Loading...
04/03/1986 - Advisory Parks & Recreation CommissionEag 7 :00 P.H. April 3, 1986 ipal Center A. Call to order and Pledge of Allegiance. B. Adopt Agenda and Approval of Minutes of March 6th, and of Special meeting March 13, 1986. C. Development Proposal: 1. Deerfield Addition 2. Ronald /Donna Rosa 3. Northview Meadows 4. Fairway Hills D. Old Business: AGENDA ADVISORY PARKS RECREATION C1 ION EAGAN. MI SOTA 324 Unit Apt. Lot split /Waiver of Plat. 2nd 38 single family 145 single family 1. Bur Oak Hills Harstad Development 2. Lexington Place 3rd Addition 3. Four Oaks Court Request to Eliminate Tot Lot. 4. Parks Dedication. E. New Business: 1. LCMR/Lawcon, Preliminary Application 1987 F. Parks Development 1. Summation of Bond Fund Account, Status Report 2. Report Update Construction Projects G. Other Business Reports 1. E.A.A. Meeting informational 2. Eagan Fun Run MEMO TO: ADVISORY PARKS RECREATION COMMISSION FROM: DATE: APRIL 1 1986 VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS RECREATION RE: APRIL 3, 1986 MEETING Following the call to order and pledge of allegiance, Staff would like to introduce the City's new Park Superintendent, Mr. John VonDeLinde. John began his employment with the City on the 24th of March. After the adoption of the agenda, the approval of the minutes of March 6, and the special meeting of March 13 are in order. DEVELOP t PROPOSALS There are four development proposals before the Advisory Commission. The first proposal is for the Deerfield addition, which members might recall is the old Eagan 40 PUD. This acreage is now being proposed to be constructed into 324 unit apartments. The development is within Park Section 28, which will be serviced by the future "Willmus Park" addition off of Johnny Cake Ridge Road. Within this service district are: Evergreen Park, Thomas Lake Park, and the future acquisition of the Willmus property and Heine Pond. Staff is recommending a Cash Dedication with this plat. ITEM 2 The proposed waiver of plat and lots split by Ronald and Donna Rosa. This lot split should be subject to a Cash Dedication requirement. I 3 Northview Meadows second addition is the third item for Commission reviewal. This proposed development is for 38 single family homes and is within Park Service Section #26. It is to be developed as part of the Old Lexington South PUD, and therefore, has fufilled it's parks dedication requirements. It is recoftiended that this plat be approved, however, subject to the condition of providing for a trail on County Road 30. ITEM 4 This item is for the proposed Fairway Hills (Ohmann Property), located in Park Service District Section #34. Enclosed in the packet is a separate memorandum discussing this development proposal. OLD BUSI Item #1 Bur Oak Hills Harstad Development Company's proposal. A separate memorandum has been prepared regarding this item. Is the Lexington Place 3rd Addition, which was deferred at the March 6 Commission meeting. Again, a separate memorandum has been prepared and is enclosed in the packet. It 2 #3 The Four Oaks request to eliminate a Tot-Lot is Item #3. Direction was given at the last Advisory Commission meeting for the applicant to petition the residents of the Homeowners Association to determine the number of residents who wish to eliminate the Tot Lot. At the time of the preparation of this memorandum, this petition has not yet been received. Staff will continue to make attempts to contact representatives regarding this item. It Enclosed is a Parks Dedication memorandum, with attachments which will be the basis for discussion of this item. Chairman Martin has also made some calculations and extentions regarding land and cash dedications. His calculations are attached. New Business Single item under New Business is for discussion and approval to submit LCMR/ Lawcon Grant Application for fiscal year 1987. Although there is uncertainty regarding continuation of funding from both the Federal and State levels, this should not prevent the City from preparing and proceeding with preliminary applications for financial assistance. These applications must be submitted by May 5, 1986. John VonDeLinde, Park Superintendent, was formally with the State's Parks Grants Section, and is very familiar with this issue. A separate memorandum will be prepared outlining funding status as well as options available to the City. P ks Development There are two items under Parks Development which are informational items. A separate memorandum on the status of the Parks Bond Fund Account has been prepared. Item #2 is an up-date of the construction projects currently underway, and proposed for 1986. There are two items under Other Business and Reports which are also informational. Unless there are other additions, the meeting can be adjourned after this item. Respectf11y Submitted, Ken Vraa, Director of Parks Recreation The meeting s called to order by Chai artin at 7:10. M:1bers present were: Porter, Masin, Martin, Bertz, Carroll, Ketch Kubik, and Caponi. ssion m bers Thurston and Alt had notified staff they would be «ble to attend. Staff present were: Parks Recreation Director, Ken Vr..; Landscape Architect /Parks P1 ner, Steve Sullivan; P1. r.er Jim Sturm and Administrative Assistant, Liz Witt. There were many people in the audience, most of them interested in the Oaks proposal. Director Vraa added items G -3 and 4 to other Business. Chairman Martin a ounced that a meeting between Harstad •tip.' representatives ..d staff had not taken place as eed upon at the last sion meeting. ther, the developer had provided material at 4 p.m. on the meeting day, too late for inclusion in the packet, or for review by staff. Chai n Martin asked if the Cots t fission was in agreement to remove from the agenda. All agreed. Martin stated that because of the n ,F +ber of residents fr the ea, ca.,oFtw ents would be taken from interested members of the audience. On a motion by Masin, seconded by roll, the agenda .s approved as ended. The motion c ried. MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE ADVISORY PARKS RECREATION COMMISSION CITY OF EAGAN 1. PARK KNOLL TRI -LAND 2. LEMAY LAKE 2ND ADDITION MARCH 6, 1986 MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 6, 1986 scion member roll moved, Kubik seconded, that the minutes approved as presented. All voted in favor. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS The proposal is for 15 single f ily homes near Schwanz Lake, Walnut Hill P ks and the High Line Trail. It received planning C sion approval, but there were concerns expressed regarding the slope, sandy soil and vegetation. A 20' setback variance was approved in order to save trees on the site. The cel is part of the Lexington South PHD d not subject to k dedi tion. AGENDA Cots +ission member Carroll moved, seconded by Bertz, to reco =s end trail dedication on Wilderness Run Road and strict observance of erosi o:control practices due to the soil and terrain conditions. The motion c ri ed. Planner St explained that the proposal is for a PUD for c +t{ercial d 1 term hotel development on a 23 acre site. Some co ercial uses being considered are a service station, restaurants, and a 120 r..,9# hotel for long- to (one week, one m th) stays. C ssion m ber Kubik expressed concern about the affect the development would have on the ter quality of the lake. He hoped the City would require stiff bond requirements to insure the developer would meet siltation standards. He noted there isn't sufficient staff to monitor construction constantly. i n Martin agreed and said the developer had to include erosion control throughout the entire construction cycle. P.la er St said, the developer was told about these conce +s ..d the landscape policy requir ents when he first de application to the City. After discussing other concerns, Co fission member Kubik moved, Porter seconded, the following reco endations: 1. Cash dedication, 2. A substantial bond requir ent to insure siltation standards are adhereed to, 3. The landscape policy will be enforced, 4. There be trail easement along the east edge of the Lake, and 5. There be a trail along Lone Oak Road if it is not already there. All voted in favor. LEXINGTON PLACE 3RD ADDITION Planner St reviewed the proposal for the Coy fission, explaining that lot C was originally scheduled to be a passive park /recreational area and now is scheduled to have 10 single family homes. He noted the Planning C. iErF ssi continued the item and wanted to have the Parks Recreation Co fission review. Director Vraa traced the history of the development and, said the area was originally R -4. The area south of Duckwood was platted as single family with two outlots for open space. U.S. Homes Corp. had planned for a h ers ass cation to +a intain the open space. The rket was not there so they sought approval to plat the outlots into 16 lots in July of 1985. The Parks Recreation Co ission recoc +ended denial and the application was withdrawn. U.S. Homes then sold much of the area south of Duckwood Drive, including the outlot to Frontier Midwest who are requesting a replat to 10 lots. Chairman Martin said, he felt the same way he did when U.S. Homes first requested the platting of the outlots. He said, the recreational area is needed to serve the residents. The nearest neighborhood park cannot acco odate all of the additional people and it would be dangerous for the yo er children to cross the heavily traveled Lexington Ave. to get to the p He was concerned with the 1 ge o t of fill put into the pond area by the precious 1 d o aer and the possible loss of the 1. ge trees. Mark P. ranto, representative for Frontier Midwest said the kids can play in the large back yards. He noted that the request is for 10 additional houses on lots that exceed the 12,000 sq. ft. zoning. Also, that the site can be developed as is without grading or construction work near the ter.. Commission member Ketch stated that he is strongly opposed to the development of the outlot. He said, the recreatio 1 ea is needed as it is t dangerous to cross Lexington Ave. to get to the park, and was part of the original agreement with the City. He also mentioned, that realtors have claimed the outlots will be recreatio 1 areas when they k.;rket the lots. Adv. Parks Rec. Co March 6, 1986 In response to the question of previous knowledge of the outlot issue, Mr. Parranto stated there is no agreement which speaks to the outlot as open space. U.S. Homes merely stated they planned to have an outlot, but it was never written into any agre ent. is sion m +ber Kubik thought the P1 ning Co ission designated the outlot as open space as one condition of approval. He then s ested the developer consider putting a tot lot on one of the lots. He asked Director V if the site would present inte. ce problx +s if used for recr do .1 space. Mr. Vraa said, the area would be somewhat difficult to maintain because of the uneven terrain, and most likely would be assigned a class "C" priority. He also noted that the P1 ing ission had rec•+rj.ended trail dedication for Outlot B and this condition did not appear in the City Council minutes. Coy =,ission member Porter moved, seconded by Kubik, the recoi +endation for sta f to review the council minutes for a ct conditions of approval; review all actions on the outlots and to explore alternative solutions. The item will be on the April agenda. All voted in favor. 4. UPDATE ON MARCH PLANNING ISSUES Planner Sturm previewed incoming proposals and noted there will be park dedication on several of the projects. The largest proposal is for 324 apartments on a 38 acre site. One h dred forty five single family h es are proposed for the 0 property. There are to be 38 more single f y h es in Northview Meadows and a large office structure on Silver Bell R BUR OAK HILLS HARSTAD COMPANY Martin noted that at the last C +ission Meeting, it was underst the developer's representatives were to have met with staff to consider alternate designs for the park. The meeting did not take place despite Mr. Vr 's contracts by phone and letter indicating that packet preparation would be Friday, the 28th. Chaff n Martin said the it would not be considered at the March meeting because there was no new material to discuss. The developers delivered some info tion to Dir for Vr at 4 pan. three hours before the regular meeting was to start. He said, that because there were interested residents in the audience, the co ission should hear their c „ents. Adv. Parks Rec. C M ch 6, 1986 The Director then recapped for the sion and audience the history of the Bur Oaks project, :r;phasizing ks. Origi lly, there was to be relatively dense housing with over 400 units. The current proposal is for 204 single family homes on lots over 12,000 square feet in size. The original PUD provided for 28 acres of kl d but was never fi 1 platted. The stad proposal calls for 23 plus acres of park, most of which is under the high water elevation. He said, there will be less than 10 acres over the high ter elevation, and much of that had steep slopes or was over the pipe line. Mr. Vr expressed concern with the developers proposal for an 85' access to the p k, the parking lot to be placed between two residential lots, grading d potential loss of trees, etc. Prior to the Febr .ry meeting the City staff had discussed its concerns with Harstad representatives. Staff relocated the play fields to reduce the potential for flooding, incr sed the r access to provide for a parking lot and eliminate the need for retaining walls, and for a better separation of facilities. Co fission member Kubik stated that the developer was given a month to get together with staff d he was disappointed that they did not follow thro on their agre ent to meet. He found it interesting that the developer found time to mail a letter to nearby residents to come to the parks meeting, but did not have time to meet with the staff. Co lssion member Caponi noted that the Parks Recreation Co fission is trying to safeguard residents from poorly conceived plans. He said, that developers come and go but leave probl they create with the residents. He voiced displ sure with the developer for bringing in ,.terial at such a late hour. He also said, the developer should have had discussions with staff, who could then have included co ents and reco endations with the regular co fission packet. Adv. Parks Rec. Co March 6, 1986 Chaff Martin stated that the Parks Recr Lion C ission s very pl °.sed with the lesser density of the project. He felt, however, that the k does not fare so well with the current proposal. He dislikes the trail located under the high .ter elevation 1.. °k. He expressed a need for a flat area for play fields and sufficient road frontage for access which definitely shows that there is a park. Richard Heimkes, a 20 year Eagan resident, was supportive of the lesser density proposal. He felt the present Bur Oak park has been neglected +d the residents deserve better. He hoped the City and developer would get together, because the residents need a g k. Mr. Mrs Charles Diemer prefer the lower density proposal too. Mr. Diemer was sorry the developer did not come in to work with the City, but he hopes they will be able to work out a compromise. Mr. L. K. Jones, Hwy 55, has a large tract of land east of the proposed develo ent upon which he has y yo apple trees. He ..ted a g...+ park in the develo•1ent, as he was afraid children might decide to use his property for a park and destroy y of the apple trees. i Martin d Tony Capons both said, the City wants a so the kids will use it and not trespass elsewhere. Vernon Sc .'f, pel Lane, was concerned with potential flooding of the pond d questioned what it would be. Director Vras said, that increased .,ounts of impervious surface will drive up the water level, but that there is a controlled elevation on the ponds. Mr. Schaaf also said, the City and developer should work out an agreeable solution so the project could move fo d. Other residents and nearby Inver Grove Heights residents c ented on the need for a better park and better play equi+ ent. rk facility Ken Bri; representing the Aarstad Co., brought along a park concept plan to the meeting. He reiterated it was not feasible to have a 600' road frontage access, because it would cost the developer too much money. He said, the company had been extremely busy the past month and didn't have time to meet with the city staff. i Martin iterated that the Co s sion likes the proposed development. The Co ission wants to get the best possible park. The City is not locked into a 600' access and t to get together with the developer to resolve the problem. Co ission member Bertz agreed and encouraged members of the audience to let City officials know what they desire for a k 2. PARK DEDICATION Ken Briggs asked if the City is willing to accept the 85' road frontage access. He also wanted to know what and where are the standards the rt ission refers to for p k access. He said, if the City wouldn't back off the 600' access the higher density project would be built. i Martin said, the City wants the park, but questioned if any in the audience would just as soon forego park and take cash dedication? The consensus was for a park, which is consistent with other city parks. C.,nui ission m ber Masin recalled the neighborh meeting prior to the park bond referend She said, that many residents expressed the need for a decent park and the Coy +fission is trying to ace plish that. 3. PARK SERVICE DISTRICT #21 Co isalon member Keteh. err. asked if staff could review the status of the S. Dela °e Hills prelims ry plat to see if it still is a viable project. After additio 1 discussion, n Martin said, the developer and staff are to meet, review d c e back to the April meeting. Later in the meeting when it was apparent a second March meeting would be necessary, there was discussion and consensus to invite the Harstad Co. to the meeting as a measure of g d faith. Director Vr .s directed to contact Mr. Merila and follow up with a letter of invitation with copies to the City council. Adv. Parks Rec. Co March 6, 1986 Staff was dir ted to c pile a file of itten doc entati and history on the Bur Oaks proposal. Director Vraa will also see if P k ssion bers can have s time at the March 11 special joint council Planning Commission meeting. This item was deferred. Later in the meeting the Co ission set a special meeting for March 13, 7:00 P.M. T.andscape Architect /P ks P1 er Sulliv reviewed the Dee d sch.1 site. He said, additio 1 1 d is necess y to develop the site as it should be. He noted much of the adjacent property has steep slopes or is otherwise inappropriate for acquisition. He also said, that a trail system will be a key factor in the service district. Chaff n Martin su,ested the additional land might be acquired via dedication. Coy +trission Members agreed that alternatives north of Deerwood were not appropriate, after discussion re ding size, proximity to r. -ds, the new school, etc. Chaff n M tin directed staff to put review and feasibility for acquiring additio 1 four acres needed for a p k. Staff should also contact adjacent property o ers to see if purchase is a possibility. They should review 1 d to the west to see if it is developable. 1. D EERWOOD FRONTAGE ROAD NAME SUGGESTIONS The Park N es Co es. Co ttee ttee is su and Deerwood Way. Th Council meeting. 2. GOLF NETTING /BATTING CAGE This it .s deferred to the April agenda. 3. WINTER PROGRAM REPORT The report was included in the packet. ssion m ber Bertz asked how the t por y buildings were contracted for during the skating seasons. Director Vraa said, there is a inim two -month charge; the City can then rent in additio .1 two week incra #ents. There was additional discussion about the difficulty in finding ng house attend ts. Director Vraa outlined the efforts used to get appli nts. George Kubik s :vested senior citizens might be interested in the part -time seasonal positions. ssion m,aber Porter moved, Kubik seconded, to exp d recruiting efforts for warming house attendants. Staff should also try to link s er-winter jobs, giving preference to those persons already employed in one season. A pay raise could be considered if it might attract qualified applic..,ts. The motion carried. Director Vr.. said, that Highview Park skating facilities were ...rly attended and had been for several years. He said, there are skaters during winter vacation and virtually no interest after that. It is used for br mball on S,.days and Mondays ..d for skating on Friday and Saturday. C fi ssion member Kubik thought City resources should be put to better use. ssion m. ber Porter s ;vested r oving the deterio ting h. key rink ..d the the warminghouse and leave the lighted skating area for interested skaters. +raatlission consensus supported his s .,:estion. tee met prior to the co ssion meeting to consider oll said several +:es were discussed and the o n es for Council consideration: Blackhawk Way e t wo suggestions are to be submitted to the March 19 NEW BUSINESS 1. SPRING '86 CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATES PARK DEVELOPMENT Co$ta,ission member Kubik said, the winter weekend event. He noted that the largest fish caught was a Martin enjoyed the tubing activity. The Co ission efforts ...d anticipate the winter weekend will be an Adv. Parks Rec. Co March 6, 1986 This item s deferred to the special meeting of March 13. as a well attended fun oz. crappie. i appreciative of staff 1 event. BUR OAKS When it was apparent a second March meeting would be necessary, Co +a fis m +ber discussed inviting Harstad Company representatives to discuss their latest concept pl The C. +x ssion felt such an invite would be a measure of g..« faith; that they do prefer the Harstad proposed density and feel the k iss can be resolved. Director Vraa was directed to contact Misters Br i: s or Merila and ask them to come. He was to follow up with a formal letter of invitation with copies to go to the Council. Staff was also directed to c pile a e.,plete file on the S. Delaware Hills /Burr Oaks p posals including minutes, phone calls and letters. Mai Martin said, he would contact the Mayor to seek inclusion on the special Council agenda, March 11, for Park Recreation C fission m bers. 22. ATHLETIC SITE OHMANN UPDATE Director Vraa noted the forthc +i +:.ng proposed development for 145 single fa ly h es a.k.a. Fai ay Hills. He said, the parcel should generate about 5 acres for park dedication. He outlined three alternatives for Co ission consideration: 1. The Coy_, fission could consider getting a piece of land adjacent to the 15 acre parcel the City hopes to purchase, and create a 20 acre park. 2. The City could condemn another 15 acres to get the 30 acres necessary for an athletic site. 3. The City could develop 8 of the 15 acres site, (Parcel F) and sell off the rest. Cash dedication would be rec.t +jended for Fai .y Hills. The athletic site would have to be located elsewhere. Co fission members discussed alternatives and decided they were not c ortable with the lack of a itten co tment fr Mrs. Iamond to sell the 15 acre site to the City. If cash dedication were accepted for Fai y Hills d the purchase fell through, the City would have no p kland for the ar There was concern, too, with an outlay of $135,000 to purchase when the City would receive $63,000 through park dedication. The C. +a; ssion felt additio l acquisition was necess if the land dedication were rec ended for Fai Hills. Chairman Martin directed staff to pursue land dedication from the proposed development of Fairway Hills and seek an additional 1 1/2 acres when the adjacent parcel comes in for development. Staff was further directed to contact the o er regarding the Co ission's concern and tactfully withdraw fr the intent to purchase, if possible. OTHER BUSINESS AND REPORTS 1. PROPOSED PARK /SCHOOL SITE This it _s deferred to the April meeting. Adv. Parks ec. Co March 6, 1986 Director Vr.* reviewed another possible athletic site 80 acre parcel just east of the proposed high school. He said, that much of the land is not buildable and the price is $8,500 per acre. He briefly described a tri,« lar shaped site in Eagan /Inver Grove Heights but the Co. +4.ission rejected it outright as not being suitable. The three possible sites e to be disc sed, with a rec• +endation given, at the April meeting. BROWN PROPERTY SERVICE SECTION #33 This it s deferred to the April meeting. 3. FOUR OAKS TOWNHOUSES (This it was discussed earlier in the meeting, but it is included it other business.) As part of origi.•1 agre ent with Rosew..d Corporation, a tot lot -s to be constructed for the to ouses and a $5,000 bond .s posted. De is g, representing Rosew•.. Corp. stated that the units are all occupied +d there are very few children living in the homes. Rosewood Corp. would like to forego the tot lot, get the bond released and maintain the area as green space. Dated: Co fission member Masin recalled that with a previous such request the ission nted a consensus of the h +eo ers for or inst a tot lot. She was not comfortable with a few members speaking on behalf' of the entire homeo ers membership. She wanted to know if a majority of the homeowners support Rosew.•d Corporation's request. The Co i sion directed Mr. Lang and the Association Board to circulate a petition ong association m 1bers which would support the release fr., the tot lot obligation and to return the petition to the Co y ission for action. Mr. agreed to follow the outlined pr edure. 4. HORSE TRAINING ARENA (This item was discussed earlier in the meeting, but is included business.) Sally Beauc ein -s present to request Co fission support to develop a horse training arena in Eagan. She said a 150' by 350', well- drained, strong turf site would be needed to meet international standards for such a facility. Martin asked if the duo- hockey rink with a r ovable interior fence could be used. He asked how many people would be interested inusing such a facility. He was concerned with all of the horse manure that would ac c ulate. Co fission member Kubik asked if Leb. on Hills was available? dra Masin asked if act 1 shows would take place in the p ctice a Chairman Martin directed Ms. Beauchmein to put specifications together for staff to review. She should also contact other possible users of such a facility. The request will be taken up on a future agenda. C ssion m ber rtz moved, Masin seconded, that the meeting be adjourned. T e of adjour en t was 11:38. ADJOURNMENT Adv. Parks ec. Co March 6, 1986 Advisor st Recreation Secr with other MEMO TO: THE ADVISORY PARKS RECREATION COMMISSION FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS RECREATION DATE: APRIL 1, 1986 RE: FAIRWAY HILLS BACKGRO City has received a preliminary plat application from Derrick Land Company, for Fairway Hills. Members are familiar with this plat as the location was recently considered for an Athletic site the Ohmann parcel. Attached to this memorandum is the Planning Department's report concerning this plat application. This item appeared before the Advisory Planning Commission on March 25, and was recommended for denial by three to two vote. This item will proceed to the April 15 City Council meeting, unless the Advisory Parks Recreation Commission action is deferred. P PLANNING Director of Parks Recreation has been in conference with Anne Durning of Erkkila Associates to prepare and review park alternatives for this parcel. These alternatives have concentrated on the acquisition of Parcel F of Laverna Lehmann. Unfortunately, the layouts are not reproduceable, and will have to be presented to the Advisory Commission on Thursday evening. On this past Monday, March 31, Director of Parks Recreation met with the owners of Parcel F and G, with the purpose of reviewing the parks plans with them. Dale Runkle, City Planner was also involved in this meeting to explain options relative to future developments that could possibly occur on Parcel F or Parcel G. The issues were discussed and explored with the two sisters. It was explained that City would have to make a decision on the Derrick Land Company proposal, and that the least the City would require is a land dedication for a neighborhood park. Mrs. Lehmann commented that a decision would have to be made in the next serveral days in order to facilitate the City's planning for parks or cash dedication as well as future of their two parcels. Staff will also be contacting the attorney for the estate, and representatives of Fairway Hills. The status of this issue is rapidly changing with several other meetings scheduled to take place between the writing of this memo and the Commission meeting. FOR C SSION ACTION KV /bls Staff will review the alternatives for parks. It is hoped that some decision will be made by Mrs. Lehmann, so that a recommendation can be presented to the Co +fission Thursday evening. ZONING LAND USE. The Twi across Pilot Knob Road. We are across Cliff Road to the line abuts Parkview Golf is acqu more Plan area All lots meet nr exceed with an 85' frontage a t this plat a density of in size from 12,000 to average. SITE PLANNING Access connected to Cliff Road, A service road similar near Cedar Pond Park i CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: REZONING PRELIMINARY PLAT PLICANT DERRICK LAND COMPANY FAIRWAY HILLS LOCATION SECTION 34 EXISTING ZONING: A (AGRICULTURAL) DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: MARCH 25, 1:986 DATE OF REPORT: MARCH 17, 1986 REPORTED BY: PLANNING ENGINEE APPLICATION: An application has been submitted for rezoning and preliminary plat approval for the Fairway Rills subdivision. This plat consists of 145 single- family lots on approximately 60 acres south of Cliff Road and east of P ilot Knob Road. Currently, there are five landowners involved; all have signed agreements approving the development plans of what has been known as the George Ohmann Sr. Estate. n View Manor subdivision i s d.iecty 11; Site Park and a small R -3 Parcel north. The entire eastern property Course. An agricultural district the south- The City Park Department is interested in r ing this area in part or in full. Should this occur, street frontage would be desired. The Comprehensive Guide designates this site primarily R -2, with a small P (Park also Generally, the topography falls toward the ravine on the northern portion of the site. This ravine and the area around i, adjacent to Pilot Knob Road, are the most wooded portions of the site. Most of the trees will be destroyed. However, some of these trees would have been lost in the improving of Pilot Knob Road, which begins next year. The intersection of Pilot Knob Road /Cliff Road will be lowered approximately 10'. just to the south and abutting the site it will be lowered as much as 1' the minimum 12 the setback 2.4 units per 38,350 sq. ft 000 sq ft. area required i ne The 145 lots give acre. These lots range wit a 13,577 sq. ft. o the site will be provided by one road and three entries from Pilot Knob Road. to that of the upgraded Diffley Road 1 connect the two nor access points REZONING PRELIMINARY MARCH 25, _986 PAGE TWO AT DERRICK LAND COMPANY FAIRWAY HILLS along t ..C_ Pilot: Knob Roa< Nor;_her.n Nat::.�.ral' Gas has a 70' easement that s e, the t bisects bisects sa.t'c: from. the northwest to the Southeast. The site development plan shows proposed housing pads and it appears that. no variances- will be necessary as a result of the easement. GRADING/DRAINAGE: The preliminary grading plan the applicant submitted dated February 14, 1986, is feasible from an engineering standpoint. The preliminary grading plan will require filling the extremely deep ravine located in the northwesterly portion of this proposed development up to 26 ft. Fills of this depth require careful placement and compaction to prevent substantial future settlement. The ravine is also quite heavily wooded and the grading operations will require much clearing and grubbing of this area. The remainder of the site is basically on a plateau and will not pose any significant grading problems. All grades and contours shown on the preliminary grading plan do conform with City Code requirements. This proposed development lies within the southeasterly most portion of Major Subdistrict B, as shown on Figure 1. The entire area drains in a northerly direction towards two well- defined ravines in the northwest corner of this site, with some drainage flowing to the northeast corner of this site in a well- defined basin which is Pond BP -34. As you can see from Figure 1, Pond BP does have an existing gravity outlet, however, the outlet s not piped a l l the way downstream. Instead, it drains over and through the Well Site Park for a considerable distance before it is again picked up by storm sewer pipe. Drainage from the two northwesterly ravines flow under Cliff Road at the point marked B -p, as shown on Figure 1. 'Likewise, with the outlet from Pond BP -34, this is just a culvert under Cliff Road and discharges over land to be collected at point B -O where it is then piped to Thomas Lake. The areas north of Cliff Road where these storm sewer outlets are located are subject to very heavy erosion due to the large volume of current runoff. Therefore, staff strongly recommends that the completion of the storm sewer pipe from point B to both Pond BP -34 and point B -p be. a requirement if .the Commission or Council gives favorable consideration for this preliminary plat. UTILITIES: Utilities of sufficient size, capacity and depth exist within the proximity of this site to provide service to it. Sanitary sewer is located at the northwest corner of this site just south of Cliff Road. Water main is located along the entire north boundary of this development just sou of Cliff Road. REZONING PREL: MARCH 25, 1986 PAGE THREE In reviewing staff has the CNARY PLAT FAIRWAY HILLS t he applicant's proposed preliminary utility layou following recommendations ocated within the easterly portion o rit hin the existing right -of -way. o the end and also The connections to the 24" line at Cliff Road and the 8" line at Hi l l crest Lane be 8" connections. These 8" lines should then be extended to the first point where they then divide into 6" lines. The sanitary sewer Block 2 be relocated Sanitary sewer and 'water main should be extended of the stubbed street to Parkview Golf Course extended to Pilot Knob Road. Storm sewer should be extended souther intersection in the vicinity of Block 2, STREETS: Cliff Road and Pilot Knob Road are existing County roadways that border this development. Both roadways are rural two -lane 'roadways under the jurisdiction of Dakota County. Dakota County is planning on upgrading Pilot Knob Road in 1987 to a four-lane undivided urban roadway. With this construction, a portion of Cliff Road east of Pilot Knob Road will also be rebuilt to four -lane urban standards. The applicant indicated to staff that the County w access as shown on Cliff Road, which is satisfactory t sta While the applicant is showing three access points to Pilot Knob Road, the County will only allow two ultimately. The most northerly connection is a temporary access to Pilot Knob Road. Because of the Pilot Knob Road reconstruction, the grades for Pilot Knob Road will be drastically cut down. When this happens, the middle access point w i l l be at the same grade as Pilot Knob Road and will become one of the two main accesses off of Pilot Knob Road to this development. The most northerly access will then be closed and residents will have to use the service road which will connect the north access point to the middle access point. The applicant also indicated the County will allow the most southerly access point as a permanent access. However, this access will have to line up with the Hilltop Lane access. In order to provide the proper alignment with Hilltop Lane, this south street will have to jog southerly then westerly at go degree angles. Staff recommends this be a more gradual S-shaped curve to provide the alignment with Hilltop Lane. Phis may result in the "elimination of Lot 11, Block 8. However, staff feels the S- shaped alignment is far more desirable from a traffic safety standpoint than the 90 jog this development proposes. As for the internal streets, the only comment ff has is that r e recommend the middle north -south street (between Block 4 and Block 5 and 6) not contain the radius to connect to the easterily westerly street between Block' 5 and 6. Staff would recommend his become a "T- shaped" intersect ion. The "T- shaped" intersection will provide much safer traffic movement. REZONING PRELI MARCH 25, 1986 PAGE FOUR he location of ft. boulevard affic safety AY HILLS RIGHT F� AY/EASIE EN'S: The applicant is proposing t0 dedicate 75 ft. half right -of� -ways for both County Road 32 (Cliff Road) and Pilot Knob Road (County Road 31) which staff feels is adequate. The applicant is also proposing 50 ft wide r.ght--of- ways for streets throughout this development. Staff does not feel that a 50 ft. wide right -of -way; is adequate for many of these streets. The 50 ft. right -of -way does not provide adequate boulevard width for snow storage, private utility locations, sidewalks, driveway access site distance, and housing setbacks from street. Lack of snow storage with a 50 ft. boulevard is probab ;1 largest problem with the 50 ft. right -of -ways. A standard 34 ft. City street leaves only an 8 ft. boulevard for 50 ft. rightof way. Additional easements are not the answer for snow storage because they do not preclude the property owner from constructing structures such as 'fences, fl poles, retaining walls, etc., at the property line These structures present problems for snow because the wings on the snowplows are 8 ft. long and in order to push the snow back to provide more snow storage for future snows presents quite a problem with the City potentially damaging the resident's structure. Although it would be the resident's responsibility to repair such ,a structure if it were located within the easement, it certainly does not provide good public relations for the City of Eagan when snow plowing operations damage any private structure. The 8 ft. boulevard also provides problems for the privat utility companies. The gas company, electric company, telephone company and cable TV company all have underground lines they have to locate within public right -of -way. While telephone and electric do currently run joint trench, it still means that three trenches are required within an 8 ft. boulevard. This problem can partially be eliminated if the topography is such that the electric company can bury their cable within the 10 ft. public utility easement dedicated with all plats. An 8 ft. boulevard is definitely not adequate for t a- sidewalk. A 5 ft. sidewalk would leave only a 3 between the curb and the sidewalk. From a standpoint, this width is too narrow. The driveway access and garage setback issues are somewhat related. The 8 ft, boulevard does not really provide adequate site distance for people backing onto residential streets if there are obstructions such as fences or trees at the right -of- way line. The garage setback from the curb with a 50 ft. right of -way is 38 ft. as opposed to 43 ft. with the 60 ft. right -of- way._ Using the typical 20 ft. lengths for vehicle stacking distance, you can see that you cannot stack two vehicles in a driveway without some overhang onto the street with a 50 ft. fight -of -way. Requiring an extra 5 ft of setback is not necessarily the answer to this problem because it would be xtremely difficult for the Inspection Department to keep track of which street has a 35 ft. setback or which has a regular 30 ft. setback. REZONING PRELIMINARY PLAT FAIRWAY HILLS MARCH 25,'1986 PAGE FIVE In summary, staff does not recommend a 50 ft. right -of ay within developments. Staff feels the 50 ft. right -of -way should be used only if there are physical constraints whereby a 60 ft. right -of way would not allow the developer to meet City Code for minimum areas, setbacks, et I n this particular instance, staff feels that a 50 ft. right -o way would be allowable if it met the following criteria. 1. Estimated AST less than 100. 2. Length of roadway less than 800 ft. PERMITS: The applicant c i l l be responsible for obtaining all necessary permits and plan approvals from the following: 1. MPCA Sanitary sewer extension permit. 2. MN Dept of Health Water main plan approval. Dakota County Grading within County right -of -way permit and access permit. Northern Natural Gas Grading within easement p ermit. ASSESSMENTS: In researching the Crys assessment records, this development will be responsible for deferred trunk area water assessments, lateral benefit from trunk area water, additional trunk area storm sewer, future street improvements, and future trailway improvements. The attached table summarizes these assessment obligations. The final rates will be based upon the rates in effect at the ti e of final platting. These rates may either be paid at the tim of final ,platting or spread as an assessment with the execution of a Waiver of Hearing. The cost of all interna l streets and utilities will be the sole responsibility of this proposed development. Description Trunk Area ate 012 --28 013 -28 Lateral Benefit from Trunk Water 012 -28 010 -26 Trunk Area S 012 -28 010 -26 01.3 -28 Street Improvements 012-28 01.0 -26 Trail ays 012 -28 010 -26 Assessment Summary Table Estimae:d' 1986 Quan y Rate 45.0 ac` 1,10ac 553,550' 0,7 ac 190 ac $833 525 627 1, 815,580 sq. 2,605 ac 1 4,850 sq.f 555 627 2, 366 627 4) 2) .88/ 8 0.05 /sq. >1, 47/a 0, 05 /sq. ft 8.44/ $8.44/ (5) 5 Amour 6,237 7,449 90,779 ,822 742 292' 24 .31 /ff. $27,942 81 /f:f. $7,405 TOTAL 217,17' {1) Total area (59.7ac) Parcel 010 -26 (2.7ac) Parcel 0';13 -28 (0 7a 20` R/W credit {2} 56,3 ac 4.2 ac (previously assessed under 15R) 20' R/W credit (3)' $2.178/ac $711 /ac. (previous ly assessed under 3158) (4) 31,350 sq.ft. 16,500 sq._ft. (previously assessed under 3158) (5) 1 74 residential equivalent rate CONDIT [ONS FAIRWAY HILLS All applicable standard engineering conditions shall apply to this development. If this development is phased, then the phasing plan shall be approved by staff. Wi t:h the exception of the sanitary sewer line connecting to the existing 12" trunk line, all sanitary sewer lines shall be within public right -of -way with sanitary sewer and water main being stubbed to the east, southeast, and southwest boundaries of this development. The water main leads into this development shall be 8 Council shall authorize the trunk storm sewer project to pipe storm water from Pond BP -34 in the northwest corner of this proposed development to the existing trunk storm sewer located within the Well Site Park prior to final plat approval. T' be �.c,e street alirrrr��aff�t shall with Figure 3. od i f i ed s l i g h t l y to correspond The intern e1 road rig:it of -ways shall be 60 ft. with the exception of the service road and the street between Block 6 and 7. lhi.s development shall dedicate the 75 ft. half right -of -way for Cliff Road and Pilot Knob Road as shown on their preliminary plat This development wi a; 1. be responsible for a trailway along Pilot: Knob Road and Cliff Road. This development will be responsible for trunk area water main, lateral benefit from trunk water main, trunk area storm sewer, future street improvements for Cliff and Pilot Knob Road and future trai.lways for Cliff and Pilot Knob Road assessments at the rate in effect at the time of final platting, This development shall dedicate 20 ft. utility easements over storm sewer lines not located within public right -of -way and 30 ft. easements over sanitary sewer lines not located within public right -of -way. 2 This development will be responsible for obtaining the necessary permits from MPCA, Mn Dept of Health, Dakota County Highway Department and Northern Natural Gas This development will be responsible for all costs of internal streets and utility installation. R S ORKVIE GOLF COORS E RAVINE PARK pluS LA NCRIZONCI ZLIF *Kr wpw1c0 &awl RAMO A ,3,1 Na 3Z ENTON LA WALDEN meicHrs PARK R Rtx4; r,rw-`,g,1 IL 3 1 Z. 1,3,3 f iY;33‘3!-33/- 7111 t ,t"7 X £4: PRELIMINARY UTILITY PLAN PAMWAY HILLS EMSTIN .A*,AMV now *swot PROPOSELX u «rr.«....aP AT{«S A ROPY SL •I 60«SMt40M6 OMOIM4fO%. HOSE A.14004413 u ®ron ENGINEERING COMPRNY, INC. MO LAST Hu mart. r••■PSSt. /0.00014 OM ER RV ■a2' FAIR AY H ILL P00 MAUI M il am Imo: AP-40 912.1. 916_2 'BP10 909.8 A 8- 9/6.0 i 3 9 P 1 6 2 0 9200 e. 8P- 23 9 3 1. 3 ,BP-9 93 911 3 9/9.6 BP-13 .9214 8P-19 ,915,0 8-h 5 920 0 B P 21 S F A R 916 0 AT 9200 1st ZAza— I 926.0 9274-- BP-5 874 5 886.5 BP-2 882.1 8850 853.2 8' P-17 LP-42 27' BP 6 5_127. 8989 90/1 r 8 8990 8P-1 r71,ty. 901.1 8990 .4. 90/1 \-9004 N. LP '-44 846 0 890.0 8940 AP 910.0 9/8./ AP 893.3 9040 43 ..0 8 20.6 4 4 :A 9 P 3 40 7, ICC.',UNTY P,IRK 9000 LP-I 1 ■•■•••1 city of eagan PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 895.2 BP 889.9 905 2 lb%) BP-4 BP-25 874 2 924 0 886 5 9272 P- JP-36 870 6 j p sip 7 8732 869 4 859 .4 -4 .872.4 8652 LP-10 LP-11 3P69;g- i 2 SUBJECT PARCEL FAIRWAY HILLS STORM SEWER MASTER PLAN 81 07 830.0 LP 43 851.1 553.8 LP-83' 8836'-. 188 4 caP8 approved: J P-51 9760 980.0Q PLACE EE: LP- 89E 90,J 0.6 n LP 51 920.0 924.8 901.2, 'te e Azo mon LP 920.2 922: L FIG. #1 standard- plate APWIle N.W. 1/4 SEC. 34 T 27 R "7 vinnilmmmrimmmyminmmimmmwrImummmmmyrilimummumm_m eeeeeoeireee***eaelpeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee 021728 O cr, 012 -t7to—rer 010 111111111111 II• zz NO Ftc-ruo. ern V4*&:( LINT TiLua WATER_ 010-25 EXISTING ZONING: AGRICULTURAL PROPOSED ZONING: R P ROBE E PI* N II ..d L*ND iBBE3 NGINEERING COMPRNY, INC. moo w7 I.0 SNKIT. EYNKIE. YIBIIESOT3 lit" PB 313.3 GENERAL INFORMATION PARKV EW GOLF COURSE TOTAL SNGLE FAIRLY LOTS: 543 LARGEST LOT SIZE: 331330 SO. IT, SMALLEST LOT SIZE: 12.000 3O. PT. GROSS AREA 33.37 ACRES DEN34TY 3.4E 01313 PER ACRE AVERAGE LOT SITE: 43,077 00. FT. ALL SINGLE 3A4NLT LOTS MEET ON EXCEED THE 031 11,000 30. ►T, AREA NEDUIRED WIEN AN 33' FRONTAGE AT ENE SETBACK 1331. ALL OWENSIONS ARE PRELRNM4RY ASO ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE ON ENE 73401 PLAT. 065 van. WI Mee tv FAIR AY HI S 119 pee d +w (Bast 3318 dew tms>swe NeOes4 .fe t3U4 dl... ewra.. ewe ea. M.o6 era w um.x .5.00 M., earn moo Bern., lMr a®xw ea ®ww on ma tare 1w at ova tvevoto Mevae aauea+c Ml Aso comer Us... Bents met. at not anoto or. sa. tot ouch at Not Ards* mrc K n 4/4 gym. tww ra e19M r4 r 50 o tmots 94 mem. O SA a e +9134. 90.46 tws Be m pa. et fie... PRELIMINARY PLAT OF FAIRWAY HILLS LEGAL DESCRIPTION SCAL,1 ,3Y VICINITY MAP A FOB: MAIO* LANG F9r Rag icipal Center 7 :00 P.H. March 13 1986 (A) Call to order (B) Items deferred from 3/6/86 1. Park dedication 2. Deerwood Frontage Road 3. Golf /Batting Cage U. Spring Construction Estimates Parks (C) Bur Oak Hills (tentative) (D) Adjournment AGENDA ADVISORY PARKS RECREATION CO SSION EAGAN® MI SOTA Agenda items were those deferred from the March 6, 1986 .meeting. 1. Park Dedication ES OF A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE ADVISORY PARKS RECREATION COMMISSION, EAGAN, MI SOTA MARCH 13, 1986 E TO APPROVAL The meeting was called to order by Chairman Martin at 7 p.m. in the City conference rooms. Members present were: Ketcham, Bertz, Caponi, Porter, Carroll, Martin, Masin and Kubik. Members Thurston and Alt had notified staff they would be unable to attend. Staff members present were Parks Recreation Director, Ken Vraa; Landscape Architect /Parks Planner, Steve Sullivan; and Administrative Assistant, Liz Witt. Director, Ken Kraa stated that he had met with other park directors and found they had little common ground for a single ordinance. He did feel the discussion input will be helpful to the Advisory Parks Recreation Co mission as the parks dedication ordinance is updated. Director Vraa noted that Eagan's present ordinance is unique in that it provides partial parkland credit for pond areas; for utility easement areas and for commercial projects which provide for on -site parks /open space. He felt the City could strengthen its ordinance by directly relating dedication to impact of development upon the park service district. He thought the City should take the density of population into account when establishing the land percentage. Mr. Vraa reminded the Commission that much of the park policy regarding dedication is found in the Park System Plan and not in the Ordinance. He noted that developers are quick to point the lack of requirements in the Ordinance; therefore, it is necessary to incorporate policies into the Ordinance, or to make reference to the process which establishes the dedication. Mr. Vraa said, the Ordinance review process will be lengthy. However, Commission members have long felt the need to better show the relationship between the platting review and the need for parks. Compliance with state statutes must be addressed also. Mr. Vraa noted the Council is fully supportive of the ordinance review. Director Vraa reviewed how current land dedication is calculated, and presented alternatives which might better reflect "reasonable and equitable" dedication fees. Chairman Martin suggested the information be put in matrix form so it would be easier to understand. He felt the selected dedication process must not be too complicated. Mr. Martin said, that Alternate 2 is Adv.Parks Rec Special Meeting March 13. 1986 more equitable of the two alternates, if the 12 acre /1,000 population standard is correct. Alternate 2 is: No. of people x .012 No. acres due (land dedication) No. of people x .012 x value of land cash dedication There was concern about the fair market value, which is determined at the tame of final plat. The value fluctuates and the price is not the market price. Some developers sell at a lower price per acre and insert a balloon payment to get around park dedication. Commission member Bertz noted that if. the City collected on the basis of number of bedrooms, the developer can designate the rooms as office or den, negating the City's ability to collect on "bedrooms 2. Deerwood frontage road 3. Golf nettinlbattin ease 4. Spring construction estimates Commission member Ketcham thought the ordinance should include the "green space" requirement. Commission member Carroll said, the ordinance must comply with state law. He also suggested that once the ordinance is completed, staff should follow -up with a comparative analysis with other similar sized communities. After additional discussion, the Commission agreed that a second meeting would be required. Chairman Martin volunteered to put together a matrix addressing alternate calculations, have staff review it, and present it for the April meeting. The Commission reopened discussion of a name for this road segment. There was some support for the "Conklin Lane" after the man who captured Chief Blackhawk. Further discussion led to the consensus that the name might connote a poor image for the Indians. Two Commission members mentioned that Blackhawk Lake was originally called Long Lake and suggested the name Long Lake Lane. That name will be submitted to the Council, along with two n. +es generated at the March 6 meeting. Director Vraa said, there is a multi -use frame for golf and batting practice on the market for approximately $1,200. He noted that Eden Prairie has one set up, in one of their hockey rinks. Use of the unit would be monitored to decrease liability impact. Chairman Martin said, that he had something different in mind when he had first requested this. He felt that a batting cage would be a service and provide a profit. Commission member Porter suggested the unit be moved from park to park so more residents could use it. Director Vraa will come back to the Commission with firm cost figures and budget considerations for purchase of the unit(s). Landscape Architect, Parks Planner, Steve Sullivan distributed estimates for 1986 construction at Blue Cross /Blue Shield, Quarry, Pilot Knob, Adv.Parks Rec. Co Special Meeting March 13, 1986 Meadowlands, and South Oaks Parks. He stated that the estimates will be submitted to the March 19 City Council meeting for Council approval to go out for bids. Sullivan is hopeful the process will result in bids received by April 11. Parks Recreation Director Vraa noted that the total figure does exceed the bond figure by $85,000. He said, that most of that difference is in the cost of development for South Oaks Park. He stated that 1986 will be a heavy construction period for the entire City and he felt it economically worthwhile to have just one contractor for all five parks. Commission member Ketcham moved, seconded by Carroll to recommend approval of bid process for the five parks. The motion carried. C. Bur Oak Hills Director Vraa said that several Co ission members attended a special meeting with the City Council on March 11. Council members were supportive of the Commission and it's concerns, the council agreed that they would not accept the proposal as an agenda item without Parks Recreation Commission reco endat Some council members expressed concern about the poor park facility available for that park service district currently, and did not want to approve a potentially worse condition. Director Vraa said, that staff had had another meeting with Mr. Briggs and Mr. Merila of Harstad Company earlier in the day. He said, the developer does not yet appear willing to compromise. The developers were asked to prepare a statement in writing as to their position. The matter will be on the April agenda. Commission member Carroll moved, Kubik seconded, that the meeting be adjourned. Dated: ADJOURNMENT Advisory Parks Recreation Seereatary CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: DEER F E ADDITION'' PRE PRELIMINARY PLAT PLICANT CHARLES HENRICH LOCATION NW4,' SECTION 28 EXISTING ZONING: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (EAGAN °40} DATE OF PUBLIC HE ING MARCH 25, 1986 DATE OF REPORT: MARCH 18, 1986 REPORTED BY: PLANNING ENGINEERING DEPTS APPLICATION: An application preliminary plat for 324: rental Development site south of Co of Thomas Lake R. ZONING LAND USE: The Eagan 40 P D. was to expire in January, 1986, after sitting idle for 10 years. The 39.6 acres were approved for 338 building units Thomas Lake Rd splits approx. 2.2 acres to the east from the rest of the site. There is no building planned for this area at this stage of development. A proposed road extension (Deerfield Rd), connecting: Thomas Lake Rd and Johnny Cake Ridge R, was shown in the P.D. layout: This will Pass through undeveloped R -4 (multiple) and RB (roadside business) zoning districts to the west. The road as shown in the preliminary plat site plan reflects that of the original conceptual plan as does the entire site plan. Undeveloped agricultural land is to the north across Co Rd 30 and a P.D. with underlying agri- cultural (A) zoning abuts this site to the east. The 100' Williams Brother Pipeline bisects this site in a south to northeast manner. The topography is ro area near the center the ponding' area from the the SE property ;line. Other has been submitted requesting a apartments on the Eagan 40 Planned Rd 30 (Diffley Rd) and just west ng but generally flows toward a ponding t he site. A deep ravine that enters w est is wooded as i the area along smaller tree stands dot the site. SITE PLANNING: The project is to be developed in 3 phases. The first consisting of 3 buildings along the southeastern portion of the site and the recreational /commons area Phase 2 will contain 2 buildings south of Deerwood Rd and west of the pipeline easement. Phase 3 will include 4 buildings with a private drive extending south from Co Rd 30. This private drive will also connect with Deerfield :Rd. All 9 buildings contain 36 units and provide underground "parking. 324 10' x 20' outside parking stalls will be required. They have been shown on the submitted preliminary plan. The proposed plat meets all City Code require mets in terms: of setbacks, lot coverage, density and parking requirements. DEERFIELD ADDITION PRELIMINARY PLAT MARCH 25, 1986 PAGE 2 The applicant intends to create a "New England" type atmosphere with this project. The buildings are designed to have the feel of a large manor home. They will be 3 story (30 35 height) gabled and have high pitched roofs. The exterior will consist of brick and horizontal lap siding. There are 5 individual unit types proposed ranging in size from 836 S.F. to 1285 S.F. some units may contain fireplaces. Other amenities include full washers/ dryers, built micro waves, elevators, a 2500 s.p. meeting room/recreational facility and tennis courts. Rents will vary from the high 6600s to middle $700's, GRADING/DRAINAGE: The preliminary grading plan th a pplic a nt submitted for this site is feasible and c ompli e s w ith a ll City Code requirements. The final grading Plan will have to show erosion control measures. In a dditi o n to the site grading, s t a ff recommends that this development also grade the southwest corner of the intersection o f Thomas Lake Road and Diffley Road to provide for a minimum 400' site distance. The intersection now is extremely dangerous because of the short site distance to the west* This proposed development is located within Major Drainage District B. Hills and basins typify the existing topography within this development. The majority of this area drains into a basin at an elevation of about 900 located near the center of this proposed development. Meanwhile the perimeters of this development generally drain away from this site. The grading will not be changing any existing drainage patterns. The first phase of this development will not require any trunk storm sewer extensions, UTILITIES: Sanitar sewer of sufficient size. ca and de exists at Clemson Drive and at Baylor Court to provide service to this proposed development. Water main of sufficient size and capacity is in place along Thomas Lake Road and County Road 30, STREETS: Thomas Lake Road and Diffley Road border this development on the northeasterly corner and northerly boundary re spect i ve l y. Thomas Lake Road is a City street designated as a c°mmunitY collector street, Diffley Road is a rural two-lane County Road under the jurisdiction of Dakota County. Thomas Lake Doad is built to its ultimate design, while Dakota County has tentative plans for upgrading County Road 30 in 1988. The proposed internal public street, Deerfield Road, will eventually connect Thomas Lake Road and Johnny Cake Ridge Road Providing a regular 32 ft, wide roadway. Staff estimates the total trip generation from this site to be about 2,0(30 trips per day. If the private access is not granted to Diffley Road, then DEERFIELD ADDITION PRELIMINARY PLAT MARCH 25, 1986 PAGE Deerfield Road i11 have to handle all 2,000 tr1; f t<he access is granted onto County Road 30, then staff esti D eerfield Road would have to handle about 1 trips per day. if a right -in right --out only is approved at County Road 30, then Deerfield Road would have to handle between 1,00 and 2,000 trips per day. Staff recommends a 6 wide roadway for Deerfield Road. Thi would mean handling about 2,000 trips per day, the worst cas situation. This width would also provide for adequate traffic f low with parking or stalled vehicles along one side of the road- RIGHT-OF-WAY/RASE NT S: Th is development w 11 have to dedicate a 65 ft half right -of -way for Diffley Road. Also, this development shall dedicate on the final plat a full 80 ft right of -way for Thomas Lake Road, which is presently; dedicated as an easement. Because of the recommended 36 ft. width for Deerfield Road, staff would recommend increasing the right -of -way dedication to 66 ft. This development will, have to provide for easements over a public utilities not located within public ri ht -of --way. Water main easements shall be a minimum of 20 ft. in width, with the sanitary sewer and storm sewer easements being a minimum of 30 ft. in width. This development w:11 be responsible for dedicating all standard easements required by City code. PERMITS: This developmen f ollowing permits: be responsib f or obtaining the MPCA Sanitary sewer extension 2. Mn Dept. of Health Water main extension. Dakota County -w Grading within County right-0 F way. Williams Brothers Pipeline Company Grading; within easement ASSESSMENTS: City assessment records indicate this developmen is responsible for trunk area storm sewer for Parcel 01 -25 and 010-26. All other trunk related assessments have been assessed at the correct zoning rates. in addition, this development will be responsible for future street upgrading assessments for Diffley Road and future trailway assessments along Diffley Road. (See Figure 2). The following table summarizes' these obligations. DEERFIELD ADDITION PRELIMINARY PLAT MARCH 25, 1986 PAGE 4 ASS SSMLN SU RY 'TABL1 E stimated 1986 uan Rate Amsun Trunk Area Storm ots'1- 344,124 sq.ft. $0 064 /sq.f $2 Outlot A ,B,C 80,476 sq. ft 0 064 /sq, f t. 75,;550 Street (Future M ultiple Equivalen Outlot A 900 f. f. $63 6/ f $57, 024 Outlot C 0 f.f. 6;.36'f` 11,405 Trail ay Outlot A 975 l.f. $11.81 /1 f $11,515 Outlot C 255 l.f. 11.81'1.f 3,812 TOTAL $179, 89 Staff will use the rates in e at the time of final platting along with the final plat areas to determine the final assessment obligation of this development. These assessments may either be paid at the time of final plat; approval or spread as an assessment by way of a Waiver of Hearing. This development shall be solely responsible for all costs o internal streets and utilities DEERFIELD PRELIMINARY PLAT PAGE 5 CONDITIONS: The developer shall comply with all standard engineering recommendations which apply. The developer shall do the necessary grading at the southwest corner of Thomas Lake Road and Diffley Road to provide for a minimum of a 400 site distance. If the ut Council approval. liti are installed under a public z us t authorize the project 'befo This development shall dedicate the following right -of -way widths: a. 65 b. 80 e. 66 half right -of --way for Diffley Road. f ull ric ht of-way for Thomas Lake Road. f ull right -of --way for Deerfield Road. This development shah] be responsible fo mi nimum of 20 ft. width utility easement fo 30 ft. utility and drainage easement for san sewer not within public right --of -way. act, then nal plat con e dedicating a ater 'main and ary and stor The development shall be required to obtain the necessa permits and approvals from the following. a MPCA Sanitary b. Mn Dept of Health Wate c. Dakota County grading with d. ,Williams Brothers Pipeline permit. This development wil s ewer, future str assessments, and a at the time of final ewer extension permi a s n approval n right -of -way permit. grading within ease en 1 be responsible for its eet upgrading multip Away assessments at the pl atting. g unk area stor e equivalent rates in effect This development shall be responsible for all costs' of installing the internal public streets and utilities. A time extension be Agreement for enough t original Agreement had extensions). 10, An Environmental Assessment submitted for staff review p permits. The garage shall be if only.2 stalls per:uni granted to the origina m e to complete the pr an option to request W orksheet or to the included in are provided 1 0 yea oject. 2 three P.D. (The Year (EA be prepared and ssuance of any building he renta l. unit price :it h he project DEERFIELD PRELI PLAT; MARCH. 25, 1986 PAGE 6 2, The project shall be subject to Park Commission`s review and comment regarding park dedication. A detailed landscaping plan shall be submitted including a bond which shall not be released less than one year er landscaping i s completed. MEMO TO: CHAIRPERSON C CREA THE ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: JIM STURM DATE: MARCH 20, 1986 SUBJECT: DEERFIELD PRELIMI PL AT NEIGHBORHOOD M EETING On Wednesday evening, March 19, 1986, a neighborhood meeting was held at the Eagan Library'.- The applicant, Charles Henrich, the site engineer and 15 area residents were present. A concern expressed by the residents of the Thomas Lake Heights Addition was the proximity of one building to the southern property line in the phase one development of Deerfield (along the SE portion of the site). The applicant has agreed to study an alternative where the third building would be removed and relocated in the phase 2 development to the west. This would keep approximately 200' of property (a sumac hillside) in its natural state and act as a buffer between the 2 developments. This alternative will be drawn up prior to the March 25 Advisory planning Commission meeting for your review. The residents also requested that >a condition for approval be that the remaining 2 building pads in phase one be field staked prior to the April 15, 1986 City Council meeting. The applicant agreed to this conditi 4:: 4Ae ',„,1 1; CT 1 60 ASOVE1DO*LARK RD a-- CONCe OE'S ATHR F'ARM MILLAND CLEMS00. s, 1 LLEMSON P VERGR PARA HLLTC NB LA viat Rd WALDEN HEIGHTS PARK LI 1 cRRr PATCH ARK as i UyUAL :4 J ames R. Hill, inc FtAN CHARLES R. HENRICH 5125 CAMELOACK ORME Wt. IOWA. 5543111 DEERFIE DEVELOPMENT EAGAN 40 LTD. PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN AP23 889. 3 141P 40 AP- 11 912.1 2 8947 LR Vi AP-42 2 2 A I I 1 1 'ks'Cs, AP-13 /1/ 4P 14 7/4.0 t BP- 3 2 9 -44 A f 9/9.3 9.37 5.9 RO A -ee -BP-18 8829 B 8990 0.0 4-44 444 16 AP-22 AP-43 24- .-i/A„1„;[.1.1,-12 )9,1;6,3 8736 896 0 441. BP-10 882 o \4 909 8 698 3. 18 12 9/6 2" BP-20 9160 \6; ,,RKJ BP-13 BP"I9 92 7 0 ,7 931 4 .915,0 8- h B 9 P 16 -2 0 1 AR BP-22 926.0 9274-- I -1-- 0 1 BP-31 .11/8448 4,44444* 1 m 935 O women, 937 6 I g I J01-47 zi ,ty zh cl_ l< RADvol, 42'-- 9 8 L BP-7 8P-12 908.0 9/40 BP-2 882.1 886.0 1P-25 380.5 788.5 7i,GA.14 MFt 816.27t9„N AP- 36 8/8 8 L 798.7 0 ,5z3...,...... 1.1 284 A-k 7 1 'A Cf,r 1 73R AP-16 0.6 46 920 0 1 92 .926.0 AP 903.5 9088 =4; 1- A P-30 9/5 922.0 city of eagan PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT AP 8P-29 809 7 T.: .„.„,-,,,...,-..„,,,„,',41-4,21 8663 A I BP-33 HILLS 8P-1 790 3 8010 908.0 AP-4 4-1) 920. 920. r t A- W PE F886 6 BP-25 ;?..A1.4.4Y7 924 0 A‘AP-35 927 2 880.6 77 42:1 913D ARK 1 y _TF:5 DEERFEILD BP -3 889. 9 9052 9/8 BP-4 P-58 e'3 W 874 5 8865 18 BP-17 887 1 892.0 SUBJECT PARCEL P -4 4 844.0 6, 5 JP 5 1 823-8 -I 1 8 34.0 CitY HALL Kitc,t,%a v4C. JP-6 818 30VOALE c 870 A 873 58672944 JP 4 8 1 7 2 8 8 7 7 4 40 5 875 0 S TORM SEWER MASTER PLAN B-p 4. LP-8 855.0 8580 P 34 988.0 /006.0 1• PARK GO COL: F approved: J J-b 3• 4 r,Ir i 2 LP-44 8 46.0 8 53 .2 ../P BI 83 12 i 420 j- 7.9 8P 0 9 70 0 5 4 4 4 Vogp,,,,,a BP-1f fl 0 9 909 6 9 20 .4 44; 9 VIEW SE G. #1 standard plate 4: 141 16111 11111 saemems0.0000000*M0000•000 80011100 t210 f **COO 0000C,000 9'17 0.48' Jaa CUTLOT OUTLOT C R3 PUD 113 ames R. Hill, inc. PLANNERS/ ENGINEERS SURVEYORS VICO owl mammon, 11,41•••■• •011 /1 1 IIII so. R3 PU .07 70 0 MID Mr *77 56.16 100 1000 00•10 R.• Shr: it.•■• =0251 Mt* 960756 MA It TO* 2.• IA O.& III Ift• .04, a se og. N N N cLmoT R3 PUD L. r e CHARLES R. HENRICH 6725 CAI121.5•CK DPIIVI CDINA. WC 55436 DEERFIELD DEVELOPMENT EAGAN 40 LTD PRELIMINARY PLAT 11•••■ 1 S1,11 rv- /ALL Pt. E LOCATION: EXISTING ZONING: DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING DATE OF REPORT: SUBJECT: WAIVER OF I'LAT APPLICANT: RONALD DONNA ROSA REPORTED BY: PLANN:INC ENGINEERING APPLICATION: An application waiver or pIat in order to in two separate 2.5 acre we is side of Dodd Road and Road. Each parcel will have NW a, SECTION 36 A (AG.RICU.LTU.RAL) MARCH 25, 1986 MARCH 18, 1986 has be submitted requesting a split a 5 acre agricultural parcel parcels. This site fronts on the is approximately 800' south of Cliff 157' of street frontage. COMMENTS: Agricultural parcels surround this site to the north, sou:-h and east of Dodd Road. The western property line abutts Lebanon Hills County jai: The topography falls slightly a depression E�'i' >:�S'r)T1 1n �i1��` NW _�.:�e.:i" of the �.1.t::�=. ��.`n1 s depression drains .a.nt.:o Schultz Lake in the park. T e applicants have been living at this location for 18 years. Their children no longer live at home and, therefore, the existing 5- bedroom home exceeds their needs. The proposed lot split will enable the Rosa's to build a house more suitable to their current needs. The proposal calls for a 185' common access drive from Dodd Road. An easement: would be desired to eliminate any potential problems. The ex:.., t .:.i.nq house is approximately 140' from the front property similar setback. City policy line and the new house would have a has been to split parcels like this one time only. A preliminary platting process would be required if anymore lots were desired. The existing house is not served by sewer and water. RIGHT OF WAY: The existing right -of -'way for Dodd Road is 33 ft. either side of center line. Because Dodd Road is classified in the Major Thoroughfare Plan as a future collector street, it will require a 40 ft. right -of -way either side of center line. Staff recommends that the applicant dedicate the additional 7 ft. of right -of -way over his parcel as a condition of waiver of plat approval. WAIVER OF PLAT ROSA MARCH 25, 1986 PAGE 2 ASSESSMENTS: I n reviewing the assessment history 0 f Parcel 020 26, staff found that this area still needs to fulfill its obligation for trunk area assessments for water and storm sewer. The existing trunk water main is only bui as far as the intersection of Dodd Road and Cliff Road. City policy requires all new developments, including waiver of plats, to be responsible for the unassessed" trunk area at the rates in effect at the time of final platting, or approval of waiver of plat as in this case. The following table summarizes these assessments and their amounts. Description Net Area CONDITIONS; ASSESSMENT SU BY TABLE Estimated 1986 Quantity Rate oun Trunk Area Water 2.99 Ac $1,190 Trunk Area Storm Sewe 0 244 2) oft 2 TOTAL 7 8 512 The applicant may either pay the above assessments at the time o the waiver or he may execute a Waiver of Hearing form which will spread these assessments over 15 years at the interest rate based upon the'latest City bond sales. 1) That n:o more lc t splits be permitted on the sit e. 2) The applicant shall hook up with sewer and water at the time of availability. 3) The applicant dedicate an additional 7' o land along Dodd Road. 4) An overall' development;; shall be submitted and reviewed by City staff prior to issuance of any additional building permits. 5) The applicant is responsible for trunk area water and s torm sewer assessments at the rate in effect at the time of waiver o plat approval. LAKESOE PARK Certificate for: Ronald Rosa 4665 Dodd Rd. Eagan, Mn. 55123 1 1 8 5 2 t t 8 h DELMAR H. SCHWANZ LAND SURVEYORS INC RPc1 Unde 14750 SOUTH ROBERT TRAIL ROSEMOUNT. MINNESOTA 55068 PHONE 612 423-1769 SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE North line of N1/2 of NE. corner of N1/2 NW1/4 Sec. 36 of NW1/4 Sec. 36 1\1 N 89 41 50" V/ Centef N. 63 Sheet 1 of 2 Sheets MINNESOTA AE3ISTAATION NO 862 SUBJECT: PL CANT: LOCATION EXISTING ZONING: DATE OF PUBLIC E ING: DATE OF REPORT: CITY OF EAGAN PRELIMINARY PLAT NORTHVIEW MEADOWS 2ND ADD SIENNA CORPORATION (ROD HARDY') PART OF THE NE SECTION 26 R -II I UNDER THE LEXINGTON SOUTH PLANNED DEVELOPMENT MARCH 25, 1986 ARCH "19, >1986 REPORTE BY: PLANNING ENGINEERING DEPTS APPLICATION SUBMI TTED: An application has been submitted requesting Preliminary Plat approval consisting of 22.3 acres containing 38 single family lots. This deviates from the R -1 zoning standards. COMMENTS: Presently the subject parcel is south west of the existing Northview Meadows 1st Addition which is a single family development where lot sizes deviate from the R -1 zoning standards. The property to the south west -is presently zoned commercial in the Lexington South Planned Development and the subject parcel was to be a buffer zone between the commercial property and the residential An R III density (6 12 dwelling units Per acre) was allotted for this property which would allow townhouse to low rise apartments to be the buffer between the single family and the commercial to the south and west. It is Staff's understanding that the applicant wishes to plat this 22.3 acre parcel of which 10.8 acres would be contained within a single family development. A 4.5 acre outlot would remain in the NW portion and would either develop as a higher density residential or a limited commercial. This would then be the buffer between the residential development and the commercial. Along with the land use change, there is a physical geographical change from the proposed plat as to what could develop on Outlot A. There would be a physical separation between the northerly tier of lots and any development on Outlot A. The proposed development would consist of single f amil y lots that would have a ,minumumof 65' lot width x 125' lot depth for a minimum square footage of 8,125 s ,F. These are larger than the lets originally platted in the Northview Meadows 1st Addition, Again, this is the minimum lot width and average lit size within the Northview Meadows 2nd Add would be 12,880'S.F. The question arises as to where the City will allow a smalle lot subdivision versus requiring the regular R -1 zoning standards. It is Staff's understanding that the City may consider a reduction of single family lot size in areas where down zoning would occur, PRRL:MN I:NARY PLAT NOR;. V I Env MEADOWS 2nd ADD i ,,P:C:.. 25, 1986 •PAGE 2 The subject parcel is presently zoned :K -III which would allow the developer to build a density of 6 12 dwelling per acre. Therefore, a substantial reduction in units would occur with this development. proposal. Also, this development is adjacent to and could be part of an existing smaller lot subdivision known as Northview Meadows 1st Addition. It seems that if a small lct subdivision would be considered, this parcel would want the considerations for such a request. With the platting the Northview Meadows 2nd Addition, South Wescott: Hills tai would be extended from Northview Meadows 1st Addi.t_ot to a `T' intersection with street that would provide access to Diffley Rd (Co Rd 30) The plat would be accessed by a curvi loop street t of which all lots would take access from this internal loop street. GRADING /DRAINAGE: The preliminary grading plan dated March 6, 1986, is feasible and meets all app i is able City codes for grading. However, staff will require some minor revisions over Lots 3, 4 and 5 of Block 1, to better suit the drainage. Basically, staff w i l l require the grading to provide drainage towards the back lots in a northwesterly direction, rather than across the rear lots in a northeasterly direction. With the drainage across the rear lots in a northeasterly direction, it is too easy for a particular home builder to grade this site differently than what is proposed. Also, the grading plan should reflect smH. l drainage swales down the lot lines where the applicant is proposing the emergency overflows from the street catch basins. This avelopme it is located within Major Drainage District J. Presently, a temporary detention pond exists in the vicinity of kLLots 16 and 17, Block 1, of this proposed development. This handles runoff from a portion of the Northview Meadows development. The applicant proposes to connect two existing storm water outlets from the Northview Meadows development into storm sewer and convey this storm water in a northwesterly direction to an existing culvert under Diffley Road. The drainage for this development is also proposed to flow northerly towards this existing culvert. The eventual destination of this storm water runoff will be Pond JP -34, as shown on Figure 1. There is no outlet for Pond JP -34 at this time nor is there any storm sewer pipe from Diffley Road to Pond JP -34 at this time. All flow is currently over land. Therefore, to reduce potential erosion problems north of Diffley Road and potential flooding problems upon JP -34, staff recommends the flow through the culvert to be limited as close as possible to the existing flow through this culvert based on nondeveloped conditions. There appears to be adequate storage volume in a lower area just south of Diffley Road and just north of this development. equire any s the f 1 ow e existing PRELIMINARY PLAT NORTHVIEW MEADOWS 2ND ADD MARCH 25, 1986 PAGE 3 ing the flow under Diffley Road through the existing >culver would be a temporary measure until the completion of the trunk storm sewer from Diffley Road to Pon JP-3. However, before the City can install this segment of storm sewer, the City will require the installation of the trunk storm sewer outlet from Pond JP -34 to the west. The time table for these trunk storm sewer extensions depends upon adjacent development. In summary, staff does not feel this development w gunk storm sewer extensions as long as the City 1 under Diffley Road through the existing culvert to th flow rate based on undeveloped drainage area. The applicant shall be responsible for obtaining all the necessary drainage calculations for staff revie UTILITIES: Water main and sanitary sewer are in place at the east end of the proposed South Wescott Hills Drive, These utilities are of sufficient size, capacity and depth to provide service to this development. The preliminary utility layout by the applicant i feasible from an engineering standpoint. The applicant indicates that the installation of .ties under Curry Trail will be done under private contract along with the storm sewer. The applicant will petition for the installation of utilities within South Wescott Hills Drive. The Council must approve this project prior to the final plat approval for this development. STREETS: A small portion of his development abutts County Road 30 (Diffley Road). South Wescott Hilis Drive is built to the southeasterly boundary of this proposed development. County Road 30 is presently a rural two -lane highway under the jurisdiction of Dakota County.; Staff recommends no direct access be allowed onto County Road 30 from this development. South Wescott Hills Drive is under the jurisdiction of the City and classified as a collector street. The Northview Meadows development constructed the northeasterly half of South Wescott Hills Drive'` Staff recommends the requirement of the completion of the southwesterly 22' of South Wescott Hills Drive, located within the Northview Meadows Addition. The applicant indicates that he will also petition the installation of South Wescott Hills Drive termination point in the Northview Meadows Addition (including the widening) to connect to County Road 30. The feasibility report for the South Wescott Hilis Drive street and utility mprovements will address the point where this roadway connects t o County Road 3. This tentative location is across from the future high school site. Therefore, in order to establish an early dialogue with the school district, a copy of this report is being sent to the school district. PRELIMINARY PLAT NORTHVIEW MEADOWS 2ND ADD MARCH 25, 1986 PAGE 4 PERMITS: The applicant will be responsible for obtaining th necessary permits and plan approvals from the followings 1) MPCA 2) Mn Dept of Health The cost for obtaining these approvals and permits will be the sole ,_responsibility of the applicant. RIGHT -O AY EASE E TS: This development shall ded. i cate the following right-of-ways as shown on their preliminary plat: 1) 65 ft. half right -of -way for County Road 30. 2) 60 ft full right -of --way for Curry Trail. 3) 80 ft, full right -of --way, for South Wescott Hi i is Drive and eet In additi on t -o ail standard easements that City Code requires, staff will require a 20 ft. utility and drainage easement over the two storm sewer lines proposed between Lots 7 and 8 and Lots 14 and 15 of Block 1. Also, staff will require a pending easement over the portion of Outlet A necessitated bY by the limiting of flow through the existing culvert under County Road 30. ASSESSMENTS: The City's assessment records indicate the area of this proposed development' located within Parcels 012 -0, 013 -.02 and 010 -03 were never assessed for';t unk area storm sewer. Staff cannot determine the estimated amount of trunk area storm sewer assessments due because none of the areas of this proposed development are related to each individual parcel. Staff will require the applicant to furnish this information prior to Council considering this preliminary plat. This development wi 11 be responsible for One- fourth of the residential rate for future County Road 30 street improve ents. The footage shown on the preliminary plat amounts to 180 ft. across Lots 7 and 8 of Block 1. The 1986 rates are $33.75 per front foot for full residential street equivalent assessment. Similarity, this development will be responsible for the trailway along County Road 30. The applicant indicates he would prefer to fuifull his obligation for trailway bY being responsible for the trailway rate of $11.81 per front foot over the 180 ft. of Lots 7 and 8, rather than physically constructing such a short piece of traiiway. The respective assessment rates wi i 1 effect at the time of final platting. be based upon the rates in PRELIMINARY PLAT NORTHVIEW MEADOWS 2ND ADDITION MARCH 25, 1986 PAGE 5 CONDITIONS: NORTHV E The Planned Development shall be amended showing this la as a single family development. No densities be tans red to any other portion: of the Planned Development A deta housing plan be provided sho that a houses can meet the setback requirement of the Planned Development. A use be determined for Outlot A all exhibits marketing the Northview Meadows 2nd Addition show the intended land use on Outlot A. All lots take access to the internal street, Curry Tra All standard plat conditions shall be adhered to. This development shall comply with all applicable standard engineering conditions. This development shall be responsible for providing adequate storage for storm water runoff within Outlot A for all stor water runoff exceeding that which is naturally occurring. The Council shall approve the street and utility improvements within South Wescott Hills Drive prior to final plat approval. 12. All costs of internal responsibility of thi This development shal and/or plan approvals f shall dedicate the following widths o This developmen right -of -way. a. 65 t. ha l right -of --way for County Road 3 b. 60 ft full right -of -way for Curry Trail. c. 80 full tight -of -way for South Wescott Hills Drive and street "A". 10. The South Wescott Hilis Drive imrovment p include the southwesterly half of South Wesco located within the Northview Meadows Addition. 11. This develo rnent shall' be responsible for trunk area sto sewer, one fourth residential gate or Diffley Road upgrading, and the trailay rate for frontage abutting County Road 30, each at the rates in effect at the time of final platting. streets and ut development. be cam MEADOWS 2ND ADDITION p er 0 t` sha Hills Drive es shall be the sole r esponsible for getting permi 'CA and the Mn Dept. of Health a 0 0. SINEVERNMENNIN IMEMBEIMi 111111111111EMENIE alacasea5 A 3 r 4 I I I NORTHVIEW MEADOWS 2ND ADD. [IMMO, PRELIMINARY PLAT SIENNA CORPORATION •140 010100 ORME OVITL 001 •I0010001.13. 1110110 James R. Hill, inc. PLANNERS ENGINEERS /SURVEYORS .12M DE S. WM....M4.4. 55.7 WALNUT GOAT HILL PARK WATE RFD 58ERR LAKE' 10.11 OAK POND HILLS PARK SCHWANZ I LAKE PARK EAr FAAK OVERHI 7 4 PAP St f.ACE ADO. PD 75-1 rpg■ rISO Rd A 1,4/rES/OF PA RK 24` A UDITOR'S SG I A ,LAKES MEMO TO: ADVISORY PARKS RECREATION CO MISSION FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS RECREATION DATE: APRIL 1, 1986 RE: BUR OAK LLS RSTAD DE ©PMENT P k P1 Since the last Advisory Commission, Staff has had two separate meetings with representatives of the Harstad Development Company concerning the Parks Plan and Layout. Staff received revisions to the Parks Plan dated March 27, 1986. (Reductions for inclusion into the packet were not available). Attached to this memorandum is a letter dated March 27, from Mr. Merila outlining Harstad Company's position and response to earlier staff concerns relative to the Park's layout. Also, attached is an updated memo from Engineering regarding grading, utilities, etc. The plans submitted by Harstad Company has revised the Parks Plan addressing and mitigating some of the concerns previously expressed. The plan does not provide any additional road frontage from the plan previously presented. What has been accomplished is as follows: 1. Rolling Hills Drive has been shifted to the South some 30 feet and Lot depths reduced allowing reorientating of the facilities, and providing for a full size Soccer Facility. 2. In those areas where the trail was below the 820 contour, a combination of reduction in lot depths and fill provide for a trail above the 820 contour. A shifting or a trail access on the east side of the Park of the entrance way provides for an elevation closer to an 8% grade. The developer also proposes to rough grade and restore the Park, grade in the proposed trailways around the lake above the 100 year flood elevation contour of 820, furnish and install a six foot high fence, with landscape screening materials for the four lots adjacent to the access road, for furnishing and installing a retaining wall in the tot lot area in order to facilitate a tennis court design. Alternatives It appears the Advisory Commission has two alternatives relative to this proposed preliminary plat. The first of these is rejection of the plat based on the following: 1. That a contract still exists between the City and the property. While the developer may wish to change the zoning, this does not necessary change the contract agreement which provides for different parks configuration. Therefore, the Advisory Commission would reject this plat based on the contract agreement. 2. The City's Parks Dedication Ordinance provides for a reasonable Parks Dedication, generally established is 10 The ordinance does provide for credits for water area. However, it does not state the City must provide for these credits. Therefore, the City could reject the Parks Plan because the area provided above the 820 or 100 year flood elevation is less than the 10% land dedication. This area will be further reduced, with a rejection of areas with steeper slopes. The major area of the park providing for athletic play is subject to flooding, therefore, does not constitute the City's intent of acquision of suitable property for the development of neighborhood park facilities. Discussion Other alternatives have not been explored for the 10% land dedication. There have been .numerous revisions and adjustments to the park area being presented to the Commission, but all have focused on the same alternative. Other alternatives which provide for substantially improved park facilities, not subject to flooding, or not including any of the water for ponding could be reviewed as a possible alternative. There are a number of other concerns relative to the park being proposed. There is marginal space for transition and separation between facilities The proximity of the Tot Lot is a marginal location, because of it's close proximity to the softball field, and could be subject to foul balls. Home plate is approximately 65 feet from the rear lot line. This is much improved, but remains relatively close to the homes. Along the third base foul line there is a grade change of a five -to -one within ten to fifteen feet of the play area. This is a difficult transition, at best. With reference to the Tot Lot, it is noted the measurements are 38 X 55. Staff has typically used a 50 x 55 size dimension. While the developer is proposing to provide a 6 ft opaque screen and landscape material, the proximity of the parking lot remains at approximately 20 to 22 feet between the rear lot line, and the parking lot. Careful review of grading plans indicate that there is potential for ponding concentration of storm water run -off from the parking lot and trail access east to the pond. This presents for erosion, with a concentration of water now being channeled overland. It is possible for some of the concerns to be further reviewed. Alte tive 2 The Advisory Commission could recommend approval of this preliminary plat subject to certain conditions. These conditions would include the following: 1. A proposed sewer outlet from Rolling Hills Drive be relocated and extended directly to the pond. Currently, it appears that the storm water is emptied into the park. 2. That the fill material to be placed in the tennis court receive compaction with density test to be taken, and that only suitable, granular material is used. 3 A detailed landscaping plan be prepared and approved for the lots adjacent to the entrance way to the park to insure adequate screening. 4. The developer provide protection for trees from grading activities. 5. Suitable ground cover be established in those areas affected by grading. 6. The developer follow and enforce the most stringent adherence to erosion control measures. 7. Other FOR CO SS ON ACTION The Commission should make a recommendation to approve/not approve the preliminary plat with/without conditions. KV/bls March 27, 1985 7216 Boone Avenue North Brooklyn Park, MN 55428 Telephone: (G12) 5337595 Mr, Ken Vraa Director of Parks and Recreation City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota 55121 Re: Bur Oaks Hills/Bur Oak Park Dear Mr. Vraa: MERILA ASSOCIATES, vu��u�u��^� �u=^,^^~^"^u"".^�, INC. ENGINEERS, SURVEYORS, SITE PLANNERS This letter is a foll0*Up of previous meetings and discussions regarding the Bur Oaks Park Plan for the proposed Bur Oak Hills Preliminary Plat. Since our last meeting, the proposed plat and park plan has been modified as follows: 1. In the area of the west summer activity park, Rolling Hills Drive has been shifted southerly and the lot depths have been reduced to enable shifting the rear lot lines of the proposed lots adjacent to the softball infield southerly approximately 30 feet. This allows re-orienting the facilities and opening up the area by home plate. 2. The depth of lots have been reduced in the areas where the trail previously was below the 820 contour so that the trail COD be constructed above the 820 contour. The 30 foot wide park entry from Oak Ridge Drive has been Shifted south one lot width to provide for the proposed trail to meet existing elevations closer with an eight percent gradg. Attached are copies of the revised Park Plan, Grading Plan and Responses to the Park Department Staff Report comments dated 2/4/85' Based on the revised Park Plan, a summary of the proposed park land dedica tion is as follows: 1. Above the 100 year flood elevation of 820 2, Between elevation 817 and 820 3. Between elevation 809 and 817 4. Below elevation 809 (normal pond elevation Total Area Area 10.45 Acres 3,50 7.58 4:52 26.05 Acres Bur Oak Hills/Bur Oak Park March 27, 1986 Page 2 The above areas more than satisfy the required park dedication of 11.11 acres with 94% of the area being above the 100 year flood elevation of 820 Under the proposed park plan, the Harstad Companies proposes to do the following: 1. Rough grade and restore the park development area; 2. Grade in the proposed trailway around the lake above the 100 year flood elevation contour of 820; Furnish and install a 6 high opaque fence and evergreen landscape screening plantings on the side and rear lot lines of the two lots adjacent to the Rolling Hills Drive summer activity area on the west side of the park; 4. Furnish and install the small retaining wall in the tot lot area of the summer activity area; 5. Dredge out to enlarge the open water area in the ponding area. Under the proposed park plan, Harstad Companies do not propose doing the following: 1. Providing additional frontage beyond the proposed 90 feet along Rolling Hills Drive for entry into the summer activity area. 2. Constructing the proposed facilities within the proposed area beyond the rough grading of the site. As you are aware, the park planning firm of Brauer Associates, Ltd., who has been in the park design business for over 20 years, has been retained to assit in design of a concept plan for Bur Oaks parks. The concept plan has been prepared on the premise that Bur Oaks Park is a neighborhood park. In accordance with the City's Park System Plan Classification System, a neighborhood park is defined as follows: CHART 11-3. PROPOSED CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM COMPONENT USE SERVICE MLA SITE SITE ATTRIBUTES SITE LOCATION Ne10.4arhood )arh Haw- grownd (City '.l1 slictios) Area har local recreational activities sa as 230' a 250' open Reid games area, pawed /lard coon panne area, trails, ploy equipment Far pre--school ant eleowintcry age children and o paean. ar natural awe. Optical f wry 1...0 I LAM ff, wowed balUlaids, scr.cat Relay, ternis courts, horiary aria, skating rinks and parking facilities. Optimal service area Is woolly within 1/2 toile radisa. Service should not extend beyond molar battlers to ecvm. 2,tet to 5,C00 population served. 10 atm. tnininesei Is typically 10 to 12 acre. but troy be as large cm 20 Dorm. PhTiairtsishy wind For iron., develop- ment. Some muesli ties enr-de- sirabl• but not red 1 have letat 00' al *The above is an excerpt from Chart H-3 Proposed Classification System on page H-7 of the City's Park System Plan. AccirmAl• to Intended sareies area. Mare active paths road better Guam to collector omen. Bur Oak Hills/Bur Oak Park March 27, 1986 Page 3 The proposed plan prepared by Brauer Associates not only porvides for the basic and optional facilities for use of a neighborhood park, but also provides for skiing and sliding areas. The proposed plan also satisfies all the characteristics which a neighborhood park site should possess to fulfill the use expectations as defined by the City's Park Classification System Chart H-3. Under the site attributes category of Chart H-3, the Park System Plan stipulates that the site "must have at least 80' of frontage on a public street". The proposed BUR OAK HILLS plat provides for a total of approximately 420 feet of frontage on public streets for Bur Oak Park in addition to the existing 455 linear feet of public street frontage along Chapel Lane on the north side of existing Bur Oaks Park. A summary of the proposed and existing street frontage to Bur Oak Park is as follows: 1. Proposed: a. Rolling Hills Drive (summer activity area) 90' b. Rolling Hills Drive (winter activity area) 260' c. Williams Pipe Line Entry 40' d. Oakridge Drive Entry 30' 2. Existing: a. Chapel Lane (west end) b. Chapel Lane (east end) 420 Lin. Ft. 415' 40' 455 Lin. Ft. Total Street Frontage 875 Lin. Ft. The above summary shows that the proposed plat for BUR OAKS HILLS provides 4.7 (420 t 90) times the minimum required amount of frontage on a public street, while the entire Bur Oak Park (existing and proposed) would have 10.9 (875 90), the minimum required amount of frontage on a public street in accordance to the City's Park System Plan. It is recognized that the City's Park System Plan contains a "model" neighborhood park, as illustrated in attached Figure H-1. On page H-9, the Park System Plan states as follows: "In actual application, the parcel shape, size, adjacent uses, topography and local input on site planning could change the facilities and layout. Conceptually, the graphic illustrates a good general relationship between activities and the spatial requirements for a neighborhood park". Bur Oak Hills/Bur Oak Park March 27, 1986 Page 4 It is Harstad Companies contention that the "model" park plan showing 1,500 linear feet of street frontage is not realistic and therefore unmeaningful as a criteria for street frontage requirements. It is our contention that shape, size and topography of this site and the city designated ponding area for drainage from 1,035 acres of offsite area create an undue hardship on the developer of this property. The fact that 15.6 acres or 14.0% of the entire site is being consumed for a storm water ponding area without any compensation does not permit the owner to provide any additional park land or street frontage. We would appreciate your endorsement of the proposed park, as we feel the proposed development would be an asset to both the neighborhood and the City of Eagan. If you have any questions relative to the above, please call me at 533-7595. JRM:ml cc: Ken. Briggs, Harstad Companies Daniel A. Price, Attorney at Law Sincerely yours, MERILA ASSOCIATES, INC. James R. Merila, P.E. President SUBJECT: RESPONSE T0 PARK DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT COMMENTS DATED 2/4/86 RE: BUR OAK HILLS BY: Harstad Companies Merila Associates, Inc. DATE: March 27, 1986 The soccer and ball field are completely overlaid. The soccer field is improperly oriented, a portion of which extends onto the infield area; therefore, its usefulness is doubtful. Response: The new layout provides for the soccer field being re-oriented to a north-south direction and lying outside of the infield area of the so ftbal] field, 2 The parking lot is located between two single family homes which just meets setback requirements. Staff is concerned with residential objections to park usage once these homes become occupied. Response: The parking lot is relocated further from the residential homes. Six foot opaque fencing and evergreen landscape screen plantings are proposed for providing a buffer between the adjacent residents and the park entry drea. The revised layout also moves the proposed street, Rolling Hills Drive, southerly so that the rear line of the lots adjacent to the softball field are 30 feet southerly of the original proposed plan. In an earlier parks plan, staff had concerns over the central park area which was to receive extensive grading west of the tennis courts. This resulted in a loss to a substantial number of significant size oak trees. In order to complete the necessary grading and contours, the developer proposes to build a series of retaining walls of approximately 300 feet in length and at places, up to six feet in height. This retaining wall psychologically separates the open space that is trying to be preserved from the park and relegates it to an Unusable area. There is some doubt whether retaining walls will save the adjacent oak trees which could be eventually lost because of disturbance associated with grading. Response: The maximum height of the original retaining walls was four feet rather than six feet. However, the new layout provides for a shifting of the facilities easterly by pivoting around home plate in a clockwise direction. This enables the tennis courts to be shifted easterly approximately 35 feet and thereby eliminating the need of retaining walls on the west side of the tennis courts. Small retaining walls are being proposed in the northeast corner of the tennis courts for grade transition to the tot lot area. Page 2 March 27, 1986 Response to Park Dept. Report of 2/4/86 Bur Oak Hills 4. The proposed troilHay around the lake falls below the normal high water elevation of 820 with 13 lot locations and is therefore, subject to flooding. Response: The new layout provides for a shifting of some rear property lines adjacent to the proposed park and a revised grading plan to provide for the proposed trailway to be benched in above the 180 year flood elevation contour Of 820. 5. The proposed tennis courts on the northeast corner becomes a fill area and requires a retaining wall to facilitate it. Response: The construction of a portion of a tennis court in a fill area is normal construction for tennis courts in the same manner as constructing roadways and buildings in fill areas. The fill material is routinely placed and compacted to specified densities to control future settlement. Furthermore, the subgrade material for structures such as tennis courts, roads, and buildings required adequate compaction efforts in a cut section as well as in a fill section. A retaining wall with a 3' maximum height is still necessary here. 6. The proposed backstop for the ball field is approximately 50 feet from the rear lot line to the adjacent property. Commission has previously looked with disfavor with other parks plans that have shown this close of a proxim Of infield to residential lots. Response: The revised layout shifts the rear lot lines of the lots adjacent to the infield areas southerly approximately 30 feet and thereby providing approximately 75 feet of distance from home plate to the closest rear lot line. MEMO TO: ADVISORY PARKS RECREATION COMMISSION FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR OF PARKS RECREATION DATE: APRIL 1, 1986 RE: LEXINGTON PLACE SOUTH 3RD ADDITION The Advisory Commission had reviewed the Lexington Place South 3rd Addition at it's March meeting, deferring any action until additional information was forthcoming. Attached to this memorandum is a packet of information prepared by the Planning Department relative to the ownership of Outlot B, as well as additional information from the Engineering Department. On March 25, the Advisory Planning Commission approved and recommended to the City Council that this preliminary plat be approved with the following conditions: The developer provide a trail easement on Outlot B, that the developer be responsible for bituminous trailway along Lexington Avenue and that the plat be subjected to a Cash Parks Dedication fee. It is the Staff's understanding that the plat would still be subject to the Advisory Parks Recreation Commission's recommendations. RNATI DISCUSSION It appears that the Commission has two alternatives to recommend in regards to this preliminary plat application. Alternative #1 would be to recommend denial of the plat based on previous committments for this outlot. It is arguable that while the PUD agreement does not specifically indicate this as open space, there is sufficient history and intent by the previous owner /developer to commit it for this purpose. It is unlikely that the current owner would develop the lot for parks purposes, but would leave it in it's "natural state As to the eventual outcome and use for this parcel, it is subject to conjecture on what might actually happen. In the very long run, it is likely that at some point in time it would go tax forfeiture and may revert to the City. Because, the parcel is relatively small, it is subject to a ponding easement, it appears there would be little parks development that could occur, other than the development of a tot lot, and some maintained area. ALTERNATIVE 2 To approve the preliminary plat subject to conditions. These conditions would include the establishment of a trail on Lexington Avenue from Deerwood Drive South. Second, the developer provide for a 30' easement and trail within Outlot B (3) that a Cash Dedication for the newly created lot. STAFF CO FOR C KV/bls 1 Previously, there has been objection to the preliminary plat of this outlot for two primary reasons. First, the previous plat's showing significant grading and filling in the ponding areas. Second, the principal of the issue of allowing U.S. Homes to change their plans, and agreement with the City for the use of this parcel. This particular plat avoids grading within the ponding easement and proposes significantly larger and fewer lots than the previous proposal. This eliminates one of the two primary objections previously stated. The second objection can not be eliminated, but can be mitigated by the requirement that the developer provide for a trailway on Lexington Avenue, easement and trailway to the South through Outlot B. It appears that original development of this outlot for parks purposes by a Homeowners Association, is not possible nor is in the City's best interest to develop it as a City Park. It appears that the position of the City might be to develop nearby Parks and provide good access to these parks. SSION ACTION Commission should either recommend d approval with conditions, or to recommend disapproval of the preliminary plat for Lexington Place South 3rd Addition. O TO: CHAIRPERSON P MCCREA FROM: JIM STURM DATE: MARCH 1 1966 SUBJECT: LEXINGTON PLACE SOUTH 3RD DITION At the February 25 Adv Planning Commission meeting, this item was continued to 1) further research the history of Outlets A, B C, and 2) to allow the Advisory Parks Recreation Commission (APRC) time to review this plat. (see attached merrier) The APRC was concerned that Outlots A C in the original plan were to be left as open space and Outlet B would provide trail access to the south. No formal approval /denial motion was made, but these conditions were recommended if the plat is approved by the APC_ 1) Outlet B provide a trail ease to the south. 2) The developer be responsible for the al ay segment along Lexington Avenue. 3) The plat be, subject to a cash Parks Dedication fee. JS /j3 Attachment MO TO D E C RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER FROM': JIM STURM,' PLANNER I DATE: MARCH '1 1986 SUBJECT: OUTLOT "B" LEXINGTON PLACE SOUTH P.D. There has been a question as to the designated use of Outlot within the Lexington Place South P.D. Hopefully, this memo will clarify this issue- The following will be excerpts f s files. One paragraph from the February 25, 1982, staff report reads The proposed plat is scheduled to be reviewed by the Advisory Park Committee Thursday, March 4, 1982, for their review and comment. However, staff is indicating that the last time the proposed plat was before the Advisory Planning c there w as a cash contribution per unit recommended and the potential f or a trail connection to the proposed park in this general neighborhood. This proposed trail connection would thus be served from the cul -de -sac street to the south. Also, it is the staff's understanding that the Park recommendation would be a trail along Lexington Avenue and either a sidewalk or trail along Duckwood Drive for this proposal. However, formal action by the Park Committee will be March 4, 1982» Conditions from the Advisory Planning Commission for p elilna plat approval were then listed. Condition 5 states: 5) The preliminary plat shall be reviewed by the Eagan Park Committee and subject to the Park Committee's recommendations. The minutes from the March 4, 1982, Advisory Parks and Recreation Committee read: "Further, that the developer provide a trail easement on th! proposed cu--de -sac in the south portion of the development, east o the edge of the proposed plat y This item was on the April 20, 1982, City Council meeting and approval was subject to several conditions including: 3) That the construction in the proposed cul °de -sac south of the looped road be designated an outlot and no specific street plan be provided at the present tme 7) The preliminary plat shall be reviewed by the Eagan Park Committee and be subject to the Park Committee's ecommenda_ tions. CONCLUSION: 'Both the Advisory Planning Commission and City Council approved this plat subject to the Parks Commission approval. The Parks Commission stated, very specifically, that an easement for trail purposes be provided east of the cul-de-sac. Therefore, outlet "B" cannot be entirely used fo a single family lot;; some trail easement will be required. cc: Ken raa JS/ MEMO TO: ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION DALE C RUNKLE, CITY PLANNER FROM: RICHARD M HEFTI, ASSISTANT CITY ENGINEER DATE: MARCH 18, 1986 S[UJIG`I LEXINGTON PLACE SOUTH 3RD ADDITION PRELIMINARY PLAT ADDI'T'IONAL INFORMATION This memorandum will hopefully address the concerns the Planning Commission had regarding the question of drainage and drainage easement within this proposed development. The attached diagram shows the area that U.S. Homes (Orrin Thompson) dedicated to the City for pondino easement. As you can see, these easements only cov'' 1 portion of Outlot C of the Lexi :.on Place South Addition. The Lexington Place South Addition' plans do not show ariy encroachment onto these e z: e:ants. As for the question regarding drainage problems in this area, the Engineering Department has not received any complaints or concerns regarding the pond elevations. The approved grading plan that U.S. Homes submitted for the Lexington Place South development shows all the basemen: elevations for surrounding homes at a minimum of 3' above the high water elevation. In light of t he above, I feel that there are no drainage problems or concerns regarding either the easement or the ponding areas within the proposed Lexington Place South 3rd Addition. I will be available to answer any questions the Commission may have regarding this issue at the March 25, 1986, Advisory Planning Commission meeting. Rey)ec tfully sub w,ted, A Richard M. Hefti P.E. Assistant City Engineer 00'003 00'001 3 s0 ,K.00 $II 00'01$ 3. 40.00.00 N 0L'000 3 .01,00.60 00'01 s 3 00•000 40 .00 N I$ 00 �o N Q N01`oNIX pa HS260N Y.. -casez Lus uisssa F`--_ 3130 00 t ci0i; 1£ '1 9ZI M ,00,00. N I� Ft r J S to 1.11 MS mil m pyl to eu'7 Is" CITY OF EAGAN SUBJECT: PRELIMINARY PLAT LEXINGTON PLACE SOUTH 3RD ADDITION APPLICANT: FRONTIER MIDWEST LOCATION: SW4, SECTION 14 EXISTING ZONING: P.D. LEXINGTON SOUTH DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: FEBRUARY 25, 1986 DATE OF REPORT: FEBRUARY 14, 1986 REPORTED BY: PLANNING ENGINEERING APPLICATION: An application has been submitted requesting a preliminary plat for 10 single family lots in the Lexington South Planned Development, north of Wescott Rd and east of Lexington Av. COMMENTS: Originally this site was intended to be an amenity/pool area for the residents of the Lexington South Development as proposed by Orin Thompson. This new plat has been designed around the existing easements and the homes will contain approx. 1,000 S.F. with the style being the same as the others in the development. All 73 lots within Lexington Place 2nd have been sold and 35 are built. The remaining, as well as these proposed lots, should have occupancy by July. Lexington Place 3rd has already been graded. The site layout will create 2 lots fronting on Falcon Way and 8 lots on a new cul-de-sac connecting to Blue Jay Way. All lots will exceed the 12,000 S.F. code requirement. The width on the cul-de-sac lots vary from 62' to 88' at the setback line. Lots 4 5 (along Falcon Way) exceed all R-1 code requirements. GRADING/DRAINAGE: The existing topography over this site is fairly flat with slopes generally less than 5%. The main grading consideration will be to maintain a 2' vertical grade separation between the high water elevation for Pond JP-46 and Pond JP-62. Pond GP-45 borders the eastern edge of this parcel and has a high water elevation of 897.3. Pond JP-62 borders the westerly portion of this development along Lexington Avenue and has a high water elevation of 895.5. As a result, the minimum basement elevations for Lots 1 through 6 should be 899.3, while the minimum basement elevations for Lots 7 through 10 should be 897.5. This development will not require constructing any subsequent downstream trunk storm sewer. UTILITIES: An 8" sanitary sewer line serving the Lexington Place South Addition north of this site almost bisects this develognneut. The sewer is deep enough and has sufficient capacity to allow this development to construct services off of it. The water main will have to be looped from Blue Jay Way to connect to the existing 4" water main at the north end of Lot 4. Staff does not recommend removing the existing 4" line to Falcon Way and replacing it with a 6" line for the following reasons: 1. The head loss through this short section of pipe is not significant. 2. The 4" main will provide the looping benefit with the 6" main providing the fire flow and direct usage benefit. STREETS: Blue Jay Way borders this development on the north and Falcon Way borders Lots 4 and 5 of this development on the 000tb. Both streets are built to their ultimate residential design standards. The cul-de-sac off of Blue Jay Way is how the applicant proposes on accessing Lots 1 through 3 and 6 through 10. This cul-de-sac is within City Code for length. PERMITS: This development will be responsible for obtaining the necessary approvals from the Department of Health for the water main extension. Because only sewer services are necessary, it will not be necessary to obtain MPCA approval. RIGHT The applicant proposes to dedicate a 50' right-of-way street with a 55' radius cul-de-sac. The code requires a 60' radius for cul-de-sacs. However, staff would recommend that the Commission consider the 55' radius request in this instance for the following reasons. 1. A 60' radius would push Lots 8 through 10 closer to Pond JP-62 and Lots 3, 6 and 7 closer to the platted lots within Lexington Place South Addition. 2, The 55' radius still allows for a 10' boulevard which meets the Engineering Department's minimum requirements for boulevards. This development would be responsible for dedicating a 20' utility easement over the water main not constructed within City right-of-way. ASSESSMENTS: City assessment records indicate all trunk area related assessments over this site were spread over all the lots within the Lexington Place South Addition, thereby completing this development's responsibilities for trunk area related assessments. All costs associated with the internal sanitary sewer services, water main and services, and street will be the sole responsibility of this development. The new development will be responsible for 1/4 of the residential equivalent street assessment rate along Lexington Avenue for future improvements to Lexington Avenue. The 1/4 residential equivalent rate is being applied to all new R-1 developments which do not direct access onto but abut arterial streets. At the 1986 rates, this would amount to $3,283 (389 f.f. x $8.44/f.f.). Staff will determine the final amount using the rates in effect at the time of final platting. CONDITIONS 1. To suit the necessary freeboard requirements, the minimum basement elevation shall be 899.3 for Lots 1 through 6 and 897.5 for Lots 7 through 10. 2. This development shall loop the water main from Blue Jay Way to the existing water main on the north end of Lot 4. This development shall be responsible for complying with all standard engineering requirements that are applicable. 4. This development shall dedicate a 20' utility easement over the water main not located within such right-of-way. 5. This development shall be responsible for lateral street assessments for Lexington Avenue at 1/4 the residential rate in effect at the time of final platting. CARRIAGE .,HILLS,.- CGllRSE. fe I s (3I7N3,11 NO.LONIX37 El 'ON OVOhl AINf700 MEMO TO: ADVISORY PA RECREATION COMMISSION FROM: KEN VRAA, DIRECTOR PARKS RECREATION DATE: APRIL 1, 1986 RE: PARKS DEDICATION ORDIN CE REVIEW KV /bls COMMISSION REVIEWAL At the last meeting of the Advisory Commission on March 13, the Commission reviewed the first memorandum prepared regarding a change in the City's Dedication Ordinance. The Commission requested Staff to prepare comparisons between a straight dedication based on a per person calculation, and dedication based on a varied percentage calculation. Attached to this memorandum (for discussion purposes) are selected examples illustrating these comparisons. Example one illustrates the amount of land dedication for a 100 acre development using the straight line method of .012 acres per person in comparison to a percentage dedication based on housing type. Members will recall that the percentage formula increased by two percent i.e. ten percent twelve percent, fourteen percent for each step increase in housing type. Example 2 is comparison of a cash dedication using the straight line method, but at the old standard of 10 acres per 1,000 population and the new standard of 12 acres per 1,000 population. Members should also note that all of these calculations use the 1985 census data of residents per housing type. Ex ple 3 illus trates cash dedication utilizing 12 acres per 1,000 standard, but increasing the and value from 11,000 per acre to 12,000 per acre. Finally, ex pie 4 is a comparison showing increases of land value based on housing types. Illustrated is a $2,000 increase for each housing type starting at $11,000 per acre for single family zoning. Also shown is cash dedication based on property beginning at $11,500, and increased by increments of $2,000. Again, this assumes the 12 acre per 1,000 per population standard is adhered to. This information is presented for discussion purposes. Staff would like direction following the discussion on the preference of the Co re+ ission. The Staff is assuming that the Commission has a preference for the 12,000 acres per 1,000 population and utilization of the 1985 census data for population density. With this in mind, and assuming the Commission can reach some general directions concerning preference for percentages versus straight line, Staff can begin to prepare language for the ordinance revision. ple #1 FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY EXTENSION OF SELECTED FO FOR PARKS DEDICATION Comparisons of increasing percentage for land dedications for each housing type, using the highest and lowest number of unit permissible, and the "straight line" method of acreage per resident; ass ing 12 acres per thousand population and a 100 acre development. Housing Type No.of Units No.of People Acres by Strt. Line Method Single Family 2 700 8.4 acres (3.5 people) 3.5 1,225 14.7 Acres b 10 10 Duplex /Quad 3.6 1,008 12. 12 (2.8 people) 4.5 1,260 15.1 12 6. 1,680 20.16 12 Townhouse /Apts. 6. 720 8.6 14 (2.1) 10. 2,100 25.2 14 Apartments 10. 1,900 22.8 acres 14.5 (1.9) E:_ple 2 Comparison of Cash dedication using straight line (per person) method at $11,000 per acre for 10 acres per 1,000 and 12 acres per thousand standard for each residential type (1985 Census). Housing Type Single Family 3.5 $393.00 Duplex 2.8 314.00 Townhouse /Quads. 2.1 234.00 Multiple 1.9 212.00 Example 3 Comparison of Cash dedication using an established land value per acre, and 12 acre per thousand standard for each resident unit. Housing Type Single Family 471. 514. Duplex 377. 411. Townhouse /Quads 280. 306. Multiple 253. 276. Example 4 No. of People 10 Acre Stand d 12 Acre St d 'd $11,000 per acre $12,000 per acre $471.00 377.00 280.00 253.00 Comparison of Cash dedication for each housing unit using increasing land values for each residential type, and a 12 acre per 1,000 population standard. Housing Type Cost Per Acre Per Unit Cost Per Acre Per hit Single Family $11,000. $471. $11,500 $492. Duplex 13,000. 445. 13,500 462. Townhouse /Quads 15,000. 382. 15,500 395. Multiple 17,000. 392. 17,500 403. 26 x w G7206 7206 BUFF S i 73 7 2 0 73 7712 E N 8 10 12 13 14 30 10 20 21 2 2 23 1 I I .2 76: 27. 70; 28 30 31 7 37:' 63 7 I I 30 I; 36 37 38 39 40 I 11 6662.60N JONES COMPANY 07206 GREE N 7206 13001 1 15 15 17 18 '79 21 23 24 20 20 3 14 35 MEMO TO: THE ADVISORY PARKS RECREATION COMMISSION FROM: KEN VRAA DIRECTOR OF PARKS RECREATION DATE: APRIL 1, 1986 RE: SUMMATION OF PARK BOND 1'D ACCO FOR YOUR I The Department Staff has received the print -out of the Bond Fund Expenditures for 1985. Staff has prepared a summation of the Fund Account Expenditures for the years 1984 -1985 (See attachment). From the summation, there have been approximately 1.3 million dollars worth of expenditiures and encumbrances through December of 1985. The Director of Parks Recreation has some observations relative to expenditures as of this date. It appears that the Rahn Park Project will be exceeding that which was budgeted. As discussed last meeting, South Oaks Park will also exceed bond funding. Cost for engineering and design services appear to be somewhat ahead of what was expected. Because, these expenses are the first to be recognized, there is the appearance of a disproportionate share of the total amount spent. As expenditures increase for construction without incurring additional engineering and field service work, the relationship between engineering services and funds expended for parks development should fall within an original percentage estimate. In general, it appears that expenditures for the Parks Bond Fund are running only slightly more than originally budgeted, but still on target. Contracts for the parks shelter buildings and spring grading contract, along with future contracts including parking lot lighting, security lighting, and athletic field fencing will be important indicators as to the ability to fall within individual park funding. Also attached is a matrix prepared in June of 1984. The matrix depicted what work was to be done in each of the parks within the bond referendum. Shading indicates work to be accomplished. Staff has updated this matrix and blackened the appropriate squares to indicate completed work. The squares which have been shaded only 50 indicates substantial completion of that particular task. This should help the Co, fission to visualize how much work has been accomplished and what work remains to be done. Should members of the Commission have any questions regarding the expenditures, the staff would be happy to respond at the Co.ission meeting. KV /bls The following data presents preliminary figures which are subject to final budget and audit adjustments, as of 12- 31 -85. Numbers have been rounded. 1984 1985 Total Personal Services $12,113. $35,571. $47,684. Other Services Charges 1,214. 1,214. Other Improvements 304. 304. Capital (Construction Engineering) 344 894 1,239,198. $358.115. $930,664. $1,288,779. $44,000. Total Expenditure /Fund Enc tiered $1,332,799. Accounts 1984 PARK BOND TION OF F DEC Payable /Encumbered Funds (Note: Staff has a more detailed report on expenditure by Account Number. Not yet available is an expenditure report by Project Number (i.e. Park Site). Park Bond eferendum CARLSON LAKE 1111E11 1111111=111111111111 1111E11 COACHMAN 1E111 MEMEE1111 CEDAR POND ■111■■■11111111111r COUNTRX HO *iE 1111111111111111111111111•1111111 CINNA ?ION RIDGE 111111111■■111111111■11■111 DE BOER ■r111■ III visszaminallimr 1 Mr' 111 11111111 r •i i m 11 1111 111111 111111■1111 r. aIa� ■uR� RI I rrom mend assess JUNE 1984 0 TO: PARKS REC FROM: KEN ADVISORY P DATE: APRIL 2, 1986 Current Grant Projects T ON S REC DIRECTOR OF P TION COMMISSION S REC The purpose of this memorandum is threefold: TION SUBJECT: REQUEST TO SUBMIT FY '87 LAWCON /LC APPLICATIONS 1. Provide you with a status report on our current- LAWCON/LCMR grants; 2. Discuss alternatives related to our FY '86 Blackhawk Park application; and Request your approval to submit two (2) FY '87 applica- tions. The City of Eagan is presently administering three active LAWCON/LCMR grants. These grants have been made available to the City under the auspices of the Minnesota Dept. of Energy and Economic Development (DEED), Community Development Division. As a matter of background information, LAWCON (or Land and Water Conservation) grants are provided to the 50 states through the U.S. Department of Interior with funding primarily derived from offshore drilling royalties. On the state side the LCMR (or Legislative Commission on Minnesota Resources) provides similar grant funding to DEED for distribution to local governments. LCMR funding is derived from a 2 cents per pack tax on cigarettes. Project grant funding is determined by DEED on an annual grants cycle basis. The three active grant projects in Eagan utilize a combination of these funding sources as outlined below: 1. Rahn Park this grant project was approved by the state in July 1983. Funding for the project is a $79,750.00 LAWCON grant with a local matching share of $79,750.00; there is no state LCMR funding. Approved items included in the grant include baseball/softball fields, site improvement, landscaping, roads and parking lots, and design/engineering. On February 25, 1985 the City submitted a partial request for payment of LAWCON funds and subsequently received a reimbursement of about $45,000.00. Our department is planning to complete minor landscaping and signage this spring with final LAWCON reimbursement and closeout by the end of summer. 2. Fish Lake Park this is a fiscal year 1984 grant approved in March 1984. Project funding includes a $31,175.00 LCMR grant with a local matching share of $31,175.00. The approved project scope calls for roads and parking, boat launch, trails, fishing dock, site preparation, landscaping, and design/engineering. This project will also be completed in 1986. Remaining development includes a fishing dock, trails, and signage. Since LCMR funding is provided through advanced grants the City has already received its state assistance on this project. 3. Trapp Farm the Trapp Farm (Schwanz Lake) grant was approved by DEED in November 1984 utilizing FY 1985 funding. This grant project has a total cost of $221,000.00 with funding allocated as follows: $110,500 LAWCON, $55,250 LCMR, and $55,250 local match. The approved project scope includes site preparation, roads/parking, utilities, dock/canoe access, trails, landscaping, signage, and design/engineering. This grant project is essentially completed with the exception of landscaping and signage. Last month our department submitted a 90% partial payment request to the state. We are now anticipating a LAWCON reimbursement of about $99,800 in the next few weeks. This project will be completed by summer's end with final LAWCON payment and closeout to follow. To summarize, staff fully expects to complete development and close-out procedures on all three of the department's active LAWCON/LCMR grant projects by the end of 1986. Fiscal Year 1986 Application In April 1985 the City of Eagan submitted a preliminary application to the State for FY 1986 LAWCON/LCMR funding for Blackhawk Lake parkland acquisition. In August 1985 DEED informed the City that our application had ranked fifth among the metropolitan area projects. We subsequently learned that the second ranked project withdrew, raising our application to number four and the possibility of receiving some funding. Under normal circumstances Eagan would have been informed of the disposition of our application by last November. Unfortunately, however, the State has not yet learned of the FY '86 federal LAWCON apportionment due to a Presidential rescission of funds under the Gramm-Rudmann-Hollings bill. Based on discussions with John VonDeLinde, Parks Superintendent (formerly with LAWCON/LCMR), it is our understanding that Congressional action on the President's rescission will be made by mid-April. Based on the wisdom of the Congress two scenarios could develop: 1. Rescission upheld by Congress this is the most unlikely scenario according to the most recent information from the State. If the rescisson is upheld, however, it is very probable that Eagan would not receive any '86 funding for Blackhawk Park. 2. Rescission struck down by Congress- it is most likely that Congress will override the President's rescission of funds. Congress has a 45 day period to take such action deadline about April 15. Under this scenario, LCMR dollars now committed to top ranked projects would be freed up for additional projects. The City could then expect to receive 2 a FY '86 LCMR grant for Blackhawk Park. A very tentative estimate of funding is in the neighborhood of $30,000.00. By late April the City should have a final word on exact funding levels. At that point the City will have to decide whether or not to accept the limited financial assistance. The total projected acquisition cost under the application is $315,000.00. Impact of '86 Funding on '87 Applications Our decision on FY '86 funding for Blackhawk Park will have a direct impact on the City's eligibility to receive FY 1987 LCMR funding. Under a new state law a local unit of government is eligible to receive only one LCMR grant per biennium. (There is no limit on the number of LAWCON grants we may receive.) As a result of this new law the City must be very careful about its decisions related to FY '86 or '87 funding. Essentially there are four alternatives for the Commission to consider with respect to FY '87 preliminary grant applications. Alternative 1 Presidential Rescission of LAWCON (unlikely) Under this alternative the City would not receive FY '86 LAWCON and/or LCMR funding for Blackhawk Park. In this case the City would be eligible for LCMR funding in 1987, as well as LAWCON. The City could conceivably apply for and receive two FY '87 grants one in the traditional grants program (LAWCON only) and one in the athletic field program (LCMR only.) Alternative 2 No rescission deny funding Under this alternative the City could turn down a small LCMR-only grant for Blackhawk Park. On the one hand this would make the City eligible for LCMR in 1987 perhaps the City would score higher on another application in '87 and receive more grant funding. On the other hand, LCMR funding in '87 could dry up under state budget cuts. Consequently, it may be more prudent to accept a small LCMR grant this year (alternatives 3 4) and hope for a LAWCON-only grant in '87. Alternative 3 No rescission accept funding, no change in project In this case the City would agree to accept the LCMR funding for Blackhawk Park. The City would proceed with the acquisition of the full 15 acres identified in the preliminary grant application at an estimated cost of $315,000.00. This would represent about a 10% grant, based upon the tentative funding estimate. The City would be eligible for only a LAWCON grant in 1987 (under the traditional program) if this alternative is selected. Alternative 4 No rescission accept funding, reduce project scope Again, under this alternative the City would agree to accept the LCMR funding for Blackhawk. However, the City would make a formal request to DEED to reduce the acreage to be acquired under the grant. This would have the effect of reducing the total project cost while increasing the state assistance percentage; e.g. the City could propose to acquire half the acreage at half the price this would significantly reduce the City's match while doubling the State's funding percentage. Similar to #3, above, the City would only be able to pursue LAWCON funding in 1987 under the new state law. Obviously our decision in this matter will be affected somewhat by actions outside of our city in Washington and in St. Paul. I did want to raise these scenarios and alternatives, though, for your consideration. As soon as a determination of FY '86 funding is made, the City will be asked to respond expeditiously on the Blackhawk Park funding. Staff recommendation: to proceed with Alternative 4 if that choice becomes available. Fiscal Year 1987 Applications Due to the convoluted and confused nature of FY '86 Funding it is staff suggestion that we proceed with application for 1987 funding immediately. (The application deadline is May 5th.) The City would then be in the most adventageous position to respond to any of the various FY '87 funding alternatives that may present themselves. Because of John VonDeLinde's insights on this program, staff feels the City has two possibilities for competitive applications this year. The first is Northview Park athletic field lighting. This application would fall under the LCMR's biennial program for athletic field development. It would propose the lighting of the fifth field at Northview. Since this is an existing field with good site quality and access it should compete fairly well. LCMR funding would be up to 50%. The second application would propose the development of passive- use, water oriented, facilities on the north shore of Thomas Lake. Possible facilities could include a boat access/launch, hard surface trails, fishing piers, picnic areas, wildlife observation decks, and a wading beach. A cursory review of '87 criteria indicates that this project would be very competitive under the traditional program. Funding of up to 50% LAWCON could be available under alternatives 3 or 4, above. Total grant related project costs would be about $250,000.00. 4 Su 1ary As noted earlier, all of our current LAWCON/LCMR projects will be closed by the end of this year. If the Blackhawk Park grant is not approved it could mean the end of our involvement in the program temporarily. Consequently, it is important that we pursue the application for FY '87 dollars. Staff believes that the City should continue to strive for a close working relationship with the local recreation grants office in St. Paul. Eagan has utilized the LAWCON/LCMR program as a successful method for supplementing our acquisition and development program. Literally hundreds of thousands of dollars have been made available to the city through this funding source. For Commission Action: to recommend to the City Council that staff submit two preliminary grant applications; athletic field lighting (Nort view Field 5) and Thomas Lake Park for fiscal '87. KV/hb DirectOr of Parks Recreation 5