Official William Bruestle, Senior Inspector MUNICIPAL CENiER 3830 PIIOT KNOB ROAD EAGAN. MINNESOiA 551 22-18 9 7 PHONE: (612) 681-4600 FAX: (612) 681-4672 iDD: (612) 454-8535 THE LONE OAK TREE THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY Equat Opportunlty/A(flrmatlve Action Empfoyer MAINTENANCE FACILITY 3501 COACHMAN POINT EAGAN. MINNESOTA 55122 PHONE: (612) 681•4300 FAX: (612) 687 -4360 iDD: (612) 454-8535 / (?, ?- ? ? 9?v - <r e/! fLI/'IL o. -vti J P ? ? ? ?pJ? ??A ?i? O?i?-? J?/ ?' ? ?u ? v-!\ ?,,? a? o? P? c4'V 61? ? Ped <? /??j,1 r% ? •? ??'re?f? Ci?.?l/lc=v??? f ro^?jC/? `, - ?G?,-- ?'/ ? P-C?..??/'? ?"G'? , ?41 V l` ? U ? 6-7-95 City of Eagan Community Development Attn: Mike Ridley RE: Outdoor storage of commercial trailers by Michael Ekblad I received a copy of yow letter sent to Mr.Ekblad on May lOth. For yow records it is almost one month and the commercial trailer is still in outdoor storage in a residential district. This person that he di ive notice or that he is be ng picked on. Ho the real eart of the matter is that he wants W set a precedent so that ev tuall the area will always allow ungaraged commercial trailers, buildin materials and equipment. this matter. S' ly, P i cc: Doug Reid Tom Hedges Tom Egan 7-4-95 Mayor Thomas Egan City of Eagan, Mn. On 5-23-95 I met with Mr. Michael Ridley of the City Planning Department regarding some issues and concerns. Since some of these issues were not addressed, on 7-3-95 a follow-up meeting I asked some pointed questions concerning those issues and concerns. Mike Ridley just walked out of the room without allowing me to finish. I was left with a more accommodating building inspector. But some of the issues were not in his area. with City Planning? Larry Poppler 3030 Poppler Ln. Eagan, Mn. 55121 cc: City Council Members . ?. r ? c. ?UL THOMASEGAN Ma}ror PATRICIA AWADA SHAWN HUNTER SANDRA A. MASIN THEODORE WACHiER CouncO Members June 30, 1995 LARRY POPPLER 3030 POPPLER DRIVE EAvRN iNM 55121 RE: 3070 Poppler Drive Dear Larry: THOMAS HEDGES Clry Atlminlsitator E.J. VANOVERBEKE Clty Clerk T'hank you for taking the rime to meet with me on May 23, 1995, regazding the above referenced matter. As we discussed, I have reviewed City records and spoken with appropriate staff relating to ihe issues raised in yow letter to Doug Reid dated May 2,_1995 (enclosed). I also met with Michael Ekblad regarding my letter m him dated May 10,1995 (enclosed). The issues raised in your letter have been addressed as follows: Storm water run o,f[/RIl brouQht to stte. The building permit for 3070 Poppler Drive was reviewed by the City's Engineering and Protective Inspections Divisions in late May of 1991. Recently, an Engineering staff person again reviewed the survey and made a site visit Among other things, issuing a building permit requires review and analysis by the Ciry Engineering Dix.!ision of the proposed storm drainage pattem based on the existing and proposed elevations provideci on the Certifecate of Survey_ The Engineering Division believes the home was built as proposed and ihat storm drainage is adequate. Fill brought to the site to develop the property as depicted on the Certificate of Survey submitted for the building permit does not require a separate pernvi has issued a permit for work on the site). 411"'IcitVioFacgion Commercial use of propertv/commercial equinment storaQe As we discussed, Larry, commercial operarions and commercial equipment storage aze not allowed uses in the R-1 Zoning District. I have discussed this issue with the Mr. Ekblad and he has assured me that the trailer stored on his property is for his personal use and that there wili be no. commercial operarions at this property (unless the business conforms with the City's Home Occuparion Ordinance or the City MUNICIPAL CENTER THE LONE OAK TREE MAINTENANCE FACILIiY 9830 PILOi KNOB ROAD EAGAN, MINNESOTA 55122-1897 THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNRV 9501 COACHMAN POINi EAGAN, MINNESOTA 55122 PHONE: (612) 681-4600 PHONE: (612) 681-4300 Fax: (e12) 681•4612 Equal Opportunlty/Atflrmative Acflon Employer . FAX: (612) Set-a%o iDD:(612)454-8535 TDD:(612)454-8535 ; .. ._ , ., . , _ . .. ?.? . :,.. . _ , i ' . ,. . ... . BuiJdinQ permit The City has informed Mr. Ekblad that the bwlding permit issued for the detached garage has to be renewed before any further work can commence on the garage (Mr. Ekblad renewed the building permit on June 26, 1995). As we discussed, Larry, at the building permit stage of development, the applicant is required to meet specific performance standards (e.g. setbacks) in order for the City to issue the bwlding permit The City'cannot deny abuilding permit based on what the building may or may not be used for. What the City can do, and has done in this case, is to make sure the property owner is aware of uses that are permitted in a particular Zoning District. I believe this letter responds to all of your concerns, Larry. wntact me. Thank you again for your time. . ieJ 1Y, f?( Mike Ridley Planner If you have any questions please cc: Tom Hedges, City Administrator Doug Reid, Chief Building Official /.. . ? ?? ?? ?„' _ ..?-,? 7-4-95 Mayor Thomas Egan City of Eagan, Mn. On 5-23-95 I met with Mr. Michael Ridley of the City Planning Department regarding some issues and concerns. Since some of these issues were not addressed, on 7-3-95 a follow-up meeting I asked some pointed questions concerning those issues and concerns. Mike Ridley just wa.lked out of the room without allowing me to finish. I was le8 with a more accommodating building inspector. But some of the issues were not in his area. What's wrong with City Planning? Sincerely, Larry Poppler 3030 Poppler Ln. Eagan, Mn. 55121 cc: City Council Members 7-7-95 To the City of Eagan Tom Hedges City Administrator Tom Egan Mayor Patricia Awada Shawn Hunter Sandra Masin Ted Wachter RE: Continuation of letter dated 7-6-95 concerning community development On July 6th, I received a letter form Mr Mike Ridley of community development. This was a report that he had promised to prior to the issuance of a permit approval. As you can see, the letter is dated June 30th 1995. The post mark on the envelope is stamped July Sth 1995. Isn't it interesting to note that the postmazk on the envelope is stamped one working day after Mr. Ridley walked out of a meeting on July 3rd. If he had the report done, why didn't he produce it on July 3rd. It is highly irregulaz to produce a report AFTER a permit approval. Sincerely, Lazry Poppler Enclosures: copy of above referenced letter and envelope _ city of eagan 'ga MEMO TO: DOUG REID, CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL MIKE DOUGHERTY, CITY ATTORNEY STEVE DORGAN, ZONING & CODE ENFORCEMENT FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: SEPTEMBER 9, 7996 SUBJECT: ORDINANCE ENFORCEMENT RELATIVE TO PROPERTY OWNED BY EKBLADS I felt our meeting on Friday, September 6, with Larry Poppler was very helpful. In reviewing my notes, I felt it would be helpful to summarize Larry's concerns and our response to each of the issues. 1) Commercial Parking on Pilot Knob Road--Mr. Poppler expressed a concern that commercial equipment is being parked at 2960 Pilot Knob Road, which is in violation of the residential use of that property. He was told by Steve Dorgan that the City has received complaints and has asked that the equipment be moved from Mr. Ekblad's property to a location that is properly zoned. Mr. Poppler expressed concem that the equipment will be moved from that site to Poppier Lane and stored on Mike Ekblad's property. Staff assured Mr. Poppler that if this occurs, the City will initiate the same regulatory enforcement as they did for the 2960 Pilot Knob Road proPertY• 2) Garaae-Mr. Poppler expressed concern that the detached auxiliary garage that Mike Ekblad constructed at his property on Poppler Lane will be used for storage of commercial equipment. He further expressed concerns over outside storage of equipment at that location. Again, staff reassured Mr. Poppler that the City will use its enforcement mechanism for outside storage if heavy equipment is being stored on the property. 3) Garage Construction--Mr. Poppler expressed concern that Mr. Ekblad is intentionally delaying completion of his garage and it is a financial detriment to the marketing of residential lots adjacent to the garage facility. The City Attorney felt it was appropriate to ask Mr. Ekblad for some type of commitment as to when he plans to complete the garage. However, he cautioned Mr. Poppler that the Uniform Building Code is quite specific that if Mr. Ekbtad continues working on his garage, there is no requirement for a compietion date. 4) LQLLin-g-There was some limited discussion on the lot line issue which everyone agreed, including Mr. Poppler, is a private matter between the Ekblads and Popplers. \ City Administrator cc: Larry.Poppler File . ? TLH/vmd • -. _ , 5^F-_s..w+? ? o-?y o? ? ?h.0.?-°?. ,At? ".?`' °.Q? S"? I -Ik` Lu=?C)ak ? (! o?.?-?? c-ti-`3. P ?,. eC"Cl? o? ?o ste? ,p ? ?,? , w • _ ? ?,?. s` ? s ????- " `? c ?- ? P?O`1' wl2 ? co vW.vw?w.?.? a-JN 4- a vJ?? 4,-SL- I-, 1 • _ _ _ _ .. _ _. ? ,. 9-6-96 Thomas Hedges City Administrator City of Eagan RE: AN ISSUE OF CREDITABILITY AND CONFIDENCE AS TO CONSISTENT ENFORCEMENT OF ORDINANCES BY CONIMUNITY DEVELOPMENT THERE APPEARS TO BE INADEQUATE FOLLOW-UP OF ENFORCEMENT OF ORDINANCES WHICH LEADS TO CERTAIN PATTERNS OF BEHAVIOR. 1) Mr. Ridley was informed in summer of 1995 that there was commercial parking of vehicles ungaraged at 2 locations on Pilot Knob Rd. Both locations were informed of the violations. One location conected the infraction and the other did not. The location at 2960 Pilot Knob Rd ignored the notice as they have for years from other complaints. Again in 1996, Mr. Ridley has said that "we aze currentty working with thE property owner to remove the commercial vehicles for tlvs property". The location ia even more ctuttered with these vehicles. It can be asserted that nothing will be done. Photo enclosed. 2) Since nothing was followed up over the years at that location, the Ekblad's took the bold step to install an industrial size accessory building at another location. He may have been told that he could not use this site as commercial application with his commercial vehicles but historically this threat was perceived to be meaningless. 3) The very size (almost 1,000 square feet of floor space, side walls of 16' with garage doors of 14) could be interpreted as another primary building on the same residenrial site. Especially when it is used as such. The assessors could spfit zone the location for property tax purposes. The building as it stands now is unfinished on the outside and the cement floor is not poured. The city has expressed now that they will enforce the ordinance concerning commercial usage. Consequently, the owner is left with a building that can't be used for what is structurally designed. The building has remained uafinished for over one year. The tu paper and some of the overhang has been damaged by the last storm. It is in fact abandoned. Why would anyone invest money to complete a building that may not be used what it is designed for? At the same time pay even higher property taxes. 4) It is absurd for the City of Eagan to assert that it is now a persona] matter between neighbors and the city will not do anything to solve this conundrum. CONCLUSION Failure to provide adequate follow-up of concerns over the years and any future failwe to monitor this situation can logically led to the assumption that there exists a certain bias for those that have a philosophy of usurping for tangible gain. . September 4, 1996 Following is a chronology of events that have taken place between Lazry Poppler, Mike Ekblad, and the City of Eagan: 6/591: Building permit to construct gazage issued to Mike Ekblad. 4/26/93: In a letter to City Attomey Mike Dougherty, Larry Poppler agreed to move the lot line of OuUot A, Poppler Homesteads Addition, plat. 6/10/9 : Larry Poppler wrote a letter to Assistant to the City Admuustrator, Jon Hohenstein, requesting to minimize the escrow account being drained on the final plat. 7/11/93: In a letter to City Planner Jim Sturm, Larry Poppler expressed the following: - concems over grading of Ekblad's lot - water drainage and erosion - gazage permit his expired. 10/1 : In a letter to 7im Sturm, Lazry Poppler expresses the following: - concerns over storage of bobcat and use of lot - backhoe - potential commercial use of property - expired building permit. 4/4/94: In a letter to Jun Sturm, Larry Poppler idenrified the differences in surveys from Bernard Lazson, County Surveyor, and Cordes and writes to Wayne Cordes asking for a change in the survey. 4 11 /94: Mike Dougherty writes a letter to Larry Poppler informing him that: - the properry line dispute is between Larry and his neighbor. - the City's position is that of an innocent bystander. 4/14/94: Larry Poppler writes a letter to Mike Dougherty expressing his disagreement that the City is simply an innocent bystander. 12/7/9 • Lany Poppler sends letter to Tom Hedges asking that the City reconsider its position as an innocent bystander. 12/8/94: Jon Hohenstein sends letter to Larry Poppler reaffirming the City's position as an innocent bystander. 2 1/ 3/95: Larry Poppler sends letter to Jim Stutm requesting reinstatement of ttte platting process. 5/2/95: Larry Poppler sends letter to Chief Building Official Doug Reid questioning: - drainage - if the building permit has expired far Ekblad's garage commercial use of Ekblad's gazage - Ekblad's lot is used for storage of excavation equipment - the amount of fill on Ekblad's lot. 5/1 : Senior Planner Mike Ridley sends letter to Mike Ekblad requesting: - removal of outdoor storage - no commencement of work on gazage until a new building pernut is issued. 5/11 /95: Letter from Larry Poppler to Mayor Egan questioning expiration of this 6uilding pernut and commercial use of site. 5/24/95: Letter from 5enior Inspector Bill Bruestle to Mike Ekblad reaffirms the need for a new building permit. Tom Hedges sends letter to Lany Poppler responding to concerns in his May 11,19951etter to Mayor Egan. He tells Lany that Mr. Ekblad has been notified that a new building permit is required before work can begin on his gazage. 6/7/95: Larry Poppler sends letter to Mike Ridley compiaining about: - the trailer being pazked outside. - commercial use of property. 6/ 26/95: Second building permit issued to Mike Ekblad for gazage. 6/30/95: Mike Ridley sends letter to Larry Poppler advising that: - the home is built as proposed. - storm drainage is adequate. - Ekblad informed him that no commercial operations were taking place on his properry and that the trailer was for his own personal use. - A new building permit was issued to Mr. Ekblad on June 26, 1995. There was no basis to deny renewing the permit based on what the building may, or may not be used for. /95: A mee6ng took place between Larry Poppler, Bill Bruestle, and Mike Ridley to discuss the size and use of Ekblad's garage. 7/4/95: Larry Poppler sends letter to Mayor Egan accusing Mike Ridley of walking out of 7/3/95 meeting. 7/695: In a letter to the Mayor, Councilmembers, and Tom Hedges, Lany Poppler:: - expressed concem that neighbors were not notified before issuing a building permit to Mike Ekblad. - questioned the dollar value of the garage and cost of the building pernut. - He did not like the size of the garage or its potential use and questioned if gazage was higher than the house. 7110/95: Larry Poppler sends a letter to Councilmembers Awada and Wachter: - claiming that the neighbors should have been notified before issuing a building permit. - questioned the permit price. - states that the Community Development Deparfinent is out of control. 7/31/95: Mayor Egan responds to Larry's letter of July 6, 1995: - the City does not share his perceptions about the way this matter is being handled. - the gazage is in conformance with City Codes. - the City is not required to notify neighbors before issuing a building permit. - Mike Ridley left the 7/3 meeting because Larry and Bill Bruestle were going over building permit matters and he felt his issues were complete. - Due to the substantial amount of time given to the problem by staff, there was no systematic failure of Community Development. - The gazage is in conformance and Larry's concerns aze lazgely due to personal matters. 12/21/95: Framing inspection was made on gazage. 2/8/96: Letter from Lazry Poppler to Mayar and City Councilmembers claims: - the City delayed platting Poppler Homesteads Addition for five years due to boundary disputes. - there have been excessive development costs associated with this development. 3/3/96: Letter from Lazry Poppler to Mayor and Councilmembers thanks the City for approving his plat that has taken over six yeazs to recognize. /2 9: Letter from Lazry Poppler to Mayor Egan claiming: - garage is non-conforming due to height and squaze footage. - permit should have not heen issued due to survey dispute. - 2860 Pilot Knob Road is being used to store trucks and heavy equipment. - extending the garage at 2860 Pilot Knob site was ignoring residential setbacks. 6/21/96: Tom Hedges answers Lany Poppler's May 28 letter to the Mayor stating: - the height and size of the garage is in conformance. - the City had no legal basis to deny a building permit. - the setbacks at 2860 Pilot Knob Road were deviated by a variance approved by the City on November 15, 1983. 7/17/96: Memo from Pat Awada to Tom Hedges requesting: - is the building perxnit expired - is Ekblad using the gazage for non-residential use. 7/19/96: Site inspection of gazage revealed soffit work and trimmers were recently added. 7/22/96: In a memo to Doug Reid, Dale Schoeppner responds to Awada's concems: - the permit is stili valid. - commercial activity has not been noticed on-site. 7/30/96: Letter from Larry Poppler to Tom Hedges - disputes definition of height. - says gazage is industrial size - questions use of the garage. - claims City hastily renewed permit and that permits only remain in effect for six months. - claims footings were approved even though not worked on and building is not finished. - trailer on site is licensed as "commercial". - Pilot Knob site is being used for dump trucks. 8/696: Letter from Doug Reid/Mike Ridley to Larry Poppler responding to July 301etter: - reaffirms that the gazage is in conformance with size and height requirements of City Code. ' - there is no evidence of commercial activity on-site. - provided name and address to send comments regazding definition of height. - states that permit is valid as long as work is not abandoned more than 180 days - Ekblad has assured the City that he is not using his trailers for commercial use. - footings were inspected at the proper time - the City is currendy working with Mr. Ekblad regarding 2860 Pilot Knob Road for parking violations of commercial vehicles. 8/15/96: Letter from Lazry Poppler to Planner Shannon Tyree states that a boulder retaining wall is located in the easement. Letter forwarded to Mike Foertsch, Engineering Department. 8/23/96: Letter from Larry Poppler to Mayor Egan states that no work has been done on the gazage since last fall; pounding a few nails every 179 days is a liberal interpretation of the Code; and there is storage of commercial vehicles at 2860 Pilot Knob Road. fcD 8-15-96 Shannon Tyre Community Development City of Eagan Dear Ms. Tyre, As we discussed, Mr. Ekblad has extended a large boulder formation from his property into the recorded drainage easement of lot #3 Poppler Homesteads #2 (east boundary) This extension of the rock barrier from Mr. Ekblads property extends at least 6 feet into the public dedicated easement. This can disrupt the normal water flow away from the 10' public water drain easement onto non easement areas. There is a safety factor also, by the fact that these uncemented bouiders could shift and fall (which could pose a hazard to unsuspecting children). This is no ordinary landscape formation! LasHy Mr. Ekblad placed these boulders there knowing that it was questionable. I understand that the city will aliow insignificant landscape done on easement property within its borders. However, if these huge rocks (which crossed the line) were allowed to remain indefinitely, they would create a prescriptive right to stay. Consequently Mr. Ekblad could somehow usurp that property with said easement recorded. (This information was given from two separate sources of legal counsel.) Why does the city have and create recorded easements if this were allowed to happen? I beGeve that the water easement on lot #3, was required as a necessary pubGc interest and should be a city concern! Thank you for looking into this matter. Sincerely, Larry Poppler cc: Tom Hedges, City Administration J ? lZ ?,Fr?d4 MEMO TO: COUNCILMEMBER HUNTER FROM: AS5ISTANT TO THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR HOHENSTEIN DA7E: AUGUST 16, 1996 SUBJECT: POPPLER CONCERNS - COMMERCIAL USE OF ECKBLAD PROPERTY Attached is a memo from the Community Development Department concerning Mr. Poppler's issue about perceived commercial activities at the home of Michael Eckblad. The department's investigation was followed by a series of site visits and letters, the most recent of which is in the informative section of this week's packet. Mr. Eckblad's garage is large and it is unusual for someone to have a bobcat at a private residence, but repeated responses to Mr. PopplePs complaints have not revealed any code violation. There is no question that these two people irritate each other and Mr. Poppier would like to see Mr. Eckblad be cited for something. So far, our staff has not been able to substantiate any of the claims. The onty legitimate issue between them seems to be the lot-line dispute which can only be resolved between the parties, privately if possible or in court if not. Please call me if you have questions or wish additional detail. ? ? As ant to the City Administrator f i.. Sk.?J.::. 1 , city of eagan TO: JON HOHENSTEIN, ASSISTANT TO THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: MIKE RIDLEY, SENIOR PLANNER DATE: AUGUST 15, 1996 SUBJECT: BACKGROUND - LAWRENCE POPPLER VS. MICHAEL EKBLAD MEMO In a May 2, 7995 letter to Doug Reid, Larry Poppler expressed concerns regarding a building permit for a detached garage on property located at 3070 Poppler Lane. In this letter he discussed numerous items ranging from water run-off from the proposed building and surrounding parking area, commercial use of the building, ingress/egress of commercial earthmoving vehicles to and from the site, excessive storage of excavating equipment on-site, and fill associated with the construction of the house and garage on-site. Based on Mr. Poppler's complaint of a commercial operation on Mr. Ekblad's property, I sent a letter to Michael Ekblad dated May 10, 1995 outlining permitted home occupations and explained that anything other than those home occupations listed were in violation of the Eagan City Code. On May 23, 1995, I met with Mr. Poppler at his house and discussed the issued raised in his May 2 ietter to Doug Reid. Subsequent to that, I met with Mr. & Mrs. Ekblad at the Maintenance Facility and discussed the issues raised in Larry's letter and the commercial use of the property. At that time, Mr. Ekblad assured me that the trailer stored on his property was for personal use and lhere would be no commercial operations on his property unless they conformed to the Home Occupation Ordinance or he received a building permit for work on-site from the City of Eagan. He stated that the bobcat he operates on his site is not a commercial vehicle and is solely for his personal use that includes clearing snow and various site work applications associated with his single family residence. Jon, if you would like further information or documentation, please let me know. Senior Planner MR/js , , . ? city oF eagan lii, iHOMAS EGAN Mayor August 6, 1996 MR LARRY POPPLER 3030 POPPLER LANE EAGAN MN 55121 RE: 3070 POPPLER LANE Dear Mr Poppler: PATRICIA AWADA SHAWN HUNTER SANDRA A. MASIN THEODORE WACHiER Cauncil Members THOMAS HEDGES City Atlminizitaroi E. J. VAN OVERBEKE City Clerk The City Administrator forwarded your July 30 letter to our department for review and comment in an effort to end the controversy that exists over the above-referenced property. You interpret the definition of height in the Uniform Building Code as being "loose." Please feel free to forward your comments regarding this code to: International Conference of Building Officials, 5360 Workman Mill Road, Whittier, CA 90601-2298; telephone: (310) 699-0541. Enclosed with your letter was a City of Eagan handout for accessory buildings. We would like you to note that this handout includes a reference to the U.B.C. definition of height. You continue to refer to this garage as being "industrtal" size or "non-conforming". The City of Eagan Zoning Code does not contain a maximum height for overhead doors. Further, there is no evidence that the garage is being used in conjunction with an iilegal home occupation. All structures located at 3070 Poppler Lane are consistent with the R-1 (single family) zoning. As previously explained in the Mayor's letter of July 31, 1995 and the City Administrator's letter of June 21, 1996, this garage is in conformance with City Code. As you are aware, the original building permit to construct the garage did expire and a new permit was applied for and granted. The Uniform Building Code, Section 106.4.4 states that a building permit is valid indefinitely as long as work is not abandoned for more than MUNICIPAL CENTER 3830 CILOi KNOB ROAD EAGAN. MINNESOiA 551221897 CHONE: (612) 681-4600 FAx:(612) 681-4612 10D: (612) 454 8535 THE LONE OAK TREE THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY Equol OpportunitylAffirmative Action Employer MAINiENANCE FACIIITY 3501 COP.CHMAN POINi EAGAN. MINNESOiA 55122 PHONE. (612)6B1-4300 FA%'. (612) 6814360 iDD: (612) a54.8535 r' 180 days. You are correct in stating thai permits have an expiration date; however, the City h2s no control over a permit remaining active as long as work is not abandoned. This means that a permit holder can simply pound a few naiis into his project every 179 days to keep a permit active. Regardless of the type of trailer license, Mr. Ekblad has assured the City that this trailer is being used for personal haufing only. City Code does not prohibit outside storage of trailers of this type. The footings for the garage were inspected after excavation and forming. We do not have an issue with the workmanship or the irtspections of these footings. You also inquired about the parking of commercial vehicles at 2860 Pilot Knob Road. The City has inspected this property and found a violation specific to the parking of commercial vehicies on a residential lot (Sec. 11.20, Subd.5 of the City Code) and we are currently working with the property owner to remove the commercial vehicles from this property. Although you may not agree with these responses, the position of the City stands unless the conditions change at this site. If you would like to meet and further discuss your concerns, please contact me at 681-4695 or Mike Ridley at 681-4689. Sincerely, U Doug Reid Chief Buiiding Official 5incerely, !? ll? ' Mike Ridley Senior Planner DR/MRfjs i" ?. ? ~>N 1 - city of eagan VIA FACSIMILE: 222-7625 TO: PAT AWADA FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: JULY 17, 1996 SUBJECT: POPPLER/ECKBLAD PROPERTYISSUE pov?' MEMO Following are key items from our file regarding this issue. We have actively pursued and responded to each of the zoning issues the Poppler's have raised and we have suggested on numerous occasions that Larry needs to resolve the property line issue privately. This includes the height of the garage issue that Doug worked on. The City has no jurisdiction in a property line dispute, but it is especially the case since the Popplers platted the property and sold the lot to the Eckblads. City Administrator lilo?llcitV oF eagan ? THOMASEGAN Moyor June 21, 1996 MR LARRY POPPLER 3030 POPPLER LANE EAGAN MN 55121 ??...? Dear?7lt?Ra{??er: PAiRICIA AWADA SHAWN HUNiER SANDRA A. MASIN THEOOORE WACHTER Council Members THOMAS HEDGES City AtlminMrabt E. J. VAN OVERBEKE CHy Cierk The Mayor forvvarded your letter of May 28 to my office to prepare a response regarding the concerns you have with the property at 3070 Poppler Lane. I asked the Buiiding Inspections Division to perform an on-site inspection to address your issue with garage height. The peak of the garage appears to be at an elevation higher than the house when referenced from Poppler Lane; however, this is not the reference point that is to be used. Eagan City Code, Section 11.10, Subd. 5 states m part , ...... no accessory building shall exceed the height of the principal building." City Code does not include a definition of "heighY'. The 1994 Uniform Building Code, as adopted in Section 4.01 of the Eagan City Code, defines height as follows: Height of buiiding is the vertical distance above a reference datum measured to the highest point of the coping of a flat roof or to the deck line of a mansard roof or to the average height of the highest gable of a pitched or hipped roof. The handbook to the Uniform Building Code states, "Where the building is stepped or terraced, the code intends that the height of such building is the maximum height of anv seament of the buildinq." According to field measurements, the height of the house is 28'6" and the garage is 28' high; therefore, the height of the garage is consistent with City Code requirements. MUNICIPAL CENTER THE IONE OAK TREE MAIN7ENANCE FACILITY 3830PilOi KNOB ROnO EAGAN, MINNE50lA 55122-1897 THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY 3501 COACHMAN vOMt - EAGAN. MINNESOTA 55122 PHONE: (612) E81-4600 PHONE: (612) 681 4300 FAx: (612) 6e1-4612 Equol OppoituNty/Attlrmatlve Actlon Employet FAX: (612) 681-4360 TDD: (612) 454-8535 1DD: (612) 454-0535 . Another concern raised in your letter was the timing of the issuance of the building permit. Although there was a question regarding the property line, the building permit was issued based on the fact that the required information was provided to the City by Mr. Ekblad and his licensed land surveyor. The setbacks on the survey and on site were verified to meet City standards. As such, the City had no legal basis for delaying or denying the permit or failing the inspections after the permit was issued. Your letter also mentioned that the City's residential setback requirements allowed Mr. Ekblad to extend a garage into said setbacks for property located at 2860 Pilot Knob Road. The setback requirement was deviated from by a formal Variance granted by the Eagan City Council at its regular meeting of November 15, 1983. As referenced in Mayor Egan's July 31, 1995 letter to you and City staffs recent on-site survey inspection, Mr. Ekblad's garage is in conformance with City Code. Larry, I understand your concern that the zoning laws appear to have been ignored; however, City staff has expended a substantial amount of time over the fast several years verifying that the zoning laws have been properly complied with and have also been very attentive to your concerns. If you have other concerns that have not been addressed, feel free to contact City staff Sincerely, \ \ Q TvL_ Thomas L. Hedges City Administrator TLH/js y ;. y Lazry Poppler 3030 Poppler Eagan, Mn. 55121 5-28-96 Mayor Thomas Eagan City of Eagan Eagan, MN. Dear Mayor, Wahin the tast year the City of Eagan has taken some positive steps to improve public communication and to listen to cirizens' concerns. Even with positive changes undenvay, I still find it necessary to draft this letter outlining serious inconsistencies and unfair applications of city zoning rules and laws favoring Mr. Michaei Ekbtad over the interest of Mr. Lawrence G. Poppler and other neighboring property owners. In previous correspondence I informed you about Mr, Ekblad's non-conforming garage in a residential area: This correspondence underlines our serious concem for action given evidence of the City of Eagan's preferential treatment of Mr. Ekblad's commercial activiries which develue the property interests of present and future property owners in this residential area. We fimily feel that a very strong case can be made demonstrating blatant disregard in ihe City's obGgation to "use due caze" in the enforcement of zoning rules and laws. We feel that this lack of due care can be interpreted as a"willful negligence of duty" which has resulted in an uousual eCOnomiC benefit for one citizen (Mr. Ekblad) at the expense of another ciiizen (Mr. Lavrrence G. Poppler). The following facts and circumstances are all demottstrable. a. According to Eagan building codes, detached buildings, such as a garage, should not be of a height higher than the primary residence (i.e., ihe house). The enclosed picture is one of many that we retain which show that the garage is higher than the house. Use the I,eMay Lake apartments as your point of reference, or come and visuatly inspect this situarion yourself b. There can be only one primary building on a residential lot according to the Uniform Building Code. The garage is more than a story high with 16 foot sidewalls (before the lowest point of the roof eaves) with essentialty a basic floor plan, the dimension of which is 990 square feet. The sheer size of ths square footage competes in slze and appearance with W. Ekblad's house and with neighboring houses (present and future). The 12 to 14 foot tall gazage doors more than suggest that Mr. Ekblad has commercial industrial vehicles and equipment to store. ? r Much evidence indicates that this industrial sized gazage functions as something more than "storage" unit. Basic property assessments have to evaluate locations meeting certain functionality tests. This industrial sized garage is being used for Mr. Ekblad's contracting and excavating business. As this garage funcrions for that pwpose, how Can a person escape the conclusfon that the structure oreates a second primary structure on a residential lot? Examine enciosed photos. c. This industrial sized garage was approved by city inspectors when a survey determination was still betng reviewed by the City of Eagan. Normally, a building permit would not be issued or re-issued until that kind of detemrination was finalized. Buiidings have certain setback requirements. However, Eagan's Community Devetopment wiih Mr. Michael Ridley's approval, allowed the permit to be renewed despite a pending survey deterrnination. On this issue, one has to question not only whether the City of Eagan acted with "due care" but also whether "witifui negligence" was operating. How does one eacplain the favorable treatment given Mr. Ekblad in light of the fact that the Ciry of Eagan would not issue the adjoining property (lots owned by W. Lawrence G. Poppler) a plat for over a period of six years? We also claim that the renewal while the boundary dispute was pending led to a favorable treatment for W. Ekblad that he wouid have not otherwlse obtained had the norma] procedures for building approval been followed. d. The City o£Eagan held a series of informationat meetings ostensibly for the public. At one of those meetings, I questioned Mr. Doug Reid (chief building inspector) on the height issue of Mr. Ekblad's garage. Mr. Reid merely cut the topic short by insisting that Community Development approved the garage and that "it wasn't his departmenYs fault". A question I now raise is "why dces the city pay inspectors when they don't bother to use the measuring devices at their disposat to enforce the rules?" To elaborate, the city inspectors have failed to enforce the dump truck/heavy equipment prolribitions in the case of Mr. Ekbtad's other residential property at 2860 Pilot Knob Rd. Moreover, Mr. Ekblad has been allowed to extend a garage ignoring the residential setback requirements at the 2860 Pilot Knob location. Tlvs residentiai location has been made into an excavating business also. At that same location, this spring, he has placed class 5 grxvel and gaded it on vlas Lane. to repair damage done by his vehicles and equ'rpment. These trivialized applications of the zoning and building ordinances in the favor of Mr. Ekblad are documeMed and easily demonstrable. I am concemed that my father, Lawrence G. Poppler, and his family have been unduly harmed by lack of due care and wiliful negligence on the part of the City of Eagan. VYe-are interested in some answers and proper embers, City Administrator, Dakota Counry Treasurer Mr. Thomas Novak 7-6-95 To City of Eagan: Tom Hedges City Administrator Tom Eagan Mayor Patricia Awada Council Member Shawn Hunter Council Member Sandra Masin Council Member Ted Wachter Council Member RE: Re-issue of detached garage pennit to Michael K. Ekblad Is it "community development" ????????? ISSUE: The Community Development Deparhment reissued a permit for a detached garage without allowing FLTLL DISCLOSURE AND CONSIDERATION to adjoining neighbors. This is not an ordinary building permit situation as there are no other Rl residenriallocarions that have ALL the following characterisrics. 1) This location has a 3 stall garage attached to the house and now a 3 stall detached garage for a total of 6 stalls ( the attached garage also has a basement ) 2) The detached 3 sta11 garage is a high profile 14 foot from floor to bottom of the rafters. It is accessible for dump truck type of vehicles. 3) The permit was approved for a person who is in the business of using these vehicles i.e.: hauling dirt, excavating and snow plowing. (This alone would be enough for community planning to call a serious "time out" for some discussions) BASIS GIVEN BY MICHAEL RIDLEY FROM COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FOR THE REISSUE AND THE WAY TT WAS HANDLED: The homeowner identified to Mr. Ridley that the equipment was for personal use and the building will be used for storage. Mr.Ridley's response to the citizens in the neighborhood was that a "person can build a structure for storage. If the equipment were used for business, then the owner is out of compliance with the Rl zone. However, the enforcement would be hard to prove but it would be looked into." RESPONSE: Listed below are some very clear and solid reasons to question the purpose (for the permit)given by the property owner for his oversized garage. 1) The records show with the state that he owns a dump truck. The dump truck is painted to resemble a MnDot vehicle. Currently it is stored outside along with bobcat at 2860 Pilot Knob Rd. Enclosed is a copy of the that vehicle registration. He has a plow attachment for large area plowing. 2) The original gazage permit dated 6-5-91 identifies "Ekblad Excavating" at 2860 Pilot Knob Rd. This document is filed with the city. 3) The dump truck with the plow attachment is used for winter plowing along with his 2 pickup trucks with plow attachments. This person has a plow route and the equipment is owned to make money. 4) I had a short opportunity to visit with a more accommodating inspector on 7-3-95 and he showed me the architects plan for the garage. Qn the lower right hand corner "Ekblad Construcrion Co." is given along with the address of 3055 Eagandale Pl, Eagan, Mn. This where Mr.Ekblad resided before he moved. The architect name is Gene Lang Designs, 1887 Bell Rd. Eagan, 454-2899. This also is in possession of community development. 5) T'he above is hard evidence that Mr. Ekblad's credibility is in question and that was mentioned to W. Ridley. He also knew that Mr. Ekblad lost his teaching job due to not telling the truth for economic gain. NOW BEING INFORMED VERBALLY AND IN WRITING WOULD'T IT MAKE SENSE FOR MR RIDLEY AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TO GIVE CAREFUL ISSUE ANALYSIS??????? ? TIME LINE May 2, 1995 Sent letter to Doug Reid chief building official May 9,1995 Ca11ed Mayor Tom Eagan May 11,1995 As per Mayor's request drafted new letter with enclosures. It took a call to the Mayor for Mr. Reid to react. May 10, 1995 letter sent to Mr. Ekblad regarding expiration of original building permit and removing his trailer. From Mike Ridley May 23, 1995 met with Mr Ridley and discussed concerns. Mr Ridley didn't mention that a letter was sent to Mr. Ekblad. Which is an interesting note and very germane to that meeting. Mr. Ridley and I reviewed some issues and concerns also and he said that he would get back to me with some answers and a report on the issues addressed. I even gave him a picture as proof of expiration of the 6-5-91 permit. Why am I giving him evidence to show my case when he already sent the May l Oth letter out????? May 24th a city letter was drafted and sent concerning the May l Oth letter. June 26, 1995 City of Eagan granted new permit to Mr. Ekblad. June 30,1995 Semi-trailer was unloaded (premade walls and roof arches) from Ivanhoe, Mn. As I researched this also, that during the building season, it would take more than 4 days notice to order, make and deliver that type of material. Mr. Ekblad must have known weeks ahead of the June 26th date that the permit was to be renewed with no questions or hesitations. He also had to organize a crew and reserve a lift tractor to hoist the material during this busy season. After the semi-trailer came that afternoon it took unti14:00 pm to talk to Mr. Ridley over the phone. He said he allowed the permit because the building would be used for storage. Wouldn't it seem prudent on Mr. Ridley's part to inform the parties concerned (as this does affect the neighborhood) when he approved the permit. July 1,1995 Construction begins 13 hours July 2, 1995 Construction continues 13 hours July 3, 1995 Tried to meet with Mike Ridley but he walked out after not answering some questions. Mr Reid was off for the day! !! r!!! Inspections were made and the building is apparently approved as work has continued. AN INTERESTING NOTE IS THAT THE GARAGE IS HIGHER THAN THE PRIMARY HOME BUII..DING AND ACCORDING TO CODE THAT SHOULDN'T BE. There is a zoning issue here. THE RESULTS DIRECTED BY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ARE DISTLTRBING, BUT TBE TIME LINE OF EVENTS ARE EXTREMELY SUSPECT. Further evidence shows that on the architect's plan (which I first reviewed on 7-3-95) shows that its an oversized garage to house dump truck type vehicles. Now when one reviews the initial permit dated 6- 5-91 it gives a market value of $15,000. This garage is worth at least perhaps twice that figure. When asked how that figure was obtained, I was told that it was the NORMAL square foot cost for a residential type gazage. When the public sees only that document, one is lead to believe that its' size fits in a residential neighborhood. Mr. Ekblad had a permit to put in a normal residential garage yet W. Reid's office was working off a an architect's plan that shows barn size dimensions. To elaborate further, the property owner received a permit fee probably based on the residential garage average square footage cost. When talking to Mike Ridley, he never gave a clue that this was an oversized garage capable of housing vehicles with commercial applications. HE MERELY INSISTED THAT TT WAS FOR APPROVED FOR STORAGE. Doug Reid just gave Mr. Ekblad a gift by charging only $275.00 by using normal residential garage permit fees. I doubt that there is any other structure THIS SIZE (being almost a 2 story house in height with almost 1,000 square foot of ground floor space) approved in this town for $275.00 bottom line fee. MR. RIDLEY SAID THAT THEY CANNOT ANTICIl'ATE WHAT THE PROPERTY OWNER MAY DO. BUT WHEN TT DOES HAPPEN (THE OWNER IS OUT OF COMPLIANCE FOR ZONING) THEN HE WII.,L REACT. However, that ATTITUDE GOES CONTRARY to the basic purpose of city planning, thoughtful community development and inspection process. Don't you make plans to head off undesirable events. Mr. Ridley's lack of city planning very likely created some long term neighborhood problems. Given the way this was handled and the land owner's credibility, I doubt that the building will be "merely used for storage" and give any enforcement attention. CLOSING STATEMENT The neighborhood was not given full disclosure and time to give thoughtful analysis to restrictions, water runoff, aesthetic concerns and other considerations. With the size of the building and its real application, the neighborhood especially the adjoining lot lost value. Any other building or person especially located in a commercial zone wauld have gone through some detailed planning, been realistic for it's purpose, and paid its rightful share of building permit fees (which includes such items as park dedication, environment fees etc.) Mr. Ekblad got by for just $275.00 without even an enforcement strategy. IS THIS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT OR IS Tf "CITY " PLANNING??????????????????????? This deserves your immediate attention. I would be glad to meet with anyone addressed in this letter at this site and will be available at 454-8906 Sincerely, Larry Poppler enclosures: Letters sent to city and received on the timeline of the report Material on record with the City of Eagan and State of Mn. 7-7-95 To the City of Eagan Tom Hedges City Administrator Tom Egan Mayor Patricia Awada Shawn Hunter Sandra Masin Ted Wachter RE: Continuation of letter dated 7-6-95 concerning community development On July 6th, I received a letter form Mr Mike Ridley of community development. This was a report that he had promised to prior to the issuance of a permit approval. As you can see, the letter is dated June 30th 1995. The post mazk on the envelope is stamped July Sth 1995. Isn't it interesting to note that the postmazk on the envelope is stamped one working day after Mr. Ridley walked out of a meeting on July 3rd. If he had the report done, why didn't he produce it on July 3rd. It is highly irregulaz to produce a report AFTER a permit approval. Sincerely, Larry Poppler Enclosures: copy of above referenced letter and envelope *dtV oF eagen ya 0 J 3 0 0- I 0. THOMASEGAN Moyor July 31, 1995 PATRICIA AWADA SHAWN HUNTER SANDRA A. MASIN THEODORE WACHTER Councll Memben LARRY POPPLER THOMAS HEDGES Ciry Adminlstrator 3030 POPPLER DRIVE 21 E ?iry ?Ak OVERBEKE EAGAN , MN 551 11 Dear Mr. P le. ? Thank ou for your letter of July 6 which raised concems about construction by Michael Ekblad and enforcement of the City code by our staff. On behatf of the City Council, I would like to say that we are sensitive to your concems and that we appreciate your documentation of them. Our review of the information suggests that while you have current and historic concerns about the use of Mr. Ekblad's property, we do not share your perceptions about the way in which the matter is being handled. Despite its size and the possibility that it could be used for other types of storage, the garage conforms with City code requirements for setbacks, height and so on. Your diiigence did assist us in being certain that the permit was properly renewed and that certain conditions of the property were reviewed at the same time. Because these reviews indicated that the construction did conform with the City code and did not require further land use or subdivision approvals, it was not subject to notice requirements for properties in the neighborhood. While it is regrettable that certain things were occurring simultaneously and that you were not aware of all of them, we do not believe that the actions of the staff were intended to purposely mislead you or to treat Mr. Ekblad inappropriately. With respect to your comments about our staff person leaving the meeting of July 3, we have discussed this matter with both Mr. Ridley and Mr. Bruestle. They indicated that when you and Mr. Bruestle teft the room to review some building permit matters, Mr. Ridley did not go with you because the remaining questions concemed Mr. Bruestie. if you had additional questions for Mr. Ridley, you are certainly free to bring them up with him, but it does not appear that he did anything unprofessional in permitting Mr. Bruestle to respond to the remainder of your questions. Based on the substantial amount of time and correspondence provided by our staff regarding this matter, we do not consider it an indication of any systematic fai?ure by the City, its Community Development Department or staff. MUNICIPAL CENTER 3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD EAGAN, MINNESOTA 55122-1897 PHONE: (612) 681-4600 FAX: (612) 681-4612 TDO: (612) 454-8535 THE LONE OAK TREE THE SYMBOL Of STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY Equal Opportuntty/Attlrmatlve Acibn Employer MAINTEHANCE FACILITY 3501 COACHMAN POINT EAGAN, MINNESOiA 55122 PHONE: (612) 681•4300 FAX: (612) 681-4360 7DD:(612) 454-8535 LARRY POPPLER JULY 31, 1995 PAGE TWO If Mr. Ekblad uses the garage as he has indicated, it is not in violation of the City code. If, however, you observe and report commercial activity on the site in such a way as to permlt our staff to investigate it as it is happening, I assure you that we will take appropriate action to prevent the use. There is nothing in the code, however, to limit a property owner's right to construct a conforming building on their property. We also understand that your dispute with Mr. Ekblad goes back a number of years and concems a number of issues. Our staff has always attempted to provide you with the information and suppoR that you need, but we have also made clear that your concerns are in large part a private matter between you and your neighbor. I know that you have taken steps to resolve these private matters in the past and we hope that they can be resolved to your satisfaction. Again, thank you very much for sharing this issue with the Council. / om Egan Mayor cc: City Council Community Development Director Reichert Senior Planner Ridley TAE/vmd 4b'Icity oF eagan . THOMASEGAN Mayor 7une 30, 1995 LARRY POPPLER 3030 POPPLER DRIVE EA^vAN ivliv' 55121 RE: 3070 Poppler Drive Dear Larry: PATRICIA AWADA SHAWN HUNTER SANDRA A. MASIN THEODORE WACHTER CouneilMemters THOMAS HED6f5 Ciry Administrator E. J. VAN OVERBEKE Cily Clerk Thank you for taking the rime to meet with me on May 23, 1995, regarding the above referenced matter. As we discussed, I have reviewed City records and spoken with appropriate staff relating to the issues raised in your letter to Doug Reid dated May 2, 1995 (enclosed). I also met with Michael Ekblad regarding my letter to him dated May 10, 1995 (enclosed). The issues raised in your letter have been addressed as follows: Storm water run a(j/frll brouQht to site. The building permit for 3070 Poppler Drive was reviewed by the City's Engineering and Protecrive Inspecrions Divisions in late May of 1991. Recently, an Engineering staff person again reviewed the survey and made a site visit. Among other things, issuing a building permit requires review and analysis by the City Engineering Divisian of the proposed storm drainage pattem based on the existing and proposed elevations provided an the.Certi£cate of Survcw, _ The Engineering Division believes the home was built as proposed and that storm drainage is adequate. Fill brought to the site to develop the property as depicted on the Certificate of Survey submitted for the building permit does not require a sepazate permit. Commercial use of property/commercial equiDment storaQe As we discussed, Larty, commercial operarions and commercial equipment storage are not allowed uses in the R-1 Zoning District. I have discussed this issue with the Mr. Ekblad and he has assured me that the trailer stored on his property is for his personal use and that there will be no commercial operarions at this property (unless the business conforms with the City's Home Occuparion Ordinance or the City has issued a permit for work on the site). MUNICIPAL CENTER THE LONE OAK TREE MAINiENANCE FACILIiY 3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD EAGAN. MINNESOTA 55122•1897 THE SYM80L Of STRENGTH AND GROWiH IN OUR COMMUNITV 3501 COACHMAN POINi EqGAN. MINNESOTA 55122 PHONE: (612) 681-4600 PHONE: (612) 681-d300 FAX: (612) 681-4612 Equal Opportunlty/AfNrmatlve Ac11on Employef FAX: (612) 6e1-4360 iDD: (612) 454•8535 TOD: (612) 454-8535 Buildina aermir The City has informed Mr. Ekblad that the building permit issued far the detached garage has to be renewed before any further work can commence on the garage (Mr. Ekblad renewed the building permit on 7une 26, 1995). As we discussed, Larry, at the building permit stage of development, the applicant is required to meet specific performance standards (e.g. setbacks) in order for the City to issue the buitding permit The City cannot deny a bwlding permit based on what the building may or may not be used for. What the City can do, and has done in this case, is to make sure the property owner is aware of uses that are permitted in a parricular Zoning District. I believe this letter responds to all of your concems, Larry. If you have aay questions please contact me. Thank you again for your dme. Mike Ridley I " Planner cc: Tom Hedges, City Administrator Doug Reid, Chief Building Officisl i : . . : ,. , 3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD . EAGAN, MN 55122-1897 city oF eagan. i ` ? LARRY POPPLER 3030 POPPLER DRIVE EAGAN MN 55121 ,. ; i / . % ? • ? ?t , SEVERSON, WILCOX & SHELDON, P.A. LARRY S. SEVERSON [AMES F. SHELDON . PATRICK WILCOX MICHAEL G. DOUGHERTY' :NICHAEL E. NOLENDA A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION A7TORNEYS AT LAW 600 MIDWAY YATIONAL BANK BUILDING 7300 W EST I47TH STREET APPLE VALLEY. MINNFSOTA 55I247538 (612) 432-3136 KENNFI'H R. HALL SCOTT D. lOHNSTON LOREN M. SOLFE57 ANNEiTE M. MARGARIT •BRADLEY SMITH SHARON K. HILLS ROBERT B. BAUER April il, 1994 '.,. Mr. Lawr e P. Poppler 303 oppler Lane gan, MN 55121 TELEFAX NUMBFR 432-3780 Re: Sigma/Ekblad - Poppler Homestead No. 2 Our File No. 206-7219 Dear Mr. Poppler: OFCOUNSEL: JOHN E. VUKELICH Your letter of April 4, 1994, was forwarded to our office by Jim Sturm of the Eagan Community Development Department. The City empathizes with your parents situation and sincerely hopes that a resolution is forthcoming. However, while your frustration may be warranted, the City's role in the ongoing dispute with Mr. Ekblad, is that of an ffinnocent bystander. The City was not involved in the transfer of property to Mr. Ekblad. The City's role in relation to the survey prepared for a building permit is limited to reviewing certain items of information from the survey in order to issue an appropriate permit. The survey was not done on behalf of the City of Eagan, nor was it prepared for the City of Eagan. Under the Uniform Building Code a municipality may require a survey of the lot to verify that the structure is located in accordance with the approved construction plans. The City of Eagan's Code of Ordinances provides that a Certificate of Survey is required wherein land is to be occupied by a structure. The City's purpose is to verify the setback distance of structures from surrounding lot lines. Ultimately if tha structure is not located as represented by the survey, the City bears no responsibility for that error, but rather the building permittee would be in violation of the permit. Again, we recognize that it is unfortunate that these problems have developed to such an extent that they hinder your parents plat proposal, but we hope you recognize that this is a private matter to be resolved between the Ekblads and your parents. Until that occurs, the City does not have any power or control over this matter. We do thoroughly wish you well in your attempts to put this matter behind you. Cordially, SEVERSON, WILCOX & SHELDON, P.A. Michael G. pougherty MGD/wkt cc: Tom Hedges, City Administrator Peggy A. Reichert, Community Development Director INDIVIDVnLTTI'ORNEYSnLSOLICEVSEC'N IOWA, WISCONSI;V pR tiEBNASKA •CERTIFIED 0.EnL PROPERTY L.ax' SGECfALIST. NSBw MEMO TO: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR REICHERT EROM: ASSfSTANT TO THE CITY ADMiNISTRATOR HOHENSTEIN DATE: DECEMBER 8, 1994 SUBJECT: POPPLER-EKBLAD LOT LINE DISPUTE I believe you have previously been copied on correspondence relative to this matter. Mr. Poppler's parents sold a lot to Mr. Ekblad and, since that time, have disputed the common lot line as a consequence of a survey prepared by Wayne Cordes. The City's position has been that the correction of that error is between the Popplers, Mr.Cordes and Mr. Ekblad. Mr. Poppler is frustrated with the time it is taking for the issue to be resolved. Jim Sturm and Mike Dougherty have both worked on this issue in the past. Hopefully, they can fill you in on any details I've omitted. Attached you will find a copy of Mr. Poppler's correspondence. I have aiso copied you on a letter to him indicating that you are now the Director of Community Development. Mr. Poppler may or may not pursue this matter further with the City. QM?A? Assi nt to the City Administrator Attachments JDH/vmd 11 city oF eagan iHOMAS EGAN Moyoi PATRICIA AWADA SHAWN HUNTER SANDRA A. MASIN THEODORE WACHTER Council Members THOMAS HEDGES City Aqminislrotor December 8, 1994 LARRY POPPLER 3030 POPPLER DRIVE EAGAN MI1 55121 Dear Mr. Poppler: E. J. VAN OVERBEKE CNy Clerk This letter is in response to your letter of Aecember 7 relative to the lot line dispute between your parents and Mr. Ekblad. Since we last spoke, Peggy Reichert has assumed the responsibilities of Community Development Director and I have returned to my position as Assistant to the City Administrator. As such, I will be forwarding you correspondence to her together with an explanation of the background as I recall it. Any future correspondence relative to this matter should be coordinated through her. The attachments to your letter included correspondence from our City Attorney's office dated April il. To my knowledge, no discussion of this matter has occurred since then. As Mr. Dougherty indicated in that letter, the City empathizes with the situation you are dealing with and we hope that you can bring about some resolution in the near future. As noted above, I will be passing your letter on to Ms. Reichert. Sincerelyc? Jon Hohenstein Assistant to the City AdministraCor cc: lYeggy Reichert, Community Development Director Mike Dougherty, Assistant City Attorney JDH/vmd MUNICIPAI CENTFR UN PILOT KN06 ROR9 EAGAN, MINNESOiA 55127-1897 PHONE: (612) 681•4600 FAX:(612)681-461p 7DD:(612) 454-6535 iHE LONE OAK TREE THE SYMBOL OF STRENGTH AND GROWTH IN OUR COMMUNITY Equal OpportunHy/Affirmative Actlon Employer MAIN7ENANCE FACIUTY 9W1 COACHMAN POINT EAGAN. MINNESOiA 55121 PHONE: (612) 691•4300 FAX:(612) 681-4360 TDD:(612)d54-B595 4-14-94 Mr. Michael Dougherty 600 Midway Nationat Bank 7340 West 147th St. Apple Vailey, Mn. 55124-3136 RE: Sigma land survey issue Dear Mr. Dougherty, I received your letter dated Ap. i l, 1994. I would have to intexprete your response for the City of Eagan [unless I hear otherwise] is that: Even though the monuments, electric boxes and fire hydrants [up and down the street done by, or supervised by the City of Eagan] match the intent of the county survey map done by the county surveyor in 1979, the City of Eagan is an °innocent bystander". I'm soiry but its hard for me to comprehend that position. Sinccerely, Larry Poppler CC Tom Hedges, city administrator ?- J _ LARRY S. SEVERSON JAMES F. SHELDON J. PATRICK WILWX MICHAELG.DOUGHERTY* MICHAEL E. MOLENDA April 11, 1994 SEVERSONg WILCOX & SHELDONg P.A. Mr. Lawr oppler 30 oppler Lane agan, MN 55121 < A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION ATTORNEYS AT LAW 600 MIDW AY NATIONAL BANK BUILDING 7300 WEST 147TH STREET APPLE VALLEY, MINIJESOTA 55124-7538 (612) 432-3136 TELEFAX NUMBER 432-3760 Re: Sigma/Ekblad - Poppler Homestead No. 2 Our File No. 206-7219 Dear Mr. Poppler: KENNETH R.HALL SCOTf D. JOHNSTON LOREN M. SOLFEST ANNETTE M. MARGARIT 'BRADLEY SMRH SHARON K. HILLS ROBERT B. BAUER OFCOUNSEL: lOHN E. VUKEGCH Your letter of April 4, 1994, was forwarded to our office by Jim Sturm of the Eagan Community Development Department. The City empathizes with your parents situation and sincerely hopes that a resolution is forthcoming. However, while your frustration may be warranted, the City's role in the ongoing dispute with Mr. Ekblad, is that of an innocent bystander. The City was not involved in the transfer of property to Mr. Ekblad. The City's role in relation to the survey prepared for a building permit is limited to reviewing certain items of information from the survey in order to issue an appropriate permit. The survey was not done on behalf of the City of Eagan, nor was it prepared for the City of Eagan. Under the Uniform Building Code a municipality may require a survey of the lot to verify that the structure is located in accordance with the approved construction plans. The City of Eagan's Code of Ordinances provides that a Certificate of Survey is required wherein land is to he occupied by a structure. The City's purpose is to verify the setback distance of structures from surrounding lot lines. Ultimately if the structure is not located as represented by the survey, the City bears no responsibility for that error, but rather the building permittee would be in violation of the permit. Again, we recognize that it is unfortunate that these problems have developed to such an extent that they hinder your parents plat proposal, but we hope you recognize that this is a private matter to be resolved between the Ekblads and your parents. Until that occurs, the City does not have any power or control over this matter. we do thoroughly wish you well in your attempts to put this matter behind you. Cordially, SEVERSON, WILCOX & SHELDON, P.A. Michael G. Dougherty MGD/wkt cc: Tom Hedges, City Administrator Peggy A. Reichert, Community Development Director INDIVIDUAL AITOANEYSALSO UCENSED INIDWA.WISCONS]N OR NEHRASKA •fERiiFlED REAL PROPERTY LAW SPECIALIST. MSHA Lam? Poppl.tir 3030 Poppler I7r Eagan, ?vin. 55121 Jalui Nahenstein Cammunity Develuprnent City of Eagan Dear Mr. Huhensiein. `i7ie pizlpo;e oi'this lazter is t<3 infc3rm y{:-u uf the probierLZ; an:i C-am-14511es esus.d hy a lanct sunrey eompiefiect t)v W:rvnc Carcles n?' Sigma LarE ; Sun?i;v::, x1i1'. WaE'ZeC CC?I'1:c'l 53c-ri"t8cl :.l :ii1J)Li;i$;.ts:?Il i11id Ci)Slltiiir ()id<.•, f':C:ilh' i3 5]:?uSTC?t1S 1i 3UI'Vi:%' 7i OIT1C' lt)1 3f3id ii) i-iC N i1Ct'Eilcl .aFCi :\i:fJ."s Jeiinei<;. X1e:rb,s•s ofthe S1a1e Bvard o`=':-krchiterttire ; 1:;nc'+- anu an a:;siss_a-it to t!?<? Attoincv i;enz?r>> ;vlinne:,.,t? ?v;tre5s:A . t ,, V?':?:S':ily7liZSp of t?7z St1pUi:il1E_)II:I?'li? G!:FiscSl: oii1?r. 1 i7zi'i-` i:i-:tilt)scCi ri cop%• oftl7e atipulatzon and evnsent order:s, Nvcl3 as cc??;ies ot v.vious Si3if agc3iC'v i611(lvv-Up lt'li?a }Iiij?C:?lillg 1}i:tt'f}32 cOTiSC'T71 i?iCitF WIL,I.. BE anlorccd. It is no«- late Deecrnber, 1994 and the rictuirrments c>F tht stipu;ation and cansent o??der hat?e no? been fullffled. 7'he ?'itti of F.-agan has taken a positior, of "innacr:nt hYStandar" :n witnessina an obvaaus wrongdoin:,' 1,y a licensed surveyor doing business wi=hin iis juri.5diction (refer to enclcsed letter ciated April, 1994). i 4vou;d ae io remind the City of the fo]lowing tacts: 1. Crriginal internat monumentation was remoE,ed after fhe prope_rty'.s sale; the abs-encz of suel-z monunizn*<ition u-as th.en presente•.i :ts part ot"a taise ;;nc3 deteptive claim tc adc?iticJnal t: nc3 v;hich the (,orcYcs su;z?CV included. 2. Due lo the nature of these action, Mr. Lawrence G. Poppler has lost the time value of money accruing from an adjacent lot x hich he could not sell for over the past thrze years because of avaiiety of t?i:atory maneuvei-s by the Ekbladi" Jeiinek 's lauyzr anct iNZr. Cordes to keep the boundazy between the hvo lors in dispute. At this poi.nt,1 seriausly cuestion the ci Y-'s ,;vi;dom in cJazmir,g a 12ct:i1't?I pos1110ri iri thl' ITIc1ttCi'. A5 8 ril3ttii' ni 1`c'Coid a71d n5 511ted iri 1hC past, the Git}supenised .rnd cortinue., to maLn:ain the utiiit:es wifr?;n thc: plaTicd road sui ;-eti' done for Lawri;nce G. Popp3cr by"OeLag,lrs .4:. Sori surveyor5 many yeo.iS azo. How can tIte i ityo±'Eagsn offficiaIly NTUT RUX)U;tiIZF, the boundaries wit3un zvhich th.se utilities ek:ist^ I request tnat tne City of Eagan serieusly examine this issue anci _ reconside-* it-i opinion. Morzok?er, 1 su;gest thtai the t:'ity of %•ag:zn no; only ca.•etuily scrutinilze future su1i-e;;• actions of?1ir. t.,ordes but alsc, examire the A1r. C'ordes surl1ey act:e;ns 'vt the City for the past tcn ?•ear?. Our e%pesience in this mattei- is that clear and undu; hardahip. a.nd . stress havc: been inilicteci on 'vlr. ana Mrs. Lawrrnce G. Popplef•. Bec3use ofthe c3slatory admutistr:ative iind ievat actior, of tie past. three year, my parents have nai been able ta settle their estate! cc. ,.vtus nuffinun as•istaztzutuniey gener.d Piun Snvtli exccutivc. secretary;tate architecture and huZd survey Oweit Sore.uson a[tontey srATE oF NurrrrF-,soTA F BOARD OF ARCf1TECTURE, ENGINEERING, LAND SURVEYING, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTIJRE AND INTERIOR DESIGN In the Matter of Wayne Cordes, L.S. License No. 14,675 STIPULATION AND CONSENT ORDER IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by Wayne Cordes, L.S. ("Respondent"), and the Minnesota Board of Architecture, Engineering, Land Surveying, Landscape Architecture and Interior Design ("Board") that without trial or adjudication of any issue of fact or law herein and without any evidence or admission by any parry with respect to any such issue: 1. On October 22, 1993, a Notice of Conference with Board of Architecture, , i Engineering, Land Surveying, Landscape Architecture and Interior Design Complaint Committee was duly served upon Respondent, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged by Respondent; 2. On November 16, 1993, Respondent appeared before the Board's Complaint Commi[tee composed of Board members John R. Madden, P.E., Chair; Susan Blumentals, A.I.A.; John E. Swenson, L.S.; M.J. VViersum and M. Ann Buck, public members to discuss allegations made in the notice referenced above. Pamela K Smith, Executive Secretary of the Board and Judy Jacobsen, Board staff, were also present. Louis Hoffman, Assistant Attorney General, represented the Board at the conference. Respondent was not represented at the conference; 3. Respondent subsequently retained counsel and, through counsel, presented r t the Board with a letter dated February 24, 1994, written on behalf of Respondent stating disagreement with the allegations in the above-referenced notice and providing the Board with explanation, argument and documentation in support of Respondent; 4. Subject to approval of this Stipulation and Consent Order by the Board, Respondent expressly waives the formal hearing and all other procedures before the Board to which he may be entitled under the Minnesota and/or United States constitutions, ? I statutes, or rules; 5. This Stipulation and Consent Order shall constitute the entire record herein and shall be filed with the Board prior to its next meeting; 6. In the event the Board in its discretion does not approve this setdement or a lesser remedy tban indicated in this settlement, this stipuladon is withdrawn and shall be of no evidentiary value and shall not be relied upon nor introduced by either party. Respondent agrees that if the Board rejects this stipulation and this case proceeds to hearing, Resgondent wi11 assert no claim that ihe Board was prejudiced by its review and discussion of this stipulation or of any records relating hereto. FACTS 7. Respondent admiu the facu referred to below and grants that the Board may, for the purpose of reviewing the record in paragraph 5 above, consider the following as true without prejudice to him in any current or future proceeding of the Board with regard to these or other allegations: a. Respondent surveyed I.ot 6, Block 1, Poppler Homesteads and Outlot F, Eagandale L,eMay Lake lst Addition upon the request of Respondent's client as part of the client's application for a building permit; b. At the time of the initial survey, no original monuments of the plat of Poppler Homesteads were located by Respondent. After completing the survey, Respondent became aware of claims by the prior owners of the property to the effect that the original plat of Poppler Homesteads was mismonumented and that the lines of the plat were in a location on the ground other than as depicted by the recorded plat. Respondent subsequently spoke with the prior owners' surveyor, the county surveyar, the client's attorney and others regarding the prior owners' claims and determined that the prior owners' conflicting claims were inconclusive in that physical evidence of the original monumentation was not found at the time of RespondenYs survey. Also, no Certificate of -2- Conection or o[her notice of any facts supporting the prior owners' claims had been placed of record; c. After the claims of the prior owners came to light, Respondent did not issue an updated survey noting the existence of the prior owners' contrary inconclusive claims and the alternate location of the propercy boundaries implied by the prior owners' claims. STATUTFS 8. Respondent does not hereby admit or agree in any way that the facu and conduct specified in paragcaph 7 above constitute a vioiation of Minn. Stat. S 326.11(1992) or Minn. Rules 1805.0100 et seq. (1991). Respondent is, however, willing to enter into this Stipulation and Consent Order as a reasonable means of concluding the Board's proceedings regarding the allegations made in the notice referenced in paragraph 1 above; 9. Upon approve of this Stipulation and Consent Order by the Board, the Board shall take no further action or conduct further proceedings involving Respondent in connection with the allegations made in the notice referenced in paragraph 1 above or the other facts and circumstances set forth herein. Tkus Stipulation shail not in any way or manner limit or affect the authority of the Board to proceed against Respondent by initiating a contested case hearing or by other appropriate means on the basis of any act, conduct, or admission of Respondent justifying disciplinary action which occurred before or after the date of this Stipulation and which is not directly related to the speciGc facu and circumstances set forth herein. REMEDY 10. Upon this stipulation and record, as set forth in paragraph 4 above, and without any further notice of proceedings, the Board may, in iu discreuon, issue an order to Respondent and require him to comply with the following: a. Respondent shall update the survey on the property described in paragraph 7.a. above by noting thereon the existence oE the prior owners' contrary -3- inconclusive claims and the alternate location of property boundaries implied by the prior owners' claims, provide a copy of the survey to both adjoining landowners, and provide proof to the Board within thirty (30) days of issuance of this Stipulation and Consent Order; b. For a period of one year from the date of this Stipulation and Order, any survey issued by Respondent involving disputed property boundaries shall be reviewed by a licensed land surveyor, selected and paid for by the Board, and Respondent shall, at the request of the Board or the Committee, meet with the Committee to review any survey reviewed under this paragraph; c. Upon expiration of a period of one year from tbe date of this Stipuladon and Consent Order, the review requirement set forth in paragraph 10.b. above shal] automatically terminate without further action required by Respondent or the Board; d. Respondent shall pay to t6e Board administrative cosu in the amount of $250 concurrent with submission of this Stipulation and Consent Order for iu approval. 11. Any appropriate court may, upon application of the Board, enter its decree enforcing the order of the Board; 12. Respondent hereby acknowledges that he has read, understands, and agrees to this Stipulation and Consent Order and has freely and voluntarily signed the stipulation without threat or promise by the Board or any of its members, employees, or agents. When signing the stipalation, Respondent acknowledges that he is fully aware that the • Stipulation and Consent Order must be approved by the Board. The Board may either approve the Stipulation and Consent Order as proposed, approve the order subject to specified change, or reject it. If the changes are acceptable to Respondent, the stipulation will take effect and the order as modified will be issued. If the changes are unacceptable to Respondent or the Board rejecu the stipulation, it will be of no effect except as specified herein; -4- 13. This stipulation contains the entire agreement between the parties, there being no other agreement of any kind, verbal or otherwise, which varies this stipulation. CONSENT: MINNESOTA BOARD OF ARCHTTECTURE, ENGINEERING, LAND SURVEl'IIdG, LANDSCAPE ARCHTTECTURE AND INTERIOR DESIGDFEOMPLAINT COMMTITEE ? , .. WAYN CORDES, L..S. JOHN E. SWENSON, LS. Respondent , Chair ! ! Dated: iti?t 1' 1994 Dated: ? , 1994 4?1?.r- K?t,? LOUIS HOFFMAN Assistant Attorney General Dated: k\ T $ . 1994 Upon consideration of this stipulation and all the files, records, and proceedings herein, IT 1S HEREBY ORDERED that all other terms of this Stipulation and Consent Order are adopted and implemented this 19th day of July, 1994. MINNESOTA BOARD OF ARCHTTECTURE, ENGINEERWG, LAND SURVEYING, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE AND }NTERIOR DESIGN ? i l susArr aiuMENTAts, ai.A. Chair -5- EAGAN TOWNSHIP 3795 Pi.lot Knob Road St. Paul, P4innesoCa 55111 Telephone 454-5242 PSRtUT FOR WATER SERVICE CONNSCTION Date: Saptpmher 19. 1970 Number: 4AO J? -??Ppu?3 HyhSm?)' ? v.3a Billing Name: Lawrence Poppler Site Address; Owaer: Lawcence Poppler P1umber:Wenzel Plumbing S Heating, Inc. Billing Address 1310 Lone Oak Road of Connection Meter Size ot?nec?tion M, rllermit ?eter No?!d ?iFee 10.00 pd 9/29/70 Meter Reading ?ii o Meter Dep. Meter Sealed: Yea Add'1 Chg. NO ITotal Chg. Building is a: Residence Xxx iRultiple No, Commerc;al Industrial Other By: Chief Inspector In consideration of the isaue and delivery to me of the above permit, I hereby agree to do Cte proposed work in accordance wi[h the rulea apd regulaCioas of Eagan lbwnship, Dakota CountyW Miitaesota. Wenzel Plumbing d Heating Inc. Inspected by Date Remarka: Unit s ? $25.00 R?-!r;sQCC`rlars FEF FoR iMPROPERLY WISTALLED NiE"iERS Pleaae aotify the above of£ice when ready for inspection aud connectioa. EAGHA TOWNSHIP 3795 Pilot Knob Road St. Paul, Minnesota 55111 Telephone 454-5242 PERMIT FOR SEW$R SERVICE CONN&CTION ? DATE: Sgatember 29. 1970 NUMBER idi 635 130 -Td a.33 . OWNER: tawrence Poppler Addrese 6-3 v p4nj'51-b, PLUMBER Wenzel Plu;mbing & Heating TypE OF PIPE cast iron DESCRIPTION OF BUIIDING Industrial Commercial Residential Multiple Dwelling No. of unfts xxx Location of Connections: Connection Charge -f ?? ?-? • ? ..? --.>...e 7/ Permit Pee 10.00 od 9/29/70 Street Repairs ToCal Inspected bq: DaCe Remarks: By Chief Inspector In consideration of the issue aad delivery to me of the above permit, I hereby agree Co do the proposed work 1n accordance with the rules and regulations of Eagan Tonanship, Dakota CounCy . Minneaota u 6? Wenzel Plumbing S Heating Inc. 1955 flhawnee Road, St. Paul 55111 Please aotify when ready for.inapectlon and connection and before any portion of the work is covered. MECHANICAL (RESIDENTIAL) Permit Application City Of Eagan f 3830 Pilot Knob Road, Eagan Mn 55122 I • Telephone # 651-675-5675 FAX # 651-675-5674 Please complete for: Single Fanvly Dwellings Towuhomes and Condos when permits aze required £or each unit D l 0\?) / LL ) ate - p - - r Site Address Unit # PrupertyOwner Teiephone # ( ?/Q Contractor StreetAddress Cit y State Zi hone # Tele p p The Applicant is _ Owner ? Contractor _ Other Add-on, modification or alteraGan to eais6ng dwe0ing unit $ 30.00 furnace replacement air exchanger air cond i t io n er , ? / ? ? / Q? ? other K('?!J (A?,e /".Yf/ aP fi?i State Surcharge $ .50 - n, ?. ?:= II 1? Total I ., ' ? 4 200 I 3 I hereby apply for a Residential Mechanical Permit and acknowledge that the informatlon is complete and accurate; that the work willbe in conformance with the ordinances and codes of the City of Eagan and with the Mechazucal Codes; that i understand this is nota pemilt, but only an application for a permit, and work is not to start without a permit; that the work will be in accordance with the approved plan in the case of work which requires a review and approval of pl?l?r ,JG?/"`/ ? C? ?2(Str ?a.l ls ? ?. , ApplicanYs Printed Name Applicant's 5ignature e \ PAT GEAGAr May 26, 2004 Mayor LARRY POPPLER nFCCY cnRtsoN 3030 POPPI:ER LA1VE EAGAN MN 55121 CYNDEE FIEI.DS M1xF MacuIue Deaz Mr. Poppler, MEG TILLEY Council Members Thank You for your letter of May 21, 2004 regazding development of the Poppler Addition. I have forwarded a copy of your letter to our Engineering Division for their review and response to you regazding lot elevation and drainage questions relative to Lots THOMAS HEDGES 4 SL S. Ciry Adminiseraror I would be happy to speak with you about your concerns, however the Engineering Division staff is faz more knowledgeable regarding the matters you raise. Mu,,;c;p,l Ce11fef: Please contact me if you have any questions. Thank you again for writing. 3830 Piloc Knob Road s?ri rely, Eagan, MN 55122-IS Phone:651.C75.5000 ? F?:651.G75-5012 Michael7. ?dley, A City Planner TDD: 651.454.8535 cc: Russ Matthys, City Engineer Maintenanw Faciliry: T1IY3 PahT, EI]gi1188I1Rg TeChrilclan 3501 Coachman Point a Eagaa, MN 55122 Phone: 651.675.5300 Fax: 651.675.5360 TDD: 651.454.8535 ?.ciryofeagan.com THE LONE OAKTREE The rym6ol oFscrengch and growEh in our communiry ? 5-21-04 1UFIM AY 2 4 2004 Mike Ridley Senior City Planner Eagan, MN. Deaz Mr. Ridley, This letter concems required the elevation levels for the residential building sites on lots 4 and 5 on Poppler Lane which are currently under construction. The owners informed me that city required the elevation level in order to obtain the building permit. Appioximately 500 to 600 truck loads of fill was and will be dumped on those rivo lots. That comes out to about 5,000 to 6,000 yards using a 10 yard load. The level of ground consequently was raised 6 to 12 feet from the original elevation. The reason given the owners by your department was to prevent flooding and the Eagan flood of a couple of yeazs ago was cited. My concarn is that because of that effort, my lot elevation is now the lowest on the street. Additionally, the new elevation of those lots creates more slopes, which encourages more runoff rather than soil absorption. Is this required elevation going to create more moisture and water damage on my property? And if this is a problem, how can it be resolved? I am azixious to heaz from you or someone in your department for an answer and any solution. 3030 Vppler Lane Eagan, MN. 55121 *° City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan MN 55122 Phone: (651) 675-5675 Fax: (651) 675-5694 r Use BLUE or BLACK Ink 070:We bit / Permit #: / �` 'b Permit Fee: 9 Date Received: / v-- / 5 Staff: t)C- 2009 RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION Date: e _ Il Site Address: Tenant: Suite #: RESIDENT / OWNER Name: Address / City / Zip: Applicant is: Owner Contractor TYPE OF WORK Description of work: Construction Cost: Multi -Family Building: (Yes / o ) CONTRACTOR Name:o2 , Address: i0/e License #: 1-/ City: St -: Zip: 5. 07 7 Phone: Contact Person: COMPLETE THIS AREA ONLY IF CONSTRUCTING A NEW BUILDING In the last 12 months, has the City of Eagan issued a permit for a similar plan based on a master plan? _Yes _No If yes, date and address of master plan: Licensed Plumber: Mechanical Contractor: Phone: Phone: Sewer & Water Contractor: Phone: 07E: Plans and supporting documents that you submit are .considered to be public information /Portions o the information may be classified as non-public if you provide specific reasons that would permit the City to conclude that they are trade secrets. CALL BEFORE YOU DIG. Call Gopher State One Call at (651) 454-0002 for protection against underground utility damage. Call 48 hours before you intend to dig to receive locates of underground utilities. www.gopherstateonecall.orq I hereby acknowledge that this information is complete and accurate; that the work will be in conformance with the ordinances and codes of the City of Eagan; that I understand this is not a permit, but only an application for a permit, and work is not to start without a permit; that the work will be in accordance with the approved plan in the case of work which requires a review and approv of plans. A Applicant's Printed Name Applicant' Signature PERMIT City of Eagan Permit Type:Plumbing Permit Number:EA136238 Date Issued:05/03/2016 Permit Category:ePermit Site Address: 3030 Poppler Lane Lot:3 Block: 0 Addition: Poppler Homesteads PID:10-58400-00-030 Use: Description: Sub Type:Residential Work Type:Replace Description:Water Heater & Water Softener Meter Size Meter Type Manufacturer Serial Number Remote Number Line Size Comments:Please call Building Inspections at (651) 675-5675 to schedule a final inspection. Carbon monoxide detectors are required within 10 feet of all sleeping room openings in residential homes (Minnesota State Building Code). Fee Summary:PL - Permit Fee (WS &/or WH)$59.00 0801.4087 Surcharge-Fixed $1.00 9001.2195 $60.00 Total: I hereby acknowledge that I have read this application and state that the information is correct and agree to comply with all applicable State of Minnesota Statutes and City of Eagan Ordinances. Contractor:Owner:- Applicant - Lawrence P Poppler 3030 Poppler Lane Eagan MN 55121 (651) 454-8906 Genz Ryan Plumbing & Heating 2200 West Highway 13 Burnsville MN 55337 (952) 767-1000 Applicant/Permitee: Signature Issued By: Signature For Office Use rl/ ::::eZ � , - ,,,„ EAGAN %,+j:.. 4.' Date Received: 3830 PILOT KNOB ROAD I EAGAN, MN 55122-1810 (651)675-5675 I TDD: (651)454-8535 I FAX: (651)675-5694 Staff: buildinginspectionsAcitvofeagan.com L 2018 RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION Date: `� /I ( 1 1 Site Address: •) 0 5 v tt' `t L'rN Unit#: 1. Name: LCA 4-1'v/ P�00`ef'.. Phone: b 1 L1. Ig 1 -j 1 Resident/ _ Owner Address/City/Zip: 3o 3 ) 0nl _( der Lv, Ce--,5 .,‘ � / )--) i ( Applicant is: Owner X Contractor � .. _..wry...�.. .. .�,�,. _ ...... Type of Work Description of work: ��0ref)j (.vac✓1"� — G 5��-)' S�r`�j ��S 1 Construction Cost: )6 �_t,)_r Multi-Family Building: (Yes /No ) i Company: / r - icy ( -ia s Contact: //ct v'k Ccd H Contractor Address: ( S (.1;C;d'dc ; • u c City: Atrie.. v s (f c j i State: /�'[/uip: ---_2,--0_4- Phone: £5/ 4f) 5?1 mail: p c'ic& Eyr(ylcy•c. -' License#: j l 7/5-1-/-5-'4--/ Lead Certificate#:NAT 70 0 q% --...2._ If the project is exempt from lead certification, please explain why: ( COMPLETE THIS AREA ONLY IF CONSTRUCTING A NEW BUILDING In the last 12 months, has the City of Eagan issued a permit for a similar plan based on a master plan? Yes No If yes, date and address of master plan: Licensed Plumber: Phone: Mechanical Contractor: Phone: Sewer&Water Contractor: Phone: Fire Suppression Contractor: Phone: NOTE:Plans and supporting documents that you submit are considered to be public information. Portions of the information may be classified as non-•ublic if •u•rovide s•ecific reasons that would •ermit the Cit to conclude that the are trade secrets. You may subscribe to receive an electronic notification from the City of proposed ordinances by signing up for an email update on the City's website at www.citvofeagan.com/subscribe. Exterior work authorized by a building permit issued in accordance with the Minnesota State Building Code must be completed within 180 days of permit issuance. CALL BEFORE YOU DIG. Call Gopher State One Call at(651)454-0002 for protection against underground utility damage. Call 48 hours before you intend to dig to receive locates of underground utilities. www.gopherstateonecall.orq I hereby acknowledge that this information is complete and accurate; that the work will be in conformance with the ordinances and codes of the City of Eagan; that I understand this is not a permit, but only an application for a permit, and work is not to start without a permit; that the work will be in accordance with the approved plan in the case of work which requires a review and approval of II s. ;� Mi&x '- C/} 7-L._ti v x `� "�l Applicant's Printed Name Applicant's Signature