11/17/2009 - City Council RegularV. PUBLIC HEARINGS
AGENDA
EAGAN CITY COUNCIL
EAGAN MUNICIPAL CENTER BUILDING
NOVEMBER 17, 2009
6:30 P.M.
ROLL CALL AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
4 5 11. ADOPT AGENDA
III. RECOGNITIONS AND PRESENTATIONS
IV. CONSENT AGENDA (Consent items are acted on with one motion unless a request is made for an item to be
pulled for discussion)
19 .4 A. APPROVE MINUTES
pil B. PERSONNEL ITEMS
P al C. APPROVE Check Registers
P 2%1 D. ACCEPT donation from Residential Mortgage Group for $200 for purchase of rescue equipment, and
approve a budget adjustment increasing revenues and expenditures in the General Fund by $200 for the
donation and its related expenditure
e E. ACCEPT donation from Betty Schofield for $400 for purchase of rescue equipment, and approve a budget
adjustment increasing revenues and expenditures in the General Fund by $400 for the donation and its
related expenditure
RAI F. APPROVE change in management on the off -sale 3.2% malt liquor (beer) license at RBF LLC of Wisconsin,
dba Rainbow Foods located at 1276 Town Centre Drive
P,G. APPROVE change in management on the on -sale liquor license at GM Eagan LLC, dba Green Mill
Restaurant Bar located at 1940 Rahncliff Court
,sa( H. APPROVE 2010 -2014 General Facilities Renewal and Replacement Improvement Program and 2010
Budget
1P 3 I. APPROVE 2010 -2014 CIP Part II Vehicles and Equipment and 2010 Budget
)9.37 J. APPROVE Recording Extension of Cedar Grove Park and Ride Final Plat MVTA
47 47\ K. CARRIAGE HILLS Environmental Assessment Worksheet Negative declaration on the need for an
Environmental Impact Statement
pt q L. AUTHORIZE the Approval of a Letter of Intent between the City of Eagan and Harris Mechanical Services to
begin Phase I Feasibility Study and Engineering Design as part of the Department of Energy Geothermal
Technologies Program: Ground source Heat Pumps grant awarded to the City of Eagan for the Eagan Civic
Arena
M M. AUTHORIZE the Submission of a Forest Protection, Planning and Preparedness Grant Application
-e,�( N. RECEIVE Petition and Schedule a Public Hearing to Vacate Public Drainage Utility Easements (Lot 2,
Block 1, Northwood Business Park 3 Addition)
e-73 O. RECEIVE Petition and Schedule a Public Hearing to Vacate a Drainage Utility Easement (Lots 11/12/13,
Block 3, Oaks of Bridgewater 2 Addition)
P75 P. APPROVE Final Payment and Authorize City Maintenance of Contract 09 -14 (Schwanz Lake Rain
Gardens Improvements)
P.'767 Q. APPROVE Records Access Agreement with Minnesota Department of Vehicle Services
-I-1 R. APPROVE Amendment to Development Contract for Extension of Completion Dates, Oak Hills Church 2nd
Addition (City Project No. 06 -N)
p S. APPROVE transfer of Massage Therapy license for Jennifer Myers, The Bodywork Studio, from 3352
Sherman Court to 1570 Century Point
s7D A. CONSIDER additional suspension of the off -sale liquor license or revoke the off -sale liquor license for Brar
Enterprises, Inc., dba Blackhawk Liquor Wine
f J 05 B. FINAL Assessment Hearing for Project 964 (Yankee Doodle Road, West of Highway 13 Yankee Drive)
I p
15 2 C. FINAL Assessment Hearing for Project 981 (Rahncliffe /Cliff Lake Road /Rahn Road)
VI. OLD BUSINESS
e, A. APPROVE Delinquent Utility Bill Certification PID 10- 62725 006 -02 Account 0012026084
VII. NEW BUSINESS
.Ptsi A. APPROVE Ordinance Amendment, Chapter 5 Beer, Wine and Liquor Licensing and Regulation in regard to
liquor violations and civil penalties
VIII. LEGISLATIVE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS UPDATE
IX. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
ejs g A. CALL TO ORDER
B. ADOPT AGENDA
C. CONSENT AGENDA
1. APPROVE EDA Minutes
D. OLD BUSINESS
E. NEW BUSINESS
t /lea 1. CEDAR GROVE REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT Adopt a Resolution regarding the Hearing Officer's
Decision regarding Relocation Assistance to Mediterranean Cruise
F. OTHER BUSINESS
G. ADJOURN
X. ADMINISTRATIVE AGENDA
A. City Attorney
B. City Council Comments
C. City Administrator
D. Director of Public Works
E. Director of Community Development
XI. VISITORS TO BE HEARD (for those persons not on agenda)
XII. CLOSED SESSION
XIII. ADJOURNMENT
a
City of Eagan MeMo
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES
DATE: NOVEMBER 13, 2009
SUBJECT: AGENDA INFORMATION FOR NOVEMBER 17, 2009 CITY COUNCIL MEETING
ADOPT AGENDA
After approval is given to the November 17, 2009 City Council agenda, the following items are
in order for consideration.
Agenda Information Memo
November 17, 2009 Eagan City Council Meeting
A. APPROVE MINUTES
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
To approve the minutes of the November 5, 2009 regular City Council meeting and October 13,
2009 Special City Council meeting as presented or modified.
CONSENT AGENDA
The following items referred to as consent items require one (1) motion by the City Council. If the
City Council wishes to discuss any of the items in further detail, those items should be removed
from the Consent Agenda and placed under Old or New Business unless the discussion required is
brief.
ATTACHMENTS:
Minutes of the November 5, 2009 regular City Council meeting are enclosed on pages
S through ID
Minutes of the October 13, 2009 Special City Council meeting are enclosed on pages l
through
Li/
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EAGAN CITY COUNCIL
Eagan, Minnesota
November 5, 2009
A Listening Session was held at 6:00 p.m. prior to the regular City Council meeting. Present were Mayor
Maguire, Councilmembers Tilley, Bakken and Hansen. Councilmember Fields was absent. There were no
visitors who wished to be heard.
A regular meeting of the Eagan City Council was held on Tuesday, October 20, 2009 at 6:30 p.m. at the
Eagan Municipal Center. Present were Mayor Maguire, Councilmembers Tilley, Bakken and Hansen.
Councilmember Fields was absent. Also present were City Administrator Tom Hedges, City Planner Mike
Ridley, Public Works Director Tom Colbert, Community Development Director Jon Hohenstein, City
Attorney Mike Dougherty and Administrative Secretary Deputy Clerk Mira Pepper.
AGENDA
City Administrator Hedges noted an item that would be added to the Administrative Agenda.
Councilmember Hansen moved, Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to approve the agenda as
amended. Aye: 4 Nay: 0
RECOGNITIONS
There were no recognitions or presentations.
CONSENT AGENDA
Councilmember Tilley moved, Councilmember Hansen seconded a motion to approve the Consent
Agenda as amended. Aye: 4 Nay: 0
A. It was recommended to approve the minutes of the October 20, 2009 regular City Council meeting as
presented.
B. Personnel Items.
1. It was recommended to accept the letter of resignation from Barbara Kalstabakken, Clerical Tech
III in Community Development.
2. It was recommended to approve new "Mobile Device" section to be added to the City of Eagan
Information Technology Policy which is included in the City of Eagan Personnel Policy Manual.
C. It was recommended to ratify check registers dated October 15, 2009 and October 22, 2009 as
presented.
D. It was recommended to approve a change in the business structure (ownership) of on -sale 3.2% malt
liquor (beer) license from Peter Ko, dba Dragon Palace Restaurant (Sole Proprietorship) to Dragon
Palace, Inc., dba Dragon Palace (Corporation).
E. It was recommended to direct the City Attorney's office to prepare an ordinance amendment to
Chapter 5 Beer, Wine and Liquor Licensing and Regulation.
F. It was recommended to approve the DARE Police Liaison Services Agreement between the City of
Eagan and ISD #196.
G. It was recommended to approve a resolution authorizing the issuance and sale of General Obligation
Recreational Facility Crossover Refunding bonds, Series 2009B.
H. It was recommended to approve the revised City Purchasing Policy.
I. It was recommended to approve the funding application to Dakota County to operate the 2010 Dakota
Valley Recycling Program, the joint recycling program for the Cities of Eagan, Apple Valley and
Burnsville.
J. It was recommended to approve Change Order No. 4 for Contract 08 -06 (Northwood Parkway I -35E
Overpass) and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents.
s
09 -27
City Council Minutes
November 5, 2009
Page 2
K. It was recommended to approve the 5 and final payment for Contract 08 -07 (Lexington /Diffley and
Safari Reservoir Improvements) in the amount of $206,825 to TMI Coatings Inc., and accept the
improvements for perpetual City maintenance subject to warranty provisions.
L. It was recommended to approve an Agreement for Contractual Snow and Ice Control services with
Gallagher's Inc. for the 2009 -2010 winter snow and ice season and authorize the Mayor and City
Clerk to execute all related documents.
M. It was recommended to approve the issuance of a permit to the Unisys Corporation to drill a water
supply well at 3199 Pilot Knob Road subject to the following conditions:
1. The well shall be no greater than 8 inches in diameter.
2. The well shall not be drilled into any part of the Prairie du Chien (or shale) aquifer, nor greater
than 335 feet, whichever is the greater restriction.
3. The well shall not pump at a rate greater than 100 gpm.
4. Unisys (and all future property owners) shall submit to the City a certified copy of the well log and
an annual report of any usage of the well.
5. The water supply line shall not be connected to any portion of the City's water supply line.
N. It was recommended to approve the resolution to withdraw from the Regional Mutual Aid Association 09 28
and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents.
O. It was recommended to approve a resolution amending the Public Works 5 Year Capital Improvement
Program (2010 -2014) to incorporate the addition of a Minnesota Department of Transportation noise 09 29
wall in 2014.
P. It was recommended to approve assessment deferment and settlement agreement for Project 905R
(Lebanon Hills Storm Drainage) for Parcel 10- 03400 032 -53 (Nelson), 10- 03400 010 -54 (Shadduck)
and 10- 22540 390 -02 (Foss) and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related
documents.
Q. It was recommended to approve a resolution requesting the Minnesota Department of Transportation
to advance to the City of Eagan $2,000,000 from the Municipal State Aid (MSA) Construction
account.
R. It was recommended to approve a six month extension of time to record the final plat for Rustin
Norvin Oaks, consisting of two single family Tots on .87 acres, located at 4870 Rusten Road.
S. It was recommended to approve the release of the Cost Participation Agreement and Waiver of
Hearing for Lot 6, Block 2, Eagan Promenade, located at 1270 Promenade Place.
T. It was recommended to schedule a public hearing for December 15, 2009 to consider the application
from the Meadowlark Ridge Homeowners Association for a Housing Improvement District for its
property.
U. It was recommended to modify the conditions of Planned Development approval for the Sam's Club
located at 3035 Denmark Avenue.
V. Item removed.
W. It was recommended to approve a change in management on the off -sale 3.2% malt liquor (beer)
license for Holiday Stationstore #247 located at 3615 Pilot Knob Road.
X. It was recommended to approve the final payment for Contract 09 -08 (Citywide Trail Improvements)
in the amount of $10,181.03 to Aslakson's Blacktopping, and accept the improvements for perpetual
City maintenance subject to warranty provisions.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
PROJECT 974, FEDERAL DRIVE WASHINGTON 81 STREET
STREET OVERLAY IMPROVEMENTS FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING
City Administrator Hedges introduced this item regarding the final assessments for the Federal Drive,
Washington and 81 Street overlay improvements. Public Works Director Colbert gave an overview of
the City's pavement management program. He then gave a staff report in regard to Project 974.
Mayor Maguire opened the public hearing. There being no public comment, he turned discussion back to
the Council.
DR ,q F
T
City Council Minutes
November 5, 2009
Page 3
Councilmember Hansen moved, Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to close the public hearing and
approve the Final Assessment Roll for Project 974 (Federal Drive Washington Drive 81 Street Street
Improvements) and authorize its certification to Dakota County for collection. Aye: 4 Nay: 0
PROJECT 975, MARICE DRIVE SHERMAN COURT
STREET OVERLAY IMPROVEMENT FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING
City Administrator Hedges introduced this item regarding the final assessments for Marice Drive and
Sherman Court street overlay improvements. Public Works Director Colbert gave a staff report.
Mayor Maguire opened the public hearing. There being no public comment, he turned discussion back to
the Council.
Councilmember Bakken moved, Councilmember Hansen seconded a motion to close the public hearing
and approve the Final Assessment Roll for Project 975 (Marice Drive Sherman Court Street
Improvements) and authorize it certification to Dakota County for collection. Aye: 4 Nay: 0
PROJECT 1006, KNOLL RIDGE DRIVE
STREET OVERLAY IMPROVEMENTS FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING
City Administrator Hedges introduced this item regarding the final assessments for Knoll Ridge Drive
street overlay improvements. Public Works Director Colbert gave a staff report.
Mayor Maguire opened the public hearing. There being no public comment, he turned discussion back to
the Council.
Councilmember Tilley moved, Councilmember Hansen seconded a motion to close the public hearing and
approve the Final Assessment Roll for Project 1006 (Knoll Ridge Drive Street Overlay Improvements)
and authorize its certification to Dakota County for collection. Aye: 4 Nay: 0
EAGANDALE CENTER INDUSTRIAL PARK NO. 16 DART TRANSIT COMPANY ADDITION
EASEMENT VACATION
City Administrator Hedges introduced this item regarding the vacation of public drainage and utility
easements within Eagandale Center Industrial Park No. 16 and the final plat of Dart Transit Company
Second Addition. Public Works Director Colbert gave a staff report.
Mayor Maguire opened the public hearing. There being no public comment, he turned discussion back to
the Council.
Councilmember Tilley moved, Councilmember Hansen seconded a motion to approve the vacation of
public drainage and utility easements within Eagandale Center Industrial Park No. 16 and Dart Transit
Company Addition and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents.
Aye: 5 Nay: 0
Councilmember Tilley moved, Councilmember Hansen seconded a motion to approve the Final Plat of
Dart Transit Company Second Addition to create one lot on approximately 10.7 acres located on the
southwest corner of Highway 55 and Lone Oak Road in the NE 1 /4 of Section 11 and the NW of Section
12. Aye: 4 Nay: 0
City Council Minutes
November 5, 2009
Page 4
CERTIFICATION OF DELINQUENT FALSE ALARM BILLS
City Administrator Hedges discussed this item regarding the delinquent false alarm bills noting there are
currently four delinquent bills with an assessable amount of $980.
Mayor Maguire opened the public hearing. There being no public comment, he turned discussion back to
the Council.
Councilmember Tilley moved, Councilmember Hansen seconded a motion to close the public hearing and
approve the final assessment roll for delinquent false alarm bills and authorize its certification to Dakota
County. Aye: 4 Nay: 0
CERTIFICATION OF DELINQUENT WEED CUTTING BILLS
City Administrator Hedges discussed this item regarding the delinquent weed cutting bills noting there are
currently 11 delinquent bills with an assessable amount of $2,369.86.
Mayor Maguire opened the public hearing. There being no public comment, he turned discussion back to
the Council.
Councilmember Bakken moved, Councilmember Hansen seconded a motion to close the public hearing
and approve the final assessment roll for delinquent weed cutting bills and authorize its certification to
Dakota County. Aye: 4 Nay: 0
CERTIFICATION OF DELINQUENT REFUSE REMOVAL BILLS
City Administrator Hedges discussed this item regarding the delinquent refuse removal bills noting there
are currently two delinquent bills with an assessable amount of $1,981.15.
Mayor Maguire opened the public hearing. There being no public comment, he turned discussion back to
the Council.
Councilmember Hansen moved, Councilmember Bakken seconded a motion to close the public hearing
and approve the final assessment roll for delinquent refuse removal bills and authorize its certification to
Dakota County. Aye: 4 Nay: 0
CERTIFICATION OF DELINQUENT BOARD UP BILLS
City Administrator Hedges discussed this item regarding the delinquent board up bills noting there is
currently one delinquent bill with an assessable amount of $382.75.
Mayor Maguire opened the public hearing. There being no public comment, he turned discussion back to
the Council.
Councilmember Bakken moved, Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to close the public hearing and
approve the final assessment roll for delinquent board up bills and authorize its certification to Dakota
County. Aye: 4 Nay: 0
CERTIFICATION OF DELINQUENT UTILITIES
City Administrator Hedges discussed this item regarding the delinquent utility bills noting there are
currently approximately 1,238 delinquent payments with an assessable amount of $185,074.02. He also
noted there is one objection to a delinquent bill and assessment. Administrative Services Director
City Council Minutes
November 5, 2009
Page 5
VanOverbeke discussed the City's delinquent utility accounts in comparison to those of gas and electric
companies.
Mayor Maguire opened the public hearing.
Mark Gilbertson, Valvoline Instant Oil Change, presented a letter of objection and explained that his
company had been paying the water bill for the entire strip mall where it is located until last year. He
further explained that he had requested the responsible party on the bill be changed. Staff was directed to
investigate the utility billing situation and possibly meet with the other property owners in the strip mall.
There being no further public comment, Mayor Maguire turned discussion back to the Council.
Mayor Maguire moved, Councilmember Bakken seconded a motion to close the public hearing and
approve the final assessment roll for delinquent utility bills and authorize its certification to Dakota County
with the exception of account number 0012026084. Aye: 4 Nay: 0
Mayor Maguire moved, Councilmember Bakken seconded a motion to continue consideration of account
number 0012026084until November 17 Aye: 4 Nay: 0
There were no Old Business items.
OLD BUSINESS
NEW BUSINESS
CONSIDERATION OF IMPOSITION OF ADDITIONAL PENALITIES FOR BRAR ENTERPRISES, INC.
DBA BLACKHAWK LIQUOR WIND
City Administrator Hedges discussed this item regarding the possible imposition of additional penalties for
Blackhawk Liquor Wine for four alcohol sales violations within a 36 -month period. After discussion, it
was the consensus of the Council to hold an administrative hearing.
Mayor Maguire moved, Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to hold an administrative hearing on
November 17 to consider the imposition of additional penalties to include revocation of the off -sale license
for Brar Enterprises, Inc.. Aye: 4 Nay: 0
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT KASHEVATSKY
City Administrator Hedges introduced this item regarding a Planned Development Amendment to allow a
3,300 square foot garage addition at 3445 Washington Drive. City Planner Ridley gave a staff report.
The applicant's representative, Quinn Hutson, was present and stated they agreed with the conditions of
approval and he would be available for questions.
The Mayor and Council discussed the proposed addition in the context of the surrounding uses and the
increase in tax base that will be generated,
Councilmember Tilley moved, Councilmember Bakken seconded a motion to approve a Planned
Development Amendment to allow a 3,300 SF garage addition at 3445 Washington Drive, legally
described as Lot 2, Block 1, Bicentennial Fourth Addition, subject to the following conditions:
Aye: 4 Nay: 0
9
City Council Minutes
November 5, 2009
Page 6
ADMINISTRATIVE AGENDA
1. An Amendment to the Planned Development Agreement shall be executed and recorded against
the property at the Dakota County Recorder's office.
2. This Amendment is intended to supplement and amend the existing Planned Development
Agreement. All other conditions and provisions of the existing Planned Development Agreement
shall remain in full force and effect.
3. Updated building facades shall be constructed per the submitted elevation plan dated September
16, 2009 and shall include garage doors painted to match the color of the building.
4. Landscaping shall be installed (as shown on the plan dated September 16, 2008) no later than
September 15, 2010.
5. The parking lot shall be restriped to have the stalls no Tess than 9 x 19 in size no later than
September 15, 2010.
There were no items for discussion.
LEGISLATIVE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS UPDATE
04,
A. Discussion was held regarding an amendment to the purchase agreement with the Rahn Family
Limited Partnership to acquire four acres to construct a fire station.
Motion was made by Bakken, seconded by Hansen to approve an amendment to the Purchase
Agreement to correct the legal description; to modify the assessment agreements that are to be
signed and delivered at closing; and to modify all other assessment agreements and to allow the
Mayor and Clerk to sign any such amendments in a form acceptable to the City Attorney.
Aye: 4 Nay: 0
Administrative Intern Chris Gelke was introduced.
VISITORS TO BE HEARD
ADJOURNMENT
Councilmember Tilley moved, Councilmember Hansen seconded a motion to adjourn the meeting at 8:30
p.m. Aye: 4 Nay: 0
Date Administrative Secretary Deputy Clerk
/0
Aye: 5; Nay: 0
MINUTES
SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 13, 2009
5:30 P.M.
EAGAN ROOM EAGAN MUNICIPAL CENTER
City Council members present: Mayor Maguire, Councilmembers Bakken, Fields,
Hansen and Tilley.
City staff present: City Administrator Hedges, Assistant to the City Administrator Miller,
Director of Administrative Services VanOverbeke, Community Development Director
Hohenstein, Fitness Coordinator Grange, Chief Financial Officer Pepper, Water Resources
Coordinator Macbeth, Superintendent of Enterprise Operations Mesko, City Engineer Matthys,
Superintendent of Utilities Schwanz, Campus Facilities Manager Vaughan, and E -TV Studio
Supervisor Ongstad. Also present was ECVB Executive Director Cory.
I. ROLL CALL AND AGENDA ADOPTION
Mayor Maguire called the meeting to order. City Administrator Hedges noted that the
Fire Safety Center update should be removed and continued to a future workshop due to a delay
in the closing on the property.
Councilmember Tilley moved; Councilmember Fields seconded a motion to adopt the
agenda as amended.
II. VISITORS TO BE HEARD
There were no visitors to be heard.
III. JOINT MEETING WITH THE AIRPORT RELATIONS COMMISSION
A. MAC Presentation of MSP Long Term Comprehensive Plan
City Administrator Hedges introduced the item noting that it is the practice of the Council
to meet with each of their Advisory Commissions at least one time each year. Hedges
introduced Dennis Probst and Chad Legve of the Metropolitan Airports Commission who
provided an update to the Council and the ARC on the MSP long term comprehensive plan.
The City Council discussed the long term plans for MSP and noted that impacts the
improvements could have on the City of Eagan. Mr. Probst noted that the improvements
proposed are anticipating MSP staying on as a significant hub for Delta Airlines. Mr. Legve
summarized the anticipated noise impact on communities between now and 2030.
I I
Special City Council Minutes
October 13, 2009
Page 2
B. 2009 -2010 ARC Work Program
Mayor Maguire welcomed members of the Airport Relations Commission (ARC). ARC
Chair, Chuck Thorkildson, presented the proposed 2009 -2010 ARC Work Plan to the City
Council. The City Council discussed the plan and encouraged the Commission to continue its
review of the economic impact that the merger of Delta and Northwest Airlines is having on the
City of Eagan. Assistant to the City Administrator Miller provided an update on the Noise
Mitigation Program that is underway as a result of the City's legal settlement with the MAC.
Mayor Maguire thanked the ARC for their work and there was Council consensus for the ARC to
continue with the 2009 -2010 ARC Work Program as presented.
IV. REVIEW OF COMPREHENSIVE RATE STRUCTURE FOR ALL PUBLIC
UTILITIES
City Administrator Hedges introduced the item, noting that in June of 2009, the Council
authorized staff to engage Springsted, Inc. to complete a rate study for all public utilities. The
purpose of the study, as communicated by Hedges, was first, to assist the City in adopting a
water rate structure by January 2010 that encourages water conservation, as required by State
law, and second, to review all utility rates in relation to long -term operating and capital financing
requirements, and recommend changes as appropriate. Hedges noted that Springsted is now
seeking direction from the City on policy questions in order to complete the analysis and present
the final report to the Council later this year.
Patty Kettles, consultant from Springsted, presented an analysis to date on the City's
utility rates, the current financial positions of the utilities, and the future financing needs of the
utilities. Ms. Kettles also identified the public policy questions associated with the study, which
the City Council discussed.
Superintendent of Utilities Schwanz provided a summary on state legislation that requires
cities to adopt a water conservation rate structure.
The City Council reviewed sample conservation rate structures. The Council stated their
lack of interest in "time of use" rates. It was suggested that one option Springsted could bring
back for further review would be a system that allows for a standard irrigation rate with
additional steps that tiers price based on water usage /consumption. It was also suggested by the
Council that the goal of the new rate structure should be to manage water as a resource and
maintain or improve upon water quality.
Ms. Kettles noted that options would be developed based on the input provided by
Council. The Council directed that the options being developed by Springsted be presented to the
City Council' Finance Committee for review prior to being brought back to the City Council at
the December 10, 2009 workshop.
Ms. Kettles summarized the storm water and water quality utilities, and the City Council
discussed the policy questions pertaining to pollutant impact charges and modeling capabilities
Special City Council Minutes
October 13, 2009
Page 3
of runoff. The Council directed the Finance Committee to review a pollutant discharge charge
combined with a credit system.
V. 2010 ENTERPRISE FUND BUDGETS (WATER, SANITARY SEWER, STREET
LIGHTING, STORM DRAINAGE, WATER QUALITY, CASCADE BAY, AND
COMMUNITY CENTER)
City Administrator Hedges introduced the item noting that Enterprise Funds are
established to account for self supporting activities, with revenues derived primarily from user
fees. Hedges summarized the proposed 2010 revenue and expenses associated with the Public
Utility Enterprise Funds.
The City Council discussed future renegotiations of joint powers agreement with
neighboring cities. The Council requested that they be notified at the time the joint powers
agreements are being renegotiated.
City Administrator Hedges summarized the proposed sanitary sewer budget and noted
that the proposed inflow and infiltration (I &I) will be scheduled on the November 10, 2009 City
Council workshop. The City Council discussed the relationship between the Minnesota Zoo and
the City of Eagan's I &I charges. The Council requested, in preparation for the November 10
workshop, that a memo be prepared outlining the percentage of the I I surcharge that is the
responsibility of the Minnesota Zoo. The Council also asked that the memo include a summary
of how the Zoo is participating in the I &I surcharge response.
City Administrator Hedges summarized the proposed street lighting, storm drainage, and
water quality budgets. There was City Council consensus to proceed with the budgets as
proposed.
City Administrator Hedges summarized the proposed 2010 Cascade Bay budget.
Superintendent of Enterprise Operations Mesko noted the difficult year that Cascade Bay has
experienced in 2009, similar to other water parks due to cool weather. The City Council
discussed how to keep Cascade Bay self sustaining. Three potential approaches were discussed
including a large capital investment, maximizing the experience, and re- examining the closing
policy for Cascade Bay.
City Administrator Hedges summarized the proposed 2010 Community Center budget.
The Council discussed the impact of the economy on room rentals and usage of the Community
Center. It was suggested that the City find a way to capture the Market Fest market to positively
impact the Community Center usage.
VI. 2010 E -TV BUDGET
City Administrator Hedges introduced the item noting that the 2010 budget will represent
the first full year for an E -TV budget.
13
Special City Council Minutes
October 13, 2009
Page 4
Communications Director Garrison summarized changes that have occurred in E -TV
from June 2008 to the present. Garrison noted that E -TV has doubled local Eagan sports
coverage, held their first ever E -TV video camp for kids, and had four cycles of classes.
Additionally it was noted that volunteers are currently working at producing new programming
for airing on E -TV.
Studio Supervisor Ongstad highlighted the accomplishments that have taken place over
the past ten months. Director Garrison summarized the financial benefits of the public private
partnership with Thomson Reuters.
The City Council discussed projections for both PEG and franchise fees, including the
possibility of franchise fees being eliminated entirely. Director Garrison noted that negotiations
regarding franchise fees will likely begin in 2011.
There was City Council consensus to proceed with the 2010 E -TV budget as proposed
and directed that the item be placed on a future City Council meeting Consent Agenda for
ratification.
VII. 2010 EAGAN CONVENTION AND VISITOR'S BUREAU BUDGET
ECVB Director Cory distributed a travel survival kit that is being distributed to the
ECVB. Mr. Cory noted the street value of the kit is $4.99.
City Administrator Hedges provided background on the proposed 2010 ECVB budget
and acknowledged the contribution of $25,000 by the ECVB to the City's 150 Anniversary
Celebration.
Mr. Cory provided background and an overview of the proposed 2010 budget, including
promotional highlights and trends relative to Eagan. The City Council discussed the proposed
ECVB budget and provided direction that the budget be placed on a future regular City Council
meeting Consent Agenda for formal ratification.
VIII. REVIEW PRACTIC PERTAINING TO APPOINTMENT OF ELECTION JUDGES
City Administrator Hedges introduced the item noting that at the August 4, 2008
Listening Session, staff was directed to review the City's ordinance pertaining to the
appointment of election judges. Hedges noted that the City does not have an ordinance
specifically covering the appointment process, and has historically used the State's Statutes
exclusively.
Director of Administrative Services VanOverbeke provided a summary of the election
judge appointment process as specified by Minnesota State Statute.
The City Council discussed the statutes. Councilmember Bakken raised concern that the
City does not screen candidates that are appointed as election judges. Bakken also raised a
l4/
Special City Council Minutes
October 13, 2009
Page 5
question regarding whether the Independent party is informed regarding the political party
appointment list created by the City.
Upon further discussion, the City Council directed that an Ad Hoc Committee be formed
to further discuss this issue of election judge appointment. Councilmember Bakken and Tilley
agreed to serve on the Ad Hoc Committee.
There was no other business.
X. OTHER BUSINESS
XI. ADJOURNMENT
Councilmember Fields moved, Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to adjourn the
meeting at 10:58 p.m.
Aye: 5; Nay: 0
I s-
Agenda Information Memo
November 17, 2009 Eagan City Council Meeting
B. PERSONNEL ITEMS
Item 1. Approve PERA Related Repetitive Leave Policy.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
To approve the attached policy entitled, "PERA Related Repetitive Leave Policy" and allow
identified employees to buy back their PERA benefits should be they be approved to work a
36 hour week verses a 40 hour week.
BACKGROUND:
This past year, 3 employees have approached their respective supervisors to propose working a
reduced schedule of 36 hours per week verses 40 hours per week. Along with this reduction in
hours; vacation, sick, and holiday accrual rates were prorated, along with Medicare and FICA
taxes and PERA contributions from both the City and the employee.
FACTS:
PERA Statute 353 states that employees may take a "periodic repetitive leave without pay up to
208 hours in a year under the provisions of MN Stat 353.01 This is available for full time
employees working 40 hours per week. The statute states that an employee may choose to
continue contributing to PERA the amount that would normally be deducted, in order to preserve
their PERA pension level, despite a reduction in income. If the employee chooses this option, the
City is than obligated to pay the Employer portion of PERA for that individual as if they we
receiving compensation for a 40 hour work week vs. a 36 hour work week. This is referenced as
a "buy back" of PERA benefits. The employee may choose not to "buy back" PERA benefits, in
that case, the City would continue to make PERA contributions based on the hours the employee
is compensated for.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City implement a voluntary program offered by PERA to allow these
three individuals to "buy back" their lost PERA benefits in 2009, and allow this opportunity for
any other eligible employee who may be approved to reduce their weekly annual work hours
from 40 hours per week to 36 hours per week in 2010 and considered annually for renewal.
ATTACHMENTS:
PERA Related Periodic Repetitive Leave Policy is attached on page 17
Buy Backp�efit Offereq t rough the Voluntary Hours Reduction Program is enclosed
on pages through
Reduced Schedule Agreement is attached on pageaD
I Le
PERA BENEFITS:
PERA Statute 353.01 states that employees may take a "periodic repetitive leave without pay up to 208
hours in a year under the provisions of MN Stat 353.01 This is available for full time employees
working 40 hours per week. The statute states that an employee may choose to continue contributing to
PERA the amount that would normally be deducted, in order to preserve their PERA pension level,
despite a reduction in income.
If the employee choose this option, the City would also pay the Employer portion of PERA for that
individual as if they we receiving compensation for a 40 hour work week vs. a 36 hour work week. This
is referenced as a "buy back" of PERA benefits. See attached document entitled PERA Buy Back Benefit.
Eligibility:
Full time employees who have completed their probationary period may request to reduce their hours
to no less than 36 hours per week. The supervisor, Department Director and Human Resources Manager
will determine the feasibility of the request and follow up with a written response. The reduction in
hours agreement may be recalled by the City at any time for any purpose. See attached sample Reduced
Schedule Agreement.
The Reduced Schedule and employee compensation and other City benefits:
Compensation:
Employees continue to earn their current hourly rate, based on hours worked. An exempt employee
would keep their exempt status, but would simply work less hours.
The City could realize up to a 10% cost savings in the personnel budget, particularly in the areas of
compensation, Medicare and FICA and payroll taxes.
Benefits:
MEDICAL /PREVENTATIVE DENTAL /LIFE LTD
The City's insurance policies and all insurance contract language state that employees who work at least
30 hours per week pay the same employee contribution to premiums to that of an employee working 40
hours per week. There are no recommendations to change this policy.
VACATION /SICK ACCURAL
Accrual rates are prorated based on hours worked.
City of Eagan
PERA Related Periodic Repetitive Leave Policy
/7
Lkp /hrpol /dev /redschel /PERA leave 11.09
Schedule
Hourly
Rate
Hours /Wk
Earnings /wk
PERA EE Cont
2009 rate
PERA ER Cont
2009 rate
6.00%
6.75%
Current Schedule
20.00
40
800
48.00
54.00
Reduced Schedule
20.00
36
720
43.20
48.60
Weekly PERA Buy Back for
EE
4.80
Weekly PERA Buy Back for
ER
5.40
Buy Back Amount per Pay
Period EE
9.60
Buy Back Amount per Pay
Period ER
10.80
Introduction:
City of Eagan
PERA Related Repetitive Leave Policy:
Buy Back Benefit Offered through the Voluntary Hours Reduction Program
PERA Statute 353 states that employees may take a "periodic repetitive leave without pay up to 208
hours in a year under the provisions of MN Stat 353.01 This is available for full time employees
working 40 hours per week. The statute states that an employee may choose to continue contributing to
PERA the amount that would normally be deducted, in order to preserve their full PERA pension level,
despite a reduction in income. If the employee chooses this option, the City is than obligated to pay the
Employer portion of PERA for that individual as if they we receiving compensation for a 40 hour work
week vs. a 36 hour work week. This is referenced as a "buy back" of PERA benefits.
The employee may choose not to "buy back" PERA benefits, in that case, the City would continue to
make PERA contributions based on the hours the employee is compensated for.
Example of buying back PERA benefits:
If a full time (40 hr /wk) employee earning $20.00 /hour, wished to work 36 hrs /wk, and decided to buy
back PERA benefits, they would pay an additional $9.60 per pay period, on a pre -tax basis. The City
would pay an additional $10.60 per pay period.
Example of exercising this option:
With City approval to reduce hours per the Voluntary Hours Reduction Program an employee could
reduce their schedule from 2080 hours per year to 1872 hours per year, or in many cases, this would
result in a schedule reduction from 40 hours per week to 36 hours per week over an entire calendar
year. This "periodic repetitive leave" under PERA may be renewed each calendar year. Per PERA, the
agreement has a start date and a stop date determined by the employee and the employer which must
be adhered to and cannot be changed. In addition, the reduction in hours must be adhered to for the
length of the agreement.
Enrollment Period:
The three identified employees who voluntarily reduced their schedule in 2009 may retroactively buy
back PERA benefits for 2009.
Eligibility for PERA Buy Back in 2010:
Employee must currently have a 40 hour work week schedule.
Employee must reduce their work hours by no more than 208 per calendar year, (36 hours per
week for a full calendar year).
Rules of Participation:
The Employee may make a request to reduce their hours by completing the Voluntary Hours Reduction
Form. Upon approval, the City will respond with a written agreement which must be signed by the
employee and a representative of the City, along with the PERA Notice of Periodic Leave form. For
enrollees after January 1, 2010, the City authorizes the buy back benefit through pre -tax payroll
reduction only.
i 9
Lkp /hrpol /poldev /reducsched /PERA buy back11.09
I agree to work a reduced schedule from January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2010,
2009. I agree to work Mondays 8:00 am to 4:30 pm and Tuesday through Friday
from 9:00 am to 4:30 pm. Effectively; this changes the total weekly hours paid from
40 hours per week to 36 hours per week. This reduced schedule does not change my
exempt status.
I understand that approval of my request for a Reduced Schedule does not in any
way guarantee a permanent schedule. I understand that my Supervisor may modify
this schedule at any time, upon sufficient notice.
I understand that even an approved Reduced Schedule is not an employment right
and that the City may at any time direct me to work the original 40 hours per week
that I was working prior to this agreement.
I agree that City business needs cannot be compromised because of my working a
Reduced Schedule and that identified City needs are determined by the Employer.
I understand that I am still responsible for all my duties as assigned by my
Supervisor and those indicated in my job description. Therefore, I am willing to be
flexible as it relates to my schedule in order to ensure other employees and the
public are not adversely impacted.
I agree to adhere to the agreed upon Reduced Schedule in its entirety. I also
understand that if the request is granted, it will be re- evaluated and reviewed by my
Supervisor at any time to further determine its feasibility and that the Employer
reserves the right to direct me to return to the typical work schedule as addressed in
the Employee Personnel Policy Handbook, Sec 10.1, Working Hours and Overtime
Pay at any time during the program.
Employee Signature Date
Supervisor Approval Date
Route to HR for retention in personnel file.
Reduced Schedule Agreement
gO
Lkp /hrpolicies /dev /reduced sched/agree P dudziak
Agenda Information Memo
November 17, 2009 Eagan City Council Meeting
C. RATIFY CHECK REGISTERS
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
To ratify the check registers dated October 29, 2009 and November 5, 2009 as presented.
ATTACHMENTS:
Check registers dated October 29, 2009 and November 5, 2009 are enclosed without page
number.
Agenda Memo
November 17 2009
Regular City Council Meeting
D. ACCEPT DONATION FROM RESIDENTIAL MORTGAGE GROUP FOR
$200 FOR PURCHASE OF RESCUE EQUIPMENT, AND APPROVE A BUDGET
ADJUSTMENT INCREASING REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES IN THE
GENERAL FUND BY $200 FOR THE DONATION AND ITS RELATED
EXPENDITURE.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
To accept a donation from RMG or $200 for purchase of rescue equipment, and to
approve a budget adjustment increasing revenues and expenditures in the General Fund
by $200 for the donation and its related expenditure.
FACTS:
Residential Mortgage Group has a program called "refer a friend. Build your
Community." They have two of their customers that have decided to make a
donation through this program to the Eagan Fire Department. The total
amount is $400 the Fire Department would like to use the donation for first
aid equipment.
The Fire Department will use the funds for the purchase of additional rescue
equipment as requested (1225.6220).
A thank you letter will be sent to both parties that made the donations.
ATTACHMENTS:
None
Ja
Agenda Memo
November 17 2009
Regular City Council Meeting
E. ACCEPT DONATION FROM BETTY SCHOFIELD FOR $400 FOR
PURCHASE OF RESCUE EQUIPMENT AND APPROVE A BUDGET
ADJUSTMENT INCREASING REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES IN THE
GENERAL FUND BY $400 FOR THE DONATION AND ITS RELATED
EXPENDITURE.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
To accept a donation from Betty Schofield or $400 for purchase of rescue equipment, and
to approve a budget adjustment increasing revenues and expenditures in the General Fund
by $400 for the donation and its related expenditure.
FACTS:
Mrs. Schofield's Husband Glenn passed away in August from a heart attack.
The Fire Department responded to the call. Mrs. Schofield has sent a $400
donation to the Fire Department and asked it be used for first aid equipment.
The Fire Department will use the funds for the purchase of additional rescue
equipment as requested (1225.6220).
A thank you letter will be sent to Betty Schofield from the fire department.
ATTACHMENTS: none
a 3
Agenda Information Memo
November 17, 2009, Eagan City Council Meeting
F. APPROVE CHANGE IN MANAGEMENT ON THE OFF -SALE 3.2%
MALT LIQUOR (BEER) LICENSE AT RBF LLC OF WISCONSIN, DBA
RAINBOW FOODS LOCATED AT 1276 TOWN CENTRE DRIVE
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
To approve a change in management on the off -sale 3.2% malt liquor (beer) license for
Rainbow Foods located at 1276 Town Centre Drive.
FACTS:
A change in management has occurred at the above referenced location. The new
manager of Rainbow, Troy Logan, has completed the necessary forms and paid the
appropriate investigation fee.
The Eagan Police Department has conducted an investigation of the new manager
and finds no reason for denial.
ATTACHMENTS (0):
Agenda Information Memo
November 17, 2009, Eagan City Council Meeting
G. APPROVE CHANGE IN MANAGEMENT ON THE ON -SALE LIQUOR
LICENSE AT GM EAGAN LLC, DBA GREEN MILL RESTAURANT
BAR LOCATED AT 1940 RAHNCLIFF COURT
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
To approve a change in management on the on -sale liquor license for the Green Mill
Restaurant located at 1940 Rahncliff Court.
FACTS:
A change in management has occurred at the above referenced location. The new
manager of the Green Mill, William Keller, has completed the necessary forms and
paid the appropriate investigation fee.
The Eagan Police Department has conducted an investigation of the new manager
and finds no reason for denial.
ATTACHMENTS (0):
a5-
Agenda Information Memo
November 17, 2009, Eagan City Council
H. APPROVE 2010 2014 GENERAL FACILITIES RENEWAL
REPLACEMENT CIP 2010 BUDGET
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
To approve the 2010 -2014 General Facilities Renewal Replacement CIP
2010 Budget and to authorize the transfer of all assets in the "City Property
Special Assessment Debt Service Fund" to the "General Facilities Renewal
Replacement Fund
FACTS:
This General Facilities Renewal Replacement Fund was created in
1999 for the purpose of providing resources for renewal and replacement
of general facilities; primarily non enterprise fund infrastructure. Major
renewal and replacement items such as roofs, parking lot improvements,
and grounds enhancements are cyclical in nature and create budgeting
problems when inserted into the annual operating budgets.
An annual allocation of the tax levy which began in 1999 at $100,000 has
been dedicated to the General Facilities Renewal and Replacement Fund
except for payable 2004 and 2009. For those two years the levy was
redirected to the General Fund to assist in enabling the City to finance the
operating budgets following budget cuts and constrained revenues
available for use in the General Fund resulting from various State actions.
The allocation to this fund of the tax levy for payable 2010 is $271,146.
Management meetings have been held at which time staff from each
department had an opportunity to discuss their proposals and challenge
other department proposals in attempts to prioritize overall City needs.
The attached list of projects totaling $212,850 with $1,650 financed by
Public Utilities and $211,200 financed by this fund was reached by
consensus.
Nearly all of the projects in the five year program at this point relate to
non street bituminous surfaces. The transition in the City's General
Governmental Maintenance operations staffing and the potential impact of
energy projects and related stimulus funds has resulted in building repair
projects being somewhat undefined at this point.
ace
Staff is currently reviewing potential short and long term capital projects
including the use of energy stimulus funds. The conclusions of the studies
may result in a request to amend this budget in 2010.
The City Property Special Assessment Debt Service Fund was created to
pay the City's share of special assessments on benefiting property that the
City owns and also relies on periodic tax levies for funding.
Given the purpose of the two funds it is appropriate to combine them into
one fund and utilize one combined tax levy as the funding source for both.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attached on page Q is a copy of the proposed 2010 General
Facilities Renewal Replacement Budget.
Attached on page c9 is a copy of the summary 2010 2014
General Facilities Renewal Replacement CIP. 2
Attached on page 3o is a copy of the summary of the financial
status of the General Facilities Renewal Replacement Fund.
c7
H
Z
W
2
W
U Q
a
w
oaf
J
N
W O
W G
Q N
N
W
1
J
U
U-
1
w
W
Z
w
t7
O
U
O O 0 0 0 0 O O
CO M O— N O a O
(c) M O
N N N
0 O
CO M
M
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 V
(r N r 0 M
N N
O
O
0
O O O O
0
0 to N- O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O O
O v
0 0 O
0)n
0
O O
c Lc)
c0 M
O O O 0
0 0 0 0
(0 M u 0
W (0 M
O
M
(0
0
M
O
O
0
m m E
c0 oo m
co 2Y m
O co co 8
J J p
W O w
CO 0) 4' In v 2 Y N co
m m c U N c
u
co O C
V N N> o c N U 7 c c O 1 m N
O a 1.2 Y ...1
U 0 a
TO a� Z 8O�VU if) Q 0. m m rn aa j m
o o as LL
7 7 -J J m C U 0 �5 025 W O N P. Q
Z Z m m e a 5 CO 'c i E y TT? II_ d w m J co D
cis' is' W c' 0 a a 8 8 u$ x III
0 a U `n `n LLJ
(n 2n a L .0 C O (0 ce C (0 (0 (0 O O cn
z m o o x a m o if o a o o y w m Z rn 5 m O
LLLL W 2 W Z lnD 2' U fY Z c ce ,2 z Z W W O O� Y QY p UN
p (0 -0 7 w F (0 (0 o a l c0 w N J
o U d it m O 2 O J>> Z m m 21 21 5 1 D
J U V W U y a
Q LL z r
re
W
LU
It 0 CO re w Q Q Q Q Q
LL f.7 d W U
0
!C
E
E
oy
W e-
W 01
t+ O
.O O
co Z r
F- O
N
1
m
V
O
N N
0
O
O
N
O
0
O O O O 0
0 0 (0 0 M
N (0
O O
O O
O 1 1 1 O
f� O
O
O
O
O
0)
N
O_ 00 0 0 00
I-- O Co (D M (O CO
(O 0) O O (O (0 M
a— I� 00
0 0
0 N
O O
M
M
co
0 0
0 0
O O
N 00
N v
0 0
0 0
Lo
O O
0 (0
as
(D
M
O 0
0 (O
r 0
CO 0
M
O O 00
0 0
00 1. 0
N N
co
0 0 CO
O 0
e- N
O O (0
LO
(D N
N N
CO 0
att Lt)
0
N
0
M CO
N N
CO N
M
CO MO
M N
0
M
O
(O
O
N
CO
00
0
N
N
N)
N
c 0)
0
0 R
E O Q m
V) m M fx
0l C- N H 0 06 o
O 0 N
C CL re
(0 u_ 0) C G Q R V 0
N l0 Y C y O V ji C O (0 (0
m c c CO 0 00 LL li 0) 06 c C LL
E (0 co f c 'E v 0) O El re
N O
a C7
E_ 8 Q C I- 7 N A M lL Ts 0)
�OlL LOO i> om v a) z m a) G C W
5 U a) V m u N
N 0) (n a u1 W 2 N O LL
c LL c m 8 m 4 m ma c a Z
E
d -(0 0) u, 0) 2 u, tt
ca co co co LL U` (1. W O W 0 >F- -I OO u) 0 (1) U U
(0
c
C
(t
0
M
0
O
U
0)
(0
N
N
0)
(0
E
(0
0)
0)
0)
(0
0
C
O
O
0)
C
0)
E
(0
a
Ce
atf
0
C O1
a1
CC C
N
a)
u_ N
(0 (0
a) m
0) TO
O
G
N 0)
(0
m
o p2
N
oo
CO
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
r Col 00
0
0
CO
L98`L46
V
Co 1• N O
00
1E1
O
O(0 �N
N
53
(3
(3
50
1,45
I I
0
!C
E
E
oy
W e-
W 01
t+ O
.O O
co Z r
F- O
N
1
m
V
O
N N
0
O
O
N
O
0
O O O O 0
0 0 (0 0 M
N (0
O O
O O
O 1 1 1 O
f� O
O
O
O
O
0)
N
O_ 00 0 0 00
I-- O Co (D M (O CO
(O 0) O O (O (0 M
a— I� 00
0 0
0 N
O O
M
M
co
0 0
0 0
O O
N 00
N v
0 0
0 0
Lo
O O
0 (0
as
(D
M
O 0
0 (O
r 0
CO 0
M
O O 00
0 0
00 1. 0
N N
co
0 0 CO
O 0
e- N
O O (0
LO
(D N
N N
CO 0
att Lt)
0
N
0
M CO
N N
CO N
M
CO MO
M N
0
M
O
(O
O
N
CO
00
0
N
N
N)
N
c 0)
0
0 R
E O Q m
V) m M fx
0l C- N H 0 06 o
O 0 N
C CL re
(0 u_ 0) C G Q R V 0
N l0 Y C y O V ji C O (0 (0
m c c CO 0 00 LL li 0) 06 c C LL
E (0 co f c 'E v 0) O El re
N O
a C7
E_ 8 Q C I- 7 N A M lL Ts 0)
�OlL LOO i> om v a) z m a) G C W
5 U a) V m u N
N 0) (n a u1 W 2 N O LL
c LL c m 8 m 4 m ma c a Z
E
d -(0 0) u, 0) 2 u, tt
ca co co co LL U` (1. W O W 0 >F- -I OO u) 0 (1) U U
(0
c
C
(t
0
M
0
O
U
0)
(0
N
N
0)
(0
E
(0
0)
0)
0)
(0
0
C
O
O
0)
C
0)
E
(0
a
Ce
atf
0
C O1
a1
CC C
N
a)
u_ N
(0 (0
a) m
0) TO
O
G
N 0)
(0
m
o p2
N
o)
9
0
z
ti
o r- r` CO CO 0 0 CO Co Cr) 1.0
0 N N N 'T CO CO N N CO O M
d CO 0 M CO N.- N 'd" CO N 0 CC)
v U r CO N. r` '1' O CO In O CO 10
(a c C O r r r 0) 0) r 0) O CO co
CO r r N N N CO N r N CO
E LL CO
3
U
a+
d
0
r
O CO 0 CO CO O 0 N N 0) O CO
N 0) O r 0 CO 0 LO 0 10 0 ct
V' r-- co co O co co_ (o N Cr
r r� GO -4 (O (N CC) r N Nr N r-.
0 co 0 0) CO v r CO Cn CO 0) CO
r N r
N
CO
CO
O)
N CO 0) CO CO r CO 0 O
LO O) 10 N O) CO O N.- N N
O c CO N (O co r�
r N r 0 0 0) 0 r
a N N r N N
CO 0 0 0) r C. r 0) r 0 CO
0 0 r• r- N 0) CO ti O) O
O N CO d O) r O CO
O O O N u') co r r-
N r r r r r r N
Q 0 O O O O co co O co
N N N N N N N N N
CO 0)
r— r-
O CO
CC) M
M
O
Cf)
co
co
O
(o
O
ti
CO
r'-
N
CC)
V
O
O CO 0 r co r co r co O O C)
(‚4 0 O is N N CO 0) CO 0 0
O s t N r� O) co co co O co co
r (O co O) CO 16 LC) CO r Cn N O)
r r r r O)
O 0 0 0 CO r O O O (O CO
0 0 O O LO Cn CO r CO N
O O O O r (C) CO O r O)
O O O U) co r ti co r l(')
O O O O O N N CO d' ti 0
r r r r r r r r N (O
Agenda Information Memo
November 17, 2009 Eagan City Council
I. APPROVE 2010 2014 CIP PART II VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT 2010
BUDGET
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
To approve Part II (Vehicles and Equipment) of the 2010 2014 Capital
Improvement Program (CIP) 2010 Budget
FACTS:
The first year of this CIP (2010) is approved as a budget with the four out
years (2011 2014) being approved only as a general plan.
For the most part, vehicles and equipment costing more than $10,000 are
budgeted in this section of the CIP with items costing less than $10,000
budgeted in departmental operating budgets.
The City Council has established a policy whereby each year an amount
of the property tax levy is allocated to the Equipment Revolving Fund
(ERF) for non- enterprise fund CIP Part II purchases. The allocation is
increased annually for population growth and inflation. The 2010
allocation was increased by 3.5% from the 2009 allocation to $1,070,549.
A slight deficit of $11,296 is being carried forward from 2009 generating a
total available balance of $1,059,253 for 2010 purchases.
Management meetings were held at which time staff from each
department had an opportunity to discuss their proposals and challenge
other department proposals in attempts to prioritize overall City capital
equipment needs, the attached list of purchases totaling $1,840,700 from
the ERF was reached by consensus. This allocation creates a carry
forward balance of $298,853 into 2011.
Staff has continued to develop options to maintain the balance between
revenues and expenditures in this fund. Given the significant cost of
certain vehicles and equipment, it has been necessary to address the
revenue sources for this fund. Additionally, certain equipment has been
moved to 2011 extending its useful life. Staff continues to maximize use
of the City's resources by stretching equipment and vehicle use.
The recently approved funding plan for Fire apparatus is one component
of proposed revisions to maintaining appropriate funding and the ability to
replace equipment as necessary.
The proposed 2010 Budget includes the use of $425,000 of antenna lease
revenue to finance the acquisition of a replacement City wide telephone
system. It is anticipated the replacement telephone system will be
acquired through the City's information technology consortium, LOGIS, to
reduce costs through the Joint Powers sharing arrangement and to
leverage existing and future technology infrastructure.
Vehicles proposed for purchase were evaluated through the use of the
Vehicle Acquisition, Use Replacement Policy approved by the City
Council in February of 2005.
Staff is continuing to research potential downsizing of vehicles and
potential incorporation of hybrids into the City's fleet of vehicles where
feasible. Public policy issues such as acquisition cost versus operating
costs will be brought before the City Council prior to a change in
acquisition parameters.
The funding sources for the total 2010 Part II CIP allocation of $1,840,700
include $760,400 from the ERF, $59,100 from the City's Utility Funds,
$455,000 from the Fire Apparatus Replacement Fund, $106,200 from
retained franchise fees, $35,000 from Police forfeiture funds and $425,000
from antenna lease revenues.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attached on page 33 is a copy of the summary of the equipment
proposed for 2010 CIP Part II purchase with the funding source for each
item.
Attached on page 3 is a copy of the summary of the proposed
2010 2014 Part II CIP.
Attached on pages 3S and 34e is a copy of information
providing background detail on the City's existing telephone system and
the proposed 2010 replacement system.
33,
as
9
O
Z
1
0
ta 0
CD 0 F
K
a
z
z
s z
w
o a
aO U
?we
o—
Z
1 .7 4
U)
W
U
Y W
E>
of
N
a
0 8 O 0 0 0 N 0 0 0
O O V N N O
O)6 r r M cF
N
88888888888
O f o 0 a N N N 0 0 0 0
(00)(0(0 N 0a'0N 0
c-0
0
N
0 0
88
ON
v
8
O N
N
O
N
Lri
.000
8
as
O O O O p O
O O 8 8 O
O N n- N
N
O
8
Y M
0 0
O
0
N W
N N
a N 0
O
u) V N
M V
0000
8888 0
0 N N N
N
53
0
0
0 O
CVO
U
U 0 0 1-
o
a E 8 w g,
e O C m
U O @p, W
cv N V p
N N CU L0
o C 0 y C LL LL
0 -8 °a m oo v d y @n aci a vv
O�ac a m= oa E0; in 0 m c o' a c v m m E e E m
n n co
E m a m
w a c v ,a c o o o o a 8 W
�AONAOO� NO '.2,0m Vu>N am
V G)r 2 60.1 C E CC >5 MN
a) D M o C J N U N t N 1 C m a T U P.
O d m E '4 c W W c c
cow E m to j r cc
---.......E. E Q d c U U U
o c )n U E a 0 N .c E0 N vt a) -8 a N N C C
u o 0 `—a m d a� a1 a) c E inin y. -y m8
i a a)
N a u) o y m O o_ c N 5 o) a 'a o N 0 0
zi�c�o����r >LL z z a aac� LLLLrn0<LL CC Ce o)Z
u c
i t c 0
E u E E a) c 2
Z It `o E E rn E
E U 0 0 0. LT. N
888
N (00
N
O 0 0
0 0
N 0 0
88
0) Y)
N N
N 0
N
Yr
c
H O
V
M C
U c
0 0
LL
0
(0 r
'c 'c
DM
m
0) m
0 a a
Z Z W
0
0
O O
p O O 0)
N N
0
8
N
8
N
O
8
0
N
8
O
0
0
N
O
8
0)
N
0
V
N
To
O
88
M
do
N 0
CO 0
N O
C
0
0
E
2
co
v
la
O C
LL y
E
U Q
7615
t1,0
OM
O
O
N
0
1 sieoi I
00000000
00000000
•-60N 0000
M O n U) 00 O U) 1
O N. 0 n CO O)
V c U 00 V
000000
0 0 0 0 0
000 00
6.-6661.
V n M M
O M
00000
0 0 0 0 0 0
U) (O N O O O
O) O O (n (n
O) (A r- M N
N 0 V
(3,488,800)
4,755,800
5,740,782
984,982
Q1
9
0
z
a
O
N
M
O
N
N
O
N
O
N
O
O
N
0 000000 0
0 000000 0
0' O (O 0 0 0 0 o
N (D 6 U) M U) N
U) N%-NN.NN M
O 0 0 0 O O 0
6 (O (D O U) n U)
O 000000 0 0
(0 N �a 0 N
V M (0
00000000
00000
O)(nO0_0000 00000
(O1 NOO O) (06(066
N O U) V U) N M (O r M M OO
U)
MV M M
000 0' 0 0 0
N .1- O V N
U M M 0) U) N N
0
o
(0
1)
O
M
8 c
c
c W .0
t7
c c m
O 0 Z Q O
m v W
H 4 m O N N c
O O
C LL
c w W 0)3 113_ p Z
room. ,c y ce oG a)
E0EEw m O m
E(3000EmtfinOa5(/)Q)
0 0 0
o v( 0 D 0 0
666
0 000
0 W 000
N f0 666
00
0 0 0 0
CO M n
N M) (D 00
0 000
0 N O 0
O M 0 U)
(O 0)0)'0
N
O
O
O
V
00
00000
00000
N 0 0 0
66666
O a
0
0)
0 0 0
O (00 CO
N M co
O O N
v CO N
0 0 t`
M W 0)
r= N (O
CO a CO
O 0 0)
0 01
O CO is
M 0) '7
V a-
t-
0 0 CO
N N O
r- 00 00
O (n —O
O
O
M
O
co
0 n
CO W
00
0) M
M 0
M
M
U)
0 0
O
W
00
O 00
V N
C
c
E
0 a
0) m
H 0
7
a Z'
V) U
LL
w w
N
M
C
O
c
O
0)
0)
N
(0
1
U
(0
c
c
(0
U)
M
O
0
0) (0
L
N
(0
E
(0
0)
0)
N
0)
0)
c
0
0
(0
W
V
0
N
0
N
ERF Cum Ending Balance
ERF Annual Allocation*
ERF Obligation
Subtotal Non-ERF
Franchise Fees
Antenna Lease
The City's current telephone system was installed in 2002. The end of life for this system was September
2009, which means that the manufacturer has stopped making this product. However, the vendor that
carries this product will guarantee parts and service for one year after the end of life of a product for the
City. Vo1P, Voice over Internet Protocol, is the direction the telephony market is headed. Most new
telephone systems are now VoIP capable, and older systems lose manufacturer support.
The City's Voicemail System has become very unstable. The software will not operate on any other
server other than the type of hardware it is dedicated to operate on. The Voicemail server is 8 years old
and service and support on this product is not available.
The City has 1000 DID's (Direct Inward Dialing) that have been purchased through our telephone service
provider. Those numbers are 651 675 -5000 651 675 -5999. Those 1000 DID's are broken down as
follows:
518 Extensions assigned to a physical telephone
129 Virtual numbers or Voice Mail Only numbers
44 Faxes or Modems
18 Alarms
291 Open numbers
Some of the features that the City will acquire with a VoIP system that it does not have with the current
PBX system are listed below. Vo1P systems in general are more flexible and portable.
Unified Messaging which is the ability to check and listen to voicemail messages from Outlook
and /or Outlook Web Access.
Ability to store and restore voicemail messages.
Moves, changes and additions will be done by IT staff versus having to have the vendor
accomplish this.
Paging over the telephone system.
Improved Caller ID allows staff to see who is calling when you are on your phone.
Conference calls allow for more connections.
Speed Dial features improved.
City Logo identified on digital screen.
Improved reporting.
Redial last outgoing number.
Call logs directly on handset. Ability to see who called you or who you called.
Using existing data connections.
Cost analysis of current charges that will remain:
The two telephone circuits that provide service to the City's current telephone system will remain:
$1,485 per month
35
Cost analysis of current charges that will be changed:
Telephone service to Fire Stations $2,484 yearly. They will be connected to the City telephone
switch.
Monthly Service and Maintenance $32,000 phone system and $3,700 yearly for Voice Mail and
with LOGIS we will pay approximately $25,000. The approximate savings per year is $10,700.
Moves, adds, changes will be done by in house IT staff and will save approximately $4,000 per
year.
We will save $1,150 per month on circuit charges that will be disconnected.
Agenda Information Memo
November 17, 2009, Eagan City Council Meeting
J. EXTENSION FOR RECORDING FINAL PLAT (CEDAR GROVE PARK AND
RIDE) MVTA
ACTIONS TO BE CONSIDERED:
To approve a six month extension of time to record the final plat for Cedar Grove Park and Ride,
consisting of 9 acres, located at 4035 Nicols Road.
REQUIRED VOTE FOR APPROVAL: Majority of Council Members present.
FACTS:
The City Council approved the final plat on September 15, 2009.
The requested six month extension would allow until March 15, 2010, for the plat to be
recorded.
The extension request is due to the deed from MnDOT to the Met Council and County
comments on the final plat. Please see the attached letter from the applicant.
ATTACHMENTS (2):
Location Map, page
Letter from Applicant, page 09
Location Map
0242
vglion
Gym win
{Ill9 IUULfil
1111E2 USW
:Mu usitu
Cit..1 'NM
VMS 10)EJ
te9EJ MIN
t ume
mural
uIu
MU
Ma n te n� graze a
uni r�r� DtJ�aE u
ran nca rrrri un nu a i
ao GM a� Tsu uo
Ei �gri2 .ZwS raCI ilir
ggualavilv
GGGSGGG]
p
nra
1.9!11
aim
CS I
a
R���;?Z�
6515x555559
r�l
r.�
NU Oa OM
M JIM VIM
gam
„r U l
Ir C�FJ
P 4� NUJ
gazanw 4 I r a
FEcl
1000
nt/Developer: MVTA Park Ride
0
1000
THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY
The City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this information and are
not responsible for errors or omissions.
Eagan Boundary
Right-of-way
Parcel Arca
Park Area
Building Footprint
2000 Feet
W E
Subject Site
City of Ea in
Developme
Co mmunity Development DopeKtnent
Minnesota Valley Transit Authority
November 2, 2009
Sarah Thomas, Planner
City of Eagan
Eagan City Hall
3830 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, MN 55122
Re: MVTA Cedar Grove Request for Extension to File Plat
TKDA Project No. 0013621.001
Dear Sarah:
The Minnesota Valley Transit Authority (MVTA) would like to request an extension of the City
Council approval to file the final signed plat for Cedar Grove. We understand the final plat
needs to be submitted for Mayor and City Cleric signature prior to delivery to Dakota County for
recording.
Before approving the final plat, the Dakota County Surveyor needs to see a record of property
transfer. The status of the property transfer (deed) from MnDOT to the Met Council is still in
progress, and is not likely to be complete before November 16, 2009.
Legal counsel also needs to try to resolve some comments from the County. These resolutions
must be placed on the final plat and printed on the final mylars for submission.
We expect the remaining efforts to be complete within the next couple months. We request an
extension of 6 months, but anticipate not needing the full amount of time.
Attached please find a check for $75 to cover the City fee.
Thank you very much for your consideration. We look forward to continuing to work with the
City of Eagan.
Sincerely,
Beverley Miller
Executive Director
3
100 East Highway 13 Burnsville, Niinnesofa 55337 www.mvta.corn MVTA office 952- 882 -7500 fax 952- 882 -7600
Agenda Information Memo
November 17, 2009 Eagan City Council Meeting
K. CARRIAGE HILLS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
WORKSHEET (EAW) CITY OF EAGAN
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
To adopt a Negative Declaration on the need for a Carriage Hills Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) for the former golf course located at 3535 Wescott Woodlands.
FACTS:
The approved use of the former Carriage Hills Golf Course property for up to 480
residential housing units triggers the need for a mandatory EAW.
At their regular meeting of July 7, 2009, the City Council authorized the
preparation of the EAW for the 120 acre site. The City's consultant SRF prepared
a draft EAW. The EAW was submitted to the Environmental Quality Board
(EQB) on September 18, 2009.
The EQB published the EAW Availability Notice in the EQB Monitor on
September 21, 2009 initiating the 30 day Comment Period. The EAW Comment
Period closed on October 21, 2009.
Comments were received from Dakota County, the DNR, Met Council, MnDOT
and the MPCA.
The Findings of Fact state and respond to the four factors to be considered under
Minnesota rules to determine the adequacy of an EAW /need for an EIS. Based on
all available information, City staff and the City's consultant, SRF, believe an EIS
is not warranted.
The full Findings of Fact and all appendices are on file with the City of Eagan
Community Development Department.
ISSUES: None
ATTACHMENTS: (3)
Findings of Fact regarding the need for an EIS on pa es 41 through e.
Summary of Comments and Responses on pages through
Resolution of Support for assage of�C-a iiage Hills pecial Area Project Findings of Fact and
Conclusion on pages5 1 through?xS
$zo
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
REGARDING DECISION ON NEED FOR AN
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
CITY OF EAGAN
CARRIAGE HILLS SPECIAL AREA PROJECT
November 17, 2009
Redevelopment of the 120 -acre site, south of Yankee Doodle Road, east of Lexington
Avenue, and just west of Wescott Woodlands in Eagan
Dakota County of Minnesota
City: Eagan
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. ADMINISTRATIVE BACKGROUND 1
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 4
III. DECISION REGARDING THE NEED FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT STATEMENT 4
A. Type, Extent, and Reversibility of Impacts 4
B. Cumulative Potential Effects of Related or Anticipated Future Projects 4
C. Extent to Which the Environmental Effects Are Subject To
Mitigation by Ongoing Public Regulatory Authority 4
D. Extent to Which Environmental Effects Can Be Anticipated and
Controlled As A Result of Other Environmental Studies 5
IV. CONCLUSIONS 5
H: I Projects168801 EPI Reports\Drafts\FoFCI Findings of Fact and Conclusions.doc
I. ADMINISTRATIVE BACKGROUND
The City of Eagan proposes the redevelopment of 120 acres of former golf course into a
municipal fire station at the northeast corner of the project area and approximately 440 units of
attached and detached residential dwellings of mixed density. The project also includes the
extension of Duckwood Drive east through the center of the project area, where it would
intersect Wescott Woodlands at the east end of the project area.
The fire station would be built on approximately four acres at the northeast corner of the project
area. Access to the facility would be provided from Wescott Woodlands, with an emergency
access on Yankee Doodle Road.
Duckwood Drive, an existing east -west roadway, would be extended from its current terminus
just east of Falcon Way eastward to Wescott Woodlands, a north -south roadway along the
eastern edge of the project area.
An Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) was prepared as a part of the state
environmental review process to fulfill M.S. 116D. At the state level, the EAW is used to
provide sufficient environmental documentation to determine the need for a state
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) or that a Negative Declaration is appropriate.
The City of Eagan is the Proposer and Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU) for this project.
In accordance with Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB) rules, the EAW was filed
with the EQB and circulated for review and comment to the EQB distribution list. A "Notice of
Availability" was published in the EQB Monitor on September 21, 2009.
The EAW was made available for public review at the Wescott Library in Eagan and at the
Eagan City Hall.
The comment period ran through October 21, 2009. All comments received were considered in
determining the potential for substantial new environmental impacts. Five written agency
comments were received during the EAW comment period and are included in Appendix A.
Reponses to agency comments are included in Appendix B.
Based upon the information in the record, which is composed of the EAW for the proposed
project, the issues raised during the public comment period, the responses to the comments, and
other supporting documents, the City of Eagan makes the following Findings of Fact and
Conclusions:
Findings of Fact and Conclusions 1 November 2009
Carriage Hills Special Area Project
43
Bloomington
Area Location Map
Carriage Hills Special Area Project
City of Eagan, Minnesota
Figure 1
Project Location USGS
Carriage Hills Special Area Project
City of Eagan, Minnesota
q5
Figure
2
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project involves the redevelopment of the former 120 -acre Carriage Hills Golf
Course site in Eagan, Minnesota. The redevelopment would include construction of a municipal
fire station, extension of Duckwood Drive eastward to Wescott Woodlands, and development of
440 units of mixed density attached and detached residential dwellings.
The project is intended to effectively redevelop the former golf course into a low /medium
density residential development, improve infrastructural continuity by extending Duckwood
Drive to Wescott Woodlands, and improve safety in the region by constructing a municipal fire
station.
III. DECISION REGARDING THE NEED FOR AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
STATEMENT
An EIS is not necessary for the proposed project based on the following criteria:
A. Type, Extent, and Reversibility of Impacts
The EAW described the type and extent of impacts to the natural environment anticipated to
result from the proposed project. The proposed design for the project includes features to
mitigate the identified impacts.
B. Cumulative Potential Effects of Related or Anticipated Future Projects
As discussed in the EAW, the cumulative potential effect of related or anticipated future
development has been considered and the proposed project has low potential for cumulative
impacts to the resources directly or indirectly affected by the project.
C. Extent to Which the Environmental Effects Are Subject To Mitigation by
Ongoing Public Regulatory Authority
The mitigation of environmental impacts will be designed and implemented in coordination with
regulatory agencies and will be subject to the plan approval and permitting processes. Permits
and approvals that have been obtained or may be required prior to project construction are
identified in Table 1.
Findings of Fact and Conclusions
Carriage Hills Special Area Project
4 November 2009
Permit
1 Agency
1 Action Required
State
National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES)
MPCA
Permit
Water
Minnesota Department of Health
Permit
Sanitary Sewer
MPCA Metropolitan Council
Environmental Services (MCES)
Permit
DNR Protected Waters Permit
DNR
Permit
WCA Corps of Engineers Joint
Permit
Corps of Engineers BWSR
Permit
Watershed Permits (if necessary)
Gun Club Lake WMO
Plan Review
Section 401
MPCA
Certification
Local
Building Permit
City of Eagan
Permit
Erosion Control
City of Eagan
Permit
Utility Connections
City of Eagan
Permit
County Road Access
Dakota County
Permit
TABLE 1
PERMITS AND APPROVALS
D. Extent to Which Environmental Effects Can Be Anticipated and Controlled
As A Result of Other Environmental Studies
Anticipated environmental impacts associated with this project are typical of impacts associated
with other regulated site redevelopment projects. City staff finds that the environmental effects
of the project can be anticipated and controlled as a result of environmental review and
experience gained on similar projects.
IV. CONCLUSIONS
1. All requirements for environmental review of the project have been met.
2. The EAW and the permit development processes related to the project have generated
information that is adequate to determine whether the project has the potential for
significant environmental effects.
3. Areas where potential environmental effects have been identified are being addressed
during the detail design of the project. Mitigation will be provided where impacts are
expected to result from project construction, operation, or maintenance. Mitigative
measures are incorporated into project design, and have been or will be coordinated with
the appropriate agencies during the permit process.
4. Based on the criteria in Minnesota Rules part 4410.1700, the project does not have the
potential for significant environmental effects.
Findings of Fact and Conclusions
Carriage Hills Special Area Project
�7
5 November 2009
5. The EAW for the Carriage Hills Special Area Project is adequate and an Environmental
Impact Statement is not required for the project.
Michael J. Ridley, AIC
le‘° (//14°47
City Planner, City s agan Date
Findings of Fact and Conclusions
Carriage Hills Special Area Project
November 2009
COMMENTS AND RESPONSES ON THE
CARRIAGE HILLS SPECIAL AREA PLAN EAW
Agencies and the public had the opportunity to submit comments during the public comment
period. The public review period ended on October 21, 2009.
Five agencies provided substantive comments during the comment period. Copies of the
correspondence containing the following comments are located in Appendix A. Some of the
following comments have been summarized.
1. Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT)
Comment #1: This development should have little impact on the Minnesota Department
of Transportation's (Mn /DOT) transportation system or right of way.
Response: Comment noted. No response needed.
2. Metropolitan Council
Comment #1: The site is consistent with the City's 2030 Comprehensive Plan Update
(Update) submitted May 29, 2009. However, the Council has not acted upon the 2030
Update, and therefore the Carriage Hills EAW was reviewed within the context of the
City's 2020 Update. The site is inconsistent with the City's 2020 Update as reviewed by
the Council on December 13, 2000.
Response: The City's 2008 Comprehensive Plan Update reflects the addition of the fire
safety campus. The City will resubmit its 2030 Comprehensive Plan Update in November
2009.
Comment #2: Eagan has been identified as a community with excessive peak hourly
flow during wet weather occurrences. As such the community has an identified I/I
reduction goal that applies to a specific part(s) of the community or to the community as
a whole. The community will need to include a description of its I/I program in its 2008
Comprehensive Plan Update. See attached Ordinance Section 3.40.
Response: On September 1, 2009, the Eagan City Council adopted an Amendment to
City Ordinance Section 3.40 (Rules Regulations relating to Sanitary Sewer Service).
The amendment supports I/I mitigation by enabling inspection of the private sewer
systems within our community, commonly referred to as a "Sump Pump and Service
Lateral Inspection Program" (SP &SLIP). Eagan has approximately 18,800 private
connections to its sewer system, which can take 7 to 10 years to complete on a citywide
APPENDIX B 1
41
basis. The new ordinance ensures access onto private property and necessary enforcement
measures to ensure compliance with the required separation of I/I from allowable sewage
disposal. The ordinance specifically addresses the full spectrum of 1/1, including
definitions, restrictions, requirements, inspections, corrections and compliance
enforcement actions /penalties. The City's Fee Schedule has been amended, as well, to
incorporate the various surcharges associated with non compliance enforcement. See
attached ordinance.
3. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA)
Comment #1: Please clarify if the streets, utilities, and storm ponds would be constructed
at the same time as the extension of Duckwood Drive and the fire station even though a
developer has not yet been identified for the residential component of the Project.
Response: Street construction will be limited to the construction of the Duckwood Drive
extension and Station Trail (access to the fire station). Water main already exists on the
Duckwood Drive extension alignment and will be added as part of the construction of
Station Trail. Sanitary sewer main exists on a portion of the Duckwood Drive extension
alignment and is not planned to be added with any other portion of the construction.
Storm sewer and storm ponds /sedimentation basins will be constructed as needed for the
new street construction.
Comment #2: Given that there are several categories within the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System Permit, item 8 on page 4 should identify which category
this Project requires.
Response: The category of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permit deemed necessary for this project is more specifically known as the
General Permit for NPDES -SDS Construction Activity.
Comment #3: The EAW should identify the former use of the Project property, Carriage
Hills Golf Course, as a small to minimal quantity hazardous waste generator and identify
the types of hazardous wastes generated at the property. The MPCA recommends that the
Project proposer obtain an environmental consultant to conduct an environmental
investigation of the property to determine if there was a release of hazardous wastes to
the environment.
Response: A Phase One Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) was done for the 120
acre site. The assessment revealed no indications of recognized environmental conditions
in connection with the site. See attached Environmental Site Assessment report.
Comment #4: The EAW does not mention mitigation for wetland impacts, which include
inundation, and does not discuss any proposed protections to the wetlands such as
buffers. The MPCA supports a requirement that adequate buffers be included surrounding
wetlands. At a minimum, these buffers should be in the 20 to 50 foot range with more
APPENDIX B 2
`7V
buffer dependant on the protection goals. The buffer of native vegetation needs to be
perpetually maintained around the wetlands and we recommend the city prohibit the
alteration of the natural vegetation within the buffer strip. Conservation easements,
covenants, recorded deed restriction or other permanent restrictions have been used to
prohibit lot owners from filling or altering wetlands and buffers when the wetland is on
their lots; however, enforcing the buffer restriction on each of the individual lot owners
can be burdensome and difficult it lot owners desire to mow these areas to expand their
back yard. We recommend that the wetland boundary and an appropriate buffer are
designated public property under the city's management to assure the maintenance of the
buffer and to avoid the difficulties of enforcing these restrictions on individual lot owners
in the future.
Response: The City does not own or control the 120 -acre site; however, wetland buffers
and wetland buffer setbacks are required by City Code and will be imposed. The City's
Water Quality and Wetland Management Plan addresses wetland protection and buffers
dependent upon the quality of the wetland. Minimum buffers are required, as well as a
prohibition of impacts without demonstration of significant public benefit. See attached
exhibit (Table 5.1).
Comment #5: Item 17a on page 12 states the Project will create approximately 27 acres
of new impervious surfaces, but Table 3 in Item 10 indicates 34 acres of new impervious
surfaces will be created. Please clarify which acreage is correct.
Response: Item 17a incorrectly stated that the project would create approximately 27
acres of new impervious surfaces. This was a typing error. As stated in other parts of the
document, the project would create approximately 34 acres of new impervious surfaces.
Comment #6: Item 17a of the EAW indicates that the proposed stormwater ponds will
discharge into wetlands currently located on -site. The EAW should evaluate if these
discharges will cause impact to the wetland by changing its natural hydrology or by any
proposed construction in the wetland such as excavation of installation of drainage pipes.
Any impacts to wetlands must be evaluated for compliance with the wetland sequence
mitigation of Minn. R. 7050.0186.
Response: Impacts to wetlands are not anticipated with the construction of the fire
station or roadway extension. Potential impacts resulting from wetland fill are not
anticipated; potential impacts resulting in hydrology changes will be analyzed when a
proposal for development of the residential component is presented to the City.
Comment #7: This section of the EAW should also discuss that an increase in
impervious surfaces will also increase the temperature of runoff, the potential effects of
this to the wetlands, and any necessary mitigation.
Response: Any runoff will be directed to stormwater treatment ponds, where it would
return to ambient temperature. As a result, impacts to wetlands are not anticipated.
APPENDIX B 3
S I
Comment #8: Item 17b of the EAW discusses the impaired nature of the receiving
waters for stormwater and that additional best management practices, including
infiltration, will be required to meet stormwater permit requirements. Figure 3 indicates
the potential locations of the stormwater ponds and item 17b indicates that the potential
locations of the infiltration practices would be around these ponds. Figure 3 should also
show the potential locations for the infiltration practices.
Response: The legend in Figure 3 was revised to reflect potential pond /infiltration
locations. See attached revised Figure 3.
Comment #9: Also, as indicated in Item 17b in the EAW, the Project is located within
one mile of Fish Lake, which is impaired for mercury, nutrients and eutrophication.
Please note that any project that will result in over 50 acres of disturbed area and has a
discharge point within one mile of an impaired water is required to submit their
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to the MPCA for a review at least 30
days prior to the commencement of land disturbing activities. If the SWPPP is found to
be out of compliance with the terms and conditions of the General Permit, further delay
may occur. The MPCA encourages the project proposer to meet with staff at preliminary
points to avoid this situation.
Response: Comment noted. No response is needed.
Comment #10: The EAW should include a table showing the estimated flow calculation
for the development and a sanitary sewer map showing the connections to the existing
sewers.
Response: See attached sewer flow memorandum, fire station utility plan, and existing
sanitary sewer connections figure.
Comment #11: The demolition of the existing buildings should be in compliance with
state and federal regulations that require the structure be inspected for hazardous
materials such as asbestos, lead based paint, light ballasts, thermostats and stored
chemicals.
Response: Any demolition of existing buildings will adhere to MPCA regulations and
guidelines.
Comment #12: The Office of Environmental Assistance no longer exists and a more
current per capita volume of solid waste should be sought.
Response: The merger of the Office of Environmental Assistance into the MPCA has
been noted.
Outdated figures from the Office of Environmental Assistance (OEA) were erroneously
used in determining per capita volume of solid waste. Additional research yielded more
recent figures from the MPCA's SCORE Report.
APPENDIX B 4
Sa,
According to the 2007 SCORE Report released in January 2009 by the MPCA, the seven
county Metropolitan Area accounted for 58 percent (or 3,562,604 tons) of the total
municipal solid waste (MSW) in 2007.
The MPCA reported an estimate of solid waste generation of 1.24 tons per person per
year in 2007 for the Metropolitan Area. With regard to the proposed project, it is
estimated that the 440 proposed units of residential development with an average of 2.18
persons per household (based on figures in Item 18a) would generate approximately
1,189 tons of solid waste per year.
Comment #13: The MPCA advocates the use of Low Impact Design (LID) practices to
aid in the minimization of storm water impacts. LID is a storm water management
approach and site design technique that emphasizes water infiltration, values water as a
resource, and promotes the use of natural system to treat water runoff.
Response: The four -acre fire station is planned to incorporate LID practices so that all
site drainage is maintained on -site to a 10 -year rainfall event. For the remainder of the
development, the following policies from the City's Water Quality Wetland
Management Plan will be used as goals for development:
GOAL 3: Protect surface water resources from impacts of land
development and re- development activities.
Policy 3.1: Require new development activity creating more than %2 acre of
new impervious surface to achieve no- net increase of Total
Phosphorus (TP) and Total Suspended Solids (TSS) loading or
meet removal performance criteria of 50 percent TP and 80
percent TSS, whichever is more restrictive.
Policy 3.2: Require redevelopment activities to achieve no- net increase of TP
and TSS loading.
Policy 3.3: Require infiltration of the first one -half inch of stormwater runoff
from any rainfall event from: 1) new impervious areas of
redevelopment activities and 2) the entire site of new development
activities.
Policy 3.4: Collect cash dedications in lieu of on -site treatment for water
quality/wetland protection capital improvements, at the City's
discretion.
Comment #14: There is an error in Item 18c on page 14, in that it should reference
Metropolitan Council (not Conservation) Environmental Services.
Response: Comment noted. No response is necessary.
APPENDIX B 5
55
4. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
Comment #1: A comparison of Figure 3 (proposed project) with Figure 5 (existing
conditions) suggests there will be more woodland lost than the 0.4 acres indicated in
Table 3 in this section. We request that you verify the amount of projected woodland
loss, and note that we are providing recommendations below on how to preserve more
woodland.
Response: The acreage amounts in Table 3 are presumed to be accurate.
Existing land cover was calculated using data from the DNR's Minnesota Land Cover
Classification System (MLCCS). Future land cover had to be calculated based on a
digitization of the proposed layout (which was in an image format from the City's
Carriage Hills Special Area Plan). Since the residential component is not being developed
at this time, it is not possible to determine exact acreage amounts. The figures in Table 3
are intended as estimations.
The MLCCS data sometimes classify areas that appear to be "wooded /forest" as
"brush /grassland." This is the primary reason for the discrepancy. Table 3 also explains
that approximately 5.9 acres of "brush /grassland" will be lost under the proposed project.
Part (if not most) of the 5.9 acres are likely to be located within immediate vicinity of
forested areas on the site.
Comment #2: The project generally does a good job of preserving green space and
existing natural features. We respectfully offer additional recommendations to further
protect natural resources, provide important fish and wildlife habitat, and retain natural
features on the site. Because most of the area is open with scattered adult trees, it offers
the potential for restoration to Oak Savanna/Prairie. A restored 120 -acre prairie or oak
savanna in the middle of a developed suburban area would showcase our rarest native
plant communities in Minnesota and add a nice amenity to the City.
Response: The City put the option of acquiring the 120 acres of property for public
purposes (i.e. park) as a referendum opportunity in the most recent election (2008). The
referendum motion failed 45 percent to 55 percent. The settlement agreement for the
property between the City and the property owner supports the preservation of 30 acres of
the site as open space.
Comment #3: The wetland labeled W -C (DOW 19 -140) was used by the DNR in the
mid -1980s as a rearing pond. There are minnows in the pond, but we are uncertain what
other fish may occur there. The shoreline is entirely wooded and has good roosts for
kingfishers, egrets, and other waterbirds. Water lilies, coontail and elodea are common
aquatic plants. Access is currently limited, but could be enhanced as part of this
development if properly planned. We recommend that a large buffer of native vegetation
be maintained along the shoreline of this basin, especially the existing woody vegetation.
APPENDIX B 6
Response: The City's Water Quality and Wetland Management Plan indicates that
Wetland W -C (DOW 19 -140) is a "Protect" Wetland (Class W1) and requires a minimum
50' wide buffer and does not allow impact without demonstration of significant public
benefit. See attached exhibit (Table 5.1).
Comment #4: The wetland labeled W -A in the document has potential for being a catfish
or largemouth bass rearing pond. It has reasonably easy access despite lowered water
levels. We believe it would be desirable to restore the shoreline to native vegetation and
not allow development along the shore. If possible, the Department of Natural Resources
would like to be allowed access for fishery management.
Response: The City's Water Quality and Wetland Management Plan indicates that
Wetland W -A is a "Protect" Wetland (Class W1) and requires a minimum 50' wide
buffer and does not allow impact without demonstration of significant public benefit. The
City is not the owner of the property upon which Wetland W -A resides and it is unlikely
that the City will ever be the owner of said property. However, the City would be open to
and encourage such access for the DNR. See attached exhibit (Table 5.1).
Comment #5: According to Table 4 (Wetlands), Wetland B also has good quality
vegetation (as do Wetlands A and C). We believe impacts to Wetland B can be avoided,
and woodland loss between Wetlands A and C minimized, by redesigning the
development proposed for the extreme southwest corner of the parcel. Specifically, we
recommend that the through road and four residential units proposed in that area not be
constructed; the four housing units could be recouped on the north side of Duckwood
Drive. To implement this recommendation, the public street coming in from the west
could terminate in a cul -de -sac as proposed, or could loop back to the north to create a
throughway. Likewise, the road along the east side coming in from the north could end in
a cul -de -sac. By not constructing the through road as proposed, a block of woods and
open -water wetlands that would serve as a wildlife oasis could be maintained intact and
unfragmented.
Response: City staff will work with the ultimate developer and suggest design changes to
maximize those natural amenities.
Comment #6: It was unclear from the document how the City is planning to effectively
manage increased runoff. The document mentions constructing NURP ponds for runoff
treatment and some infiltration, but it is uncertain that these measures would limit runoff
volume to pre development levels. We recommend that 1) wetlands, especially wetlands
A and C, not be used as a repository for additional runoff; 2) runoff to wetlands A and C
be limited to quantity and quality of runoff before development; and 3) outlets not be
constructed from either of these basins.
Response: City staff appreciates the comments and will encourage incorporation with
any future development proposals. The City Code limits runoff to pre- development levels
APPENDIX B 7
and the City's Storm Water Management Plan requires a half -inch rain event to remain
on site.
5. Dakota County
Comment #1: We believe it is important to work with the City to make local street
connections to adjacent areas. We also believe it is important to reduce local trip son the
higher -speed County highway system, which, in turn, results in safer and more efficient
transportation for those who live in or near the new development area. We have included
only limited transportation comments in this letter because we are concurrently working
with the City through the County's plat review process.
Response: The cooperative effort between the County and the City through the current
plat review process, as well as the previous Yankee Doodle Road Corridor Study and
other ongoing transportation management efforts, is strongly supported by the proposed
extension of Duckwood Drive to Wescott Woodlands. This new street construction will
provide the opportunity for local trips to stay on local streets, allowing the County
highways to be more fully utilized for regional trips.
APPENDIX B 8
S(p
Whereas,
Whereas,
Whereas,
Whereas,
Whereas,
RESOLUTION
CITY OF EAGAN
RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT FOR PASSAGE OF
CARRIAGE HILLS SPECIAL AREA PROJECT
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
the Carriage Hills Special Area Project "the Project located in
Section 14, Range 19W, Township 27N, City of Eagan, Dakota County,
Minnesota, will redevelop the former Carriage Hills golf course site into a
municipal fire station and development of approximately 440 mixed
density, attached and detached residential dwellings;
the Project will also include the extension of Duckwood Drive eastward to
connect with Wescott Woodlands, improving transportation infrastructure
continuity;
the Project required a mandatory EAW, under EQB rule 4410.4300,
Subp. 19, Residential Development Projects;
the proposed action was described and analyzed in an Environmental
Assessment Worksheet (EAW) that was circulated to the Environmental
Quality Board (EQB) distribution list via a "Notice of Availability" in the
EQB Monitor on September 21, 2009 for public comment period, ending
October 21, 2009;
as the Responsible Governmental Unit for this project, the City of Eagan
has undertaken a thorough analysis of the project and its impacts, based on
EQB rule 4410.1700, Subp. 7, Criteria:
A) type, extent, and reversibility of environmental effects;
B) cumulative potential effects of related or anticipated future projects;
C) the extent to which the environmental effects are subject to mitigation
by ongoing public regulatory authority; and
D) the extent to which environmental effects can be anticipated and
controlled as a result of other available environmental studies
undertaken by public agencies or the project proposer, includes other
EISs.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT, the CITY OF EAGAN
finds that, based on the associated Environmental Assessment Worksheet and EQB rules,
an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not necessary.
Page 1/2
57
CITY OF EAGAN
CITY COUNCIL
By:
Its: Mayor
Attest:
Its:
City Clerk
Motion by:
Seconded by:
Those in Favor:
Those Against:
Date: November 17, 2009
RESOLUTION
CITY OF EAGAN
RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT FOR PASSAGE OF
CARRIAGE HILLS SPECIAL AREA PROJECT
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS
ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eagan this 17` day of November, 2009.
I, Mira Pepper, City Clerk of the City of Eagan, Dakota County,
Minnesota, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly passed
and adopted by the City Council of the City of Eagan, Dakota County,
Minnesota, in a regular meeting thereof assembled this 17` day of
November, 2009.
CERTIFICATION
Mira Pepper, City Clerk
Agenda Memo
November 19, 2009 Regular City Council Meeting
L. AUTHORIZE the approval of a Letter of Intent between the City of Eagan and
Harris Mechanical Services to begin Phase I- Feasibility Study and Engineering
Design as part of the Department of Energy Geothermal Technologies Program:
Ground Source Heat Pumps Grant awarded to the Eagan Civic Arena.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
Authorize the approval of a Letter of Intent with Harris Mechanical Services to begin Phase I
Feasibility Study and Engineering Design as part of the Department of Energy Geothermal
Technologies Program: Ground Source Heat Pumps Grant awarded to the Eagan Civic Arena
and direct the Mayor to sign the appropriate documents.
FACTS:
The City Council approved the submission of an application for a 50% matching grant for the
replacement of existing compressors, boilers and domestic hot water heaters within the ice
arena with a centralized geothermal heat pump system on August 3. The application was
submitted by Harris Mechanical Services on August 6.
On October 30 staff was notified that the application had been selected for negotiations
leading to an award of $1.338 million; 50% of an estimated $2.67 million project.
This grant award was one of 37 demonstration projects awarded in the United States and the
only one in this category in Minnesota. Of 88 total grants issued nationwide in 6 geothermal
categories, only 3 of them are in Minnesota. The University of Minnesota and Honeywell are
the other two grant recipients.
The Letter of Intent requested will begin the Phase I process which includes the engineering
review to narrow the actual costs and to finalize energy rebates that are expected to be
significant. An existing arena that recently moved to geothermal has seen almost total
elimination of natural gas costs over the past year.
After the engineering process is completed and the actual costs are clearer, the City can
choose not to proceed with the grant however engineering fees up to a maximum of $25,000
would be owed to Harris Mechanical Services.
The cost of Harris Mechanical's services is included in the grant application as an eligible
expenditure. The final cost is determined by the scope of services following completion of
the engineering study.
St?
The annual energy savings, paybacks, and pricing resulting from the improvements are
guaranteed by Harris Mechanical.
As part of the engineering study the west rink floor will also be looked at to assess how or if
there may be efficiencies in repairing it to maximize the energy enhancements proposed.
While this repair cannot be included as part of the geothermal grant, it will be a consideration
in energy conservation calculations.
ATTACHMENTS:
Notification from the DOE on Pages
Grant recipients in Ground Source Heat Pump Demonstration Category on Pages legtclQg.
Proposed Letter of Intent on Pages
606
November 17, 2009
Mr. Bob Swanger
Harris Mechanical Servicwe, LLC.
909 Montreal Circle
St. Paul, MN 55102
Subject: Letter of Intent Eagan Civic Arena
Funding Opportunity Announcement #DOE DE- FOA00000116
Dear Mr. Swanger,
The City of Eagan intends to pursue the activities required to secure the
Geothermal Heat Pump Grant project as approved under the Department of Energy
Geothermal Technologies Demonstration Program in the amount of $1,338,000
(50% of proposed facility renovation). It is our understanding that to capture
available funding the City of Eagan needs to begin Phase 1 Feasibility Study and
Engineering Design as required for Topic Area 1 under the referenced Program.
This letter of Intent authorizes Harris Companies to begin Phase 1 of the grant with
an understanding of the City's objectives as follows:
1. Develop engineered documents and support documents to comply with
Phase I of the Technology Demonstration Grant awarded to the City �f
Eagan for the installation of a TRAK GeoExchange Heat Pump System.
2. Engineering includes finall design of TRAK GEoExchange System, Low
Emissivity Ceilings, Expanded Direct Digital Controls, installation of fluid
cooler, and any other provision within the scope of the Federal Grant
submission.
3. The City of Eagan has a known problem with leaks in the floor in Rink 1. It
is understood that the analysis of the rink floor will be included in the
engineering study being completed by Harris Companies under this Letter
of Intent.
4. Energy and Operation cost savings will comply with requirements of MN
Uniform Municipal Contracting Law (Statute 471.345 subd 13- Energy
Efficiency Projects) enabling the City of Eagan to enter into an agreement
that uses the guaranteed savings from the project to fund the debt service of
the balance of the final project after deducting the federal grant.
5. Harris Companies will coordinate the effort on behalf of the City of Eagan
to work with all applicable utility providers to obtain the maximum rebates
available for energy improvements to the facility.
The deliverable from this Letter of Intent (Phase 1) will include all documentation
required to complete Phase 2- Installation and Commissioning of Equipment and
Phase 3 Operation, Data Collection and Marketing. Harris Companies will take
the lead and work with the City of Eagan t complete all program requirements of
the Department of Energy Geothermal Technologies grant.
401
Draft
By signing this letter, we are indicating willingness to provide access to our
facilities and to provide all information required by Harris Companies to complete
Phase 1. We understand that Harris Companies will incur costs to complete Phase
1 of this grant process and provide assistance to the City of Eagan to complete the
award application. If the City of Eagan elects not to proceed with the final solution
that meets the requirements of the federal grant and the terms set forth above, the
City of Eagan will agree to pay for the work completed by Harris Companies in an
amount not to exceed $25,000. A detailed recap of the work done and reports
completed to that point will be turned over to the City of Eagan for their files.
Should an agreement be reached in compliance with Phase 2 of the Department of
Energy Geothermal technologies grant, the costs incurred during Phase 1 shall be
included in the overall project cost and paid per the terms of that agreement.
Sincerely,
City of Eagan
Mike Maguire
Mayor
Approved by Council action November 17, 2009
oa
Draft
Cherryl Mesko
Parks Recreation Superintendent Operations
City of Eagan
3830 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, MN 55122
Dear Cherryl Mesko:
Federal Recycling Program
Department of Energy
Golden Field Office
1617 Cole Boulevard
Golden, Colorado 80401 -3393
October 30, 2009
SUBJECT: Funding Opportunity Announcement Number DE- FOA- 0000116,
Recovery Act Geothermal Technologies Program: Ground Source Heat Pumps
Application Titled: The proposal set forth in this application would replace the existing
compressors, boiler, and domestic hot water heater within the city's ice arena with a
centralized geothermal heat pump system.
Evaluation of your application received in response to the subject Funding Opportunity Announcement
has been completed. After a careful review, I am pleased to inform you that your application has been
selected for negotiations leading to an award. You will be notified in the near future by a representative
from this office if further information is needed to clarify and supplement your application, in order for an
award to be finalized.
During fiscal year 2008, this office implemented a new electronic, paperless procurement system called
STRIPES. Upon implementation of STRIPES, ALL organizations currently doing or wanting to do
business with this office MUST BE registered with the Central Contractor Registration (CCR) and with
FedConnect. As a result, it is imperative that you read and react to information provided in the document
entitled "CCR and FedConnect Registrations" on the above referenced PMC website.
On behalf of the Department of Energy, I would like to express a sincere appreciation of your interest and
participation in the Geothermal Technologies Program and look forward to initiating this worthwhile
project.
Any questions can be addressed to me at 303 -275 -4728.
Sincerely,
Eric K. Hass
Merit Review Committee Chairperson
Printed on Recycled Paper
Cherry) Mesko
From: Geothermal [Geothermal @ee.doe.gov]
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 4:21 PM
Subject: Congratulations!
Dear Selectee:
On behalf of the Geothermal Technologies Program at the U.S. Department of Energy, I'd like to congratulate you on
being selected for one of our October 29 2009, awards under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. This is a
very exciting time both for our program and the geothermal industry in the United States. Together we can accelerate
technology development and expand the reach of this transformative industry. I thank you for being a part of this effort,
and I look forward to working with you.
You will be contacted shortly by our Golden Field Office to begin the award negotiation process. If you have any
questions, please contact my office at (202) 287 -1818.
Thank you,
Edward J. Wall
Program Manager
Office of Geothermal Technologies
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
�f,
CA 0 Protect Project
ee r Location i cation De
>rtUnt.C1ty) State
6) Ground Source Heat Pump Demonstration Projects
$233,819
Oklahoma
City
Energy Center
of Wisconsin
E riylr on
Interrtatjpna
Corporation
The University
of Texas at
$245,797 Golden
$190,395
$109,999
$250,000
$250,000
$250,000
$146,973
$232,596
Colorado School of Mines will create a "Geothermal
Academy," a data and analysis clearinghouse for GHP
projects.
The Energy Center of Wisconsin will gather and analyze
data and develop enhanced design tools for hybrid GHP
systems.
Madison
Princeton
Miami-
Stillwater
Austin
West
Hartford
Dayton
OK
C O
WI
NJ
FL
OK
TX
CT
OH
ClimateMaster will build models to allow potential GHP
system customers to analyze cost and performance of
GHP systems.
Environ International Corporation will develop a least
cost design tool aimed at improving GHP efficiency in
varying climate zones and building types.
Florida International University will gather and analyze
data to improve GHP loop design and efficiency in
systems intended for use in hot and humid regions of
the country.
Oklahoma State University will design optimized sizing
tools for surface water and standing column well (SCW)
systems.
The University of Texas at Austin will design
supplementary heat rejection systems that will enable
GHPs to work more effectively in hot, arid climates.
The University of Hartford will develop an integrated
system simulation and design model for hybrid GHP
systems designed to effectively balance ground thermal
loads.
Wright State University will create a modeling decision
tool that provides more detailed loop sizing,
performance, and cost information than currently
available.
DOE Pro e
rantee Grant tocation
..Alrttoun city x'
e r pkion
Cedarville
School DIStr'iLt
44
Color.;adn
Department; o
Personnel and,'
Admtnlstration(
Departmeit_'of,
Military Affairs:
Flathead
Electric
Cooperative
$5,000,000
$4,000,000
$1,628,515
$1,338,000
$1,298,625
$4,600,000
$430,000
$2,611,832
1,200 000
$155,270
Muncie
Hailey
Carey
Bellevue
Cedarville
Eagan
Wake
Denver
Rangely
Deriver
Bloomington
Kalispell
IN
ID
ID
ID
AR
MN
NC
C O
C O
CO
IL
MT
Ball State University will replace coal -fired boiler
systems across the campus with GHP systems.
Blaine County will retrofit a number of schools with a
combination of direct -use geothermal heating and GHP
systems to provide cooling.
Cedarville School District will retrofit heat and cooling
systems at a number of schools in order to reduce
utility costs and provide regional economic growth.
The City of Eagan will use produced cold water for ice
rink maintenance and hot water for facilities' heating
and hot water needs.
The City of Raleigh will retrofit a Waste Processing
Center with a GHP hot water loop as well as
heating/cooling system.
The Colorado Department of Personnel and
Administration and its partners will collect and analyze
data to assess the performance of GHP systems.
Colorado Northwestern Community College will retrofit
a number of campus buildings to provide heating and
cooling capacity as well as a strong educational
opportunity.
The Denver Museum of Nature and Science is
demonstrating the use of municipal waste water as the
heat exchange medium for a heating /cooling system.
The Illinois Department of Military Affairs will install a
GHP heating/cooling system at the National Guard
Headquarters Building and will use water contained in
abandoned subsurface mines as the heat exchange
medium.
Flathead Electric Cooperative will convert their HVAC
system to a GHP heating/cooling system.
g4
$1,571,027 Hattiesburg
$2,457,741 Greenville
Indiana
$1,339,591 Fort Wayne
Technology
Indie Energy
Systems
ompan'
$2,459,971 Countryside
Newport
School District
$311,324
$1,800,000
51,072,744
$1,627,796
$2,752,163
$978,168
Glendale
Nashville
Butte
Newport
Rochester
Appleton
MS
S C
IN
IL
WI
TN
MT
AR
MI
WI
Forrest County will install a GHP heating/cooling system
at a prison facility.
Furman University will incorporate GHP heating/cooling
systems into a campus housing facility.
The Indiana Institute of Technology will be installing a
GHP system that will use CO2 as the cooling medium.
Indie Energy Systems will retrofit the Local 150
International Union of Operating Engineers' campus
with a GHP heating /cooling system.
Johnson Controls will install GHP heating /cooling
systems in a LEED Platinum Certified building.
The Metropolitan Development and Housing Agency
will retrofit a low- income multi family housing facility.
Montana Tech will demonstrate low -cost heating of a
modern building with a GHP using water from a nearby
mine as a heat exchange medium.
Newport School District will retrofit their high school
with a GHP heating /cooling system.
Oakland University will incorporate a GHP system with
a roof mounted solar thermal hot water array to
provide summer dehumidification and cooling as well
as winter space heating.
Riverheath LLC will demonstrate river -based heat
exchange plates that use flowing water to provide high
heat transfer.
1,7
Pro}et Project`
1 cad9n Gi t,ert
$2,786,250
Lawrenceburg
Cookeville
Chattanooga
Manchester
Holliday
Bunceton
Albany
Washington
$1,682,920 Philadelphia
Lincoln
Oak Ridge
Twin Lakes
TN
MO
NY
DC
PA
NE
TN
WI
The Tennessee Department of Education will install
GHP systems in schools in order to validate the current
hybrid GHP system design model developed by
ASHRAE. Oak Ridge National lab will analyze
performance and savings.
The University of Missouri will retrofit two poultry
farms with solar- assisted GHP systems, making use of
an innovative concentrated solar collector and
financing approach.
The University at Albany will install a large GHP system
serving 200,000 sq. ft. of dorm and apartment housing,
and will leverage additional incentives from the State of
NY.
The Geothermal Heat Pump Consortium will create a
national certification standard for GHP installation
technicians.
1001 South 15th Street Associates will retrofit a historic
train depot with a hybrid GHP system to reduce heating
and cooling costs and improve cycle efficiency.
District Energy Corporation will incorporate a GHP
heating /cooling system at an adult detention facility.
The Oak Ridge City Center is a 660,000 sq. ft. shopping
mall which will be fitted with an innovative hybrid GHP
heating /cooling system.
Skychaser Energy, Inc. will demonstrate the viability of
an innovative GHP business and financing model.
Agenda Memo
November 19, 2009 Regular City Council Meeting
M AUTHORIZE the Submission of a Forest Protection, Planning and Preparedness
Grant Application
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
Authorize staff to prepare and submit a grant application to the Mn Department of Agriculture
for a Forest Protection Reserve Planning and Preparedness Grant and authorize the Director of
Parks and Recreation to sign the application documents on behalf of the City. The grant monies
are to be used to plan and implement a City program to manage and control the spread of
Emerald Ash Bore. The deadline for application is November 20.
FACTS
Emerald Ash Bore (EAB) has been determined to be a lethal pest to Ash trees and has
devastated Ash tree populations in several states.
EAB spreads rapidly through a variety of means including, self flight, on fire wood, in
rough wood products attaching itself to vehicles and equipment.
Earlier this year, an EAB infestation was found within less than ten miles of the Eagan
border, it is highly likely the infestation will eventually reach Eagan.
The EAB has no known natural predator and can lay dormant in a tree for several years
before symptoms become obvious, an infestation in a tree is most always fatal.
Currently, the most efficient means of control and containment of EAB is to implement a
strategy that includes the removal of weakened/susceptible trees and pre- infestation
chemical treatment of healthy trees.
Of the approximately 17,000 inventoried boulevard trees in the City, over 3500 are Ash
trees, approximately 10% of all park trees are Ash, the number of Ash on private property
is unknown but is quite high.
City staff began the chemical treatment of park trees park trees this year on a trial basis.
The grant would be used to implement an expanded program of removal and chemical
control for several hundred of the Ash trees on public property including parks and
boulevards with a goal of controlling /containing the spread of the infestation.
The determination of which trees are removed or treated would be based upon a widely
used and recognized "condition index" that has already been applied to most all Ash trees
on City property; mature trees scoring highly would be treated while those with a low
score would generally be removed.
iaI
The grant is for 85% of the program cost, the local share of 15% can include in -kind
labor by City staff, the cost of supplies and/or cash, at this time need for a cash match is
seen as being unlikely.
The program would be implemented in 2010 and include a combination of contractual
services and staff.
Staff is preparing a grant application for a program that would cost $100,000/ $85,000 to
be paid by a grant, the local share of $15,000 being supplies and in -kind labor services.
The grant is competitive with no guarantee of an award, should the application be
successful, the Council will be consulted prior to formal acceptance.
Efforts to control EAB will be ongoing for years, avoidance of any impact is unlikely
ATTACHMENTS: None
70
Agenda Information Memo
November 17, 2009 Eagan City Council Meeting
N. LOT 2, BLOCK 1 NORTHWOOD BUSINESS PARK 3 ADDITION
EASEMENT VACATION
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Receive the petition to vacate public drainage
utility easements within Northwood Business Park 3rd Addition and schedule a public
hearing to be held on December 15, 2009.
FACTS:
On October 28, 2009, City staff received a petition from Kari Gill, representing
Dakota County CDA, requesting the vacation of public drainage utility easements
within a portion of Northwood Business Park 3 Addition.
The easements were dedicated with this plat for the construction and maintenance of
public utility lines.
With the proposed development of this property by the Dakota County CDA as
residential townhomes, it was discovered that some of the utility lines constructed did
not fall within the easement dedicated with the plat.
It is anticipated that the development proposal of the Dakota County CDA (Eagan
Northwoods), dedicating all necessary replacement public easements, will also be
presented to the Council for consideration December 15, 2009, to coincide with
consideration of this vacation.
Notices for a public hearing will be published in the legal papers and sent to all
potentially affected and /or interested parties for comment prior to the public hearing.
ATTACHMENTS:
Location Map, page '7a
71
LONE OAK ROAD
YANKEE DOODLE RD.
WESCOTT ROAD
L 1
INTERSTATE
MENDOTA iii HEIGHTS
Ifs
LONE OAK ROAD
10/21 /2008
City of Eap
Engineering Department
Proposed Easement Vacation Location
Lots 2, Block 1, Northwood Business Park 3rd Add.
Fig. 1
Agenda Information Memo
November 17, 2009 Eagan City Council Meeting
O. LOTS 11, 12, 13, BLOCK 3 OAKS OF BRIDGEWATER 2
ADDITION
EASEMENT VACATION
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Receive the petition to vacate public drainage
utility easements within Lots 11, 12, and 13, Block 3 Oaks of Bridgewater 2nd (3862,
3858, and 3854 Bridgewater Drive) and schedule a public hearing to be held on
December 15, 2009.
FACTS:
On October 29, 2009, City staff received a petition from Quinn Hutson, representing
the property owners of 3862, 3858, and 3854 Bridgewater Drive, requesting the
vacation of public drainage utility easements within Lots 11, 12, and 13, Block 3 of
Oaks of Bridgewater 2nd
The easements were dedicated with this plat for the construction and maintenance of
public utility lines, standard lot line easements, and for ponding purposes.
It is anticipated that the proposed final subdivision and plat of Oaks of Bridgewater
3 dedicating all necessary replacement public easements, will also be presented to
the Council for consideration December 15, 2009, to coincide with consideration of
this vacation.
Notices for a public hearing will be published in the legal papers and sent to all
potentially affected and/or interested parties for comment prior to the public hearing.
ATTACHMENTS:
Location Map, page 71
73
Gfl
w.ne�+� I aU
1\
1.
iie4 Wire
Os 4
0
W
z
0
0
z
X
w
YANKEE DOODLE RD.
wESCOTT ROAD
Proposed Vacation
Location
DIFFLEY ROAD
1
CLIFF ROAD
J
a_
-gm
'MB
a
SO
3
z
City of Cap
Engineering Department
I
-71f_
Proposed Easement Vacation Location
Lots 11,12 13, Block 3, Oaks of Bridgewater 2nd
tor
Fig. 1
Agenda Information Memo
November 17, 2009 Eagan City Council Meeting
P. CONTRACT 09 -14, SCHWANZ LAKE RAIN GARDENS
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve the final payment for Contract 09 -14
(Schwanz Lake Rain Gardens Improvements) in the amount of $2,880.55 to Earth
Wizards, Inc., and accept the improvements for perpetual City maintenance subject to
warranty provisions.
FACTS:
Contract 09 -14 provided for the construction of 10 rain garden sites located within the
Golden Meadow neighborhood located north of Schwanz Lake, within the nearly 32
acres that presently drain overland directly into the lake. This work has been
completed in accordance with the approved plans and specifications.
The total cost for the rain garden site construction was $57,610.93, or 4.5% less than
the bid amount of $60,347.16
These improvements have been completed, inspected by representatives of the Public
Works Department, and found to be in order for favorable Council action of final
payment and acceptance for perpetual maintenance subject to warranty provisions.
7S_
Agenda Information Memo
November 17, 2009 Eagan City Council Meeting
Q. APPROVE RECORDS ACCESS AGREEMENT WITH MINNESOTA
DEPARTMENT OF VEHICLE SERVICES
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve an agreement with the Minnesota
Department of Driver and Vehicle Services (DVS) to allow access to certain records and
authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents.
FACTS:
The Engineering Division of the Public Works Department has initiated a pilot
program with the DVS to improve the accuracy of data related to motor vehicle
crashes which occur in the City of Eagan. If this Pilot Program is found to be
successful, other county and municipal agencies across the state will be allowed to
make use of the process.
Annually, the Engineering Division analyzes large quantities of historical motor
vehicle crash data to determine general trends in crash and severity rates. Recently,
more detailed analyses of smaller quantities of historical crash data have been
performed to identify trends in crash types and contributing factors at specific
locations. The results of the analyses are then used to determine if potential
countermeasures are necessary and cost effective.
An overwhelming majority of the data contained in the historical crash reports is
accurate. However, the data relative to the crash location is sometimes inaccurate
reducing efficiency and effectiveness of this process.
Currently, the DVS receives Motor Vehicle Crash Reports from across the state and
records the location of the crash based on information in the report. While this
process is relatively accurate for crashes which occur at major intersections, it is more
complicated and less accurate for crashes that occur at less major intersection and
non intersection locations.
The proposed Pilot Program would provide specific Public Works employee(s) access
to the DVS motor vehicle crash data so they can identify the actual crash location on
future motor vehicle crash reports for crashes which occur within the City. It is
anticipated that the accuracy of crash location data will be improved due to the
familiarity of City staff with the City's transportation network.
The agreement has been reviewed by the City Attorney and Public Works Department
and is in order for favorable Council action.
70
Agenda Information Memo
November 17, 2009 Eagan City Council Meeting
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve an amendment to the Development
Agreement providing for the further extension of contract completion dates for Oak Hills
Church 2 Addition (City Project No. 06 -N) to June 1, 2009.
FACTS:
Oak Hills 2 Addition is a 2 -lot single family residential subdivision located east of
Coachman Road and south of Yankee Doodle Road, near the City's Maintenance
Facility. The development agreement approved by the Council on Dec. 17, 2007
required the installation of a public sidewalk along Coachman Road, individual
sanitary sewer water services, grading/ erosion control, lot corners, and mailbox
supports to be performed privately by the developer under the terms and conditions of
the development contract.
On December 18, 2008, the City Council approved an amendment to the development
contract to allow for extension of the completion dates for the remaining
improvements identified in the development contract due to poor economic
conditions.
Pastor Rodney Carlson of Oak Hills Church, owner and developer of the Oak Hills
Church 2 Addition, has requested a further extension of the completion dates for the
remaining improvements identified in the development contract, again due to current
economic conditions. The request is to extend the completion dates from June 1, 2009
to June 30, 2010.
The Church has requested the City install the improvements in Spring 2010, and levy
the costs of the improvements as a special assessment.
The City will continue to hold a financial guarantee to ensure completion of these
improvements in accordance with the Oak Hills Church 2nd Addition development
contract, until the special assessment is levied against the properties.
ATTACHMENTS:
R. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AMENDMENT OAK HILLS
CHURCH 2 ADDITION
CITY PROJECT 06 -N
Letter from Developer, page e.
77
October 26, 2009
Mr. John Gorder
City of Eagan
Engineering Department
3830 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, MN 55122 -1897
Re: Oak Hills Church
Development Agreement Extension of Time
Dear Mr. Gorder:
RECEIVED
c urch (ICI 3 0 2009
ENGINEERING
DEPARTMENT
On behalf of the Oak Hills Church we are requesting an extension on the development agreement that is currently
in place on the Oak Hills Church 2 Addition. Two Oak Hills Church Board members met with you on October
26, 2009 to discuss the current situation with the 2 residential lots that were approved as part the 2 °d Addition.
As was discussed Oak Hills Church received an extension on the dates to complete the public improvements to
June 30, 2009 (we had requested a date of October 31, 2009). The lots are located on the southwest corner of our
property located at Yankee Doodle Road and Coachman Road. The Development Agreement required that we
complete the improvements by August 2008.
Based on the current economic times, our Church has yet been able to raise sufficient funds to develop these lots
into the vision for our Church. The vision is to construct homes on these sites that could be used by missionaries
on leave from the field. This continues to be our vision, but the timing seems to be slipping at this time.
We request that the City of Eagan extend the time to complete the development to June 30, 2010. Per our
discussion, we also request that the City of Eagan construct the water and sewer services to these lots. We are in
receipt of the quotes that you received for these services. While we understand that the market is good for public
works projects, we also all recognized that we are likely paying for cold weather concrete and pavement work. It
was also discussed, that impacting the road to your access to the public works facility this late in the fall could be
problematic for the City. We hope and believe that this will give us sufficient time to raise the money to
complete the vision.
Please review this request and let us know if you need anything to complete this request.
Please call the Church office or Paul Danielson (our Church Building Committee representative) at 651- 643 -0407
if you have any questions or need additional information. Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Oak Hills Church
Rodney Carlson
Senior Pastor
C: Paul Danielson
71?
1570 yankee doodle road eagan minnesota 55121 651 .289.1570
Agenda Memo
November 17, 2009
City Council Meeting
CONSENT AGENDA:
S. Transfer of Massage Therapy Establishment License for Jennifer Myers, The Bodywork
Studio, from 3352 Sherman Court #103 to 1570 Century Point.
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
Approve transfer of Massage Therapy Establishment License for Lisa Myers, The Bodywork
Studio, from 3352 Sherman Court #103 to 1570 Century Point.
FACTS:
None
Jennifer Myer's lease at 3352 Sherman Court expired on October 31, 2009.
Ms. Myers will be subleasing and office sharing with Angie Bybooth of Permanent
Make -up located at 1570 Century Point.
A Code Enforcement Officer will be inspecting the premises at 1570 Century Point to
ensure the property complies with the City Code requirements for a massage therapy
establishment prior to the Council meeting on November 17.
ATTACHMENTS:
7 q
Agenda Information Memo
November 17, 2009, Eagan City Council Meeting
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. CONSIDER ADDITIONAL SUSPENSION OF THE OFF -SALE LIQUOR
LICENSE OR REVOKE THE OFF -SALE LIQUOR LICENSE FOR BRAR
ENTERPRISES, INC. DBA BLACKHAWK LIQUOR WINE
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
To impose no additional penalties upon the licensee.
Or
To adopt Findings of Fact and Resolution to impose additional restrictions on the licensee to
include up to an additional 30 days suspension of the off -sale license.
Or
To adopt Findings of Fact and Resolution to revoke the off -sale liquor license.
FACTS:
Bold information is new information not provided in the November 5, 2009 City Council
packet.
At the November 5, 2009 City Council meeting, the Council directed that a hearing
be conducted by the Council at the November 17, 2009 City Council meeting. The
licensee was noticed of this hearing. In advance of the hearing, the licensee met with
staff on November 10, 2009 and submitted information on the history of the licensee
and the business, which is enclosed.
In addition to the 30 -day suspension of the liquor license which was imposed for the
fourth violation, a $1,600 civil penalty was also imposed. The monetary penalty
must be paid within 30 days of the date of the violation notice, which was October 5.
Payment was due by November 4. To date, payment of the civil penalty has not
been received.
On September 1, 2009, Brar Enterprises, Inc., dba Blackhawk Liquor Wine, was cited
for a fourth alcohol sales violation within a 36 -month period. Per Eagan City Code,
Chapter 5, Section 5.02, Subdivision 4 (G), a civil penalty of $2,000 and 30 days
suspension of the license, unless a greater civil penalty, suspension or revocation is
otherwise determined by City Council, shall be imposed upon a licensee upon the fourth
or more violation within a 36 -month period. The forgoing penalties shall not restrict the
City Council from ordering the revocation of the license, suspension of the license for up
to 60 days, a civil penalty up to $2,000 or impose any combination thereof.
Section 5.03 of the Eagan City Code, states that no suspension or revocation of a license
or civil penalty shall take effect until the licensee has been given an opportunity for a
hearing. The licensee was afforded the right to a hearing to appeal this matter but did not
request one.
OD
The fourth violation involved the licensee obtaining alcohol from another retailer for the
purpose of resale, which is a violation of MS 340A.415 and Eagan City Code Chapter 5,
Section 5.02, Subdivision 4 (G). This violation was discovered by an agent of the
Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division on September 1, 2009. At the time of the
infraction, the licensee was on the Minnesota Department of Revenue Liquor Posting tax
delinquent list and is still identified as being on this list, which means that no liquor
deliveries can be made to the establishment until the tax delinquency has been satisfied.
The three previous alcohol sales violations occurred as follows: July 18, 2007 bought
liquor at retail for the purpose of resale; March 15, 2008 sale of alcohol to a minor and
July 17, 2008 sale of alcohol to a minor.
As a result of the fourth violation, the off -sale liquor license for Brar Enterprises, Inc.
was suspended by the City on October 19, 2009 at 12:01 a.m. for a period of 30 days.
The suspension will end on November 17, 2009 at midnight. Additionally, the licensee is
required to pay a civil penalty of $1,600 to the City no later than November 4, 2009.
Minnesota Statute 340A.415 does not allow a civil penalty greater than $2,000 to be
imposed for each violation. Per the notice of violation that was issued by the State of
Minnesota on September 25, 2009, the licensee was fined $400 for violation of state law.
As such, the City could only impose a civil penalty of $1,600 so as not to exceed the
$2,000 cap established by state law.
Aside from the 30 -day suspension and $1,600 civil penalty already imposed upon Brar
Enterprises, Inc., the City Council could 1) choose to impose no additional penalties, 2)
suspend the off -sale liquor license up to an additional 30 days or 3) order the revocation.
ATTACHMENTS (7):
Bold items are included as additional new information. Non -bold items were provided in
the November 5, 2009 packet information.
Findings of Fact and Resolution for revocation of the off -sale liquor license enclosed
on pages 8a through pg
Findings of Fact and Resolution for suspension of off-sale liquor license enclosed on
pages through G f
History of lackhawk Li uor and Win submitted by licensee on November 10,
2009 enclosed on pages through(.
November 6, 2009 letter seht to licensee roviding notice of the hearing on
November 17, 2009 enclosed on page/
September 25, 2009 letter sent to licensee by the State of Minnesota Department of
Public Safety, Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division on page/
October 5, 2009 City of Eagan notice of alcohol sales violation on page
October 26, 2009 letter to licensee providing notice o the intent to consider additional
penalties related to alcohol sales violations on pages d3 through
EXTRACT OF MINUTES OF MEETING OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EAGAN,
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, was
duly held at the Eagan Municipal Center located at 3830 Pilot Knob Road, in said City on
November 17, 2009, at 6:30 p.m.
The following members were present: Maguire, Bakken, Hansen, Fields and Tilley; and the
following were absent: none.
Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
FINDINGS OF FACT AND RESOLUTION
FOR
REVOCATION OF OFF -SALE LIQUOR LICENSE FOR BRAR ENTERPRISES, INC.
DB /A BLACKHAWK LIQUOR AND WINE
Based upon the information produced at the hearing and all records, files and documents
presented to Council in this matter, the City Council of the City of Eagan makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The City Council of the City of Eagan granted an of sale liquor license to Brar
Enterprises, Inc., doing business as Blackhawk Liquor and Wine "Licensee located at 4130
Blackhawk Road, Eagan, Minnesota 55122.
2. On or about September 25, 2009, the Minnesota Department of Public Safety
Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division notified the City of its agency action against the
Licensee for unlawfully obtaining alcohol from another retailer for the purpose of resale.
3. Under Minnesota state liquor regulations, Minn. Stat. Chapter 340A, licensed liquor
retailers may purchase their stock of alcoholic beverages only from duly licensed Minnesota
manufacturers, brewers, and wholesale distributors. While licensed liquor retailer is on the
Minnesota Department of Revenue Liquor Posting Tax Delinquent list, no alcoholic beverages may
be delivered to the retail establishment until the tax delinquency has been satisfied. On September 1,
2009, the Licensee was on the Minnesota Department of Revenue Liquor Posting Tax Delinquent
list when an agent of the Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division inspected the Licensee's
premises and observed alcohol from another retailer displayed for the purposes of resale.
4. The Minnesota Department of Public Safety Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement
Division imposed a civil penalty against the Licensee in the amount of $400.00 pursuant to Minn.
Stat. 340A.415.
ga
5. The September 1, 2009 violation constitutes the Licensee's fourth (4 alcohol sales
violation within a 36 -month period.
6. The Licensee's three previous alcohol sales violations occurred as follows: July 18,
2007 Obtained alcohol from another retailer for the purpose of resale; March 15, 2008 Sale of
alcohol to a minor; and July 17, 2008 Sale of alcohol to a minor
7. Upon the Licensee's fourth violation on September 1, 2009, the City sent a Notice
of Alcohol Sales Violation to the Licensee, dated October 5, 2009.
8. Pursuant to Eagan City Code, Section 5.02, the Notice of Alcohol Sales Violation
notified the Licensee that the City of Eagan imposed a civil penalty of $1,600.00 and 30 -day
suspension, effective October 19, 2009 at 12:01 a.m. and ending on November 17, 2009 at midnight.
9. Pursuant to Eagan City Code, Section 5.02, the Licensee was further advised of its
right to a hearing to appeal the Notice and imposition of the civil penalties. The Licensee did not
request a hearing to appeal the October 5, 2009 Notice of Alcohol Sales Violation.
10. A copy of the Notice of Alcohol Sales Violation, dated October 5, 2009, is attached
hereto and incorporated as a part hereof as Exhibit "A".
11. The Licensee's civil penalty of $1,600.00 was required to be paid on or before
November 4, 2009. The Licensee has not paid the $1,600.00 civil penalty.
12. Pursuant to Eagan City Code, Section 5.02, a civil penalty of $2,000.00 and 30 -days
suspension of the license shall be imposed upon a licensee upon the fourth or more violation within
a 36 -month period unless a greater civil penalty, suspension or revocation is otherwise determined
by City Council. Eagan City Code, Section 5.02, further provides that the foregoing penalties shall
not restrict the City Council from ordering the revocation of the license, suspension of the license for
up to 60 days, a civil penalty up to $2,000.00, or imposition of any combination thereof.
13. Because the State of Minnesota has imposed a $400.00 civil penalty upon the
Licensee for the violation, the City's civil penalty is limited to the sum of $1,600.00 and no
additional monetary penalty may be imposed upon the Licensee.
14. On October 26, 2009, the City sent to the Licensee a Notice of Consideration of
Additional Penalties Related to Alcohol Sales Violations. A copy of the Notice is attached hereto
and made a part hereof as Exhibit `B The Notice advised the Licensee that the Eagan City
Council will consider the imposition of additional penalties at its November 5, 2009 City Council
meeting.
15. The City Council, at its November 5, 2009 meeting, approved consideration of
additional penalties against the Licensee, including additional suspension day or revocation of the
Licensee's off-sale liquor license, and set the hearing for November 17, 2009.
2
e3
16. The City sent the Licensee notice of the November 17, 2009 hearing attached hereto
and incorporated as a part hereof as Exhibit "C
17. The Licensee's representative, Jess Brar, did did not appear at the public hearing
on November 17, 2009.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Eagan,
Dakota County, Minnesota that it hereby declares that the Licensee, Brar Enterprises, Inc. d/b /a
Blackhawk Liquor and Wine, did commit four violations of the alcohol regulations as set forth in
Minn Stat. §340A and Eagan City Code, Chapter 5 within a 36 -month period.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the off -sale liquor license issued to Brar Enterprises,
Inc. d/b /a Blackhawk Liquor and Wine with a licensed premises located at 4130 Blackhawk Road,
Eagan, Minnesota 55122, shall be, and hereby is, REVOKED.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the revocation of the off -sale liquor license for Brar
Enterprises, Inc. d/b /a Blackhawk Liquor and Wine is effective immediately.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that no person shall sell, barter, keep for sale or
otherwise dispose of liquor as part of any commercial transaction on the premises located at 4130
Blackhawk Road, Eagan, Minnesota 55122 effective immediately.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that City staff is authorized to take any action, including
legal action or suit, to enforce the terms of this Findings of Fact and Resolution.
ATTEST:
ADOPTED this 17th day of November, 2009.
Mira Pepper, Deputy City Clerk
Mike Maguire, Mayor
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Member and
upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor: Maguire,
Bakken, Hansen, Fields and Tilley; and the following voted against the same: none.
WHEREUPON, said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted and was signed by
the Mayor and his signature attested by the City Clerk.
3
DATE: 10/5/09
TO: LICENSEE: Brar Enterprises, Inc.
NOTICE OF ALCOHOL SALES VIOLATION
City of Eagan
Address: 4130 Blackhawk Road, Eagan, MN 55122
Case N/A
LICENSED PREMISES: Blackhawk Liquor Wine, same address as above
-RE: Alcohol Sales Violation: 4
Date of Violation: 9/1/09
Date of Prior Alcohol Sales Violations (include Case
7/18/07 no case number;
3/15/08 08 -1519
7/17/08 08 -4331
c;c1wcsa--k
YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED as the Licensee of the above referenced Licensed Premises that a
violation of the alcohol regulations as set forth in Minnesota Statutes, Section 340A.101., et. seq. and
Eagan City Code, Sections 5.01 -5.99 has occurred at the above referenced Licensed. Premises, as follows:
(date and description of alcohol sales violation)
The fourth violation in a 36 -month period occurred on 9/1/09 Purchase of liquor at retail for the purpose
of resale.
THEREFORE, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 340A.415,
and Eagan City Code, Section 5.02, the City of Eagan imposes the following civil penalty upon you:
1. A civil penalty of $500.00
2. A civil penalty of $1,000.00, because the above referenced violation is the second
violation within 24 months of a previous violation.
3. A civil penalty of $1,500.00 and a seven (7) day suspension effective: (i) ten (10)
business days after the issuance of this Notice or (ii) upon completion of a
hearing, if requested as set forth below, if a violation has been found to occur because the
above referenced violation is the third violation within 24 months of the firms violation.
4. A civil penalty of $1,600 and a thirty (30) day suspension effective:. (i) ten (10)
business days after the issuance of this Notice (10/19/09 beginning at 12:01 a.m. and
ending on 11/17/09 at midnight); or (ii) upon completion of a hearing, if requested as set
forth below, if a violation has been found to occur because the above referenced violation
is the fourth violation within 36 months of the first violation.
YOU ARE HEREBY FURTHER NOTIFIED that pursuant to Minn. Stat. §340A.415, and Eagan City
Code, Section 5.02, you have a right to a hearing to appeal this Notice and the imposition of the civil
penalties. Should you desire to have a hearing, you are required to request a hearing by serving the
attached Request for Hearing upon the City Clerk within ten (10) business days of the date of this Notice.
Upon receipt of your Request for Hearing, a hearing will be set before the City's hearing officer, no more
than fourteen (14) days from the date of the City's receipt of your Request for Hearing. If the hearing
officer determines that a violation has occurred upon the conclusion of the hearing, or if you do not timely
request a hearing, you are required to immediately comply with the provisions herein.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact:
Maria Petersen, City Clerk/Admin. Svcs. Coord. at (651) 675 -5034
Signature
/v S OI
125- Date
4P City of Eaaall
Mike Maguire
Mayor
Paul Bakken
Cyndee Fields
Gary Hansen
Meg Tilley
Council Members
Thomas Hedges
City Administrator
Municipal Center
3830 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, MN 551 22 -1 81 0
651.675.5000 phone
651.675.5012 fax
651.454.8535 TDD
Maintenance Facility
3501 Coachman Point
Eagan, MN 55122
651.675.5300 phone
651.675.5360 fax
651.454.8535 TDD
www.cityofeagan.com
The Lone Oak Tree
The symbol of
strength and growth
in our community.
October 26, 2009
Dear Mr. Brar:
6(6\21)-- {3 e Jv
J- eSS�cv��
r7lo TO CC
Fo jows, S s
Mr. Jess Brar
BRAR Enterprises, Inc. NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONAL
dba Blackhawk Liquor Wine PENALTIES RELATED TO ALCOHOL
4130 Blackhawk Road SALES VIOLATIONS
Eagan, MN 55122
The City of Eagan sent you a notice dated October 5, 2009, informing you that as a result
of a fourth alcohol sales violation in a 36 -month period, your off -sale liquor license
would be suspended beginning October 19, 2009 for a 30 -day period ending on
November 17, 2009. Additionally, a $1,600 civil penalty was imposed.
Per Eagan City Code Section 5.02, Subd. 4 (G) Notwithstanding the foregoing civil
penalties, a civil penalty of $2,000.00 and 30 days suspension of the license, unless a
greater civil penalty, suspension or revocation is otherwise determined by City Council,
shall be imposed upon a licensee upon the fourth or more violation within a 36 -month
period. The foregoing penalties shall not restrict the City Council from ordering the
revocation of the license, suspension of the license for up to 60 days, a civil penalty up to
$2,000.00, or impose any combination thereof.
The purpose of this letter is to inform you that on Thursday, November 5, 2009, the
Eagan City Council will consider the possible imposition of additional penalties related to
alcohol sales violations that occurred at your establishment on July 18, 2007, March 15,
2008, July 17, 2008 and September 1, 2009. The Council meeting will begin at 6:30
p.m., or as soon thereafter as Council business permits, at the Eagan City Hall, 3830 Pilot
Knob Road, Eagan Minnesota.
Be advised that this meeting is your opportunity to be heard and to present any
evidence or testimony you may have for the City Council to consider before it
makes its decision. Please bring with you any evidence or witnesses you wish to
present on your behalf.
Please contact me at (651) 675 -5034 should you have any questions regarding this matter.
Sincerely,
Maria Petersen
City Clerk/Administrative Services Coordinator
Cc: Tom Hedges, City Administrator
Gene VanOverbeke, Director of Administrative Services
4 City of Eaall
Mike Maguire
Mayor
Paul Bakken
Cyndee Fields
Gary Hansen
Meg Tilley
Council Members
Thomas Hedges
City Administrator
Municipal Center
3830 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, MN 55122 -1810
651.675.5000 phone
651.675.5012 fax
651.454.8535 TDD
Maintenance Facility
3501 Coachman Point
Eagan, MN 55122
651.675.5300 phone
651.675.5360 fax
651.454.8535 TDD
www.cityofeagan.com
The Lone Oak Tree
The symbol of
strength and growth
in our community.
November 6, 2009
Mr. Jess Brar
BRAR Enterprises, Inc.
dba Blackhawk Liquor Wine
4130 Blackhawk Road
Eagan, MN 55122
E Kto).a--
NOTIFICATION OF HEARING TO CONSIDER ADDITIONAL SUSPENSION
OF THE OFF SALE LIQUOR LICENSE OR TO REVOKE THE OFF
SALE LIQUOR LICENSE
Dear Mr. Brar:
As you are aware, the City Council, at its November 5, 2009 meeting, scheduled an
administrative hearing for November 17, 2009 commencing at 6:30 p.m., or as soon
thereafter as Council business permits, at Eagan City Hall, 3830 Pilot Knob Road, Eagan,
Minnesota, to include additional suspension on the liquor license up to an additional 30
days and also to consider revocation of the Off Sale Liquor License.
Please be advised that this hearing is your opportunity to be heard and present any
evidence or testimony that you may have for the City Council to consider before it makes
its decision. Please bring with you any evidence or witnesses you wish to present on
your behalf.
Please contact me at (651) 675 -5034, should you have any questions regarding this
matter.
Very truly yours,
rfiaLtia_
Maria Petersen
City Clerk
cc: Thomas L Hedges, City Administrator
Gene VanOverbeke, Director of Administrative Services
Robert B. Bauer, City Attorney
3g
EXTRACT OF MINUTES OF MEETING OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EAGAN,
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, was
duly held at the Eagan Municipal Center located at 3830 Pilot Knob Road, in said City on
November 17, 2009, at 6:30 p.m.
The following members were present: Maguire, Bakken, Hansen, Fields and Tilley; and the
following were absent: none.
Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
FINDINGS OF FACT AND RESOLUTION
FOR
SUSPENSION OF OFF -SALE LIQUOR LICENSE FOR BRAR ENTERPRISES, INC.
D/B /A BLACKHAWK LIQUOR AND WINE
Based upon the information produced at the hearing and all records, files and documents
presented to Council in this matter, the City Council of the City of Eagan makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The City Council of the City of Eagan granted an off -sale liquor license to Brar
Enterprises, Inc., doing business as Blackhawk Liquor and Wine "Licensee located at 4130
Blackhawk Road, Eagan, Minnesota 55122.
2. On or about September 25, 2009, the Minnesota Department of Public Safety
Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division notified the City of its agency action against the
Licensee for unlawfully obtaining alcohol from another retailer for the purpose of resale.
3. Under Minnesota state liquor regulations, Minn. Stat. Chapter 340A, licensed liquor
retailers may purchase their stock of alcoholic beverages only from duly licensed Minnesota
manufacturers, brewers, and wholesale distributors. While licensed liquor retailer is on the
Minnesota Department of Revenue Liquor Posting Tax Delinquent list, no alcoholic beverages may
be delivered to the retail establishment until the tax delinquency has been satisfied. On September 1,
2009, the Licensee was on the Minnesota Department of Revenue Liquor Posting Tax Delinquent
list when an agent of the Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division inspected the Licensee's
premises and observed alcohol from another retailer displayed for the purposes of resale.
4. The Minnesota Department of Public Safety Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement
Division imposed a civil penalty against the Licensee in the amount of $400.00 pursuant to Minn.
Stat. 340A.415.
5. The September 1, 2009 violation constitutes the Licensee's fourth (4 alcohol sales
violation within a 36 -month period.
6. The Licensee's three previous alcohol sales violations occurred as follows: July 18,
2007 Obtained alcohol from another retailer for the purpose of resale; March 15, 2008 Sale of
alcohol to a minor; and July 17, 2008 Sale of alcohol to a minor.
7. Upon the Licensee's fourth violation on September 1, 2009, the City sent a Notice
of Alcohol Sales Violation to the Licensee, dated October 5, 2009.
8. Pursuant to Eagan City Code, Section 5.02, the Notice of Alcohol Sales Violation
notified the Licensee that the City of Eagan imposed a civil penalty of $1,600.00 and 30 -day
suspension, effective October 19, 2009 at 12:01 a.m. and ending on November 17, 2009 at midnight.
9. Pursuant to Eagan City Code, Section 5.02, the Licensee was further advised of its
right to a hearing to appeal the Notice and imposition of the civil penalties. The Licensee did not
request a hearing to appeal the October 5, 2009 Notice of Alcohol Sales Violation.
10. A copy of the Notice of Alcohol Sales Violation, dated October 5, 2009, is attached
hereto and incorporated as a part hereof as Exhibit "A".
11. The Licensee's civil penalty of $1,600.00 was required to be paid on or before
November 4, 2009. The Licensee has not paid the $1,600.00 civil penalty.
12. Pursuant to Eagan City Code, Section 5.02, a civil penalty of $2,000.00 and 30 -days
suspension of the license shall be imposed upon a licensee upon the fourth or more violation within
a 36 -month period unless a greater civil penalty, suspension or revocation is otherwise determined
by City Council. Eagan City Code, Section 5.02, further provides that the foregoing penalties shall
not restrict the City Council from ordering the revocation of the license, suspension of the license for
up to 60 days, a civil penalty up to $2,000.00, or imposition of any combination thereof.
13. Because the State of Minnesota has imposed a $400.00 civil penalty upon the
Licensee for the violation, the City's civil penalty is limited to the sum of $1,600.00 and no
additional monetary penalty may be imposed upon the Licensee.
14. On October 26, 2009, the City sent to the Licensee a Notice of Consideration of
Additional Penalties Related to Alcohol Sales Violations. A copy of the Notice is attached hereto
and made a part hereof as Exhibit `B The Notice advised the Licensee that the Eagan City
Council will consider the imposition of additional penalties at its November 5, 2009 City Council
meeting.
15. The City Council, at its November 5, 2009 meeting, approved consideration of
additional penalties against the Licensee, including additional suspension day or revocation of the
Licensee's off -sale liquor license, and set the hearing for November 17, 2009.
2
16. The City sent the Licensee notice of the November 17, 2009 hearing attached hereto
and incorporated as a part hereof as Exhibit "C
17. The Licensee's representative, Jess Brar, did did not appear at the public hearing
on November 17, 2009.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Eagan,
Dakota County, Minnesota that it hereby declares that the Licensee, Brar Enterprises, Inc. d/b /a
Blackhawk Liquor and Wine, did commit four violations of the alcohol regulations as set forth in
Minn. Stat. §340A and Eagan City Code, Chapter 5 within a 36 -month period.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the off -sale liquor license issued to Brar Enterprises,
Inc. d/b /a Blackhawk Liquor and Wine with a licensed premises located at 4130 Blackhawk Road,
Eagan, Minnesota 55122, shall be, and hereby is, SUSPENDED FOR DAYS (NOT TO
EXCEED 30 DAYS), EFFECTIVE NOVEMBER 17, 2009 AT 11:59 p.m.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the suspension of the off -sale liquor license for Brar
Enterprises, Inc. d/b /a Blackhawk Liquor and Wine is effective immediately.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that no person shall sell, barter, keep for sale or
otherwise dispose of liquor as part of any commercial transaction on the premises located at 4130
Blackhawk Road, Eagan, Minnesota 55122 effective immediately.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that City staff is authorized to take any action, including
legal action or suit, to enforce the terms of this Findings of Fact and Resolution.
ATTEST:
ADOPTED this 17th day of November, 2009.
Mira Pepper, Deputy City Clerk
3
Mike Maguire, Mayor
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Member and
upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor: Maguire,
Bakken, Hansen, Fields and Tilley; and the following voted against the same: none.
WHEREUPON, said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted and was signed by
the Mayor and his signature attested by the City Clerk.
DATE: 10/5/09
TO: LICENSEE: Brar Enterprises, Inc.
NOTICE OF ALCOHOL SALES VIOLATION
City of Eagan
Address: 4130 Blackhawk Road, Eagan, MN 55122
Case N/A
LICENSED PREMISES: Blackhawk Liquor Wine, same address as above
RE: Alcohol Sales Violation: 4
Date of Violation: 9/1/09
Date of Prior Alcohol Sales Violations (include Case
YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED as the Licensee of the above referenced Licensed Premises that a
violation of the alcohol regulations as set forth in Minnesota Statutes, Section 340A.101., et. seq. and
Eagan City Code, Sections 5.01 -5.99 has occurred at the above referenced Licensed Premises, as follows:
(date and description of alcohol sales violation)
The fourth violation in a 36 -month period occurred on 9/1/09 Purchase of liquor at retail for the purpose
of resale.
THEREFORE, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 340A.415,
and Eagan City Code, Section 5.02, the City of Eagan imposes the following civil penalty upon you:
1. A civil penalty of $500.00
2. A civil penalty of $1,000.00, because the above referenced violation is the second
violation within 24 months of a previous violation.
3. A civil penalty of $1,500.00 and a seven (7) day suspension effective: (i) ten (10)
business days after the issuance of this Notice or (ii) upon completion of a
hearing, if requested as set forth below, if a violation has been found to occur because the
above referenced violation is the third violation within 24 months of the first violation.
4. A civil penalty of $1,600 and a thirty (30) day suspension effective:. (i) ten (10)
business days after the issuance of this Notice (10/19/09 beginning at 12:01 a.m. and
ending on 11/17/09 at midnight); or (ii) upon completion of a hearing, if requested as set
forth below, if a violation has been found to occur because the above referenced violation
is the fourth violation within 36 months of the first violation.
YOU ARE HEREBY FURTHER NOTIFIED that pursuant to Minn. Stat. §340A.415, and Eagan City
Code, Section 5.02, you have a right to a hearing to appeal this Notice and the imposition of the civil
penalties. Should you desire to have a hearing, you are required to request a hearing by serving the
attached Request for Hearing upon the City Clerk within ten (10) business days of the date of this Notice.
Upon receipt of your Request for Hearing, a hearing will be set before the City's hearing officer, no more
than fourteen (14) days from the date of the City's receipt of your Request for Hearing. If the hearing
officer determines that a violation has occurred upon the conclusion of the hearing, or if you do not timely
request a hearing, you are required to immediately comply with the provisions herein.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact:
Maria Petersen, City Clerk/Admin. Svcs. Coord. at (651) 675 -5034
X
Signature clO� Date
7/18/07 no case number,
3/15/08 08 -1519
7/17/08 08 -4331
City of Eagan
Mike Maguire
Mayor
Paul Bakken
Cyndee Fields
Gary Hansen
Meg Tilley
Council Members
Thomas Hedges
City Administrator
Municipal Center
3830 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, MN 551 22 -1 81 0
651.675.5000 phone
651.675.5012 fax
651.454.8535 TDD
Maintenance Facility
3501 Coachman Point
Eagan, MN 55122
651.675.5300 phone
651.675.5360 fax
651.454.8535 TDD
www.cityofeagan.com
The Lone Oak Tree
The symbol of
strength and growth
in our community.
October 26, 2009
Dear Mr. Brar:
93
�.x Itii
Cc e,,► -o
ss
ZZ
Mr. Jess Brar
BRAR Enterprises, Inc. NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONAL
dba Blackhawk Liquor Wine PENALTIES RELATED TO ALCOHOL
4130 Blackhawk Road SALES VIOLATIONS
Eagan, MN 55122
The City of Eagan sent you a notice dated October 5, 2009, informing you that as a result
of a fourth alcohol sales violation in a 36 -month period, your off -sale liquor license
would be suspended beginning October 19, 2009 for a 30 -day period ending on
November 17, 2009. Additionally, a $1,600 civil penalty was imposed.
Per Eagan City Code Section 5.02, Subd. 4 (G) Notwithstanding the foregoing civil
penalties, a civil penalty of $2,000.00 and 30 days suspension of the license, unless a
greater civil penalty, suspension or revocation is otherwise determined by City Council,
shall be imposed upon a licensee upon the fourth or more violation within a 36 -month
period. The foregoing penalties shall not restrict the City Council from ordering the
revocation of the license, suspension of the license for up to 60 days, a civil penalty up to
$2,000.00, or impose any combination thereof.
The purpose of this letter is to inform you that on Thursday, November 5, 2009, the
Eagan City Council will consider the possible imposition of additional penalties related to
alcohol sales violations that occurred at your establishment on July 18, 2007, March 15,
2008, July 17, 2008 and September 1, 2009. The Council meeting will begin at 6:30
p.m., or as soon thereafter as Council business permits, at the Eagan City Hall, 3830 Pilot
Knob Road, Eagan Minnesota.
Be advised that this meeting is your opportunity to be heard and to present any
evidence or testimony you may have for the City Council to consider before it
makes its decision. Please bring with you any evidence or witnesses you wish to
present on your behalf.
Please contact me at (651) 675 -5034 should you have any questions regarding this matter.
Sincerely,
Maria Petersen
City Clerk/Administrative Services Coordinator
Cc: Tom Hedges, City Administrator
Gene VanOverbeke, Director of Administrative Services
City of Eaaall
Mike Maguire
Mayor
Paul Bakken
Cyndee Fields
Gary Hansen
Meg Tilley
Council Members
Thomas Hedges
City Administrator
Municipal Center
3830 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, MN 55122 -1810
651.675.5000 phone
651.675.5012 fax
651.454.8535 TDD
Maintenance Facility
3501 Coachman Point
Eagan, MN 55122
651.675.5300 phone
651.675.5360 fax
651.454.8535 TDD
www.cityofeagan.com
The Lone Oak Tree
The symbol of
strength and growth
in our community.
November 6, 2009
Mr. Jess Brar
BRAR Enterprises, Inc.
dba Blackhawk Liquor Wine
4130 Blackhawk Road
Eagan, MN 55122
NOTIFICATION OF HEARING TO CONSIDER ADDITIONAL SUSPENSION
OF THE OFF SALE LIQUOR LICENSE OR TO REVOKE THE OFF
SALE LIQUOR LICENSE
Dear Mr. Brar:
As you are aware, the City Council, at its November 5, 2009 meeting, scheduled an
administrative hearing for November 17, 2009 commencing at 6:30 p.m., or as soon
thereafter as Council business permits, at Eagan City Hall, 3830 Pilot Knob Road, Eagan,
Minnesota, to include additional suspension on the liquor license up to an additional 30
days and also to consider revocation of the Off Sale Liquor License.
Please be advised that this hearing is your opportunity to be heard and present any
evidence or testimony that you may have for the City Council to consider before it makes
its decision. Please bring with you any evidence or witnesses you wish to present on
your behalf.
Please contact me at (651) 675 -5034, should you have any questions regarding this
matter.
Very truly yours,
Matta-
Maria Petersen
City Clerk
cc: Thomas L. Hedges, City Administrator
Gene VanOverbeke, Director of Administrative Services
Robert B. Bauer, City Attorney
4S
History of Jess Brar and Blackhawk Liquor Wine
Jess Brar —1768 Talon Trail, Eagan, MN. I have lived and worked in the Eagan area since
1997.
Purchased Blackhawk Liquor in January 1999 with support of my parents. At the time
the business was also a small Eagan family business since 1994.
Over the course of the next 7 years we increased the physical size of business, more
than doubled gross sales, and created a good viable family business that the whole
neighborhood felt happy with. We sponsored many local softball teams, did what we
could for the community, and hired people from the surrounding area. We always did
what we could to join with other small business owners in supporting each other, cross
advertising, or recommending them.
I personally felt the obligation to do as much as possible to keep my spending in the city
and local stores.
Out of the 20+ full part time employees we have had, everyone has been from the
Eagan area, most also have family and friends in the city, giving the store a sense of
community and kept business in the area. Also, this network of employees, their
families, their friends, and my family gained an understanding of local business and
supporting them.
With the idea of starting up a different business in the area, we decided to sell the
business to another family looking to run their own business, and sold the store in
spring of 2006. I provided the financing for the new owner and offered any assistance I
could. Unfortunately, the community did not take to the new owner very well, and he
refused my help. In a matter of about 10 months he managed to ruin the business by
over 50 lost the customer base, and defaulted on his financial agreement with me.
Rather than bankrupt the man with a wife and 2 small children, I repossessed the store
and let him out of his agreement in the spring of 2007.
9le
After taking over the business, I once again set out to reopen, but he had left me with
$1000.00 in city fines which I paid to get a new license, taken sold most everything
from the store including inventory and left me having to spend $50,000.00+ just to
open. With the Toss of business, financial hole, and no employees I sent out to rebuild.
This was just the beginning of my problems. The task was extremely hard. I hired an
employee out of haste and he received a sales violation, he was fired immediately. Over
the year I seemed to be gaining some ground. The business seemed on the verge of
turning around. I had to leave the country for a few weeks for family reasons in early
2008, and while gone we received a second sales violation.
During the rest of 2008 the economy seemed to drop. Every effort to keep the business
moving failed, and my parents and I kept pouring more and more money in to stay
afloat. By the early 2009 we were about $100,000.00 in debt and no relief in sight.
Everyday expenses, rent, utilities, taxes could not be paid, and we could not afford to
buy inventory and bills had piled up.
All year long we have fought to survive. The business value dropped so low that we
cannot afford to sell; bankruptcy would mean that my whole family would suffer (my
wife, baby on the way, my parents). The third and fourth violations were of hardship
and inability, not by any purposeful intent. My parents have not been able to physically
be around to assist due to medical reasons, leaving it more difficult to watch over
everything as well as we would like.
I would like to think that I in some small way can be good for my community. I have
made some mistakes, but hope that in continuing to be a business owner in the area I
do everything I can to be beneficial to the city rather than a detriment.
I just recently will been able to pay a good size part of my debt, including the back sales
taxes that I owed which is the first step to clearing up my responsibilities. My wish is
to prove myself as an upstanding member of the community and to show other small
businesses that hard times can be overcome.
97
Blackhawk Liquor Wine Plan of Action
In the past I have during the interview process stated with no uncertain terms
that the employee and myself is responsible to verify every customer purchase,
that we both can incur legal fines, and that the employee will be fired if found
selling to a minor. Also, I have them read our alcohol policy handbook. I do my
best to watch over the employee and customers to make sure ID's are looked at.
Currently, the financial situation of my parents and me has caused other
violations to occur that must be dealt with. We have never been in this kind
of situation before. Personally and professionally my parents and I have done
well. These past 24 months have caused extremely difficulty and hardship,
but that is no excuse. We have come up with a plan to help rectify the
situation.
Finalize payment of all back taxes, along with any penalties or fines. This to
be completed by November 16 This has been possible buy the sale of a
small condo finalized in mid October that was on the market for two years.
Sales tax payment will be made first priority in expenses and a separate bank
account will be kept for daily weekly deposits of taxes for future payments.
My training of employees must change. At this time 1 (Jess Brar) am the only
employee. ALL new or returning employees must complete an online or
attended course in alcoholic beverage sales. They must follow the guidelines
of the employee alcohol policy handbook. I must immediately have a rule
that EVERY PERSON must have proper ID, no exceptions, no excuse that the
customer has been carded in the past.
qe
Have update and reoccurring sessions about liquor sales and legal
responsibility, every 60 to 90 days or earlier based on the possible turn
over of employees.
I will purchase an ID verification system, an ID card scanner ($500 $1000) or
preferably a new computer system that requires you swipe an ID before any
sale is recorded (approx $3000). Either item will be beneficial in assisting me
in complying with the rules,
One of these items WILL be purchased, which one will depend on finances.
Ideally, I would want the computer system, but would not be able to
purchase until the store reopens to create a proper budget. The ID scanner is
fine but does not help to resolve the issue completely.
Any other recommendation would be greatly appreciated and taken to heart.
THIS IS A ROUGH DRAFT AS OF 11/09/09
411° City of Eagan
Mike Maguire
Mayor
Paul Bakken
Cyndee Fields
Gary Hansen
Meg Tilley
Council Members
Thomas Hedges
City Administrator
Municipal Center
3830 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, MN 55122 -1810
651.675.5000 phone
651.675.5012 fax
651.454.8535 TDD
Maintenance Facility
3501 Coachman Point
Eagan, MN 55122
651.675.5300 phone
651.675.5360 fax
651.454.8535 TDD
www.cityofeagan.com
The Lone Oak Tree
The symbol of
strength and growth
in our community.
November 6, 2009
Mr. Jess Brar
BRAR Enterprises, Inc.
dba Blackhawk Liquor Wine
4130 Blackhawk Road
Eagan, MN 55122
NOTIFICATION OF HEARING TO CONSIDER ADDITIONAL SUSPENSION
OF THE OFF SALE LIQUOR LICENSE OR TO REVOKE THE OFF
SALE LIQUOR LICENSE
Dear Mr. Brar:
As you are aware, the City Council, at its November 5, 2009 meeting, scheduled an
administrative hearing for November 17, 2009 commencing at 6:30 p.m., or as soon
thereafter as Council business permits, at Eagan City Hall, 3830 Pilot Knob Road, Eagan,
Minnesota, to include additional suspension on the liquor license up to an additional 30
days and also to consider revocation of the Off Sale Liquor License.
Please be advised that this hearing is your opportunity to be heard and present any
evidence or testimony that you may have for the City Council to consider before it makes
its decision. Please bring with you any evidence or witnesses you wish to present on
your behalf.
Please contact me at (651) 675 -5034, should you have any questions regarding this
matter.
Very truly yours,
M OLLeu
Maria Petersen
City Clerk
cc: Thomas L. Hedges, City Administrator
Gene VanOverbeke, Director of Administrative Services
Robert B. Bauer, City Attorney
MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY
Alcohol
and Gambling
Enforcement
ARMER/911
Program
Bureau of
Criminal
Apprehension
Driver
and Vehicle
Services
Homeland'
Security and
Emergency
Management
Minnesota
State Patrol
Office of
Communications
Office of
Justice Programs
Office of
Traffic Safety
State Fire
Marshal and
Pipeline Safety
s•
Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement'
444 Cedar Street Suite 133 Saint. Paul, Minnesota 55101 -5133
Phone: 651.201.7500 Fax: 651.297.5259 TTY: 651.282.6555
www.dps.state.mn us
BRAR Enterprises Inc.
Blackhawk Liquor Wine
4130 Blackhawk Rd /Suite 100
Eagan MN 55076
September 25, 2009
2z.0zi
NOTICE OF AGENCY ACTION
The Department of Public Safety, Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement has
evidence that while on the Minnesota Department of Revenue Liquor Posting tax
delinquent list you obtained alcohol from another retailer for the purpose of
resale, which is in violation of Minn. Stat. 340A.415. This was noted by an
agent of Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division when he visited your
establishment on September 1, 2009. Under the provisions of Minnesota Rule
.7515.0520 all retail dealers shall purchase their stock of alcoholic beverages
only from duly licensed Minnesota manufacturers, brewers, and wholesale
distributors.
The Department of Public Safety, Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement is given
the authority to take civil action in the form of a fine, license suspension or
license revocation for any violation of Statute, Rule or Ordinance related to
alcoholic beverages. Pursuant to this authority, you are hereby notified that this
agency is imposing a civil fine in the amount of $400.00, for violation of the law
as provided for in Minn. Stat. 340A.415. This fine is due 20 days from the date
of this notice unless you contact us within this time period contesting this
matter. This is your second violation of this type within the past five years.
You are also advised that you have the right to a hearing before an
administrative law judge. The request for such a hearing must be in writing and
must be sent to the' undersigned within twenty days of the date of this Notice. If
you request a hearing, this agency will initiate a. contested case proceeding
pursuant to the provisions of the Minnesota Administrative Procedures Act.
If you do not wish to contest this agency action, send a check payable to the
Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Director in the amount of $400.00. If we
have not received payment or a request for a hearing by October 15, 2009,
additional and more serious agency action may be taken against your license for
failure to comply with the directive of the Commission
4
l iconsee 1 R-
rte` erNe--
Sc.c.-
EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER G t 6 1
y,
n illems,
Director
Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement
/0
DATE: 10/5/09
TO: LICENSEE: Brar Enterprises, Inc.
NOTICE OF ALCOHOL SALES VIOLATION
City of Eagan
Address: 4130 Blackhawk Road, Eagan, MN 55122
Case N/A
LICENSED PREMISES: Blackhawk Liquor Wine, same address as above
RE: Alcohol Sales Violation: 4
Date of Violation: 9/1/09
Date of Prior Alcohol Sales Violations (include Case
YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED as the Licensee of the above referenced Licensed Premises that a
violation of the alcohol regulations as set forth in Minnesota Statutes, Section 340A.101., et. seq. and
Eagan City Code, Sections 5.01 -5.99 has occurred at the above referenced Licensed. Premises, as follows:
(date and description of alcohol sales violation)
The fourth violation in a 36 -month period occurred on 9/1/09 Purchase of liquor at retail for the purpose
of resale.
THEREFORE, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 340A.415,
and Eagan City Code, Section 5.02, the City of Eagan imposes the following civil penalty upon you:
1. A civil penalty of $500.00
2. A civil penalty of $1,000.00, because the above- referenced violation is the second
violation within 24 months of a previous violation.
3. A civil penalty of $1,500.00 and a seven (7) day suspension effective: (i) ten (10)
business days after the issuance of this Notice or (ii) upon completion of a
hearing, if requested as set forth below, if a violation has been found to occur because the
above referenced violation is the third violation within 24 months of the first violation.
4. A civil penalty of $1,600 and a thirty (30) day suspension effective: (i) ten (10)
business days after the issuance of this Notice (10/19/09 beginning at 12:01 a.m. and
ending on 11/17/09 at midnight); or (ii) upon completion of a hearing, if requested as set
forth below, if a violation has been found to occur because the above referenced violation
is the fourth violation within 36 months of the first violation.
YOU ARE HEREBY FURTHER NOTIFIED that pursuant to Minn. Stat. §340A.415, and Eagan City
Code, Section 5.02, you have a right to a hearing to appeal this Notice and the imposition of the civil
penalties. Should you desire to have a hearing, you are required to request a hearing by serving the
attached Request for Hearing upon the City Clerk within ten (10) business days of the date of this Notice.
Upon receipt of your Request for Hearing, a hearing will be set before the City's hearing officer, no more
than fourteen (14) days from the date of the City's receipt of your Request for Hearing. If the hearing
officer determines that a violation has occurred upon the conclusion of the hearing, or if you do not timely
request a hearing, you are required to immediately comply with the provisions herein.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact:
Maria Petersen, City Clerk/Admin. Svcs. Coord. at (651) 675 -5034
ate U Signature
6a, Date
7/18/07 no case number;
3/15/08 08 -1519
7/17/08 08 -4331
City of Eagan
Mike Maguire
Mayor
Paul Bakken
Cyndee Fields
Gary Hansen
Meg Tilley
Council Members
Thomas Hedges
City Administrator
Municipal Center
3830 Pilot Knob Road
Eagan, MN 551 22 -1 81 0
651.675.5000 phone
651.675.5012 fax
651.454.8535 TDD
Maintenance Facility
3501 Coachman Point
Eagan, MN 55122
651.675.5300 phone
651.675.5360 fax
651.454.8535 TDD
www.cityofeagan.com
The Lone Oak Tree
The symbol of
strength and growth
in our community.
October 26, 2009
NSSTos.cy\Tc-
E-0.y s s LZ
Mr. Jess Brar
BRAR Enterprises, Inc. NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONAL
dba Blackhawk Liquor Wine PENALTIES RELATED TO ALCOHOL
4130 Blackhawk Road SALES VIOLATIONS
Eagan, MN 55122
Dear Mr. Brar:
The City of Eagan sent you a notice dated October 5, 2009, informing you that as a result
of a fourth alcohol sales violation in a 36 -month period, your off -sale liquor license
would be suspended beginning October 19, 2009 for a 30 -day period ending on
November 17, 2009. Additionally, a $1,600 civil penalty was imposed.
Per Eagan City Code Section 5.02, Subd. 4 (G) Notwithstanding the foregoing civil
penalties, a civil penalty of $2,000.00 and 30 days suspension of the license, unless a
greater civil penalty, suspension or revocation is otherwise determined by City Council,
shall be imposed upon a licensee upon the fourth or more violation within a 36 -month
period. The foregoing penalties shall not restrict the City Council from ordering the
revocation of the license, suspension of the license for up to 60 days, a civil penalty up to
$2,000.00, or impose any combination thereof.
The purpose of this letter is to inform you that on Thursday, November 5, 2009, the
Eagan City Council will consider the possible imposition of additional penalties related to
alcohol sales violations that occurred at your establishment on July 18, 2007, March 15,
2008, July 17, 2008 and September 1, 2009. The Council meeting will begin at 6:30
p.m., or as soon thereafter as Council business permits, at the Eagan City Hall, 3830 Pilot
Knob Road, Eagan Minnesota.
Be advised that this meeting is your opportunity to be heard and to present any
evidence or testimony you may have for the City Council to consider before it
makes its decision. Please bring with you any evidence or witnesses you wish to
present on your behalf.
/Q3
Please contact me at (651) 675 -5034 should you have any questions regarding this matter.
Sincerely,
Maria Petersen
City Clerk/Administrative Services Coordinator
Cc: Tom Hedges, City Administrator
Gene VanOverbeke, Director of Administrative Services
Agenda Information Memo
November 17, 2009 Eagan City Council Meeting
FACTS:
ATTACHMENTS:
B. PROJECT 964, YANKEE DOODLE ROAD/ YANKEE DRIVE
STREET OVERLAY IMPROVEMENTS
FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve the Final Assessment Roll for Project 964
(Yankee Doodle Road/ Yankee Drive Street Improvements) and authorize its
certification to Dakota County for collection.
Project 964 provided for the street improvements of Yankee Doodle Road (west of
Highway 13) and Yankee Drive, largely commercial/ industrial streets in northwest
Eagan, and driveway and parking lot improvements to the Valley Acres Police
Firearms Training Facility under terms of a joint powers agreement between the Cities
of Apple Valley and Eagan.
The Final Assessment Roll was presented to the City Council on October 20, 2009,
with a public hearing scheduled for November 17 to formally present the final costs
associated with this public improvement to the affected benefiting properties.
The final assessment cost is approximately 18% less than the estimated benefit
amounts that were presented at the original Public Hearing on March 3, 2009.
All notices have been published in the legal papers and sent to all affected property
owners informing them of this public hearing. An informational meeting was held on
November 10 to address all property owners' questions or concerns and provide any
additional information of interest. Of the 10 parcels (1 public facility, 9 commercial/
industrial) being assessed, no one attended the meeting.
The City of Apple Valley has also been notified of their obligation for the
improvements under terms of the joint powers agreement.
Final Assessment Report, pagesJOthrough I1
gas
Number: Project 964
Name: Yankee Doodle Rd/ Yankee Dr Project Approval Date: March 3, 2009
Street Improvements
Trunk
Lateral
Service
Lat. Benefit /trunk
OTHER
SANITARY
SEWER
WATER
Trunk
Lateral
Service
Lat. Benefit /trunk
WAC
Service Pair
PROJECT PUBLIC HEARING DATES
Contract Number of
Number Parcels Terms
FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING
Final Feasibility
Rate Report Units
09 -10 10 10 Years 6.5%
`de
Assessment: November 17, 2009
STORM SEWER
Trunk
STREET
Gravel Base
Surf/ Signs CI I; 1,068.71 $1,300 Acre
Public Facility $796.70 $1,000 Acre
City Park
C/I Equiv.
EI Driveway
STREET LIGHTS
Installation
Based on $86 L SY
costs to
repair
Energy Charge
Interest Amount City
Rate Assessed Financed
$250,650 F.R.
$231,635.78
Final Feasibility
Rate Report Units
$151,150 F.R.
$134A14.52
(F.R. Feasibility Report)
4 City of Eagan MeMo
To: Mayor and City Council
From: John Gorder, Assistant City Engineer
Date: November 4, 2009
Subject: Final Assessment Roll, Project 964
Yankee Doodle Road/ Yankee Drive Street Overlay Improvements
At the public hearing on March 3, 2009, the City Council ordered Project 964, and in accordance with the feasibility report,
the following improvements were constructed on Yankee Doodle Road/ Yankee Drive: mill and overlay and replacement of
traffic and street signage, repair of curb and gutter/ concrete entrance aprons as needed. In the feasibility report, it was
proposed to assess 100% to the commercial/ industrial properties and 75% to the public facility properties of the street
overlay and signage and concrete entrance apron improvements, in accordance with the City Special Assessment Policy .Mill
and overlay improvements on the existing Valley Acres driveway, and the realignment of City access near the Valley Acres
firing range through an agreement with the City of Apple Valley were also completed. All improvements were completed
under Contract 09 -10. The following information was used in the preparation of the assessment roll for Project 964.
PROJECT COST
The construction cost includes the amount of $270,370.58 paid to the contractors for the construction of the improvements.
Traffic and street signage was installed at a cost of $6,682.71. Other costs including engineering, design, contract
management, inspections, financing, legal, bonding, administration, and other totaling $88,997.01 were incurred resulting in
an improvement and project cost of $366,050.30. The detail of these other costs is provided on Schedule I. These other
costs are allocated to the improvements constructed in order to determine the cost of each improvement and the assessment
rate.
CONSTRUCTION OTHER COSTS IMPROVEMENT FEASIBILITY
IMPROVEMENT COST COST REPORT
Street Resurfacing $92,664.31 $29,766.28 $122,430.59 $150,000
Curb Gutter Repair 23,311.08 7,488.15 30,799.23 $35,500
Concrete Entrance Rep. 58,959.42 18,939.36 $77,898.78 $77,000
Valley Acres Drive 25,061.75 8,050.51 33,112.26 $25,900
Valley Acres Driveway 77,056.73 24,752.71 101,809.44 $113,400
Re- alignment
Totals $277,053.29 $88,997.01 $366,050.30 $401,800
1
/O7
ASSESSMENTS
TRUNK ASSESSMENTS
No trunk assessments for utilities were proposed in the feasibility report, therefore, none are proposed in this assessment
roll.
STREET IMPROVEMENTS
The costs of the street overlay and street signage improvements were computed using the following unit prices and
quantities:
UNIT EXTENDED
ITEM UNIT QTY PRICE COST
Mobilization L.S. 0.29 $4,250.00 1,232.50
Mill Bituminous Pavement (1 '/4" depth) Sq. Yd. 6100.00 0.46 2,806.00
Type LVWE45030B Wearing Course Ton 1608.82 44.75 71,994.70
Mixture
Bituminous Material for Tack Coat Gal 870.00 2.50 2,175.00
Adjust Fame Ring Casting (Manhole) Each 1.00 450.00 450.00
Adjust MH Casting Riser Adjustment Each 2.00 186.00 372.00
Adjust Gate Valve Box Each 6.00 54.00 324.00
Repair Gate Valve Top Section Each 2.00 300.00 600.00
Remove Replace Frame Ring Each 2.00 750.00 1,500.00
Casting
Traffic Control L.S. 0.29 5,000.00 $1,450.00
4" Double Solid Line Yellow L.F. 2857.00 0.60 1,714.20
Pavement Message Arrow (Left) Each 3.00 95.00 285.00
4" Solid Line White L.F. 394.00 0.30 118.20
Zebra Crosswalk White S.F. 384.00 2.50 960.00
Traffic Signs L.S. 1.00 6,682.71 6,682.71
SUBTOTAL $92,664.31
Other costs 32.12% 29,766.28
Mill Overlay/ Street Sign Cost $122,430.59
CONCRETE ENTRANCE REPAIRS
The costs of the concrete entrance apron repaired were computed using the following unit prices and quantities:
UNIT EXTENDED
ITEM UNIT QTY PRICE COST
Remove Concrete Curb Gutter L.F. 414.00 5.95 $2,463.30
Remove Bituminous Pavement Sq. Yd. 970.00 4.65 4,510.50
Remove Concrete Valley Gutter Sq. Yd. 136.00 10.00 1,360.00
Common Excavation Cu.Yd. 70.00 18.75 1,312.50
Select Topsoil Borrow Cu.Yd. 15.00 21.00 315.00
Type LVWE45030B Wear Course Ton 30.00 89.00 2,670.00
Street Patch
2
ITEM UNIT QTY UNIT EXTENDED
PRICE COST
Type LVWE45030B Wear Course Sq. Yd. 78.30 89.00 6,968.70
Driveways
Adjust Frame Ring Casting Each 2.00 50.00 100.00
Concrete Curb Gutter L.F. 36.50 12.90 470.85
Remove Replace Casting Each 1.00 550.00 550.00
Concrete Curb Gutter B618 L.F. 36.50 14.51 529.62
7" Concrete Driveway Pavement Sq. Yd. 836.60 42.00 35,137.20
Sodding, Type Lawn Sq. Yd. 273.00 6.75 1,842.75
Compost Grade 1 Ton 27.00 27.00 729.00
SUBTOTAL $58,959.42
Other costs 32.12% $18,939.36
Concrete Ent. Apron Replace/ $77,898.78
Repair Cost
IMPROVEMENT AND ASSESSMENT RATES
Public Facility The improvement and assessment rates for public facility properties (Valley Acres) are computed as
follows:
1) Public Facility 6.8 Acres/ 114.6 Total Acres 5.9%
2) [$122,430.59 (Mill Overlay Sign Cost) x 75% x 5.9 $5,417.55 (Total Public Facility Assessment)
3) $5,417.55 (Public Facility Assessment) 4 $796.70 /acre
6.8 Acres Public Facility
Commercial/ Industrial Street -The improvement and assessment rates for commercial/ industrial properties is
computed as follows:
1) Commercial /Industrial 107.8 Acres/ 114.6 Total Acres 94.1%
2) [$122,430.59 (Mill Overlay Cost Signage Cost) x 100% x 94.1 $115,207.19 [Total Assessment]
3) $115,207.19 (Total CI Assessment) $1,068.71 acre
107.8 Acres Comm/Ind
Commercial/ Industrial Concrete Entrance Apron Repair/ Replacement Assessment costs will be allocated to
benefitting properties based on the individual entrance repair costs for each commercial/ industrial property (4 total). The
proposed assessment for each property for concrete entrance replacements or repairs, per actual cost of driveway
repaired, is proposed as follows:
1750 Yankee Doodle Road: $34,327.34
1765 Yankee Doodle Road: $24,781.44
3385 Sibley Memorial Hwy: $3,979.25
3400 Yankee Drive: $14,810.75
Total $77,898.78
/Q
ASSESSMENT TERMS
The assessments are proposed for a term of 10 years for public facility and commercial/ industrial properties. The interest
rate is 6.5% per annum on the unpaid balance.
CITY REVENUES RESPONSIBILITY
IMPROVEMENT
Street Resurfacing/ Signs
Curb Gutter Repair
Concrete Entr. Repair
Valley Acres Drive
Valley Acres Driveway
Re- alignment
Total
'Note:
Assessments to the Valley Acres Police Firearms Training Facility property (L 1, B1 Valley Acres 1785 Yankee Doodle
Road) will be allocated to the Cities of Eagan and Apple Valley in accordance with the March 3, 2009 Access
Agreement for maintenance and use of the police range:
Street Resurfacing/ Signs:
Valley Acres Drive:
Totals
Assessment to be paid by City:
Grand Tot3I City Funds:
CITY FUND RESPONSIBILITY (WITH ASSESSMENTS)
Jolt Gorder, P.E
IMPROVEMENT
COST
$122,430.59
*Major Street Fund:
*Part I CIP, Gen Fac R R Fund:
*Utilities Fund:
Subtotal:
30,799.23
77,898.78
33,112.26
101,809.44
$366,050.30
Revie
Public Works
7
Date
p-
epa
ASSESSMENT
REVENUE
$120,624.74*
77,898.78
33,112.26*
$231,635.78
Eagan Apple Valley
$3,077.17 $2,340.39
$27,975.11 $5,137.15
$31,052.28 $7,477.54
32,605.08
33,936.48
67,872.96
$134,414.52
$31,052.28
$165,466.40
Reviewed
c: Thomas A. Colbert, Director of Public Works
Mike Dougherty, City Attorney
Sue Sheridan, Accountant I
Fin ce Department
I oft
Date 4
a7.64111._
CITY
RESPONSIBILITY
$1,805.85
30,799.23**
101,809.44
$134,414.52
,��i
X h� 7 i
1
1785
/BIEY TER
/R/AL ,ARK,
1771
RIVERPARK OFFICE CENTER
800
xi/
092 -02
LEGEND
Assessment Area
Street Improvements
Commercial Industrial
Public Facility
Conc. Entrance Replace
Yankee Doodle Rd./ Yankee Drive
Street Revitalization Project 964
Final Assessments
NORTH
1,068.71/ Acre
796.70/ Acre
Cost to
Remove Replace
91/2/2009
City of Eaftali
Engineering Department
G:\Project and Contract Intorma0on10969 Yankee Doodle Rd (west of TH 13) Yankee DNVe \Final Assessment Info \FINAL 055ES5.dw9, 11/2/2009 33910
Combined Assessment Roll
Project Number 10P964
PID
10- 00800 020 -76
10- 13831 010 -01
10- 18200- 012 -01
10- 39901- 010 -01
10- 47285 020 -00
10- 64425 010 -00
10- 64425 010 -01
10- 68050 111 -01
10- 77199- 010 -01
10- 81180- 010 -01
Summary for 'SA
Sum
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Address Addition Name
3385 Sibley Memorial H
1765 Yankee Doodle Rd
3400 Yankee Dr
1750 Yankee Doodle Rd
1800 Yankee Doodle Rd
1771 Yankee Doodle Rd
3311 Terminal Dr
1785 Yankee Doodle Rd
_Nbr' 10P964 (10 detail records)
Section 8
Best Brands 2nd
Comsery 1
R L Johnson 2nd
Mardelann
Riverpark Office Center
Riverpark Office Center
Sibley Terminal Industrial Park
Transport America
Valley Acres
Pending Assess
1/03/09 Variance
$15,886.00
$40,286.00
$38,298.00
$51,960.00
$16,510.00
$46,670.00
$1,300.00
$2,340.00
$4,290.00
$32,700.00
$250,240.00
$9,876.20
$2,342.91
$6,708.50
$2,459.09
$2,937.38
$8,303.31
$231.29
$416.32
$763.26
$5,829.82
Proposed
Assessment
$6,009.80
$42,628.91
$31,589.50
$54,419.09
$13,572.62
$38,366.69
$1,068.71
$1,923.68
$3,526.74
$38,529.82
-$18, 604.44 $231, 635.56
Page 1 of 1
Agenda Information Memo
November 17, 2009 Eagan City Council Meeting
C. PROJECT 981, RAHNCLIFF ROAD/ CLIFF LAKE ROAD RAHN ROAD
STREET OVERLAY/ LANDSCAPE MEDIAN IMPROVEMENTS
FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
Approve the Final Assessment Roll for Project 981 (Rahncliff Road/Cliff Lake
Road /Rahn Road Street Improvements) as presented and authorize its certification to
Dakota County for collection;
OR
1) Approve the Final Assessment Roll for Project 981 (Rahncliff Road /Cliff Lake
Road/Rahn Road Street Improvements) for the Residential and Public Facilities
properties only, authorizing its certification to Dakota County for collection and,
direct the preparation of a revised Final Assessment Roll for Project 981 for the
remaining Commercial properties and schedule a new Final Assessment Hearing to
be held on December 15, 2009.
AND (if appropriate)
2) Direct a Supplemental Assessment Hearing to be held on December 15, 2009 for
Project 972 (Lone Oak/Waters Area) and Project 978 (Eagandale LeMay Lake).
FACTS:
Project 981 provided for the street improvements of Rahncliff Road, Cliff Lake Road
and Rahn Road, along with landscape median improvements on Cliff Lake Road, in
southwest Eagan.
The Final Assessment Roll was presented to the City Council on October 20, 2009,
with a public hearing scheduled for November 17 to formally present the final costs
associated with this public improvement to the affected benefiting properties.
The final assessment cost is approximately 16% less than the estimated benefit
amounts that were presented at the original Public Hearing on March 3, 2009.
All notices have been published in the legal papers and sent to all affected property
owners informing them of this public hearing. An informational meeting was held on
November 10 to address all property owners' questions or concerns and provide any
additional information of interest. Of the 213 parcels (3 Single Family Residential,
178 Townhome, 28 Commercial/ Industrial, 2 City Park, 2 Public Facility) being
assessed, one resident attended the meeting and one business representative contacted
staff directly.
(continued on next page)
l/3
Agenda Information Memo
November 17, 2009 Eagan City Council Meeting
C. PROJECT 981, RAHNCLIFF ROAD/ CLIFF LAKE ROAD RAHN ROAD
STREET OVERLAY/ LANDSCAPE MEDIAN IMPROVEMENTS
FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING
(continued from pervious page)
ISSUES:
The property owner at 1965 Cliff Lake Road (Cliff Lake Marketplace) is objecting to
the gross area method for spreading the assessment for the street and landscape
median improvements. The owner feels the gross area method is not equitable to this
property because approximately one -half of the property is covered by ponding
easement.
The gross area method of assessment was most recently applied for similar street
improvement Project 972 Lone Oak/ Waters Area and Project 978 Eagandale
LeMay Lake (Final Assessment Hearings Oct. 20, 2009). At the Public Hearing for
Project 972, the issue of gross area versus net area was also raised by an affected
property owner. With limited historical past precedence to the contrary, the City
Council sustained the proposed gross area method of special assessment and approved
the final assessment rolls for both projects as presented.
Upon subsequent research and investigation by staff, it has been determined that the
Special Assessment Policy does provide credit for dedicated ponding easements when
calculating and allocating special assessments on an area basis. This policy was
inadvertently not applied to the 3 projects in question (Proj 972, 978 981).
In order to have the ponding area credits properly applied where the Final Assessment
Roll has already been adopted (i.e. reduce the certified assessment to the affected
properties), it would require a new "Supplemental Assessment" hearing to allow the
proportionate reallocation of the related assessments credits to the remaining parcels
within each respective project (i.e. increase the certified assessments).
For Project 981, where the Final Assessment Roll has not yet been adopted, it would
require the re- notification of a new Public Hearing to present a Revised Final
Assessment Roll for formal certification. The ponding credits do not affect the
proposed assessments for the Residential and Public Facility (i.e. non commercial)
properties, allowing those parcels to have their assessments adopted and certified as
presented.
The amounts of ponding credit to be reallocated for each of these 3 Projects are
identified as follows:
o Project 972 (Lone Oak/Waters) $61,857
o Project 978 (Eagandale /LeMay Lake) $7,050
o Project 981 (Cliff Lake /Rahn Cliff) $54,940
ATTACHMENTS:
Project 981 proposed Final Assessment Report (All Property Types), pages (GS
through
Project 981 Final Assessment Report (Residential and Public Facility), pages(a7
through( 3 9
Proj 981 Final Assessment Report (Commercial), pages fqt hrougli
Neighborhood Meeting Minutes, pageI j through/ ca
Number: Project 981
Name: Rahncliff/ Cliff Lk Rd/ Rahn Rd Project Approval Date: March 3, 2009
Street Improvements
SANITARY
SEWER
Trunk
Lateral
Service
Lat. Benefit /trunk
WATER
Trunk
Lateral
Service
Lat. Benefit /trunk
WAC
OTHER
FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING
PROJECT PUBLIC HEARING DATES
Final Feasibility
Rate Report Units
Median Landscape $3,744.35 $3,780 Acre
Contract Number of
Number Parcels Terms
09 -10 213 5/10 Years 6.5%
l5
Assessment: November 17, 2009
STORM SEWER
Trunk
STREET
Gravel Base
C/I Equiv.
O Driveway
STREET LIGHTS
Installation
$663,850 F.R.
$555,211.97
Final Feasibility
Rate Report Units
O Surf/ Signs CI $2,599.64 $3,735 LAcre
LD Residential $200.42 $288 /SF Lot
$150.32 $216 /TH Lot
O Public Facility $327.58 $470 LAcre
Based on 83 LY
costs to
repair
Energy Charge
Interest Amount Citv
Rate Assessed Financed
$265,630 F.R.
$226,832.37
(F.R. Feasibility Report)
City of EaQall VeMo
To: Mayor and City Council
From: John Gorder, Assistant City Engineer
Date: October 22, 2009
Subject: Final Assessment Roll, Project 981
Rahncliff/ Cliff Lake Road/ Rahn Road Street Overlay Landscape Median Improvements
At the public hearing on March 3, 2009, the City Council ordered Project 981, and in accordance with the feasibility report,
the following improvements were constructed on Rahncliff/ Cliff Lake Road/ Rahn Road: mill and overlay and replacement
of traffic and street signage, repair of curb and gutter/ concrete entrance aprons as needed. In the feasibility report, it was
proposed to assess 100% to the commercial/ industrial properties and 75% to the public facility properties of the street
overlay and signage and concrete entrance apron improvements, in accordance with the City Special Assessment Policy.
Also, median landscape improvements on Cliff Lake Road were approved as an alternate by the City Council. It was
proposed to assess 100% of the median landscape improvements to the commercial/ industrial properties adjacent to Cliff
Lake Road. All improvements were completed under Contract 09 -10. The following information was used in the
preparation of the assessment roll for Project 981.
PROJECT COST
The construction cost includes the amount of $599,568.68 paid to the contractors for the construction of the improvements.
Traffic and street signage was installed at a cost of $18,113.37. Other costs including engineering, design, contract
management, inspections, financing, legal, bonding, administration, and other totaling $164,362.29 were incurred resulting
in an improvement and project cost of $782,044.34. The detail of these other costs is provided on Schedule I. These other
costs are allocated to the improvements constructed in order to determine the cost of each improvement and the assessment
rate.
CONSTRUCTION OTHER COSTS IMPROVEMENT FEASIBILITY
IMPROVEMENT COST COST REPORT
Street Resurfacing $284,311.85 $75,654.05 $359,965.90 $516,940
Curb Gutter Repair 107,583.50 28,627.46 136,210.96 $135,500
Concrete Entrance Rep. 91,757.41 24,416.22 116,173.63 $76,880
Cliff Lake Road Median 134,029.29 35,664.56 169,693.85 $200,160
Landscape
Totals $617,682.05 $164,362.29 $782,044.34 $929,480
1
ASSESSMENTS
TRUNK ASSESSMENTS
No trunk assessments for utilities were proposed in the feasibility report, therefore, none are proposed in this assessment
roll.
STREET IMPROVEMENTS
The costs of the street overlay and street signage improvements were computed using the following unit prices and
quantities:
UNIT EXTENDED
ITEM UNIT QTY PRICE COST
Mobilization L.S. 0.64 $4,250.00 $2,720.00
Mill Bituminous Pavement (1 1/4" depth) Sq. Yd. 18513.09 0.46 8,516.02
Type LVWE45030B Wearing Course Ton 4,148.56 44.75 185,648.06
Mixture
Bituminous Material for Tack Coat Gal 2420.00 2.50 6,050.00
Adjust Fame Ring Casting (Manhole) Each 13.00 450.00 5,850.00
Adjust MH Casting Riser Adjustment Each 6.00 186.00 1,116.00
Adjust Gate Valve Box Each 3.00 54.00 162.00
Repair Gate Valve Mid Section Each 7.00 157.00 1,099.00
Repair Gate Valve Top Section w /Cover Each 18.00 300.00 5,400.00
Traffic Control L.S. 0.64 5,000.00 3,200.00
NMC Loop Detector Each 36.00 875.00 31,500.00
Pavement Message Arrow (left)- Epoxy Each 23.00 95.00 2,185.00
Pavement Message Arrow (right) Epoxy Each 5.00 95.00 475.00
24" Solid Line White Epoxy L.F. 263.00 7.00 1,841.00
24" Solid Line Yellow Epoxy L.F. 514.00 5.50 2,827.00
4" Double Solid Line Yellow L.F. 1995.00 0.60 1,197.00
4" Solid Line White Epoxy L.F. 7011.00 0.30 2,103.30
8" Solid Line White Epoxy L.F. 344.50 3.80 1,309.10
Traffic signs L.S. 1.00 18,113.37 18,113.37
Zebra Crosswalk White Epoxy Sq. Ft. 1200.00 2.50 3,000.00
SUBTOTAL $284,311.85
Other costs 26.61% 75,654.05
Mill Overlay/ Street Sign Cost $359,965.90
CONCRETE ENTRANCE REPAIRS
The costs of the concrete entrance apron repaired were computed using the following unit prices and quantities:
UNIT EXTENDED
ITEM UNIT QTY PRICE COST
Remove Concrete Curb Gutter L.F. 744.50 5.95 $4,608.28
Remove Bituminous Trail Pavement Sq. Yd. 13.00 4.45 57.85
2
UNIT EXTENDED
ITEM UNIT QTY PRICE COST
Remove Bituminous Pavement Sq. Yd. 1450.00 4.65 6,742.50
Remove Concrete Driveway Sq. Yd. 74.00 10.00 740.00
Remove Concrete Valley Gutter Sq.Yd. 151.00 10.00 1,510.00
Common Excavation Cu.Yd. 117.29 18.75 2,199.19
Select Topsoil Borrow Cu.Yd. 19.00 21.00 399.00
Aggregate Base, Cl. 5 Ton 5.37 13.00 69.81
Type LVWE45030B Wear Course Ton 59.09 89.00 5,259.01
Street Patch
Type LVWE45030B Wear Course Ton 38.43 89.00 3,420.27
Driveways
Concrete Curb Gutter B612 L.F. 60.00 12.90 774.00
Concrete Curb Gutter B624 L.F. 91.00 15.86 1,443.26
7" Concrete Driveway Pavement Sq. Yd. 1407.50 42.00 59,115.00
7" Concrete Driveway Pavement Sq. Yd. 74.00 42.00 3,108.00
Repair
Adjust Frame Ring Casting Each 1.00 50.00 50.00
Sodding, Type Lawn Sq. Yd. 231.00 6.75 1,559.25
Compost, Grade 1 Ton 26.00 27.00 702.00
SUBTOTAL 891,757.41
Other costs 26.61% $24,416.22
Concrete Ent Apron Replace/ $116,173.63
Repair Cost
MEDIAN LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS CLIFF LAKE ROAD
The costs of the median landscape improvements on Cliff Lake Road were computed using the following unit prices and
quantities:
UNIT EXTENDED
ITEM UNIT QTY PRICE COST
Clearing Tree 47.00 $50.00 $2,350.00
Grubbing Tree 47.00 25.00 1,175.00
Common Excavation CY 1728.00 18.75 32,400.00
4" Perforated Pipe Drain L.F. 730.00 9.00 6,570.00
Connect 4" Pipe Drain Each 2.00 100.00 200.00
Irrigation System L.S. 1.00 49,197.00 49,197.00
Landscape Edger L.F. 140.00 4.75 665.00
Deciduous Tree (2'/2" B &B) Each 14.00 295.00 4,130.00
Deciduous Tree (1 "B B) Each 22.00 155.00 3,410.00
Deciduous Shrub Each 140.00 39.00 5,460.00
I'erennial No. 1 Container Plant 552.00 8.75 4,830.00
Storm Drain Inlet Protection Each 1.00 125.00 125.00
Mulch Material Type 6 C.Y. 115.00 55.00 6,325.00
3
ITEM
UNIT EXTENDED
UNIT QTY PRICE COST
Seeding (Special "No -Mow" w/ S.Y. 1125.00 1.20 1,350.00
Erosion Control Blanket
Compost Grade 1 Ton 25.00 27.00 675.00
Select Topsoil Borrow Type B C.Y. 514.41 28.75 $14,789.29
Select Topsoil Borrow C.Y. 18.00 21.00 378.00
SUBTOTAL $134,029.29
Other costs 26.61% $35,664.56
Cliff Lake Rd Median Cost $169,693.85
IMPROVEMENT AND ASSESSMENT RATES
Commercial/ Industrial Street The street improvement and assessment rates for commercial/ industrial properties
are computed as follows:
1) Commercial Industrial 9,594 Front Feet/ 15,805 Total F.F. 60.7%
2) [$359,965.90(Mill Overlay Sign Cost) x 100% x 60.7 $218,499.30 (Total C/I Assessment)
3) $218,499.30 (Commercial/ Industrial Assessment) $2,599.64/acre
84.05 Acres Commercial Industrial
Low Density Residential Street —The improvement and assessment rates for low density residential lot equivalent
properties (136.5 total, 178 townhomes 133.5 lot equivalents plus 3 single family), based on a 32 -foot wide roadway
width, is computed as follows:
1) Low Density Residential 3,307 Front Feet/ 15,805 Total Front Feet 20.9%
2) [$359,965.90 (Mill Overlay Cost Sign Cost) x 50% x 20.9% x 32/44] $27,357.41 [Total Assmnt.]
3) $27,357.41 (Total LD Assessment) 4 $200.42 lot
136.5 Residential Lot Equivalents
4) Townhouse 75% of a SF Lot (0.75 x $200.42/ lot) $150.32 Townhouse Unit
Public Facility- Street The street improvement and assessment rates for public facility properties (Rahn Park,
Meadowland Park, Rahn Elementary, Assemblies of God Church) are computed as follows:
1) Public Facility 1,381 Front Feet/ 15,805 Total F.F. 8.7%
2) [$359,965.90 (Mill Overlay Sign Cost) x 75% x 8.7 $23,487.78 (Total PF Assessment)
3) $23,487.78 (PF Assessment) $327.58 /acre
71.7 Acres PF
4
1 17
4630 Rahncliff Rd.
$3,902.96
1984 2000 Rahncliff Ct., etal. (6 properties)
8,763.00
1995 Rahncliff Ct.
9,291.28
1964 Rahncliff Ct.
9,455.02
1960 Rahncliff Ct.
3,245.61
1940 Rahncliff Rd.
5,038.88
2030 Cliff Rd.
6,164.11
2010 Cliff Rd.
6,645.06
960 Cliff Lake Rd.
10,453.75
1965 Cliff Lake Rd.
5,940.43
1940 Cliff Lake Rd. (Cub Foods)
25,571.41
2000 Cliff Lake Rd. (Target)
16,996.91
950 Rahncliff Dr. (Holiday Inn East entrance)
2,260.74
2005 Pin Oak Dr.
1,070.07
4675 Rahncliff Rd.
1,373.67
Total
$116,173.63
Note: Approximately 9.7% (1,523 feet) of property frontage adjacent to the street improvement is sideyard or backyard, with
n property access, and is considered unassessable.
Commercial/ Industrial Concrete Entrance Apron Repair/ Replacement Assessment costs will be allocated to
benefitting properties based on the individual entrance repair/ replacement costs for each commercial/ industrial property
(21 driveways on 16 total properties). The proposed assessment for each property for concrete entrance replacement or
repair, per actual cost of driveways repaired, are proposed as follows:
Median Landscape Improvements Cliff Lake Road This special assessment calls for 100% of the median landscape
improvement costs to be assessed to the commercial/ industrial properties with access to Cliff Lake Road. The cost per
commercial/ industrial acre to be assessed is calculated as follows:
1) Cost of Median Landscaping Improvements Cliff Lake Road $169,693.85
2) $169,693.85 (Median Landscaping Cost) $3,744.35/ acre Commercial/ Industrial
45.32 Acres Access to CLR
ASSESSMENT TERMS
The assessments are proposed for a term of 5 years for residential properties and 10 years for public facility and commercial/
industrial properties. The interest rate is 6.5% per annum on the unpaid balance.
5
1 ao
CITY REVENUES RESPONSIBILITY
Reviewed
IMPROVEMENT ASSESSMENT CITY
IMPROVEMENT COST REVENUE RESPONSIBILITY
Street Resurfacing/ Signs $359,965.90 $269,344.47 $90,621.41
Curb Gutter Repair 136,210.96
Concrete Entr. Repair 116,173.63 116,173.63
Cliff Lake Road Median 169,693.85 169,693.85
Landscape
CITY FUND RESPONSIBILITY
Major Street Fund: $226,832.37
Jcn Gorder, P.E.
7(
Pi b1ic Works Department
II-12 o'
Date
Total $782,044.34 $555,211.97
c: Thomas A. Colbert, Director of Public Works
Mike Dougherty, City Attorney
Sue Sheridan, Accountant I
Reviewed
Fin e Department
Date
6
■1- t3 -O`t
la(
136,210.96
$226,832.37
00000lh OV021 NWAI
4 4
w 4
1 3 4
z, z2
000000
\.00
0000
000000 0
0000 00^00 0c
0 000 0 0 .1...+10
000000 r -0<000
000000c 1 ■0000
0000000 '•01.000000 00000c'' 1.1-
00000 0 0000
0
o 00 10000
0 0000000000
00000
000
00
1 D
r 0000001
I
0
cy
1
ti
0
PG�NP�K RO
73 T—
M CO
O 0)
U
C N
L
as
Q' d
O o)
C 0)
a)
J N Q
(6
U a) u-
C a)
_c Q)
0
Q
0
4
G-2•<,..,. y
�e co
G
0
0
uJ
0
u.1
_J
LI
.ir
10
LL
u_
:1
pi R
c„
0
ia3
(0 00
.1,103
a) v
o
dliONHVH
z
1
R .,c) rt
0 co
7* ye,
0
vr CC- 0 N 1 u 0
CV
1
cc
0
z
0)
0)
cc)
C0
Combined Assessment Roll
Project Number 10P981
PID Address Addition Name
10- 02900 010 -52
10- 02900 012 -51
10- 03000 010 -75
10- 03000 012 -76
10- 16703- 010 -02
10- 17780- 010 -01
10- 17780- 020 -01
10- 17780- 030 -01
10- 17781- 010 -01
10- 17782- 010 -01
10- 17782- 020 -01
10- 17785- 010 -01
10- 17785- 010 -02
10- 17785- 010 -03
10- 17785- 020 -01
10- 17785- 020 -02
10- 17785- 020 -03
10- 17785 030 -01
10- 17785- 030 -02
10- 17785- 030 -03
10- 17785 040 -01
10- 17785- 040 -02
10- 17785 040 -03
10- 17785- 050 -01
10- 17785- 050 -02
10- 17785 050 -03
10- 17785 060 -01
10- 17785 060 -02
10- 17785 060 -03
10- 17785 070 -01
10- 17785 070 -02
10- 17785 070 -03
10- 17785- 080 -01
10- 17785- 080 -02
10- 17785 080 -03
10- 17785 090 -01
10- 17785 090 -03
10- 17785- 100 -01
10- 17785 100 -03
4431 Lakeshore Ter
4424 Sandstone Dr
2014 Shale Lane
1940 Cliff Lake Rd
1960 Cliff Lake Rd
2000 Cliff Lake Rd
1950 Cliff Lake Rd
4395 Rahn Rd
1965 Cliff Lake Rd
1840 Cliff Lake Ct
4491
4494
1842
4489
4492
1844
4487
4490
1846
4485
4488
1848 Cliff Lake Ct
4475 Lakeshore Ter
4486 Lakeshore Ter
1850 Cliff Lake Ct
4473 Lakeshore Ter
4484 Lakeshore Ter
1852 Cliff Lake Ct
4471 Lakeshore Ter
4482 Lakeshore Ter
1854 Cliff Lake Ct
4469 Lakeshore Ter
4480 Lakeshore Ter
1856 Cliff Lake Ct
4478 Lakeshore Ter
1858 Cliff Lake Ct
4476 Lakeshore Ter
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Lakeshore Ter
Lakeshore Ter
Cliff Lake Ct
Lakeshore Ter
Lakeshore Ter
Cliff Lake Ct
Lakeshore Ter
Lakeshore Ter
Cliff Lake Ct
Lakeshore Ter
Lakeshore Ter
Section 29
Section 29
Section 30
Section 30
Cedar Grove 4th
Cliff Lake Centre
Cliff Lake Centre
Cliff Lake Centre
Cliff Lake Centre 2nd
Cliff Lake Centre 3rd
Cliff Lake Centre 3rd
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Pending Assess
1/03/09
)a
$576.00
$4,794.00
$6,307.00
$19,543.00
$288.00
$74,910.00
$120,740.00
$103,922.00
$12,680.00
$14,054.00
$35,247.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
Variance
$175.16
$1,452.68
$1,910.88
$5,922.22
$87.58
$2,075.87
$16,141.44
$12,510.08
$5,130.73
$2,190.74
$446.74
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
465.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
465.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
Proposed
Assessment
$400.84
$3,341.32
$4,396.12
$13,620.78
$200.42
$72,834.13
$104,598.56
$91,411.92
$7,549.27
$11,863.26
$35,693.74
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
Pagel of 5
Combined Assessment Roll
Project Number 10P981
PID
10- 17785 110 -01
10- 17785- 110 -02
10- 17785- 110 -03
10- 17785- 120 -01
10- 17785- 120 -02
10- 17785- 120 -03
10- 17785- 130 -01
10- 17785- 130 -02
10- 17785- 130 -03
10- 17785- 140 -01
10- 17785 140 -02
10- 17785- 140 -03
10- 17785- 150 -01
10- 17785- 150 -03
10- 17785- 160 -01
10- 17785 160 -03
10- 17785- 170 -01
10- 17785- 170 -03
10- 17785- 180 -01
10- 17785- 180 -03
10- 17785- 190 -01
10- 17785- 190 -03
10- 17785- 200 -01
10- 17785- 200 -03
10- 17785- 210 -01
10- 17785- 210 -03
10- 17785- 220 -01
10- 17785- 220 -03
10- 17785- 230 -01
10- 17785- 230 -03
10- 17785- 240 -01
10- 17785- 240 -03
10- 17785- 250 -01
10- 17785- 250 -03
10- 17785- 260 -01
10- 17785- 260 -03
10- 17785- 270 -01
10- 17785- 280 -01
10- 17786 010 -01
10- 17786 010 -02
10- 17786- 020 -01
Address
1860 Cliff Lake Ct
4447 Lakeshore Ter
4474 Lakeshore Ter
1862 Cliff Lake Ct
4445 Lakeshore Ter
4472 Lakeshore Ter
1847 Cliff Lake Ct
4443 Lakeshore Ter
4470 Lakeshore Ter
1849 Cliff Lake Ct
4441 Lakeshore Ter
4468 Lakeshore Ter
1857 Cliff Lake Ct
4466 Lakeshore Ter
1855 Cliff Lake Ct
4464 Lakeshore Ter
1859 Cliff Lake Ct
4462 Lakeshore Ter
1861 Cliff Lake Ct
4460 Lakeshore Ter
1865 Cliff Lake Ct
4458 Lakeshore Ter
1863 Cliff Lake Ct
4456 Lakeshore Ter
1851 Cliff Lake Ct
4454 Lakeshore Ter
1853 Cliff Lake Ct
4452 Lakeshore Ter
4420 Lakeshore Ter
4450• Lakeshore Ter
4422 Lakeshore Ter
4448 Lakeshore Ter
4424 Lakeshore Ter
4446 Lakeshore Ter
4426 Lakeshore Ter
4444 Lakeshore Ter
4430 Lakeshore Ter
4428 Lakeshore Ter
4451 Lakeshore Ter
4439 Lakeshore Ter
4449 Lakeshore Ter
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Addition Name
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores 2nd
Cliff Lake Shores 2nd
Cliff Lake Shores 2nd
l as
Pending Assess
1/03/09
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
Variance
Proposed
Assessment
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
465.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
465.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
465.68 $150.32
465.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
465.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
465.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
465.68 $150.32
465.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
465.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
Page 2 of S
Combined Assessment Roll
Project Number
PID
10- 17786- 020 -02
10- 17790- 001 -02
10- 17790 002 -02
10- 17790- 003 -02
10- 17790 004 -02
1 0- 17790- 005 -02
10- 17790 006 -02
10- 17790- 007 -02
1 0- 17790 008 -02
1 0- 17790 009 -02
10- 17790- 010 -02
10- 17790- 011 -02
10- 17790 012 -02
10- 17790 013 -02
1 0- 17790 014 -02
10- 17790- 015 -02
10- 17790- 016 -02
1 0-17790-017-02
10- 17790- 018 -02
10- 17790 019 -02
10- 17790 020 -02
10- 17790 021 -02
10- 17790 022 -02
10- 17790 023 -02
10- 17790 024 -02
10- 17790- 025 -02
1 0- 17790- 026 -02
1 0- 17790- 027 -02
10- 17790- 028 -02
10- 17790 029 -02
1 0- 17790- 030 -02
10- 17790 031 -02
1 0- 17790- 032 -02
10- 17790 033 -02
10- 17790- 034 -02
10- 17790 035 -02
10- 17790- 036 -02
1 0- 17790- 037 -02
10- 17790 038 -02
1 0- 17790- 039 -02
10- 17790- 040 -02
Thursday, November 12, 2009
10P981
Address
4437 Lakeshore Ter
1986 Jan Echo Tr
1984 Jan Echo Tr
1982 Jan Echo Tr
1980 Jan Echo Tr
1978 Jan Echo Tr
1976 Jan Echo Tr
4470 Glen Echo Bay
4468 Glen Echo Bay
4466 Glen Echo Bay
4464 Glen Echo Bay
4462 Glen Echo Bay
4460 Glen Echo Bay
19$8 Jan Echo Tr
1990 Jan Echo Tr
1992 Jan Echo Tr
1994 Jan Echo Tr
1996 Jan Echo Tr
1998 Jan Echo Tr
1989 Glen Echo Bay
1991 Glen Echo Bay
1993 Glen Echo Bay
1995 Glen Echo Bay
1997 Glen Echo Bay
1999 Glen Echo Bay
4409 Overland Cir
4413 Overland Cir
4415 Overland Cir
4417 Overland Cir
4419 Overland Cir
4421 Overland Cir
4420 Fremont Alcove
4418 Fremont Alcove
4416 Fremont Alcove
4414 Fremont Alcove
4412 Fremont Alcove
4410 Fremont Alcove
1988 Overland Cir
1986 Overland Cir
1984 Overland Cir
1982 Overland Cir
Addition Name
Cliff Lake Shores 2nd
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Pending Assess
1/03/09
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216,00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216,00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.0Q
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
Variance
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
-$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
465.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
465.68
465.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
Proposed
Assessment
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
Page 3of5
Combined Assessment Roll
Project Number 10P981
PID
10- 17790- 041 -02
10- 17790 042 -02
10- 17790 043 -02
10- 17790- 044 -02
10- 17790- 045 -02
10- 17790- 046 -02
10- 17790- 047 -02
10- 17790 048 -02
10- 17790 049 -02
10- 17790 050 -02
10- 17790 051 -02
10- 17790- 052 -02
10- 17790- 053 -02
10- 17790 054 -02
10- 17790 055 -02
10- 17790 056 -02
10- 17790 057 -02
10- 17790 058 -02
10- 17790 059 -02
10- 17790 060 -02
10- 17790- 061 -02
10- 17790 062 -02
10- 17790 063 -02
10- 17790- 064 -02
10- 17790 065 -02
10- 17790 066 -02
10- 17790 067 -02
10- 17790 068 -02
10- 17790- 069 -02
10- 17790- 070 -02
10- 17790 071 -02
10- 17790- 072 -02
10- 17790 079 -02
10- 17790 080 -02
10- 17790 081 -02
10- 17790 082 -02
10- 17790- 083 -02
10- 17790 084 -02
10- 17791- 089 -02
10- 17791- 090 -02
10- 17791- 091 -02
Address
1980 Overland Cir
1978 Overland Cir
1977 Jan Echo Tr
1979 Jan Echo Tr
1981 Jan Echo Tr
1983 Jan Echo Tr
1985 Jan Echo Tr
1987 Jan Echo Tr
1965 Jan Echo Tr
1967 Jan Echo Tr
1969 Jan Echo Tr
1971 Jan Echo Tr
1973 Jan Echo Tr
1975 Jan Echo Tr
1966 Overland Cir
1968 Overland Cir
1970 Overland Cir
1972 Overland Cir
1974 Overland Cir
1976 Overland Cir
1950 Grant Alcove
1948 Grant Alcove
1946 Grant Alcove
1944 Grant Alcove
1942 Grant Alcove
1940 Grant Alcove
1939 Jan Echo Tr
1941 Jan Echo Tr
1943 Jan Echo Tr
1945 Jan Echo Tr
1947 Jan Echo Tr
1949 Jan Echo Tr
1927 Jan Echo Tr
1929 Jan Echo Tr
1931 Jan Echo Tr
1933 Jan Echo Tr
1935 Jan Echo Tr
1937 Jan Echo Tr
1913 Jan Echo Tr
1915 Jan Echo Tr
1917 Jan Echo Tr
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Addition Name
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes 2nd
Cliff Lake Townhomes 2nd
Cliff Lake Townhomes 2nd
Pending Assess
1/03/09
1 ad
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
Proposed
Variance Assessment
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
Page 4 of 5
Combined Assessment Roll
Project Number 10P981
PID
Sum
Address
Addition Name
10- 17791 092 -02 1919 Jan Echo Tr Cliff Lake Townhomes 2nd
10- 17791 093 -02 4409 Naper Bay Cliff Lake Townhomes 2nd
10- 17791 094 -02 4411 Naper Bay Cliff Lake Townhomes 2nd
10- 17791 095 -02 4413 Naper Bay Cliff Lake Townhomes 2nd
10- 17791 096 -02 4415 Naper Bay Cliff Lake Townhomes 2nd
10- 17791 097 -02 4417 Naper Bay Cliff Lake Townhomes 2nd
10- 17791 098 -02 4419 Naper Bay Cliff Lake Townhomes 2nd
10- 17791 099 -02 4420 Jan Echo Tr Cliff Lake Townhomes 2nd
10- 17791 100 -02 4418 Jan Echo Tr Cliff Lake Townhomes 2nd
10- 17791 101 -02 4416 Jan Echo Tr Cliff Lake Townhomes 2nd
10- 17791 102 -02 4414 Jan Echo Tr Cliff Lake Townhomes 2nd
10- 17791 103 -02 4412 Jan Echo Tr Cliff Lake Townhomes 2nd
10- 17791 104 -02 4410 Jan Echo Tr Cliff Lake Townhomes 2nd
10- 17791 107 -02 4412 Naper Bay Cliff Lake Townhomes 2nd
10- 17791 108 -02 4410 Naper Bay Cliff Lake Townhomes 2nd
10- 31725 010 -01 2040 Cliff Rd Hadler Park
10- 31725 020 -01 2020 Cliff Rd Hadler Park
10- 31725 030 -01 2010 Cliff Rd Hadler Park
10- 31725 040 -01 2030 Cliff Rd Hadler Park
10- 56722- 010 -01 2000 Cliff Rd Park Center 3rd
10- 56730 010 -01 2055 Cliff Rd Park Center 6th
10- 62725 001 -02 2000 Rahncliff Ct Rahncliff 1st
10- 62725 002 -02 Rahncliff 1st
10- 62725 003 -02 1996 Rahncliff Ct Rahncliff 1st
10- 62725 004 -02 1992 Rahncliff Ct Rahncliff 1st
10- 62725 005 -02 1988 Rahncliff Ct Rahncliff 1st
10- 62725 006 -02 1984 Rahncliff Ct Rahncliff 1st
10- 62726- 010 -01 1995 Rahncliff Ct Rahncliff 2nd
10- 62726- 010 -03 1980 Rahncliff Ct Rahncliff 2nd
10- 62726 020 -01 4630 Rahncliff Rd Rahncliff 2nd
10- 62726 020 -03 1964 Rahncliff Ct Rahncliff 2nd
10- 62727 010 -01 1975 Rahncliff Ct Rahncliff 3rd
10- 62727 010 -02 1960 Rahncliff Ct Rahncliff 3rd
10- 62728 010 -01 1950 Rahncliff Ct Rahncliff 4th
10- 62728 020 -01 1940 Rahncliff Ct Rahncliff 4th
10- 62750 010 -01 2024 Rahn Way Rahn Ridge
10- 62751- 010 -01 2005 Pin Oak Dr Rahn Ridge 2nd
10- 62751 020 -01 4675 Rahncliff Rd Rahn Ridge 2nd
Summary for 'SA_Nbr' 10P981 (200 detail records)
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Pending Assess
1/03/09
/DR
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$4,968.00
$4,445.00
$7,482.00
$23,124.00
$6,627.00
$77,633.00
$1,307.00
$1,307.00
$1,307.00
$1,307.00
$1,307.00
$1,307.00
$11,682.00
$3,698.00
$6,773.00
$24,120.00
$10,122.00
$5,988.00
$13,073.00
$7,769.00
$3,055.00
$2,652.00
$9,039.00
$659, 009.00
Variance
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
-$1,510.48
$1,351.43
$2,464.60
$5,313.50
$414.29
-$12,099.58
$1,063.37
$1,063.37
$1,063.37
$1,063.37
$1,063.37
$1,063.37
$598.87
$1,124.36
$62.43
$3,018.60
$3,076.98
$480.70
$1,713.52
$2,677.13
$925.73
$263.81
$1,374.20
Proposed
Assessment
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$3,457.52
$3,093.57
$9,946.60
$17,810.50
$6,212.71
$65,533.42
$2,370.37
$2,370.37
$2,370.37
$2,370.37
$2,370.37
$2,370.37
$12,280.87
$2,573.64
$6,710.57
$21,101.40
$7,045.02
$5,507.30
$11,359.48
$10,446.13
$2,129.27
$2,915.81
$7,664.80
$78,134.69 $580,874.31
Page 5 of 5
PROJECT PUBLIC HEARING DATES
Number: Project 981 (Residential/ PF/ Parks) Assessment: November 17, 2009
Name: Rahncliff/ Cliff Lk Rd/ Rahn Rd Project Approval Date: March 3, 2009
Street Improvements
SANITARY
SEWER
Trunk
Lateral
Service
Lat. Benefit /trunk
WATER
Trunk
Lateral
Service
Lat. Benefit /trunk
WAC
OTHER
FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING
Final Feasibility
Rate Report Units
STORM SEWER
Trunk
STREET
Gravel Base
C/I Equiv.
Driveway
Installation
Contract Number of
Number Parcels Terms
09 -10 185 5/10 Years 6.5%
El Surf/ Signs
LD Residential $200.42 $288 /SF Lot
$150.32 $216 /TH Lot
0 Public Facility $327.58 $470 Acre
STREET LIGHTS
Energy Charge
Interest Amount City
Rate Assessed Financed
$73,030 F.R.
$50,845.19
Final Feasibility
Rate Report Units
$130,130 F.R.
$191,915.68
(F.R. Feasibility Report)
(0 City of Eaali Memo
To: Mayor and City Council
From: John Gorder, Assistant City Engineer
Date: November 12, 2009
Subject: Final Assessment Roll, Project 981— ResidentiaU Public Facility/ Parks
Rahncliff/ Cliff Lake Road/ Rahn Road Street Overlay Improvements
At the public hearing on March 3, 2009, the City Council ordered Project 981, and in accordance with the feasibility report,
the following improvements were constructed on Rahncliff/ Cliff Lake Road/ Rahn Road: mill and overlay and replacement
of traffic and street signage, repair of curb and gutter/ concrete entrance aprons as needed. In the feasibility report, it was
proposed to assess 100% to the commercial/ industrial properties and 75% to the public facility properties of the street
overlay and signage and concrete entrance apron improvements, in accordance with the City Special Assessment Policy.
Also, median landscape improvements on Cliff Lake Road were approved as an alternate by the City Council. It was
proposed to assess 100% of the median landscape improvements to the commercial/ industrial properties adjacent to Cliff
Lake Road. All improvements were completed under Contract 09 -10. The following information was used in the preparation
of the assessment roll, for residential/ public facilities/ parks properties only, for Project 981.
TOTAL PROJECT COST
The construction cost includes the amount of $599,568.68 paid to the contractors for the construction of the improvements.
Traffic and street signage was installed at a cost of $18,113.37. Other costs including engineering, design, contract
management, inspections, financing, legal, bonding, administration, and other totaling $164,362.29 were incurred resulting
in an improvement and project cost of $782,044.34. The detail of these other costs is provided on Schedule I. These other
costs are allocated to the improvements constructed in order to determine the cost of each improvement and the assessment
rate.
CONSTRUCTION OTHER COSTS IMPROVEMENT FEASIBILITY
IMPROVEMENT COST COST REPORT
Street Resurfacing $284,311.85 $75,654.05 $359,965.90 $516,940
Curb Gutter Repair 107,583.50 28,627.46 136,210.96 $135,500
Concrete Entrance Rep. 91,757.41 24,416.22 116,173.63 $76,880
Cliff Lake Road Median 134,029.29 35,664.56 169,693.85 $200,160
Landscape
Totals $617,682.05 $164,362.29 $782,044.34 $929,480
1
I O
ASSESSMENTS
TRUNK ASSESSMENTS
No trunk assessments for utilities were proposed in the feasibility report, therefore, none are proposed in this assessment
roll.
STREET IMPROVEMENTS
The costs of the street overlay and street signage improvements were computed using the following unit prices and
quantities:
UNIT EXTENDED
ITEM UNIT QTY PRICE COST
Mobilization L.S. 0.64 $4,250.00 $2,720.00
Mill Bituminous Pavement (1 '/4" depth) Sq. Yd. 18513.09 0.46 8,516.02
Type LVWE45030B Wearing Course Ton 4,148.56 44.75 185,648.06
Mixture
Bituminous Material for Tack Coat Gal 2420.00 2.50 6,050.00
Adjust Fame Ring Casting (Manhole) Each 13.00 450.00 5,850.00
Adjust MH Casting Riser Adjustment Each 6.00 186.00 1,116.00
Adjust Gate Valve Box Each 3.00 54.00 162.00
Repair Gate Valve Mid Section Each 7.00 157.00 1,099.00
Repair Gate Valve Top Section w /Cover Each 18.00 300.00 5,400.00
Traffic Control L.S. 0.64 5,000.00 3,200.00
NMC Loop Detector Each 36.00 875.00 31,500.00
Pavement Message Arrow (left)- Epoxy Each 23.00 95.00 2,185.00
Pavement Message Arrow (right) Epoxy Each 5.00 95.00 475.00
24" Solid Line White Epoxy L.F. 263.00 7.00 1,841.00
24" Solid Line Yellow Epoxy L.F. 514.00 5.50 2,827.00
4" Double Solid Line Yellow L.F. 1995.00 0.60 1,197.00
4" Solid Line White Epoxy L.F. 7011.00 0.30 2,103.30
8" Solid Line White Epoxy L.F. 344.50 3.80 1,309.10
Traffic signs L.S. 1.00 18,113.37 18,113.37
Zebra Crosswalk White Epoxy Sq. Ft. 1200.00 2.50 3,000.00
SUBTOTAL $284,311.85
Other costs 26.61% 75,654.05
Mill Overlay/ Street Sign Cost $359,965.90
IMPROVEMENT AND ASSESSMENT RATES
Low Density Residential Street -The improvement and assessment rates for low density residential lot equivalent
properties (136.5 total, 178 townhomes 133.5 lot equivalents plus 3 single family), based on a 32 -foot wide roadway
width, is computed as follows:
2
131
1) Low Density Residential 3,307 Front Feet/ 15,805 Total Front Feet 20.9%
2) [$359,965.90 (Mill Overlay Cost Sign Cost) x 50% x 20.9% x 32/44] $27,357.41 [Total Assmnt.]
3) $27,357.41 (Total LD Assessment) 4 $200.42 lot
136.5 Residential Lot Equivalents
4) Townhouse 75% of a SF Lot (0.75 x $200.42/ lot) $150.32 Townhouse Unit
Public Facility- Street The street improvement and assessment rates for public facility properties (Rahn Park,
Meadowland Park, Rahn Elementary, Assemblies of God Church) are computed as follows:
1) Public Facility 1,381 Front Feet/ 15,805 Total F.F. 8.7%
2) [$359,965.90 (Mill Overlay Sign Cost) x 75% x 8.7 $23,487.78 (Total PF Assessment)
3) $23,487.78 (PF Assessment) 4 $327.58 /acre
71.7 Acres PF
Note: Approximately 70.3% (11,117 feet) of property frontage adjacent to the street improvement is commercial property,
covered in a separate assessment report, or sideyard or backyard, with no property access, and considered unassessable.
ASSESSMENT TERMS
The assessments are proposed for a term of 5 years for residential properties and 10 years for public facility properties. The
interest rate is 6.5% per annum on the unpaid balance.
CITY REVENUES RESPONSIBILITY ResidentiaU Public Facility/ Parks Portion Only
IMPROVEMENT ASSESSMENT CITY
IMPROVEMENT COST REVENUE RESPONSIBILITY
Street Resurfacing/ Signs $106,549.91 $50,845.19 $55, 704.72
Curb Gutter Repair 136,210.96 136,210.96
Total
CITY FUND RESPONSIBILITY
Major Street Fund: $191,915.68
Johi//Gorder, P.E.
$242,760.87 $50,845.19 $191,915.68
3
13a
Reviewed
Pub1I Works Department
r /2 a?
Date
c: Thomas A. Colbert, Director of Public Works
Mike Dougherty, City Attorney
Sue Sheridan, Accountant I
Reviewed
Fin ce Department
Date
1l- t3- t�(
4
1 33
z
w
W
-J
\.00
0
0000000
000000 00000, "o r )Q 0 00`
0000000 000
0000000 M
00 00 0 Nr J L000000
00 D .00000 0
000CIt 0000
00 0 0000
0000000000
0000000
.00000
0000.
00
3>I 1
N
U Q st
CC
cr
1\\:\-77,\\\
—r
I�
1E
r' z
CL 1 c
o o \I ci 2.
blif
U
m
LL
0
a
0)
PGKNP KR p.
�bao 00 ab'02i NHv?� Nir
10000°
u�
1.0004
-zr
Q
1
1 o
U
Of '1
F„
Z
N
0
0
Combined Assessment Roll
Project Number 10P981
PID
10- 02900 010 -52
10- 02900 012 -51
10- 03000 010 -75
10- 03000 012 -76
10- 16703 010 -02
1S 17780 010 01
10- 17785- 010 -01
10- 17785- 010 -02
10- 17785 010 -03
10- 17785- 020 -01
10- 17785 020 -02
10- 17785- 020 -03
10- 17785- 030 -01
10- 17785- 030 -02
10- 17785- 030 -03
10- 17785 040 -01
10- 17785 040 -02
10- 17785 040 -03
10- 17785 050 -01
10- 17785- 050 -02
10- 17785- 050 -03
10- 17785- 060 -01
10- 17785- 060 -02
10- 17785- 060 -03
10- 17785 070 -01
10- 17785- 070 -02
10- 17785- 070 -03
10- 17785- 080 -01
10- 17785 080 -02
10- 17785 080 -03
10- 17785- 090 -01
10- 17785- 090 -03
10- 17785- 100 -01
10- 17785 100 -03
10- 17785- 110 -01
Friday, November 13, 2009
Address Addition Name
4431 Lakeshore Ter
4424 Sandstone Dr
2014 Shale Lane
1940 Cliff Lake Rd
1840 Cliff Lake Ct
4491 Lakeshore Ter
4494 Lakeshore Ter
1842 Cliff Lake Ct
4489 Lakeshore Ter
4492 Lakeshore Ter
1844 Cliff Lake Ct
4487 Lakeshore Ter
4490 Lakeshore Ter
1846 Cliff Lake Ct
4485 Lakeshore Ter
4488 Lakeshore Ter
1848 Cliff Lake Ct
4475 Lakeshore Ter
4486 Lakeshore Ter
1850 Cliff Lake Ct
4473 Lakeshore Ter
4484 Lakeshore Ter
1852 Cliff Lake Ct
4471 Lakeshore Ter
4482 Lakeshore Ter
1854 Cliff Lake Ct
4469 Lakeshore Ter
4480 Lakeshore Ter
1856 Cliff Lake Ct
4478 Lakeshore Ter
1858 Cliff Lake Ct
4476 Lakeshore Ter
1860 Cliff Lake Ct
Section 29
Section 29
Section 30
Section 30
Cedar Grove 4th
Cliff Lokc Ccntrc
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Pending Assess
1/03/09
$576.00
$4,794.00
$6,307.00
$19,543.00
$288.00
$74,910.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
Proposed
Variance Assessment
$175.16 $400.84
$1,452.68 $3,341.32
$1,910.88 $4,396.12
$5,922.22 $13,620.78
$87.58 $200.42
$2,075.07 $72,034.13
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
Page 1 of 5
Combined Assessment Roll
Project Number 10P981
PID
10- 17785- 110 -02
10- 17785 110 -03
10- 17785 120 -01
10- 17785- 120 -02
10- 17785- 120 -03
10- 17785- 130 -01
10- 17785- 130 -02
10- 17785 130 -03
10- 17785- 140 -01
10- 17785 140 -02
10- 17785- 140 -03
10- 17785- 150 -01
10- 17785- 150 -03
10- 17785 160 -01
10- 17785- 160 -03
10- 17785- 170 -01
10- 17785- 170 -03
10- 17785- 180 -01
10- 17785- 180 -03
10- 17785- 190 -01
10- 17785- 190 -03
10- 17785- 200 -01
10- 17785- 200 -03
10- 17785- 210 -01
10- 17785- 210 -03
10- 17785- 220 -01
10- 17785- 220 -03
10- 17785 -230 -01
10- 17785 230 -03
10- 17785- 240 -01
10- 17785 240 -03
10- 17785- 250 -01
10- 17785- 250 -03
10- 17785- 260 -01
10- 17785- 260 -03
10- 17785- 270 -01
10- 17785- 280 -01
10- 17786- 010 -01
10- 17786- 010 -02
10- 17786- 020 -01
10- 17786 020 -02
Address
Friday, November 13, 2009
4447 Lakeshore Ter
4474 Lakeshore Ter
1862 Cliff Lake Ct
4445 Lakeshore Ter
4472 Lakeshore Ter
1847 Cliff Lake Ct
4443 Lakeshore Ter
4470 Lakeshore Ter
1849 Cliff Lake Ct
4441 Lakeshore Ter
4468 Lakeshore Ter
1857 Cliff Lake Ct
4466 Lakeshore Ter
1855 Cliff Lake Ct
4464 Lakeshore Ter
1859 Cliff Lake Ct
4462 Lakeshore Ter
1861 Cliff Lake Ct
4460 Lakeshore Ter
1865 Cliff Lake Ct
4458 Lakeshore Ter
1863 Cliff Lake Ct
4456 Lakeshore Ter
1851 Cliff Lake Ct
4454 Lakeshore Ter
1853 Cliff Lake Ct
4452 Lakeshore Ter
4420 Lakeshore Ter
4450 Lakeshore Ter
4422 Lakeshore Ter
4448 Lakeshore Ter
4424 Lakeshore Ter
4446 Lakeshore Ter
4426 Lakeshore Ter
4444 Lakeshore Ter
4430 Lakeshore Ter
4428 Lakeshore Ter
4451 Lakeshore Ter
4439 Lakeshore Ter
4449 Lakeshore Ter
4437 Lakeshore Ter
Addition Name
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores
Cliff Lake Shores 2nd
Cliff Lake Shores 2nd
Cliff Lake Shores 2nd
Cliff Lake Shores 2nd
Pending Assess
1/03/09
131e
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
Variance
Proposed
Assessment
$65.68 $150.32
465.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
465.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
465.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
465.68 $150.32
465.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
465.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
465.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65,68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
Page 2 of 5
Combined Assessment Roll
Project Number 10P981
PID Address Addition Name
10- 17790 001 -02
10- 17790- 002 -02
10- 17790- 003 -02
10- 17790- 004 -02
10- 17790 005 -02
10- 17790 006 -02
10- 17790 007 -02
10- 17790- 008 -02
10- 17790 009 -02
10- 17790- 010 -02
10- 17790- 011 -02
10- 17790- 012 -02
10- 17790- 013 -02
10- 17790- 014 -02
10- 17790 015 -02
10- 17790- 016 -02
10- 17790- 017 -02
10- 17790 018 -02
10- 17790 019 -02
10- 17790 020 -02
10- 17790- 021 -02
10- 17790- 022 -02
10- 17790- 023 -02
10- 17790- 024 -02
10- 17790- 025 -02
10- 17790- 026 -02
10- 17790- 027 -02
10- 17790- 028 -02
10- 17790- 029 -02
10- 17790- 030 -02
10- 17790- 031 -02
10- 17790 032 -02
10- 17790- 033 -02
10- 17790 034 -02
10- 17790- 035 -02
10- 17790- 036 -02
10- 17790- 037 -02
10- 17790- 038 -02
10- 17790- 039 -02
10- 17790- 040 -02
10- 17790- 041 -02
Friday, November 13, 2009
1986 Jan Echo Tr
1984 Jan Echo Tr
1982 Jan Echo Tr
1980 Jan Echo Tr
1978 Jan Echo Tr
1976 Jan Echo Tr
4470 Glen Echo Bay
4468 Glen Echo Bay
4466 Glen Echo Bay
4464 Glen Echo Bay
4462 Glen Echo Bay
4460 Glen Echo Bay
1988 Jan Echo Tr
1990 Jan Echo Tr
1992 Jan Echo Tr
1994 Jan Echo Tr
1996 Jan Echo Tr
1998 Jan Echo Tr
1989 Glen Echo Bay
1991 Glen Echo Bay
1993 Glen Echo Bay
1995 Glen Echo Bay
1997 Glen Echo Bay
1999 Glen Echo Bay
4409 Overland Cir
4413 Overland Cir
4415 Overland Cir
4417 Overland Cir
4419 Overland Cir
4421 Overland Cir
4420 Fremont Alcove
4418 Fremont Alcove
4416 Fremont Alcove
4414 Fremont Alcove
4412 Fremont Alcove
4410 Fremont Alcove
1988 Overland Cir
1986 Overland Cir
1984 Overland Cir
1982 Overland Cir
1980 Overland Cir
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
13
Pending Assess
1/03/09
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
Variance
$65.68
465.68
$65.68
465.68
465.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
465.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
465.68
$65.68
$65.68
465.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
$65.68
Proposed
Assessment
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
$150.32
Page 3 of 5
Combined Assessment Roll
Project Number 10P981
PID
10- 17790- 042 -02
10- 17790 043 -02
10- 17790- 044 -02
10- 17790- 045 -02
10- 17790- 046 -02
10- 17790 047 -02
10- 17790- 048 -02
10- 17790 049 -02
10- 17790- 050 -02
10- 17790- 051 -02
10- 17790- 052 -02
10- 17790 053 -02
10- 17790 054 -02
10- 17790 055 -02
10- 17790 056 -02
10- 17790 057 -02
10- 17790- 058 -02
10- 17790 059 -02
10- 17790 060 -02
10- 17790 061 -02
10- 17790 062 -02
10- 17790- 063 -02
10- 17790- 064 -02
10- 17790- 065 -02
10- 17790- 066 -02
10- 17790 067 -02
10- 17790 068 -02
10- 17790- 069 -02
10- 17790- 070 -02
10- 17790 071 -02
10- 17790 072 -02
10- 17790- 079 -02
10- 17790- 080 -02
10- 17790 081 -02
10- 17790- 082 -02
10- 17790 083 -02
10- 17790 084 -02
10- 17791- 089 -02
10- 17791 090 -02
10- 17791- 091 -02
10- 17791 092 -02
Address
1978
1977
1979
1981
1983
1985
1987
1965
1967
1969
1939
1941
1943
1945
1947
1949
1927
1929
1931
1933
1935
Friday, November 13, 2009
Overland Cir
Jan Echo Tr
Jan Echo Tr
Jan Echo Tr
Jan Echo Tr
Jan Echo Tr
Jan Echo Tr
Jan Echo Tr
Jan Echo Tr
Jan Echo Tr
1971 Jan Echo Tr
1973 Jan Echo Tr
1975 Jan Echo Tr
1966 Overland Cir
1968 Overland Cir
1970 Overland Cir
1972 Overland Cir
1974 Overland Cir
1976 Overland Cir
1950 Grant Alcove
1948 Grant Alcove
1946 Grant Alcove
1944 Grant Alcove
1942 Grant Alcove
1940 Grant Alcove
Jan Echo Tr
Jan Echo Tr
Jan Echo Tr
Jan Echo Tr
Jan Echo Tr
Jan Echo Tr
Jan Echo Tr
Jan Echo Tr
Jan Echo Tr
Jan Echo Tr
Jan Echo Tr
1937 Jan Echo Tr
1913 Jan Echo Tr
1915 Jan Echo Tr
1917 Jan Echo Tr
1919 Jan Echo Tr
Addition Name
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Town homes
Cliff Lake Town homes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes
Cliff Lake Townhomes 2nd
Cliff Lake Townhomes 2nd
Cliff Lake Townhomes 2nd
Cliff Lake Townhomes 2nd
Pending Assess
1/03/09
3?
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
Variance
Proposed
Assessment
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
Page 4 of 5
Combined Assessment Roll
Project Number 10P981
PID Address
10- 17791- 093 -02
10- 17791- 094 -02
10- 17791 095 -02
10- 17791- 096 -02
10- 17791 097 -02
10- 17791- 098 -02
10- 17791 099 -02
10- 17791- 100 -02
10- 17791 101 -02
10- 17791 102 -02
10- 17791 103 -02
10- 17791- 104 -02
10- 17791- 107 -02
10- 17791 108 -02
10 31725 010 01
10 31725 020
4409 Naper Bay
4411 NaperBay
4413 NaperBay
4415 NaperBay
4417 NaperBay
4419 NaperBay
4420 Jan Echo Tr
4418 Jan Echo Tr
4416 Jan Echo Tr
4414 Jan Echo Tr
4412 Jan Echo Tr
4410 Jan Echo Tr
4412 NaperBay
4410 NaperBay
2040 Cliff Rd
10 62725 003 02 1996 RdIlilt. Iff Ct
10- 62725- 004 -02 1002 Ct
10 62726 010 01 1996 Rahncliff Ct
16- 62.726- 026-01 4630 Rahncliff Rd
'10 -C2727 010-01
'l0 62727 010 02
10- G2720- 020 -01
0- 62750 010 -01
0 -C2751 -010 01
Friday, November 13, 2009
1075 Rahncliff Ct
1960 Rahncliff Ct
1940 Rah.,fff Ct
2024 Rahn Way
2005 rin Oak Dr
Addition Name
Cliff Lake Townhomes 2nd
Cliff Lake Townhomes 2nd
Cliff Lake Townhomes 2nd
Cliff Lake Townhomes 2nd
Cliff Lake Townhomes 2nd
Cliff Lake Townhomes 2nd
Cliff Lake Townhomes 2nd
Cliff Lake Townhomes 2nd
Cliff Lake Townhomes 2nd
Cliff Lake Townhomes 2nd
Cliff Lake Townhomes 2nd
Cliff Lake Townhomes 2nd
Cliff Lake Townhomes 2nd
Cliff Lake Townhomes 2nd
Hadlcr Park
I<dlni.M
Rahncliff tat
Rahnoliff 2nd
Rahncliff 2nd
Rahncliff 3rd
Rahncliff 3rd
Summary for 'SA_Nbr' 10P981 (200 detail records)
Sum
Rahncliff 4t1.
Rahn Ridge
Rahn Ridge 2nd
Pending Assess
1/03/09
i39
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$216.00
$4,068.00
31,30 66
$1,307.00
$-1397-89
6110, 000.
$11,682.00
36,773.00
V471-28,09
$10,122.00
$6,988.00
$13,073.06
$7,7610.00
$3,055.00
02,662.00
Proposed
Variance Assessment
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$65.68 $150.32
$1,510.48 $3,457.52
$1,063.37 $2,370.37
$.1704347----$2
$608.87 $12,280.87
062.43
$0,710.57
$3,076.98 $7,045.02
$180.70 $5,507.30
02,677.13
$925.73
$263.81
010,44C.13
$2,129.27
$2,015.81
$78,134.69 $580,874.31
Pagesof5
Number: Project 981 Commercial
FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING
PROJECT PUBLIC HEARING DATES
Assessment: November 17, 2009
Name: Rahncliff/ Cliff Lk Rd/ Rahn Rd Project Approval Date: March 3, 2009
Street Improvements
C] Trunk
Lateral
O Service
CJ Lat. Benefit /trunk
WATER
Trunk
Lateral
Service
Lat. Benefit /trunk
WAC
OTHER
SANITARY
SEWER
Final Feasibility
Rate Report Units
ICJ Median Landscape $3,712.40 $3,780 Net
Acre
Contract Number of
Number Parcels Terms
STORM SEWER
Trunk
RI Driveway
STREET
Gravel Base
El Surf/ Signs CI 52,910.61 $3,735 Net
Acre
Public Facility
C/I Equiv.
STREET LIGHTS
Installation
Final Feasibility
Rate Report Units
Based on $83 SY
costs to
repair
Energy Charge
Interest Amount City
Rate Assessed Financed
09 -10 28 10 Years 6.5% $663,850 F.R. $265,630 F.R.
$504,298.47 $171,195.96
(F.R. Feasibility Report)
40 1° City of Eagan yemo
To: Mayor and City Council
From: John Gorder, Assistant City Engineer
Date: November 12, 2009
Subject: Final Assessment Roll, Project 981- Commercial
Rahncliff/ Cliff Lake Road/ Rahn Road Street Overlay Landscape Median Improvements
At the public hearing on March 3, 2009, the City Council ordered Project 981, and in accordance with the feasibility report,
the following improvements were constructed on Rahncliff/ Cliff Lake Road/ Rahn Road: mill and overlay and replacement
of traffic and street signage, repair of curb and gutter/ concrete entrance aprons as needed. In the feasibility report, it was
proposed to assess 100% to the commercial/ industrial properties and 75% to the public facility properties of the street
overlay and signage and concrete entrance apron improvements, in accordance with the City Special Assessment Policy.
Also, median landscape improvements on Cliff Lake Road were approved as an alternate by the City Council. It was
proposed to assess 100% of the median landscape improvements to the commercial/ industrial properties adjacent to Cliff
Lake Road. All improvements were completed under Contract 09 -10. The following information was used in the
preparation of the assessment roll, for commercial properties only, for Project 981.
TOTAL PROJECT COST
The construction cost includes the amount of $599,568.68 paid to the contractors for the construction of the improvements.
Traffic and street signage was installed at a cost of $18,113.37. Other costs including engineering, design, contract
management, inspections, financing, legal, bonding, administration, and other totaling $164,362.29 were incurred resulting
in an improvement and project cost of $782,044.34. The detail of these other costs is provided on Schedule I. These other
costs are allocated to the improvements constructed in order to determine the cost of each improvement and the assessment
rate.
CONSTRUCTION OTHER COSTS IMPROVEMENT FEASIBILITY
IMPROVEMENT COST COST REPORT
Street Resurfacing $284,311.85 $75,654.05 $359,965.90 $516,940
Curb Gutter Repair 107,583.50 28,627.46 136,210.96 $135,500
Concrete Entrance Rep. 91,757.41 24,416.22 116,173.63 $76,880
Cliff Lake Road Median 134,029.29 35,664.56 169,693.85 $200,160
Landscape
Totals $617,682.05 $164,362.29 $782,044.34 $929,480
1
ASSESSMENTS
TRUNK ASSESSMENTS
No trunk assessments for utilities were proposed in the feasibility report, therefore, none are proposed in this assessment
roll.
STREET IMPROVEMENTS
The costs of the street overlay and street signage improvements were computed using the following unit prices and
quantities:
UNIT EXTENDED
ITEM UNIT QTY PRICE COST
Mobilization L.S. 0.64 $4,250.00 $2,720.00
Mill Bituminous Pavement (1 '/4" depth) Sq. Yd. 18513.09 0.46 8,516.02.
Type LVWE45030B Wearing Course Ton 4,148.56 44.75 185,648.06
Mixture
Bituminous Material for Tack Coat Gal 2420.00 2.50 6,050.00
Adjust Fame Ring Casting (Manhole) Each 13.00 450.00 5,850.00
Adjust MH Casting Riser Adjustment Each 6.00 186.00 1,116.00
Adjust Gate Valve Box Each 3.00 54.00 162.00
Repair Gate Valve Mid Section Each 7.00 157.00 1,099.00
Repair Gate Valve Top Section w /Cover Each 18.00 300.00 5,400.00
Traffic Control L.S. 0.64 5,000.00 3,200.00
NMC Loop Detector Each 36.00 875.00 31,500.00
Pavement Message Arrow (left)- Epoxy Each 23.00 95.00 2,185.00
Pavement Message Arrow (right) Epoxy Each 5.00 95.00 475.00
24" Solid Line White Epoxy L.F. 263.00 7.00 1,841.00
24" Solid Line Yellow Epoxy L.F. 514.00 5.50 2,827.00
4" Double Solid Line Yellow L.F. 1995.00 0.60 1,197.00
4" Solid Line White Epoxy L.F. 7011.00 0.30 2,103.30
8" Solid Line White Epoxy L.F. 344.50 3.80 1,309.10
Traffic signs L.S. 1.00 18,113.37 18,113.37
Zebra Crosswalk White Epoxy Sq. Ft. 1200.00 2.50 3,000.00
SUBTOTAL $284,311.85
Other costs 26.61% 75,654.05
Mill Overlay/ Street Sign Cost $359,965.90
CONCRETE ENTRANCE REPAIRS
The costs of the concrete entrance apron repaired were computed using the following unit prices and quantities:
UNIT EXTENDED
ITEM UNIT QTY PRICE COST
Remove Concrete Curb Gutter L.F. 744.50 5.95 $4,608.28
Remove Bituminous Trail Pavement Sq. Yd. 13.00 4.45 57.85
2
i�a
UNIT EXTENDED
ITEM UNIT QTY PRICE COST
Remove Bituminous Pavement Sq. Yd. 1450.00 4.65 6,742.50
Remove Concrete Driveway Sq. Yd. 74.00 10.00 740.00
Remove Concrete Valley Gutter Sq.Yd. 151.00 10.00 1,510.00
Common Excavation Cu.Yd. 117.29 18.75 2,199.19
Select Topsoil Borrow Cu.Yd. 19.00 21.00 399.00
Aggregate Base, Cl. 5 Ton 5.37 13.00 69.81
Type LVWE45030B Wear Course Ton 59.09 89.00 5,259.01
Street Patch
Type LVWE45030B Wear Course Ton 38.43 89.00 3,420.27
Driveways
Concrete Curb Gutter B612 L.F. 60.00 12.90 774.00
Concrete Curb Gutter B624 L.F. 91.00 15.86 1,443.26
7" Concrete Driveway Pavement Sq. Yd. 1407.50 42.00 59,115.00
7 Concrete Driveway Pavement Sq. Yd. 74.00 42.00 3,108.00
Repair
Adjust Frame Ring Casting Each 1.00 50.00 50.00
Sodding, Type Lawn Sq. Yd. 231.00 6.75 1,559.25
Compost, Grade 1 Ton 26.00 27.00 702.00
SUBTOTAL $91,757.41
Other costs 26.61% $24,416.22
Concrete Ent Apron Replace/ $116,173.63
Repair Cost
MEDIAN LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS CLIFF LAKE ROAD
The costs of the median landscape improvements on Cliff Lake Road were computed using the following unit prices and
quantities:
UNIT EXTENDED
ITEM UNIT QTY PRICE COST
Clearing Tree 47.00 $50.00 $2,350.00
Grubbing Tree 47.00 25.00 1,175.00
Common Excavation CY 1728.00 18.75 32,400.00
4" Perforated Pipe Drain L.F. 730.00 9.00 6,570.00
Connect 4" Pipe Drain Each 2.00 100.00 200.00
Irrigation System L.S. 1.00 49,197.00 49,197.00
Landscape Edger L.F. 140.00 4.75 665.00
Deciduous Tree (2' /z" B &B) Each 14.00 295.00 4,130.00
Deciduous Tree (1' /4 "B B) Each 22.00 155.00 3,410.00
Deciduous Shrub Each 140.00 39.00 5,460.00
Perennial No. 1 Container Plant 552.00 8.75 4,830.00
Storm Drain Inlet Protection Each 1.00 125.00 125.00
Mulch Material Type 6 C.Y. 115.00 55.00 6,325.00
3
4630 Rahncliff Rd.
$3,902.96
1984 2000 Rahncliff Ct., etal. (6 properties)
8,763.00
1995 Rahncliff Ct.
9,291.28
1964 Rahncliff Ct.
9,455.02
1960 Rahncliff Ct.
3,245.61
1940 Rahncliff Rd.
5,038.88
2030 Cliff Rd.
6,164.11
2010 Cliff Rd.
6,645.06
1960 Cliff Lake Rd.
10,453.75
ITEM
SUBTOTAL
Other costs 26.61%
Cliff Lake Rd Median Cost
UNIT EXTENDED
UNIT QTY PRICE COST
Seeding (Special "No -Mow" w/ S.Y. 1125.00 1.20 1,350.00
Erosion Control Blanket
Compost Grade 1 Ton 25.00 27.00 675.00
Select Topsoil Borrow Type B C.Y. 514.41 28.75 $14,789.29
Select Topsoil Borrow C.Y. 18.00 21.00 378.00
IMPROVEMENT AND ASSESSMENT RATES
Commercial Street The street improvement and assessment rates, per net are, for commercial properties are
computed as follows:
1) Commercial 9,594 Front Feet/ 15,805 Total F.F. 60.7%
2) [$359,965.90(Mill Overlay Sign Cost) x 100% x 60.7 $218,499.30 (Total Comm. Assessment)
3) $218,499.30 (Commercial Assessment) $2,910.61 /net acre
75.07 Net Acres Commercial
$134,029.29
$35,664.56
$169,693.85
Note: Approximately 39.3% (6,211 feet) of property frontage adjacent to the street improvement is residential/ public
facility/ parks property, covered in a separate assessment report, or sideyard or backyard, with no property access, and
considered unassessable.
Commercial Concrete Entrance Apron Repair/ Replacement Assessment costs will be allocated to benefitting
properties based on the individual entrance repair/ replacement costs for each commercial/ industrial property (21
driveways on 16 total properties). The proposed assessment for each property for concrete entrance replacement or repair,
per actual cost of driveways repaired, are proposed as follows:
4
)LF
1965 Cliff Lake Rd.
5,940.43
1940 Cliff Lake Rd. (Cub Foods)
25,571.41
2000 Cliff Lake Rd. (Target)
16,996.91
1950 Rahncliff Dr. (Holiday Inn East entrance)
2,260.74
2005 Pin Oak Dr.
1,070.07
4675 Rahncliff Rd.
1,373.67
Total
$116,173.63
Median Landscape Improvements Cliff Lake Road This special assessment calls for 100% of the median landscape
improvement costs to be assessed to the commercial properties with access to Cliff Lake Road. The cost per net
commercial/ industrial acre to be assessed is calculated as follows:
1) Cost of Median Landscaping Improvements Cliff Lake Road $169,693.85
2) $169,693.85 (Median Landscaping Cost) -4 $3,712.40/ net acre Commercial
45.71 Net Acres Access to CLR
ASSESSMENT TERMS
The assessments are proposed for a term of 10 years for commercial properties. The interest rate is 6.5% per annum on the
unpaid balance.
CITY REVENUES RESPONSIBILITY Commercial Properties Only
IMPROVEMENT ASSESSMENT CITY
IMPROVEMENT COST REVENUE RESPONSIBILITY
Street Resurfacing/ Signs $253, 415.99 $218, 430.99 $34, 985.00
Curb Gutter Repair 136,210.96
Concrete Entr. Repair 116,173.63
Cliff Lake Road Median 169, 693.85
Landscape
116,173.63
169, 693.85
136,210.96*
Total $675,494.43 $504,298.47 $171,195.96*
CITY FUND RESPONSIBILITY
Major Street Fund: $171,195.96. Curb gutter repair ($136,210.96) is a City responsibility and accounted for in the
Assessment Report Residential/ Public Facilities/ Parks.
5
/1/
Jahn Gorder, P.E.
Reviewed
Public Works Department
Date
c: Thomas A. Colbert, Director of Public Works
Mike Dougherty, City Attorney
Sue Sheridan, Accountant I
Reviewed
Date
6
It- 13 —Oct
0000
000000
000000000
00000x^0
000000 Uo0
000000 r Q 000
000000c 000•
0000000 t.( 00000
00 00000 'o .00
00c x '0000
•0 0 0000
0000000000
0000000
0
0
N s�
■t•••■
0
Z
u.l
CD
w
J
z
uJ
1'
W i
t
N
co
c0
LL
O
0
v
m
o a
EL)
N Q
z_ (0
M Z Q
EA
c
C
N
E
2 (N5
co
co
co Q Q
E m
O
U
,GoN"'
s s s
0
0
a
MM ME ME MN ME ME MM ME Mg M
0
CO CO
i
C N
tea- E
U
O U u>
m
J N N
vi
oa) c
Wv)
1
1
1
U
N
LL
U_
7
CL
aN
ct CD
N
M d
�Z
w
c
4)
E
a)
0
n
E
(4
0_
U
co
U
J
ftk
a
r
CD 00
C9,6
o z
Q
co co 1
C3 r I'
N
as co
o
U
c 4)
E
L
LL I..L E
-0 U
0
O N
E
J N
CU 4)
U'5 u)
c w c
L N jl,
ca
ct
COMMERCIAL/
INDUSTRIAL
P.I.N.
Net
Area
(Acres)
Rate/
Acre
Street
Overlay
Assess.
D/W
Assess.
Landscape
Median
Assess.
Total
Assessment
CLIFF ROAD
10- 62728 010 -01
3.50
2,910.61
$10,187.14
2,260.74
2010 Cliff
Road
10- 31725 030 -01
1.27
2,910.61
3,696.47
6,645.06
3,245.61
10,341.53
2020 Cliff
Road
10- 31725 020 -01
1.19
2,910.61
3,463.63
$13,039.53
9,455.02
3,463.63
2030 Cliff
Road (4.48)
10- 31725 040 -01
3.09
2,910.61
8,993.78
6,164.11
27,657.38
15,187.89
2040 Cliff
Road
10- 31725 010 -01
1.33
2,910.61
3,871.11
2,881.50
4,417.76
3,871.11
2000 Cliff
Road
10- 56722 010 -01
0.88
2,910.61
2,561.34
3,347.2
3,266.91
5,828.25
2055 Cliff
Road
10- 56730 010 -01
10.33
2,910.61
$30,066.6
$44,998.02
38,349.09
68,415.69
(19.48 Gross)
Subtotal
18.09
$52,652.93
12,809.17
$41,616.00
$107,108.10
1940 Rahncliff
Court (2.08)
10- 62728 020 -01
1.76
2,910.61
5,122.67
5,038.88
10,161.55
1950 Rahncliff
Court
10- 62728 010 -01
3.50
2,910.61
$10,187.14
2,260.74
12,447.88
1960 Rahncliff
Court
10- 62727 010 -02
0.87
2,910.61
2,532.23
3,245.61
5,777.84
1964 Rahncliff
Court
10- 62726- 020 -03
4.48
2,910.61
$13,039.53
9,455.02
22,494.55
1975 Rahncliff
Court
10- 62727 010 -01
2.71
2,910.61
7,887.75
27,657.38
74,912.83
7,887.75
1980 Rahncliff
Court
10- 62726 010 -03
0.99
2,910.61
2,881.50
4,417.76
7,881.39
2,881.50
1995 Rahncliff
Court
10- 62726- 010 -01
1.15
2,910.61
3,347.2
9,291.28
82,180.95
12,638.48
(15.78 Gross)
Subtotal
15.46
$44,998.02
29,291.53
$74,289.55
4630 Rahncliff
Road
10- 62726- 020 -01
1.08
2,910.61
3,143.46
3,902.96
7,046.42
4675 Rahncliff
Road
1062751- 020 -01
2.42
2,910.61
7,043.68
1,373.67
8,417.35
Subtotal
3.50
$10,187.14
5,276.63
$15,463.77
CLIFF LAKE ROAD
1940 Cliff
Lake Road
10- 17780 010 -01
7.45
2,910.61
$21,684.04
25,571.41
27,657.38
74,912.83
1950 Cliff
Lake Road
10- 17781 010 -01
1.19
2,910.61
3,463.63
4,417.76
7,881.39
1960 Cliff Lk
Rd (14.84)
10- 17780 020 -01
10.83
2,910.61
$31,521.91
10,453.75
40,205.29
82,180.95
Rahncliff/ Cliff Lake Road/ Rahn Road
City Project No. 981
Final Assessment Roll Net Acreage (Commercial)
RAHNCLIFF COURT
RAHNCLIFF ROAD
1965 Ctiff
Lake Road
(4.69)
10- 17782 020 -01
2.15
2,910.61
6,257.81
5,940.43
7,981.66
20,179.90
2000 Cliff
Lake Road
10- 17780 030 -01
11.73
2,910.61
$34,141.46
16,996.91
43,546.45
94,684.82
(39.90 Gross)
Subtotal
33.35
2,910.61
$97,068.85
$58,962.50
$123,808.54
$279,839.89
RANN ROAD
4395 Rahn
Road (1.87)
10- 17782 010 -01
1.15
2,910.61
3,347.2
4,269.26
7,616.46
(1.87 Gross)
Subtotal
1.15
1,018.71
3,347.2
4,269.26
7,616.46
2005 Pin Oak
Drive
10- 62751 010 -01
1.42
(0.71)
2,910.61
2,066.53*
1,070.07
3,147.40*
2160 Cliff
Road
Subtotal
1.42
2,910.61
2,066.53*
1,070.07
3,147.40*
*corner lot credit for previous
street assessment (Proj 781)
10- 62725 003 -02
0.35
2,910.61
1,018.71
1,460.50
2160 Cliff
Road
10- 62725 001 -02
0.35
2,910.61
1,018.71
1,460.50
2,479.21
2160 Cliff
Road
10- 62725 002 -02
0.35
2,910.61
1,018.71
1,460.50
2,479.21
1996 Ctiff
Road
10- 62725 003 -02
0.35
2,910.61
1,018.71
1,460.50
2,479.21
1996 Cliff
Road
10- 62725 004 -02
0.35
2,910.61
1,018.71
1,460.50
2,479.21
1988 Cliff
Road
10- 62725 005 -02
0.35
2,910.61
1,018.71
1,460.50
2,479.21
1984 Cliff
Road
10- 62725 006 -02
0.35
2,910.61
1,018.71
1,460.50
2,479.21
Subtotal
2.10
6,112.26
8,763.00
$14,875.26
Totals
Commercial Net
75.07
$218,430.99
$116,173.85
$169,173.85
$504,298.47
PIN OAK DRIVE
CLIFF ROAD (Business Condos)
1 5D
RAHNCLIFF/ CLIFF LAKE ROAD RAHN ROAD
STREET REVITALIZATION
CITY PROJECT NO 981
INFORMATIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING FINAL ASSESSMENTS
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 2009
5:30 P.M. CONFERENCE ROOM 1— CITY HALL
Attendance: John Gorder, Assistant City Engineer, 1 person representing 1 property (see
attached sign -in sheet).
Gorder welcomed the resident and provided a brief project review.
Questions/ Comments from Residents
Why is my property (4431 Lakeshore Terrace) being assessed $400 versus the $150
assessed to the adjoining townhome units? The property (now used as a single family
home) lies within the Cliff Lake Shores townhome neighborhood, and is guided in the
City Comprehensive Guide Plan to be developed to a townhome use. Because of the
current use and the fact that the property could be easily subdivided into at least 2 lots, it
is proposed to assess the property for two single family lot equivalents ($200.42 each).
The meeting adjourned at 5:45 p.m.
G:Proj -Cont/ 981/Minutes
Is1
4.
City of Eagan
NAME
2.
3.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
G:FORMS /SIGN IN.Sheet
FINAL ASSESSMENT NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING
Rahncliffe/ Cliff Lake Rd./ Rahn Rd.
Project 981
Tuesday, November 10, 2009, 5:30 p.m.
ADDRESS
E 7 ":3(-:- 114A/
Asa
Agenda Information Memo
November 17, 2009, Eagan City Council
VII. Old Business
A. APPROVE DELINQUENT UTILITY BILL CERTIFICATION PID 10- 62725-
006-02 ACCOUNT 0012026084
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
1. To approve the certification of delinquent utility account number
0012026084 in the amount of $1,456.24 to parcel 10- 62725 006 -02.
or
2. To cancel the certification and direct staff to initiate alternative means to
collect the delinquent utility bill and to resolve the utility service issues and
billing questions regarding the account in question.
FACTS:
At the November 5, 2010 City Council meeting an objection was received
regarding the proposed assessment of delinquent utility account number
0012026084 in the amount of $1,456.24 to parcel 10- 62725 006 -02.
The account was removed from the assessment roll and staff was directed
to meet with the various property owners to attempt to facilitate a solution
to the use of one City water meter for a number of businesses.
Staff was directed to bring the proposed assessment back to the
November 17 meeting.
Through the assistance of the property owners a meeting has been
scheduled for Monday morning, November 16 to attempt to facilitate a
solution to the issues raised at the public hearing.
The Director of Public Works and Director of Administrative Services are
scheduled to meet with the property owners to explain the City's interests
and to prove utility service and billing options to the property owners.
Staff will provide an update with the Administrative Packet on Monday,
hopefully incorporating consensus solutions to the problems related to this
account.
ATTACHMENTS:
(None)
Agenda Information Memo
November 17, 2009, Eagan City Council Meeting
VII. NEW BUSINESS
A. APPROVE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT, CHAPTER 5 BEER, WINE AND LIQUOR
LICENSING AND REGULATION IN REGARD TO LIQUOR VIOLATIONS AND CIVIL
PENALTIES
ACTIONS TO BE CONSIDERED:
To approve an ordinance amendment to Chapter 5, specifically as it relates to liquor violations
and civil penalties and direct the City Attorney to publish the amendment in the legal newspaper.
FACTS:
At the November 5, 2009 City Council meeting, the City Attorney's office was directed to
prepare an ordinance amendment to clarify language in Chapter 5 regarding liquor violations and
civil penalties.
The proposed changes are as follows:
For a fourth or more violation in a 36 -month period, after the prescribed civil penalties
have been imposed, the Council shall conduct a hearing to consider the revocation or
additional days of suspension of the licensee's license. (The City Code does not provide
for additional Council action for the first, second or third violations. The penalties were
previously set by Council and the City Clerk is authorized to impose the violations as
prescribed in the City Code.)
The suspension of a license shall occur for non payment of a civil penalty within 30 days
only after the license has been afforded an opportunity for a hearing related to non-
payment of the monetary penalty.
Any appeal of the hearing officer's or Council's decision regarding civil penalties,
suspension or revocation shall be pursuant to a Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the
Minnesota Court of Appeals.
ATTACHMENTS (1):
Draft ordinance amendment enclosed on pages/ through I
ORDINANCE NO. 2ND SERIES
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EAGAN, MINNESOTA, AMENDING EAGAN CITY
CODE CHAPTER FIVE ENTITLED "BEER, WINE AND LIQUOR LICENSING AND
REGULATION" BY AMENDING SECTION 5.02, SUBDIVISION 4, REGARDING LIQUOR
LICENSE VIOLATION PENALTIES AND HEARING; AND BY ADOPTING BY REFERENCE
EAGAN CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 5.99.
The City Council of the City of Eagan does ordain:
Section 1. Eagan City Code Chapter 5 is hereby amended by changing Section 5.02, Subd.
4(G) and (H), to read as follows:
G. Penalty. Upon a finding that the licensee has sold alcoholic beverages to another
retail licensee for the purpose of resale; purchased alcoholic beverages from another
retail licensee for the purposes of resale; conducted or permitted the conduct of
gambling on the licensed premises in violation of the law; failed to remove or dispose
of alcoholic beverages when ordered by the commissioner to do so under Minnesota
Statutes; or failed to comply with any other applicable state statute or rule, or Code
provision herein relating to alcoholic beverages, a civil penalty of $500.00 for the first
violation, $1,000.00 for the second violation within a 24 -month period, and $1,500.00
and a seven (7) day suspension of license for a third violation within a 24 -month
period, and $2,000.00 and a thirty (30) days suspension of license for a fourth or more
violation within a 36 -month period shall be imposed upon the licensee who shall pay
the civil penalty within 30 days of the date of a notice from the city. Notwithstanding
el
I.
the license, unless a greater civil penalty, suspension or revocation is otherwise
No suspension of a license or civil penalty
imposed hereunder shall take effect until the licensee has been given an opportunity
for a hearing before a hearing officer duly appointed by the city administrator as
provided in this section. The foregoing penalties shall not restrict the city council
Any licensee found to have a fourth or more violation within a 36 -month period shall
appear for a hearing before the City Council for consideration of revocation or
additional days of suspension of the licensee's license. The City Clerk shall set the
date and time of the Council's hearing for any regular Council meeting.
H. If the licensee fails to pay the civil penalty within 30 days of notice, the licensee's
license shall be suspended until the civil penalty, plus any surcharge or interest for
late payment, is paid in full. A licensee subject to suspension under this paragraph
shall first have a right to a hearing before the hearing officer in accordance with the
1
hearing provisions set forth herein, provided the exclusive issue for hearing is the
suspension of license for nonpayment of the civil penalty.
I4.I. Hearing. No suspension or revocation of a license or ci
this section shall take effect until the licensee has been given an opportunity for a
hearing A hearing before the hearing officer shall be pursuant to under the Minnesota
Administrative Procedure Act. If the licensee files a request for hearing with the city
clerk within ten business days of the date of the notice of the license action or civil
penalty, the city clerk shall schedule a hearing before a hearing officer duly
In the event that the licensee fails to timely
request a hearing or fails to appear at a scheduled hearing, the licensee shall be
deemed to have waived his /her right to a hearing and shall be subject to the license
action or civil penalties imposed hereunder.
If the licensee timely requests a hearing, the hearing shall be held before the hearing
officer within 14 days of the date the licensee files a request for hearing with the city
clerk. Upon conclusion of the hearing, the hearing officer shall issue written findings
of fact and conclusions as to whether a violation has occurred and the penalty
imposed as authorized herein.
revocation of the liccnsc. Any hearing before the City Council for consideration of
additional penalties as proscribed herein shall be in addition and subsequent to any
hearing before the hearing officer.
Any appeal of the hearing officer's or City Council's decision under this section
shall be pursuant to a Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the Minnesota Court of
Appeals in accordance with Minnesota Statutes governing administrative procedures
and the Minnesota Rules of Civil Appellate Procedure.
Section 2. Eagan City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions
Applicable to the Entire City Code Including 'Penalty for Violation and Section 5.99, entitled
"Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety by reference as though repeated
verbatim.
Section 3. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect upon its adoption and publication
according to law.
ATTEST: CITY OF EAGAN
City Council
By: Maria Petersen By: Michael Maguire
Its: City Clerk Its: Mayor
Date Ordinance Adopted:
Date Ordinance Published in the Legal Newspaper:
3
I 5'7
CITY OF EAGAN
REGULAR MEETING OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
EAGAN MUNICIPAL CENTER
NOVEMBER 17, 2009
A. CALL TO ORDER
B. ADOPT AGENDA
C. CONSENT AGENDA
1. APPROVE EDA Minutes
D. OLD BUSINESS
E. NEW BUSINESS
1. CEDAR GROVE REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT Adopt a
Resolution regarding the Hearing Officer's Decision regarding
Relocation Assistance to Mediterranean Cruise
F. OTHER BUSINESS
G. ADJOURN
AGENDA
/S
Agenda Information Memo
Eagan Economic Development Authority Meeting
November 17, 2009
NOTICE OF CONCURRENT ACTIONS
The Council acting as the Board of Commissioners of the Economic
Development Authority "EDA may discuss and act on the agenda items
for the EDA in conjunction with its actions as a Council.
A. CALL TO ORDER
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To convene a meeting of the Economic
Development Authority to run concurrent with the City Council meeting.
B. ADOPT AGENDA
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To adopt the Agenda as presented or modified.
C. CONSENT AGENDA
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the Consent Agenda as presented or
modified.
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of the October 20, 2009 EDA meeting
are enclosed on pages W 1
1 5q
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE
EAGAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Eagan, Minnesota
October 20, 2009
A meeting of the Eagan Economic Development Authority was held on Tuesday,
October 20, 2009 at the Eagan Municipal Center. Present were President
Maguire, Commissioner Bakken, Commissioner Tilley, Commissioner Hansen
and Commissioner Fields. Also present were Executive Director Hedges, and
City Attorney Dougherty.
ADOPT AGENDA
Commissioner Tilley moved, Commissioner Fields seconded a motion to approve
the agenda as presented. Aye: 5 Nay: 0
CONSENT AGENDA
Commissioner Bakken moved, Commissioner Fields seconded a motion to
approve the Consent Agenda as presented. Aye: 5 Nay: 0
1. It was recommended to approve the minutes of the September 1, 2009
EDA meeting as presented.
OLD BUSINESS
There were no Old Business items.
NEW BUSINESS
CEDAR GROVE REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
REVISION OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH LENNAR FOR
NICOLS RIDGE PROJECT
City Administrator Hedges discussed the proposed amendment of the TIF
Development Agreement to implement the proposed settlement with Lennar in
regard to the Nicols Ridge project.
Commissioner Tilley moved, Commissioner Hansen seconded a motion to direct
the City Attorney to prepare an Amendment of the TIF Development Agreement
to implement the proposed settlement with Lennar regarding the Nicols Ridge
project in the Cedar Grove Redevelopment District. Aye: 5 Nay: 0
OTHER BUSINESS
There were no Other Business items.
ADJOURNMENT
Commissioner Bakken moved, Commissioner Tilley seconded a motion to
adjourn the meeting at 9:40 p.m. Aye: 5 Nay: 0
Date Thomas Hedges, Executive Director
Re 1
Agenda Memo
Eagan Economic Development Authority
New Business
November 17, 2009
1. CEDAR GROVE REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT RESOLUTION REGARDING THE
HEARING OFFICER'S DECISION REGARDING RELOCATION ASSISTANCE TO
MEDITERRANEAN CRUISE
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To adopt a resolution accepting the Finding of Fact, Conclusions
of Law and Recommendations from the Administrative Hearing Officer, as modified by the EDA, for
the relocation benefit appeal of the Mediterranean Cruise Cafe.
FACTS:
As part of the development of Cedar Grove, the EDA acquired the Mediterranean Cruise Cafe
property located at 3945 Sibley Memorial Highway.
As part of the eminent domain acquisition process, the Mediterranean Cruise Cafe is eligible
for relocation benefits including business reestablishment, searching expenses, and moving
expenses.
The EDA retained Dan Wilson at Wilson Development Services to provide relocation
assistance to Mediterranean Cruise Cafe. Mediterranean Cruise Cafe submitted relocation
claims totaling $429,796.62. The EDA made the following advanced relocation benefits to
Mediterranean Cruise Cafe:
$10,000.00
$2,500.00
$21,900.00
$50,000.00
$84,400.00
Following the completed move to the new facility in Burnsville, Mediterranean Cruise Cafe
refined its relocation claims and submitted claims totaling $386,993.03.
The EDA, through its Relocation Consultant, recommended approval of $67,547.55 of the
claims.
The Mediterranean Cruise Cafe appealed the decision of the Relocation Consultant and an
administrative hearing was held before attorney Corrine Heine of Kennedy and Graven.
The hearings were conducted on August 11 and August 12, 2009 and in her decision, the
hearing officer made a recommendation that the EDA should pay $105,366.94 of the claimed
$386,993.03.
The EDA's Relocation Consultant recommended that the EDA reimburse Mediterranean Cruise
Cafe for $40,559.33 for claims that were not appealed thereby bringing the total relocation
claim to $145,926.27.
With the EDA already having advanced the sum of $84,400.00, the hearing officer concluded
that there was an outstanding balance of $61,526.27 that should be paid.
The EDA also provided payment in the amount of $37,905.88 subsequent to the hearing as an
additional advance. Because the hearing officer was unaware of the most recent advance, there
is only an unpaid balance of $26,620.39 that is due to Mediterranean Cruise Cafe. The
proposed resolution notes this modification.
Business Reestablishment
Search Expenses
SAC fees
Advance on Moving Expenses
In addition, the hearing officer recommended payment of one claim only if the appropriate
documentation was provided. However, in paragraph 23 of her Order, there is no requirement
for the Mediterranean Cruise Cafe to provide such documentation. The City Attorney is
recommending that payment of that amount be made upon presentation of such documentation.
With the two modifications, it is appropriate to consider acceptance of the hearing officer's
recommendation.
Under the administrative act, the decision from the hearing officer shall constitute the final
decision unless the EDA modifies or rejects the recommendation with 90 days from the close
of the record (August 19, 2009).
Because this item relates to pending litigation (the appeal), if the EDA has questions about the
action item or wishes to discuss the matter in advance of taking action, it may adjourn to
executive session for that purpose. If not, the resolution is in order for consideration.
ATTACHMENTS:
Resolution on pages through (VS
Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Recommendations of hearing officer on pages) (Q.
througha
1(03
EXTRACT OF MINUTES OF MEETING OF THE
EAGAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTUORITY
DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
A regular meeting of the Eagan Economic Development Authority of the City of Eagan,
Dakota County, Minnesota, was duly held at the Eagan Municipal Center located at 3830 Pilot
Knob Road, in said City on November 17, 2009, at 6:30 p.m.
The following members were present: Mike Maguire, Cyndee Fields, Meg Tilley, Paul
Bakken and Gary Hansen; and the following were absent: none.
Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS
AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING OFFICER AS
MODIFIED THROUGH THIS RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, as part of the development of Cedar Grove, the Eagan Economic Development
Authority "EDA acquired the property owned by Mediterranean Cruise Cafe and located at 3945
Sibley Memorial Highway, Eagan, Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, as a result of such acquisition, the Mediterranean Cruise Cafe was displaced
from the Eagan site and relocated to the City of Burnsville; and
WHEREAS, Mediterranean Cruise Cafe was eligible for relocation benefits as a result of
such displacement; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with the EDA's relocation assistance procedure for appeals, the
Mediterranean Cruise Cafe appealed a decision of the City's relocation consultant conceming the
amount of certain relocation assistance; and
WHEREAS, the EDA designated Corrine Heine as the hearing officer; and
WHEREAS, the hearing officer conducted hearings on August 11 and August 12, 2009 and
provided Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Recommendation to the EDA concerning the
relocation benefits; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners of the Eagan
Economic Development Authority as follows:
1. The report of the hearing officer dated November 9, 2009 is hereby
ADOPTED by the EDA with the following two modifications:
2009.
(a) the EDA will pay Claim 10 (the Dakota Electric bill estimate
in the amount of $15,172.00) only upon proof by
Mediterranean Cruise Cafe that this amount has been paid
and the EDA will pay up to $15,172.00 for reimbursement of
this claim; and
(b) subsequent to the hearing, the EDA provided an additional
payment of $37,905.88 on September 25, 2009 and this
payment should be so reflected in the recommendation.
ADOPTED by the Eagan Economic Development Authority this day of November,
Mike Maguire, President
Thomas L. Hedges, Executive Director
STATE OF MINNESOTA EAGAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
COUNTY OF DAKOTA ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL
Mediterranean Cruise Cafe,
vs.
Appellant,
Eagan Economic Development Authority,
Respondent.
The following witnesses testified for Appellant:
Jamal Ansari, Mediterranean Cruise Cafe
Ryan Grefsheim, Greiner Construction
Farid Sabongi, Sabongi consulting Group, Inc.
1
FINDINGS OF FACT
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This matter came on for an administrative hearing before the undersigned Administrative
Hearing Officer on August 11 and 12, 2009 at the offices of Kennedy Graven, 470 U.S. Bank
Plaza, 200 South Sixth Street, Minneapolis, MN 55402. Appellant Mediterranean Cruise Cafe
"MCC appeals the denial by Respondent Eagan Economic Development Authority "EDA
of portions of Cafe's claims for relocation benefits.
Appearances were as follows:
Kirk Schnitker, Esq. of Schnitker Associates, P.A., 1330 81 Avenue N.E.,
Spring Lake Park, MN 55432, appeared on behalf of Appellant. Jamal Ansari,
owner of the MCC, also attended.
Robert B. Bauer, Esq. and Jessica L. Sanborn, Esq. of Severson, Sheldon,
Dougherty Molenda, P.A., 7300 West 147 Street. Suite 600, Apple Valley,
MN 55124 appeared on behalf of Respondent EDA. Also present on behalf of
the EDA were Jon Hohenstein, community development director, and Erik
Slettedahl, GIS specialist.
Kurt Hartner, Yaggy Colby Associates
The following witnesses testified for Respondent:
Jon Hohenstein, Eagan community development director
Daniel Wilson, Wilson Development Services
Keith Traxler, CCR Homes
Larry Schmit, Robb Electric
Based upon the evidence presented and all of the files, records and proceedings herein,
the Administrative Hearing Officer "AHO makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
Introductory Facts
1. The Claimant Mediterranean Cruise Cafe (MCC) is a restaurant business that was
located at 3945 Sibley Memorial Highway, Eagan, MN 55122 (the "Eagan site from 1979 until
June 9, 2009.
2. MCC was displaced from the Eagan site as a result of a redevelopment project
and eminent domain acquisition by the Respondent Eagan Economic Development Authority
"EDA
3. MCC relocated to 12500 Nicollet Avenue in Burnsville, Minnesota.
4. The MCC submitted three separate claims to the EDA for reimbursement
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, sections 117.52 through 117.56: March 17, 2009 for
$245,416.06; May 29, 2009 for $191,314.47; and June 9, 2009 for $3,895.00.
5. The EDA approved relocation payments in the amount of $120,606.88 and has
paid a total of $84,400.00 in claims. The EDA denied the remainder of MCC's claims.
6. The MCC appealed the EDA's denial of the claims and requested an
administrative hearing.
2
/(Q7
7. The MCC's claims for reimbursement initially totaled $440,625.53. At the
relocation hearing and afterward, the MCC and EDA modified their positions on several claims
so that there remain a total of 17 claim items in dispute, totaling $429,796.62.
8. The administrative record closed at the conclusion of the August 12, 2009
administrative hearing, with the exception of certain corrections and updates that the parties
agreed to complete and exchange with each other and the AHO by August 19, 2009.
Background Facts; Eminent Domain
9. Jamal Ansari is the owner of the MCC. He and two brothers opened the MCC in
1979 at the Eagan site. Mr. Ansari purchased the business from his brothers in 1987.
10. The building on the Eagan site was one story, approximately 2,850 gross square
feet in area. The kitchen had 1,036 square feet and the restaurant and bar area 1,534 square feet.
The restaurant had seating for 110 patrons indoors and 40 patrons at an outdoor patio. The
restaurant area had a small dance platform for use by belly dance entertainers. The restaurant
ambience was informal and consistent with a neighborhood bar /restaurant. Although
appropriately maintained, the building showed its age of over 30 years, with 8 -10 foot ceilings, a
relatively small dining area, and modest furnishings.
11. The MCC was displaced from the Eagan site as a result of the EDA's acquisition
of the site for a redevelopment project. Mr. Ansari testified that for over six years prior to the
MCC being displaced, the EDA had expressed an interest in acquiring the Eagan site for
redevelopment.
12. In July 2007, Mr. Ansari first contacted the City of Burnsville about possibly
relocating the MCC to the City of Burnsville development area known as the "Heart of the City."
13. On September 14, 2007, the EDA made a formal written offer to MCC's attorney
to acquire the Eagan site.
3
14. The EDA initiated eminent domain proceedings in 2007 to acquire the Eagan site
and other properties in connection with a redevelopment project.
15. The Dakota County district court issued an initial order in the condemnation
proceeding on February 5, 2008. In that order, the Court determined that the action met the
requirements of 2006 Minn. Laws c. 214, sec. 22(b)(2), which excepted certain projects from the
application of that 2006 Minn. Laws. c. 214 (the "2006 Legislation
16. The February 5, 2008 order approved the petition and appointed commissioners to
determine damages, but it expressly deferred ruling as to seven properties, including the Eagan
site. The evidence introduced at the hearing did not disclose the date of a subsequent order
approving the petition as to the Eagan site, but it is undisputed that the EDA subsequently
acquired the Eagan site through the eminent domain proceedings.
17. The record does not disclose the specific date upon which the EDA acquired title
to the Eagan site; however, Mr. Ansari testified that the property was acquired in 2008 and that
MCC remained in possession of the Eagan site, rent -free, for approximately one year following
the transfer of title.
18. The court- appointed commissioners in the condemnation action filed their award
of damages with respect to the taking of the Eagan site on October 17, 2008, in the total amount
of $813,500.00, of which $748,000.00 was designated for land and building, $65,000.00 was
designated for trade fixtures, and $500.00 was designated for reimbursement of appraisal fees.
The award clearly identifies the specific fixtures acquired by the EDA in the condemnation
proceeding, and it is undisputed that Appellant's relocation claim does not include claims for
fixtures acquired by condemnation.
4
/6,7
Judicial Notice; Legislative History
19. In 2008, while the eminent domain action was pending and before MCC had
moved from the Eagan site, the Minnesota legislature enacted into law Senate File No. 2379, as
2008 Minn. Laws c. 312 "S.F. 2379" or the "2008 Legislation
20. The AHO takes judicial notice of the legislative history for S.F. 2379, as obtained
from the official websites of the Minnesota House and Minnesota Senate.
21. Senator Thomas Bakk was the author in the Senate of S.F. 2379. The bill was
introduced on February 12, 2008 and referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee. As originally
introduced and as finally enacted, the legislation included two sections, each of which stated that
it was "effective retroactively from January 16, 2007."
22. The Senate Judiciary Committee heard the bill on February 19, 2008. The audio
recording of the committee hearing (Part 1 of audio, at approx. 03:10) includes the following
comments by Senator Bakk:
Madam Chair and Committee members. When we did the eminent domain reform
in 2006, we cleaned up some of the language in law relative to eminent domain and
one of the things that inadvertently happened was ...previously we had the
legislature had authorized up to $50,000 to be paid for relocation of existing
businesses, and somehow in the process of cleaning up some language, we
inadvertently eliminated that, and what ends up happening was we fall back under
federal law, where federal like highway projects where there is federal money
that applies, and the reimbursement goes down to $10,000, which is what there is
under federal law. So, we've got a number of projects that have gone forward that
the relocation benefit we've paid is not the higher $50,000 number that we had
always paid but because of the clean up language we're now only authorized to pay
$10,000. So this just corrects something that we believe inadvertently happened in
the 2006 bill.
The only other comments on the bill were by Senator Moua, the chair of the committee, who
summed up the legislation as follows just before calling for the vote:
5
170
Any questions for Senator Bakk? Again, this is one of those situations where I think
the law doesn't reflect what we actually wanted to do and we are just making that
correction.
23. S.F. 2379 received second reading in the Senate on February 25, 2008 and third
reading on February 28, 2008. At third reading, Senator Bakk made the following comments on
the floor of the Senate, according to the audio recording of that session (approx. 0:7:10: of
audio):
Thank you, Mr. President and Members. In 2006 when we did the eminent domain
reform legislation, we cleaned up a bunch of language, old language and law, that
wasn't needed any longer. And what happened was we inadvertently deleted a
provision that changed the relocation benefits that a business can receive when they
are being relocated under an eminent domain proceedings. So under the old law, we
were able to a local unit of government or MnDOT was able to pay them
$50,000. We never had any discussion about changing that number but
inadvertently the number got reduced to $10,000. MnDOT is actually the one who
brought me this bill and said they've actually had several businesses that they were
only able to pay $10,000 to because of the inadvertent drafting change. There is no
opposition to the bill. It just reinstates current law of offering $50,000 relocation to
businesses affected by eminent domain.
The Senate passed S.F. 2379 on a vote of 60 -0.
24. The companion bill to S.F. 2379 in the House was H.F. 2789, authored by
Representative David Dill. H.F. 2798 was introduced in the House on February 12, 2008 and
referred to the House Public Safety and Civil Justice Committee. H.F. 2789 received no further
action, but on March 3, 2008, the House received S.F. 2379 and referred it to the Public Safety
and Civil Justice Committee.
25. At the hearing before the Public Safety and Civil Justice Committee on March 13,
2008 (audio, at approx. 03:26:10), Representative Dill made the following introductory
comments:
This is a product of the drafting error that was done in the eminent domain bill that
was passed a couple of years ago and it was in the past that a business that was
relocated by acquiring right of way, when they required a right of way on a highway
6
l2(
when a business had to be relocated the Department does provide $50,000 worth
of assistance to that business. And so when it was drafted improperly in the past in
the eminent domain bill because it didn't include the language to allow the $50,000
reimbursement, we defaulted back to the federal requirements in federal law, which
is $10,000. And so what we're doing here is we're fixing a problem we created in
the eminent domain bill through this calamity of errors that caused this to be the
problem, and that's essentially the entire bill.
26. The House gave S.F. 2379 a second reading on March 18, 2008 and re- referred
the bill to the Local Government and Metropolitan Affairs Committee.
27. On March 19, 2008, the Local Government and Metropolitan Affairs (audio, at
approx. 00:00), without any substantive comment, recommended passage and be placed on the
consent calendar. S.F. 2379 received second reading before the House on March 27, 2008.
28. S.F. 2379 came before House for third reading on April 10, 2008 (video, approx:
10:24:05). At that time, Rep Dill offered an amendment on the floor:, to add a third section to
the effect that the bill would not apply to projects described in Laws 2006, chapter 214,
section 22, paragraph (b). Rep. Dill introduced the bill and amendment as follows:
Rep. Dill: Madam Speaker. Could I just explain the bill and then the amendment
will make sense? ...When the eminent domain bill was passed in 2006, there was a
$50,000 limitation on relocation expenses to businesses that are relocated after an
eminent domain proceeding for MnDOT and state projects. But because of the way
the bill was placed in statute, it made it only applicable to state projects so after the
35 bridge collapsed and they started acquiring right of way and doing some
condemnations down along the bridge area there, it came to light that they didn't
have the authority to pay the $50,000. So we're restoring that authority and that is
what the bill does.
Madam Speaker: The Clerk will report the amendment:
Clerk: Representative Dill moving to amend Senate File 2379 as follows: The
amendment is coded HDA584.
Madam Speaker: Representative Dill
Rep. Dill: ...In the language as the language was read by various cities, they were
concerned that cities that were doing redevelopment districts and acquiring right of
way in those redevelopment districts that they thought that they might have to go
7
17 a
back and retroactively pay the larger amount than they'd already paid when they
made their deal in these redevelopments such as the TIFs and things of that nature.
So this amendment just clarifies that it does not apply to cities who are in the process
of doing redevelopment and using the eminent domain statutes.
29. Upon questioning by Representative Kohls about the retroactivity date of
January 16, 2009, Representative Dill responded:
Yes, we have that, and the date of January 16, 2007 date has to do with some of the
acquisitions relating to the bridge problem.
The House passed the bill as amended, 133 -0.
30. The Senate did not confer in the House amendment, and both the House and
Senate appointed conference committees on April 24, 2008.
31. On May 5, 5005, the conference committee gave its report, with the House
acceding to the Senate version of the bill. The AHO did not locate any on -line audio or video
recording of the conference committee hearing on the bill.
32. The Senate re- passed the bill on third reading on May 5, 2008, on a vote of 65 -0.
(Video, 00:25:57) Sen. Bakk introduced the bill, stating:
Members, what you're voting on is the same language that passed the Senate. This
is the small little technical change in the eminent domain law that we passed in 2006
where we had inadvertently deleted a provision from law that established $50,000 as
the relocation cost for a business and the House had put an amendment on it and saw
the Senate's wisdom in conference, and were willing to take their amendment off, so
it's the same language that you passed earlier.
33. The House adopted the conference committee report and passed the legislation on
May 8, 2008, on a vote of 134 -0. (Video at 02:01:05). Representative Dill commented on the
work of the conference committee as follows:
This is the eminent domain bill which has to do with the going back and paying the
people for the land and future people when we condemned their land for business
purposes and getting it back up to the regular $50,000 back and when we did the bill
on the floor, when it left the House floor, I put an amendment on it that we'd
believed it was a technical amendment. It ended up we did not need the amendment.
8
173
In the conference committee we removed the amendment. It was a very small
technical amendment. Representative Kohls, if you were ever asked a question
about the retroactive date, we took that back off. It's the original bill as drafted. I
urge you to adopt the report. All of the conferees signed the report.
34. The Governor signed the legislation on May 15, 2008.
Relocation Assistance
35. The EDA retained Daniel Wilson of Wilson Development Services to serve as the
EDA's consultant with respect to the provision of relocation services and benefits.
36. The EDA provided the MCC with written notice that it was eligible for relocation
assistance on November 27, 2007.
37. According to Mr. Ansari, Mr. Wilson first contacted him in 2007 regarding the
relocation of the MCC. It was unclear from the testimony, but Mr. Ansari may have been
referring to the written notice of eligibility.
38. Mr. Wilson testified that his initial in- person meeting was with Mr. Ansari's
attorney, and that he was told not to contact Mr. Ansari directly. Mr. Ansari was represented at
the time by the attorney who assisted him in negotiating for the purchase of his relocation site.
At some later date, Mr. Ansari retained Mr. Schnitker. Mr. Wilson testified that he had
"nominal" direct contact with Mr. Ansari but that he had at least six meetings with Mr. Ansari's
legal counsel.
39. Representatives of the EDA, including Community Development Director
Hohenstein and Wilson Development Services, provided Mr. Ansari with referrals of possible
replacement sites that were available. Documented referrals were made on January 10 and 11
and April 8, 21, and 30, all in 2008. (Claimant Exh. Book, p. 209). Mr. Hohenstein also testified
to several other referrals that he had made on unspecified dates in conversation with Mr. Ansari.
9
114
40. Mr. Ansari retained Sabongi Consulting Group, Inc. and Farid Sabongi, architect,
to assist him in locating replacement properties. Mr. Sabongi and Mr. Ansari both testified that
Mr. Ansari desired to purchase rather than lease. Both testified that the criteria that they used for
evaluating replacement sites were: location close to Eagan site; close to highway and visible;
adequate parking; outdoor patio space.
41. The EDA referred more than 12 properties to Mr. Ansari for his consideration.
(Claimant Exh. Book, p. 209). Mr. Ansari found nearly all of them unacceptable for one or more
of the following reasons: available for lease but not purchase; not a freestanding building; too
small; no patio; not visible from Highway 13; a ramp instead of a surface parking lot; too distant
from the Eagan site.
42. Two sites that were available for purchase but were ultimately rejected were a
former Baker's Square building at 1960 Rahncliffe Court in Eagan, and another property at
Highway 149 and Lone Oak Road, also in Eagan.
43. Mr. Sabongi testified that there was only one parcel in Eagan that "would have
worked," but the "cost was prohibitive." It was unclear whether he was referring to the Lone
Oak site or the Baker's Square site.
44. Mr. Ansari testified that the site at Lone Oak Road was "too expensive," with an
asking price of $700,000.00.
45. Mr. Ansari gave serious consideration to the Baker's Square site. He had learned
of the availability of the site in December 2007, prior to the EDA's January notice to him about
its availability. Mr. Sabongi inspected the site and identified a number of improvements that the
building would need, including: increased water main to support sprinkler system; bringing the
kitchen up to code; replacing the roof; bringing restrooms to code; contracting for shared parking
10
175
spaces on adjacent land under the control of the seller, because the parking on the parcel was
inadequate.
46. The Baker's Square site was listed for $1.2 million, and Mr. Ansari gave a letter
of intent for $750,000, which took into account the improvements that Mr. Ansari deemed
necessary. The owner of the Baker's Square site countered with an offer of $1,050,000. Mr.
Ansari told the owner's agent that he would take it for $900,000, but he did not get a further
response. In the meantime, he had made a decision to relocate the MCC to Burnsville.
47. Although Mr. Ansari did not purchase the Baker's Square site, his nephew did.
The restaurant on the site is now owned and operated by Mr. Ansari's nephews as "Ansari's
Mediterranean Grill Lounge.
Relocation Site
48. Mr. Ansari decided to relocate the MCC to 12500 Nicollet Avenue in Burnsville
(the "Burnsville site in a development known as the "Heart of the City." The Burnsville site,
at the time, was an unimproved parcel of land, consisting of approximately .6 acres. It was
owned by the Burnsville Economic Development Authority "BEDA and located within a
redevelopment area and tax increment financing district.
49. Mr. Ansari first considered relocating to the Heart of the City in 2007. Mr.
Sabongi testified that he met with Burnsville representatives in 2007, but they wanted a payment
of $20,000 for use of the public parking ramp adjacent to the Burnsville site. Mr. Ansari did not
pursue it further until 2008, when he was approached by the mayor of Burnsville, who said that
the $20,000 would not be required. Mr. Sabongi's billing statements (Claimant's Exh. Book, pp.
23 and 24) suggest that Mr. Ansari first considered the Burnsville site prior to May 14, 2007 and
renewed his interest sometime near April 2008.
11
I 74)
50. Ansari Corporation, dba J 0 Mediterranean Cruise Partnership, entered into a
purchase and redevelopment agreement with BEDA,' effective June 17, 2008. Under the
agreement, Mr. Ansari agreed to pay $165,000 for the Burnsville site and to construct certain
"Minimum Improvements" on the site, including: a restaurant facility of approximately 7,760
square feet with 24 parking stalls; a 250 square -foot, finished, winterized, restroom facility that
would be accessible from the exterior of the restaurant building for use by the general public; and
a 120 square -foot pump room to house pump equipment that would serve an adjacent public
park. The BEDA paid Ansari $165,000 as consideration for the easements.
51. The redevelopment agreement required Mr. Ansari to submit all construction
plans for the Minimum Improvements to BEDA for prior approval. Mr. Ansari testified that
BEDA required a certain size building and building height. BEDA wanted "something unique
and beautiful," which he accepted as a "trade -off for buying the property." His original
estimated construction cost for the building was $1.5 million. The evidence did not disclose the
actual total construction cost.
52. The restaurant at the Burnsville site, after construction, has 10,746 gross square
feet, compared to the Eagan site's 2,850 square feet. The kitchen is 2,129 square feet, compared
to the Eagan site's 1,036 square feet. The restaurant and bar is 4,962 square feet, compared to
the previous 1,534. The Burnsville restaurant has seating for 199 diners indoors and 60 on the
adjacent patio, compared to 110 and 40, respectively, at the Eagan site.
53. The Burnsville site has a partial basement, banquet room, and upstairs /mezzanine
area with a bathroom, two offices and two storage rooms, none of which were available at the
BEDA was represented in the negotiations with Ansari by Kennedy Graven, Chartered, which is the law firm of the
Administrative Hearing Officer. The AHO did not participate in the firm's representation of BEDA on that matter and
disclosed the firm's representation to both parties, in writing, prior to the hearings in this matter. Both parties consented
to the assignment of this matter to the AHO. The AHO has not obtained any information related to that purchase from
any source other than the record in this matter.
12
177
Eagan site. The restaurant interior is majestic, with two -story cathedral ceilings over the main
dining area, chandelier lighting and an eye- catching, black granite bar two or three times the
length of the bar at the Eagan site.
54. Mr. Ansari testified that he had experienced significant stress in making decisions
related to relocation and that he had taken "a big chance." He acknowledged that he
discontinued the discussions with the Baker's Square owners because he made a business
decision to go to Burnsville, and he admitted having told the EDA's consultant that "you need to
dream big."
55. BEDA and Ansari Corporation closed on the purchase of the Burnsville site on
August 6, 2008.
56. The AHO finds that MCC relocated to the Burnsville site because it offered an
opportunity to expand and significantly upgrade the restaurant facilities over what MCC had had
at the Eagan site.
Disputed Relocation Claims
Claim 1 (City Connection Charges) (Claim 1 in March 17, 2009 Claim)
57. Claim 1 relates to various sewer and water charges imposed by the City of
Burnsville in connection with the sewer and water permit issued September 29, 2008.
(Claimant's Exhibit Book, p. 17).
58. Claim la is in the amount of $875.00, for a water meter supplied by the City of
Burnsville to meter water for the lawn irrigation system. Judicial notice is taken that in
Minnesota water meters are attached to the real estate and commonly purchased and sold as part
of the real estate once attached. The EDA denied Claim la in its entirety.
13
59. Claim lb is in the amount of $1,840, for a water meter supplied by the City of
Burnsville. The EDA denied Claim lb in its entirety.
60. Claim lc is in the amount of $24,831 for a city sewer connection charge. The
EDA denied Claim lc in its entirety.
61. Claim ld is in the amount of $29,078 for a city water connection charge. The
EDA denied Claim ld in its entirety.
62. Claim le is in the amount of $56,575 for a SAC or service availability charge.
The EDA approved $21,900 of Claim le but denied the balance of $34,675.
63. The SAC charge originated with the Metropolitan Council Environmental
Services division (MCES) and was collected by the City of Burnsville. At the time a property
connects to the metropolitan wastewater system, the Metropolitan Council Environmental
Services division charges the local government unit for its use of the metropolitan system
capacity, based on the estimated volume of wastewater flow from the property. The estimated
volume is expressed in units, with one unit being equivalent to an estimate of 274 gallons of
wastewater per day.
64. MCES determined that MCC's proposed use would generate 31 units, and MCES
charged the City of Burnsville $1,825 per unit or $56,575 for the connection to the metropolitan
system. The City of Burnsville required MCC to pay the Metropolitan Council's SAC charge as
part of the city's permitting requirements for the site.
65. The MCC had been charged for 12 SAC units when the Eagan site developed, and
the EDA approved reimbursement to the MCC for 12 units at $1,825 per unit or $21,900.
66. The City of Burnsville also calculates its connection charges for sewer and water
based upon the MCES determination of SAC units for the proposed use. Similar to the MCES
14
nq
SAC charges, which reimburse MCES for its costs of constructing the metropolitan wastewater
system, the City of Burnsville connection charges are used by the city to pay for the cost of
constructing, maintaining and making available its municipal sewer and water systems. The total
fee is determined based upon the number of units (as determined by MCES) and the applicable
rates, which the City determines based upon periodic review of trends in consumption,
connections to the system, anticipated development, and estimated costs. The city water
connection charge was calculated as 31 units times $938 or $29,078, and the sewer connection
charge was calculated as 31 units times $801 or $24,831.
67. The City uses connection charges as a means to finance the "cost of construction,
reconstruction, repairing, improving, enlarging, obtaining, maintaining and operating potable
water, sanitary sewer and storm sewer system facilities." (Claimant Exh. Book, p. 310). Storm
sewer connection charges are calculated based on acreage and collected as part of subdivision or
development approvals. Charges for water and sanitary sewer are collected with the building
permit. Id. p. 311.
68. Connection charges are usual and ordinary expenses incurred in connection with
land development. However, the charges are not limited to new development. Any change in
use of an existing structure that requires a building or plumbing permit will trigger a re-
determination by the MCES of the appropriate SAC charge. If the MCES levies a charge for
increased volume due to the change in use, the City of Burnsville also collects its connection fees
in an equivalent amount. (Claimant Exh. Book, pp. 331, 311).
Claim 2 (Architect's Fees) (March 17, 2009 Claim 2)
15
r8a
69. Claim 2 is for reimbursement of professional services provided by Sabongi
Consulting Group, in the total amount of $29,626. (Claimant Exh. Book, pages 19 -24). The
City approved $3,800 and denied the remainder of the claim.
70. Invoice 1 is dated May 14, 2007, is in the amount of $4,685, and indicates it is for
site analysis and schematic design. This invoice identifies a total fee for phase A —site analysis
and schematic design, in the amount of $12,673.
71. Invoice 2 is dated April 30, 2008, is in the amount of $3,800, and is for site
analysis and schematic design. This invoice identifies additional estimated contract fees,
including subsequent phases B through E for design development, construction documents,
bidding and construction management.
72. Invoice 3 is dated May 30, 2008, is in the amount of $4,188, and is for site
analysis and schematic design. The total of Invoices 1, 2 and 3 is $12,673, the initially identified
cost of site analysis and design.
73. Subsequent invoices are dated June 30, 2008 or after and are for subsequent
phases of the work, including design development and preparation of bidding documents.
Claim 3 (Zoning Report) (March 17, 2009 Claim 3)
74. Claim 3 is for reimbursement of professional services provided by Dakota County
Abstract for the preparation of an ownership report necessary for a zoning hearing, in the amount
of $320. (Claimant Exh. Book, pp. 14 and 26).
Claim 4 (Attorney Fees) (March 17, 2009 Claim 4)
75. Claim 4 is for reimbursement of professional services provided by the law firm of
Kelly Lemmons, in the amount of $7,447.50, for services provided between May 9, 2008 and
August 6, 2008. (Claimant Exh. Book, pp. 28 -31).
16
76. The law firm's billings are for review and negotiation of the purchase agreement
terms and matters related to the closing on the purchase and redevelopment agreement.
Claim 5 (Building Permit) (March 17, 2009 Claim 5)
77. Claim 5 is for a building permit fee for plan review, paid to the City of Burnsville,
in the amount of $4,651.89. (Claimant Exh. Book, pp. 14 and 33 -34). The payment was made
August 22, 2008.
Claim 6 (Zoning Fees) (March 17, 2009 Claim 6)
78. Claim 6 relates to application fees for zoning approvals and escrow monies
required by the City of Burnsville, in the amount of $5,630. (Claimant Exh. Book, pp. 14 and
36 -37). The payment was made May 21, 2008.
Claim 7 (Development Fees) (March 17, 2009 Claim 7)
79. Claim 7 relates to various development fees charged by the City of Burnsville, in
the amount of $11,879.31. (Claimant Exh. Book, pp. 14 and 39). The fees include park
dedication fees, a charge for updating city maps, an erosion control inspection fee, and a storm
sewer charge. The bill is dated May 14, 2008.
Claim 8 (Permit Fees) (March 17, 2009 Claim 8)
80. Claim 8 relates to permit fees paid to the City of Burnsville, including: building
permit, $11,819.64; plumbing permit, $2,144; electrical permits, $2,125.50; fire prevention
plumbing permit, $444.88; heating permit, $2,798.80; utility plumbing permit, $826.79, and
building permit for grading, $2,502.75. (Claimant Exh. Book, pp. 14 and 41 -61).
Claim 9 (Increased Costs of Operation)(March 17, 2009 Claim 9)
81. Claim 9 is a claim for reimbursement of increased costs of operation at the
Burnsville site, in the amount of $50,000. (Claimant Exh. Book, pp. 63 -64; Claimant Exh. 17).
17
Aga
82. MCC paid $7,090.40 per year in real estate taxes at the Eagan site in 2008.
Mr. Ansari estimated that taxes at the Burnsville site would be $40,000 per year, but actual tax
data was not available. He claimed the difference in taxes between the two sites for a period of
24 months or two years, totaling $65,819.35. MCC claimed $50,000, the amount which it asserts
is the cap on reestablishment expense reimbursement under applicable law.
83. Mr. Ansari's estimate of the taxes for the Burnsville site was based upon the
anticipated taxable value of the property following completion of construction, which did not
occur until May 2009. Judicial notice is taken that property taxes in Minnesota are based on the
use and market value of the property as of January 2 in the year preceding the year in which the
taxes are paid. The Burnsville site was owned by BEDA until August 6, 2008 and therefore
should have been exempt from taxes in 2009. MCC's construction of the new building on the
Burnsville site was incomplete on January 2, 2009, with limited contributing building value.
(Resp. Exh. 11). No evidence was presented regarding the estimated taxes that the Eagan site
would generate based on its estimated value of $243,800 as of January 2, 2009.
84. At the hearing, MCC introduced evidence that his monthly loan payments had
totaled $3,503 when he owned the Eagan site in 2008 but that he had obtained loans from the
SBA to finance the Eagan site, with monthly payments of $9,451.53 and $3,182.25.
Claim 10 (Dakota Electric Bill) (May 29, 2009 Claim 3)
85. Claim 10 is for reimbursement of costs to provide three -phase electrical service to
the MCC at the Burnsville site, in the amount of $15,172.00. (Claimant Exh. Book, pp. 79 -82).
86. Although there was electric service to the Burnsville site, a retaining wall was
built over the top of the existing electrical service. The electric service provider, Dakota Electric
Association "DEA required the electric service to be replaced at MCC's cost, in order to
18
r
comply with DEA's installation standards. DEA determined that the retaining wall prevented
adequate access to the underground facilities.
87. The re- routing of the electrical service was performed outside the property
boundaries of the Burnsville site, within the public right of way for Nicollet Avenue and
Travelers Trail West. Nicollet Avenue abuts the Burnsville site, and Travelers Trail West is the
first intersecting street to the north of the Burnsville site, but it does not abut the Burnsville site.
88. Dakota Electric required the existing service to be replaced, not only to serve the
MCC's Burnsville site, but also that the replaced line could provide service to the Nicollet Park
transformer and other properties in the vicinity.
89. The $15,172.00 was an estimate, and no actual bill had been generated by Dakota
Electric as of the date of the hearing.
Claim 11 (DPM Moving Estimate) (May 29, 2009 Claim 6)
90. Claim 11 is for reimbursement of costs to move MCC's computerized cash
register system, in the amount of $15,500.00. (Claimant Exh. Book, pp. 95 -97; Exh. 18).
91. MCC obtained two quotations from Dynamic Products Midwest, LLC "DPM
one to move and install the point of sale system for $15,500.00; and another to install a new
system for $17,313.00. At the hearing, MCC introduced evidence that the actual bill for
installing a new system was $18,538.08 (which included sales tax that had been omitted from the
quotation). MCC's claim is for the lower of the two estimates: $15,500.00.
92. The EDA's relocation consultant obtained a cost estimate from Sovran, Inc. to
move and install the old system at the Burnsville location. The Sovran estimate was for
$2,649.88. Because the EDA believed the DPM estimate was excessive, the EDA approved only
$2,649.88 of the claim.
19
/g�
93. The DPM quotation lacks the specificity of the Sovran quotation. Sovran's
estimate included a detailed breakdown of the hardware that would be moved and the estimated
time for moving the hardware and wiring and backing up the data to prevent data loss. Sovran
estimated 13 hours of time at hourly rates that ranged from $95 to $150. In contrast, DPM's
quote was broken down into categories:
labor to move and set up computers and POS system to new location
reinstall and secure network
cables connectors installed in new location
20
$8,400.00
$2,260.00
$4,840.00
Items to be moved are not identified. No hourly rate is provided, and no estimate of time is given.
Even assuming an hourly rate of $200, the DPM quote assumes it would take 42 hours to move and
set up the computer equipment. Sovran estimated the wiring at $589.38, compared to DPM's
quotation of $4,840.00.
94. From the documentation provided, the AHO is unable to determine DPM's hourly
rate, what equipment DPM proposed to move and install, what security measures needed to be
taken for the data, or what DPM's estimate of time was to perform the work.
Claim 12 (Printing Costs) (May 29, 2009 Claim 8)
95. Claim 12 is for reimbursement of printing costs for lunch and dinner menus, take-
out menus and flyers, in the amount of $5,309.47. (Claimant Exh. Book, p. 105). At the
relocation hearing, MCC withdrew its $838.51 request for printing flyers.
96. The EDA's relocation consultant examined the old lunch menus, dinner menus,
and take -out menus. Only the take -out menus contained the address and telephone number of the
Mediterranean Cruise. The take -out menus were one -page menus produced by photocopying.
97. The Mediterranean Cruise submitted invoices from Minuteman Press that
included $1,1718.36 for 150 lunch menus, $698.51 for 1000 take -out menus, and $1,718.36 for
150 dinner menus, plus tax and shipping. Mr. Ansari testified that the order quantities were all
minimum orders required by the printer.
98. The EDA's relocation consultant requested a copy of the new take -out menu and a
count of the old menus spoiled by the move. MCC stated that it had 425 take out menus on
hand. There was no evidence concerning the number of dinner and lunch menus on hand, but
because there were at least 100 vinyl covers for each of the lunch and dinner menus, the AHO
infers that there were at least 100 lunch menus and 100 dinner menus on hand.
99. Mr. Ansari testified that MCC needed to upgrade and change its menu and change
prices. He testified that the MCC had to increase its prices because of the move. The AHO finds
this testimony credible, with respect to the change in menu prices.
100. The EDA denied the claims for the lunch and dinner menus because those menus
did not have addresses and were not spoiled for that reason. The EDA agreed to reimburse the
MCC $296.87 for the 425 take -out menus spoiled by the relocation. (425/1000 x $698.51
$296.87).
Claim 13 (Menu Covers) (May 29, 2009 Claim 9)
101. The parties resolved Claim 13 at the relocation hearing.
102. The MCC sought reimbursement for the cost of custom vinyl menu covers.
MCC's initial claim was for 300 covers totaling $4,980.00 in printing expenses.
103. The EDA had counted only 69 covers at the Eagan site, but Mr. Ansari testified
that there were at least 200 covers spoiled by the move. The EDA agreed to reimburse the MCC
for 200 covers, and the MCC accepted that offer.
Claim 14 (Loss of Food) (May 29, 2009 Claim 10)
21
104. Claim 14 is for reimbursement in loss of food during the 3 -day closing period
between the move from the Eagan site to the Burnsville site, in the amount of $3,000.00. MCC
was closed for three days, from May 27 -29, 2009.
105. MCC supported the claim with a memo from Mr. Ansari. In the memo, Mr.
Ansari stated that MCC purchases food twice per week and spends approximately $3,000.00 per
week on produce and meat. He estimated that with food prep and labor the total loss would be
around $4,500.00 to $5,500.00
106. MCC also provided copies of invoices from various food vendors. (Claimant
Exh. Book, pp. 109 -136.) The invoices documented expenditures as follows: week of April 17,
2009, total of $567.09 (p. 111); week of April 26, 2009, $780.59 (pp. 121, 129 and 130); week of
May 16, 2009, $636.42 (p.133); week of May 17, 2009, $3,854.82 (pp. 110, 112,115, 117, 119-
120, 123 -124, 128, 131 -132); and week of May 28, 2009, $2,194.0 (pp. 134 -136).
107. The EDA's relocation consultant's assistant, Steve Schmieg, contacted the
Minnesota Department of Health on June 11, 2009 to inquire about the move of food products.
Gary, from the Minnesota Department of Health, said that frozen and refrigerated food products
could be moved, provided food was not spoiled.
108. During the relocation consultant's visit to the Eagan facility on June 11, 2009, he
observed approximately 10 items in bowls in a refrigerator that were not moved. The AHO does
not find that evidence indicative of the amount of food lost, because spoiled food would have
been disposed of earlier.
109. Mr. Ansari did not provide any testimony regarding specific quantities of food
that were identified in the supplied invoices and that were subsequently lost as a result of the
move.
22
1�7
110. Mr. Wilson testified that MCC should have been able to anticipate the move when
ordering food.
111. The EDA used the following method to determine the lost food total:
$3,000 /week for food $428 per day x 3 days $1,284 lost food estimate. The EDA approved
this amount as a moving expense.
112. The EDA denied the remainder of the claim.
Claim 15 (Moving /Substitute Equipment) (May 29, 2009 Claim 11)
113. Claim 15, in the amount of $94,941.00, is for reimbursement of MCC's costs of
moving personal property or substituting equipment.
114. To determine the reasonableness of the MCC's claims, the EDA's relocation
consultant obtained estimates from: Keith Traxler of CCR Homes, a general contractor, and
Larry Schmit, an electrician with Robb Electric. Traxler's estimates were based in part upon
estimates from Swanson Plumbing, for plumbing items. Based on the estimates from Traxler,
Schmit and Swanson, the EDA approved $34,126.00 ($31,706.00 general contractor estimate for
disconnect and reconnect plus $2,420 estimate for moving) and denied the remaining claim.
115. At the relocation hearing, Ryan Grefsheim testified on behalf of the MCC and
Keith Traxler and Larry Schmit testified on behalf of the EDA.
116. Grefsheim was employed by Greiner Construction and was the project manager
for the construction at the Burnsville site. Grefsheim prepared the estimate for the disconnect
and reconnect of the personal property on behalf of Greiner Construction. Grefsheim has been
employed in the construction industry for two years, since his graduation from Mankato State in
2007 with a construction management and business administration degree. His experience has
been in new construction, and approximately 25 percent of his work has been on
23
1 8g
kitchen/restaurant construction or build -out. He has experience as a job estimator on commercial
bid requests.
117. Keith Traxler is a general contractor with CCR Homes and Construction. He
testified that he had worked on commercial projects in the past, but he had never worked on a
commercial restaurant. He testified that he had never worked with structural steel and did not
calculate in -wall blocking for any of the items in his estimate.
118. Larry Schmitt is an electrician with Robb Elecric. He testified that he has been
providing electrical estimates for 11 years. He testified that he had worked on several restaurants
and commercial kitchens.
119. Grefsheim testified that it is not his usual job to estimate the cost of disconnecting
personal property. He testified that in restaurant moves, it is common not to relocate all fixtures.
Some items cannot be moved because of health department requirements. For some items,
relocating and modifying the equipment is more time consuming than purchasing new
equipment. Many of the Claim 15 items were substitute equipment claims, where the displaced
business does not move the actual item but is reimbursed for moving costs based on the lower of
the cost to disconnect, move and reconnect the old equipment compared to the cost to replace
and install new equipment. In that regard, many of the claims were based on estimated, rather
than actual, moving and reconnection costs.
120. Grefsheim testified that Greiner Construction uses union contractors, and his
estimates were based upon union rates. His estimate was also based on estimates provided by a
subcontractor, Kitchen Equipment. Grefsheim testified that he was required to use Kitchen
Equipment according to Greiner's union contracts, but he was unable to provide any breakdown
24
�9
of the Kitchen Equipment bid by number of hours, hourly rate, type of labor provided (skilled or
unskilled) or cost of materials.
121. Grefsheim testified that he would charge $85 to $88 per hour for electrical work;
$90 to $92 per hour for plumbing work; $88 to $90 per hour for carpentry; and $110 per hour for
trucking. Grefsheim's estimates included the cost of the moving truck. Grefsheim included the
estimate for the moving truck with each item. His estimates calculated that the moving truck
would be at the job for the amount of time that the laborers were at the job. His estimate did not
figure that one truck would be available to move multiple items at one time.
122. The EDA's estimates were not based upon union rates. Schmit testified that his
estimates were based upon $80 per hour for electrical work. Traxler testified that the plumbing
rate was $80 per hour, which was not based on prevailing wages. He testified that he used
prevailing wage information from the Internet for use of skilled laborers ($38.09 per hour) and
carpenters ($45 per hour). Traxler also testified that he had prepared his estimate by looking at
each individual item of equipment but had also estimated the job as a total package. Traxler
obtained an estimate for trucking costs from Berger Trucking, in the amount of $2,420. The
estimate was based on moving multiple items together at one time rather than individually.
Traxler also testified that the disconnects could be done as demolition project without using an
electrician or plumber, which would also save approximately $6,400 in costs.
Claim 16 (Computer System) (June 9, 2009 Claim 1)
123. Claim 16 was for the cost of moving computers, in the amount of $1,760.00
(MCC Exh. Book, p. 149). MCC withdrew this claim on August 14, 2009.
Claim 17 (Liquor Menus) (June 9, 2009 Claim 2)
25
124. Claim 17 is for the cost of printing 250 beverage and liquor menus, in the amount
of $1,964.20. (MCC Exh. Book, p. 150). The original claim was $2,135. The EDA approved
$170.80, and the remaining amount was appealed.
125. The EDA's relocation consultant counted 20 liquor menus at the Eagan site on
June 11, 2009.
126. Mr. Ansari testified that Minuteman Press required a minimum order of 250 for
printing the liquor menus.
127. The EDA agreed to reimburse the MCC $170.80 for the 20 menus on hand at the
time of the relocation. (20/250 x $2,135 $170.80).
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Preliminary Legal Matters
1. The EDA's obligation to pay relocation benefits is governed by the Minnesota
Uniform Relocation Act, Minn. Stat. 117.50 -56 "MURA MURA is intended to make
public funds available to reimburse relocation costs incurred by households and businesses
displaced by public acquisitions of property where there is no federal financial participation. In
re Application for Relocation Benefits of James Brothers Furniture, 642 N.W. 2d 91 (Minn. Ct.
App. 2002). Under MURA, Minn. Stat. 117.52, an "acquiring authority" must
as a cost of acquisition, provide all relocation assistance,
services, payments and benefits required by the [federal] Uniform
Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of
1970 and those regulations adopted pursuant thereto.
2. The regulations promulgated under the federal URA are found at 49 C.F.R.
Part. 24.
3. MCC is a "displaced person" within the meaning of Minn. Stat. 117.50, subd. 3
and 49 C.F.R. 24.2(a)(9)(i)(A). It is therefore entitled to reimbursement of: (i) "actual moving
26
and related expenses, as the [EDA] determines to be reasonable and necessary," according to 49
C.F.R. 24.301; (ii) "actual, reasonable and necessary expenses" as specified in 49 C.F.R.
24.303; and (iii) reestablishment expenses as allowed under 49 C.F.R. 24.304 and MURA.
4. A distinction between moving expenses under 24.301 and reestablishment
expenses under 24.304 is that moving expenses relate to personal property only, and
reestablishment expenses relate to modifications to the replacement real property. See The MN
Cape Ann v. United States, 199 F.2d 61, 67 (1 Cir. 1999). This is supported by the comments in
the preamble to the proposed rule changes that were ultimately promulgated January 4, 2005 (see
Fed. Reg., vol. 68, no. 242, p. 70350 [comments to 24.303]), and also by the preamble to the
final revised relocation regulations, published January 4, 2005:
Claims for Moving Expenses under 49 C.F.R. 24.301
5. The MCC has submitted claims for reimbursement pursuant to the several
provisions of 49 C.F.R. 24.301. The general provision for eligible moving expenses is found at
24.301(a)(1):
as follows:
[W]e believe actual moving cost expenses for businesses should be limited to
personal property items, while expenses for improving business real property
should be reimbursed under reestablishment provisions of 24.304. However, we
note that three provisions which were formerly under reestablishment limitations,
and which do not fall within the category of realty or personalty, have been
moved to revised 24.303, and can be considered for reimbursement without a
defined dollar limitation. Fed. Reg. vol. 70, no. 2, p. 603 (discussion of
comments to 24.301(g)(3)).
Any owner occupant or tenant who qualifies as a displaced person and who
moves from a business ...is entitled to payment of his or her actual moving and
related expenses, as the Agency determines to be reasonable and necessary.
6. The specific provisions of 24.301 under which MCC has submitted claims are
27
(d) Moves from a business, farm or nonprofit organization. Personal property as
determined by an inventory from a business may be moved by one or a
combination of the following methods: (Eligible expenses for moves from a
business include those expenses described paragraphs (g)(1) through (g)(7) of
this section and paragraphs (g)(11) through (g)(18) of this section and 24.303.)
(2) Self -move. A self -move payment be based on one or a combination of the
following:
(i) The lower of two bids or estimates prepared by a commercial mover or
qualified Agency staff person. At the Agency' s discretion for a low cost or
uncomplicated move may be based on a single bid or estimate; or
(ii) Supported by receipted bills for labor and equipment. Hourly labor rates
should not exceed the rates paid by a commercial mover to employees performing
the same activity and, equipment rental fees should be based on the actual rental cost
of the equipment but not to exceed the cost paid by a commercial mover.
(11) Any license, permit, fees or certification required of the displaced
person at the replacement location. However, the payment may be based on the
remaining useful life of the existing license, permit, fees or certification.
Claims Under 49 C.F.R. 24.301(g)(1) (2), (3) and (16): Claims 11 and 15
7. Claim 11 was made pursuant to 24.301(g)(1), and Claim 15 was made pursuant
to 24.301(g)(1), (2), (3) and (16):
(g) Eligible actual moving expenses.
(1) Transportation of the displaced person and personal property.
[language omitted]
(2) Packing, crating, unpacking, and uncrating of the personal property.
(3) Disconnecting, dismantling, removing, reassembling, and reinstalling
personal property. For businesses, this includes machinery, equipment,
substitute personal property, and connections to utilities available within the
building; it also includes modifications to the personal property, including those
mandated by Federal, State or local law, code or ordinance, necessary to adapt it to
the replacement structure, the replacement site, or the utilities at the replacement
site, and modifications necessary to adapt the utilities at the replacement site to the
personal property.
(16) Purchase of substitute personal property. If an item of personal
property, which is used as part of a business or farm operation is not moved but is
28
j�3
promptly replaced with a substitute item that performs a comparable function at the
replacement site, the displaced person is entitled to payment of the lesser of:
(i) The cost of the substitute item, including installation costs of the replacement
site, minus any proceeds from the sale or trade -in of the replaced item; or
(ii) The estimated cost of moving and reinstalling the replaced item but with no
allowance for storage. At the Agency's discretion, the estimated cost for a low cost
or uncomplicated move may be based on a single bid or estimate.
8. MCC's documentation for Claim 11 was not adequately detailed for the AHO to
determine what was included in the invoice and whether the charge was reasonable. MCC did
not meet the burden of proof for its claim, and the AHO affirms the EDA's approved amount of
$2,649.88.
9. Although Claim 15 was quite detailed in some respects, in many respects, it also
lacked the detail that the AHO would have preferred in order to determine the reasonableness of
each and every claim. The AHO's determinations on each of the disputed items is addressed in
the chart attached as Exhibit A, which is incorporated herein as additional findings and
conclusions.
10. The results reached in the attached Exhibit A are based in part upon the following
general determinations. The EDA's estimate was lower than MCC's estimate, in part, due to the
EDA's use of non union, unskilled labor in its estimate. It is not, however, per se unreasonable
for a business to use union rates for purposes of determining its moving costs. Use of union rates
could be abused if the rates are used only for the purpose of substitute personal property claims
where the equipment is never actually moved but the estimated moving costs are compared to the
cost of the new replacement equipment. This claim contains a high number of substitute
equipment items. Nevertheless, MCC did actually retain a union contractor to install new and
moved equipment, and the AHO concludes that MCC's use of union labor rates was not
29
1 q4
unreasonable. The AHO has used the lower end of the union rate range quoted by Grefsheim for
all of the claims.
11. Evaluation of MCC's moving estimate was complicated by the fact that MCC
constructed a new building rather than moved into an existing building. Unlike Traxler and
Schmit, Grefsheim did not provide a breakdown of hours and materials for each item. Although
the hourly rates to which Grefsheim testified were reasonable union rates, the lack of detailed
information on hours and materials make it difficult to evaluate the reasonableness of the overall
estimate for each item. For example, there was no information on any of the estimates provided
by Kitchen Equipment not the level of skilled labor used, not the hourly rates, not the
materials, and no description of the specific work that was involved.
12. In contrast, the AHO found Schmit's testimony credible and detailed with respect
to the number of hours required to do the work and the cost of materials. Traxler had less
credibility on some matters because of his lack of experience in estimating disconnections and
reconnections for restaurants, and in several instances the AHO has determined that Traxler
underestimated the hours required. For the most part, the AHO has utilized the hours and
materials as estimated by the EDA and the hourly rates quoted by Grefsheim.
13. The MCC's cost estimates are overstated and unreasonable to the extent that
Grefsheim estimated the cost of moving each item individually rather than moving them
together. Although most of the items were replaced rather than moved, so that the estimates are
essentially hypothetical, the failure to estimate for an efficient move of equipment results in an
unreasonably high estimate. The AHO has accepted the EDA's moving cost estimate.
14. Both parties used a 10% profit and overhead factor, which is reasonable. The
AHO has used the same profit and overhead factor.
30
1 4S
15. Based upon the available evidence, the AHO determines that the EDA properly
denied $49,904.12 of the total amount for Claim 15, and the AHO determines that MCC is
entitled to reimbursement of a total of $45,036.88 for Claim 15.
Claims Under 49 C.F.R. 24.301(g)(6) and (7): Claim 14
16. Claim 14 was made pursuant to 24.301(g)(6) and (7):
(g) Eligible actual moving expenses.
(6) The replacement value of property lost, stolen, or damaged in the
process of moving (not through the fault or negligence of the displaced person, his
or her agent, or employee) where insurance covering such loss, theft, or damage is
not reasonably available.
(7) Other moving related expenses that are not listed as ineligible under
24.301(h), as the Agency determines to be reasonable and necessary.
17. MCC did not identify any specific food items that were actually lost or spoiled.
Mr. Ansari testified regarding average expenses of the business for food, but the evidence
showed that MCC incurred only $2,194.07 for the week in which the move occurred. Mr. Ansari
did not testify that MCC lost the entire amount of food it had ordered for the week in which the
move occurred, nor is it reasonable to infer from the evidence that MCC would have ordered
food only to throw it all away. The EDA assumed a loss of $428 per day, based on $3,000 per
week for food and a 3 -day closure. The AHO determines that the $1,284 is a reasonable and
proper relocation payment, in the absence of more specific documentation of loss by MCC.
Claims Under 49 C.F.R. 24.301(g)(11): Claims la and lb, 5, 6, 7, and 8
31
18. The MCC made several claims (Claims la -e, 5, 6, 7 and 8) pursuant to 49 C.F.R.
24.301(g)(11). (Claim 1 a was also made under 24.303(a), and that provision is discussed at
conclusions 39 -41 below.)
19. Section 24.301(g)(11) provides for reimbursement of:
(g) Eligible actual moving expenses.
(11) Any license, permit, fees or certification required of the displaced
person at the replacement location. However, the payment may be based on the
remaining useful life of the existing license, permit, fees or certification.
20. FHWA FAQ No. 63 provides as follows:
63. 24.301(g)(11). Are there any (imitations on the costs that can be
reimbursed for licenses, permits, or certifications required of the displaced
person at the replacement location?
The costs must be actual, reasonable, and necessary. The licenses, permits, or
certification requirements necessary to operate the particular business being
relocated are eligible for payment as moving expenses. Occupancy permits,
licenses and such fees paid for the replacement real property, which were
formerly eligible as reestablishment expenses, can now be reimbursed as moving
expenses. Reimbursement of actual, reasonable, and necessary costs may be
limited to those amounts that are for the remaining useful life of the licenses, etc.,
at the site acquired.
(Emphasis added.)
21. The language in the regulation does not clearly define the scope of the "licenses,
permits and fees" that may be reimbursed. The FAQ provides some, but little guidance. It
suggests that the expense must be a license, permit or fee necessary to operate the particular
business. For example, a liquor license fee might be reimbursed under 24.301(g)(11).
22. Section 24.301 must be read as a whole. Section 24.301(h)(10) provides that
"physical changes to the real property at the replacement location" are ineligible moving
32
1.17
expenses "except as provided in 24.301(g)(3) and 24.304(a)." Section 24.301(g)(3) relates
only to modifications that are made to personal property to adapt them to the replacement site or
modifications made to utilities at the replacement site necessary to adapt them to the personal
property; and, 24.304(a) relates to reestablishment expenses. Section 24.301 (h)(10) suggests
that 24.301(g)(11) was not intended to allow reimbursement for building permits.
23. The FHWA's comments to the 2005 revised relocations also provide guidance in
interpreting the scope of 24.301(g)(11). In those comments, the FHWA indicated that the costs
that had been moved from the reestablishment category to the moving expense category "only
included those costs that were unrelated to improvements at the replacement site. Costs related
to improving the replacement real property were more clearly considered to be `reestablishment
expenses,' and accordingly, were retained in 24.304." Fed. Reg., Vol. 70, no. 2, p. 605
(comment to 24.304). The FHWA comments provide further support for the conclusion that
building permit fees are not eligible expenses under 24.301(g)(11).
24. Accordingly, the AHO determines that the EDA properly denied Claim 5
(building permit fee) in the amount of $4,651.98, Claim 6 (zoning application fees) in the
amount of $5,630.00, Claim 7 (park dedication and development fees) in the amount of
$11,879.31, and Claim 8 (building, plumbing, electrical, heating and grading permits for new
construction) in amounts totaling $22,662.36. All of the fees were incurred with respect to
physical changes at the replacement location and are costs related to the improvement of the
replacement real property.
25. In theory, permit fees that are not prohibited by 24.301(h)(10) (.i.e., those that
could be paid under 24.303g)(3)) could be reimbursed in some situations. E.g., if a building or
plumbing permit were necessary for purposes of modifying existing utilities at the replacement
33
19�
site to the personal property. However, the permits obtained by MCC were for new construction
and installation of new improvements, not for modifications to an existing structure.
26. Claims 5 through 8 could be characterized as reestablishment expenses under
24.304(a), which is discussed further at conclusion 78 below.
27. Claims la and lb are "fees" incurred for the installation of water meters one for
the lawn irrigation system and one for the building. MCC contends that under the plain language
of 24.301(g)(11), it is entitled to reimbursement of "any fees,... at the replacement
location" (emphasis added), but such a broad reading of the regulation would allow claimants to
evade limitations in the rules simply by characterizing an expense as a "fee." These expenses are
charges for water meters and not merely regulatory fees. Water meters are capital equipment,
the cost of which is incurred in constructing a new business building, and those costs are
ineligible under 24.301(b)(1). (See also, Fed. Reg., Vol. 70, No. 2, p. 605 (comment to
24.304).
28. The EDA properly denied Claims la, lb, 5, 6, 7 and 8.
Claims Under 49 C.F.R. 24.301(g)(13): Claims 12, 13 and 17
29. The MCC submitted Claims 12, 13, and 17 pursuant to 49 C.F.R. 24.301(g)(13),
which provides:
(g) Eligible actual moving expenses.
(13) Relettering signs and replacing stationery on hand at the time of
displacement that are made obsolete as a result of the move.
30. The parties settled Claim 13 at the hearing.
31. Claim 12 related to the costs of printing lunch, dinner and take -out menus.
Claim 17 related to the cost of printing liquor and beverage menus.
34
i ii
32. The AHO determines that as a result of the move, MCC reasonably and
necessarily ordered new lunch, dinner and take -out menus for the replacement site. The AHO
further determines that it is reasonable to reimburse the lunch and dinner menus based upon a
count of 100 of each, similar to the vinyl menu covers.
33. The regulations provide only for reimbursement of the cost to replace menus "on
hand at the time of displacement" rather than reimbursement of the entire minimum order
amount. Similar to stationery, menus will require replacement on an ongoing basis due to use,
wear, damage or loss. Reimbursing for the entire minimum order would not simply replace
menus spoiled by the move (the menus on hand), but it would effectively re -stock a supply item
used in the normal course of business operations, which is prohibited by 24.304(b)(2).
34. The AHO recommends that the EDA reimburse $1,261.56 for the lunch menus
(100/150 x $1,718.36 $1,145.57; plus, allocable portion of the sales tax and handling,
$115.99).
35. The AHO recommends that the EDA reimburse $1,261.56 for the dinner menus
(100 /150 x $1,718.36 $1,145.57; plus, allocable portion of the sales tax and handling, $115.99)
36. The AHO recommends that the EDA reimburse $317.26 for the take -out menus.
(425/1000 x $698.51 $296.87; plus, allocable portion of the sales tax ad handling, $20.39)
37. The AHO recommends that the EDA reimburse $170.80 for the liquor menus
(20/250 x $2,135 $170.80).
38. The EDA properly denied the remainder of Claims 12 and 17.
Claims for Related Nonresidential Eligible Expenses
Claims Under 49 C.F.R. 24.303(a): Claims la, lb and 10
35
cCIO
39. The MCC submitted two claims (Claims la, lb and 10) made pursuant to 49
C.F.R. 24.303(a), which provides reimbursement for:
(a) Connection to available nearby utilities from the right -of -way to
improvements at the replacement site.
40. Claims la and lb were also submitted under 24.301(g)(11) and, as discussed
above, disallowed under that provision. As determined above, water meters are capital
equipment and a cost of improving real property, which are generally ineligible under
24.301(b)(1). See also Fed. Reg. Vol. 70, no. 2, page 605 (comment to section 24.304). Water
meters are part of the "improvements at the replacement site" to which the utilities connect,
rather than a cost of making that connection.
41. The EDA properly denied Claims la and lb.
42. Claim 10, in the amount of $15,172.00, relates to the charges imposed by Dakota
Electric for re- routing a three -phase electric feeder from its existing location, within a utility
easement, to the nearest transformer.
43. The EDA contends that the claim is ineligible because 24.303(a) only allows
reimbursement for utility work performed on the replacement property, because of the phrase
"from the right -of -way to improvements at the replacement site." The EDA's interpretation
renders the adjective "nearby" meaningless. The regulation does not limit reimbursement to
work performed on the replacement property.
44. Although this cost was incurred in connection with the construction of a new
building, it is neither a cost incurred in moving or modifying personal property, nor is it a cost of
improving the replacement real property, since the work was done within the right -of -way. This
is consistent with the intended scope of 24.303. See Fed. Reg. Vol. 70, No. 2, p. 603
(comments to 24.301(g)(3)).
36
aol
45. The Dakota Electric bill is eligible for replacement under 24.303(a). MCC is
entitled to reimbursement if the charge is "actual, reasonable and necessary." 49 C.F.R.
24.303(a). The $15,172 is an estimate and not the actual cost. Payment of the charge was
necessary for the MCC to obtain electric service to the replacement property. Although it could
be unreasonable in some cases to extend utilities a significant distance to a replacement property,
all of this work was done within the relatively short distance of one city block. The evidence did
not indicate that the need for utility relocation was caused by any avoidable error on the part of
MCC or its contractors.
46. The AHO recommends that the EDA reimburse MCC for the actual cost of re-
routing the three -phase electric service, based upon the final billing submitted by Dakota Electric
to MCC. If the final Dakota Electric bill is not yet available and if MCC has paid Dakota
Electric based upon the $15,172 estimate, then the EDA shall reimburse MCC for the full
$15,172, upon receipt of (i) a written assignment by MCC to the EDA of the right to any refund
upon final billing, and (ii) written acknowledgement by Dakota Electric that it will honor the
assignment.
Claims Under 49 C.F.R. 24.303(b): Claims 2, 3 and 4
47. The MCC submitted three claims (Claims 2, 3 and 4) pursuant to 49 C.F.R.
24.303(b), which provides for reimbursement of:
(b) Professional services performed prior to the purchase or lease of a replacement
site to determine its suitability for the displaced person's business operation
including but not limited to, soil testing, feasibility and marketing studies (excluding
any fees or commissions directly related to the purchase or lease of such site). At
the discretion of the Agency a reasonable pre- approved hourly rate may be
established. (See appendix A, 24.303(b).)
48. Claim 2 relates to professional services provided by Sabongi Consulting Group
from the time frame of May 2007 to August 2008. The EDA contends that MCC may not claim
37
any expenses incurred (i) prior to the initiation of negotiations or (ii) after the date that MCC
signed a purchase agreement for the Burnsville site.
49. Eligibility for relocation assistance begins on the date that a notice of intent to
acquire is given, upon initiation of negotiations, or upon acquisition, whichever occurs first. 49
C.F.R. 24.203(b). The EDA initiated negotiations on September 14, 2007 by making an offer
to purchase the Eagan site. 49 C.F.R. 24.2(a)(14) (defining "initiation of negotiations" as
delivery of initial written offer of just compensation).
50. The eligibility date restricts the acquiring authority's ability to reimburse
expenses but does not necessarily restrict the displaced business's ability to incur expenses for
later reimbursement. According to the "Uniform Act Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs),"
published by the Federal Highway Administration at its website
http: /www.fhwa. dot .gov /realestate /ua/uafags.htm, a business may incur expenses once it has a
reasonable expectation that its business will be displaced, but the agency may not reimburse the
expense until the business has qualified as a "displaced person." FHWA FAQ No. 66 (emphasis
added).
51. The interpretations of the FHWA are entitled to deference, because the FHWA is
the lead agency for promulgating and administering the federal relocation regulations. When the
language of a regulation is unclear or susceptible to different reasonable interpretations, a court
will give deference to the interpretation of the promulgating agency. Request for Issuance of
SDS General Permit MNG300000, 769 N.W.3d 312, 317 (Minn. App. 2009).
52. The invoices dated May 14, 2007, April 30, 2008 and May 30, 2008, totaling
$12,673, are eligible for reimbursement. Although the May 14 invoice reflects costs incurred
prior to the initiation of negotiations, MCC had a reasonable expectation at that time that its
38
a(z
business would be displaced. The costs relate to the "site analysis and schematic design" phase,
which was for the purpose of determining site feasibility. The fees were actually, reasonably and
necessarily incurred. The EDA improperly denied $8,873 for the May 14, 2007 and May 30,
2008 invoices.
53. The professional services that are eligible under 24.303(b) are restricted to
services performed "prior to the purchase or lease of a replacement site" for purposes of
determining "suitability for the displaced person's business operation. It does not allow
reimbursement of fees directly related to the purchase of a site. See FHWA FAQ No. 57.
54. The EDA properly denied the invoices dated June 30, 2008, July 11, 2008 and
August 18, 2008, totaling $16,703.00. Those costs were incurred after MCC had committed to
the purchase of the Burnsville site and were not incurred to determine the suitability of the
Burnsville site for MCC's business. The services provided relate to development of the building
design and construction documents rather than the determination of site feasibility.
55. With respect to Claim 2, the MCC has received reimbursement of $3,800 and is
entitled to additional reimbursement in the amount of $8,873.00.
56. Claim 3, in the amount of $320, relates to a title report required for a zoning
hearing. The preamble to the relocation regulations identifies professional services related to
zoning matters as an example of eligible professional services, if provided prior to the purchase
or lease of the replacement site. See Fed. Reg., Vol. 70, No. 2, p. 605 (discussion of changes to
24.303(b)). Although the purchase agreement was signed in June, it was contingent upon
approval of zoning, without which, the site would not have been feasible for the MCC's
business. The expense was reasonably and necessarily incurred to determine the feasibility of
the replacement site.
39
ac(it
57. The AHO recommends that the EDA reimburse MCC $320 for Claim 3.
58. Claim 4, in the amount of $7,447.50, is for legal fees provided by MCC's
attorney.
59. The EDA properly denied Claim 4. The professional services provided by
MCC's attorney relate directly to the purchase of the Burnsville site rather than the determination
of site suitability.
Claims Under 49 C.F.R. 24.303(c): Claim 1
60. As an alternate theory to its moving expense claim, the MCC also submitted
Claims lc and ld and le pursuant to 49 C.F.R. 24.303(c), which provides for reimbursement
of:
(b) Impact fees or one time assessments for anticipated heavy utility usage, as
determined necessary by the Agency.
61. Claims lc and ld relate to sewer and water connection charges imposed by the
City of Burnsville. Claim le relates to the SAC charges imposed by the MCES.
62. FAQ No. 75 of the FHWA Frequently Asked Questions provides as follows:
75. 24.303(c). What are some examples of impact fees or one -time
assessments?
Actual and reasonable impact fees for anticipated heavy utility usage are eligible
for payment as a related moving expense. In the past these fees were eligible as a
reestablishment expense and limited to $10,000. Examples include (a) water and
sewer tap fees for a laundromat business which requires a larger service tap than a
typical business, (b) a fee to provide 3 -phase electrical service required by the
displaced business when replacement sites available were served by single phase
transformers, or (c) other one -time charges or fees a utility requires to finance
infrastructure necessary to provide increased usage.
The intent is to reimburse a business for impact fees for anticipated heavy utility
usage when the move requires the business to move to a new location where
impact fees for anticipated heavy utility usage are being charged. If suitable
replacement sites or properties are available where impact fees for anticipated
40
heavy utility usage are not being charged, reimbursement is at the agency's
discretion, based on what is reasonable and necessary. Potential eligibility of
impact fees for anticipated heavy utility usage is an important advisory service.
The regulation limits impact fees or one -time assessments for anticipated heavy
utility usage to utilities, i.e., water, sewer, gas, and electric. Impact fees for other
major infrastructure such as roads, fire stations, regional drainage improvements
and parks, for example, are not eligible.
63. The FAQ makes clear that the rule is intended to cover only impact fees for
"anticipated heavy utility usage." It does not cover other typical development costs, such as
contribution to regional drainage improvements or parks (e.g., the city's storm water connection
fee or park dedication fee). This situation presents an interesting dichotomy, because, although
the City connection fees and MCES SAC fees are based upon estimated utility usage, the fees are
applicable to ALL development, regardless of usage.
64. In purchases of undeveloped land, development fees such as park dedication, area
charges, and connection charges are commonly factored into the purchase price paid for the
property. The relocation regulations do not provide for reimbursement for the purchase price of
the replacement property.
65. On the other hand, if MCC had moved to an existing building that was a retail
space but was not equipped as a restaurant, the MCC would have paid additional SAC charges
and connection charges for the estimated increase in water and sewer usage, and the FAQ
indicates that the regulation was intended for that purpose.
66. Accordingly, the AHO determines that the connection fees and SAC fees are
eligible under 24.303(c), but that the amount to be reimbursed must be determined based upon
the regulatory requirement that the expense must be "actual, reasonable and necessary."
67. The AHO determines that it is not reasonable to reimburse any portion of the City
connection fees under the particular facts of this case, for the following reasons: (a) a portion of
41
aolf
the fees, equivalent to a minimum of 2 units, is a "base charge" that would be incurred for any
type of commercial development of the replacement property and is not imposed for "anticipated
heavy usage;" (b) the effective purchase price for the replacement property, subject to the
sidewalk easement, was $0.00, and it is reasonable to conclude that some portion of the various
development expenses, including connection fees, are actually reflected in that purchase price,
which is not reimbursable under the regulations; (c) the MCC incurred the connection charges
because of Mr. Ansari's decision to construct a new, significantly larger and higher -end building
rather than relocate to an existing restaurant facility, where MCC would not have incurred any
additional charges; Mr. Ansari's efforts to achieve his dreams by expanding and upscaling the
restaurant are laudable and inspiring, but it is unreasonable for the EDA to pay the costs of
realizing that dream.
68. The analysis above applies equally to Claim le, regarding the MCES SAC
charges and would have justified denial of Claim le in its entirety. The EDA approved and paid
$21,900 of Claim le, and that partial payment is not subject to appeal. The AHO determines that
the EDA's denial of the remaining balance of $34,675 was reasonable.
Claims for Reestablishment Expenses nonresidential moves
Reestablishment Expense Limit
69. The federal relocation regulations establish a limit of $10,000 on the payment of
reestablishment expenses to displaced small businesses. 49 C.F.R. 24.304.
70. Prior to the enactment of 2006 Minn. Laws. c. 214, MURA provided discretionary
authority to Minnesota acquiring authorities to exceed the federal cap of $10,000 and instead pay
up to $50,000 in reestablishment expenses of a displaced business, in situations where federal
financial participation existed. Minn. Stat. 117.51 (2004) provided:
42
ao7
117.51 COOPERATION WITH FEDERAL AUTHORITIES.
In all acquisitions undertaken by any acquiring authority and in all voluntary
rehabilitation carried out by a person pursuant to acquisition or as a
consequence thereof, the acquiring authority shall cooperate to the fullest
extent with federal departments and agencies, and it shall take all necessary
action in order to insure, to the maximum extent possible, federal financial
participation in any and all phases of acquisition, including the provision of
relocation assistance, services, payments and benefits to displaced persons.
An acquiring authority may consider reimbursing up to $50,000 in
reestablishment expenses of a displaced business.
71. Minn. Stat. 117.51 governed projects with federal financial participation. In
contrast, Minn. Stat. 117.52 (2006) required that projects without federal funding "provide all
relocation assistance, services, payments and benefits required by the [federal] Uniform
Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 and those
regulations adopted pursuant thereto, Section 117.52 contained no authority to exceed the
$10,000 cap under the federal regulations.
72. In 2006, the legislature enacted 2006 Minn. Laws c 214, which represented a
significant reform of Minnesota Statutes chapter 117. As part of that legislation, the legislature
deleted the last sentence of Section 117.51 (which authorized payments of up to $50,000) and
enacted the following subdivision in section 117.52:
Subd. la. Reestablishment costs limit. For purposes of relocation benefits
paid by the acquiring authority in accordance with this section, the provisions
of Code of Federal Regulations, title 49, section 24.304, with respect to
reimbursement of reestablishment expenses for nonresidential moves are
applicable, except that the acquiring authority shall reimburse the displaced
business for expenses actually incurred up to a maximum of $50,000.
2006 Minn. Laws c. 214, secs. 16 and 18 (emphasis added).
73. The 2006 legislation had a confusing effective date provision with several
exceptions. 2006 Minn. Laws c. 214, sec. 22. Although generally effective as of the day after
enactment, May 20, 2006, the act did not apply to certain condemnation actions commenced
43
og
prior to February 1, 2008 (including the EDA's acquisition of the Eagan site), and it did not
apply to:
property acquired for a highway project that, by the effective date, has
been selected to receive federal funding by the area transportation partnership
or metropolitan planning organization as part of the state transportation
improvement program, if the action is commenced on or before January 15,
2007.
Id., sec. 22(e) (1) (emphasis added).
74. In 2008, the legislature amended Minnesota Statutes section 117.51 and 117.52 by
enactment of 2008 Minn. Laws c. 312, with the express provision that the amendments were
"effective retroactively to January 16, 2007." The amendments to section 117.52 were technical
in nature, and the amendment to section 117.51 added a subdivision as follows:
Subd. 2. Reestablishment costs limit. For purposes of relocation benefits
paid by the acquiring authority in accordance with this section, the provisions
of Code of Federal Regulations, title 49, part 24, with respect to
reimbursement of reestablishment expenses for nonresidential moves are
applicable, except that the acquiring authority shall reimburse the displaced
business for eligible expenses up to a maximum of $50,000.
The effective date language in the 2008 Legislation is ambiguous, because it is unclear whether the
legislation was intended to affect projects that were "grandfathered" by the effective date language
of the earlier 2006 Legislation.
75. When a statute is reasonably susceptible to more than one meaning, it is
ambiguous and subject to statutory construction. Westchester Fields Co. v. Hasbargen, 632
N.W.2d 754, 756 (Minn. App. 2001). If a statute is ambiguous, it is permissible to look at
legislative history to determine how the language should be read. Baumann v. Chaska Bldg.
Ctr., Inc., 621 N.W.2d 795, 797 (Minn. App. 2001). The object of all statutory construction is to
ascertain and effectuate legislative intent. Minn. Stat. 645.16 (2008).
44
c oq
76. Based upon its legislative history, the 2008 Legislation was intended to reinstate
the authority of state acquiring authorities to pay reestablishment expenses up to $50,000 in
connection with projects that received federal funding. The retroactive effective date of
January 16, 2007 coincides with the January 15, 2007 grandfather provision for highway projects
that had federal funding, and ensures that acquiring authorities could choose to pay up to
$50,000 in reestablishment expenses on any federally funded highway project. There is nothing
in the legislative history to suggest that the Legislature intended to retroactively remove the
protections of the 2006 legislative grandfather provisions as to projects that had no federal
financial participation.
77. Because the EDA's project fell within the grandfather provisions of 2006 Minn.
Laws c. 214, sec. 22(b), the provisions of Minn. Stat. 117.52, subd. la are not applicable to
MCC's relocation. MCC is entitled to maximum reestablishment expenses of $10,000, pursuant
to Minn. Stat. 117.52, subd. 1 (2004) and 49 C.F.R. 24.304. The EDA has already paid that
maximum amount.
Claims Under 49 C.F.R. 24.304(a)(1) and (2): Claims 5, 6, 7 and 8
78. CIaims 5, 6, 7 and 8 might be characterized as reestablishment expenses under 49
C.F.R. 24.304(a)(7). However, because the EDA has paid the maximum amount of $10,000
for business reestablishment, the EDA properly denied these claims.
Claims Under 49 C.F.R. 24.304(a)(6): Claim 9
79. The MCC's Claim 9 is made pursuant to 49 C.F.R. 24.304(a)(6), which allows
reimbursement as a reestablishment expense for:
(6) Estimated increased costs of operation during the first 2 years at the replacement site
for such items as:
(i) Lease or rental charges.
(ii) Personal or real property taxes;
45
a 1D
(iii) Insurance premiums; and
(iv) Utility charges, excluding impact fees.
80. Claim 9 has two aspects: increased real estate taxes, in the estimated amount of
$32,908.60 per year or $65,817.20; and increased monthly loan payments of $10,500 per month
or $252,000.
81. Both bases for the claim are problematic, because MCC's decision to significantly
expand and upgrade its facility would result in increased taxes and payments. It is not possible
to determine on this record to what extent the increases are attributable to that expansion.
82. In addition, MCC's claim based upon real estate taxes appears overstated. MCC's
tax estimate was based upon the value of the property as fully improved. However, the closing
statement indicates that the Eagan site was tax exempt in 2008 and, because the closing occurred
after July 1, 2008, the property would have remained tax exempt for 2009. Minn. Stat. 272.02,
subd. 38(a). In addition, taxes payable in 2010 will be based upon the incomplete status of
construction as of January 2, 2009 and therefore should be lower than the estimate. MCC has
failed to provide adequate credible documentation as to this claim item.
83. The increased loan costs are based on a loan of $1.7 million. The loan payment
undoubtedly includes the amounts for purchase of the real property, the construction of the
improvements, interest and may also include the purchase of replacement equipment and trade
fixtures. None of those costs is reimbursable under the regulations. See 49 C.F.R.
24.304(b)(1) and (3) (capital assets and interest on borrowed money not eligible);
24.301(h)(10)(physical changes to real property generally ineligible); Fed. Reg. Vol. 70, No. 2,
p. 605 (cost of constructing new building generally ineligible).
84. Finally, the EDA has paid the maximum reestablishment expense of $10,000.
85. For all of the above reasons, the EDA properly denied Claim 9.
46
a 1 l
$875.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The AHO determines that the EDA properly denied Claim la in the amount of
2. The AHO determines that the EDA properly denied Claim lb in the amount of
$1,840.00.
3. The AHO determines that the EDA properly denied Claim lc in the amount of
24,831.
4. The AHO determines that the EDA properly denied Claim ld in the amount of
$29,078.
5. The AHO affirms the EDA's decision to reimburse $21,900 for Claim le and to
deny the remaining balance of $34,675.
6. The AHO determines that MCC is entitled to reimbursement in the amount of
$12,673 for Claim 2.
7. The AHO determines that MCC is entitled to reimbursement in the amount of
$320 for Claim 3.
8. The AHO determines that the EDA properly denied Claim 4 in the amount of
$7,447.50.
9. The AHO determines that the EDA properly denied Claim 5 in the amount of
$4,651.98.
10. The AHO determines that the EDA properly denied Claim 6 in the amount of
$5,630.00.
11. The AHO determines that the EDA properly denied Claim 7 in the amount of
$11,879.31.
47
cla>
12. The AHO determines that the EDA properly denied Claim 8 in the amount of
$22,662.36.
13. The AHO determines that the EDA properly denied Claim 9.
14. The AHO recommends that, with respect to Claim 10, the EDA should reimburse
MCC for the actual cost of re- routing three -phase electric service, based upon the final billing
submitted by Dakota Electric to MCC. If the final Dakota Electric bill is not yet available and if
MCC has paid Dakota Electric based upon the $15,172 estimate, then the AHO recommends that
the EDA reimburse MCC the amount of $15,172 upon receipt of a written assignment by MCC
to the EDA of the right to any refund from Dakota Electric upon final billing and written
acknowledgement by Dakota Electric that it will honor the assignment.
15. The AHO affirms the EDA decision to reimburse $2,649.88 of Claim 11 and to
deny the remaining balance of that claim.
16. The AHO determines that MCC is entitled to reimbursement in the amount of
$2,840.38 for Claim 12.
17. The AHO recommends that the EDA reimburse MCC in the amount of $3,320 for
Claim 13, in accordance with the parties' settlement of that item.
18. The AHO affirms the EDA's decision to reimburse $1,294 for Claim 14.
19. The AHO determines that MCC is entitled to reimbursement in the amount of
$45,036.88 for Claim 15.
20. The AHO makes no recommendation on Claim 16, which has been withdrawn.
21. The AHO affirms the EDA's decision to reimburse MCC in the amount of
$170.80 for Claim 17.
48
a 1
17 claims:
22. The EDA should pay the Mediterranean Cruise as follows with respect to each of its
49
Amount Claimed
EDA Approved
AHO Recommended
Payment
Claim 1
113,199.00
$21,900.00
$21,900.00
Claim 2
29,626.00
$3,800.00
$12,673.00
Claim 3
320.00
$0.00
$320.00
Claim 4
7,447.50
$0.00 this claim;
$2,500.00 prior claims
$0.00
Claim 5
4,651.89
$0.00
$0.00
Claim 6
5,630.00
$0.00
$0.00
Claim 7
11,879.31
$0.00
$0.00
Claim 8
22,662.37
$0.00
$0.00
Claim 9
$50,000.00
$0.00 this claim;
$10,000.00 for prior
claim
$0.00
Claim 10
$15,172.00
$0.00
$15,172.00
Claim 11
$18,538.08
$2,649.88
$2,649.88
Claim 12
$4,470.96
$296.87
$2,840.38
Claim 13
$3,320.00
$3,320.00
$3,320.00 agreed to at
hearing.
Claim 14
$3,000.00
$1,284.00
$1,284.00
Claim 15
$94,941.00
$34,126.00
$45,036.88
Claim 16
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Claim 17
$2,135.00
$170.80
$170.80
Total
$386,993.03
$67,547.55
$105,366.94
17 claims:
22. The EDA should pay the Mediterranean Cruise as follows with respect to each of its
49
23. In addition to the amounts listed above, the EDA and the Mediterranean Cruise agreed
to reimburse the Mediterranean Cruise $40,559.33 for claims that were not appealed above.
Therefore, the EDA owes a total of $145,926.27. It has already paid $84,400.00, including the
$10,000.00 maximum business reestablishment expense, maximum search fess of $2,500.00 and the
$21,900.00 SAC fees listed above. Therefore, it must pay to the Mediterranean Cruise an additional
$61,526.27.
24. These findings of facts, conclusions of law, and order shall constitute the final
decision unless the agency (the EDA) modifies or rejects this recommendation within 90 days
following the close of the record in this proceeding which occurred at 5 p.m. on Wednesday
August 19, 2009.
Dated: November 9, 2009.
50
alb
Respectfully submitted,
KENNEDY GRAVEN, CHARTERED
By: U�
Corrine A. Heine, #149743)
470 U.S. Bank Plaza
200 South Sixth Street
Minneapolis, MN 55402
(612) 337-9300
�;.53'
15.1
�.G°•� S` Jk4
Dance Floor
L FA �F'.,�
1,610.00
-L p
75.00
C
250.00
'�'d� S ,23'�G����
2 hrs x $88 /hr carpenter
$75 moving cost
15.2
Ceiling Stage Light
1,814.00
1,540.00
1,617.50
elec 15.5 x $85 $250
mtls $50 mov
15.3
Stainless Steel Ice
Well
2,171.00
615.00
835.00
plumbing 3 x $90 /hr
$50 mtls Carpentry
$2.2 x $88 /hr elec
$270 move $50
15.4
Kitchen Wash sink
3,010.00
915.00
985.00
plumb 7 x $90 /hr $230
mils move $125
15.5
Wire Shelves
336.00
106.00
150.00
Labor 2 x $75 /hr
15.6
Wall Mount Sink
1,943.00
763.00
715.00
plumb 7 x $90 /hr $130
mtls move $25
15.7
Wall Mounted
Stainless Steel
Shelf
589.00
106.00
201.00
carp. 2 x $88 /hr $25
move
15.8
Stainless Steel
Exhaust
Hood /Stove
10,557.00
5,616.00
6,590.00
plumb- 35 x $90 /hr $850
mtl elec 10 x $85 /hr
$320 mtl carp. 15 x
88 /hr move $150
15.9
Stainless Steel
Exhaust/Hood /Grill
10,557.00
5,581.00
6,665.00
plumb 45 x $90 /hr
elec. 10 x $85 /hr $320
mtl carp 15 x 88 /hr
move $125
15.10
Stainless Steel
Table
7,704.00
785.00
840.00
plumb 5.5 x 90 /hr $195
mtls move $150
15.11
Stainless Steel Wall
Mounted Shelves
701.00
701.00
701.00
No dispute
15.12
Concrete Janitor's
Mop Sink
2,171.00
865.00
915.00
plumb 5 x 90 /hr 380
mtls carp $85
15.13
Wire Shelves
925.00
136.00
289.00
carp 3 x 88/hr move
$25
15.14
Wall Mounted
Counter Top
540.00
540.00
540.00
No dispute
15.15
Wall Mounted
Mirror
403.00
403.00
403.00
No dispute
15.16
Entryway Cabinet
1,270.00
188.00
190.00
elec 1 x 90 move $100
15.17
Cabinet Artifacts
346.00
75.00
150.00
Labor 2 x $75 /hr
15.18
Wall Mounted CD
Display Case
621.00
146.00
201.00
elec 1 x 85 /hr 8
Carp. 1 x 88 Move $20
15.19
Television Set
Mounts -West
Dining
1,880.00
700.00
1,432.00
elec. 6 x $90 /hr carp. 9
x 88 /hr move 100
15.20
Television Set
Mounts -East Dining
1,880.00
740.00
1,432.00
elec 8 x $90 /hr carp. 9
x88 /hr move 100
15.21
Under Counter
1,120.00
200.00
200.00
elec. $100 move $100
EXHIBIT A
A -1
iY
3j. .591
.x ,t
M e _._:._kt:.15G-
Cooler
'q a( T +s
�a,+..a...:iAi 4�� ,d.l.• :t
FF: r F
iii m
7? 8
3, ild3nia L r�� cep
,df}
�'S a 0
15.22
Stainless Steel
Condiment
Dispensers (5)
672.00
150.00
150.00
Inadequate support for
Kitchen Equipment
estimates
15.23
Sharp Cash
Register
425.00
195.00
425.00
actual cost of move
15.24
Veri -Phone Credit
Car Machine
325.00
195.00
325.00
actual cost of move
15.25
Stereo, Video
Components
3,450.00
3,450.00
3,450.00
Stipulated
15.26
Single Keg Cooler
286.00
286.00
286.00
claim withdrawn
15.27
Stainless Steel Milk
Cooler
468.00
468.00
468.00
claim withdrawn
15.28
Under Counter
Refrigerated
Cabinet
1,251.00
508.00
505.25
plumb 2.85 x 90 /hr
elec 1.75 x 85 /hr 40 mtl
move 60
15.29
Sandwich /Salad
Prep Table
1,161.00
300.00
308.75
elec 1.75 x 85 /hr 40 mtl
move 120
15.30
DCS Gas
Stove /Oven
2,458.00
558.00
738.75
plumb 4 x 90 /hr 40 mtl
elec 1.75 x 85 /hr 40 mtl
move 150
15.31
Table Top Gas Grill
1,025.00
636.00
838.75
plumb 4 x 90 /hr 40 mtl
elec 1.75 x 85 /hr 40 mtl
labor 2 x75 /hr move 100
15.32
Deep Fat Fryer
1,573.00
656.00
858.75
plumb 4 x 90 /hr 40 mtl
elec 1.75 x 85 /hr 40 mtl
labor 2 x 75 /hr move 120
15.33
Refrigerated
Beverage Cabinet
898.00
376.00
458.75
elec 1.75 x 85 /hr 40 mtl
labor 2 x 75 /hr move 120
15.34
Vertical Broilers
1,963.00
634.00
833.75
plumb 4 x 90 /hr 40 mtl
elec 1.75 x 85 /hr 40 mtl
Tabor 3 x 75 /hr move 60
15.35
Star Max
Charbroiler
1,198.00
724.00
967.50
plumb 4 x 90/hr 40 mtl
elec 2.5 x 85 /hr 80 mtl
Tabor 3 x 75 /hr move 50
15.36
Gas Grill
1,753.00
774.00
1,017.50
plumb 4 x 90 /hr 40 mtl
elec 2.5 x 85 /hr 80 mtl
labor 3 x 75 /hr move 100
15.37
Order Bar
1,071.00
262.00
480.00
carp 5 x 88 /hr move 40
15.38
Wire Shelving Unit
336.00
68.00
105.00
labor 1 x $75 /hr move
30
15.39
Convection Ovens
2,956.00
940.00
892.50
plumb 3.5 x 90 /hr move
120 elec 3.5 x 85 /hr
160 mtls
15.40
Water Softener
2,219.00
748.00
elec. .85 x 85 /hr 20 mtls
plumb 7 x 90 /hr 40 mtls
move60
15.41
Electric Food
Heater
1,061.00
406.00
elec 2.75 x 85 /hr 50 mtls
labor 2 x 75 /hr move 60
A -2
air
Metal Shelving
15.42 Units
15.43
15.44
15.45
15.46
Computer Cabling
Phone Cabling
Beer Signs
General Contractor
Fees 10%
less moving costs
Adjusted total
Add 10% fee
total contractor
costs
plus moving fee
Total payment
784.00
2,820.00
2,260.00
1,434.00
85,995.00
8,946.00
94,941.00
125.00
1,520.00
1,050.00
35,825.00
31, 706.00
2,420.00
34,126.00
1,520.00
1,231.87
41,162.62
(2,420.00)
38,742.62
3,874.26
42,616.88
2,420.00
45,036.88
labor 3.5 x 75 /hr move 25
based on EDA invoice
included in DPM invoice
elec. 3.875 x 85 /hr 40
mtls labor 3.5 x 75 /hr
move600
EDA amount of $34,126 is based on Exh. 13. Because of modifications and stipulations made during hearing, the
10% fee does not match precisely with the subtotal of $35,825.
The $41,162.62 includes moving costs of $2420.00, which are deducted to arrive at the general contractor's profit
and overhead and then added back to arrive at the final payment of $45,036.88.
A -3
a��
Agenda Information Memo
Eagan Economic Development Authority Meeting
November 17, 2009
F. OTHER BUSINESS
There is no other business to come before the EDA at this time.
G. ADJOURNMENT
ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To adjourn the Economic Development
Authority meeting.