The URL can be used to link to this page

11/01/2005 - City Council RegularAGENDA EAGAN CITY COUNCIL - REGULAR MEETING EAGAN MUNICIPAL CENTER BUILDING November 1, 2005 6:30 P.M. I. ROLL CALL & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE II. ADOPT AGENDA (At approximately 8:00 p.m. the Council will take a short recess) III. RECOGNITIONS & PRESENTATIONS IV. CONSENT AGENDA a A. /(7 O B. P ///el c. 0/6 �j6F. P' vQ G. aoH. ,04). 7 I. /23 j. p3vK. 17)34 m. p37 N. 380. p3? P. 'o Q. py,R. 5,42 S. saT. APPROVE MINUTES PERSONNEL ITEMS CHECK REGISTERS APPROVE Part II (Vehicles and Equipment) 2006-2010 Capital Improvement Program ACCEPTANCE of $1,250 grant from Sam's Club APPROVE temporary On -Sale Liquor License and waive license fee for Faithful Shepherd Catholic School AUTHORIZE the issuance of Request for Proposals for insurance broker services and authorize the advertisement for bids APPROVE Qwest Contract for transfer of 9-1-1 calls to out of area locations APPROVE vendor selection for web streaming project and authorize entering into contract subject to final negotiations and City Attorney and City Administrator approval APPROVE Final Plat — Halley's 2°d Addition — A Final Plat to combine two lots (Lots 4 & 5, Block 1, Halley's Addition) into one lot Located at 4861 Biscayne Avenue in the SE 'A of Section 36 and to APPROVE an associated Easement Vacation for Halley's 2°d Addition RECEIVE assessment roll and schedule final assessment public hearing (December 5, 2005) for Project 917 (Coachman Road -Street Overlay Improvements) APPROVE Qwest lease renewal (3805 Pilot Knob Rd and 1410 Towerview Rd.) RECEIVE Feasibility Report and schedule public hearing (December 5, 2005) for Project 926 (Saddlehom/Sunset Additions/Northview Meadows — Street Overlay) , RECEIVE Feasibility Report and schedule Public Hearing (December 5, 2005) for Project 927 (Meadowland 1st/Beaver Dam Road/Suncliff 1 st-5`s — Street Overlay) ACKNOWLEDGE completion and authorize city maintenance for five private developments (Projects 01-G, Safari at Eagan 151 Add; 02-R, Greyhawk 2°d Add; 04-B, Terra Glenn 1St Add; 04-H, Long Acres 2°d Add; 04-W, Terra Glenn 2nd Add) REDUCE Retainage for Contract 03-09, Coachman Water Treatment Plant Expansion REFER policy pertaining to the issuance of financial guarantees by banks and other financial institutions to Council Finance Committee APPROVE Final Planned Development — Lot 2, Block 1 Blue Ridge Sixth Addition — CSM Properties, Inc. RECOMMEND that the City of Eagan pursue the listing of Holz Farm on the National Register of Historic Places by entering into a contract with U.S. West Research, Inc. APPROVE Radio Service Agreement 5 U. APPROVE Tobacco License for Michael Madigan, Cedar Grove Liquor, 1983 Silver Bell Road PS s V. RECEIVE bids & Award Contract for Snow & Ice Control services W. APPROVE Massage Therapy Establishment Business License for Brian Garrity V. PUBLIC HEARINGS F G OA. PROJECT 911, Final Assessment Hearing, Berkshire Ponds, Safari 2nd Addition (Street Overlay Improvements) P 69 B. PROJECT 915, Final Assessment Hearing, Ridgecliff, Covington Lane, Galaxie Avenue (Street Overlay r Improvements) C13 C. CERTIFICATION of delinquent false alarm bills Grp CERTIFICATION OF delinquent weed cutting bills P9? E. CERTIFICATION of delinquent utility bills VI. OLD BUSINESS / /3 A. RECEIVE BIDS and award sale of $5,155,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2005A; $3,840,000 General Obligation Water Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2005B; and $1,550,000 General Obligation Improvement Refunding Bonds, Series 2005C. p 110 B. PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION — Esmeralda Addition — Charles Hanf — A Preliminary Subdivision of .62 acres to create two single family lots located at Lot 1, Block 1, Pilot Knob Heights Fourth in the SW '/ of Section 1. p/ gt C. SIGN ORDINANCE APPEAL — Appeal of staff interpretation relative to gas pump canopy signage. II( • V., NEW BUSINESS PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT — Attracta Sign (John Deere) — A Planned Development Amendment to allow Two (2) monument signs for one building located at 2955 Lone Oak Drive in the SW ''A of Section 1. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT HEARING — Consider Revocation of Conditional Use Permit for Magnum Towing (Kevin Mellon), 4871 Biscayne Avenue. VIII. LEGISLATIVE/INTERGOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS UPDATE a Y? IX. NEW RUNWAY/AIRPORT UPDATE X. ADMINISTRATIVE AGENDA A. Comments by City Council, City Administrator, and Department Heads P XV' ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 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 B. ADOPT AGENDA faagic). APPROVE MINUTES . OLD BUSINESS E. NEW BUSINESS 3 1. NORTHEAST EAGAN REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT — Public Hearing to consider a Development p0t Agreement with McGough Companies and the Public Purpose of the Acquisition and Assembly of Property Located on Blue Gentian Road and Blue Gentian Circle. F. OTHER BUSINESS G. ADJOURNMENT XII. VISITORS TO BE HEARD (for those persons not on agenda) XIII. CLOSED SESSION XIV. ADJOURNMENT The City of Eagan is committed to the policy that all persons have equal access to its programs, services, activities, facilities and employment without regard to race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, disability, age, marital status, sexual orientation, or status with regard to public assistance. Auxiliary aids for persons with disabilities will be provided upon advance notice of at least 96 hours. If a notice of less than 96 hours is received, the City of Eagan will attempt to provide such aid. 44111 City of Eagan Meo To: HONORABLE MAYOR & COUNCILMEMBERS From: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES Date: OCTOBER 28, 2005 Subject: AGENDA INFORMATION FOR NOVEMBER 1, 2005 CITY COUNCIL MEETING ADOPT AGENDA After approval is given to the November 1, 2005 City Council agenda, the following items are in order for consideration. Agenda Information Memo November 1, 2005 Eagan City Council Meeting 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. A. APPROVE MINUTES ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the minutes of the October 18, 2005 regular City Council meeting and the October 11, 2005 special City Council meeting as presented or modified. ATTACHMENTS: • Minutes of the October 18, 2005 regular City Council meeting are enclosed on pages 3 through 6 . • Mi utes of the October 11, 2005 special City Council meeting are enclosed on pages through 9 . a MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE EAGAN CITY COUNCIL Eagan, Minnesota October 18, 2005 A Listening Session was held October 18, 2005 at 6:00 p.m. prior to the regular City Council meeting. All members of the City Council were present. There were no citizens who wished to be heard. A regular meeting of the Eagan City Council was held on October 18, 2005 at 6:30 p.m. at the Eagan Municipal Center. Present were Mayor Geagan, Councilmembers Fields, Tilley, Maguire and Carlson. Also present were City Administrator Tom Hedges, Community Development Director Jon Hohenstein, City Planner Mike Ridley, Public Works Director Tom Colbert, City Attorney Mike Dougherty and Administrative Secretary / Deputy Clerk Mira Pepper. AGENDA Councilmember Fields moved, Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to approve the agenda as presented. Aye: 5 Nay:0 CONSENT AGENDA Councilmember Fields moved, Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to approve the consent agenda as presented. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 A. Minutes. It was recommended to approve the minutes of the October 6, 2005 regular City Council meeting and the September 12, 2005 special City Council meeting as presented. B. Personnel Items. 1. It was recommended to approve the hiring of Nicole Inman as a 9-1-1 Dispatcher in the Police Department. 2. It was recommended to approve the hiring of Taylor Foster and Bridget powers as part-time fitness attendants at the Community Center. 3. It was recommended acknowledge the internal transfer of Dan Olson from Parks Maintenance Worker to Forestry Maintenance Worker. 4. It was recommended to accept the resignation of Jane Hovind, Clerical Tech III in Community Development. C. Check Registers. It was recommended to ratify the check registers dated October 6, 2005 and October 13, 2005 as presented. D. Disposal of Unclaimed or Abandoned Property. It was recommended to approve the destruction of unclaimed or abandoned weapons per City Ordinance 2.70. E. Contract 05-02. It was recommended to approve Change Order #2 to Contract 05-02 (Citywide Street Overlays) and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. F. Donation. It was recommended to approve a resolution accepting a $1,000 donation from the Sam's Club Foundation. G. Contract 04-04. It was recommended to approve Change Order No. 3 to Contract 04-04 (Lexington Avenue, Lone Oak Road to TH 55 — Street and Trail Improvements) and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. H. Assign Development Contract. It was recommended to assign the development contract for Tan -Me Industrial Park 2nd Addition to new property owners, Crash Site, LLC. I. Project 938. It was recommended to receive the petition and authorize the preparation of a feasibility report by the City Engineer for Project 938 (Nicols Road, Pin Oak Drive to Cliff Road). J. Findings of Fact. It was recommended to confirm the Findings of Fact, Conclusions and Resolution of Denial of the Planned Development Amendment request of Larson Properties to allow an interim use of expanded parking associated with airport shuttle service at the Microtel Inn hotel on property located at 3000 Denmark Avenue, legally described as Lot 1, Block 2, Eagandale Center Industrial Park No. 9 in the NE '/a of Section 10. K. RFP — Banking Services. It was recommended to authorize staff to issue a Request for Proposals for banking services. L. Easement Vacation. It was recommended to receive the petition to vacate public drainage and utility easements within Lot 1, Block 2 Kennerick Addition and schedule a public hearing to be held on November 15, 2005. Eagan City Council Meeting Minutes October 18, 2005 Page 2 °RAFT I M. Easement Vacation. It was recommended to receive the petition to vacate public drainage and utility easements within Lot 2, Block 3 The Oaks of Bridgewater 2°d Addition and schedule a public hearing to be held on November 15, 2005. N. Comments to City of Rosemount. It was recommended to approve comments to the City of Rosemount regarding the Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment for county Road 42 and US 52 Land Use Area. O. RFP — Food Service. It was recommended to authorize staff to advertise for Request for Proposals for the exclusive catering food service within the Eagan Community Center to accommodate meetings and events. P. Meter Reading Contract. It was recommended to authorize a contract between the City and SL-SERCO for water meter reading services, subject to review by the City Attorney. Q. Final Plat and Easement Vacation. It was recommended to approve a vacation of existing drainage and utility easements upon Outlot C, Eagan Woods Office Park 2nd Addition, located at the southwest corner of Pilot Knob Road and Buffet Way in the NE ''/ of Section 4. and approve a Final Plat (La Quinta Addition) to combine two parcels into one lot on approximately 2.88 acres upon property located on the southwest corner of Pilot Knob Road and Buffet Way in the NE ''/ of Section 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS PROJECT 913, WALDEN HEIGHTS / TWIN VIEW MANOR / HILLCREST STREET OVERLAY IMPROVEMENTS FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING City Administrator Hedges introduced this item regarding the fmal assessment roll for Project 913, Walden Heights / Twin View Manor / Hillcrest Additions street overlay improvements. City Engineer Matthys gave a staff report. Mayor Geagan opened the public hearing. There being no public comment, Mayor Geagan closed the public hearing and turned discussion back to the Council. Councilmember Maguire moved, Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to approve the fmal assessment roll for Project 913 (Walden Heights / Twin View Manor / Hillcrest Additions — street overlay improvements and authorize its certification to Dakota County for collection. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 PROJECT 912, DENMARK AVENUE / DEERWOOD DRIVE / WINDCREST STREET OVERLAY IMPROVEMENTS FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING City Administrator Hedges introduced this item regarding the fmal assessment roll for Project 912, Denmark Avenue / Deerwood Drive / Windcrest - street overlay improvements. City Engineer Matthys gave a staff report. It was noted that a written objection to the proposed assessment had been received from Pat McCarthy claiming a portion of overlay at the east end of Deerwood Drive is located on his property. Mayor Geagan opened the public hearing. There being no further public comment, Mayor Geagan closed the public hearing and turned discussion back to the Council. Councilmember Carlson moved, Councilmember Fields seconded a motion to approve the fmal assessment roll for Project 912 (Denmark Avenue / Deerwood Drive / Windcrest — street overlay improvements) and authorize its certification to Dakota County for collection, excluding Parcel #10-02200-013-04. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 PROJECT 878, CINNAMON RIDGE STREET OVERLAY IMPROVEMENTS FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING City Administrator Hedges introduced this item regarding the Final Assessment Roll for Project 878, Cinnamon Ridge street overlay improvements. City Engineer Matthys gave a staff report. Mayor Geagan opened the public hearing. There being no public comment, Mayor Geagan closed the public hearing and turned discussion back to the Council. S� Eagan City Council Meeting Minutes October 18, 2005 Page 3 DRAFT Councilmember Fields moved, Councilmember Maguire seconded a motion to approve the fmal assessment roll for Project 878 (Cinnamon Ridge — Street Overlay Improvements) and authorize its certification to Dakota County for collection. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 PROJECT 786, DENMARK AVENUE, WESCOTT ROAD TO CRESTRIDGE LANE STREET AND SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS City Administrator Hedges introduced this item regarding Project 786, Denmark Avenue, Wescott Road to Crestridge Lane street and sidewalk improvements. City Engineer Matthys and Traffic Engineer Plath discussed the feasibility report. Lieutenant Greg Johnson provided information regarding speed and accident issues on Denmark Avenue. Councilmember Carlson left the meeting at 7:00 p.m. Mayor Geagan opened the public hearing. Five residents of the area spoke in support of the installation of sidewalks expressing concem over the safety of pedestrians walking on the street and the use of the proposed sidewalk by cyclists. Four residents spoke expressing their opposition to the proposed sidewalks. The impact of increased traffic on Denmark Avenue after the Best Buy store is completed was discussed, as well as the lack of visibility of the stop sign at Wescott and poor lighting on the street. There being no further public comment, Mayor Geagan closed the public hearing and turned discussion back to the Council. Councilmembers discussed the number of accidents in the area, speed surveys, the possibility of chokers being installed, additional signage for stop signs, and parking options. Staff indicated that options regarding parking will be investigated and reported back to Council at the time of final plans and specifications. Councilmember Maguire moved, Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to approve Project 786 (Denmark Avenue, Wescott Road to Crestridge Lane — Street and Sidewalk Improvement) and authorize preparation of detailed plans and specifications. Aye: 3 Nay: 1 (Fields opposed) OLD BUSINESS There was no old business. NEW BUSINESS There was no new business. LEGISLATIVE / INTERGOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS UPDATE City Administrator Hedges discussed a meeting to be held at the Community Center Thursday, October 20 at 4:30 regarding joint efforts with Eagan High School to offer assistance to Pass Christian, Mississippi, which was devastated by Hurricane Katrina. NEW RUNWAY / AIRPORT UPDATE Assistant to City Administrator Miller discussed the opening of the new runway on October 27. ADMINISTRATIVE AGENDA City Engineer Matthys discussed the installation of pumping equipment at Well House #11 (3616 Ashbury Road). Council was requested to authorize the extension of the working hours to allow required testing of the equipment. Councilmember Tilley moved, Councilmember Fields seconded a motion to authorize the extended working hours for Contract 05-03 (Well #21 — Drilling and Pumping Equipment) by the contractor, Traut Wells, Inc. to include 24 hours a day from Wednesday, October 19 through Saturday, October 22 without the use of a generator or Eagan City Council Meeting Minutes October 18, 2005 Page 4 Wednesday, October 26 through Saturday, October 29 (to allow notification of the surrounding area) with the use of a generator. Aye: 4 Nay: 0 Community Development Director Hohenstein provided an update regarding the City's redevelopment districts. Councilmember Maguire requested clarification regarding the consent item authorizing the advertisement for a Request for Proposal for Food Service at the Community Center. City Administrator Hedges discussed the proposed RFP. The City Council meeting was recessed at 8:20 p.m. to immediately convene a meeting of the Economic Development Commission. The regular City Council meeting was reconvened at 8:40 p.m. VISITORS TO BE HEARD There were no visitors who wished to be heard. Councilmember Fields moved, Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to adjourn the regular City Council meeting at 8:45 p.m. and convene a closed session to discuss a settlement request by Charlie Rae, Inc. Aye: 4 Nay: 0 The regular City Council meeting was reconvened at 9:00 p.m. Councilmember Fields moved, Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to accept an offer of settlement with Charlie Rae, Inc. with payment of $2,422.00. Aye: 4 Nay: 0 The regular City Council meeting was adjourned at 9:10 p.m. Date Administrative Secretary / Deputy City Clerk If you need these minutes in an alternative form such as large print, Braille, audio tape, etc., please contact the City of Eagan, 3830 Pilot Knob Road, Eagan, MN 55122, (651) 675-5000, (TDD phone: (651) 454-8535). The City of Eagan is committed to the policy that all persons have equal access to its programs, services, activities, facilities and employment without regard to race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, disability, age, sexual orientation, marital status or status with regard to public assistance. MINUTES SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING OCTOBER 11, 2005 5:30 P.M. EAGAN ROOM — EAGAN MUNICIPAL CENTER City Councilmembers present: Mayor Geagan, Councilmembers Carlson, Fields, Maguire and Tilley. City staff present: City Administrator Hedges, Assistant to the City Administrator Miller, Administrative Intern Walz, Director of Parks and Recreation Johnson, Communications Director Garrison, Director of Administrative Services VanOverbeke, Communications Coordinator Foote, Public Works Director Colbert, Streets Superintendent Struve, Human Resources Manager Peterson, Fire Chief Kriha, and City Engineer Matthys. Also present were Firefighters Pat Diloia and Lee Sundrup. I. ROLL CALL AND AGENDA ADOPTION City Administrator Hedges noted that the sixty-day agency deadline for the Delta Development Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment request will expire in advance of the next regular City Council meeting. Therefore, per the direction of the Council at the October 6, 2005 City Council meeting, Findings of Fact for Denial for a Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment presented by Delta Development for property located in the Preusse Second Addition on Old Sibley Highway is proposed for action at tonight's workshop. Councilmember Maguire moved; Councilmember Fields seconded a motion to adopt the agenda with the inclusion of the consideration for Findings of Fact for Denial for the Comp Guide Amendment presented by Delta Development. Aye: 3; Nay: 0 (Councilmember Carlson and Tilley were not present for the vote) II. VISITORS TO BE HEARD There were no visitors to be heard: III. PRESENTATION OF 2005 COMMUNITY SURVEY RESULTS City Administrator Hedges introduced the item noting that in the spring of 2005, the City of Eagan again contracted with Decision Resources to conduct its community wide survey which is budgeted on a bi-annual basis per the City Council direction. Hedges added that the 2005 Eagan survey was constructed in May and June of this year with input from the Communications Committee of the City Council. Hedges introduced Bill Morris of Decision Resources to present a summary of the findings of the 2005 survey. It was noted that this year's survey numbered 196 questions and was fielded to 400 Eagan residents beginning in August to yield results with a 95 percent degree of confidence. Councilmember Tilley arrived at 5:40 p.m. Councilmember Carlson arrived at 5:43 p.m. Mr. Morris provided a summary of the survey findings and noted the overwhelming success according to the survey results in City services, direction of the City, and City Council and City staff. The City Council discussed the survey findings. Mayor Geagan recognized the City Council and staff for their excellent work, and thus the excellent survey results. Councilmember Fields moved; Councilmember Maguire seconded a motion to accept the report from Decision Resources. Aye: 5, Nay: 0 IV. REVIEW OF FULL-TIME FIRE CHIEF JOB DESCRIPTION City Administrator Hedges introduced the item noting that at the September 12, 2005 City Council workshop, the draft job description for a full-time Fire Chief was presented. Hedges added that upon reviewing feedback from the Council, Human Resources Manager Peterson met with the Full -Time Chief Committee on September 14, 2005 to assist with incorporating the feedback from the Council into the job description. Hedges introduced Lee Sundrup, Co -Chair of the Full -Time Fire Chief Committee, to present the revised job description on behalf of the committee. Mr. Sundrup and Human Resource Manager Peterson highlighted the changes to the job description questionnaire based on Council feedback from September 12, 2005. The Council suggested that "ongoing involvement with civic organizations" be added to the job description. Councilmember Carlson moved; Councilmember Maguire seconded a motion to accept the revised job description for a full-time Fire Chief and directed staff to proceed with the advertisement and recruitment of a full-time Fire Chief for 2006. Aye: 5, Nay: 0 V. 2006 PUBLIC UTILITY ENTERPRISE FUND BUDGETS City Administrator Hedges introduced the item noting that the Council is asked to provide direction to staff regarding the proposed 2006 Public Utility Enterprise Fund Budgets, which include: water, sanitary sewer, street lighting, storm drainage, and water quality. Hedges highlighted the proposed changes in the 2006 budgets. Public Works Director Colbert summarized the proposed change in staffing from a Clerical V position to a Systems Analysis position. The Council also discussed the proposed half-time Operations Support Specialist proposed in the 2006 budget. There was City Council consensus to proceed with advertisement for the half-time Operations Support Specialist position in order to hire the position in December 2005. City Administrator Hedges noted that the Public Utility Enterprise Fund Budgets would be included on an upcoming regular City Council meeting agenda for formal consideration. The City Council briefly discussed the rain storm that occurred during the week of October 3 – 7, 2005. Public Works Director Colbert summarized the locations of damage and the steps to be taken to initiate a public improvement process in various locations throughout the community. Colbert also noted that the storm water improvements made following the 2000 Super Storm were very successful, as there were very few incidences of flooding reporting after the recent 6 inch rainfall. VI. FINDINGS OF FACT FOR DENIAL—DELTA DEVELOPMENT COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN AMENDMENT—PRUESSE SECOND ADDITION City Administrator Hedges introduced the item noting that at its meeting of October 6, 2005, the City Council directed preparation for Findings of Fact for Denial for a Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment presented by Delta Development for property located in the Pruesse Second Addition on Old Sibley Highway. Hedges added that the sixty-day agency deadline noted in the staff report is October 14, 2005. Hedges informed the Council that since this date precedes the next City Council meeting, the City Attorney advised that the Findings of Fact for Denial be considered for action at tonight's workshop. City Administrator Hedges distributed the proposed findings for Council consideration. Councilmember Carlson moved; Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to approve the Findings of Fact for Denial for a Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment presented by Delta Development for property located in Pruesse Second Addition on Old Sibley Highway. Aye: 5, Nay: 0 That was no other business. VII. OTHER BUSINESS VIII. ADJOURNMENT The City Council adjourned the Special City Council workshop at 6:40 p.m. 9 Agenda Information Memo November 1, 2005 Eagan City Council Meeting B. PERSONNEL ITEMS Item 1. Part-time Guest Services-Concessions/Community Center ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of Barb Normandin as a part-time guest services -concessions worker at the Community Center. Item 2. Resolution Proposing Veteran for Discharge— ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve a resolution proposing a veteran for discharge. FACTS: • This item was first considered by the City Council on July 20, 2005, at which time the item was continued. • After a thorough process, the item is now ready for Council consideration. • The notice of layoff is consistent with a directive of the 2004-2005 Organizational Study conducted by Virchow Krause. ATTACHMENTS: • Enclosed without page number is the proposed resolution, entitled " Resolution Proposing Veteran for Discharge" /0 Agenda Information Memo November 1, 2005 Eagan City Council Meeting C. RATIFY CHECK REGISTERS ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To ratify the check registers dated October 20, 2005 and October 27, 2005 as presented. ATTACHMENTS: • Check registers dated October 20, 2005 and October 27, 2005 are enclosed without page number. 1/ Agenda Information Memo November 1, 2005, Eagan City Council D. APPROVE 2006-2010 CIP PART II VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve Part II (Vehicles and Equipment) of the 2006 — 2010 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) FACTS: • The first year of this CIP (2006) is approved as a budget with the four out years (2007 — 2010) 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. • In 1993 the City Council established a policy whereby each year an amount is allocated to the Equipment Revolving Fund (ERF) for non -enterprise fund CIP Part II purchases. The allocation is based on an initial amount of $500,000 used in 1993 that is increased annually by population growth and inflation factors. The 2006 allocation was increased by 3.5% from the 2005 allocation to $932,921. An amount of $379,174 is being carried forward from 2005 generating a total available balance of $1,312,095 for 2006 purchases. • The ERF is funded through an annual ad valorem property tax levy. • The schedule for this approval is timed to allow for coordination with various purchasing/bidding options to provide for the best possible prices, the necessary lead times for ordering the equipment, and the desire to place the equipment in service during 2006. • A management meeting was 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 $787,309 from the ERF was reached by consensus. This allocation allows for a carry forward to 2007 of $524,786. The carry forward balance illustrates the desire to maximize the City's resources by stretching equipment and vehicle use. • Vehicles proposed for purchase were evaluated through the use of the revised Vehicle Acquisition, Use & Replacement Policy approved by the City Council in February of this year. • The funding sources for the total 2006 Part II CIP allocation of $920,838 include $787,309 from the ERF, $62,000 from the City's Utility Fund, $46,529 from retained franchise fees, and $25,000 from the DUI Forfeiture Fund. • The City Council gave consideration to this item at the special City Council meeting on September 12, 2005. ATTACHMENTS: • Attached on page /9 is a copy of the summary of the equipment proposed 2006 CIP Part II purchases with the funding source for each unit. • Attached on page /S is a copy of the summary of the proposed 2006 — 2010 Part II CIP. / 3 October 28, 2005 a U (0 m a 0 N 88 00 NN O U N 0000000 0 §000 p N (. V 400(.0 ONO 6 69 800000 0 00 44(0(0((0))0 0 0 0 .:f.-:6N._N N NM 00)0000 W O O ((0 O N NNN(OWWN .e1. (004 NOO r •-N r w 0 O 4' Document Imaging Software and Conversion 8' 00 04-L6 NM w 800008$ n V o N m h �(VQN (MN w LL (0 0 0I 0 0 0 N )000 0 0 N 0 N u u) 6' c 0 N 2g 0) m E m U ? c m m E >. 4g --2& V a a NmL 0 a>i . m(r00 0 m o N EU a- a 2122=8.00 c cOU. _ E.0E0400,2U US u0i t t 2 '? W o a 3 E 'C c p g O U U U o o m a. E m E v n,3 .0 .�.�v v �, '-r o o cR o >, O a o c U (n a ] N 8 a a aE m J T Om U > anUUEEa mWmo 000am=0000>0o Umma wa 0aacaOcfa w a a a E Communications O O OO i pl §_§§ O§ NoO O O 0 0 0a0 V0 00000.00 O oON NNu)VONN NN 040404(00404 0 0 0 m m 0 LO- C,' r, 8 N 000000 000(42(0 m r-Nmr (O N N 0 (0 0 ao 0 N r- 69 5 Thermal Imagery Cameras © $15,000 LL 0 0 O O V O N.- 69 0 0 (0 V m 0000 66u)- 0 0 W in 00 0 00 0 m N N 8 0 8 m m v c'4 0 0000000 oQ 00000000 N N N NN N N N 4, New Security System and Updated Fire Alarm System Central Svc Maint 0 0 0 o m NN 000- m r r m ro m m C C C C 'E a 7yy 7 7mm 7 7 7 U 0 U U U V (0 (0 (0 CO 40 CO L 4,0000012MZMWWwl- a 46,529 $ 25,000 O 0 (N0 0) 0) 0 CV CO M Ea. 69 4'- 0 0 N 0) 6, L O 0 O LL (0 (0 a w I- )- October 28, 2005 Totals 00 0 M 0 O T GO- U) (0 U) 0 0 O - M LO 0 0 OO - I� (0 0 0 M 00 0) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 00 N O N' - - - - - - - Ln O O N M N O (- T 0) T (D O O O O O - N- (NJ $ 5,539,538 $ 5,539,538 (533,529) O 0 0 co- O M O - T 00 N N O) - U) N- .- T N (D r (n 0) '-- N '-- O M M N U) Ln 69 Eft 64 69 0 O N OO 0 O 1- o O N O O O O 0 0 0 0 O 0' O' (0 O O O ' O' '- O N-6-11516 d' Tt LO (D LO N O N TrLO T T ff} 1 1 O O O CD O O O O O O U ) ' O' (D ' O T ' N O O ' O Ti N L0-0- 05 CO- L() M N (D r- O M T M N (V r T E/9 O 0060 000 ( ' ' i (0000.4 ' (0000) co- O tt) N (0 (0 . - (D Ln N 0) T N N N T N Co 000 0 000 (0 N T '- N M 69 0) O T o O 0 0 or- (Ns - 000 r - O I- (NT 000 Tr -05 0) 01 T N N '- i w O o 0 o O o 0 0 0 0 0 01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO T O M W O O (D d' M '- 0) ' 'c7 LC ti (D L• 115 L() N (D O r- h Ln LnMT01O)T0)N N ER 0 O 0 M T Efi Ef) 00 N M N0) -a- 00 O T L() M M '- (D r 69- 03rn CO N CO LE) O co - CV M 0) Ei3 U) t O N V C E 0) (C6LL U) O - C C _ O N N a• Q n. En C N • C -o _ N C .6 N N N LL CD c C LL C ' w W d INc) _W U '� N mi (") N 7 7 �toc 00 p U' N O - VEEw S��Y��E1 as >, E E_ N N c l 3 : rn a. oo O ICiOOdLLdv)Oa3>v)v)> 1- o N N (0 E O z N co /6' OThr - CO COM O N 01 Tr O N T T ER EA O O (D co U) CO Cr N M O LO- 01 N O N r- ER 69 O O CO N Ln ti O 0) UD LO 01 Nr 6'05 0) N 69- ER 0 0 0) cr (0 CO UD LO ti �n v rn� ER ER 0) O M CO CO 69 ER ERF Obligation ER ER ER- 69 0 M T O CO- M 0) N '7 69 ER CO 07 0D O N N T N CO U) C 0 O Q N LL � .2• 1-1-1g). Q F2Q wrc W 0 03 al O O <U ~ ERF Balance " 2007-2010 ERF allocation figures are estimates based on 3.5% annual increases (growth + inflation) Consent Agenda Information Memo November 1, 2005 E. SAM'S CLUB GRANT ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To adopt a resolution accepting a $1,250 grant from Sam's Club. FACTS: • Sam's Club has presented the police department with a grant as part of their annual public safety grants program • The money will be used to purchase additional police equipment such as evidence equipment & cameras. ATTACHMENTS A copy of the resolution is attached as page /' . /,‘ 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 1, 2005, at 6:30 p.m. The following members were present: Geagan, Carlson, Fields, Maguire and Tilley. Member introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION ACCEPTING DONATION TO THE CITY OF EAGAN WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Eagan encourages public donations to help defray the costs to the general public of providing services in Eagan; and WHEREAS, Sam's Club has presented the Police Department with a grant in the amount of $1,250 as part of their annual Public Safety Program. WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes §465.03 requires that all gifts and donations of real or personal property be accepted only with the adoption of a resolution approved by two-thirds of the members of the City Council; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, that the donation is hereby accepted for use by the City; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City sincerely thanks Sam's Club for the gracious and generous donation. ADOPTED this 1st day of November, 2005. CITY OF EAGAN CITY COUNCIL By: It's Mayor Attest: Motion by: Seconded by: Those in Favor: Those Against: Date: November 1, 2005 It's Clerk Agenda Information Memo November 1, 2005, Eagan City Council Meeting F. APPROVE TEMPORARY ON -SALE LIQUOR LICENSE AND WAIVE LICENSE FEE FOR FAITHFUL SHEPHERD CATHOLIC SCHOOL ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve a temporary on -sale liquor license and waive the license fee for Faithful Shepherd Catholic School. FACTS: • Faithful Shepherd Catholic School has requested a temporary on -sale liquor license be issued to them for a fundraiser planned for January 28, 2006. The fundraiser is the sixth Annual Live and Silent Auction, which is being held to raise money for the operation of the school. • The application form has been submitted and deemed in order by staff. • Faithful Shepherd Catholic School is asking that the $150.00 license fee be waived. Following Council approval, the application will be forwarded to the Department of Public Safety/Liquor Control Division for their approval. ATTACHMENTS: • Letter enclosed without page number. /d Agenda Information Memo November 1, 2005, Eagan City Council Meeting G. AUTHORIZE THE ISSUANCE OF REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR INSURANCE BROKER SERVICES AND AUTHORIZE THE ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To authorize the issuance of Request for Proposals for insurance broker services and authorize the advertisement for bids. FACTS: ➢ Requests for Proposals for contracted City services are typically sought on a three to five year cycle. At this time, staff is requesting permission to issue a Request for Proposal (RFP) to solicit bids for insurance broker services. ➢ RFPs will be sent to the City's current insurance broker in addition to one other firm. These brokers represent the primary vendors providing brokerage services to governmental entities. An advertisement for bids will also be placed in the City's legal newspaper. ➢ Staff expects that a recommendation for insurance broker services would be presented to the City Council at the December 20 Council meeting. ➢ If any member of the City Council would like to review a copy of the RFP, please contact the City Administrator's office. ATTACHMENTS (0): /9 Consent Agenda Information Memo November 1, 2005 H. QWEST Contract for transfer of 9-1-1 calls to out of area locations. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Enter into an agreement with QWEST for the ability to transfer 9-1-1 calls to law enforcement jurisdictions outside the metro area. FACTS: • We currently cannot transfer 9-1-1 calls to law enforcement jurisdictions outside the metro area. This contract would allow us to do that on a per use fee. • If we do not use this service, there is no other fee involved. • This has been reviewed by the City Attorney and found to be in order. ATTACHMENTS Agreement on pages / through . ao QWEST LOYAL ADVANTAGE— AGREEMENT This Qwest Loyal Advantage Agreement ("Agreement") is between Qwest Communications Corporation ("Qwest" or "QCC") and City of Eagan ("Customer") and is effective on the date QCC signs it ("Effective Date"). If Qwest Interprise America, Inc.'s ("QIA") CPE Terms are attached to this Agreement, the QCC signature on this Agreement means that QCC is acting as QIA's agent for those terms. The offer contained in this document is only valid through October 31, 2005, and will expire if Customer does not execute and deliver the Agreement to QCC on or before that date. CUSTOMER: CITY OF EAGAN QWEST COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION By: By: Name: ' Name: Title: Title: Date: Date: • 1. Services. QCC will provide, and Customer will purchase, the services ("Services") set forth in service exhibits attached hereto ("Service Exhibits"). Except for OneFlex® Integrated Access Service, QCC will not be responsible for coordinating Customer's local access if the Local Access Service Exhibit is not included in this Agreement, and Customer will be solely responsible for all local access and all associated costs. Customer represents and warrants that it will not resell the Services and that its use of the Services will comply with all applicable laws. The parties agree that any notation to the "Qwest Total Advantage' Agreement" or "QTA Discount" on the Service Exhibits will be disregarded and such exhibits will be govemed by the Agreement. The Service Exhibits attached hereto as of the Effective Date are: rm. 2. Term. Customer selects the following "Initial Term" of the Agreement: th+l`a a>`,• �' iagda At the end of the Initial Term, this Agreement will automatically renew for consecutive renewal periods equal to the Initial Term (a "Renewal Term") if not terminated earlier in accordance with this Agreement. The Initial Term and each Renewal Term are referred to as the "Term." 3. Rates. QCC will provide the Services at the rates and discounts as set forth in the Service Exhibit or Order Form associated with the then -current Term. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement or in a Service Exhibit, the domestic rates expressly set forth in a Service Exhibit will be fixed during the Initial Term. Upon the renewal of the Agreement, QCC may apply: (a) its then current rates and discounts to Customer's existing ordered Services and will fix those rates and discounts during the Renewal Term; and (b) its then current rates and discounts in effect at the time a new Service or a different grade of an existing Service is ordered and will fix those rates and discounts during the Renewal Term. The foregoing, however, will not apply to international rates or limit QCC's right to change the rates for Service at any time for changes based upon Regulatory Activity. "Regulatory Activity" means any regulation and/or ruling, including modifications thereto, by any regulatory agency, legislative body or court of competent jurisdiction. If Regulatory Activity causes an increase in the rates for Customer's ordered Services that materially and adversely affects Customer, then Customer may terminate the affected Service upon 30 days prior written notice to QCC without liability for Cancellation Charges for the affected Service, provided, however that Customer: (c) provides such notice within 30 days after the increase occurs; and (d) provides QCC 30 days to cure such increase. If Customer does not provide QCC such notice during the time permitted in this Section, Customer will have waived its right to terminate the affected Service under this Section. 4. Payment. Customer must pay QCC all charges within 30 days from the invoice date. Any amount not paid when due will be subject to late interest at the lesser of the rate of 1Y2% per month or the highest rate permitted by applicable law. Customer must also pay QCC any applicable Taxes assessed in connection with Customer's Services. QCC may reasonably modify the payment terms or require other assurance of payment based on Customer's payment history or a material and adverse change in Customer's financial condition. 5. Disclaimer of Warranties. EXCEPT AS MAY BE SPECIFICALLY SET FORTH IN THIS AGREEMENT OR IN A SERVICE EXHIBIT, THE SERVICES ARE PROVIDED WITHOUT WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, WARRANTIES OF TITLE, NONINFRINGEMENT, MERCHANTABILITY, OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. NO ADVICE OR INFORMATION GIVEN BY QCC, ITS AFFILIATES, AGENTS, OR CONTRACTORS OR THEIR RESPECTIVE EMPLOYEES WILL CREATE ANY WARRANTY. CUSTOMER ASSUMES TOTAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR USE OF THE SERVICES. QCC DISCLAIMS: (A) ANY LIABILITY FOR LOSS, DAMAGE, OR INJURY TO ANY PARTY AS A RESULT OF ANY CPE; AND (B) ALL WARRANTIES FOR CPE. 6. Limitation of Liability. (a) NEITHER PARTY, ITS AFFILIATES, AGENTS, OR CONTRACTORS WILL BE LIABLE FOR ANY INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, RELIANCE, PUNITIVE, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR FOR ANY LOST PROFITS OR REVENUES OR LOST DATA OR COSTS OF COVER RELATING TO THE SERVICES OR THIS AGREEMENT, REGARDLESS OF THE LEGAL THEORY UNDER WHICH SUCH LIABILITY IS ASSERTED. WITH REGARD TO ANY SERVICE RELATED CLAIM BY CUSTOMER FOR DAMAGES THAT IS NOT LIMITED BY THE PRECEDING SENTENCE, CUSTOMER'S EXCLUSIVE REMEDIES FOR SUCH CLAIM WILL BE LIMITED TO: (A) THOSE REMEDIES SET FORTH IN THE APPLICABLE SERVICE LEVEL AGREEMENT; OR (B) IF NO SERVICE LEVEL AGREEMENT APPLIES TO THE AFFECTED SERVICE, THE TOTAL MRCs OR USAGE CHARGES PAID BY CUSTOMER TO QCC FOR THE AFFECTED SERVICE IN THE ONE MONTH IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING THE OCCURRENCE OF THE EVENT GIVING RISE TO THE CLAIM. EACH PARTY'S TOTAL AGGREGATE LIABILITY ARISING FROM OR RELATED TO THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT EXCEED THE TOTAL MRCs AND USAGE CHARGES PAID BY CUSTOMER TO QCC UNDER THIS AGREEMENT IN THE THREE MONTHS IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING THE OCCURRENCE OF THE EVENT GIVING RISE TO THE CLAIM ("DAMAGE CAP"). Notwithstanding the foregoing, the limitation of liability in this Section and the Damage Cap will not apply to: (a) a party's indemnification obligations; and (b) Customer's payment obligation for all charges under this Agreement, including without limitation, Service charges, Taxes, interest, Early Termination Charges, and Service Cancellation Charges. DGMIOMR # 1108342 Page 1 Copyright Co 2005 Qwest. All Rights Reserved CONFIDENTIAL V3 10-06-05 ai QWEST LOYAL ADVANTAGE'S AGREEMENT (b) Any claim or dispute arising out of or relating to this Agreement must be brought within two years after the cause of action arises. 7. Personal Injury, Death, and Property Damage. To the extent permitted under law, each party will be responsible to the other party for the actual, physical damages directly caused by its negligent acts or omissions in the course of its performance under this Agreement, limited to damages resulting from personal injury or death to a party's employees (if not covered under applicable workers' compensation laws) and loss or damage to a party's personal tangible property. Damages under this Section will be subject to the limitation of liability in this Agreement but not the Damage Cap. 8. Indemnification. To the extent permitted under law, each party will defend and indemnify the other party, its Affiliates, agents, and contractors against all third party claims, liabilities, costs, and expenses, including reasonable attorneys' fees, involving personal injury or death to persons or loss or damage to personal tangible property resulting from the gross negligence or willful misconduct of the indemnifying party; provided, however, the foregoing indemnification will not apply to any claims made by employees that are covered under applicable workers' compensation laws. Furthermore, to the extent permitted under law, Customer will indemnify Qwest, to the extent as set forth in Rate Service Schedule ("RSS") #3. 9. Termination. Either party may terminate a Service in accordance with the applicable Service Exhibit. Either party may terminate this Agreement: (a) by providing written notice of termination to the other party at least 30 days prior to the expiration of the then current Term; or (b) for Cause; provided that if Customer is terminating this Agreement for Service related claims, Cause exists where there is cause to terminate all or substantially all of the Services in accordance with the applicable service level agreements or Service Exhibits. If Customer terminates this Agreement under subsection (a) of the immediately preceding sentence before the expiration of any individual service term for a particular Service described in a Service Exhibit, the applicable Cancellation Charge for the Service will apply. If, prior to the conclusion of the Term, this Agreement is terminated either by QCC for Cause or by Customer for any reason other than Cause, then Customer will also pay to QCC: (a) an Early Termination Charge; and (b) any applicable Service Cancellation Charges. Customer will remain liable for charges accrued but unpaid as of the termination date. 10. Confidentiality; Publicity. Except to the extent required by an open records act or similar law, neither party will, without the prior written consent of the other party: (a) issue any public announcement regarding, or make any other disclosure of the terms of, this Agreement or use the name or marks of the other party or its Affiliates; or (b) disclose or use (except as expressly permitted by, or required to achieve the purposes of, this Agreement) the Confidential Information of the other party. Such consent may only be given on behalf of Qwest by its Legal Department. A party may disclose Confidential Information if required to do so by a governmental agency, by operation of law, or if necessary in any proceeding to establish rights or obligations under this Agreement, provided that the disclosing party gives the non -disclosing party reasonable prior written notice. 11. Dispute Resolution; Governing Law. The parties shall attempt'in good faith to resolve through negotiation any dispute, claim or controversy arising out of or related to this Agreement. Either party may initiate negotiations by providing a written notice to the other party setting forth the dispute and the relief requested. If the parties are unable to resolve such dispute within a reasonable period of time, either party may commence a civil action in a court of competent jurisdiction located, at the option of the moving party, in either: (a) the place of business of the other party, as indicated in the address to which required notices must be sent; or (b) in Denver, Colorado. To the extent the Communications Act of 1934 does not govern, this Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the state in which the Customer's principal office is located without regard to its choice of law principles. Notwithstanding the above, any action by QCC to collect payment for services may be commenced in Denver, Colorado. Each party hereby expressly waives its right to a trial by jury and consents to the jurisdiction of such courts for the purposes described in this Section. Such court shall not award any indirect, incidental, special, reliance, punitive, or consequential damages, including damages for lost profits. Each party shall bear the cost of preparing and presenting its own claims and/or defenses (including its own attorneys' fees). 12. Non -Appropriations. Customer intends to continue this Agreement for its entire Term and to satisfy its obligations hereunder. For each fiscal period for Customer: (a) Customer agrees to include in its budget request appropriations sufficient to cover Customer's obligations under this Agreement; (b) Customer agrees to use all reasonable and lawful means to secure these appropriations, including but not limited to applying for Universal Service Fund Discounts as described in the Federal Communications Commission Docket No. 96-45; (c) Customer agrees it will not use non -appropriations as a means of terminating this Agreement in order to acquire functionally equivalent products or services from a third party. Customer reasonably believes that sufficient funds to discharge its obligations can and will lawfully be appropriated and made available for this purpose. In the event that Customer is appropriated insufficient funds, by appropriation, appropriation limitation or grant, to continue payments under this Agreement and has no other funding source lawfully available to it for such purpose (as evidenced by notarized documents provided by Customer and agreed to by QCC), Customer may terminate this Agreement by giving QCC not less than 30 days prior written notice. Upon termination and to the extent of lawfully available funds, Customer will remit all amounts due and all costs reasonably incurred by QCC through the date of termination. 13. Notices. (a) Required Notices. Customer's current address, facsimile number, and person designated for notices are: Except as otherwise provided herein, all required notices to QCC must be in writing and sent to 1801 Califomia Street, Suite 900, Denver, Colorado 80202; Facsimile #: (888) 778-0054; Attn.: Legal Department, and to Customer at its then current address as reflected in QCC's records (if different than what is stated in this Section); Attn.: General Counsel or other person designated for notices. Except as otherwise provided herein or in a Service Exhibit, all notices will be deemed given: (i) when delivered in person to the recipient named above; (ii) three business days after delivered via regular U.S. Mail; (iii) when delivered via overnight courier mail; or (iv) when delivered by facsimile so long as duplicate notification is also sent by regular U.S. Mail. (b) Service Termination Notices. Customer's notice of termination for Services must be sent via mail, facsimile or e-mail to: Qwest, Attn.: Dublin Service Center, GBM Disconnects, 6000 Parkwood Place, 5"' Floor Disconnect Center, Dublin, OH 43017, FAX: DGM/OMR # 1108342 Page 2 Copyright © 2005 Qwest. All Rights Reserved CONFIDENTIAL V3 10-06-05 QWEST LOYAL ADVANTAGE— AGREEMENT 866.887.6633, e-mail: GBMdisconnectsagwest.com. Such termination will be effective 30 days after QCC's receipt of the notice, unless a longer period is otherwise required. 14. General. Customer may not assign this Agreement or any of its rights or obligations under this Agreement without the prior written consent of QCC, which consent will not be unreasonably withheld. This Agreement is intended solely for QCC and Customer and it will not benefit or be enforceable by any other person or entity, including without limitation, End Users. If any term of this Agreement is held unenforceable, such term will be construed as nearly as possible to reflect the original intent of the parties and the remaining terms will remain in effect. Except as specifically stated in a Service Exhibit, neither party's failure to insist upon strict performance of any provision of this Agreement will be construed as a waiver of any of its rights hereunder. All terms of this Agreement that should by their nature survive the termination of this Agreement will so survive. In the event of a conflict in any term of any documents that govern the provision of Services hereunder, the following order of precedence will apply in descending order of control: a Service Exhibit, this Agreement, and any Order Form. Neither party will be liable for any delay or failure to perform its obligations hereunder if such delay or failure is caused by a Force Majeure Event. This Agreement, any applicable Service Exhibit, and. any Order Forms hereunder constitute the entire agreement between Customer and QCC with respect to the subject matter hereof, and supersede all prior oral or written agreements or understandings relating to the subject matter hereof. Except for Service modifications initiated by QCC or as set forth in a Service Exhibit, all amendments to this Agreement must be in writing and signed by the parties' authorized representatives. QCC reserves the right at any time to reject any handwritten change to this Agreement. 15. Definitions. "Affiliate" means any entity controlled by, controlling, or under common control with a party. "AUP" means the Qwest Acceptable Use Policy, which is posted at http://www.gwest.com/legal/. "Cancellation Charge" means: (a) early termination charges that apply to a particular Service if the Service is terminated prior to the expiration of the service term as described in the Service Exhibit; and (b) charges incurred by QCC from any third party provider. "Cause" means the failure of a party to perform a material obligation under this Agreement, which failure is not remedied: (a) in the event of a payment default by Customer, within five days of separate written notice from QCC notifying Customer of such default; or (b) in the event of any other material breach, within 30 days of written notice (unless a different notice period is specified in this Agreement). "Confidential Information" means any information that is not generally available to the public, whether of a technical, business, or other nature and that: (a) the receiving party knows or has reason to know is confidential, proprietary, or trade secret information of the disclosing party; and/or (b) is of such a nature that the receiving party should reasonably understand that the disclosing party desires to protect such information against unrestricted disclosure. Confidential Information will not include information that is in the public domain through no breach of this Agreement by the receiving party or is already known or is independently developed by the receiving party. "CPE" means any customer equipment, software, and/or other materials of Customer used in connection with the Service. "Early Termination Charge" means an amount equal to 35% of the average monthly charges billed under this Agreement through the date of termination multiplied by the number of months remaining in the Term. "End Users" means Customer's members, end users, customers, or any other third parties who utilize or access the Services or the QCC network via the Services provided hereunder. "Force Majeure Event" means an unforeseeable event beyond the reasonable control of that party, including without limitation: act of God, fire, flood, labor strike, sabotage, fiber cut not caused by QCC, acts of terror, material shortages or unavailability, government laws or regulations, war or civil disorder, or failures of suppliers of goods and services. "MRC" means monthly recurring charges. "NRC" means nonrecurring charges. "Order Form" means order request forms issued by QCC. "Taxes" means foreign, federal, state and local taxes, surcharges, and other similar charges. DGM/OMR # 1108342 Page 3 Copyright © 2005 Qwest. All Rights Reserved CONFIDENTIAL V3 10-06-05 a.3 QWEST LOYAL ADVANTAGE'S AGREEMENT This Qwest Loyal Advantage Agreement ("Agreement") is between Qwest Communications Corporation ("Qwest" or "QCC") and City of Eagan ("Customer") and is effective on the date QCC signs it ("Effective Date"). If Qwest Interprise America, Inc.'s ("QIA") CPE Terms are attached to this Agreement, the QCC signature on this Agreement means that QCC is acting as QIA's agent for those terms. The offer contained in this document is only valid through October 31, 2005, and will expire if Customer does not execute and deliver the Agreement to QCC on or before that date. CUSTOMER: CITY OF EAGAN QWEST COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION By: By: Name: Name: Title: Title: Date: Date: 1. Services. QCC will provide, and Customer will purchase, the services ("Services") set forth in service exhibits attached hereto ("Service Exhibits"). Except for OneFlex® Integrated Access Service, QCC will not be responsible for coordinating Customer's local access if the Local Access Service Exhibit is not included in this Agreement, and Customer will be solely responsible for all local access and all associated costs. Customer represents and warrants that it will not resell the Services and that its use of the Services will comply with all applicable laws. The parties agree that any notation to the "Qwest Total Advantage® Agreement" or "QTA Discount" on the Service Exhibits will be disregarded and such exhibits will be governed by the Agreement. The Service Exhibits attached hereto as of the Effective Date are 2. Term. Customer selects the following "Initial Term" of the Agreement: tits „° 't .:%i At the end of the Initial Term, this Agreement will automatically renew for consecutive renewal periods equal to the Initial Term (a "Renewal Term") if not terminated earlier in accordance with this Agreement. The Initial Term and each Renewal Term are referred to as the "Term." 3. Rates. QCC will provide the Services at the rates and discounts as set forth in the Service Exhibit or Order Form associated with the then -current Term. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement or in a Service Exhibit, the domestic rates expressly set forth in a Service Exhibit will be fixed during the Initial Term. Upon the renewal of the Agreement, QCC may apply: (a) its then current rates and discounts to Customer's existing ordered Services and will fix those rates and discounts during the Renewal Term; and (b) its then current rates and discounts in effect at the time a new Service or a different grade of an existing Service is ordered and will fix those rates and discounts during the Renewal Term. The foregoing, however, will not apply to international rates or limit QCC's right to change the rates for Service at any time for changes based upon Regulatory Activity. "Regulatory Activity" means any regulation and/or ruling, including modifications thereto, by any regulatory agency, legislative body or court of competent jurisdiction. If Regulatory Activity causes an increase in the rates for Customer's ordered Services that materially and adversely affects Customer, then Customer may terminate the affected Service upon 30 days prior written notice to QCC without liability for Cancellation Charges for the affected Service, provided, however that Customer: (c) provides such notice within 30 days after the increase occurs; and (d) provides QCC 30 days to cure such increase. If Customer does not provide QCC such notice during the time permitted in this Section, Customer will have waived its right to terminate the affected Service under this Section. 4. Payment. Customer must pay QCC all charges within 30 days from the invoice date. Any amount not paid when due will be subject to late interest at the lesser of the rate of 11/2% per month or the highest rate permitted by applicable law. Customer must also pay QCC any applicable Taxes assessed in connection with Customer's Services. QCC may reasonably modify the payment terms or require other assurance of payment based on Customer's payment history or a material and adverse change in Customer's financial condition. 5. Disclaimer of Warranties. EXCEPT AS MAY BE SPECIFICALLY SET FORTH IN THIS AGREEMENT OR IN A SERVICE EXHIBIT, THE SERVICES ARE PROVIDED WITHOUT WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, WARRANTIES OF TITLE, NONINFRINGEMENT, MERCHANTABILITY, OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. NO ADVICE OR INFORMATION GIVEN BY QCC, ITS AFFILIATES, AGENTS, OR CONTRACTORS OR THEIR RESPECTIVE EMPLOYEES WILL CREATE ANY WARRANTY. CUSTOMER ASSUMES TOTAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR USE OF THE SERVICES. QCC DISCLAIMS: (A) ANY LIABILITY FOR LOSS, DAMAGE, OR INJURY TO ANY PARTY AS A RESULT OF ANY CPE; AND (B) ALL WARRANTIES FOR CPE. 6. Limitation of Liability. (a) NEITHER PARTY, ITS AFFILIATES, AGENTS, OR CONTRACTORS WILL BE LIABLE FOR ANY INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, RELIANCE, PUNITIVE, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES OR FOR ANY LOST PROFITS OR REVENUES OR LOST DATA OR COSTS OF COVER RELATING TO THE SERVICES OR THIS AGREEMENT, REGARDLESS OF THE LEGAL THEORY UNDER WHICH SUCH LIABILITY IS ASSERTED. WITH REGARD TO ANY SERVICE RELATED CLAIM BY CUSTOMER FOR DAMAGES THAT IS NOT LIMITED BY THE PRECEDING SENTENCE, CUSTOMER'S EXCLUSIVE REMEDIES FOR SUCH CLAIM WILL BE LIMITED TO: (A) THOSE REMEDIES SET FORTH IN THE APPLICABLE SERVICE LEVEL AGREEMENT; OR (B) IF NO SERVICE LEVEL AGREEMENT APPLIES TO THE AFFECTED SERVICE, THE TOTAL MRCs OR USAGE CHARGES PAID BY CUSTOMER TO QCC FOR THE AFFECTED SERVICE IN THE ONE MONTH IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING THE OCCURRENCE OF THE EVENT GIVING RISE TO THE CLAIM. EACH PARTY'S TOTAL AGGREGATE LIABILITY ARISING FROM OR RELATED TO THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT EXCEED THE TOTAL MRCs AND USAGE CHARGES PAID BY CUSTOMER TO QCC UNDER THIS AGREEMENT IN THE THREE MONTHS IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING THE OCCURRENCE OF THE EVENT GIVING RISE TO THE CLAIM ("DAMAGE CAP"). Notwithstanding the foregoing, the limitation of liability in this Section and the Damage Cap will not apply to: (a) a party's indemnification obligations; and (b) Customer's payment obligation for all charges under this Agreement, including without limitation, Service charges, Taxes, interest, Early Termination Charges, and Service Cancellation Charges. DGM/OMR # 1108342 Page 1 Copyright © 2005 Qwest. All Rights Reserved CONFIDENTIAL V3 10-06-05 QWEST LOYAL ADVANTAGE" AGREEMENT (b) Any claim or dispute arising out of or relating to this Agreement must be brought within two years after the cause of action arises. 7. Personal Injury, Death, and Property Damage. To the extent permitted under law, each party will be responsible to the other party for the actual, physical damages directly caused by its negligent acts or omissions in the course of its performance under this Agreement, limited to damages resulting from personal injury or death to a party's employees (if not covered under applicable workers' compensation laws) and loss or damage to a party's personal tangible property. Damages under this Section will be subject to the limitation of liability in this Agreement but not the Damage Cap. 8. Indemnification. To the extent permitted under law, each party will defend and indemnify the other party, its Affiliates, agents, and contractors against all third party claims, liabilities, costs, and expenses, including reasonable attorneys' fees, involving personal injury or death to persons or loss or damage to personal tangible property resulting from the gross negligence or willful misconduct of the indemnifying party; provided, however, the foregoing indemnification will not apply to any claims made by employees that are covered under applicable workers' compensation laws. Furthermore, to the extent permitted under law, Customer will indemnify Qwest, to the extent as set forth in Rate Service Schedule ("RSS") #3. 9. Termination. Either party may terminate a Service in accordance with the applicable Service Exhibit. Either party may terminate this Agreement: (a) by providing written notice of termination to the other party at least 30 days prior to the expiration of the then current Term; or (b) for Cause; provided that if Customer is terminating this Agreement for Service related claims, Cause exists where there is cause to terminate all or substantially all of the Services in accordance with the applicable service level agreements or Service Exhibits. If Customer terminates this Agreement under subsection (a) of the immediately preceding sentence before the expiration of any individual service term for a particular Service described in a Service Exhibit, the applicable Cancellation Charge for the Service will apply. If, prior to the conclusion of the Term, this Agreement is terminated either by QCC for Cause or by Customer for any reason other than Cause, then Customer will also pay to QCC: (a) an Early Termination Charge; and (b) any applicable Service Cancellation Charges. Customer will remain liable for charges accrued but unpaid as of the termination date. 10. Confidentiality; Publicity. Except to the extent required by an open records act or similar law, neither party will, without the prior written consent of the other party: (a) issue any public announcement regarding, or make any other disclosure of the terms of, this Agreement or use the name or marks of the other party or its Affiliates; or (b) disclose or use (except as expressly permitted by, or required to achieve the purposes of, this Agreement) the Confidential Information of the other party. Such consent may only be given on behalf of Qwest by its Legal Department. A party may disclose Confidential Information if required to do so by a governmental agency, by operation of law, or if necessary in any proceeding to establish rights or obligations under this Agreement, provided that the disclosing party gives the non -disclosing party reasonable prior written notice. 11. Dispute Resolution; Governing Law. The parties shall attempt in good faith to resolve through negotiation any dispute, claim or controversy arising out of or related to this Agreement. Either party may initiate negotiations by providing a written notice to the other party setting forth the dispute and the relief requested. If the parties are unable to resolve such dispute within a reasonable period of time, either party may commence a civil action in a court of competent jurisdiction located, at the option of the moving party, in either: (a) the place of business of the other party, as indicated in the address to which required notices must be sent; or (b) in Denver, Colorado. To the extent the Communications Act of 1934 does not govern, this Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the state in which the Customer's principal office is located without regard to its choice of law principles. Notwithstanding the above, any action by QCC to collect payment for services may be commenced in Denver, Colorado. Each party hereby expressly waives its right to a trial by jury and consents to the jurisdiction of such courts for the purposes described in this Section. Such court shall not award any indirect, incidental, special, reliance, punitive, or consequential damages, including damages for lost profits. Each party shall bear the cost of preparing and presenting its own claims and/or defenses (including its own attorneys' fees). 12. Non -Appropriations. Customer intends to continue this Agreement for its entire Term and to satisfy its obligations hereunder. For each fiscal period for Customer: (a) Customer agrees to include in its budget request appropriations sufficient to cover Customer's obligations under this Agreement; (b) Customer agrees to use all reasonable and lawful means to secure these appropriations, including but not limited to applying for Universal Service Fund Discounts as described in the Federal Communications Commission Docket No. 96-45; (c) Customer agrees it will not use non -appropriations as a means of terminating this Agreement in order to acquire functionally equivalent products or services from a third party. Customer reasonably believes that sufficient funds to discharge its obligations can and will lawfully be appropriated and made available for this purpose. In the event that Customer is appropriated insufficient funds, by appropriation, appropriation limitation or grant, to continue payments under this Agreement and has no other funding source lawfully available to it for such purpose (as evidenced by notarized documents provided by Customer and agreed to by QCC), Customer may terminate this Agreement by giving QCC not less than 30 days prior written notice. Upon termination and to the extent of lawfully available funds, Customer will remit all amounts due and all costs reasonably incurred by QCC through the date of termination. 13. Notices. (a) Required Notices. Customer's current address, facsimile number, and person designated for notices are: s <Q z gEagan,M 5512 Except as otherwise provided herein, all required notices to QCC must be in writing and sent to 1801 California Street, Suite 900, Denver, Colorado 80202; Facsimile #: (888) 778-0054; Attn.: Legal Department, and to Customer at its then current address as reflected in QCC's records (if different than what is stated in this Section); Attn.: General Counsel or other person designated for notices. Except as otherwise provided herein or in a Service Exhibit, all notices will be deemed given: (i) when delivered in person to the recipient named above; (ii) three business days after delivered via regular U.S. Mail; (iii) when delivered via overnight courier mail; or (iv) when delivered by facsimile so long as duplicate notification is also sent by regular U.S. Mail. (b) Service Termination Notices. Customer's notice of termination for Services must be sent via mail, facsimile or e-mail to: Qwest, Attn.: Dublin Service Center, GBM Disconnects, 6000 Parkwood Place, 5th Floor Disconnect Center, Dublin, OH 43017, FAX: DGM/OMR # 1108342 Page 2 Copyright © 2005 Qwest. All Rights Reserved V3 10-06-05 CONFIDENTIAL as QWEST LOYAL ADVANTAGE' AGREEMENT 866.887.6633, e-mail: GBMdisconnects(awest.com. Such termination will be effective 30 days after QCC's receipt of the notice, unless a longer period is otherwise required. 14. General. Customer may not assign this Agreement or any of its rights or obligations under this Agreement without the prior written consent of QCC, which consent will not be unreasonably withheld. This Agreement is intended solely for QCC and Customer and it will not benefit or be enforceable by any other person or entity, including without limitation, End Users. If any term of this Agreement is held unenforceable, such term will be construed as nearly as possible to reflect the original intent of the parties and the remaining terms will remain in effect. Except as specifically stated in a Service Exhibit, neither party's failure to insist upon strict performance of any provision of this Agreement will be construed as a waiver of any of its rights hereunder. All terms of this Agreement that should by their nature survive the termination of this Agreement will so survive. In the event of a conflict in any term of any documents that govern the provision of Services hereunder, the following order of precedence will apply in descending order of control: a Service Exhibit, this Agreement, and any Order Form. Neither party will be liable for any delay or failure to perform its obligations hereunder if such delay or failure is caused by a Force Majeure Event. This Agreement, any applicable Service Exhibit, and any Order Forms hereunder constitute the entire agreement between Customer and QCC with respect to the subject matter hereof, and supersede all prior oral or written agreements or understandings relating to the subject matter hereof. Except for Service modifications initiated by QCC or as set forth in a Service Exhibit, all amendments to this Agreement must be in writing and signed by the parties' authorized representatives. QCC reserves the right at any time to reject any handwritten change to this Agreement. 15. Definitions. "Affiliate" means any entity controlled by, controlling, or under common control with a party. "AUP" means the Qwest Acceptable Use Policy, which is posted at http://www.awest.com/legal/. "Cancellation Charge" means: (a) early termination charges that apply to a particular Service if the Service is terminated prior to the expiration of the service term as described in the Service Exhibit; and (b) charges incurred by QCC from any third party provider. "Cause" means the failure of a party to perform a material obligation under this Agreement, which failure is not remedied: (a) in the event of a payment default by Customer, within five days of separate written notice from QCC notifying Customer of such default; or (b) in the event of any other material breach, within 30 days of written notice (unless a different notice period is specified in this Agreement). "Confidential Information" means any information that is not generally available to the public, whether of a technical, business, or other nature and that: (a) the receiving party knows or has reason to know is confidential, proprietary, or trade secret information of the disclosing party; and/or (b) is of such a nature that the receiving party should reasonably understand that the disclosing party desires to protect such information against unrestricted disclosure. Confidential Information will not include information that is in the public domain through no breach of this Agreement by the receiving party or is already known or is independently developed by the receiving party. "CPE" means any customer equipment, software, and/or other materials of Customer used in connection with the Service. "Early Termination Charge" means an amount equal to 35% of the average monthly charges billed under this Agreement through the date of termination multiplied by the number of months remaining in the Term. "End Users" means Customer's members, end users, customers, or any other third parties who utilize or access the Services or the QCC network via the Services provided hereunder. "Force Majeure Event" means an unforeseeable event beyond the reasonable control of that party, including without limitation: act of God, fire, flood, labor strike, sabotage, fiber cut not caused by QCC, acts of terror, material shortages or unavailability, government laws or regulations, war or civil disorder, or failures of suppliers of goods and services. "MRC" means monthly recurring charges. "NRC" means nonrecurring charges. "Order Form" means order request forms issued by QCC. "Taxes" means foreign, federal, state and local taxes, surcharges, and other similar charges. DGMIOMR # 1108342 Page 3 Copyright © 2005 Qwest. All Rights Reserved CONFIDENTIAL V3 10-06-05 cab Consent Agenda Information Memo November 1, 2005 I. APPROVE VENDOR SELECTION FOR WEB STREAMING PROJECT AND AUTHORIZE ENTERING INTO CONTRACT SUBJECT TO FINAL NEGOTIATIONS AND CITY ATTORNEY AND CITY ADMINSISTRATOR APPROVAL ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve selection of Web Streaming vendor (Granicus) and authorize entering into contract subject to final negotiations and City Attorney and City Administrator approval. FACTS: • On December 13, 2004, the Eagan City Council approved 2005 City budgets, including the Communications Department budget and a targeted priority of providing live webcasting (called Web streaming) over the Internet of City Council and commission meetings. • The priority was in response to industry data indicating that four out of ten Eagan residents do not subscribe to cable television and therefore have no exposure or access to televised city meetings, the City video, or other video messages the City may wish to deliver to all Eagan residents. • City survey results show that the more residents know about the work of the Council and city government, the higher their satisfaction with city services. • On August 22, 2005 the City of Eagan issued a Request For Proposals to Web Streaming vendors and published an RFP notice in the City's legal newspaper. • Proposals were received by the October 3, 2005 deadline and reviewed by the City Communications Director, Director of Administrative Services and IT Manager. Two vendors were chosen for final presentations and were interviewed on October 19, 2005 by a cross -departmental team including the directors and managers named above plus the Community Television Manager, and Deputy City Clerk. • Granicus, the nation's largest provider of streaming video and webcasts of local government meetings, was selected. It was not only the low bid, but judged to be the best bid as well. a7 • The cost of securing the webcasting and on -demand video archiving services is approximately $13,325 in one-time costs for hardware, software, installation, configuration, training and Web site integration. An additional $725 per month management fee insures 24x7 technical and user support, system monitoring and automatic software updates. • Discounted pricing was obtained by making a two-year commitment, and the entire costs of that commitment were envisioned and are covered by the already adopted 2005 budget allocation. • The next closest bids were between $23,000 to $39,000 more expensive with fewer overall services. • In the City Council's June 24th Informative packet, an article was included about the significant national trend in cities webcasting their meetings. Those cities currently include Bloomington and Minneapolis; and of the 83 cities attending this fall's Minnesota Association of Community Television Administrators, only five were not currently in negotiation to acquire a webcasting capability. Currently at least 22 million residents nationwide are served by this capability of seeing government meetings via the Web with 10-15 jurisdictions being added per month. • Perhaps the most significant benefit of the Web streaming of meetings is the on - demand archiving which allows any Councilmember, any citizen or staff member the ability to go back and view the specific segment of a specific meeting held within the last year and not have to watch the entire meeting. This is consistent with trends indicating that citizens want what they want when they want it and to not have to view content according to a strict schedule. • Granicus provides unlimited storage for all city meeting videos no matter how many meetings or how long they are, and 50 hours worth of storage for other videos for 12 months. Specific "jump to" points are inserted and key word search capability is included to easily find content in the City's video archives. The system supports up to 1,000 concurrent users, the ability to record staff training sessions for later recall on the City's Intranet, and to automatically publish to the Web with no staff support following the conclusion of the meeting. (The cablecaster will note and insert the jump to points during the meeting.) • Further, the Web streaming capability insures that even if franchise fees were to be eliminated by Congress to fund local community television, cities with Web streaming capability would still have an efficient means to deliver their own video messages and webcast their public meetings. 923 • It is expected that the system will be up and running within 30 to 60 days after a signed contract is returned to the vendor. Upon Council confirmation of vendor selection a contract will be negotiated for review by the City Attorney and final approval by the City Administrator. ATTACHMENTS Attachments on pages 30 through 3/ . a9 Granicus MediaManagerTM Software ► Schedule live events to automati- cally broadcast live and archive content ► Keyword search of archived meetings and other media files ► Index and time stamp video in real-time or later, adding "Jump to" points within video files ► Import documents and have them displayed with the video ► Search closed captions by keyword within video files ► Link documents to video archives ► Media tools to edit, merge, trim, and delete audio/video files ► Content Management and Delivery ► User/Group administration and access control granicus® Granicus MediaManager consists of proprietary web -based software tools designed to effi- ciently organize and manage your streaming content. These tools put the control of broadcast activity, user account management, live event management, and usage reporting in your hands. MediaManager Basic Edition is the foundation of Granicus' software package and has a variety of robust add-on modules to meet the unique needs of every local government agency's size or cost requirement. ► Media Manager Basic Edition: a full featured software application to access, archive, keyword search, index, and integrate documents into your streaming media. Basic Edition, the foundation of our software, will get you started with a complete system with features you require to save yourself time and money. And includes basic training, and unlimited 24/7 technical support and system monitoring. ► Media Manager Enterprise Module: allows for unlimited access and use of MediaManager* a o�V by group, setting user access to clips, assigning access based on specific criteria, access to software template language, unlimited template creation, flexible web publishing, Qty and more. Basic Edition application. Available for large organizations that require segmented control of different departments or services. Additional tools feature; categorized media libraries ► MediaManager MinutesMakerTM Module: adds the ability to effortlessly annotate public meeting minutes live during meetings, by capturing motions, votes and discussion sum- maries as they occur. Record votes and absenteeism, and note attendance in real-time through a simple interface, linking your annotations to the audio/video. A44- "iQc'd€d) Distribution options are available to better manage your external bandwidth requirements. StreamReplicatorTM, and MediaVaultTM ensure you are maximizing your existing infrastructure, while the Granicus MediaCenterTM provides you with optimized file management and distribu- tion with redundant connections. Granicus Managed Services provides 24/7 technical support and system monitoring for a complete end-to-end solution created and designed for local government. Cil, or EWA hele, Ston . min Sid., 111* 30 aw 1 itanturi a.xtae.rat %.1$( cJ3Ca tae1RL:3,e,.:L1:!:A e lso j (qy (...pie screen Keyword Search import Documents Jump Tc" Indexing Granicus System Diagram r Video, Tapes, CD/DVD Video and Audio from cameras, videocassettes, or compact discs are captured and converted to Microsoft Windows media format. ON ALR err l i Outcast'' Encoder Converts your audioNideo signal into digital Microsoft Windows Media format ready for streaming to the Web. l ice? r—' ♦I� - MediaVault" Provides long-term storage and management of audio/video content, while maximizing existing broadband connectivity. Ns, ON. MR P�� MediaCenter"" A secure and reliable facility stores and distributes audio/video content '. to the public over the Internet. MediaCenter receives one source file and delivers it to all public connections, keeping your bandwidth requirements to a minimum. StreamReplicator" Replicates live broadcasts to viewers within your network. Its multicast technology allows hundreds to watch a single stream file. Internet Connecte Television - ;( granicuse 28 2nd Street, 415.522.5216 Coliyrigh12005, all h• MecliaVault MobileEncoJ Ste 400, San Francisco, California 94105 www.granicus.com Set Vet! Tht' Granicus Togo is a registered trademark and MediaMana ger, MediaCenter, nut akel, OutCast, StreamReplicatm, VotingSystem are trademarks of Granicus, Inc. Agenda Information Memo November 1, 2005 City Council J. FINAL PLAT (HALLEY'S 2ND ADDITION) — MANLEY LAND DEVELOPMENT ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To continue action on the Vacation of easements and the Final Plat for Halley's 2nd Addition to the January 3, 2006, City Council meeting. REQUIRED VOTES FOR APPROVAL: Majority of Councilmembers present FACTS: > The site consists of Lots 1 and 2, Halley's Addition located at the southwest corner of Red Pine Lane and Biscayne Avenue in the SE 'A of Section 36. > These items first appeared on the Council agenda on May 17, 2005. It has been continued three times to allow the City to proceed with a study of development/redevelopment issues in this area and to work toward a master plan approach to redevelopment in this area. > At the applicant's request, approval of these items is being postponed another two months to January 3, 2006. > A Predevelopment Agreement was approved on August 1, 2005, and the parties continue to work on development of the master plan, with the intention of development/redevelopment of the subject site, adjacent property to the west, and other properties in this area. ATTACHMENTS (1): Letter from Tim Johnson, Manley Land Development, page 33 3a OCT -27-2005 12:44 From: MANEL.EY Land Development, Inc. 1915 Plaza Drive. Eagan, MN 5b122 Phone r,5 I r. Y). ; T63 Fax 6S I. 289.432`) wvV.vmanlepnCJ rant October 76. 2005 Pun Dudtiak, Planoct City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 To:651 675 5694 P.2'2 Re Request for Continuance of Application for Fugal Plat/Eascmcnt Vacations for Halley -s 2"d Addition Dear Pam, Manley Land Development submitted applications for sinal Plat and Easement Vacations to the City of Eagan in May 2005 for the property at 4841 Biscayne Avenue We understand that the City Council needs additional time in order to review the Red Pine Area Master Plan and the Predevelopment Agreement. Manley is hereby requesting that our applications be continued until January 3.2006_ as this would be in t c best interests of all parties involved 1 can be reached direct 'it; (h5 i) 289-5506, or on my mobile 'ii; (651) 587-9354 with any questions Sincerely, 19W1444$71\ -- Tim Johnson T.zind Planner 3 3 Agenda Information Memo November 1, 2005 Eagan City Council Meeting K PROJECT 917, COACHMAN ROAD — STREET OVERLAY FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Receive the Final Assessment Roll for Project 917 (Coachman Road — Street Overlay) and schedule a public hearing to be held on December 5, 2005. FACTS: • Project 917 provided for the bituminous overlay of Coachman Road, in northwest Eagan. The street resurfacing was completed as outlined and discussed in the feasibility report. • This project, constructed under Contract 05-02, has been completed, all costs tabulated and the final assessment roll prepared. The assessments are based upon the City of Eagan's Special Assessment Policy for all such assessable properties. • This roll is now being presented to the Council for their consideration of scheduling a public hearing to formally present the final costs to be levied against the benefited properties. • An informational neighborhood meeting will be scheduled prior to the final assessment hearing with the affected property owners and address any concerns. • The final assessments are less than the estimate contained in the feasibility report presented at the public hearing held on January 18, 2005. 35� Agenda Information Memo November 1, 2005 Eagan City Council Meeting L. ()WEST LEASE AGREEMENTS ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve renewal lease agreements with Qwest for 3805 Pilot Knob Rd and 1410 Towerview Rd. and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. FACTS: • Currently, Qwest has two small brick buildings located at 3805 Pilot Knob Rd (adjacent to the Historic Town Hall) and 1410 Towerview Rd (adjacent to the Sperry Reservoir). These telecommunication switching stations were originally constructed on City property in 1985 under a 20 year lease which expired this past August. • The original lease for each site was for $500/yr for 20 years. The new lease, which is more in line with our telecommunications leases, provides for $6,000/yr with a 6% annual increase for the next 20 years in addition to a $4,000 application fee and landscaping escrow for each site. • The final leases have been reviewed by the Public Works Department and City Attorney's office and found to be in order for favorable Council action. 3S Agenda Information Memo November 1, 2005 M. PROJECT 926, SADDLEHORN/ SUNSET/ NORTHVIEW MEADOWS ADDITIONS STREET IMPROVEMENTS ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Receive the Draft Feasibility Report for Project 926 (Saddlehorn/Sunset/Northview Meadows Additions — Street Improvements) and schedule a public hearing to be held on December 5, 2005. FACTS: • On June 7, 2005 the City Council directed staff to prepare a feasibility report considering a street rehabilitation of the streets in the Saddlehorn/ Sunset/ Northview Meadows Additions, south of Diffley Road. and west of Dodd Road. • The bituminous overlay of the streets within this neighborhood is programmed for 2006 in the City of Eagan's 5 -Year CIP (2006-2010). • An informational neighborhood meeting will be held with the adjacent property owners prior to a public hearing to review and discuss the proposed improvements. • A draft of this Feasibility Report has been prepared and is being presented to the Council for their consideration of scheduling a public hearing for December 5, 2005. ATTACHMENTS: • Draft Feasibility Report, attached without page numbers. 3 6 Agenda Information Memo November 1, 2005 Eagan City Council Meeting N. PROJECT 927, MEADOWLAND 1sT/ BEAVER DAM ROAD/ SUNCLIFF ADDITIONS STREET IMPROVEMENTS ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Receive the Draft Feasibility Report for Project 927 (Meadowland 1St/ Beaver Dam Road/ Suncliff Additions — Street Improvements) and schedule a public hearing to be held on December 5, 2005. FACTS: • On June 7, 2005 the City Council directed staff to prepare a feasibility report considering a street rehabilitation of the streets in the Meadowland 1St/ Beaver Dam Road/ Suncliff Additions, south of Diffley Road. and west of Blackhawk Road. • The bituminous overlay of the streets within this neighborhood is programmed for 2006 in the City of Eagan's 5 -Year CLP (2006-2010). • An informational neighborhood meeting will be held with the adjacent property owners prior to a public hearing to review and discuss the proposed improvements. • A draft of this Feasibility Report has been prepared and is being presented to the Council for their consideration of scheduling a public hearing for Monday, December 5, 2005. ATTACHMENTS: • Draft Feasibility Report, attached without page numbers. Agenda Information Memo November 1, 2005 Eagan City Council Meeting O. DEVELOPMENT ACCEPTANCE & MAINTENANCE AUTHORIZATION ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Acknowledge the completion of the public streets and utilities and authorize perpetual City maintenance subject to warranty provisions for the following Development Agreement Contracts: • 01-G (Safari at Eagan 1St Addition) • 02-R (Greyhawk 2nd Addition) • 04-B (Terra Glenn 1St Addition) • 04-H (Long Acres 2nd Addition) • 04-W (Terra Glenn 2" Addition) FACTS: • Greyhawk 2" Addition, Long Acres 2" Addition, Safari at Eagan 1st Addition, and Terra Glenn 1st and 2nd Additions, were constructed within the City of Eagan over the past few years. These developments required the installation of public sanitary sewer, water main, and storm sewer, as well as grading and new street construction, which was all performed privately by the developers under the terms and conditions of the individual development contract agreements. • The improvements have been completed, inspected by representatives of the Public Works Department and found to be in order for favorable Council action for acceptance for perpetual maintenance subject to warranty provisions. 3 a' Agenda Information Memo November 1, 2005 Eagan City Council Meeting P. CONTRACT 03-09, COACHMAN WATER TREATMENT PLANT ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve a reduction in retainage for Contract 03-09 (Coachman Water Treatment Plant) and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. FACTS: • Contract 03-09 provides for the expansion and renovation of the existing north Water Treatment Plant located on Coachman Rd. This contract was awarded in July of 2003 and the construction is approx. 99.5 % complete. • Under the terms of the original contract, the City has withheld 5% of each payment and placed it in escrow to insure satisfactory completion of the contract. • Now that the construction is nearly complete and close to a final close out, it is appropriate that the Retainage be reduced to 1% which will be held until the final change order and pay request is ready for processing for Council approval. 3y Agenda Information Memo November 1, 2005, Eagan City Council Meeting Q. REFER POLICY PERTAINING TO THE ISSUANCE OF FINANCIAL GUARANTEES BY BANKS AND OTHER FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS TO COUNCIL FINANCE COMMITTEE ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To refer consideration of a policy pertaining to the issuance of financial guarantees by banks and other financial institutions to Council Finance Committee. FACTS: D The City requires financial guarantees to insure completion of requirements in development agreements in the form of letters of credit, performance bonds or cash deposits. Typically, guarantees other than cash deposits are issued by banks or other financial institutions. D Recently, the City has seen an increase in proposals to submit letters of credit from non - licensed financing companies. While such companies may have substantial financial resources, they are not licensed and regulated in the same way as banks and other financial institutions are. > At the Council meeting of July 5, 2005, staff' and the City Attorney requested and the City Council authorized the preparation of a policy regarding the acceptance of financial guarantees. Preliminary work in that regard has been done, but the because of the cross over between policy issues and the logistics of assuring collectibility from unlicensed providers, staff would request that the item be referred to the Council Finance Committee for review in anticipation of bringing forward a recommendation to the full Council for consideration. ATTACHMENTS: None. 174 o Agenda Information Memo November 1, 2005, Eagan City Council Meeting R. FINAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT - LOT 2, BLOCK 1, BLUE RIDGE 6TH ADDITION (CSM PROPERTIES, INC. ACTIONS TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve (OR direct findings of fact for denial) a Final Planned Development to construct a 46,500 sq. ft. office/warehouse building located at 2975 Lone Oak Drive in the SW' V4 of Section 1. REQUIRED VOTE FOR APPROVAL: Majority of Council Members Present FACTS: ➢ The Preliminary Planned Development (Laukka-Beck) was established in 1985. A Final PD was approved in 2003 for the first building in a three -building development on a 20 - acre site (L1, BI, Blue Ridge 5th Addition). The 20 -acre site was subdivided in September (Blue Ridge 6t'' Addition) and the plat was recorded in October. ➢ CSM Properties is now developing a 46,500 square foot office/warehouse building as the second building of the three-phase development. The proposed development is consistent with the prior Planned Development Agreements governing this property. ➢ The Final Planned Development Agreement is signed and in order for execution at the regular meeting of the City Council ATTACHMENTS (None) 5�/ Agenda Memo November 1, 2005 Regular City Council Meeting CONSENT AGENDA S. RECOMMEND that the City of Eagan pursue the listing of Holz Farm on the National Register of Historic Places by entering into a contract with U.S. West Research, Inc. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To recommend that the City of Eagan enter into a contract with U.S. West Research, Inc. in the amount of $6,000 to list Holz Farm on the National Register of Historic Places. FACTS: • In concert with the Friends of the Farm, The APrC has expressed an interest in pursuing the potential historic designation for Holz Farm. • A preliminary review for eligibility on the National Register of Historic Places conducted by the Minnesota Historical Society determined that the Holz Farm property is eligible for nomination. • The City Council took action of May 17, 2005 to solicit proposals from consultants to determine the financial viability of pursuing the technically challenging task of pursuing this historic designation. • Four proposals were received and reviewed by a committee consisting of staff, APrC and Friends of the Farm representatives. • The APrC reviewed the benefits and concerns of Holz Farm being listed on the National Registry of Historic Places and are recommending to the City Council that the city enter into a contract with U.S. West Research, Inc. in the amount of $6,000. • The Friends of the Farm board met and discussed cost participation and have agreed to fund one-half ($3,000) of the contract amount. • The continued partnership between Friends of the Farm and the City of Eagan in moving forward with this project will confirm Holz Farm as a unique area of historical significance. ATTACHMENTS: • Background from October 11, 2005 APrC meeting attached on pages 7 J �a IL e City of Eagan Parks and Recreation MEMO Date: October 11, 2005 Agenda Item: H-2; ;Holz Farm NRHP Application Action Information Attachments X 1. Memo from MHS regarding NRNP nomination eligibility 2. Advertised SOQ X AGENDA ITEM: H-2; HOLZ FARM NRHP APPLICATION TO: FROM: ADVISORY PARKS and RECREATION COMMISSION JULI SEYDELL JOHNSON, DIRECTOR OF PARKS and RECREATION JEFF ASFAHL, SUPERINTENDENT OF RECREATION ITEM OVERVIEW: Background review of considerations associated with application of the Holz Farm property to the National Register of Historic Places. BACKGROUND/HISTORY: The Holz Farm Master Plan of 2003 suggested nominating the Holz Farm property for listing on the National Registry of Historic Places (NRHP). The National Register of Historic Places is the official listing of historic properties recognized by the Federal Government as worthy of preservation for their significance in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering and culture. In the fall of 2004, staff submitted materials to the Minnesota Historical Society (MHS) for preliminary review and. The MHS evaluation determined that the property is eligible for nomination to the NRHP under National Register Criterion A, (the area of significance of Agriculture as an example of a family farming operation that kept pace with the changes occurring in the state's agricultural economy). The MHS recommended hiring a consultant to complete the NRHP application due to its demanding technical requirements, etc. Staff was then authorized to advertise a Statement of Qualifications for these services. Four proposals were received and reviewed by a committee consisting of staff, one APrC representative, and one member of the Friends of the Farm organization. IDENTIFIED BENEFITS OF BEING LISTED ON NRHP: - That while future funding was uncertain and unpredictable they did feel that properties with NRHP status do have a competitive advantage when seeking funding. Confirms Holz Farm as a unique area of historical significance. May be a marketing tool. IDENTIFIED CONCERNS OF BEING LISTED ON NRHP: - Although this doesn't legally limit change in use, the perception of protection may make any change much more political. Pursuing listing on the NRHP does not significantly change the current operations at Holz Farm. `7L-3 /l, DISCUSSION/EVALUATION: Friends of the Farm and staff support pursuing the listing of Holz Farm on the NRHP. The committee recommends entering into a contract with U.S. West Research, Inc. because their proposal offered the strongest combination of professional training and experience, demonstrated experience and success with other NRHP property applications, proposed a strong approach to the process, and offered good value. Cost for the services is approximately $6000.00. Friends of the Farm is scheduled to discuss the idea of sharing half the cost of this project at their October 13, 2005 meeting. ALTERNATIVES FOR COMMISSION CONSIDERATION: 1. To make a recommendation to the City Council to support pursuing the listing of Holz Farm on the National Register of Historic Places by entering into a contract with U.S. West Research, Inc. in the amount of $6,000. Funding would be provided through a 50% cost share between the Friends of the Farm and the CIP Small Projects Fund. 2. To make a recommendation to the City Council that the City of Eagan not pursue the listing of Holz Farm on the National Registry of Historic Places. 3. Other Ili I I Item: HI; Ho iz rm N Kk4 P MINNESOTA HISTORICAL SOCIETY February 7, 2005 Mr. Jeff Asfahl 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota 55122 Dear Mr. Asfahl: Attachment # /. Memo -firm M115 RE: Holz Family Farmstead, 4665 Manor Drive, Eagan, Dakota County Preservation Office staff completed a review of materials on the above property submitted by the City of Eagan's Parks and Recreation Department. My response is very tardy and I sincerely appreciate your patience. After evaluating the information and applying National Register criteria, it is our opinion that the property is eligible for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places under National Register Criterion A, under the Area of Significance of Agriculture as an example of a family farming operation that kept pace with the changes occurring in the state's agricultural economy. The property's level of significance is local and the period of significance is 1899-1955 representing the farm's operation by two generations of the Holz family --Louisa and Otto Sr., and Ella and Otto Jr. However, while the information submitted suggests that the property may be eligible for the National Register, it is not sufficient to officially initiate the process. Nominating a property involves an exacting process of data collection and presentation. These requirements are designed to assure that properties are properly documented for a permanent archival record and that the significance of nominated properties is based on complete and thorough information. National Register Bulletins How to Complete the National Register Registration Fomi and How to Apply National Register Criteria for Evaluation, and the Preservation Office's, "Supplemental instructions for the Completion of a National Register Registration Form" explain in detail the form the documentation is required to take. This documentation must not only include the basic historical information about a property (age, original owner, historic function), but must discuss in detail that body of information in relation to the property's "historic context," placing the significance of a property within a historic theme, place, and time. Because the property is historically significant it will be necessary to discuss the development of Minnesota's agriculture at the turn -of -the -century in general and the Holz farming operation in particular noting how the farmstead significantly represents the family's response to not only an expanding agricultural economy, but advances in farming technology. The Holz Farmstead symbolizes how a family could adapt its operation to meet market demands. The farmstead retains exceptional historic physical integrity. There is no doubt that if either couple stepped on the farmstead, they would recognize it as their own --a true test of the farmstead's authenticity. This office 345 Kellogg Boulevard West / Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102-1906 /Telephone 651-296-6126 '71-5" Item: 11-25 4/2 i rm IUk'H P Attachment #Z Adverfi { -50( City of Eago Request for Statement of Qualifications and Quotes (SOQQ) National Register of Historic Places Nomination Form — Holz Farm Historic Farmstead July 29, 2005 PURPOSE The City of Eagan Parks and Recreation Department is seeking quotes from a qualified historic preservation consulting service should the City decide to pursue nomination of the Holz Farm Historic Farmstead to the National Register of Historic Places. The Statement of Qualification and Quote (SOQQ) will allow the Eagan Advisory Parks Commission (APrC) and the Eagan City Council to make an informed decision as to whether pursuing nomination to the NRHP has a broad public benefit. HOLZ FARM PROFILE Holz Farm is one of Eagan's few remaining historic properties. The Holz Family operated the farm since the late 1890s, raising crops and livestock, until the mid 1970s when portions of the property were sold for residential development. As development in the area increased during the 80s and 90s, the City of Eagan purchased the remaining Holz property to operate it as a public park. Under the City's ownership, the property has been open for public and programmatic use. Stewardship group Friends of the Farm have provided invaluable assistance in programming and maintaining the farmstead buildings. The Friends of the Farm have interpreted the site to reflect a 1940s farmstead, focusing on the period that electricity came to the farm. Each year the farmstead hosts major City events, including the Spring Festival, summer youth camps, and the Old Fashioned Holiday.and other special activities are held at the farm to give citizens a taste of 1940s farm life. Barn buildings are still used to house City of Eagan equipment, and Friends of the Farm tend chickens in the original Holz chicken house . The City of Eagan and Friends of the Farm have taken great care to protect the integrity of the buildings while still allowing festival and public use on the property. In 2003, as part of a park master plan prepared by Brauer and Associates, Miller — Dunwiddie Associates prepared an assessment of the structures, including recommendations for future preservation efforts. The historic assessment was conducted as part of the Master Park Plan for Holz Farm Park to guide future development of the public park and develop preservation strategies. In 2004, the City of Eagan asked the Minnesota State Historical Preservation Office (SHPO) to provide a preliminary evaluation of the Holz Farm property. SHPO responded that the property has potential for NRHP listing under Criterion A, Area of �`6 do Significance -Agriculture. The property may also be evaluated under Criterion C as an example of vernacular farmstead architecture. The significant buildings and outbuildings represent vernacular agricultural architecture spanning from the early 1900s to the 1940s. RESPONSE FORMAT Reference materials will be available for consultant review at Eagan City Hall, 3830 Pilot Knob Road, Eagan, MN, 55122. These materials will include: • Holz Farm Master Plan, including the Historic Building Survey conducted by Miller-Dunwiddie Associates. • Topographic maps of the property • Land use and zoning maps of the property to delineate development around the site. The respondent shall supply three (3) copies of the SOQQ, at least one unbound, for distribution to appropriate City officials. Faxed or e-mailed responses will not be accepted. Responses are to be received no later than 4:00 p.m. on August 31, 2005. Send responses to: Jeff Asfahl, Recreation Superintendent City of Eagan Parks and Recreation 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55121 651.675.5500 RESPONSE CONTENT Please include the following information in this order: Cover Letter/Title Page • Include a brief summary of the SOQQ, the name of the firm, local address, telephone and fax number, name of the primary contact person, and the date. Table of Contents • Include a clear identification of the material by section and page number. Consultant Profile • Please include the areas of general services and/or technical expertise of the firm. • Include qualifications of the firm as it relates to the specific services to be provided. Qualifications - Resumes • Include the qualifications and resumes of the professional staff that typically conduct NRHP nomination services. • Identify project managers and those responsible for overseeing and coordinating an NRHP nomination. Qualifications - References • Please include a list of municipal and private clients where NRHP nomination services were or are currently being provided by staff identified in Resumes. Also include the name and telephone number of a person who may be contacted at that municipality. • Provider shall include at least three (3) references that demonstrate successful NRHP nominations; nominations that have been approved and listed on the National Register. Qualifications —Procedure • Describe your firm's approach to preparing a typical farmstead nomination for the National Register of Historic Places, including site analysis, description of historic context, and approach to photography. • Provide an estimated timeline for the completion of a nomination to the National Register of Historic Places in weeks/ months. Quote - Fees • Provide an estimate for the preparation of a nomination to the National Register of Historic Places. Include fees for staff, related billable hours, materials, travel, photography, research (including copying and related materials), and a "not to exceed" cost. PROJECTED TIMELINE Submission Deadline August 31, 2005, 4:00 pm Review of Responses September 1 - 16, 2005 Review of Responses by Friends of the Farm and the Advisory Parks Commission September 19, 2005 Anticipated Review by City Council September 20, 2005 REVIEW OF RESPONSES Submittal of SOQQ and review of responses by the Advisory Parks Commission and City Council is meant to provide the basis for these entities to determine whether they would like to pursue nomination of the Holz Farm Historic Farmstead to the National Register of Historic Places, and determine which firms may be interested and qualified to perform such services. The review does not obligate the City toward award of any contract or retention of services. � 8' SOQQ ETHICS Proposing firms and their representatives are prohibited from contacting any elected or appointed official for purposes of lobbying to secure a potential contract. No elected official or employee of the City who exercises any responsibilities in the review, approval or implementation of the SOQQ or potential subsequent contract shall participate in any decision, which affects his or her direct or indirect financial interest. It is a breach of ethical standards for any person to offer, give, or agree to give any City employee or Council person, or for any City employee or Council person to solicit, demand, accept, or agree to accept from another person or firm a gratuity or an offer of employment whenever a reasonable prudent person would conclude that such consideration was motivated by an individual, group or corporate desire to obtain special, preferential, or move favorable treatment than is normally accorded to the general public. The firm shall not assign any interest in this contract and shall not transfer any interest in the same without the prior written consent of the City. To remove any potential or actual conflict of interest, a Regular or Specialty consultant representing any private party client submitting a project or activity to the City shall not represent or review the project or activity on behalf of the City. This firm shall not accept any private client or project which, by nature, places it in ethical conflict during its representation of the City of Eagan. The City requires affirmative action and, therefore, the firm selected shall not discriminate under the contract against any person in accordance with federal, state and local regulations. ACCEPTANCE/ REJECTION OF PROPOSALS Proposals may not be withdrawn for 60 days after the receipt of proposals without the consent of the City of Eagan. The City of Eagan reserves the right to accept any proposal, to reject any or all proposals, to waive irregularities and information in the proposal procedure, and to act in its best interest. An SOQQ does not commit the City to award contract or share in any expenses of preparing these proposals, including travel expenses related to the proposal process. AFFIRMATIVE ACTION The City of Eagan, Minnesota, has adopted a policy that it will not discriminate in employment practices on the basis of race, color, creed, religion, sexual orientation, national origin, sex, age, marital status, public assistance status, veteran status, handicap or disability; that it has agreed to take affirmative action to recruit minorities, women and handicapped persons into its employment; and that it will transact business only with firms who have adopted similar non-discriminatory and affirmative action policies. DISPOSITION OF RESPONSES All materials submitted in response to this RFQQ will become property of the City and will become public record after the evaluation process is completed and an award decision made. If the Respondant submits information that it believes to be trade secret materials as defined by the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Minn. Stat. § 13.37, the Responder must: • Clearly mark all trade secret materials in its response at the time the response is submitted, • Include a statement with its response justifying the trade secret designation for each item, and • Defend any action seeking release of the materials it believes to be trade secret, and indemnify and hold harmless the City, its agents and employees, from any judgments or damages awarded against the City in favor of the party requesting the materials, and any and all costs connected with that defense. This indemnification survives the City's award of a contract. In submitting a response to this RFQQ, the Responder agrees that this indemnification survives as long as the trade secret materials are in possession of the City. The City is required to keep all the basic documents related to its contracts, including the submitted SOQQ for a minimum of seven years. The City will not consider the prices submitted by the Responder to be proprietary or trade secret materials. Contents of SOQQ responses are private data until City Council takes action. CITY OF EAGAN INFORMATION City Organization The City of Eagan was incorporated in 1974 as a statutory Plan A City. It has a Council -Administrator form of government. The City provides a full array of municipal services and general administrative functions. City Council The Eagan City Council is the final review and approval authority regarding all contracts, payments, plans, improvements, policies, procedures and other business of the City. The City Council, composed of four members and the Mayor, is the legislative and policy making body of the City. The Mayor, who presides over the City Council meetings, and all Council members are elected at Targe for four-year terms. Set forth on the following table is certain information pertaining to the City Council. SO t City Administrator The City Administrator reviews and coordinates all matters coming before the City Council. He is responsible for the implementation of Council direction and coordination and management of City departments on a daily basis. City Staff The City Administrator implements Council directions through the Department Heads of six (6) City departments. For purposes of this proposal, the primary department shall be Public Works. However, other Department Heads shall act as the project manager and principal liaison to the consultants for projects/work orders initiated by the specific department. Parks and Recreation Department This department consists of forty (40) full-time employees and three hundred (300) seasonal and part-time staff. This department oversees public recreational programs and events, parks and natural resources, the Eagan Civic Arena, Cascade Bay Aquatic Facility, and the Eagan Community Center. Friends of the Farm Eagan Parks and Recreation works closely with Friends of the Farm, an active stewardship group that oversees events, activities, and assists with restoration and maintenance of Holz Farm Historic Farmstead. There nine members of the Board of Directors, and an estimate 35 members. Consent Agenda Information Memo November 1, 2005 T. APPROVE RADIO SERVICE AGREEMENT ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Enter into an agreement with Ancom Technical Center, Inc. to provide maintenance to the police department's radio infrastructure. FACTS: • Ancom is currently providing service to us on an hourly rate to repair radio infrastructure. • We no longer conduct business with past vendor who provided radio service. • The contract provides a cost effective method to insure peak performance of emergency radio infrastructure. • The contract is designed for termination upon migration to Dakota Communications Center. • The contract was reviewed by City Attorney and found to be in order. ATTACHMENTS Contract on pages pages5-3 through . sa RADIO SERVICE CONTRACT THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into the First day of November 2005, by and between Eagan and ANCOM Technical Center, Inc. (ATC), a Minnesota Corporation. 1. Services to be Performed. ATC agrees to maintain the twe-way radio equipment listed on the attached page. All labor and materials required to repair this equipment, which has become defective due to normal wear and tear will be furnished at no additional cost. Periodic inspections will be made as required to assure equipment performance levels as stated in the manufacturer's specifications. 2. Timely and Professional Manner. ATC agrees to provide service in both a professional and timely manner. Non -emergency service shall be provided during normal business hours, five (5) days per week, holidays excepted. Emergency service shall be available twenty-four (24) hours, seven days per week. 3. Exclusions. This contract will not cover the following items: A. Maintenance or replacement of any tower, tower light or associated antenna and antenna transmission lines. B. Batteries for portable or paging equipment C. Repair of equipment that has become defective or is damaged by accident, physical abuse or misuse, acts of God or fire. D. Installation and/or removal of any equipment. E. Any radio equipment deemed unrepairable. Determination of which will be at the discretion of ATC. 4. Additions or Deletions. This contact may be amended at any time for the purpose of adding or deleting specific items of equipment. All changes will be based upon the established rates of this contract. 5. Term. The initial term of this contact will be a period of not less than one (1) year commencing from the date of this contract. After the initial contract period, this contract will renew forthe next contract period without notice. Either party may terminate this contract with not less than thirty - (30) days written notice of intent to terminate prior to its anniversary date. Any and all rate adjustments will be preceded by not less than thirty- (30) days written notice. 6. Unsatisfactory Workmanship. In the event the customer is dissatisfied with the service received within this contract period and the issue is not reconcilable, this contract may be canceled following not less than thirty (30) days written notice of intent to terminate. 7. Insurance. A. With respect to performance hereunder, and in addition to ATC's obligations to indemnify, ATC agrees to maintain, at all times during the term of this Agreement, the following minimum insurance coverage and limits and any additional insurance and/or bonds required by law: 1. Worker's Compensation insurance with benefits afforded under the laws of the state in which Services are to be performed and Employers Liability insurance and minimum limits of five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) per occurrence. Page I of 2 2. Commercial General Liability insurance or equivalent with limits of not less than that of one million dollars ($1,000,000) per occurrence, combined single limit, for bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage liability. Eagan and its affiliated companies will be listed as Additional Insured on the Commercial General Liability policy. 3. Automobile liability insurance with a combined single limit of one million dollars ($1,000,000) per accident for bodily injury (including wrongful\ death) and property damage liability arising from owned, un -owned and hired automobiles. B. ATC shall require all subcontractors performing work on the project or who may enter upon the work site to maintain the same insurance requirements listed above. 8. Payment. Payment shall be $1750 per month for maintenance of fixed equipment as specified on addendum page. 9. Relationship of Parties. ATC is performing pursuant to this Agrment only as an independent contractor. Nothing set forth in this agreement shall be construed t ,create a partnership relationship, a principal and agent relationship or a joint venture rel •` onship between Eagan and ATC. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, ATC and Eagan have caused this . ement t' be executed by duly authorized corporate officers on the date above first written. Customer: Co City of Eagan AN By: Bye t_ J\V T. Title: 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122-1897 Page 2 of 2 , 1800 East Cliff Road Suite 17A Burnsville, MN 55337 City of Eagan Communications Infrastructure Sperry Water Tower 5 Transmitters (PD, FD, PW) 7 Voting Receivers (PD, FD, PW) Diffley Water Tower 6 Transmitters (PD, FD, PW) 7 Voting Receivers (PD, FD, PW) City Hall 3 Dispatch Console Positions 2 Transmitters (PD, FD) 1 800 MHZ Control Station 10 Receivers (PD, FD) 8 Monitor Receivers 2 Comparators 7 Voting Receivers (PD,FD) 3 PW Control Stations @ PW 3 PD Control Stations @ PD 2 PW Control Stations @ PD 12 PW Tone Remotes 1 FD Tone Remote @ EOC 17 PD Tone Remotes 3 PW Tone Remotes @ PD Fire Stations 1-5 5 Tone Remotes 5 Encoders 5 FD Control Stations Fire Offices 1 Control Station 5 Tone Remotes East Rosemount Water Tower 3 PD Voting Receivers ss Shannon Tank 5 Voting Receivers (PD, FD) Meredith Cable 7 Voting Receivers (PD, FD, City) Safari Water Tower 7 Voting Receivers (PD, FD, City) Yankee Doodle Water Tower 7 Voting Receivers (PD, FD, City) S6 Agenda Memo November 1, 2005 Regular City Council Meeting CONSENT AGENDA: U. Tobacco License for Michael Madigan, Cedar Grove Liquor, 1983 Silver Bell Road ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve Tobacco License for Michael Madigan, Cedar Grove Liquor, 1983 Silver Bell Road. FACTS: • A liquor license for Cedar Grove Liquor was approved September 20, 2005. • All requirements of the tobacco license application have been met. • Staff has reviewed the application and deem it in order for approval. ATTACHMENTS: None (The application is available for review in Administration.) ,c Agenda Information Memo November 1, 2005 Eagan City Council Meeting V SNOW & ICE CONTROL — CONTRACT FOR SERVICSES ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Receive the bids and approve entering into contract agreements with Gallagher's, Inc for mainline street and cul de sac snow removal services and Bever Landscaping for trail and sidewalk snow removal services for the 2005-2006 winter season and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. FACTS: • The current contract for snow and ice control or our mainline street, cul-de-sac and sidewalk/trial maintenance program has expired. Although it is renewable on an annual basis with no price increase, fuel increases preclude the current ocontractors form exercising this option. Subsequently, the City of Eagan advertised and invited bidders to submit sealed quotations for the 2005-2006 snow and ice control season/operations. • Gallagher's, Inc was the successful low bidder for the mainline street and cul de sac snow removal contract. They have been our contractor for the past several years and have provided satisfactory service. • Bever Landscaping was the low bidder for the trail and sidewalk snow removal contract. They are a spin off of the firm that has been our contractor for the past several years and have also provided satisfactory service. • The new quotations reflect overall average price increases of 10.5% for street & cul de sac snow removal and 20% for trail/sidewalk snow removal reflecting the significant increase/fluctuations in fuel costs. • The City attorney has reviewed the quotation solicitation and contract documents and found everything to be in order for favorable Council consideration. SFr Agenda Memo Regular City Council Meeting November 1, 2005 CONSENT AGENDA: W. Massage Therapy Establishment License ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve Massage Therapy Establishment License for Brian Garrity, Twin Cities Therapeutic Massage, 4660 Slater Road. FACTS: • Brian Garrity has applied for a Massage Therapy Establishment License for 4660 Slater Road. • All fees have been paid and requirements of the application met. • The Police Department conducted a background investigation and found no reason to deny the application. • Staff recommends approval of the license. ATTACHMENTS: None. The application is available for review in Administration. Agenda Information Memo November 1, 2005 Eagan City Council Meeting PUBLIC HEARINGS A. PROJECT 911, BERKSHIRE PONDS/ SAFARI 2ND — STREET OVERLAY FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve the Final Assessment Roll for Project 911 (Berkshire Ponds/ Safari 2nd Additions — Street Overlay) and authorize its certification to Dakota County for collection. FACTS: • Project 911 provided for the bituminous overlay of streets within the Berkshire Ponds and Safari 2nd Addition neighborhoods, which include Covington Lane, Berkshire Drive, Berkshire Court, Berkshire Way, and Skyview Court, in southwest Eagan. The street resurfacing was completed as outlined and discussed in the feasibility report. • This project, constructed under Contract 05-02, has been completed, all costs tabulated and the final assessment roll prepared. The assessments are based upon the City of Eagan's Special Assessment Policy for all such assessable properties. • The final assessment roll was presented to the City Council on October 6, 2005, with a public hearing being scheduled for November 1 to formally present the final costs associated with this public improvement to the affected benefiting properties. The final assessments are approximately 10% less than the estimate contained in the Feasibility Report presented at the Public Hearing held on February 1, 2005. • All notices have been published in the legal newspaper and sent to all affected property owners informing them of this public hearing. In addition, an informational meeting was held October 27, to address all property owners' questions or concerns and provide any additional information of interest. Of the 81 parcels (R-1) being assessed, no one attended the meeting and no objections have been received to date. ATTACHMENTS: • Final Assessment Report, pages 6 / through ZS . 60 FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING PROJECT NUMBER - 911 NAME - Berkshire Ponds & The Safari 2nd Mill and Overlay IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED F.R.=Feasibility Report FINAL F.R RATE RATE UNITS SANITARY SEWER ❑ Trunk ❑ Lateral ❑ Service ❑ Lat. Benefit/trunk HEARING DATES ASSESSMENT - November 1, 2005 IMPROVEMENT - February 1, 2005 STORM SEWER ❑ Trunk ❑ Lateral ❑ Lat. Benefit/trunk FINAL F.R RATE RATE UNITS WATER ❑ Trunk ❑ Lateral ❑ Service ❑ Lat. Benefit/trunk ❑ WAC STREET O Gravel Base H Surfacing Single Family $381.06 $424 /Lot ❑ C/I Equiv. ❑ Trail/Sidewalk SERVICES ❑ Water & San Sewer STREET LIGHTS ❑ Installation ❑ Energy Charge CONTRACT NO. OF INTEREST AMOUNT CITY NO. PARCELS TERMS RATE ASSESSED FINANCED $34,360 F.R. $90,080 F.R. 05-02 81 5 Year 4.50% $30,865.86 $62,509.96 COMMENTS: 6� city of eagan MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Gerald R. Wobschall DATE: October 6, 2005 SUBJECT: Final Assessment Roll Project No.911 Berkshire Ponds & The Safari 2nd Street Overlay MEMO The City Council at the conclusion of the public hearing on February 1, 2005 ordered Project 911. According to the feasibility report, the following improvements were to be constructed and/or assessed. The improvements are mill and overlay of existing streets and replacement of curb and gutter. In the feasibility study, it was proposed to assess the improvements using a lot unit method for single-family properties. This assessment roll is prepared using the lot unit method presented at the public hearing. Construction of the improvements was accomplished under Contract No. 05-02, which is complete. The assessment hearing is scheduled for November 1, 2005. The following information was used in the preparation of the assessment roll. I. PROJECT COST The construction cost of $71,085.71 includes the amount of $70,006.68 paid to the contractor for the construction of the following detailed improvements and $1,079.03 for street signs. Other costs which consist of engineering, design, contract management, inspections, financing, legal, bonding, administration, and other totaling in the amount of $22,290.11 were incurred resulting in an improvement and project cost of $93,375.82. The detail of these other costs is provided on Schedule I and they are allocated to the improvements constructed in order to determine the cost of each improvement. CONSTRUCTION OTHER IMPROVEMENT FEASIBILITY IMPROVEMENT COST COSTS COST REPORT Street resurfacing $46,994.11 $14,737.35 $61,731.46 $68,710 Curb repair 24,091.60 7,552.76 31,644.36 55,730 TOTAL $71,085.71 $22,290.11 $93,375.82 $124,440 II. ASSESSMENTS A. TRUNK ASSESSMENTS No trunk assessments for utilities were proposed in the feasibility report, therefore, none are proposed in this assessment roll. B. STREET IMPROVEMENTS 1. Street Overlay The cost of the street overlay improvement was computed using the following unit prices and quantities: ITEM UNIT EXTENDED UNIT QTY PRICE COST Mobilization LS. 1 $250.00 $250.00 Mill bituminous surface Sq. Yd. 5,105 .75 3,828.75 Bituminous mat. for tack coat Gal. 325 1.50 487.50 Type 41 Wear Course Ton 1,045.18 32.40 33,863.83 Traffic control L. S. 1 1,260.00 1,260.00 Adjust water valve box Each 5 125.00 625.00 Adjust manhole casting Each 16 350.00 5,600.00 Street Signage LS 1 1,079.03 1,079.03 SUBTOTAL $46,994.11 Other costs @31.36% 14,737.35 Mill and Overlay Cost $61,731.46 A. Low Density Residential Property Assessment Rate The improvement cost for the low-density residential property classification was computed using: TOTAL IMPROVEMENT COST $61,731.46 IMPROVEMENT RATE $762.12/ Lot ASSESSABLE UNITS 81 Lots ASSESSABLE PORTION 2. Curb and Gutter replacement IMPROVEMENT RATE $762.12/Lot ASSESSMENT RATE X 50% $381.06/Lot The cost to replace damaged curb and gutter amounted to $24,091.60 and costs in the amount of $7,552.76 were allocated resulting in a replacement cost of $31,644.36. The City's Major Street Fund will finance the curb and gutter replacement. ‘33 C. ASSESSMENT SPREAD The special assessments are spread to the abutting and adjacent parcels. D. ASSESSMENT TERMS The assessments for this project have a term of 5 years with interest charged at an annual interest rate of 4.50 % on the unpaid balance. III. CITY REVENUES/(RESPONSIBILITIES) IMPROVEMENT IMPROVEMENT COST Mill and Overlay Curb and Gutter Replacement TOTAL $61,731.46 31,644.36 $93,375.82 CITY'S ASSESSMENT (RESPONSIBILITY) $30,865.86 ($30,865.60) 0.00 $30,865.86 The following fund will provide financing for the listed improvements. Major Street Fund ze_9(5; Gerald R. Wobschall Review- 41-- , I Public Works D artment ep Finance D - s artment Dated Dated cc: Thomas A. Colbert, Director of Public Works Mike Dougherty, City Attorney Sue Sheridan, Accountant I GRW ‘,1 (31,644.36) ($62,509.96) $62,509.96 Combined Assessment Roll SA_NBR PID 10-13750-010-01 10-13750-010-02 10-13750-010-03 10-13750-010-04 10-13750-010-05 10-13750-020-01 10-13750-020-02 10-13750-020-03 10-13750-020-04 10-13750-020-05 10-13750-030-01 10-13750-030-02 10-13750-030-03 10-13750-030-04 10-13750-030-05 10-13750-040-01 10-13750-040-02 10-13750-040-03 10-13750-040-04 10-13750-040-05 10-13750-050-02 10-13750-050-03 10-13750-050-04 10-13750-050-05 10-13750-060-02 10-13750-060-03 10-13750-060-04 10-13750-060-05 10-13750-070-02 10-13750-070-03 1 0P91 1 Addition Name BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS Thursday, October 27, 2005 Assessment $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 6� Estimated Assesment Under (Over) Estimate $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 Page 1 of 3 Combined Assessment Roll SA_NBR 10P911 PID 10-13750-070-04 10-13750-080-02 10-13750-080-03 10-13750-080-04 10-13750-090-02 10-13750-090-03 10-13750-090-04 10-13750-100-02 10-13750-100-03 10-13750-100-04 10-13750-110-02 10-13750-110-03 10-13750-110-04 10-13750-120-02 10-13750-120-03 10-13750-120-04 10-13750-130-02 10-13750-130-03 10-13750-130-04 10-13750-140-02 10-13750-140-03 10-13750-140-04 10-13750-150-02 10-13750-150-03 10-13750-150-04 10-13750-160-02 10-13750-160-03 10-13750-160-04 10-13750-170-02 10-13750-170-04 Addition Name BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS Thursday, October 27, 2005 Assessment $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 Estimated Assesment Under (Over) Estimate $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 $424.00 $42.94 Page 2 of 3 Combined Assessment Roll SA_NBR 10P911 PID 10-13750-180-02 10-13750-180-04 10-13750-190-02 10-13750-190-04 10-13750-200-02 10-13750-200-04 10-13750-210-02 10-13750-210-04 10-13750-220-02 10-13750-230-02 10-13750-240-02 10-75851-010-01 10-75851-020-01 10-75851-030-01 10-75851-040-01 10-75851-050-01 10-75851-060-01 10-75851-070-01 10-75851-080-01 10-75851-090-01 10-75851-100-01 Summary for 'SA_NBR' Sum Addition Name BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS BERKSHIRE PONDS THE SAFARI 2ND THE SAFARI 2ND THE SAFARI 2ND THE SAFARI 2ND THE SAFARI 2ND THE SAFARI 2ND THE SAFARI 2ND THE SAFARI 2ND THE SAFARI 2ND THE SAFARI 2ND = 10P911 (81 detail records) Thursday, October 27, 2005 Assessment $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 $381.06 Estimated Assesment $424.00 $424.00 $424.00 $424.00 $424.00 $424.00 $424.00 $424.00 $424.00 $424.00 $424.00 $424.00 $424.00 $424.00 $424.00 $424.00 $424.00 $424.00 $424.00 $424.00 $424.00 Under (Over) Estimate $42.94 $42.94 $42.94 $42.94 $42.94 $42.94 $42.94 $42.94 $42.94 $42.94 $42.94 $42.94 $42.94 $42.94 $42.94 $42.94 $42.94 $42.94 $42.94 $42.94 $42.94 $30,865.86 $34,344.00 $3,478.14 69 Page 3 of 3 N / - / ./ / // / _ // / , / / 4< / .' / / / W -1--E —r E S — 64, / • / \ ..,k, ,--, / 03 j / ,/ // / s NO SCALE / / / / * s• dIN4,0 / /// / / // / // // 1S‘ /2 / 4q1— / // / // /• / 7 / / /----., / / ,/ / / / / , / / ,/ / / 4 // - X. '' / N., / '' N' / ,/ / , . „, , / / / -. N -, N. -,„`-.., -. N - 4 N 4 / / / / • / \ 1 \ / / / / /A\ , / I / / \ \\\ *\ * * * *' * / //( 1 / / --'----- * / / / /- , 1 COViNG *ON // *I * * * * / w F- Ct k•-) \\'', /N' ' \ \ \ 2 .1, - (0 \ , ' --. uj CO / / / / / / uJ X 1 0I : I ; ; I at * * ..„...---'\ -----c------‘-'s ‘..„...... \ \ \ <.' ..." \ \ -, ,/,•, , , \ ,-,' ,x-'`), G:Fecsibility Reports2005\Proj911\StreetImprov City of Eagan LEGEND $ 1,381.05 / LOT ASSESSMENT STREET IMPROVEMENTS 10/25/05 Berkshire Ponds / Safari 2nd Add., Street Improvements / Assessment A City Project 911 Fig. 1 Agenda Information Memo November 1, 2005 Eagan City Council Meeting B. PROJECT PROJECT 915, RIDGECLIFFE/ COVINGTON LN./ GALAXIE AVE — STREET OVERLAY FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve the Final Assessment Roll for Project 915 (Ridgecliffe/ Covington Lane/ Galaxie Avenue — Street Overlay Improvements) and authorize its certification to Dakota County for collection. FACTS: • Project 915 provided for the bituminous overlay of the streets within the Ridgecliffe/ Berkshire Ponds Additions, Galaxie Avenue (Berkshire Lane to Cliff Road), Covington Lane (Safari Trail to Johnny Cake Ridge Road) neighborhood, south of Cliff Road, west of Johnny Cake Ridge Road. ' • The Final Assessment Roll was presented to the City Council on October 6, 2005, with a public hearing scheduled for November 1 to formally present the final costs associated with this public improvement to the affected benefiting properties. • The final assessment cost is about 30% less than the estimated benefit amounts that were presented at the original Public Hearing December 13, 2004. • All notices have been published in the legal papers and sent to all affected property owners informing them of this public hearing. No written objections have been received to date. An informational meeting was held on October 27 to address all property owners' questions or concerns and provide any additional information of interest. Of the 481 parcels (280 single-family, 200 townhomes, and 1 public facility property) being assessed, one resident attended the meeting. City staff provided information to the resident's satisfaction. ATTACHMENTS: • Final Assessment Report, pages 761 through9a �9 FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING PROJECT HEARING DATES NUMBER - 915 ASSESSMENT - November 1, 2005 NAME - RidgeCliffe/Park Ridge/OakPointe/Galaxie Hi11IMPROVEMENT - December 13, 2004 Oaks Additions Galaxy Ave/Covington Lane and other Streets Mill and Overlay IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND/OR ASSESSED F.R.=Feasiblity Report FINAL F.R RATE RATE UNITS SANITARY SEWER ❑ Trunk ❑ Lateral ❑ Service ❑ Lat. Benefit/trunk STORM SEWER ❑ Trunk ❑ Lateral ❑ Lat. Benefit/trunk FINAL F.R RATE RATE UNITS WATER ❑ Trunk ❑ Lateral O Service . O Lat. Benefit/trunk ❑ WAC STREET ❑ Gravel Base ❑ Surfacing Direct Access Properties Single $386.66 $595 /Lot Townhouse 289.25 446 Unit Indirect Access Properties Single 267.53 394 /Lot Townhouse 200.65 296 /Unit 0 SERVICES O Water & San Sewer STREET LIGHTS ❑ Installation ❑ Energy Charge CONTRACT NO. OF INTEREST AMOUNT CITY NO. PARCELS TERMS RATE ASSESSED FINANCED $263,360 F.R. $747,690 F.R. 05-02 513 5 Year 4.50% $173,680.10 $443,710.83 COMMENTS: city of eagan MEMO TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Gerald R. Wobschall DATE: October 6, 2005 SUBJECT: Final Assessment Roll Project No. 915 RidgeCliffe & Park Ridge Additions Street Overlay MEMO The City Council at the conclusion of the public hearing on December 13, 2004 ordered Project 915. According to the feasibility report, the following improvements were to be constructed and/or assessed. The improvements are mill and overlay and replacement of traffic and street signage, of Galaxie Avenue, Covington Lane, Ridge Wind and West Wind Trails, Lenore Lane, Flora Drive, Narvik Drive and other neighborhood streets and replacement of curb and gutter along the same streets on an as needed basis. In the feasibility study, it was proposed to assess the mill and overlay and the street and traffic sign improvements using linear methods. This assessment roll is prepared using the methods presented at the public hearing. Construction of the improvements was accomplished under Contract No. 04-03, which is complete. The assessment hearing is scheduled for November 1, 2005. The following information was used in the preparation of the assessment roll. I. PROJECT COST The construction cost includes the amount of $492,183.55 paid to the contractor for the construction of the following detailed improvements and $9,589.07 for street and traffic signage for a total construction cost of $51,772.62. Other costs which consist of engineering, design, contract management, inspections, financing, legal, bonding, administration, and other totaling in the amount of $115,618.31 were incurred resulting in an improvement and project cost of $617,390.93. The detail of these other costs is provided on Schedule I and they are allocated to the improvements constructed in order to determine the cost of each improvement. IMPROVEMENT Street resurfacing -44 Foot Street resurfacing -32 Foot Curb and gutter TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COST $99,199.78 209,405.46 193,167.38 $501,772.62 OTHER COSTS $24,303.95 51,304.34 40,010.02 $115,618.31 �r= IMPROVEMENT FEASIBILITY COST REPORT $123,503.73 $176,250 260,709.80 437,580 233,177.40 397,220 $617,390.93 $1,011,050 II. ASSESSMENTS A. TRUNK ASSESSMENTS No trunk assessments for utilities were proposed in the feasibility report, therefore, none are proposed in this assessment roll. B. STREET IMPROVEMENTS The costs of the street overlay improvements were computed using the following unit prices and quantities: 1. Street Overlay-Galaxie Avenue ITEM Mobilization Mill bituminous surface Bituminous mat. for tack coat Type 41 Wear Course Adjust water valve box Adjust manhole casting Repair gate valve top 4 -inch double solid line 4 -inch solid line Traffic control Traffic signs SUBTOTAL Other costs @24.5% Mill and Overlay Cost UNIT EXTENDED UNIT QTY PRICE COST L.S. 1 $1,500.00 $1,500.00 Sq. Yd. 8,367 .75 6,275.25 Gal. 1,175 1.50 1,762.50 Ton 2,192.91 31.00 67,980.21 Each 15 125.00 1,875.00 Each 36 350.00 12,600.00 Each 10 260.00 2,600.00 L.F. 1,933 .65 1,256.45 L.F. 3,769 .30 1,130.70 L.S. 1 1,260.00 1,260.00 L.S. 1 959.67 959.67 $99,199.78 2. Local Streets Overlay Including Covington Narvik Drive, Lenore Lane and Others ITEM Mobilization Mill bituminous surface Bituminous mat. for tack coat Type 41 Wear Course Traffic control Adjust water valve box Repair gate valve top Adjust manhole casting Traffic signs SUBTOTAL Other costs @24.5% Mill and Overlay Cost UNIT L.S. Sq. Yd. Gal. Ton L. S. Each Each Each L.S. 24,303.95 $123,503.73 Lane, Ridge Wind and West Wind Trail, QTY 1 19,611 2,300 4,408.42 1 31 25 79 1 UNIT PRICE $500.00 .75 1.50 32.40 1,26 .00 125.00 260.00 350.00 8,629.40 EXTENDED COST $500.00 14,708.25 3,450.00 142,832.81 1,260.00 3,875.00 6,500.00 27,650.00 8,629.40 $209,405.46 51,304.34 $260,709.80 3. Improvement and Assessment Rates The improvement and assessment rates for various property classes are computed in the following manner: a. Improvement and Assessment Rates 1. The improvement and assessment rates for low density residential property is computed in the following manner: IMPROVEMENT PROPORTIONAL DESCRIPTION RATIO COSTS COSTS 44 Foot Wide 32/44 $123,503.73 $89,820.89 32 Foot Wide 32/32 260,709.80 260,709.80 $350,530.69 IMPROVEMENT COST 32 IMPROVEMENT FOOT EQUIVALENT ASSESSABLE UNITS RATE $350,530.69 39,764 F.F. $8.82/F.F. PROPERTY CLASS IMPROVEMENT ASSESSABLE ASSESSMENT RATE PORTION RATE Low Density Property $8.82/F.F. X 50% $4.41/F.F. b. Low Density Residential With Direct Driveway Access Assessment Rate The per lot assessment rate was computed using the following: DIRECT DRIVEWAY FONTAGE 37,801 F.F. 1. Computation of Lot Equivalents ASSESSABLE UNITS ASSESSABLE COSTS PRORATED $4.41/F.F. $166,991.11 A. There are 280 single family parcels and a fire station parcel with 3 single family equivalent lots and 200 townhouse units lots proposed assessment. The lot equivalents are computed in the following manner: Residential Lot Property Class Lots Weighting Factor Equivalents Single Property 280 100% 280 Public Facility 3 100% 3 Townhouse 200 75% 150 Total 483 433 PROPERTY CLASS ASSESSABLE ASSESSABLE ASSESSMENT COSTS PORTION RATE PRORATED Direct_SF $166,991.11. 433 Lots $385.66/Lot Direct_Tnhse $385.66 .75 289.25/Unit 73 c. Low Density Residential With Indirect Driveway Access Assessment Rate The per lot assessment rate was computed using the following: INDIRECT DRIVEWAY FONTAGE ASSESSABLE UNITS ASSESSABLE COST PRORATED 1,514 F.F. $4.41/F.F. $6,610.41 1. Computation of Lot Equivalents a. There are 4 single family parcels and 180 townhouse units lots proposed assessment. The lot equivalents are computed in the following manner: Property Class Single Property Townhouse Total PROPERTY CLASS Indirect_SF Indirect_Tnhse ASSESSABLE COSTS PRORATED $6,610.41 $264.42 4. Curb and Gutter replacement Residential Lot Lots Weizhting Factor Equivalents 4 100% 4 28 75% 21 32 25 ASSESSABLE PORTION 25 Lots .75 ASSESSMENT RATE $264.42/Lot 198.31/Unit The cost to replace damaged curb and gutter amounted to $193,167.38. Other costs, in the amount of • $40,010.02, were allocated resulting in a replacement cost of $233,177.40. This improvement will be financed by the City's Major Street Fund. C. ASSESSMENT SPREAD The special assessments are spread to the abutting and adjacent parcels. D. ASSESSMENT TERMS The assessments for this project have a term of 5 years with interest charged at an annual interest rate of 4.50 % on the unpaid balance. III. CITY REVENUES/(RESPONSIBILITIES) IMPROVEMENT Streets Resurfacing Curb Replacement TOTAL IMPROVEMENT CITY'S COST ASSESSMENT (RESPONSIBILITY) $384,213.53 $173,680.10 ($210,533.43) 233,177.40 (233,177.40) $617,390.93 $173,680.10 ($443,710.83) The following funds will provide financing for the listed improvements. Major Street Fund Gerald R. Wobschall Reviewed /D' 27-o 5 Dated Reviewed Finance 1 epartment Dated cc: Thomas A. Colbert, Director of Public Works Mike Dougherty, City Attorney Sue Sheridan, Accountant I GRW '?S $443,710.83 Combined Assessment Roll SA_NBR PID 10-28720-010-01 10-28720-020-01 10-28720-030-01 10-28720-040-01 10-53775-080-01 10-53775-090-01 10-53775-100-01 10-53775-110-01 10-53775-120-01 10-53775-130-01 10-53775-140-01 10-53775-150-01 10-53775-160-01 10-53775-170-01 10-53775-180-01 10-53776-010-01 10-53776-010-02 10-53776-020-01 10-53776-020-02 10-53776-030-01 10-53776-030-02 10-53776-040-01 10-53776-040-02 10-53776-050-01 10-53776-060-01 10-53776-070-01 10-53776-080-01 10-53776-090-01 10-53776-100-01 10-53776-110-01 10-53776-120-01 10-53776-130-01 10-56750-010-01 10-56750-010-02 10P915 ADDITION NAME GALAXIE HILL OAKS GALAXIE HILL OAKS GALAXIE HILL OAKS GALAXIE HILL OAKS OAKPOINTE OF EAGAN 1ST OAKPOINTE OF EAGAN 1ST OAKPOINTE OF EAGAN 1ST OAKPOINTE OF EAGAN 1ST OAKPOINTE OF EAGAN 1ST OAKPOINTE OF EAGAN 1ST OAKPOINTE OF EAGAN 1ST OAKPOINTE OF EAGAN 1ST OAKPOINTE OF EAGAN 1ST OAKPOINTE OF EAGAN 1ST OAKPOINTE OF EAGAN 1ST OAKPOINTE OF EAGAN 2ND OAKPOINTE OF EAGAN 2ND OAKPOINTE OF EAGAN 2ND OAKPOINTE OF EAGAN 2ND OAKPOINTE OF EAGAN 2ND OAKPOINTE OF EAGAN 2ND OAKPOINTE OF EAGAN 2ND OAKPOINTE OF EAGAN 2ND OAKPOINTE OF EAGAN 2ND OAKPOINTE OF EAGAN 2ND OAKPOINTE OF EAGAN 2ND OAKPOINTE OF EAGAN 2ND OAKPOINTE OF EAGAN 2ND OAKPOINTE OF EAGAN 2ND OAKPOINTE OF EAGAN 2ND OAKPOINTE OF EAGAN 2ND OAKPOINTE OF EAGAN 2ND PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE Thursday, October 27, 2005 Street Proposed Estimated Variance Overlay Assessment Assessment $267.53 $267.53 $446.00 $178.47 $267.53 $267.53 $446.00 $178.47 $267.53 $267.53 $446.00 $178.47 $267.53 $267.53 $446.00 $178.47 $200.65 $200.65 $296.00 $95.35 $200.65 $200.65 $296.00 $95.35 $200.65 $200.65 $296.00 $95.35 $200.65 $200.65 $296.00 $95.35 $200.65 $200.65 $296.00 $95.35 $200.65 $200.65 $296.00 $95.35 $200.65 $200.65 $296.00 $95.35 $200.65 $200.65 $296.00 $95.35 $200.65 $200.65 $296.00 $95.35 $200.65 $200.65 $296.00 $95.35 $200.65 $200.65 $296.00 $95.35 $200.65 $200.65 $296.00 $95.35 $200.65 $200.65 $296.00 $95.35 $200.65 $200.65 $296.00 $95.35 $200.65 $200.65 $296.00 $95.35 $200.65 $200.65 $296.00 $95.35 $200.65 $200.65 $296.00 $95.35 $200.65 $200.65 $296.00 $95.35 $200.65 $200.65 $296.00 $95.35 $200.65 $200.65 $296.00 $95.35 $200.65 $200.65 $296.00 $95.35 $200.65 $200.65 $296.00 $95.35 $200.65 $200.65 $296.00 $95.35 $200.65 $200.65 $296.00 $95.35 $200.65 $200.65 $296.00 $95.35 $200.65 $200.65 $296.00 $95.35 $200.65 $200.65 $296.00 $95.35 $200.65 $200.65 $296.00 $95.35 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 'I6 Page 1 of 16 Combined Assessment Roll SA_NBR PID 10-56750-010-03 10-56750-010-04 10-56750-010-05 10-56750-010-06 10-56750-010-07 10-56750-020-01 10-56750-020-02 10-56750-020-03 10-56750-020-04 10-56750-020-05 10-56750-020-06 10-56750-030-01 10-56750-030-02 10-56750-030-03 10-56750-030-04 10-56750-030-05 10-56750-030-06 10-56750-040-01 10-56750-040-02 10-56750-040-03 10-56750-040-04 10-56750-040-05 10-56750-050-01 10-56750-050-02 10-56750-050-03 10-56750-050-04 10-56750-050-05 10-56750-060-02 10-56750-060-03 10-56750-060-04 10-56750-060-05 10-56750-070-02 10-56750-070-03 10-56750-070-04 10P915 ADDITION NAME PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE Thursday, October 27, 2005 Street Overlay $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 7 7 Proposed Assessment $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 Estimated Assessment $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 Variance $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 Page 2 of 16 Combined Assessment Roll SA_NBR PID 10-56750-070-05 10-56750-080-02 10-56750-080-03 10-56750-080-04 10-56750-080-05 10-56750-090-02 10-56750-090-03 10-56750-090-04 10-56750-090-05 10-56750-100-03 10-56750-100-04 10-56750-100-05 10-56750-110-03 10-56750-110-04 10-56750-110-05 10-56750-120-03 10-56750-120-04 10-56750-120-05 10-56750-130-03 10-56750-130-04 10-56750-130-05 10-56750-140-03 10-56750-140-04 10-56750-140-05 10-56750-150-03 10-56750-150-05 10-56750-160-03 10-56750-160-05 10-56750-170-05 10-56751-010-01 10-56751-010-02 10-56751-010-03 10-56751-010-04 10-56751-020-01 10P915 ADDITION NAME PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE PARK RIDGE 2ND PARK RIDGE 2ND PARK RIDGE 2ND PARK RIDGE 2ND PARK RIDGE 2ND Thursday, October 27, 2005 Street Proposed Estimated Variance Overlay Assessment Assessment $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 76" Page 3of16 Combined Assessment Roll SA_NBR PID 10-56751-020-02 10-56751-020-03 10-56751-020-04 10-56751-030-01 10-56751-030-02 10-56751-030-03 10-56751-030-04 10-56751-040-01 10-56751-040-02 10-56751-040-03 10-56751-040-04 10-56751-050-01 10-56751-050-02 10-56751-050-03 10-56751-050-04 10-56751-060-01 10-56751-060-02 10-56751-060-03 10-56751-060-04 10-56751-070-01 10-56751-070-02 10-56751-070-03 10-56751-070-04 10-56751-080-01 10-56751-080-02 10-56751-080-04 10-56751-090-01 10-56751-090-04 10-56751-100-01 10-56751-100-04 10-56751-110-01 10-56751-110-04 10-56751-120-01 10-56751-120-04 10P915 ADDITION NAME PARK RIDGE 2ND PARK RIDGE 2ND PARK RIDGE 2ND PARK RIDGE 2ND PARK RIDGE 2ND PARK RIDGE 2ND PARK RIDGE 2ND PARK RIDGE 2ND PARK RIDGE 2ND PARK RIDGE 2ND PARK RIDGE 2ND PARK RIDGE 2ND PARK RIDGE 2ND PARK RIDGE 2ND PARK RIDGE 2ND PARK RIDGE 2ND PARK RIDGE 2ND PARK RIDGE 2ND PARK RIDGE 2ND PARK RIDGE 2ND PARK RIDGE 2ND PARK RIDGE 2ND PARK RIDGE 2ND PARK RIDGE 2ND PARK RIDGE 2ND PARK RIDGE 2ND PARK RIDGE 2ND PARK RIDGE 2ND PARK RIDGE 2ND PARK RIDGE 2ND PARK RIDGE 2ND PARK RIDGE 2ND PARK RIDGE 2ND PARK RIDGE 2ND Thursday, October 27, 2005 Street Overlay $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 `79 Proposed Assessment $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 Estimated Assessment $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 Variance $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 Page 4 of l6 Combined Assessment Roll SA_NBR 10P915, PID ADDITION NAME 10-56751-130-01 10-56751-130-04 10-56751-140-01 10-56751-140-04 10-56751-150-04 10-63980-010-01 10-63980-010-02 10-63980-010-04 10-63980-010-05 10-63980-010-06 10-63980-010-07 10-63980-010-08 10-63980-010-09 10-63980-010-10 10-63980-010-11 10-63980-010-12 10-63980-010-13 10-63980-020-01 10-63980-020-02 10-63980-020-04 10-63980-020-05 10-63980-020-06 10-63980-020-07 10-63980-020-08 10-63980-020-09 10-63980-020-10 10-63980-020-11 10-63980-020-12 10-63980-020-13 10-63980-030-01 10-63980-030-02 10-63980-030-04 10-63980-030-05 10-63980-030-06 PARK RIDGE 2ND PARK RIDGE 2ND PARK RIDGE 2ND PARK RIDGE 2ND PARK RIDGE 2ND RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST Thursday, October 27, 2005 Street Overlay $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 0 Proposed Assessment $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 Estimated Assessment $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 Variance $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 Page 5 of 16 Combined Assessment Roll SA_NBR 10P915 PID ADDITION NAME 10-63980-030-07 10-63980-030-08 10-63980-030-09 10-63980-030-10 10-63980-030-12 10-63980-030-13 10-63980-040-01 10-63980-040-02 10-63980-040-04 10-63980-040-05 10-63980-040-06 10-63980-040-07 10-63980-040-08 10-63980-040-09 10-63980-040-10 10-63980-040-12 10-63980-040-13 10-63980-050-01 10-63980-050-02 10-63980-050-04 10-63980-050-05 10-63980-050-07 10-63980-050-08 10-63980-050-09 10-63980-050-10 10-63980-050-12 10-63980-050-13 10-63980-060-01 10-63980-060-02 10-63980-060-04 10-63980-060-05 10-63980-060-07 10-63980-060-08 10-63980-060-09 RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST Thursday, October 27, 2005 Street Proposed Estimated Variance Overlay Assessment Assessment $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 Page 6 of 16 Combined Assessment Roll SA_NBR 10P915 PID ADDITION NAME 10-63980-060-10 10-63980-060-12 10-63980-060-13 10-63980-070-01 10-63980-070-02 10-63980-070-04 10-63980-070-05 10-63980-070-07 10-63980-070-09 10-63980-070-10 10-63980-070-13 10-63980-080-01 10-63980-080-02 10-63980-080-04 10-63980-080-05 10-63980-080-07 10-63980-080-09 10-63980-080-10 10-63980-080-13 10-63980-090-01 10-63980-090-02 10-63980-090-04 10-63980-090-05 10-63980-090-07 10-63980-090-09 10-63980-090-10 10-63980-090-13 10-63980-100-01 10-63980-100-02 10-63980-100-04 10-63980-100-05 10-63980-100-09 10-63980-100-10 10-63980-100-13 RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST Thursday, October 27, 2005 Street Proposed Estimated Variance Overlay Assessment Assessment 5385.66 5385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 5385.66 $595.00 $209.34 5385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 5385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 5595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 5209.34 5385.66 $385.66 5595.00 $209.34 5385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 5385.66 5385.66 $595.00 $209.34 5385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 5595.00 $209.34 5385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 5385.66 $385.66 5595.00 5209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 5385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 5385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 5385.66 $595.00 5209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 5385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 5385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 5385.66 $385.66 $595.00 5209.34 5385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 5385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 Page 7 of 16 Combined Assessment Roll SA_NBR 10P915 PID ADDITION NAME 10-63980-110-01 10-63980-110-02 10-63980-110-04 10-63980-110-09 10-63980-110-10 10-63980-110-13 10-63980-120-01 10-63980-120-02 10-63980-120-04 10-63980-120-09 10-63980-120-10 10-63980-120-13 10-63980-130-02 10-63980-130-09 10-63980-130-10 10-63980-130-13 10-63980-140-02 10-63980-140-09 10-63980-140-13 10-63980-141-10 10-63980-150-02 10-63980-150-09 10-63980-150-13 10-63980-151-10 10-63980-160-02 10-63980-160-09 10-63980-160-13 10-63980-161-10 10-63980-170-02 10-63980-170-09 10-63980-170-13 10-63980-180-02 10-63980-180-09 10-63980-190-02 RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST Thursday, October 27, 2005 Street Overlay $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 g3 Proposed Assessment $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 Estimated Variance Assessment $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $20934 $209.34 Page 8 of 16 Combined Assessment Roll SA_NBR IOP915 PID ADDITION NAME 10-63980-190-09 10-63980-200-02 10-63980-200-09 10-63980-210-02 10-63980-210-09 10-63980-220-02 10-63980-220-09 10-63980-230-02 10-63980-230-09 10-63980-240-02 10-63980-250-02 10-63980-260-02 10-63980-270-02 10-63980-280-02 10-63980-290-02 10-63980-300-02 10-63980-310-02 10-63980-320-02 10-63980-330-02 10-63980-340-02 10-63980-350-02 10-63980-360-02 10-63981-010-01 10-63981-010-02 10-63981-010-03 10-63981-010-04 10-63981-010-05 10-63981-010-06 10-63981-010-07 10-63981-010-08 10-63981-010-09 10-63981-010-10 10-63981-020-01 10-63981-020-02 RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 1ST RIDGECLIFFE 2ND RIDGECLIFFE 2ND RIDGECLIFFE 2ND RIDGECLIFFE 2ND RIDGECLIFFE 2ND RIDGECLIFFE 2ND RIDGECLIFFE 2ND RIDGECLIFFE 2ND RIDGECLIFFE 2ND RIDGECLIFFE 2ND RIDGECLIFFE 2ND RIDGECLIFFE 2ND Thursday, October 27, 2005 Street Proposed Estimated Variance Overlay Assessment Assessment $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $385.66 $385.66 $595.00 $209.34 $289.25 $289.25 $394.00 $104.75 $289.25 $289.25 $394.00 $104.75 $289.25 $289.25 $394.00 $104.75 $289.25 $289.25 $394.00 $104.75 $289.25 $289.25 $394.00 $104.75 $289.25 $289.25 $394.00 $104.75 $289.25 $289.25 $394.00 $104.75 $289.25 $289.25 $394.00 $104.75 $289.25 $289.25 $394.00 $104.75 $289.25 $289.25 $394.00 $104.75 $289.25 $289.25 $394.00 $104.75 $289.25 $289.25 $394.00 $104.75 Page 9 of 16 Combined Assessment Roll SA_NBR 10P915 PID ADDITION NAME 10-63981-020-03 10-63981-020-04 10-63981-020-05 10-63981-020-06 10-63981-020-07 10-63981-020-08 10-63981-020-09 10-63981-020-10 10-63981-030-01 10-63981-030-02 10-63981-030-03 10-63981-030-04 10-63981-030-05 10-63981-030-06 10-63981-030-07 10-63981-030-08 10-63981-030-09 10-63981-030-10 10-63981-040-01 10-63981-040-02 10-63981-040-03 10-63981-040-04 10-63981-040-05 10-63981-040-06 10-63981-040-07 10-63981-040-08 10-63981-040-09 10-63981-040-10 10-63982-010-01 10-63982-010-02 10-63982-010-03 10-63982-010-04 10-63982-010-05 10-63982-010-06 RIDGECLIFFE 2ND RIDGECLIFFE 2ND RIDGECLIFFE 2ND RIDGECLIFFE 2ND RIDGECLIFFE 2ND RIDGECLIFFE 2ND RIDGECLIFFE 2ND RIDGECLIFFE 2ND RIDGECLIFFE 2ND RIDGECLIFFE 2ND RIDGECLIFFE 2ND RIDGECLIFFE 2ND RIDGECLIFFE 2ND RIDGECLIFFE 2ND RIDGECLIFFE 2ND RIDGECLIFFE 2ND RIDGECLIFFE 2ND RIDGECLIFFE 2ND RIDGECLIFFE 2ND RIDGECLIFFE 2ND RIDGECLIFFE 2ND RIDGECLIFFE 2ND RIDGECLIFFE 2ND RIDGECLIFFE 2ND RIDGECLIFFE 2ND RIDGECLIFFE 2ND RIDGECLIFFE 2ND RIDGECLIFFE 2ND RIDGECLIFFE 3RD RIDGECLIFFE 3RD RIDGECLIFFE 3RD RIDGECLIFFE 3RD RIDGECLIFFE 3RD RIDGECLIFFE 3RD Thursday, October 27, 2005 Street Overlay $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 Proposed Assessment $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $28925 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $28925 $289.25 $289.25 $28925 $28925 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 Estimated Assessment $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 Variance $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 Page 10 of 16 Combined Assessment Roll SA_NBR PID 10-63982-010-07 10-63982-010-08 10-63982-010-09 10-63982-010-10 10-63982-020-01 10-63982-020-02 10-63982-020-03 10-63982-020-04 10-63982-020-05 10-63982-020-06 10-63982-020-07 10-63982-020-08 10-63982-020-09 10-63982-020-10 10-63982-030-01 10-63982-030-02 10-63982-030-03 10-63982-030-04 10-63982-030-05 10-63982-030-06 10-63982-030-07 10-63982-030-08 10-63982-030-09 10-63982-030-10 10-63982-040-01 10-63982-040-02 10-63982-040-03 10-63982-040-04 10-63982-040-05 10-63982-040-06 10-63982-040-07 10-63982-040-08 10-63982-040-09 10-63982-040-10 10P915 ADDITION NAME RIDGECLIFFE 3RD RIDGECLIFFE 3RD RIDGECLIFFE 3RD RIDGECLIFFE 3RD RIDGECLIFFE 3RD RIDGECLIFFE 3RD RIDGECLIFFE 3RD RIDGECLIFFE 3RD RIDGECLIFFE 3RD RIDGECLIFFE 3RD RIDGECLIFFE 3RD RIDGECLIFFE 3RD RIDGECLIFFE 3RD RIDGECLIFFE 3RD RIDGECLIFFE 3RD RIDGECLIFFE 3RD RIDGECLIFFE 3RD RIDGECLIFFE 3RD RIDGECLIFFE 3RD RIDGECLIFFE 3RD RIDGECLIFFE 3RD RIDGECLIFFE 3RD RIDGECLIFFE 3RD RIDGECLIFFE 3RD RIDGECLIFFE 3RD RIDGECLIFFE 3RD RIDGECLIFFE 3RD RIDGECLIFFE 3RD RIDGECLIFFE 3RD RIDGECLIFFE 3RD RIDGECLIFFE 3RD RIDGECLIFFE 3RD RIDGECLIFFE 3RD RIDGECLIFFE 3RD Thursday, October 27, 2005 Street Overlay $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 gb Proposed Assessment $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 Estimated Variance Assessment $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 5394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 5104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 Page 11 of 16 Combined Assessment Roll SA_NBR 10P915 PID ADDITION NAME 10-63983-010-02 10-63983-010-03 10-63983-010-04 10-63983-010-05 10-63983-010-06 10-63983-010-07 10-63983-010-08 10-63983-010-09 10-63983-010-10 10-63983-010-11 10-63983-010-12 10-63983-010-13 10-63983-010-14 10-63983-010-15 10-63983-010-16 10-63983-020-02 10-63983-020-03 10-63983-020-04 10-63983-020-05 10-63983-020-06 10-63983-020-07 10-63983-020-08 10-63983-020-09 10-63983-020-10 10-63983-020-11 10-63983-020-12 10-63983-020-13 10-63983-020-14 10-63983-020-15 10-63983-020-16 10-63983-030-02 10-63983-030-03 10-63983-030-04 10-63983-030-05 RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH Thursday, October 27, 2005 Street Overlay $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 0289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 Proposed Assessment $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 Estimated Assessment $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 Variance $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 Page 12 of 16 Combined Assessment Roll SA NBR 10P915 PID ADDITION NAME 10-63983-030-06 10-63983-030-07 10-63983-030-08 10-63983-030-09 10-63983-030-10 10-63983-030-11 10-63983-030-12 10-63983-030-13 10-63983-030-14 10-63983-030-15 10-63983-030-16 10-63983-040-02 10-63983-040-03 10-63983-040-04 10-63983-040-05 10-63983-040-06 10-63983-040-07 10-63983-040-08 10-63983-040-09 10-63983-040-10 10-63983-040-11 10-63983-040-12 10-63983-040-13 10-63983-040-14 10-63983-040-15 10-63983-040-16 10-63984-010-01 10-63984-010-02 10-63984-010-03 10-63984-010-04 10-63984-010-05 10-63984-010-06 10-63984-010-07 10-63984-010-08 RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 4TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH Thursday, October 27, 2005 Street Overlay $289.25 $289.25 5289.25 5289.25 5289.25 5289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 5289.25 $289.25 5289.25 5289.25 $289.25 5289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 5289.25 5289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 5289.25 8IF Proposed Assessment 5289.25 $289.25 5289.25 5289.25 $289.25 5289.25 5289.25 5289.25 5289.25 $289.25 5289.25 5289.25 5289.25 5289.25 $289.25 5289.25 $289.25 5289.25 $289.25 $289.25 5289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 5289.25 $289.25 5289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 5289.25 5289.25 Estimated Variance Assessment $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 5394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 5394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 5394.00 5394.00 5394.00 5394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 5394.00 $394.00 $394.00 5394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 5104.75 5104.75 $104.75 5104.75 5104.75 5104.75 5104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 5104.75 5104.75 $104.75 $104.75 5104.75 5104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 5104.75 $104.75 $104.75 5104.75 $104.75 5104.75 5104.75 5104.75 5104.75 Page 13 of 16 Combined Assessment Roll SANER PID 10-63984-010-09 10-63984-010-10 10-63984-010-11 10-63984-010-12 10-63984-010-13 10-63984-010-14 10-63984-010-15 10-63984-020-01 10-63984-020-02 10-63984-020-03 10-63984-020-04 10-63984-020-05 10-63984-020-06 10-63984-020-07 10-63984-020-08 10-63984-020-09 10-63984-020-10 10-63984-020-11 10-63984-020-12 10-63984-020-13 10-63984-020-14 10-63984-020-15 10-63984-030-01 10-63984-030-02 10-63984-030-03 10-63984-030-04 10-63984-030-05 10-63984-030-06 10-63984-030-07 10-63984-030-08 10-63984-030-09 10-63984-030-10 10-63984-030-11 10-63984-030-12 10P915 ADDITION NAME RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH Thursday, October 27, 2005 Street Overlay $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 g9 Proposed Assessment $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 Estimated Assessment $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 Variance $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 Page 14 of 16 Combined Assessment Roll SA_NBR 10P915 PID ADDITION NAME 10-63984-030-13 10-63984-030-14 10-63984-030-15 10-63984-040-01 10-63984-040-02 10-63984-040-03 10-63984-040-04 10-63984-040-05 10-63984-040-06 10-63984-040-07 10-63984-040-08 10-63984-040-09 10-63984-040-10 10-63984-040-11 10-63984-040-12 10-63984-040-13 10-63984-040-14 10-63984-040-15 10-63985-010-01 10-63985-020-01 10-63985-030-01 10-63985-040-01 10-63985-050-01 10-63985-060-01 10-63985-070-01 10-63985-080-01 10-63986-010-01 10-63986-020-01 10-63986-030-01 10-63986-040-01 10-63986-050-01 10-63986-060-01 10-63986-070-01 10-63986-080-01 RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 5TH RIDGECLIFFE 6TH RIDGECLIFFE 6TH RIDGECLIFFE 6T1-1 RIDGECLIFFE 6TH RIDGECLIFFE 6TH RIDGECLIFFE 6TH RIDGECLIFFE 6TH RIDGECLIFFE 6TH RIDGECLIFFE 71H RIDGECLIFFE 7TH RIDGECLIFFE 7TH RIDGECLIFFE 7TH RIDGECLIFFE 7TH RIDGECLIFFE 7TH RIDGECLIFFE 7TH RIDGECLIFFE 7TH Thursday, October 27, 2005 Street Overlay $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 90 Proposed Assessment $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $289.25 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 $385.66 Estimated Assessment $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $394.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 $595.00 Variance $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $104.75 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 $209.34 Page 15 of 16 Combined Assessment Roll SA_NBR 10P91 S PID ADDITION NAME 10-63986-090-01 10-63986-100-01 10-67603-010-01 RIDGECLIFFE 7TH RIDGECLIFFE 7TH SCHINDELDECKER 4TH ADD Summary for 'SA NBR' = 10P915 (513 detail records) Sum Thursday, October 27, 2005 Street Overlay $385.66 $385.66 $1,156.98 $173,680.10 Proposed Assessment $385.66 $385.66 $1,156.98 $173, 680.10 Estimated Assessment $595.00 $595.00 $1,785.00 Variance $209.34 $209.34 $628.02 $257,257.00 $83,576.90 Page 16 of 16 • --1 LL3 I I / ... . C1V01:1 39CM 3NVO ANNHOP ! e". : • • I -1 ‘ I Jr ' - 1 a0 I , /i/, !:'5/,`D,,,14(,,..,.__..,,,...4r ,,/ ‘4(s.,;,„.1-.I.---in.,.....1_--1---_,,,,,,-,' .ii.,,.--;-2:,.......1-2.‘!,•,c;,,i•-•‘;',‘,...,:,. \ %f• :▪ 11,,,‘ ,ii ,- • --,!,!:-. ,,,e,•,,,. j!, 1; 7, Ab•ei. aqt . is....A.A.I.V., 17. -I-7L *it . • '(/ 'A :I.?' ,,,,:'''-i" \,.''', !!)-17:11 L.,1 • i • '. • 1 • 1 • I IE.I 4( * -IC i I ': , II , `.• •••••• * I ,... , • 4( \ I ," •., :f / ,,.44.. i!• ! *'-.•, • ,',-.'-4 -::.-•-. --. .-,„-,•,.-.- .--,-, %,-•i-:',.-.7.•,'-.;-4 .-0,r..:4.•I';.''..,':.‘ .‘\„.,.\.‘,,,,,,'r1FH,t--•i7.,-, --•• I,• ••0 _i -i ;.1• - -- .2 -4i;, t:n! L 3ohvH , -_.•---.•,T.:i__ < :\--• ,,.. /,-- :T:i:- idz f ,e 1•1 • I • • • • ” CI • ' • • '•••-•<.'t /\ , 114( 4( .N7 .•k•-• t44=.44, 4( 74. • • • ....„.. • . .... •7---.^-, ,, ,---,--,'',..... . ' - 7,,."• i.,....11 4111 • i I • I• I re / • / ,--..„.., \ .7.''. -” •-lr-----1, t --1--N-4-4,1* i•''',.- \'' ‘, •,x, i i • ; • i I • l• N• 4 , - • 4, (V\ V.' • ',./- '' •/,/ >„ • ,>''s •< • `,-; • /c. • //,`e, • (/•;;<,---•\ • -) .4( q.? / 0 w0 L1J I / I , 111 i • • *1.4 \ • F 7. 4 x •r \ „ x DIRECT ACCESS IDII x • , \ ` ‘ S4:7, • -; : x, , • , • . • . • , , • • • .• 1,1 „ ill III \*I-SCIidir I TR ...-4-------' ' ' \ c) 4(•'"\*', \ *1 -***4(17:',C71. 44Iti I 7- PQ '‘*' ..4rC1--.1. •-1-14-J, -X -4:tti-* — \ .4(\''.44'''''s• *\ \ -X- - * I "'1*Z tc \ ",!:Fr. 1L) rir . -K :47 -- 94- 4( 0 . , • ''''' I h N,S4ets, (/ \If CY- 4( t IL• • \ \ • I >`. • 0 N if) GI Agenda Information Memo November 1, 2005, Eagan City Council Meeting C. CERTIFICATION OF DELINQUENT FALSE ALARM BILLS ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To close the public hearing and approve the final assessment roll for delinquent false alarm bills and authorize its certification to Dakota County. FACTS: > The City Code allows for collection through certification of delinquent false alarm bills, which are not paid. > At the October 6 City Council meeting, a public hearing was scheduled for the November 1, 2005 City Council meeting. > The City does not charge residents or businesses for the first three false alarms in a calendar year. A fourth or subsequent false alarm results in a $100 fee per alarm. The delinquent false alarm bills include a 10% penalty and a $25 certification fee. > The City currently has six delinquent false alarm bills. The assessable amount of these bills is $1,360.00. These items are in order for certification to the County. > All notices have been published in the legal newspaper and sent to all affected property owners informing them of this hearing and their proposed assessments. ATTACHMENTS (1): Proposed assessment roll on page gy . 93 Delinquent False Alarm Bills Property ID Outstanding Dollar Amount 10-62726-010-03 $135.00 10-14388-040-01 $355.00 10-22472-010-03 $465.00 10-22504-010-01 $135.00 10-22472-050-02 $135.00 10-83475-070-01 $135.00 Total $1,360.00 9� Agenda Information Memo November 1, 2005, Eagan City Council Meeting D. CERTIFICATION OF DELINQUENT WEED CUTTING BILLS ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To close the public hearing and approve the final assessment roll for delinquent weed cutting bills and authorize its certification to Dakota County. FACTS: > The City Code allows for collection through certification of delinquent weed cutting bills, which are not paid. > At the October 6 City Council meeting, a public hearing was scheduled for the November 1, 2005 City Council meeting. > A 10% penalty and a $25 certification fee are added to all outstanding delinquent bills. > The City currently has two delinquent weed cutting bills. The assessable amount of these bills is $418.10. These items are in order for certification to the County. > All notices have been published in the legal newspaper and sent to all affected property owners informing them of this hearing and their proposed assessments. ATTACHMENTS (1): Proposed assessment roll on page 944 / Delinquent Weed Cutting Bills Property ID Outstanding Dollar Amount 10-16601-090-03 $168.94 10-75850-010-01 $249.16 $418.10 96 Agenda Information Memo November 1, 2005 Eagan City Council Meeting PUBLIC HEARINGS E. Certification of Delinquent Utilities ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To close the public hearing and approve the final assessment roll for delinquent utility bills and authorize its certification to Dakota County. FACTS: The City Code allows for collection through certification of delinquent utility bills, which are not paid. At the October 6th City Council meeting, a public hearing was scheduled for the November 1, 2005 City Council meeting. The City currently has approximately 379 utility bill accounts with delinquent payments. The assessable amount of these accounts is $61,890.09. These items are in order for certification to the County. All notices have been published in the legal newspaper and sent to all affected property owners informing them of this hearing and their proposed assessments. ATTACHMENTS: Delinquent account list; pages 9r through Ha 97 27 -OCT -2005 (09:29) ASSESS -AMT ACCOUNT -STATUS z w O REPORT SORThw BY ACCOUNT NUMBER r N r H CO 10 0 CO CO CO 0 M 0 0 N M Lf) LD in CO H r H d M 1D U1 N ri CO d' CO 01 10 Ul CO • M 10 V. d' r 10 N V' M W r co r N co CO r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CO 01 co M 01 Lf) N N CO M CO CO v. -1 M 10 N u1 N r 0 .4,N OH ON IP r -I O1 1O N Lf) N Q\ N Lll N O1 Ol 0 Lf) N N 1O .-I r CO M Lfl H to Lfl N N r -I r -I H H ri H H r-1 r -I r -I H H N rl H H 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 ICC FC 4 4 4 4 4 4 KC 4 4 4 4 4 r N r r -I CO 1D 0 CO CO CO 0 M 0 0 N M 1f1 10 Ul CO ri r r -I ▪ M 10 Lfl N r -I CO d' o 01 1D U) CO d4 M 1D di • r 1D N • N CO N N co CO r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . M d' M co dL O N r M CO M M 01 10 CO rI N O r N Lf) 01 r u1 10 IP N M 01 r M 0 N M • r vs4 m 0 10 1D r M II M 01 Lfl 0 N CO N N N -1 H H r1 H H H ri H H H N r -I H 101682003001 1010050101 101670310008 1010510404 101670305008 1010560902 101670314005 1010910601 101670308004 1020120003 101670130007 1020550801 101670106005 1030330304 101670105002 1030950805 101670116004 1031110803 101670102001 1040050501 101670129001 1040250104 101670109001 1040450702 101670311003 108460007005 108460001004 H d M 0 0 0 N 0 M 0 0 0 N CO o1 0 M 0 0 0 Q1 lfl Lfl 0 ri/ U rI 108460027002 1050850504 108460018002 1050980002 108460023001 1051240804 102488021005 1060650701 101640014100 1061241402 108435103001 1070120904 108435110001 1070190206 108435302003 1070670305 108435305006 1071220602 108435410002 1090230204 108435410003 1090360704 108435417003 1090510702 27 -OCT -2005 REPORT SORTED BY ACCOUNT NUMBER 6 :-7 0 U N U1 lD 11 CO Lf1 OD N 0 M 01 0 N Ul 0 eM M M H H N lD 4 N d' N tb lD H 0 H LI1 4 0 ti' 01 CO lD N l0 O l0 N N d' CO N 01 y' l0 N CO ID 01 c•'1 P'1 01 M d' 01 01 O d' d' d' N O Lf1 N CD m lD O 01 00 N d' N V' N N Ul 10 01 N 0 N CO H Ill d' N 111 0 N 01 N 01 CO V d' Ul H N 10 M 4 Ill f`1 N H H N H N H H H cel H H H N N H H H H H H N 111 10 U1 CO U1 CO N O 01 01 O N Ln O d' M N1 H H N 1D 4N 01 N CO lD H O H Ul 4 0 [M 01 OD lD N VD O lD N N d' CO N 01 Cr ID N O lD 01 co co d' CO 01 d' d' L11 01 01 01 N Ill O N Cl O H U1 d' 01 N 01 N O1 N N N L°1 N d' N O l0 CO N H D1 M N Lfl N 0 lD 10 H N M 01 d' d' O H f7 M N H N H H H H 01 H H N N HHHHH 108425020001 1091050304 108460108007 1100130208 108460111001 1100520408 108460117006 1101370305 108460224002 1110630908 104725129001 1111590401 104725108001 1111800702 106440007004 1120560602 108435518003 1140500803 108425116001 1150010503 108425107004 1150620101 108425205002 1150750604 104805008401 104805007002 H N 0 0 N N 0 O LD 01 H L11 104805009801 1171370804 104805009601 1171390605 104805009501 1171400302 104805009201 1171430002 107297508002 1172000002 107297615001 1172670002 107297617001 1172690804 107297601002 1172760903 107297901001 1173080104 107297704201 1174390304 101350008002 1180410101 101350006009 1181380502 101500001002 1190951201 27 -OCT -2005 (09:29) REPORT SORTEu BY ACCOUNT NUMBER ASSESS -AMT ACCOUNT -STATUS z w O H H 0 U U O1 O 1p W CO 01 V' 1:71 N 0 CO 10 0 O1 O N O N ri N V' CO V' -1 M H N 12/ CO V' 01 Lf1 N 1` co 1` 10 co 01 M O M 01 N CO 10 01 III H 01 O 1.0 . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LC1 CO 01 V• C` H O S 10 .-I Ln 01 M C11 CO CO d' H rl N <\ Lf1 N 10 V' N CO HOCOMHHCVS CO O 01 N N N COO .-1 N N V' CO N N l0 O CO CO N M H M N N H r-1 H r-1 H 0 .-1 H H H N H H H r-1 N r -I 01 0 10 CO CO O1 V' 01 N 0 CO '.0 0 01 0 N 0 N 1-1 N V• CO V' H M r-1 N 1.0 CO V• 01 Ln N S CO 1` LO CO 01 M O M M V' H N CO 10 01 lfl H 01 O 10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 M V' 01 fV l0 IJ N r -I 10 0 V' CO d' M M 01 1.0 10 N N 0 S r -I O1 N M a1 CO ▪ 0 01 OD 0 Ln 10 [- N o V' Ln 10 co co v' rn H 0 01 V, N Ln 10 H N HNHN e-1 H .-1 ri O r1 N rl r1 .-I r-1 ra 108195016001 1200730802 108195007001 1200820707 108195005205 1201370205 107700006001 1201820604 107585202001 1202220804 107585207102 1202280203 101715030002 1210070704 101715028002 1210090502 101715025002 1210120004 101715315001 1211070605 101635017002 1211780002 108355003003 1211810505 105380111201 105380111101 105380102102 M Ill CO 0 0 0 N H CO 0 0 0 M V' u M M V' M M M H H H Vri 105380104102 1213490404 105380104202 1213500006 105621006002 1220350102 103059001001 1220500104 104430001002 1220520902 105615007001 1221060503 105210035002 1221271804 105210015005 1221360904 105210018002 1221570305 105210008004 1222050504 105210010005 1222250103 105210016004 1222330104 Ln 0 01 rtf CL, rn O1 O Ln O O U 0 r 0) W W 0) H 0 U U z 0 H CO z H 0 a U U w 0 w CO O • Z 0) 1 H H Z x � O 0 0a U a 4 • W LD 01 CO N 01 01 VV U) ri P1 N N m M C'1 co CO 01 CO H 1D 01 01 V' V� l0 Ul CO V. CO N 0) U1 d• C1 10 N CO 01 V LO M V' 0) H M CO 0 01 10 O In CO 0 CO D CO H CO l0 r 1.11 M r M LCl lO r r CO N N V r1 M N 01 01 10 V O 01 O1 H M N O CO 01 M CO 01 CO r f-1 r l0 10 01 V 01 r O M LO N r-1 H N r-1 H ri H r 1 [`'1 N r-1 ri H • ri H 000000000000000000000000000 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 1D 10 01 CO N 01 M V 111 H M N M CO CD 01 CO .--1 l0 01 0) WU1 COCr CON Lrl lI) V' M l0 N COL l V▪ ' Ul M • 41 H 01 CO O M l0 O In . . . . . . . C1 U1 M 1-1 ("1 lD C'1 ri N 0 CO N O 0 ri N N M r N 01 01 10 CO N V' 0 ✓ ' r1 10 r N CO r1 0 CO lD l0 .--1 U) r l0 Lll 01 U1 P1 LLD ri N V' U) ri r-1 ri r-1 r-1 ri ri H P1 ri ri r 4 r-1 -1 H H r-1 r♦ 105210003006 1222800302 107298502001 1222830005 102580001006 1224270702 105615105003 1228067303 103980102002 1230060405 103980005002 1230660105 103980204004 1231020705 103980203005 1231070205 103980204008 1231180903 103980301002 1231460504 103980404001 1231643601 103980403003 103980304009 103980302009 V• l0 M 0 0 0 01 0 CO CO 0 0 V V l0 ' r N M N ri 104420002001 1240340803 104507005002 1242950204 104507101002 1243010402 104507202004 1243670503 107595003003 1250500406 107586517002 1253300603 107610024002 1257560102 101660001201 1260120904 101660101201 1260140705 101660202001 1260810503 101660204001 1260830306 101660209001 1260880802 101660212102 1260920205 27 -OCT -2005 (09:29) REPORT SORTEu BY ACCOUNT NUMBER 0 H Oo 6 z 0 U U M LD in CO 01 CV LD t` 1.0 CV 0 .0 .0 M VL H 0 00 N H W V CO 01 N V' L11 CO tO V• VV 01 LCI CV N V+ r1 CV N dl M 0 0 O CI M O 0 CV 0) H iD N CV V0 V 01 V M 01 CV Up V N O LCI N N r M 10 01 L- CO VV 0 0) CO H N O .0 0 H N N N rl t0 01 111 LO N W rl W 01 M CV H r-1 ri rl rl H M ri M H H H r1 ri CV r1 rl H rl 000C.JUCJUUCJUUCJUUUUCJUU U0000000 M kD Ul CO 01 CV r 10 CV 0 V' M W H 0 CO CV 1-1 W VV CO 01 r d1 Ul CO 0 V V 01 Ill N (V V• d• 4 CV (11 01 M 0 0 N N 4 4 N O (V m O L11 L- 0 0) H O 1- Cl 01 d•. 01 CO V0 L- ,-4 01 CV 0) O N (V CV CO ,-I V' CV M r -I N 0) V1 in M 111 (O V CO H N 01 V Ln V' 01 M N CV VV 0 M 01 CV b H CV rl rl (V H M rl rf r-1 r1 (V rl r1 rl 101660206202 1261040809 101660202102 1261120806 101740014800 1261200810 101740016400 1261370904 101740018400 1261490503 101740020000 1261650406 101740016800 1261810407 101740108001 1262000106 101740004002 1262130603 101740001101 1262180104 101740008201 1262310401 101740008101 1262320306 101740227002 101740207203 101740210104 CV Ln 0 0 0 LC) CO 0 0 0 0 dV 0 0 X1(1 000 0 101740202104 1263160202 101740304101 1263268307 101740404201 1263285704 101740405201 1263287307 106398011001 1270110803 106398004002 1270160301 106398001010 1271130504 106398007010 1271190905 106398104002 1280110606 106398103008 1280280706 106398101007 1280380506 106398301002 1280990103 27 -OCT -2005 (09:29) ACCOUNT -STATUS z 0 z H 0 Qi 0 U U W ▪ W 6 O z co 1 O • 0 CO U O.' FC O\ ▪ C' V O\ 0 rl h H dl ON U) rl w HI 0 V W U1 h l0 ,-i CD l0 V� h W O\ V' ri ri U) H m co O l0 O\ CD N N M V' lD O co ON N 0 ON [M In ND U) CO U1 N NO M M rl L!) CO V O V CO CO h U1 O M M O V N l0 Vl O\ V N U1 0\ H O\ 0\ V M O 0 CD W CO ON ,- Vl lD CO Vl \O N CO M V 0 r-1 r -I rl ri H N N -1 HI rl N H H rl N ri H N O 00000000000000000000000000 O\ V d• 0\ O r -I h H O\ O\ U) ri V, H 0 Vr lD N h lD H CO ND V• h 1 ON ▪ H rl U) H M CO 0 ND O\ CO N N M Vl ND 0 CO O\ N 0 O\ U) V' H O M O N H 00 V, l0 O m Ol U1 O\ M M N O U) co CO in Ol O\ s ri O\ h N U1 m lD O\ lD h ri ri l0 N U1 M l0 N 01 N CO U) r1 d• U) C7 N N r -I H H H N N r -I ri H rl r1 H N rl H H 106398301012 1281370503 106398402010 1281830802 106398403007 1281900903 106398401003 1282000705 105675001006 1282230002 105675001004 1282720002 105675005002 1283110303 101375016003 1283610203 101375001005 1283780301 101375001002 1283830606 101375005002 1283870202 102275001002 1290400903 102275019001 102275020001 102275030002 N N 0 0 0 M 0 0 O 0 o H o l0 M 043 01 ri N N HI HI H 105670002003 1300210001 107820006003 1300440302 107820109001 1300800804 103297508001 1301410501 102560103004 1303020002 106585117001 1310740401 102560201002 1311110901 104433010001 1313160202 104433005002 1313380602 104509301001 1314760801 103215138002 1315590801 104509407002 1317990801 27 -OCT -2005 (09:29) ACCOUNT -STATUS a 0 fx 6 z H Q 0 a U U P7 4 CO 0 z a' ▪ J 0 0 COrai r -I 0 ON d' co dr N r♦ d' r-1 Lf) O W N O\ CO b 01 M Lf) ▪ O\ M ri r 0 O co N Lf) M r NO O t` M 111 U1 t` O O 0. O 01 O O l0 N N l0 d, 01 W . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . N • N W 01 N CO LD CO N 0 b b NO Lf) C N 0 Lf) co O1 M N O1 co O N O\ 0 CO M CO -1 O d, • ul M W H 0 tll N r-1 H O 0 L!) Lfl N 0 0 -4 r -i N r1 N H H H r-1 N H N ri N H H ri H r-1 N r -I H r -I U U U U U U 000000000000000000000 4 4 4 Kt 4 4 Kt Kt 4 a 4 < 4 < 4 4 4 4 Kt Kt KC < 4 4 CO H 0 ON d, CO d' ri Lf) 0 lO N C1 CO N O\ M Lf) m M r1 t` 0 O CO N to M (` O r M Lf) Lfl [. O O !` O O\ O O LO N N 1p d' O\ W . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l� O O1 N • N M r -I m N Lf) N O\ N rt 0 N N U) 0 M d' CO N d' M 0. O W CO tD ri W Q\ CO N N N r-1 M O\ W m 0 ON co co co M N O\ W CO ri H r-1 N H ri N rl H N H N 104503004001 1318320702 105769003001 1318910501 105769004002 1319010302 105769003005 1319200001 104725347001 1321150301 104509603001 1322000901 105766306002 1323480201 105380200402 1323770602 105766511002 1324840603 108465003001 1326470001 102090004003 1550860901 100390001009 1551310402 101670005001 101670020002 101670008006 101670010006 d' N N l0 0 0 0 0 H m W 0 0 0 0 H O N M Lf) N N O O rl r-1 H r I ri M N N 101670030005 2311240204 101670013006 2311390505 101670201006 2321370504 101670210006 2321520503 101665004001 2330080902 101665003001 2330090802 101670224008 2330410805 101670234008 2330490003 101670243008 2330580803 101670201007 2330760602 100180008079 2340686102 27 -OCT -2005 (09:29) REPORT SORTED BY ACCOUNT NUMBER 6 0 U U l0 r -I V. M W Cn CO lD 01 0 d4 CO CO N d. d. N -1 N CO M M M N 01 H 01 Cr) N M l0 W V. ri N O1 W CO M l0 O l0 • O r -i CO 0 N l0 Lf1 0, M Ln r N M H Ol l0 H CO CO N CO H 0 0 CO N LCI Ol CO 0 Lf1 to M l0 l0 V' M CIl 0\ O 0, M r-1 d. Ol N d. W r1 01t-- N H M O He- O\ 01 W W W rl N N H r-1 H r-1 H M ri H N r-1 (N f-1 H N H H 000000000000000000000000000 lD H V• M co 01 co l0 01 0 CD W N N H N CO M M M N O\ r4 0\ 0\ N M W CO d. H N CT CO CO d' M l0 O ▪ 10 d. O H CO 0 N lD ll1 Lf1 M O N N CO W [M ri lO M m I- m lD lfl 0, m N 0 M 1Jl 0 0 CO 01 -1 e-1 N r-1 N l0 N M H CO N N d' N U1 W l0 W d' O\ H co co ul N N is) l0 l0 ri H N H H H -1 N H N H ri r 1 N r 1 H 101330002001 2340831306 101680005202 2341000401 101670411004 2350560502 101670405005 2350740301 101670409005 2350780905 101670403012 2350900303 101670406006 2351250201 101670804002 2361130403 101671107003 2371240902 101671208101 2371350606 101670412010 2380360401 101670623001 101670632002 101670613005 101670619005 N H cT 0 0 0 0 M 01 0, 0 0 0 0 O l0 d• al COOHH co M M N N 100200004177 2390010303 101190004001 2390050903 101670637005 2390530003 101670601009 2390680305 101670619009 2390860101 101670602008 2390930205 101670605008 2390960904 101670607008 2390980703 101670614007 2391300705 103295103002 2391660407 103295102005 2391770103 103295104009 2391940003 u, v..1 0 rn (1) ftl o O Lfl 0 0 H U 0 N ACCOUNT -STATUS REPORT SORTEu BY ACCOUNT NUMBER Lfl cr N N 0 CO d' 0 N V' al 0 m M CO ri [M N CO d' Cn CO '"'1 0 r♦ 0 N ON N r-4 H M O H M U) Ul O ri Ul U) d' V' Ol 10 OD 0 N CO 0 0 V' c1' N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . N M M Ol N N 0 L- 0 N ON l0 W r-1 0 b M O N M w 01 N V' O1 10 N ON H d' ri 1D U) 10 CO 10 CT OD N O1 11D CO W N H H 01 CO CO Lfl O co H H Ln ri .--1 d' r-1 r-1 M r-1 M H H H ri 000000000000000000000000000 Ul [M N N 0 CO d' 0 N V' al 0 M M CO H d' N W d' CT CO r-1 0 H 0 N Ol N r-1 ri M O .-1 M Lfl UI '0 ri U) Ul V' d' ON 10 W 0 N CO 0 0 V' d' N N CO CO d' N N Lf) N in s d' H M 10 Ul N CO UI N W ri d' N O1 V' r-1 N O CO r-1 Cr) M N M 1.1) M H Ul N W d' to d' Lfl Lfl Lfl CO 01 N 1.0 Ul CO CO In r-1 Lfl • r-1 M r -I N H r1 r -I 107710005017 2400060604 107710003015 2400370909 107710005010 2400540703 107710005012 2400610802 107710002016 2400790808 107710006006 2400830202 107710003005 2401040704 107710002003 2401090203 107710004008 2401270003 101670702007 2410100803 101670703005 2410830004 101438705002 2411850701 107300208009 107300006004 107300006015 M Ol w 0 0 0 H O O O U1 M N H N U) yep 107300001014 2420550205 107300108012 2421120302 107300301004 2421320902 107300506001 2421450405 107300501001 2421460302 107300604006 2421570901 107300402002 2421650905 107650103002 2430340604 107650002005 2430560903 107650001002 2430680502 107650004002 2430720904 107650204008 2431010403 REPORT SORTED BY ACCOUNT NUMBER ASSESS -AMT ACCOUNT -STATUS O 0 H O1 lD W O1 in N H V CO M V' D1 M W N r1 O1 r1 d• LD M Lt) lf1 1.0 N M 1D Lf) 1D N 01 O1 V' V' Lf) N l0 LI) D\ V• N Ul 0 H W N N M ,-I M O M l0, 0 co in W N W V4 N 0 .44 01 N • 0 M H ri W ri W H S ri LD M l0 N 0 M 0\ V' CO ri V' .--1 U'1 V, 1▪ 0 '.0 . 1 V' ri co O . -i M N 10 C.1 ri N co 01 H N N ri N H H H H ri ri H M r♦ N ri . -I r -I r-4 H r-1 ri U c.),Ci U U U U U U 0000000000000000000000000 U U U U U U U U U U U U U a a a 4 4 a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a 01 l0 W 01 1!) N H W M VV O) co W ri O1 H 10 M Lf) Ul lfl N M l0 N LO N ON 01 VV Lf) N 1/40 N 01 N Lf1 O .-I CO N N M .-4 m O ('1 LD O M O M r M 01 N lf) O1 V' N O1 N 01 W W l0 LD M LD M l0 N ri W ri O W ri '.O N U1 CO H CO M ri Lf) [' W H W Lf) N 01 0 0 M r-1 CO 0 Lf) N H ri N ri N ri ri ri rl N H e-1 ri ri ri ri r-1 107650203008 2431020301 107650302010 2431850305 105750318003 2432450107 108446109001 2432920302 108446107002 2433110005 108446012001 2433380902 108446011001 2433390803 100160001379 2440641501 103310001001 2440840302 101417507002 2444070302 108365005105 2451180003 108365302004 108365204001 102190011002 N M 0 0 \0 0 O 0 N N 102190008002 2460520603 103300026005 2470400904 106590205002 2480760404 106590409001 2480960002 103275005002 2490120907 101870016001 2490290001 101870020001 2490460901 101499001001 2500010007 101499020001 2500200702 101499108001 2500280903 101499351001 2501030709 101499301002 2501260002 103190021002 2510210403 ASSESS -AMT ACCOUNT -STATUS z a O REPORT SORTEu BY ACCOUNT NUMBER CO e -I H CO • CO M N l0 0 0 H • r -I N 0 H 01 H M d' de l0 de M l0 M 01 r O CO H lO r r lO r -I l0 M M 01 N N r r lfl O 01 01 O N 01 O r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O e-4 Lfl 0 N N N N N • N 01 N N r N 0 1O r N M • r to O r co co 01 ▪ O N M N M 01 WI 01 r • r 0 M l0 01 M M M CO lD CO 1O l0 ri N ri r -I H H H r -I H e1 H N H r -I r -I . -1 H 00000000000000000 0000000000 CO 1--1 1-1 CO • CO M N 10 0 0 r1 • r -I N 0 r -I 01 .—I M ,P d' 10 M 1O O1 r 0 CO H 1D r r lD r -I 10 M M 01 N N r r In (0 01 01 O N Ol 0 r 1.() 10 0 1) r r r r r O1 r co r r N r lfl r-1 N N co 01 N 0 lfl N M H lfl N . -I N 01 0 01 0 10 M 1.0 ' r-1 lfl r 0 de N 0 0 0 1D Cr Lf) de e1 N r4 H H H H r- H H r1 H r-1 r-1 103190037002 2510560201 102390025003 2530500406 101910004003 2531020205 101910104002 2531098802 100200006079 2550170102 105376420003 2550550401 101432522003 2565300705 104205104002 2567670102 105376305005 2569380501 108347507001 2572370102 103097605002 2572470902 103097615004 2572810602 107725006100 100120003002 107620103001 N 1 ri 0 0 0 CO 0 N 0 0 0 CO r N H ♦ In _ 01 O 104800010001 3610500503 104130005001 3610710004 101815004002 3611258901 101815002008 3611284503 101630028001 3611770306 101815101006 3611970902 101807506001 3614040802 101807542001 3614400402 106420001000 3620260402 106399510001 3623050603 108140006003 3630190102 108140002001 3630520902 REPORT SORTED BY ACCOUNT NUMBER ASSESS -AMT ACCOUNT -STATUS Ca H a 0 U N N O1 M c1 07 r N O1 1.11 CO CO 1D c H N r r 01 r M r tf1 CO CO CO s to H tD o 01 N N lD O1 H r-1 ▪ C' H r 1D N to [O 01 01 H tD co s r c0 w to r C' r a' to r 01 V' r o 1D m H v' CO ▪ CO N N 01 c0 l0 O1 00 .O Q1 d' N N O\ O1 .--1 CO 01 H lD d' 01 to VD VD M Ill M N N N N H N M H H H H H H H H r H 0 N H H N N H H U UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU d' N N O1 M M 00 r N 01 to c0 00 w d' H to N N 01 r M r to CO CO CO r L(1 H CD O 01 N r W C>1 H H 4. d' H r 1D N to m M 01 Cr r [r M H H M N N c`l 01 0 N Ol N O\ O N • 01 N III H V' 10 O1 M H M r r d' tD ▪ N lO a' lD N 0 01h N 0110 NOD v' H r COM M H M H 01 O1 O N H H N M H H H H H NHONHH H H H H 101830005101 3630790804 102096007003 3640210504 102096002003 3640260005 106270002001 3640710401 104465157001 3643050201 100030001077 3650240902 104775006002 3650620205 104775004003 3650900805 104775208001 3651230902 104190001301 3660201903 101560009000 3660420502 106710001001 103200002000 101550138002 N N M 0 0 0 L(1 to H 0 0 0 r to r- , H 10 r to M M M 101550114003 3672550501 103299003002 3680340101 103299034007 3682220302 107079004001 3690350801 108361103501 3700370402 108360203201 3700590703 108361107501 3700670702 104506020002 3701120204 104506008002 3701740701 104506205001 3701850402 104506005009 3701890004 107250035004 3711110102 107250006004 3711540903 27 -OCT -2005 (09:29) REPORT SORTEL BY ACCOUNT NUMBER 0 H a w z 0 0 0 • H d N d' CO VD OD N Ul CO N M d' d N 0 Ol O V, d' OD S 1D lD N CIl d+ O Ul N lD H V, O Ol VD M 01 Ul M N H L- d, V, CO N Ln d' CO l� L!1 N \D H lD • Dl N lD N N Ol N O 0) d• CO H W N M [M L- 0 OD UI d• LIl V' N 0 0 0 L- N V' UD CO lD I.D CO M 0 VD U1 r -I N 0) N N N H H H N H M N Ul H H H H N H H 00000000000000000000000000 v ▪ H d' N d. CO lD co r lfl co N M d' o (Jl co v. v. m N N LT d' O Ln N H V� O Ol to M D1 U1 M ▪ N H r- V� d' CO N Ul CO L- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O N H lD H C11 dr N H r N d' N U1 M 0) M lD Ul C>\ H 0\ N OD D1 N CO lD M H M H Ul OD O N V. 0 N H V, LI) V, M U) 0 OD M M OD V, I- H N N H H H H N N d' Ul H H H H H H 107250011005 3711640702 107250006005 3711690204 103090005002 3720050803 101827517004 3750410703 101499601010 3761100101 101499614016 3761710701 104507504001 3770340207 104507526001 3770800502 104507523001 3770830203 104508026002 3780200601 104508005001 3780890401 107587832001 107587819001 108373003001 N 111 V 0 0 0 M CO lD 0 0 0 a r- 0) rn 0 d' 101840313003 3824740901 101460002001 3826180601 101460002001 3826181401 107510002001 3826210101 108360202101 3827290201 108360203101 3827300902 108360204001 3827310802 102246105001 3827370202 102880214001 3828910401 106480202001 3830520702 106480002001 3830560301 101705015001 3831150201 48150.70* 27 -OCT -2005 (09:29) REPORT SORTED BY ACCOUNT NUMBER O Cd Cl] c Cn Ezi 0 U U CY) 0 Et Q H a, CO 6 0 U U ,--i ri m N a V' CO 0 CO krOtO CO 0 CO N O m N to M .-I in Ln N S CO r ri N Ln In N U1 Ln ▪ eN CO C- O m m to r'1 N N m O N ▪ N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . Crt V. 0 NO 10 0 d' Ln M (1 N lD tD Ln Ln Ln Ln 0 1` m r -I CO L N CO 'D O N N d' 10 m V. N Cl HI HI V+ 0 CO N Ln Ln V• O m ON N m 1.0 a' • N r -I r( N ri N ri N , 1 r -I H H H 111 H WN N CO CO PO CO CO W CO Cq CO W CO W CO CO CO CO CO W PCI W CO a0 W PO CO CO n U U 0 0 U U U 0 0 U U U U U 0 U U 0 U U U U U U U U v H m 0) N d' O 0 CO LD '0 N W O 0 CO N 0 m b In m H Ln Ul N N CO N H N L11 Ln N 111 L0 1.11 V' O N 0 m m Ln M N N ON 0 N '.D N CO ON Lry rl H Ln m U1 CO CO N HI HI 0 111 O O Ln N LD M N L. V. d• N d' 0 r-1 N O O CO N CO V N C1 m H O r --I 'D Ul 0 LD d• N N H H N H N ,-I HI r -f r1 Lll H L0 N V' N 101670344008 1010620106 101670107002 1030930004 101670121004 1031060504 101670136001 1040180006 104725228002 1111252101 105210003005 1222180005 103980202001 1230930804 107595134001 1251740503 101660206001 1260850107 101740010101 1262360904 101740204203 1262670106 101740202203 105670003001 101230014004 131490601 105766103001 1322910901 100190004112 2340231605 107650201008 2431000507 101870008001 2490360101 105376408004 2570340602 101807546001 3614440004 103299013002 3680240304 107079010002 3690440702 108361102501 3700380304 108361203501 3700430605 108361106501 3700660805 104506004008 3702000503 4389.39* Ln 4-4 0 In v rn ro 27 -OCT -2005 (09:29) REPORT SORTku BY ACCOUNT NUMBER H co m H 0 0 0 z a 0 H a as 6 0 0 0 4 61890.09* 52540.09* /ia Agenda Information Memo November 1, 2005 Eagan City Council Meeting Old Business A: Receive bids and award sale of $5,160,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2005A; $3,840,000 General Obligation Refunding Water Revenue Bonds, Series 2005B; and, $1,550,000 General Obligation Improvement Refunding Bonds, Series 2005C; and engage Springsted, Inc. to perform continuing disclosure reporting and arbitrage rebate calculation requirements for such bonds. ACTIONS TO BE CONSIDERED: • To approve the resolutions awarding the sale of $5,160,000 General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series 2005A; $3,840,000 General Obligation Refunding Water Revenue Bonds, Series 2005B; and $1,550,000 General Obligation Improvement Refunding Bonds, Series 2005C; and • To engage Springsted, Inc. to perform future continuing disclosure reporting and arbitrage rebate calculation requirements for the above bonds. • To acknowledge the S&P rating upgrade. (no official action required) FACTS: • Resolutions to issue and sell the referenced bonds were approved at the October 6 City Council meeting. • The bid opening will take place at noon on November 1. • Dave MacGillivray of Springsted will be at the Council meeting to present the bids and recommend action. • Ratings were requested from both Standard & Poors (S&P) and Moody's. S&P upgraded the City from AA to AA+, one step below AAA. Moody's reaffirmed its existing rating of Aal, which is also one step below AAA. Mr. MacGillivray will also be available to speak to S&P's rating upgrade. • Sale recommendations were previously made available to the Council. ATTACHMENTS: / • The credit rating upgrade report from Standard & Poors is enclosed on pages through / i 4 . • The credit rating affirmation report from Moody's is enclosed on pages // 7 through lig • • The resolutions for these issues -33 pages in length—are not included with the packet, but are available for review at the City Administrator's office. /43 STANDARD 6 Pc oR'S Publication date: 26 -Oct -2005 Reprinted from RatingsDirect Eagan, Minnesota Primary Credit Analyst: Jane Hudson Ridley, Chicago (1) 312-233-7012; jane_ridley@standardandpoors.com Secondary Credit Analyst: Corey Friedman, Chicago (1) 312-233-7010; corey_friedman©standardandpoors.com Credit Profile. US$3.84mil :GO;wtr rev rfdg bnds ser 2005B dtd 12/01/2005 due 12/01/2010 AA+, US$6.705 mil GO imp bnds & GO imp rfdg bnds ser 2005A&C dtd 12/01/2005 due 02/01/2021 AA+ Sale date: 01-NOV-2005 UPGRADED' outstanding GO bnds TO -AA+ FROM M OUTLOOK: STABLE Rationale The standard Tong -term rating and Standard & Poor's underlying rating (SPUR) on Eagan, Minn.'s GO improvement and refunding bonds has been raised to 'AA+' from 'AA', based on the city's on going trend of strong financial performance and continued strong growth in the local economy and tax base despite the city's nearly built -out status. The city appears to have handled an extended period of significant growth without pressuring its financial position. The rating reflects: • Participation in the strong Minneapolis -St. Paul, Minn. MSA; • Above-average income levels with high market value per capita bolstered by strong growth in the local economy; • Good financial performance with ample fund balances; and • Manageable debt burden with a rapid amortization schedule. Eagan, with an estimated population of 67,000, is 14 miles south of downtown Minneapolis -St. Paul, allowing residents access to the MSA's strong economy. After spending several decades as one of the fastest-growing suburbs in the Twin Cities area, residential development has begun to slow, as has the growth of its population. Maximum population projections are not expected to exceed 70,000. Good highway access and proximity to the Minneapolis -St. Paul airport have helped contribute to steady growth in commercial and residential development, as well as to the expansion of the tax base. Market value increases have been consistent, averaging more than 10% annually since 2000. The total market value of $7.5 billion in 2005 is equal to a high $111,000 per capita. Although they have fallen some over the past few years, household and per capita effective buying income of 147% and 136%, respectively, remain well above both state and national averages as well. In keeping with the rest of the MSA, Eagan's unemployment levels have historically been below state and national figures; for the first seven months of 2005, the city continued that trend with an average unemployment rate of 3.1%. Eagan's financial position is very good, with ample fund reserves despite a history of growth pressures. At fiscal year-end 2004, the general fund balance was $12.1 million, or 57.9% of expenditures. The city's policy calls for an unreserved, undesignated fund balance of 30%-35%, and in fiscal 2004 the unreserved balance remained well above this target at 50% of expenditures. Expectations for fiscal 2005 indicate better -than break-even performance in the general fund, with a positive variance of up to $700,000-$800,000. State aid reductions enacted by the legislature in 2003 resulted in the Toss of $1.3 million in state aid annually, about $700,000 of which is general fund support. The city has levied back for the lost amount, however, allowing financial performance to remain healthy without making significant cuts to expenditures. The city also made several other revenue enhancements, including increasing the amount of the transfer from the city's utility fund and raising some fees. Eagan's debt burden remains moderate at $2,089 per capita, or 1.9% of market value. While the city's debt service carrying charges are high at 21 %, a rapid amortization schedule and non -GO sources offset this burden. Of the city's $31 million in direct debt, approximately 41 % is supported by property taxes while payments for the remainder of the debt come from special assessments or other revenue sources. The special assessment bonds are also backed by the city's GO pledge, but there has been no need for a general fund supplement for debt service. The city has no additional debt plans at this time. Outlook The stable outlook reflects the expectation of the city's continued good financial performance, maintenance of healthy fund balance levels in accordance with the city's policies, and moderate additional debt, which would allow the city to maintain stable debt ratios. Ongoing growth in the tax base— despite the nearly fully developed nature of the city—is also integral to the rating as it will serve to provide support to the city's financial position. Recent downward trends in income levels, as well as the challenges of transitioning from a growing community to a fully developed city, also limit the rating. Economy Eagan residents benefit from the ability to commute to a plethora of jobs around the MSA, as well as local employment opportunities. Given ample employment sources, unemployment levels in Eagan have typically been below average and remain low in 2005; the average for the first seven months of this year was 3.1%, more than a point below the state average, and two points below the national rate. Leading employers in the city include: • West Group (Thomson Legal Publishing, 5,700 employees); • Blue Cross -Blue Shield of Minnesota (2,300); • Lockheed Martin Corp. (1,500); • United Parcel Service of America Inc. (1,435); and • Midwest Coca-Cola Bottling (1,000). The world headquarters of Northwest Airlines is located in Eagan, with a current employment level of 800. Although the carrier has reduced its staffing level in the city significantly over time, at this time there is no expectation that it will reduce it further despite the airline's recent bankruptcy filing. The Eagan presence includes both offices and a training facility. With available land for residential development in Eagan at a premium, new housing has centered on multifamily, higher -density projects, including rental and owner -occupied units. New development includes some residential infill and larger scale projects still in the planning phases. Most single-family home prices in Eagan range from $200,000-$500,000. to rev(tnl$ grr>mtG on eb side at www stapdardan atl�:: lysis f visit ou_ n sdire Published by Standard & Poor's, a Division of The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. Executive offices: 1221 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10020. Editorial offices: 55 Water Street, New York, NY 10041. Subscriber services: (1) 212-438-7280. Copyright 2005 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. Reproduction in whole or in part prohibited except by permission. All rights reserved. Information has been obtained by Standard & Poor's from sources believed to be reliable. However, because of the possibility of human or mechanical error by our sources, Standard & Poor's or others, Standard & Poor's does not guarantee the accuracy, adequacy, or completeness of any information and is not responsible for any errors or omissions or the result obtained from the use of such information. Ratings are statements of opinion, not statements of fact or recommendations to buy, hold, or sell any securities. Tom Pepper From: Moody's Investors Service [epi@moodys.com] Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 5:16 PM To: Tom Pepper Subject: Eagan (City of) MN MOODY'S INVESTORS SERVICE ASSIGNS Aal RATING TO THE CITY OF EAGAN'S (MN) GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 2005A, SERIES 2005B, AND SERIES 2005C Aal AFFIRMATION AFFECTS $28.365 MILLION OF OUTSTANDING PARITY DEBT, INCLUDING CURRENT ISSUE Eagan (City of) MN Municipality Minnesota Moody's Rating Issue Rating General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2005A Sale Amount $5,155,000 Expected Sale Date 11/01/05 Rating Description General Obligation Unlimited Tax General Obligation Water Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2005B Sale Amount $3,840,000 Expected Sale Date 11/01/05 Rating Description General Obligation Unlimited Tax General Obligation Improvement Refunding Bonds, Series 2005C Sale Amount $1,550,000 Expected Sale Date 11/01/05 Rating Description General Obligation Unlimited Tax Aal Aal Aal NEW YORK, October 27, 2005 -- Moody's Investors Service has assigned a Aal rating to the City of Eagan (MN) $5,155,000 General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 2005A; $3,840,000 General Obligation Water Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 2005B; and $1,550,000 General Obligation Improvement Refunding Bonds, Series 2005C. Concurrently, Moody's has affirmed the Aal rating on the city's $28.365 million of outstanding parity debt, including the current issue. The current bonds are secured by the city's general obligation unlimited tax pledge, although debt service for the Series 2005A and Series 2005C bonds is expected to be paid with special assessments against benefited properties, and debt service for the Series 2005B bonds is expected to be paid with net revenues of the city's water utility system. Series 2005A bond proceeds will finance various improvements in the city; Series 2005B bond proceeds will refund outstanding maturities of the city's Series 1993B General Obligation Water Revenue Refunding Bonds for expected savings; and Series 2005C bond proceeds will refund outstanding maturities of the city's Series 2000A General Obligation Improvement Bonds for expected savings. The high Aal rating reflects the city's substantial taxbase in the Twin Cities metropolitan area; well managed financial operations with healthy reserves; and modest debt levels with limited future borrowing plans. TWIN CITIES SUBURB SUPPORTED BY SUBSTANTIAL TAXBASE Moody's expects the city's large taxbase to continue to grow at a moderate pace due primarily to ongoing commercial redevelopment. Located in the economically strong Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan area in Dakota County (rated Aaa), the city's substantial $7.5 billion taxbase has grown at a steady /17 pace: full value increased an average of 11.6% between 1999 and 2004. The rate of growth. is expected to moderate somewhat, as the city is approximately 98% built out residentially and 85% built out commercially. Current commercial development includes several projects in the Cedar Grove Tax Increment Financing District, as well as office and retail development in the Birchwood Office Park and Grand Oak Business Park. The city's taxbase is relatively diverse, with the ten largest taxpayers comprising just 7.2% of total assessed value. The city, which is home to Thompson West Publishing and Blue Cross Blue Shield of Minnesota, reportedly recorded the largest increase in jobs (6,000) between 2000 and 2004 than any other city in the metropolitan area. Population more than tripled between 1970 and 2000, reaching an estimated 67,051 in 2005. Wealth indices exceed state averages: per capita income and median family income levels are 130% and 141% of the state, respectively. WELL MANAGED FINANCIAL OPERATIONS WITH HEALTHY RESERVES Moody's expects the city's financial health to remain stable due to strong financial management and ample reserve levels. The city offset state cuts in local government aid (a loss of approximately $1.3 million per year since FY 2003) in part by implementing hiring freezes, increasing fees (most notably liquor license fees), and raising property taxes (which is the city's largest revenue source, comprising 67% of operating revenues). In FY 2005, the city increased the property tax levy by 6.5% (generating an additional $1.3 million in revenue). With a City Council policy that calls for a minimum General Fund balance of 30% to 35% of the next year's budget, the city's reserves have been historically stable. In FY 2004, the General Fund balance was $10.751 million (a healthy 49% of General Fund revenues), and city management expects the fund balance to grow by an additional $100,000 in FY 2005. Moody's notes that the city has been able to finance several large projects with cash on hand rather than by issuing debt; these expenditures include the $17 million North Water Treatment Plant expansion and the $2.4 million purchase of the Eagan Economic Development Authority (EDA) Series 2000 bonds (enabling the city to use this land for public recreation, as opposed to the original plan of retiring the EDA bonds with proceeds from the sale of the land). The latter expense largely explains the FY 2003 operating deficit. Going forward, the city is planning to consolidate emergency dispatch services with Dakota County and neighboring cities within the County for expected savings; joint services should be operational by 2007. MODEST DEBT LEVELS WITH LIMITED FUTURE BORROWING PLANS Moody's believes the city's debt burden will remain minimal, given is continued taxbase growth and limited future borrowing plans. The city's direct debt burden and overall debt burden are both well below state averages, at 0.3% and 1.9%, respectively. Principal amortization is slightly slower than average, with 71% of all debt retired in ten years. Debt service payments comprise 19.4% of operating expenditures, which is slightly below average for Minnesota cities. City management anticipates limited future borrowing needs, other than possibly issuing General Obligation Tax Increment Financing bonds to fund continued commercial redevelopment in the Cedar Grove area (although it is more likely that the city will be able to finance this development internally rather than by issuing bonds). KEY STATISTICS 2000 population: 63,557 (an increase of 34.1% from 1990) 2004 full value: $7.741 billion 2004 full value per capita: $117,555 Direct debt burden: 0.3% Overall debt burden: 1.9% Principal amortization (10 years): 71.0% FY 2004 General Fund balance: $10.751 million (49% of General Fund revenues) 1999 per capita income: $30,167 (130.0% of state) 1999 median family income: $80,062 (140.8% of state) 2 /i8' Post -sale parity debt outstanding: $28.365 million, including current issue ANALYSTS: Rachel Cortez, Analyst, Public Finance Group, Moody's Investors Service Jonathan North, Backup Analyst, Public Finance Group, Moody's Investors Service Douglas Benton, Senior Credit Officer, Public Finance Group, Moody's Investors Service CONTACTS: Journalists: (212) 553-0376 Research Clients: (212) 553-1653 Copyright 2005, Moody's Investors Service, Inc. and/or its licensors including Moody's Assurance Company, Inc. (together, "MOODY'S"). All rights reserved. ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT LAW AND NONE OF SUCH INFORMATION MAY BE COPIED OR OTHERWISE REPRODUCED, REPACKAGED, FURTHER TRANSMITTED, TRANSFERRED, DISSEMINATED, REDISTRIBUTED OR RESOLD, OR STORED FOR SUBSEQUENT USE FOR ANY SUCH PURPOSE, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, IN ANY FORM OR MANNER OR BY ANY MEANS WHATSOEVER, BY ANY PERSON WITHOUT MOODY'S PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT. All information contained herein is obtained by MOODY'S from sources believed by it to be accurate and reliable. Because of the possibility of human or mechanical error as well as other factors, however, such information is provided "as is" without warranty of any kind and MOODY'S, in particular, makes no representation or warranty, express or implied, as to the accuracy, timeliness, completeness, merchantability or fitness for any particular purpose of any such information. Under no circumstances shall MOODY'S have any liability to any person or entity for (a) any loss or damage in whole or in part caused by, resulting from, or relating to, any error (negligent or otherwise) or other circumstance or contingency within or outside the control of MOODY'S or any of its directors, officers, employees or agents in connection with the procurement, collection, compilation, analysis, interpretation, communication, publication or delivery of any such information, or (b) any direct, indirect, special, consequential, compensatory or incidental damages whatsoever (including without limitation, lost profits), even if MOODY'S is advised in advance of the possibility of such damages, resulting from the use of or inability to use, any such information. The credit ratings and financial reporting analysis observations, if any, constituting part of the information contained herein are, and must be construed solely as, statements of opinion and not statements of fact or recommendations to purchase, sell or hold any securities. NO WARRANTY, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, AS TO THE ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE OF ANY SUCH RATING OR OTHER OPINION OR INFORMATION IS GIVEN OR MADE BY MOODY'S IN ANY FORM OR MANNER WHATSOEVER. Each rating or other opinion must be weighed solely as one factor in any investment decision made by or on behalf of any user of the information contained herein, and each such user must accordingly make its own study and evaluation of each security and of each issuer and guarantor of, and each provider of credit support for, each security that it may consider purchasing, holding or selling. MOODY'S hereby discloses that most issuers of debt securities (including corporate and municipal bonds, debentures, notes and commercial paper) and preferred stock rated by MOODY'S have, prior to assignment of any rating, agreed to pay to MOODY'S for appraisal and rating services rendered by it fees ranging from $1,500 to $2,400,000. Moody's Corporation (MCO) and its wholly-owned credit rating agency subsidiary, Moody's Investors Service (MIS), also maintain policies and procedures to address the independence of MIS's ratings and rating processes. Information regarding certain affiliations that may exist between directors of MCO and rated entities, and between entities who hold ratings from MIS and have also publicly reported to the SEC an ownership interest in MCO of more than 5%, is posted annually on Moody's website at www.moodys.com under the heading "Shareholder Relations - Corporate Governance - Director and Shareholder Affiliation Policy." Moody's Investors Service Pty Limited does not hold an Australian financial services licence under the Corporations Act. This credit rating opinion has been prepared without taking into account any of your objectives, financial situation or needs. You should, before acting on the opinion, consider the appropriateness of the opinion having regard to your own objectives, financial situation and needs. 83°1 Agenda Information Memo November 1, 2005 Eagan City Council Meeting B. PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION (ESMERALDA ADDITION) — CHARLES HANF ACTIONS TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve (Or direct Findings of Fact for Denial) a Preliminary Subdivision (Esmeralda Addition) of .62 acres to create two single family lots and a Variance to lot width for property located at Lot 1, Block 1, Pilot Knob Heights Fourth in the SW 1/4 of Section 1; subject to the conditions in the APC minutes. REQUIRED VOTE FOR APPROVAL: Majority of Council Members Present FACTS: > This item was continued from the regular September 20, 2005 City Council meeting. The Council suggested the applicant hold a neighborhood meeting. > The applicant held a neighborhood meeting on October 4, 2005; an additional neighborhood meeting was held on Thursday October 27, 2005. > The applicant revised the plans, which include a conservation easement and a reduced house footprint. The proposed house is about 30 feet from the side lot line, 10 feet is required. > The applicant is requesting approval of a subdivision to create two single family lots. ➢ A single family home is present in the southwest corner of the site and will remain after subdivision. ➢ The proposed lots comply with the R-1 lot requirements except for Lot 1 does not meet the lot width requirement at the setback line, it maintains a 50 foot width and 85 feet is required. > The subject site is located within the Shoreland Overlay District of Fish Lake and is restricted to 25% impervious surface. > The Advisory Planning Commission held a public hearing on August 23, 2005 and recommended approval. /a0 ISSUES: > At the neighborhood meeting the applicant provided a revised plan and a list of concerns from the neighbors, which he addressed in writing and in discussion at the meeting (attached). > The neighbors stated their concerns with the subdivision/variance and did provide some suggestions, but stated their opposition to any development. The main concern was about the impaired view from the neighboring properties. Neighbors suggested additional screening along the common property line, trees or berms. 120 DAY AGENCY ACTION DEADLINE: November 20, 2005 ATTACHMENTS (7): Draft APC Minutes on page Staff report on pagesp f /throughp 9 Revised Site Plan on page/3 Applicants information packet on pages/j9through /9S Letter from Coldwell Banker Burnet on pages/y4through /S Consultation from Kunde tree consultants on ages j5 hrough_57 Correspondence from neighbors on pages/ through/y /;j City of Eagan Advisory Planning Commission Meeting Minutes August 23, 2005 Page 13 B. Esmeralda Addition Applicant Name: Charles Hanf Location: 3702 Denmark Ave.; Lot 1, Block 1, Pilot knob Heights Fourth Application: Preliminary Subdivision A Preliminary Subdivision of .62 acres to create two single family lots. File Number: 15 -PS -04-07-05 Planner Cartney introduced this item and highlighted the information presented in the City Staff report dated August 12, 2005. She noted the background and history. Charles Hanf explained his desire to remain in Eagan, and therefore would like to subdivide his lot and position the new home as close to the pond as possible. Chair Heyl opened the public hearing. Pam Madison 1173 Timbershore Lane stated concern for wildlife, property value, location of the driveway, and snow removal, as well as her view of the pond. Dan and Doris Zimmerman, representing their son Steven Zimmerman stated he has concern for the distance of the proposed home to their sons' property. He also has concerns for tree removal, wildlife, and wetlands. Chris Rivera 1181 Timbershore Lane stated concern for wildlife and view from her home. Mary Annala, 1275 Timbershore Lane, President of the Homeowners Association stated the variance is not in the best interest of the homeowners and is concerned for the traffic and distance to other homes. Peggy Riedel 1175 Timbershore Lane stated concern for the view from her property. Mary Hagberg 1177 Timbershore Lane stated concern for the view from her property and snow removal. Roxanne, daughter of the Hanf's, stated she is purchasing the existing home and is in favor of the proposal because of the unique opportunity to raise her children so close to their grandparents. There being no further public comment, Chair Heyl closed the public hearing and turned the discussion back to the Commission. Assistant City Engineer John Gorder addressed the pond and stated it is used for storm water management. He explained that with proper erosion control, the proposal would not negatively impact the pond. Mr. Hanf stated the tree in question will not be removed and the driveway will have plenty of room on both sides for snow storage. Member Gladhill stated opposition due to setting a precedence and lack of hardship for the lot width variance at the setback line. /.1.2 City of Eagan Advisory Planning Commission Meeting Minutes August 23, 2005 Page 14 Chair Heyl stated Mr. Hanf has made efforts to preserve the property and a Preliminary Subdivision is allowed. She stated it may appear to be a tight fit; however, it is allowed and consistent with Code standards and other flag Tots the City has approved. She also stated that the proposal works better than some other approved subdivisions. She stated approval would be consistent. She asked the applicant could lessen the width of the driveway and staff responded that that would be allowed. Member Chavez moved, Member Dugan seconded a motion to recommend approval of a Preliminary Subdivision of 0.62 acres to create two single family lots with a variance to Lot 1 for lot width, for property located at 3702 Denmark Avenue in the SW 1/4 of Section 15 subject to the following conditions: 1. The developer shall comply with these standards conditions of plat approval as adopted by Council on February 2, 1993: Al, B1,4, C1, D1, El 2. The property shall be platted. 3. The subdivision is subject to the Shoreland Overlay District of Fish Lake limiting impervious surface to 25% per lot. 4. A cash dedication in lieu of on-site water quality ponding is required for this development. 5. Cash park and trail dedication for Lot 1 is required. 6. This development shall dedicate drainage & utility easements to an elevation three feet above the calculated 100 -year storm event elevation of Pond JP -47 (to elevation 855.5). A vote was taken: Aye: Chair Heyl, Members Bendt, Chavez, Dugan, Hansen, and Matthees. Nay: Member Gladhill. Motion Carried 6-1. /a3 PLANNING REPORT CITY OF EAGAN REPORT DATE: August 12, 2005 CASE: 15 -PS -04-07-05 APPLICANT: Charles Hanf PROPERTY OWNER: Same REQUEST: Preliminary Subdivision HEARING DATE: August 23, 2005 APPLICATION DATE: August 2, 2005 PREPARED BY: Sheila Cartney LOCATION: 3702 Denmark Ave COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: LD, Low Density Residential ZONING: R-1, Single Family Residential SUMMARY OF REQUEST The applicant is requesting approval of a Preliminary Subdivision of 0.62 acres to create two single family lots and a Variance for property located at 3702 Denmark Avenue in the SW 1/4 of Section 15. AUTHORITY FOR REVIEW Subdivision: City Code Section 13.20 Subd. 6 states that "In the case of platting, the Planning Commission and the Council shall be guided by criteria, including the following, in approving, denying or establishing conditions related thereto: A. That the proposed subdivision does comply with applicable City Code provisions and the Comprehensive Guide Plan. B. That the design or improvement of the proposed subdivision complies with applicable plans of Dakota County, State of Minnesota, or the Metropolitan Council. C. That the physical characteristics of the site including, but not limited to, topography, vegetation, susceptibility to erosion and siltation, susceptibility to flooding, water storage and retention are such that the site is suitable for the type of development or use Planning Report — Esmeralda Addition August 23, 2005 Page 2 contemplated. D. That the site physically is suitable for the proposed density of development. E. That the design of the subdivision or the proposed improvement is not likely to cause environmental damage. F. That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements is not likely to cause health problems. G. That the design of the subdivision or the improvements will not conflict with easements of record or with easements established by judgment of court. H. That completion of the proposed development of the subdivision can be completed in a timely manner so as not to cause an economic burden upon the City for maintenance, repayment of bonds, or similar burden. I. That the subdivision has been properly planned for possible solar energy system use within the subdivision or as it relates to adjacent property. (Refer to City Handbook on Solar Access). J. That the design of public improvements for the subdivision is compatible and consistent with the platting or approved preliminary plat on adjacent lands. K. That the subdivision is in compliance with those standards set forth in that certain document entitled "City of Eagan Water Quality Management Plan for the Gun Club Lake Watershed Management Organization" which document is properly approved and filed with the office of the City Clerk hereinafter referred to as the "Water Quality Management Plan". Said document and all of the notations, references and other information contained therein shall have the same force and effect as if fully set down herein and is hereby made a part of this Chapter by reference and incorporated herein as fully as if set forth herein at length. It shall be the responsibility of the City Clerk to maintain the Water Quality Management Plan and make the same available to the public." BACKGROUND/HISTORY The subject property was platted in 1974 as Lot 1, Block 1, Pilot Knob Heights Fourth Addition. EXISTING CONDITIONS There is a single family home present on the southwest corner of the 0.6 acre lot. The subject site is within the Shoreland Overlay District of Fish Lake and is restricted to 25% impervious surface coverage. City property abuts the subject site to the south, this sliver of property is used for access and for future drainage. /25 Planning Report — Esmeralda Addition August 23, 2005 Page 3 SURROUNDING USES The following existing uses, zoning, and comprehensive guide plan designations surround the subject property: EVALUATION OF REQUEST Compatibility with Surrounding Area — The subject site is surrounded with residential uses or Park uses. An additional single family home is compatible with the surrounding area. Airport Noise Considerations — The subject property is not located within an airport noise contour. Density — The subject site is guided Low Density Residential 0-4 units/acre. The proposed subdivision will result in a density of 3.2 units/acre. Lots — Proposed Lot 1 is 15,107 square feet and proposed Lot 2 is 12,000 square feet. The existing single family home will remain on Lot 2 with the subdivision. R-1 single family residential zoning district requires 12,000 square feet per lot. Lot 1 has a 50 foot lot width at the street as well as at the 30 foot setback, City Code requires at least 85 feet width at the setback line therefore a variance is necessary if city officials deem this deviation appropriate. Setbacks — The standard R-1 setbacks apply and have been met or exceeded. Shoreland Overlay - The subject is within the Shoreland Overlay District of Fish Lake. The Shoreland Overlay district limits the amount of impervious surface on a lot to 25% of the lot area. As proposed Lot 1 will have 24.9% impervious surface coverage, limiting any additions. Lot 2 is proposed to have 22.9% impervious coverage. Existing Use Zoning Land Use Designation North Townhouses Planned Development Medium Density Residential South Park property and Single Family home Park and Planned Development Parks and Recreation Open Space and Low Density Residential East Park property and Single family home Park and Agriculture Parks and Recreation Open Space and Low Density Residential West Park property Park Parks and Recreation Open Space EVALUATION OF REQUEST Compatibility with Surrounding Area — The subject site is surrounded with residential uses or Park uses. An additional single family home is compatible with the surrounding area. Airport Noise Considerations — The subject property is not located within an airport noise contour. Density — The subject site is guided Low Density Residential 0-4 units/acre. The proposed subdivision will result in a density of 3.2 units/acre. Lots — Proposed Lot 1 is 15,107 square feet and proposed Lot 2 is 12,000 square feet. The existing single family home will remain on Lot 2 with the subdivision. R-1 single family residential zoning district requires 12,000 square feet per lot. Lot 1 has a 50 foot lot width at the street as well as at the 30 foot setback, City Code requires at least 85 feet width at the setback line therefore a variance is necessary if city officials deem this deviation appropriate. Setbacks — The standard R-1 setbacks apply and have been met or exceeded. Shoreland Overlay - The subject is within the Shoreland Overlay District of Fish Lake. The Shoreland Overlay district limits the amount of impervious surface on a lot to 25% of the lot area. As proposed Lot 1 will have 24.9% impervious surface coverage, limiting any additions. Lot 2 is proposed to have 22.9% impervious coverage. Planning Report — Esmeralda Addition August 23, 2005 Page 4 Grading/Storm Drainage - The preliminary grading plan is acceptable. The site is heavily wooded and generally slopes to the west and south. The proposed grades for the new house and driveway on Lot 1 generally match the existing grades. Wetlands/Water Quality — There are no wetlands directly associated with this parcel. The subject site is located in the "J" Watershed that drains west to Fish Lake. Due to the size and nature of this residential subdivision, water quality ponding is neither necessary nor feasible. In order to meet the City's water quality requirements a cash dedication is appropriate for this development in lieu of ponding. Utilities - The preliminary utility plan is acceptable. The existing house on Lot 2 is connected to the City sanitary sewer and water main system. Existing sanitary sewer and water mains of sufficient size, depth and capacity are available within Denmark Avenue for service connection for proposed Lot 1. The sanitary sewer and water main service work for Lot 1 will require the removal and replacement of a portion of the Denmark Avenue street section. Access/Street Design/Circulation - The driveway access for the existing house on Lot 2 will remain onto Denmark Avenue, and access to Lot 1 is also proposed onto Denmark Avenue. Easements/Rights of Way/ Permits - The development property is adjacent to Pond JP -47 (as designated in the City's Storm Water Management Plan). To cover temporary storage of storm water runoff in large storm events, the developer should dedicate drainage & utility easements to an elevation three feet above the calculated 100 -year storm event elevation of Pond JP -47 (to elevation 855.5). Similar easement dedication is required of all developments adjacent to City storm water ponds. Tree Preservation — Tree preservation issues will be determined at the time of building permit. Parks and Recreation — Cash dedication for Park and Trails is required for Lot 1. SUMMARY/CONCLUSION The subject site is currently developed with a single family home on the southeast corner. The applicant is requesting to subdivide the site into two single family lots. Both lots comply with the R-1 lot requirements except for Lot 1 does not meet the lot width requirement at the setback line it maintains a 50 foot width and 85 feet is required. The subject site is located within the Shoreland Overlay of Fish Lake; therefore, each lot is limited to 25% impervious surface, as proposed Lot 1 will be 24.9% limiting any future additions or patios. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED To recommend approval of a Preliminary Subdivision of .62 acres to create two single family lots with a variance to Lot 1 for lot width, for property located at 3702 Denmark Avenue in the SW 1/4 of Section 15. If approved, the following conditions should apply: /a 7 Planning Report — Esmeralda Addition August 23, 2005 Page 5 1. The developer shall comply with these standards conditions of plat approval as adopted by Council on February 2, 1993: Al, B1,4, Cl, D1, El 2. The property shall be platted. 3. The subdivision is subject to the Shoreland Overlay District of Fish Lake limiting impervious surface to 25% per lot. 4. A cash dedication in lieu of on-site water quality ponding is required for this development. 5. Cash park and trail dedication for Lot 1 is required. 6. This development shall dedicate drainage & utility easements to an elevation three feet above the calculated 100 -year storm event elevation of Pond JP -47 (to elevation 855.5). STANDARD CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL A. Financial Obligations 1. This development shall accept its additional financial obligations as defined in the staffs report in accordance with the final plat dimensions and the rates in effect at the time of final plat approval. B. Easements and Rights -of -Way 1. This development shall dedicate 10 -foot drainage and utility easements centered over all lot lines and, in addition, where necessary to accommodate existing or proposed utilities for drainage ways within the plat. The development shall dedicate easements of sufficient width and location as determined necessary by engineering standards. 2. This development shall dedicate, provide, or financially guarantee the acquisition costs of drainage, ponding, and utility easements in addition to public street rights-of-way as required by the alignment, depth, and storage capacity of all required public utilities and streets located beyond the boundaries of this plat as necessary to service or accommodate this development. 3. This development shall dedicate all public right-of-way and temporary slope easements for ultimate development of adjacent roadways as required by the appropriate jurisdictional agency. 4. This development shall dedicate adequate drainage and ponding easements to incorporate the required high water elevation plus three (3) feet as necessitated by storm water storage requirements. C. Plans and Specifications 1. All public and private streets, drainage systems, and utilities necessary to provide service to this development shall be designed and certified by a registered professional engineer in accordance with City adopted codes, engineering standards, guidelines, and policies prior to application for final plat approval. 2. A detailed grading, drainage, erosion, and sediment control plan must be prepared in accordance with current City standards prior to final plat approval. 3. This development shall ensure that all dead-end public streets shall have a cul-de-sac constructed in accordance with City engineering standards. 42? 4. A separate detailed landscape plan shall be submitted overlaid on the proposed grading and utility plan. The financial guarantee for such plan shall be included in the Development Contract and shall not be released until one year after the date of City certified compliance. D. Public Improvements 1. If any improvements are to be installed under a City contract, the appropriate project must be approved by Council action prior to final plat approval. E. Permits 1. This development shall be responsible for the acquisition of all regulatory agency permits required by the affected agency prior to final plat approval. F. Parks and Trails Dedications 1. This development shall fulfill its park and trail dedication requirements as recommended by the Advisory Parks Commission and approved by Council action. G. Water Quality Dedication 1. This development shall be responsible for provided a cash dedication, ponding, or a combination thereof in accordance with the criteria identified in the City's Water Quality Management Plan, as recommended by the Advisory Parks Commission and approved by Council action. H. Other 1. All subdivision, zoning, and other ordinances affecting this development shall be adhered to, unless specifically granted a Variance by Council action. Advisory Planning Commission City Council Approved: August 25, 1987 September 15, 1987 Revised: July 10, 1990 G:Engineering/Forms/Standard Conditions of Plat Approval / 30 Revised: February 2, 1993 Request Date: Applicant / Contact: Property Owners: Request: Location: Legal Description: (Existing) Preliminary Subdivision Plan June 30, 2005 Charles Hanf Charles Hanf Jessie Monfleury Preliminary Subdivision Approval (Single -Phase Development) 3702 Denmark Ave. Lot 1, Block 1, Pilot Knob Heights, Fourth Proposed name: Comprehensive Plan: Zoning: (Current and Proposed) Surveyor: Principal Contractor: (Proposed) Summary of Request: (651) 454-2649 Esmeralda Addition LD, Low Density Residential R-1 Delmar Schwanz (651) 423-1769 Jim Williams Valley Investment Construction, Inc. We are requesting approval of this preliminary subdivision of our lot to create a second lot and we request a variance to the required lot width as specified in the Land Use Regulations, Use Districts and Overlays Sec. 11-60 subd. 5. We believe the two subdivided lots meet all City Codes that define a lot except for the requirement for an 85 foot width back 30 feet from the Public Right-of-way. The newly created lot width would exceed the 85 -foot minimum where the proposed house would be constructed. We are requesting approval of this lot -split in order that we may remain in Eagan since there is a scarcity of affordable land available. Wetland Conservation: This subdivision would comply with Level 1 requirements of Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act. Enclosed is a report from Aquatic Ecosolutions, Inc. /3/ RECEIVED JUL 20 2005 Tree Preservation Plan: There is only one significant tree as identified by Kunde, Inc. report (attached) in the proposed construction zone. This is a maple tree identified as #13 on the plat plan. We will try not to disturb even this one significant tree on the lot during construction. Contiguous Zoning: The subject Tots are zoned R-1. The adjacent land to the North, Timbershore Development consisting primarily of quad -homes, is zoned R-3; to the East is a 30 foot wide easement to JP -47 owned by the City of Eagan; to the South is R-1 single family homes; and to the West is Fish Lake Park. Timing/Phasing: We plan to build a single family house on the proposed lot as located on the Preliminary Plat prepared by Delmar Schwanz Surveyors, Inc. Pending approval, we anticipate breaking ground in late fall 2005 or early Spring 2006 and completing construction in the third quarter of 2006. Current Use: The proposed subdivision is currently being used as yard for the 3702 Denmark Ave. property Submitted by: Charles Hanf Jessie Monfleury RECEIVED JUL 20 2005 FINANCIAL OBLIGATION-Emseralda Preliminary Subdivision There are pay-off balances of special assessments totaling $-0- on the parcel proposed for platting. The pay-off balance will be allocated to the lots created by the plat. At this time, there are no pending assessments on the parcel proposed for platting. This estimated financial obligation is subject to change based upon the areas, dimensions and land uses contained in the final plat. Based upon the study of the financial obligations collected in the past and the uses proposed for the property, the following charges are proposed. The charges are computed using the City's existing fee schedule and for the connection and availability of the City's utility system. The charges will be computed using the rates in effect at time of connection or subdivision. IMPROVEMENT USE RATE QUANTITY AMOUNT /33 Location Map Eagan Boundary f Right-of-way Parcel Area i':- Park Area ins Building Footprint bf /1 rat -7 WI 1000 a 2000 Feet Development/Developer: Esmeralda Addition Application: Preliminary Subdivision Case No.: 15 -PS -04-07-0 411/11 City at Eagan Community Darftopmont Dopartmant Map Pt -cowed 0 data previCed by Dakota as of Aped 2005. THIS MAP IS IN 0 FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY The City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantee fhe accuracy of this information and are not responsible for errors or omissions. Esmeralda Addition Current Zoning and Comprehensive Guide Plan Prelim Subdivision Land Use Map Case No. 15 -PS -04-07-05 Zoning Map CSC ,\..ji=3A3a2itarE .ucawoo. � r . W1/4 . MWan rlR�ln WAS 11111274.11k — limn 111111 A %am mumwommi . MUM ea ,..._41I 110 Current Zoning: ILA: Lig R'� -ie.. 4 -- :: LocationR-1 . kVill ,♦:-0:411 1■■■��, ::—r .�Il/j# EmuSingle Family Residential _ " r - = I' VII -� ; _ �J I V 11111 . i P ••';,'`,•-, 4 kiNk X44 mei vivo" q W , n..co7T/O. \s� .00 0 000 7200 Foot r`� Comprehensive Guide Plan SA NI 1--1-Te)2ale3r\ WCIIWOOa 1 Land Use Map L M� _ pm p r Mai 1/4 rJt f4 - slim ;:go ►.,. AMR. m► "Q► � `slit ---- ......■I ;;' �lll. ::= I• - - 'lj iii Mil ■�� :r�I ■� Location '1 Fa(D♦ Current Land Use Designation: tLir 'mei r■mig �� Ill 4 LI All'� 1 / ._ �■■ B■■■■■F ....,,as /;i;e� . = r.. -,L - 11111 = ■■■F AM1111 u LD 1� ,` �� 111 Low DensityResidential m iii;&‘ i _ 11 kill NAV* 964" —44 IMI Ill 110101411 4 FA4 ° iSVa ..,„.. &val 000 0 000 1200 F..tn... ..... rou Parcel Eamap In rma n pro .i akoL en CaLand Survey D.partm.R Jean. 2003. N ring Ino a alntaln byCity 30.01 City of Eagan IA, E THIS MA FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY Community Development Department The City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this information. S ?6/ x a • 1 r1. Pond JP -47 Preliminary Plat and Grading Plan For: i Charlie Hanf ESMERALDA ''/ 111 A 410 .3( !1,3.5.3 s r. RECEIVED AUG 022005 cki m PRELIMINARY PLAT h E/ = 3/7N3A V )1tl VHN30 RECEIVED AUG 0 2 2005 Im 4DDI T ION I r / O sNC III ( N Q N O 1Cm 0 0.C0 aOo v ^ " VO y w ^ ! m m G ^ •h ]. v o Q• 1 m o 1 1-,la0fi 1Ni ti t 0°'1 11 1 aci. , n \(*Ts‘,'A \ /�3.a5.S�Z`S --. --c„\ \ \ k 4q J ovi \z, \IA' •rg, 1 1 f1, \ 1 \ 1 1 re!' %,// i> s \ 01t it\ \ `` \ \� al \ h \ \ �yg y \ Cons 1+ \ `\ m1 / 1 MI Concrete Pad - 9 sq. feet Bituminous Driveway v 676 U 4 m q et Concre Iepery Species Codes a0 t70)r N 11N ta In V W O U W U cc K Q O m 0 co O W 0) f W N W C 0) N 10 o aEE� ro a CO Q CO v C .113 N • O O N 't- U .'ooEa�d Omo<cncnix coon_ 0o Q m U W W 2 az H LL CC h9/ ph R, may/ / . ay / I 1 ^ i\ o I r+ m• 14. s 1 / zI Fa y II an 'os 00 e 1 m __ n m 8601 I 'Ia 1 e a ro 15 QI I g e 18oi 1 ...-A-- 2 1-2 -_ �+ 2 t- es're M„ T. OE 0014 — 3 0-',-- — Proposed Eagan Lot Subdivision — Esmeralda Date: October 21, 2005 Neighbor's Concerns expressed at the Planning Commission, Eagan City Council & Neighborhood Meetings: • Too close to townhouses • Disrupt animal habitat and pathway • Limits the view of some • Property values affected • Snow removal • Removing or damaging a valuable tree • Cleaned pond recently • Privacy • Traffic & noise • Water grading & environmental impact • Visual buffer from east corner Note: Those items underlined are new since the October 4th neighborhood meeting. RECEIVED OCT 212005 /39 Issue: Proposed house would be too close to townhouses and not close enough to the existing house The revised plan moves the location of the proposed house and garage approximately -1-0 20 feet further away from the townhouses than originally proposed. The distance to the nearest townhouse will be about 50 60 feet. The proposed house will now be approximately 55 feet from the existing house on lot 2. Issue: Disrupts animal habitat and pathway 75% or more of the proposed lot will be free of any impervious structures or surfaces. There will be habitat such as grass, shrubs and trees on the lot most of which will remain undisturbed. The revised plan will allow for at least 20 30 feet from the north lot line to the house/garage structure for wildlife movement between the pond area and the lake area west of Denmark Ave. /40 Issue: Limits the view for some neighbors We are proposing to build a modest sized one- story home to minimize the impact. The footprint for the house/garage has been reduced by 20 25% from the original 2,000 to 1,500 sq. ft. Also, the proposed driveway has been downsized in area by approximately 30%. The majority of JP47 surface area lies southeast of the proposed house location. Therefore, the neighbors (sharing a lot line with lot 2) that publicly expressed concerns at either the Planning Commission or City Council meetings will still have a view of the pond nearly unobstructed by the proposed house. Issue: Property values affected We will follow all applicable Eagan codes in the construction of the proposed house and creating a conservation easement that will remain in effect forever. Also, Coldwell Banker -Burnet conducted a property value analysis indicating there should be no adverse affect on townhouse property values due to the proposed construction. Issue: Snow removal There will be a minimum of 5 feet along the edges of the driveway to our lot line for removal of snow. Issue: Damaging a valuable tree The tree in question is identified as #18 on the proposed plot plan. This tree will be located in the conservation easement and will thus be protected. The revised plan locates the house/garage about -a-8 25 feet from this tree. We will follow the tree preservation guidelines from Kunde Forestry Consultants to minimize any risk at all to the tree. Issue: Cleaned pond recently The City Engineer addressed this question at the Planning Commission meeting. The pond was cleaned of sediment created by City sponsored water clarifying activities. c7 Issue: Privacy The conservation easement will be added to the north and east sides of the lot line and will be a lasting buffer zone between the proposed lot and the neighboring townhouses. The width of the proposed conservation easement on the north, added to the existing setback from townhouse patios/decks, will now equal approximately 30 feet. This buffer is consistent with current Eagan codes for setbacks for new townhouse construction. There will also be a berm added to the east corner of the lot and pine trees planted to add a visual buffer. Issue: Traffic & noise The proposed house will be a single-family home and will be zoned R-1. The Eagan City Planning Department has determined that the addition of the proposed house will be consistent with the density of single-family homes in the area. Issue: Grading & Environmental Impact Comprehensive studies have been conducted on the proposed site: Aquatic EcoSolutions, Inc. was retained in May 2005 to examine the site for wetland conditions and delineate the edges of the wetland adjacent to the proposed subdivision. The applicable codes require a setback of at least 30 feet from the edges of the wetland. The setbacks for the proposed house will meet or exceed this minimum. Kunde Forestry Consultants Company was hired to locate and identify all significant trees on the lot. For example, tree number 18 was identified as a Silver Maple. Schwanz Land Surveyors, Inc. was retained to create the plat and grading plan for the proposed subdivision. Assistant City Engineer John Gorder explained at the Planning Commission meeting that with proper erosion control (required by the Eagan Building Department), the proposal would not negatively impact the pond. 4ci *** Date Change: Due to a death in the family we are forced to change the date of the meeting to Thursday Oct. 27th at 6:30 PM. Sorry for the short notice. ******************************************************************************************* To: Neighbors adjacent to 3702 Denmark Ave. From: Charlie Hanf — Owner (651) 454-2649 Date: October 22, 2005 Location of Meeting: Eagan Community Center South Meeting Room - lower level Date Of the Meeting: October 28, 2005 (F-riday) Time: 6:30 — 8:00 PM Purpose of the Meeting: Review plans to address your concerns — 2nd Meeting You have been invited to attend this meeting because your property is adjacent to the subject property and/or you expressed concerns at either the Eagan Planning Commission meeting, the Eagan City Council meeting or the previous neighborhood meeting on Oct 4th regarding this proposed subdivision. I will address: • Additional reduction in the size and relocation of the proposed house • Enlarged conservation easement at the east corner of the lot • Berm with pine tree planting on the east corner of the lot • Tree preservation plan for the mature maple tree #18 We'll see you at the Eagan Community Center - South meeting room at 6:30 PM on Friday. Thursday Best Regards, Charlie Hanf Cc: Eagan Mayor and Council Members Ms. Sheila Cartney "IS COLDWeLL BANKeR 0 BURNET October 20, 2005 Charlie and Jessie Hanf 3702 Denmark Ave Eagan, MN 55123 Dear Charlie & Jessie, R CE/1/6.0 ocr Thank you for inviting me to review the situation you have at hand. You have a lovely home situated on a fantastic lot in a great area. I can see that building another dwelling would be a wonderful addition for both your family and the neighborhood. In Eagan, as well as many other of our southern suburbs, we find that land use as it has come about mainly since the 1980's has been shared as a combination of single family homes, town homes, apartments, light industry and commercial use. Throughout most neighborhoods we see a harmonious mixture of all as well as a wide range of home values. My professional opinion has been developed through years of living and working within the community. I moved to Eagan in 1984 and have been a Realtor with Coldwell Banker Burnet for the past 16 years. Endless growth and change have happened all around us as Eagan has developed. Along with that growth comes challenge and opposition. I've included some maps and statistics that demonstrate the many areas of town home developments both in your neighborhood and throughout other comparable areas in Eagan. All developments are surrounded and impacted either by freeway and road noise, airplanes, retail shops, strip malls, gas stations etc whether they are single family homes or town home developments. In some cases business or high density dwellings were in place first and at other times housing developments were impacted by commercial space moving in. In almost every case I can think of the impact of any kind of change is what caused much anxiousness among most homeowners. Once a change has been implemented and completed the concerns that have come along with most often disappear. In reviewing the statistics and determining any impact to surrounding properties, which is where I believe the concern lies, I would have to conclude that while I believe certain views would change, there would be not be severe impact to future marketability of the town homes. Quite to the contrary, future value concerns may have more of an impact on / `716 the value of a new construction single family home as it relates to it's positioning near an older town home development. I would think that what you are trying to do is preserve the beauty, tranquility and peacefulness of the surroundings that currently exist. Current values for the eight properties that have sold in the Timbershore development this year show an average sale or pending sale price of $166,700. Other similar town home areas in Eagan that are already affected by single family homes, busier roads or commercial use have even higher average sale prices in the $170,000 and $180,000's range. In conclusion, it is my professional opinion that your new dwelling will not lessen values and may add value rather than adversely affect those in the area. Retaining as many trees as possible or providing the new landscape plan would be of greatest importance for both yourselves and the neighborhood. Good luck in your endeavor and please contact me if any questions or concerns regarding any real estate matters should arise. Respectfully, 72? 62 -/t66/ -- Lori McCahey Realtor Coldwell Banker Burnet Realty 1875 Plaza Drive Eagan MN 55122 Geospan Neighborhood Tour ❑ Zoom 0 3702 DENMARK AVE, SAINT PAUL - '! 1 'i 2 1 3 i 4 i UPGRADE TO NTour-PRO » 'T -4u R Page 2 of 2 ©2003 Copyright Geospan Corporation geovista.com /r Pitt»•//xxnxrxv aanvicta rnm/ATTr i, f TTn,+r nnr 9D:.,-1 (114cr1a111111 2 1 n/1 1 I -,r rC welcome Lori mccaney Tuesday, October 11, 2005 Home Search My Matrix 1 Finance Roster Tax I Open House 1 History r Home Base I Help I Logout I Single -Family General 1 Detail 1 Address 1 MLS# 1 Today's New Listings 1 Create Your Own Search Map Size NORT#I�. Ishbury -i be 3806 -WILLOW Nicoll _ �38O7riHeather ibiEr� uell d -j 38/5 Dolomite-_-- r 3851 -Heather -I P---!.43861 , Dolomite iJ!1i 1±t±- 84iafl. - de -Err --1 120441:imbers ore restriclge , 1241;22131C lr�rrrY.. ..to e +�!-1d 1247ne' Timbershorb 1170-TIMBER8HORE3 I� 1 ice, yI' I --re 3841 Windcrest'- Eaga—�— g _ .--1290 Deercli`----ff- , --61-1,.. r �0 ;i shelf ,r Cf 7.2 Yi ,L/ s -4409 W Kyie 11 -4461 WOODGATE CT-, 1719 HICKORY HILL I -- .71171_5-HickorylHilkir 32 =f�, r 1572,CIemson t — f; / n I� nntint+tp I4446.3OHNNY:CAKE RIDGEr 177001HICKORYIHILLHiII 1635 Hickory 41667 HickorA 11663 k Hicry 46729ACKSTONE . f j'�'�VIF4681(111irtaa 'I 1 r,- 1" _114715. hnePT; H `' ��' T4'S' '4678 Ridge.Cliffe -b 4690iHiirta�,:•, ' 1 % Lk,� 117961Covington 02005 nitroso t C.Ip' .2004 NaVTEQ-ana/or-GDT Ilrc — 1 ii http://matrix.northstarmis. com/Matrix/Mapping. aspx?c=AAEAA.AD* * * * *AQAAAAAA... 10/11/2005 /97 MATRIX Page 1 of 2 Welcome Lori McCahey Tuesday, October 11, 2005 Home Search My Matrix 1 Finance Roster Taxi Open House History Home Base 1 Help 1 Logout I Single -Family I General 1 Detail I Address 1 MLS# 1 Today's New Listings 1 Create Your Own Search Map Size NORTH -+estridge-{e-- rl 3664 Kolstad 1 kolsttd-tR... 1245 Timbershore Lane ITimbershort-in Egan 4-11247 Timber --1 1217 Timt 4 ''• I-11204 Timber 13.02 Kolstad $ ._ 1�0 TIMBERSHORE M 1174 Timbersha 1187 Timbershore 1-11 1165 Timbershi htta://matt-ix.northstarmis.com/Matrix/Maroing. asvx?c=AAEAAAD* * * * *AOAAAAAA... 10/11/2005 Single Line Report, Single Family Residential Search conducted: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 /5/ This Report Prepared By: Lori McCahey 651-6834257 4- 4- o o oa Information Deemed Reliable But Not Guaranteed. 0 Regional MLS of Minn., Inc. All Rights Reserved. Forestry Consultants UNDE CO. INC. 4 Charlie Hanf 3702 Denmark Ave Eagan, MN 55123 651-454-2649 October 11, 2005 Re: tree preservation Dear Mr. Hanf, 2489 RICE ST. #160 • ROSEVILLE, MINNESOTA 55113 • (651) 484-0114 RECEIVED OCT 212005 Concerning your call and the concerns about the tree on you property (#18 from my inventory of 05-25-2005, a 23"dbh silver maple in good condition); I would like to offer the following list of possible recommendations for discussion and possible use. Not all items on the list need be applied to all cases; it will depend on the severity of the impacts anticipated. This is measured as a proportion of roots to be impacted and should consider the entire rootzone extending out radially on all sides. In other words, with adequate protection of roots on the opposite side of a tree, impacts on one side need not be fatal or excessively damaging, even if within the rootzone. In this particular case, silver maple is a species with some tolerance for root impacts, and the distance to the proposed building of about 20 feet does allow a reasonable envelope of 10 to 15 feet around the building for work space. As this area is within the dripline (or a 30 foot radius of the tree), the following is strongly recommended: • Placement of tree protection fencing between the tree and the work area. • Spread a thick woodchip layer to mitigate soil compaction • Pre prune any overhanging limbs to avoid inadvertent damage. MEMBER: Minnesota Forestry Association - Society of American Foresters - Minnesota Society of Arboriculture International Society of Arboriculture • American Forestry Association Additional measures you might consider would be: • More elaborate soil bridging with beams and sheeting • The application of Cambistat (info and proposal enclosed). If you decide to use the Cambistat, we can apply it up until the ground freezes, so let me know soon ■ Hand pruning and sealing of any exposed roots during excavation. Tree Preservation Principles • Large trees are assets that are impossible to replace without an equivalent investment of time as it took to grow the original. • In sites used by people or populated with other targets, trees need to be held to a higher standard of structural integrity and safety than areas without such activity. • It is possible to preserve a large tree trunk physically, while killing the plant biologically. Large trees are living plants that need a large root system. Most roots will be in the upper 2 feet of soil (where nutrients and moisture are found) and extend well beyond the dripline, 2 to 3 times the horizontal extent of the canopy, or equivalent to the height of the tree laid horizontally. • Large trees will use stored reserves that can allow some biological activity, at a diminishing rate until eventual death, for up to 7 years or more. Mature trees that have suffered severe root damage often don't even show symptoms in the first 2 years. Impacted trees will typically show branch tip dieback on the top, advancing each year, as the crown contracts to compensate for lost roots. • Trees that have been impacted physically are stressed and weakened and can become susceptible and attractive to other opportunistic and common pathogens that would normally not be lethal. • The older a tree, the less capacity it has to adapt to drastic changes in its surroundings. Trees also have a limited lifespan. If severe impacts are anticipated in the delicate root zone of a tree that is nearing the end of this period, that remaining time may be better spent growing a new replacement tree. • It is far more successful and cost effective to prevent and avoid damage to a large tree, than to try to mitigate for it after the fact. / S3 Tree Preservation Recommendations: Design Phase • Route utilities, sprinkler systems, etc., to avoid trenching any closer to the trees than necessary. Use common utility trenches in critical areas. • Reduce foundation excavation footprint. Posts for support of decks and porches, rather than complete footings, will greatly reduce impacts at points of close approach to the tree. • Devote as much area within rootzones as practical to mulch and perennial plantings, rather than sod. Design and install landscaping that will mimic a natural duff layer. This will have multiple benefits of maintaining cooler soil temperatures, more constant moisture, higher levels of organic matter, etc. • Group save trees together whenever possible. • Design rain downspouts and runoff from any impervious surfaces to not dram excessively into rootzones and drown established trees. ■ Prepare the trees for construction disturbance and increase likelihood of survival by making sure they're as healthy as possible before construction begins. Water regularly if rainfall is not adequate. • Design, install, and program lawn irrigation to also consider the needs of the tree's deeper root systems with zones that can run longer duration but less frequently than for grass alone. ■ For driveway and parking areas within rootzones consider: o Use of a water -permeable surface o Minimizing width of driveways o Minimizing excavation depth o Use of pH neutral base material (not limestone) o Use of a pavement type requiring a thinner cross-section. o Use of a geo-textile material to reduce sub -base compaction Construction Phase • Installation of high -visibility orange mesh safety fencing supported by metal posts as tree protection zone delineation around perimeter of work site. The area under the trees within this zone will be closed to all vehicle traffic. Machinery access to north and east side of the structure may be limited and materials need to be hand -carried from either side. • Prior to large equipment moving onsite, pre -prune any low -hanging limbs to avoid later damage. • Do advance root cutting of large trees where time and space allow. • Use thick (6 to 8 inch) blankets of woodchips to moderate soil compaction. In cases of severe impacts, use wood bridging as well. • Excavate using a backhoe (rather than a push dozer). If the need for stockpiling backfill soil is greater than the space available, trucking offsite may be necessary. In tight areas, back cast excavation material, rather than store alongside. • Use oak wilt prevention protocols in areas with any save oak trees adjacent. • Protect the soil in areas that are to become part of the new landscape for future tree planting. A layer of wood chips, even under temporary material storage, can prevent soil compaction. • In the early wintertime, maintain impacted rootzones open to allow freezing (frozen ground will compact less), and do not store materials or soil there that might insulate them. • Have photographs of the site before construction begins to document the condition of individual trees and protection methods used. • Monitor during construction. Periodic site inspections alert workers of the need for careful treatment of the trees. Maintain protective fences in place until all construction activity is complete. Utilize a landscape protection contract signed by the builder and all sub -contractors to ensure compliance. /.51 Post -Construction Phase • Irrigate regularly for several years --never let the trees become water -stressed. • After establishment of the new fmal grade, do core or radial aeration to alleviate compaction, vertical mulching to encourage new root growth, and or chemical treatments to temporarily minimize crown growth and compensate for lost roots. • Commit to long-term maintenance. Trees will not recover from construction damage in just one or two years. Mulch as much of the rootzone as possible. Plant understory shrubs and perennials rather than grass. ■ Have an arborist inspect the trees periodically to determine if pruning, fertilization, and/or pest/disease control tactics are necessary Special Considerations For large trees located close to the activity, extraordinary measures may be necessary in order to increase their chances of survival. Some species are more sensitive than others to root impacts. Where any trees are located within the tree protection fencing, the following should be done: ■ Pre -pruning of the crowns to remove any potential conflicts and reduce potential of inadvertent damage. • Install temporary root bridging with timbers laid radially out from the trunks, woodchips between, and plywood over any areas to receive traffic. Heavy equipment must be excluded from the remaining unaffected root zone of these trees if this is not possible. A liberal blanket of woodchips 6 to 10 inches deep should cover any areas not protected by bridging. The woodchips can be placed on geo-textile for easier cleanup, but preferably will remain. • Treat early with a growth regulating chemical called Cambistat. This will reduce crown growth over 3 years, while increasing fibrous root development. This leads to improved crown: root ratio and tolerance to stress. ■ As the excavation for the foundation is occurring, any roots exposed should be immediately hand pruned and sealed in order to prevent drying and retain ability to resprout. Prompt backfill of this area after walls are built should also be a priority. /SS • Minor physical wounds to the trunk of an oak can cause major problems. All subcontractors working on the site need to be aware of this and follow oak wilt prevention protocols. • Soil compaction is far better avoided by prevention rather than treated after the fact. If it has occurred despite the previously outlined procedures, core aeration or radial trenching may be utilized as mitigation. • After construction, maintain an adequate, but not excessive, supply of water to the root zone, especially during the dry summer months. A long, slow soak over the entire root zone is the preferred method of watering. Avoid overwatering and also frequent, shallow watering. Make sure surface water drains away from the tree. Proper irrigation may do more to help trees recover from construction stress than anything else you could do. Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance to you in this matter. Sincerely, Glen Olson ISA Cert. Arborist #MN -0239A Kunde Company '1,1N1/21/4 73 ( Exisf i 4-Piex 872.6 8 _7 t -r.,,.1* Bp 870.9 41"4,.;s4N1/4868. 0 -4411(!°6114, 4016%‘-' Ash \Z;11;36, 887. 2 leo ass,5 406 rtette 866. e tr13 45. S8 +44'1O W 164. Canser vat.i un ,ebb►, ��.. ,_ rice -11111► fie. PP.:7 Tom. 866. 7 + + 4 \sat. ti N e§` 3_ 199 *44 868.8 859- 4 14 KUNDE CO., INC. 2489 RICE ST #160 ROSEVILLE MN 55113 651-484-0114 FAX 651-484-0228 SUBMITTED TO: PROPOSAL DATE Oji- /l, c7490,5--- WORK 74905WORK PERFORMED AT: NAME— i1k_ _STREET 3 7 V y� �o1L 0,4,, #„`p CITY J V Q,6 — STATE tA/Ki. ZIP CODE i g-3 STREET CITY ZIP CODE MN WI HUDSON PG # GRID # CROSS ST. f ONE (W) WE HEREBY PROPOSE TO FURNISH ALL THE MATERIAL AND PERFORM ALL LABOR NECESSARY FOR COMPLETION OF: fVORK ORDER # KP - OAK WILT CONTROL ROOT SEVERING - PROFESSIONAL CONSULTATION 1 INSPECTION ROOT SEVERING CONTROL UNE -LAYOUT VIBRATORY PLOW / OPERATOR FOLLOW-UP INSPECTIONS WHEN REQUIRED hIVORK ORDER # KI - FUNGICIDE INJECTION - PROFESSIONAL CONSULTATION /INSPECTION - FUNGICIDE INJECTION TREE# SPECIES DBH TREE# SPECIES DBH TREE# SPECIES DBH TREE# SPECIES DBH Ar SW,Wr, P-3 1111 -1°71, ----- OPTIONS: Respectfully Submitted: Date 0 1145- KUNDE COMPANY REPRESENTATIVE INJECTION COST $ / 75, Od SALES TAX $ , 3 S TOTAL $ ( $6,39 OTAL 6 `/O 3 OB COST $ Kunde Company maintains Worker's Compensation and General Liability Insurance. TERMS AND CONDITIONS KUNDE COMPANY is released from liability for damage resulting from VIBRATORY PLOWING operations and FUNGICIDE injection procedures, res, t include the following: death to trees, grass, shrubs, disruption of soil or vegetation due to necessary oak wilt contrIT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE PROPERTY OWNER TO MARK ALL PRIVATE UNDERGROUND SYSTEMS - KUNDE COMPANY is released from liability for damage resulting from VIBRATORY PLOWING OPERATION, to include the following: damage to wells, disposal septic systems, sprinkler systems, private gas and electric lines or anything else in the soil. There is a possibility that some small trees and 1 or shrubs may have to be removed to facilitate plow movement. NOTE /i p r Aft L is responsible forlaving the PUBLIC UTILITIES checked and marked. ACCEPTED BY PAYMENT DU Date OMPLETION OF WORK PLEASE RETURN SIGNED PROPOSAL TO KUNDE CO., INC. O.W. PROP 6.03 RE: Charlie and Jessie Hanf - 3702 Denmark Avenue Sheila Cartney From: Jon Hohenstein Sent: Friday, October 21, 2005 11:03 AM To: Mike Ridley; Sheila Cartney Subject: FW: Charlie and Jessie Hanf - 3702 Denmark Avenue FYI for file and packet. From: Mira Pepper Sent: Fri 10/21/2005 8:18 AM To: 'Dale Turnham' Subject: RE: Charlie and Jessie Hanf - 3702 Denmark Avenue Page 1 of 1 Your message has been forwarded to the Mayor and Council as well as the Community Development Director. Thank you for your comments. Original Message From: Dale Turnham [mailto:t.turnham@comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2005 7:06 PM To: City Council Subject: Charlie and Jessie Hanf - 3702 Denmark Avenue I am writing you in support of the request by the Hanfs to build on their lot east of their present home. I feel that their reasons for building are sound and will have an minimum impact on the home surrounding them. I would appreciate your further review of this and subsequent approval. I have lived in Eagan for the past 28 years and my property is southeast of his property on the other side of the cities out lot. Thank you for your consideration. Dale and Terolle Turnham 3708 East Denmark Court Eagan 55123 /5? 10/21/2005 To: Ms. Sheila Cartney From: Peggy Riedel 1175 Timbershore Lane Date: 10-01-05 Re: Neighbors of Charlie Hanf-Meeting scheduled for Oct 4th, 2005. I received a notice of the meeting for the Neighbors North of Property Line 3702 Denmark Avenue Proposed Subdivision, and unfortunately will not be able to attend. While I appreciate the fact that the Hanfs are willing to discuss their building plans with their neighbors, I still have to object. I am opposed to any building on this lot as I purchased my property with the knowledge that the land adjacent to mine, the Hanf property, was zoned for a single family dwelling, and would not be developed further. I would also like to say that I am sorry that this has caused a rift between the Hanfs and the owners of homes adjacent to their property. However, we all purchased our homes because of the current zoning laws. That was the main reason I bought my home, and I know most, if not all of my neighbors concur. Thank you, 41) '`14)5 1-(,L_Jap Peggy Riedel 1175 Timbershore Lane Cc: Eagan Mayor and Council Members RECEIVED OCT 4 -2005 3656 Kolstad Rd. Eagan, MN 55123 905.0219 bethi seminger(a�hotmail. com To: Mayor and City Council Members: Re: City Council Agenda 9/20/05 VII. NEW BUSINESS A. PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION—Esmeralda Addition — Charles Hanf—A Preliminary Subdivison of .62 acres to create two single family lots located at Lotl Block 1 Pilot Knob Heights Fourth in the SW 1/4 of Section 1. Even though the variance requests were recently approved by the Zoning Committee for this action, I would appreciate your second thoughts for the following reasons. 1. This is an irregularly shaped lot which slopes dramatically down towards a numbered pond. A second home built on back of this lot will be subject to natural drainage from the higher ground to the north. 2. The zoning ordinances are enacted and enforced for a reason and to benefit all. Abeyance of the ordinances sets dangerous precedents and uncomfortable implications for the future. 3. The petitioner's rationale for dividing their lot seemed to stem from their inability to find suitable housing in Eagan. I don't find this rationale valid since housing (single family homes, townhouses, condos, and apartments) of varying size and costs are regularly available within a very short walking distance of their home. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Beth Iseminger Esmeralda Add Charles Hanf /67 Page 1 of 2 Sheila Cartney From: Jon Hohenstein Sent: Monday, October 24, 2005 1:46 PM To: Mike Ridley; Sheila Cartney Subject: FW: Esmeralda Addition- Meeting November 1, 2005 FYI for packet and file. Jon Jon Hohenstein Community Development Director City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 651-675-5660 Fax 651-675-5694 jhohenstein@cityofeagan.com From: Mira Pepper Sent: Monday, October 24, 2005 1:46 PM To: 'Jacqui Beierman' Subject: RE: Esmeralda Addition- Meeting November 1, 2005 Your message has been forwarded to the Mayor and Council as well as the Community Development Director. From: Jacqui Beierman [mailto:Jacqui@degreelaw.com] Sent: Monday, October 24, 2005 1:43 PM To: City Council Subject: Esmeralda Addition- Meeting November 1, 2005 October 24, 2005 The Honorable Pat Geagan Mayor of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Re: Esmeralda Subdivision Case No.: 15 -PS -04-07-05 Dear Mayor Geagan: As you are aware, City Council will hold a final public hearing on the above matter on November 1, 2005. This proposed subdivision is an extremely important and contentious issue to at all of the 172 homes in the Timbershore Association and the Hanf s. 10/24/2005 /6 Page 2 of 2 While you have seen aerial views, maps, plats and pictures of the proposed subdivision, they do not put it into proper perspective. They do not show what a "tight fit" this really is. I firmly believe that without visiting the site in person, it will be difficult for you and City Council to make an informed decision. I am respectfully requesting that you and the members of City Council take an opportunity prior to the meeting on November 1, 2005 to visit the property, which is to be subdivided, in person. I am willing to meet you, and any members of City Council, to do a short walk through of the proposed site. If you are interested in a walk through, please feel free to contact me at: Home- 651-454-6937 Cell- 612-998-6756 Work- 612-746-4277 E-mail- Jacqui o Degreelaw.com I will be submitting additional information to you and City Council prior to the upcoming meeting and look forward to further discussing this issue with you. Sincerely, Jacqui Rivera 1181 Timbershore Lane Eagan, MN 55123 /63 10/24/2005 Community Development Department 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 File No 15 -PS -04-07-05 Esmeralda Addition Hearing Date August 23 2005 To Whom It May Concern Stephen and Kotoko Zimmerman 1167 Timbershore Lane Eagan, MN 55123 August 22 2005 RECEIVED p„1-1\r:n rsL 231116 fA r15 We are the residents of 1167 Timbershore Lane, one of the 4-plexes located North of the proposed new house. We oppose the project because of the following reasons: to protect our privacy, to protect Fish Lake and natural habitat of the area. According to the preliminary plat and grading plan we obtained from planning department of the City of Eagan, the proposed new house seems too close to our residence. We have 20' x 8' deck and concrete patio which both seems not included in the plan map. There is a tree in between our unit and the north comer of the proposed house. This tree blanches over our deck, which means the edge of the new house will be extremely close to our unit. We enjoy spending time on the deck in the summer and the view from our living room in the winter. We just want to keep our privacy and backyard view which are the main reasons why we chose to buy this townhouse unit. In addition to the privacy issue, it seems impossible to build a new house in the proposed lot because of the tree we just mentioned and the pond connecting to Fish Lake. To build a proposed house, it must be required to remove the whole tree. This tree gives us shades and protection from outdoor elements. Also, removing the tree and roots might /6 � require a new concrete patio for our unit because of the extensive root system. We were told from the previous owner of our residence that the tree belongs to the Timbershore Homeowners Association lot. We need clarification of the border between both properties since proposed contour of the new lot includes this tree. Also, the plan shows the South side of the new house will be build over the pond JP -47. We are concerned about what damage this will bring to nature. The City of Eagan is working very hard to protect Fish Lake. They just completed a project for the pond last summer to protect Fish Lake's water quality. This summer, we have been noticing better changes already. We have been seeing more deer, butterflies, locus, birds, frogs, rabbits, ducks and geese in our backyard and the proposed area. Most of these animals love and require clean water. The proposal addition might destroy all the work the City of Eagan has put into protecting Fish Lake and the natural habitat of the area. We love living in Eagan because it is close to the city yet it has a country feeling. Eagan protects and preserves nature for everyone to enjoy. We hope City Council will make the right decision. Sincerely, Stephen and Kotoko Zimmerman /6 s Ennio rr m► : z—: Enuo it ,v DENM 4f,7K A VENUEI- ! R !Li a I4! °I IIS VO7Vi3WS3 JUPH 9r1Je119 5001 Z0 9nv 03/13,338 Li -dr PUod .: / / 1 1 9 / /- `I 9 �I YI ( Preliminary Plat and Grading Plan For: /66 Jacquelin Rivera 1181 Timbershore Lane Eagan, Minnesota 55123 651-454-6937 September 16, 2005 The Honorable Pat Geagan Mayor of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, Minnesota 55122 Re: Case No.: 15 -PS -04-07-05 Proposed Subdivision of 3702 Denmark Avenue Dear Mayor Geagan: My husband and I are owners of property located behind the above proposed subdivision. I am writing in opposition to the proposed subdivision. I am requesting you deny the request for a variance for the following reasons: First, the proposal does not comply with the City Code in two significant areas: 1. Lot width does not meet the lot width requirements at the setback line. The proposed lot maintains a 50 foot width whereas 85 feet is required. This is a 41% deficit which is quite significant. 2. The proposal as outlined at the planning meeting exceeds the 25% impervious surface coverage requirement which is contrary to the proposal presented. The written proposal site plan on file proposes a 1600 square foot size "cottage" and 2100 square foot driveway. However, at the planning meeting the size of the "cottage" was increased to 2000 square feet. According to my calculations this is 27% impervious surface coverage which exceeds the 25% maximum impervious surface coverage allowed. There is a significant deficit on the lot width requirements because the property is a flag shaped lot. The City Planners expressed concern that this proposal was a "tight fit." That is putting it mildly. There is a deficit of over 41 %. This property clearly does not meet, or even come close to, the City Code lot width requirements. I have included several photos which will give you a better idea of the proposed location of the subdivision. The Honorable Pat Geagan September 16, 2005 Page 2 Second, the written proposal outlines the proposed small "cottage" to be 1,600 square feet and the driveway to be 2,100 square feet. The total lot size is 15,107 square feet. At the City Planning meeting the property owners stated the cottage would be 2,000 square feet and the driveway would be 2,100 square feet, which clearly exceeds the 25% impervious surface coverage the City Code limits. This is also a significant factor because the "proposed" property is located just feet from a rainwater drainage reservoir in the Shoreland overlay of Fish Lake. The design of the proposal does not take into account the relationship of the site to the surrounding areas. This proposal also does not take into account the undesirable impact on the adjoining properties or the environmental impact. The proposal only takes into account 1 mature tree that they "will try not to disturb." The fact of the matter is that there are 2 mature trees on the property that provide exceptional cover and aid in erosion control. These trees also help absorb water runoff and if they are removed there will be an adverse effect on drainage. Again, this is a significant factor as the property is located in the Shoreland overlay of Fish Lake. If these trees are cut down for construction, there is an undue and adverse environmental impact as well as a loss of privacy by all property owners. The proposal as outlined does not meet, or fall into, the hardship category as the property in question can be put to reasonable use under the current conditions and a hardship variance has not been requested. The current property owners (Hanf and Monfleury), who are seniors, are proposing to subdivide "so that they may remain in Eagan since there is a scarcity of affordable land available." The fact of the matter is they want to subdivide for one reason and that is to give their current home and land to their grown children while building a "small" 2000 square foot "cottage" on the same piece of property. I am struggling with the fact that the current property owners want to voluntarily give their current land and home to their grown children, and then complain that they cannot afford to purchase affordable land to build on in Eagan. We must not forget that the senior property owners currently own land and a home, in Eagan, that they have lived in for over 30 years, and nobody is forcing them out of their current home. The variance for the subdivision is not an altemative option when there are over 350 available properties for sale in Eagan. It is worth mentioning that there are currently over 200 single family homes (over 325 including townhomes or condos) currently for sale in Eagan. There are also 5 senior facilities that offer senior housing options available in Eagan as well. The only reason for the subdivision is so that the senior home owners may remain in Eagan on the same piece of property they voluntarily gave to their grown children. The Honorable Pat Geagan September 16, 2005 Page 3 Lastly, when we purchased our property over a year ago, we chose this property because of the mature trees which provided privacy and shade as well as the location next to a wetland that is home to deer, fox, rabbits, and other wildlife. Another factor in the purchase of our home was the fact that the land adjacent to our home contained a home that was zoned for single family use. If we had known that a house was going to built 30 feet away from our home we would not have purchased our property. Our property values will suffer considerably if this proposal is accepted. In conclusion, we are respectfully requesting that you do not grant a variance for the proposal for the reasons outlined above as well as the fact the variance would be materially detrimental to the purpose of the City Code as well as property in the same zone. I look forward to further addressing this matter with you at the City Council meeting on September 20, 2005. Sincerely, (Lige Jacquelin Rivera X69 SITE PLAN Pond JP -47 a 3• •i RECEIVED AUG 022005 r F i r I 3Jra_ L a O M e L l —it— ! I i 3; / •"H . , / 1 o t--/ ,1_ 2 — RII 4\ ai iif i [ i 338N XH0911\130 R /%D m.1I Mina tzt Eli x -_...:y� . _ . � � . Edina Realty www.edinarealty.com An affiliate of Edina Realty Home Services, a complete real estate services company October 26, 2005 RE: Case No.: 15 -PS -04-07-05 PROPOSED SUBDIVISION OF LOT 1, BLK 1, PILOT KNOB HEIGHTS 4TH ADDN The Honorable Pat Geagan Mayor of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Rd Eagan, MN 55122 Dear Mayor Geagan, I am a homeowner whose property abuts the northern boundary line of 3702 Denmark Ave which is the parcel under your consideration for subdivision. I am also a realtor with Edina Realty. I respectfully request that you do not approve the proposed subdivision. I have enclosed information for your review, so you can see that this is not an emotional plea nor do I have a "not in my backyard" attitude. When this plan is looked at from a rational view of the consequences, it falls far short of being beneficial to the land use protections provided in our city Code; in fact, only one homeowner, the owner of the lot in question, benefits. The remainder of the adjacent properties will suffer economic damage as well as intangible damage from the aesthetic losses during the tenure of their residency. I have enclosed information that shows why an approval of this proposed plan would be materially detrimental to the purpose and intent of Eagan's Code and to the adjacent properties. I appreciate your time and consideration of this matter. Respectfully, John Hutchison 1165 Timbershore Lane Eagan, MN 55123 EDINA REALTY 1250 Yankee Doodle Road Eagan, MN 55121 PHONE 651-688-0000 FAX 651-688-9183 General Overview 1. There are 1,430 residential lots in Eagan that are between 0.60 and 1.99 acres. The proposed subdivision does not represent a unique circumstance that owners of similar parcels do not face and could represent a future trend as undeveloped residentially zoned land in Eagan becomes obsolete. 2. Charles Hanf has expressed an interest in staying close to his current residence. As of October 21, 2005, there were 411 properties for sale in Eagan -204 single family dwellings and 207 townhomes. Of these properties, 143 were less than two miles from 3702 Denmark Ave. 3. There will be an adverse economic impact directly upon the Timbershore home owners adjacent to the planned subdivision and potentially an indirect negative economic impact to all 172 members of the Timbershore townhome development through the principle of neighborhood regression. 4. Approval of the proposed plan to subdivide the parcel under consideration is contrary to the intent and purpose of the Eagan Municipal Code and granting a variance is not justified under provisions of the Code. ?6 1. A growing trend in Eagan? There are 1,430 residential lots in Eagan that are between 0.60 and 1.99 acres. While not all of these lots are ecologically, topographically, or developmentally suitable for subdivision, to move forward with the proposed subdivision for the property located at Lot 1, Block 1, Pilot Knob Heights 4th Addition could represent a growing trend since land suitable and zoned for residential purposes is a scarcity in Eagan. Would this be in agreement with the purpose of Chapter 13 of Eagan's code which is to guide the future growth and development of the city in accordance with the comprehensive guide plan? 2. Plenty of viable alternatives With market inventory at an all time high, there are plenty of other options that would allow for the Hanf family to remain close. As of October 21, 2005, there were 411 properties for sale in Eagan -204 single family dwellings and 207 townhomes. Of these properties, 143 were less than two miles from 3702 Denmark Ave. /fr?9 3. Adverse Economic Impact on adiacent properties The value of a property is determined by market forces. Typically home values are dictated by the sales values of other comparable properties. This is especially true for townhomes because of the abundance of very similar homes in close proximity which allows for accurate sales value prediction. Within a townhome community, there will not be large fluctuations of values. Historically, the homes in the best condition and with the best location will generally sell for higher values and in a shorter period of time. For example, there are three homes in Timbershore that are on the market right now. 1. 3635 Denmark Ave listed at $164,900; 2. 3664 Kolstad Rd listed at $169,900; and 3. 1298 Crestridge Lane listed at $179,900 This is a fairly large range for Timbershore; however, 1. the home on Denmark is directly on the corner of Denmark and Crestridge, i.e., location affects its list price; 2. The home on Kolstad is priced at the market average currently for Timbershore and in a decent interior location; 3. The home on Crestridge has a decent location and is in good condition; however, its list price is pretty aggressive given today's marketplace conditions. Looking at sales data from 2002 to present (see Chart A), we can see that the Timbershore properties abutting Fish Lake and the proposed lot for subdivision have consistently sold at higher values than the market average for Timbershore at the time of sale. The Timbershore homes along the proposed subdivision will lose the one thing that makes these homes worth more—their enviable location that provides privacy, views of nature, and relative peace and quiet. The economic loss at the time of sale would amount to potentially $10,000 if their favorable location is fundamentally altered by the proposed home. Finally, the economic effect could be detrimental to the property values of all 172 homes within Timbershore through regression. In the past these properties that have sold at higher values have helped the overall appreciation of the development through progression. Basically as units sell at higher values, other units within the same development can begin to increase incrementally as well; however, should the proposed subdivision be approved and these units begin to sell for less, the other units' values could begin to regress as well. Charts B and C represent the adverse effect of long market times on sales values which could affect the adjacent properties should buyers not find these homes suitable due to the proposed subdivision and development of the lot under consideration. Chart A Timbershore sales activity for affected properties and comparable properties 2002-2005 :i iri 12] 1.1liiI i pigo!,'Imanzumin ituir �� tz 11 F,� 4140 1•t' P ' . 11 ®■ 3 Copyright © 2005, Dakota County. Ear !44 ,i5 1r,'2JI U 1 mrj Fog immfd Tam maim Iseirial11 trai wrai.mffi fir 3/41111 ii1JLPJMIttW 11 Iiiniffi 6 y Property Address Date and Value of last Qualified Sale Timbershore Mkt. Avg. at the time Amount Higher than average 1. 1310 Kolstad Ln September 2003 $171,100 $159,000-166,000 $12,100 - $5,100 2. 1302 Kolstad Ln June 2005 $175,000* $168,000-172,000 $7,000 – $3,000 3. 3697 Denmark Av May 2003 $163,000** $158,000-165,000 $5,000 - (-$2,000) 4. 1165 Timbershore Ln April 2005 $163,7001 $167,000-171,000 -$3,300 – (-$7,400) 5. 1167 Timbershore Ln August 2002 $157,400 $151,000-154,000 $6,400 – $3,400 6. 1181 Timbershore Ln January 2004 $170,900 $161,000-166,000 $9,900 – $4,900 *Sale had a three (3) day market time (in a 45-60 day market) indicating potentially a higher sales value could have been obtained. **Parcel had two opposing location factors: 1) A positive factor—on Fish Lake; 2) A negative factor— on Denmark Ave; however, home still sold in the upper range of the average and sold within 12 days (in a 25-35 day market.) tProperty backs up directly to 3702 Denmark Ave, had a 225 day market time, and sold below the market average for Timbershore. ©2005 All information obtained and based on data from the REGIONAL MULTIPLE LISTING SERVICE OF MINNESOTA„�1 d Dakota County Tax Records. Chart B Activity vs. Timing This chart highlights buyer interest over the duration of market time. 0 1 2 3 4 5 Weeks on Market 6 7 8 Chart C The potential effects of longer market times This chart highlights the adverse effect on sale values as homes are on the market for longer time periods. -3.fi% -5.6% -8.9% Less than 4 weeks 4-12 weeks /I( 13-24 weeks More than 24 weeks 4. Intent and purpose of our city code We feel that approving this subdivision only benefits one homeowner while it would be detrimental to far more families and homeowners. We also feel that the known consequences and potential unforeseen consequences of this action are contrary to the intent and purpose of our city's code and are materially detrimental to the purposes of the code. Section 11.10, the intent and purpose of the Land Use Regulations that are contrary to the approval of this subdivision are: (1) Protecting the public health, safety and general welfare; (2) Dividing the city into zones and districts restricting and regulating therein the location, height, number of stories, size of buildings and other structures, and percentage of lot which may be occupied, the size of yards and other open spaces, and the density and distribution of population; (3) Promoting orderly development of the residential, business, industrial, recreational and public areas; (6) Preventing the overcrowding of land and undue concentration of structures by regulating the use of the land and buildings and the bulk of buildings in relation to the land and buildings surrounding them; Section 13.01, the intent and purpose of the Subdivision Regulations that are contrary to the approval of this subdivision are: (1) To protect and provide for the public health, safety and general welfare of the city; (3) to provide for adequate light, air and privacy, to secure safety of the land and undue congestion of population; (4) to protect the character and the social and economic stability of all areas of the city and to encourage the orderly and beneficial development of all areas of the city; (5) to protect and conserve the value of land throughout the city and the value of buildings and improvements upon the land and to minimize the conflicts among the uses of land and buildings; (8) to establish reasonable standards of design and procedures for subdivisions and resubdivisions in order to further the orderly layout and use of land; and to insure proper legal descriptions and monumenting of subdivided land; (10) to prevent the pollution of air, streams, ponds; to assure the adequacy of drainage facilities; to safeguard the water table; and to encourage the wise use and management of natural resources throughout the city in order to preserve the integrity, stability and beauty of the city and the value of the land; (11) to preserve the natural beauty and topography of the city and to insure appropriate development with regard to these natural features; We also feel that the request for a variance in this proposal is not justified and there is also a lack of a hardship on the applicant's part. Section 11.30, the definition of a hardship: a situation where property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use under the conditions allowed by the official controls where the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to this property, not created by the landowner. Economic considerations alone shall not constitute a hardship if a reasonable use for the property exists under terms of the official controls. First, the current parcel as it was originally platted is being "put to reasonable use." Had the lot been suitable for two homes when platted in 1993, the developer would have certainly done so. They do not waste land. Second, there is no "plight" of the landowner. Unfortunately, the proposal is the desire of the homeowner and not a need. Third, the circumstances surrounding the request for a variance are not "unique to this property." Of the 1,430 parcels between 0.60 and 1.99 acres, surely there are many landowners that would be in the same circumstances should they desire to divide their lots. Fourth, if there is a hardship, it is "created by the landowner." The parcel as originally platted functions as it should in a residential neighborhood. Finally, it appears that "economic considerations alone" are the only factors causing this request for a variance since there are hundreds of available properties within a few miles that are viable alternatives. Section 11.50, Subdivision 3 the factors that the council considers in granting a variance are: 3. The city council may approve, approve with conditions or deny a request for a variance. In considering all requests for a variance, city council shall consider the following factors: a. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances apply to the property which do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone or vicinity, and result from lot size or shape, topography, or other circumstances over which the owners of property have no control. b. The literal interpretation of the provisions of this Code would deprive the applicant property use commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the provisions of this Code. c. That special conditions or circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. d. That granting of the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this Ordinance to owners of other lands, structures or buildings in the same district. e. The variance requested is the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship. f. The variance would not be materially detrimental to the purposes of this Code or to property in the same zone. First, there are no "exceptional or extraordinary circumstances [that] apply to the property which do not apply generally to other properties in the same zone or vicinity." Second, "the literal interpretation of the provisions of this Code would deprive the applicant property use commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district under the provisions of this Code." Owners of similar properties do not currently enjoy usage of their properties in a fashion that Charles Hanf is deprived of. Third, granting the variance is "materially detrimental to the purposes of this Code and to property in the same zone." Agenda Information Memo November 1, 2005 City Council C. APPEAL OF STAFF DECISION — IDENTIGRAPHICS ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To direct consideration of canopy signage to a Council Workshop. Or To direct staff to process an ordinance amendment to Chapter 11, beginning with the APC holding a Public Hearing. REQUIRED VOTES FOR APPROVAL: Majority of Councilmembers present Bold text represents new information FACTS: > This item was before the City Council at their regular meeting of September 20, 2005. The City Council continued the item and requested the City Attorney research whether LED canopy signage could be restricted to gasoline price only. The attorney has stated that canopy signage can be restricted. > Staff believes gas price advertising on the canopy presents a larger policy question that would best be considered by the City Council at a future workshop. > The City Code does not contain standards for canopy signage; however, signage requests for business name/logo and corporate color raceway striping have been exclusively approved. The City Attorney's office has advised that this policy practice should be codified regardless of whether gas price signage would be permitted or not. > Earlier this year, Identigraphics contacted staff regarding removing Amoco signage and replacing it with Marathon signage at four Eagan locations. Their proposal to change out signage for 1286 Lone Oak Road was to remove the existing Amoco logo from the north elevation canopy and replacing it with a Marathon logo, text stating "unleaded self -serve", and an LED price box on the north and east elevations. Identigraphics would like the same type of canopy signage for the Marathon/Oasis Markets at 3390 Coachman and 4250 Lexington. > Identigraphics, on behalf of their customer, is appealing staff s interpretation of the City Code. They are seeking to get the price information "out there" to the customer, and avoid placing price information within a box on the canopy pole (as shown in attached photo). lec ISSUES: > In proposing to introduce price information on canopies, it is not apparent that the sign company has demonstrated that it has explored or exhausted alternatives to meet the same information needs through signage on the existing building or pylon/monument sign. > City staff has concern with precedent being set whereby any or all convenience gas operations will opt to put gas prices on the canopy in order to free up pylon sign area for other advertising opportunities, thereby inadvertently resulting in increased sign area for the property. ➢ The City Council may wish to consider case by case situations where a variance from code may be appropriate due to existing impediments. ATTACHMENTS (3): p Existing and Proposed canopy signage for 1286 Lone Oak Road on page / and 1't Photos of typical canopy signage on page /2' and l90 . Letter from Identigraphics on pager (t . /86 BLDG SIGN Channel Letters 48" x 20' _z H cn W 0 fA 0 Oasis Market - 3' x 8' CANOPY (60 sq ft) O 0 x x x So m Tr o O O Q Q TOTAL SOUARE FEET A c 5e Oasis Market - 3' x 8' TOTAL SOUARE FEET N IA g oca G North Maralhon LED Date: 7-6-05 1:1 --.. r,..) 20 0 --` = 9.) •••••••, IIIIIIIIIIIIII DENTI- GRAPHICS "A Total Sign Source" www.igdecal.com 8660 HWY 7, P.O. BOX 160 • ST. BONIFACIUS, MN 55375-0160 PHONE 952-446-1172 • FAX 952-446-1717 August 29, 2005 City of Eagan City Council 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Dear City Council Members : As the sign installation company representing Twin Cities Stores, we are writing to request that the council override the denial of permission to put LED price signs on the east and north sides of the canopy at the Oasis Market located at 1286 Lone Oak Road in Eagan. It is our understanding that the city does not have a clear code provision for LED signs on canopies. but that city planning staff has not granted permission for these types of signs. Please note that these are not flashing signs. We are requesting that the signage for this location be updated to provide adequate signage to advertise our products and draw customers into our store.The present signage (building wall sign) and a small ID sign (3' x 8') on a pylon is inadequate to let our customers know that we sell fuel and what the price of that fuel is. We have looked at alternatives such as: • A. New primary ID sign 10' wide & 17' tall, with a price change sign and a reader board • B. LED price change signs on the canopy (30" x 120") - 2 of these , one on the east side and the other on the north side of the existing canopy Either system will let our customers know what products we sell and what the current price is. Currently there are two Amoco illuminated signs on the canopy which total 30 sq ft each — both of these will be removed. The two 30" x 120" LED price signs would replace the existing Amoco signage. Our first choice, of course, would be the new 10 ft ID & price change sign. which I understand would require a variance to place a second freestanding sign . Therefore; I respectfully ask you to consider our appeal for permission to put up the LED price signs on the canopy. I have enclosed a computer rendering of what the LED signs on the canopy would look like. In addition, we are also requesting city council approval for LED price signs on the south & east sides of the canopy of the Oasis located at 3390 Coachman Road and for the west & north sides of the canopy of the Oasis located at 4250 Lexington Ave in Eagan.,Here; again, not having visible price signs leaves us at a competitive disadvantage because our pricing cannot be seen until one is actually at the station. If you need additional information, please contact me at 952-446-1172. Sincerely, oom Nelson President /99/ 3M PirAp CERTIFIED GRAPHIC INSTALLERS PV6RV Agenda Information Memo November 1, 2005, Eagan City Council Meeting VII. NEW BUSINESS A. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT — ATTRACTA SIGN ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve (OR direct preparation of findings of fact for denial) a Planned Development Amendment to allow two monument signs for one building at 2955 Lone Oak Drive, legally described as Lot 1, Block 1, Blue Ridge 6th Addition (formerly L1, B1, Blue Ridge 5th Addition), located in the SW 1/4 of Section 1, subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. REQUIRED VOTE FOR APPROVAL: At least three votes. FACTS: > A Final Planned Development for this building was approved in 2003 and the building was constructed in 2004. The 20 -acre site was recently subdivided into two parcels, leaving the existing building on a 7.5 -acre parcel. ➢ The Final PD Agreement for this building states "All signage shall comply with City Sign Code requirements for Business Park zoning districts." > The City Code allows one free-standing monument sign per building. • On behalf of John Deere, Attracta Sign is requesting approval of an additional free- standing monument sign for one of the building's occupants, John Deere, on the northwest corner of the lot, on the existing berm. > This multi -tenant building has an existing monument sign at the entrance to the site which provides space for individual occupant names. ➢ The applicant has indicated that the separate monument sign would allow John Deere to maintain their national identification for corporate facilities and would help with wayfinding to the business since many visitors will not be familiar with this area. Also, the applicant indicated the existing monument sign is not illuminated. > The APC held a public hearing on October 25, 2005 and did recommend denial of the PD Amendment. ISSUES: > The reasons stated by the APC for the recommendation of denial were that it would set a bad precedent; the building signage for John Deere is visible; the existing monument sign is visible; and the proposal is inconsistent with the City Code and presents no public benefit to the City. > The APC stated their preference that John Deere work with the building owner to better utilize existing signage. /9z 60 DAY AGENCY ACTION DEADLINE: November 20, 2005 ATTACHMENTS (2): October 25, 2005 APC Minutes, pages /99through gtS- Staff Report, pagesi%through New Business A. John Deere Applicant Name: Attracta Sign Location: 2955 Lone Oak Drive; Lot 1, Block 1 Blue Ridge 5th Application: Planned Development Amendment PD Amendment to allow two monument signs for one building. File Number: 01 -PA -12-09-05 Chair Heyl opened the public hearing. Craig Murray, representative for John Deere discussed the need for the Planned Development Amendment to allow two monument signs for one building. There being no public comment, Chair Heyl closed the public hearing and turned the discussion back to the Commission. Member Chavez asked if the current monument sign or the building signs are illuminated. Mr. Murray stated the building signage is illuminated but the monument sign is not illuminated. Chair Heyl stated it is a deviation from the City Code;and this particular area needs consistency in regards to signage. Approval of -this items would be setting a signage precedent in an area with many multi -tenant -buildings. She stated if the signage is not visible, the owner should reevaluate the design of the sign. Member Bendt asked if the applicant had worked with the building owner to address the concerns of John Deere. Mr. Murray stated he had not. Member Chavez stated building signage is visible as you approach the site and becomes Tess visible as your get closer to the building. He agreed with Chair Heyl in regard to the precedence Member Dugan stated a specific situation could be noted because of the training aspect of the facility. He stated he believes the City needs to recognize that these national companies have signage needs. He stated he will vote in favor of the item. Member Keeley stated agreement with Member Dugan. Planner Dudziak stated she is not aware of a similar situation of two monument signs for one building. Member Bendt stated disagreement with a second sign; however he stated he would support modifications to the present sign to increase visibility. Member Chavez moved, Member Bendt seconded a motion to recommend denial of a Planned Development Amendment to allow two monument signs for one building at 2955 Lone Oak Drive, legally described as Lot 1, Block 1, Blue Ridge 5th Addition, located in the SW 1/4 of Section 1 due to the following reasons: 1. An additional monument sign for the subject site would set an undesirable precedent. 2. Present building signage is visible. 3. Present monument sign is visible; however, the design could be improved. 4. Consistency in the area is needed and the City of Eagan would not benefit from the PD Amendment. A vote was taken: Aye: Chair Heyl, Members Bendt, and Chavez. Nay: Members Keeley and Dugan. Motion carried 3-2. V. OTHER ITEMS VI. VISITORS TO BE HEARD (FOR THOSE NOT ON AGENDA) There were no visitors to be heard for items not on the agenda. VII. OTHER BUSINESS City Planner Ridley announced that a workshop would be held on Wednesday October 36, 2005 at 6:30 p.m. along with a workshop on November 10, 2005 at 5:30 p.m. VIII. ADJOURNMENT Member Bendt moved, Member Chavez seconded a motion to adjourn the Advisory Planning Commission meeting at 6:53 p.m. All voted in favor. Motion carried 5-0. /9S PLANNING REPORT CITY OF EAGAN REPORT DATE: October 20, 2005 APPLICANT: Attracta Sign (John Deere) PROPERTY OWNER: CSM Corporation CASE: 01 -PA -12-09-05 HEARING DATE: October 25, 2005 APPLICATION DATE: Sept. 21, 2005 REQUEST: Planned Development Amendment PREPARED BY: Pamela Dudziak LOCATION: 2955 Lone Oak Drive COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: SA, Special Area ZONING: PD, Planned Development SUMMARY OF REQUEST On behalf of John Deere, Attracta Sign is requesting approval of a Planned Development Amendment to allow two monument signs for one building at 2955 Lone Oak Drive, legally described as Lot 1, Block 1, Blue Ridge 5ch Addition, located in the SW '/4 of Section 1. AUTHORITY FOR REVIEW Chapter 11, Section 11.50, Subdivision 5 states, in part, 1. The provisions of this chapter may be amended by the majority vote of the council, except that amendments changing the boundaries of any district or changing the regulations of any district may only be made by an affirmative vote of two-thirds of all members of the council. 2. The Council shall not rezone any land in any zoning district or make any other proposed amendment to this chapter without first having referred it to the planning commission for its consideration and recommendation. BACKGROUND/HISTORY This property was part of the Laukka-Beck Planned Development which was established in 1985. With the City-wide update of the Comprehensive Guide Plan in 2001, the property was designated Special Area. The Special Area plan designates the site for office use. The property is currently zoned PD, Planned Development, and is generally considered similar to the BP, Business Park, zoning district. /q6 Planning Report — Attracta Sign (John Deere) October 25, 2005 Page 2 A Final Planned Development for this building was approved in 2003 and the building was constructed in 2004. Those development plans showed three buildings on a 20 -acre site. The site was recently subdivided into two parcels, leaving the existing building on a 7.5 -acre parcel. EXISTING CONDITIONS The site is developed with an existing 45,000 sq. ft. warehouse/manufacturing building which was constructed in 2004. Part of the building has been leased to John Deere Company. The site contains an existing monument sign on the north side of the driveway from Lone Oak Drive. The existing driveway and monument sign are located at the south end of the property. SURROUNDING USES (Existing Monument Sign) The following existing uses, zoning, and comprehensive guide plan designations surround the subject property: EVALUATION OF REQUEST City Requirements — The City Code permits one ground (monument) sign per building. Monument signs are limited to seven feet total height, with a four -foot maximum height of the sign area. Applicant's Proposal — The applicant is proposing to install a monument sign for one of the building's occupants, John Deere, on the northwest comer of the lot, on the existing berm. The proposed monument sign is 6'7" in height. The sign consists of a one -foot base, a 5'7" high backing panel and a 3'6" high sign message area. The sign is 14'9" long. The sign is proposed to be constructed of painted aluminum panels. Illumination is proposed to be from external ground mounted lights. /9� Existing Use Zoning Land Use Designation North Vacant PD, Planned Development SA, Special Area (O/S, Office/Service) South Residential (rural) A, Agriculture SA, Special Area (NB, Neighborhood Business) East Office (Ecolab) PD, Planned Development SA, Special Area (O/S, Office/Service) West Vacant and Office A, Agriculture and PD, Planned Development SA, Special Area (RC, Retail Commercial & BP, Business Park) EVALUATION OF REQUEST City Requirements — The City Code permits one ground (monument) sign per building. Monument signs are limited to seven feet total height, with a four -foot maximum height of the sign area. Applicant's Proposal — The applicant is proposing to install a monument sign for one of the building's occupants, John Deere, on the northwest comer of the lot, on the existing berm. The proposed monument sign is 6'7" in height. The sign consists of a one -foot base, a 5'7" high backing panel and a 3'6" high sign message area. The sign is 14'9" long. The sign is proposed to be constructed of painted aluminum panels. Illumination is proposed to be from external ground mounted lights. /9� Planning Report — Attracta Sign (John Deere) October 25, 2005 Page 3 Landscaping — The proposed sign location does not conflict with any existing landscaping. No new landscaping is proposed. Applicant's Narrative — John Deere has submitted a narrative which states that the separate monument sign for John Deere "allows John Deere Company to maintain their national identification requirements for corporate facilities." Further, "it is of particular importance for this facility [because it] will be drawing clients on a regular basis from many different States throughout the Midwest. The monument sign will serve not only brand identification but also as a `wayfinding' sign to the facility." The stated benefit is "to the surrounding properties as there will be less confusion of traffic flow to the property since most of the clients are unfamiliar with the area." Site Conditions — John Deere occupies a center space in the building and has a building mounted sign. The John Deere building mounted sign is not very visible from the north because of the berm upon which the second monument sign is proposed to be placed. The sign, driveway and building are more visible from the south. Conforming Plan — A conforming plan would utilize only one monument sign. Analysis — The Sign Ordinance allows one monument sign per building. The property contains an existing monument sign at the driveway entrance. The existing monument sign provides space for individual occupant names. The proposed monument sign is consistent with *the current design standards in the City Code and the sign appears to be compatible in design appearance to other monument signs in this area, however, the John Deere sign should have a decorative block base to match the existing monument sign for this building. The installation of two ground signs for a single building is a deviation from City Code standards. Several buildings in this area were developed and are owned by CSM and all have the same type of monument sign, which identifies the building and has space for tenant names. The single -occupant buildings in the area, such as Ecolab, also have monument signs which identify the business, similar to what is proposed for John Deere. Thus, each building has only one monument sign and the signage is similar throughout The Waters business park area. Because many of the buildings in the area are multi -tenant, staff has concern that the proposed tenant ground sign for this building will lead to other separate tenant ground signs, which would be inconsistent with the Sign Ordinance and the established sign pattern within this office park. The acceptability of the proposed deviation to allow two monument signs for one building is a policy matter to be determined by City officials. SUMMARY/CONCLUSION In summary, the applicant is requesting approval of a Planned Development Amendment to install a second monument sign for the building located at 2955 Lone Oak Drive. The proposed sign design is consistent with City Code requirements, however, the installation of two ground monument signs for one building is a deviation. Staff is concerned with the precedent this Planning Report — Attracta Sign (John Deere) October 25, 2005 Page 4 request may set in an office/showroom/warehouse area with many multi -tenant buildings. The acceptability of the deviation is a policy matter to be determined by City officials. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED To recommend approval of a Planned Development Amendment to allow two monument signs for one building at 2955 Lone Oak Drive, legally described as Lot 1, Block 1, Blue Ridge 5th Addition, located in the SW '/a of Section 1. If approved the following conditions shall apply: 1. An Amendment to the Planned Development Agreement shall be executed and recorded against the property at Dakota County. The following exhibits are required for the Planned Development Amendment Agreement: • Site Plan • Sign Plan 2. The monument sign shall be located at least 10 feet from all property lines. 3. , The John Deere sign shall have a decorative block base to match the existing monument sign for this building. 4. A sign permit is required before the sign is installed. /99 Location Map Eagan Boundary N Right-of-way Parcel Area Park Area Building Footprint 1000 0 1000 2000 Feet Development/Developer: Attracta Sign - CSM Properties Application: Planned Develo • f - 1 mendment Case No.: 01 -PA -12-09- *City of Eappi Community D.v.lopm.nt Department Map Prepared ume - 1. Parcel base map data provided by Dakota County Office of GIS and is current as of April 2005. THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY I The City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this information and are not responsible for errors or omissions. Current Zoning and Comprehensive Guide Plan Land Use Map Attracta Sign - CSM Properties PD Amendment Case No. 01-PA-12-09-05 Zoning Map PD Location lir 4 Current Zoning:a it PF PD(61 PD / \tom/ PD % . Planned Development Po PD ` _ A 1.1 hi"Are TMYNK NWT ikdI ft. 60. 88 MN Ilk 000 0 coo 12011 F.61 Na ,,e _1 i PD Comprehensive Guide Plan Land Use Map I SA \........../ SA i Location I4 ,.. A '0 Current Land Use Designation: _ SA / SA 1 po . , SA Special Area 4MI RC ,= ■ SA IND Ili 4.!Ilreftsa- nWY, .5■ cgs N. Ail IN Ilan \ . og ._ 44coo 0 600 1200 F0.1 :tea IND Bpd ,m n i MD Parcel base map Into anon p /ofa my Land Survey DapartmeM June 2003. N ning Informal ta111ed by City Staff. City of Eagan W E THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY Community Development Department The City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this information. S ai kea, 1• I ' PROPOSED 1 'JOHN DEERE'\\ ', / /:MONUMENTS1GNN..i r/47 j/ Q v R+•, EXISTING V/ 14` 8?,p6 MONUMENT SIGN X •N • ..`\ N\ N 'N N. 11111IIILLil111.111il1111i.1 N N ::C;',/,.N j s \` , FUTURE ':: In; f �'1/71 1 • 1 1 1 .\ 1 • BLOCK 5 1•. 1 NERANO EDGE i 1 BUFFER EDGE \• LOT 2 FUTURE r rr n (-r i 1]-rTrrrnTi1TJ( I ill ill;! iii L 1 JJ11if[liii1J11 i I IIIIJ±L UJ -1 --- rj u G N 9° 5 50"E 038.33 COUNTY, STATE AID tel. iv6, sb arra 0A;c ROAD) vood Professional Services, Inc gram Drive tic MN 55344 ;2537-5150 Fae 5521937-5112 0 ..+1 a44.u,1..r a r.n..4 ft.,. W u Dual ll Pula os 07/20/04 ra®>a 15519 D—= -. .4 "mad f.7: 9... ..•. CSM Properties Inc. 2573 Uns1=, AMm.Rh-194aa 150 SITE PLAN Nd1d NOIS � O LLjO COCD O Z O LJ 1 O >:z: t - CO OI- J d O w p —WJ tY� EE � Z � o 0.;QQ��Q Q J — — CC iG JF 0a--mdZp Q fn N J CD u0 ()I CID 1- Z W WF- Z • F- O eLJ LA C m W ¢ W D a °DQcnwz~ Z u..1 V Op 0 w w w z w w w w ixix CC CC CD CC l• -=CC X X Lam• >( 4.1 X LJ W w 8 J --f f- ,0-,L — O Z r SEE DETAIL A O Ln O O )- 1- F- ZCC J U to ¢ F - Z O • N O as > Z U O 2 o r L� o ¢ J H w 0O ¢ • 47 U w • d U In CD 1.2 = N 0 H h 0 U za d coo O • 0•- o O_to • C J • _— 0 - -D W 0 c W 0 O M NOIIVA I1B NOIS • 6t V 1 X 1 X C 3 2 1 2 1 2 8 y5 S 2 Y 2 2 2 0 8 8 1 i 5 5 i4 2 M 3 A 1 1 2 2 8 6 5 8 5 5 • SS R 5 a J -J U 0 U W J CC W W O CL Z Z SZ w Lai O U = -�iwi..11 W Dm 0 7 Li LM 3 W 00 Ws 0 m< �o mZ 0 m La a J¢ ¢ ~ W m ct O Z U W p W O WG Z W N w G 8 ul rO Z 2YHZ(p zw<00 o • re =)MZ 0cLJFm� U0 En H znOwWOZWQ OO W K W!Z O <�QF W N7 U�� Q W 0 V)<01 <WOUWWt~+t<„<Z Z V)dm i.?ti . `2. L� < L..„. - [V M•••1, IA 41 V)li E [wwsof l .z L — [ww4S01] .Z/t S ,f [wwlOLl] .L -,S [ww900Z] „L ,9 E E v v n E n 18" [457mm] TYP. E E ._i 0 1- > W J W V) FRONT ELEVATION ww�.9] .Z/t L -,z [wwsoc 1) F N c0 ECSD r co a LY L] F— O If) N u) U 0 zCL < (CI N— U 0 C J W - y c W (1)- WC O 0 0 M J e e 1 3 a i 1 1 5 3 5 2 1 2 2 9 W Z 0 RECEIVED SEP 212009 OLLA-i0IN11-110f Exhibit C JUN -10-2005 13:30 5 1 PHASE 5 LONE OAK DRIVE z FUTURE TENANT NAME l� •1U2 ROCHON CORP 1Y -O" 7635598101 P.02/02 71-4• the WATE "I/2• FUTURE TENANT NAME owt4t0 4D MANAO BY CSM 612-395-7000 1 z 1 :r u Y"WfTE G� MEDRIM I SIGN OA (2) REMC PANELS YL TS FLAT PC BAGK6F COPY: * 12" X 8" SILL Bi - ANCHOR WHEAT 6RADE tJ r i9 f .,___,.7-3 L 4 IT ROCK I L ANCHOR Y4HEAT a: I L1 J MONUMENT 516N ELEVATION SCALE: V2'Nr„o• 1 3 CZ' aDb EXISTING MONUMENT SIGN JOHN DEERE August 11, 2005 RE: Planned Development Amendment for Waters V Business Center Subject address: 2995 Lone Oak Drive, Suite 100 Eagan, MN 55121-1553 Existing Land Use: Multi -tenant, commercial Surrounding property zoning and land use: Multi -tenant, commercial To whom it may concern: John Deere Company 2001 W. 94th Street, Bloomington, MN 55431 USA Phone: 952-887-6336 Fax: 952-887-6244 E-mail: EhlisDavidG@JohnDeere.com David G. Ehlis Sales Branch Manager CSM Properties, Inc. of 500 Washington Ave, Minneapolis, MN has given written permission (Exhibit A & B-1) to JOHN DEERE COMPANY for a monument sign (Exhibit C) at the above named property. In doing so, this allows JOHN DEERE COMPANY to maintain their national identification requirements for corporate facilities. It is of particular importance to identify this facility with the proposed monument sign due to the fact that this facility will be drawing clients on a regular basis from many different States throughout the Midwest. The monument sign will serve not only brand identification but also as a "wayfmding" sign to the facility. This will be a benefit to the surrounding properties as there will be less confusion of traffic flow to the property since most of the clients are unfamiliar with the area. The proposed monument sign has no impact on the subject property and land use nor to City services such as sewer, water, storm run-off nor roads. Included with this proposal you will find: Two sets of 11" X 17" sign plans (Exhibit D-1) Two sets of reduced 8 'W' X 11" sign plans (Exhibit D-2) Two Sets of full scale site plans (Exhibit E-1) Two sets of reduced site plans (Exhibit E-2) Two Copies of Land Title Survey (Exhibit F) Your consideration of this amendment is appreciated. Sincerely, David Ehlis Sales Branch Manager John Deere Company - Minneapolis RECEIVED SEP 212005 Agenda Information Memo November 1, 2005, Eagan City Council Meeting B. HEARING TO CONSIDER REVOCATION OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR 4871 BISCAYNE AVENUE MAGNUM TOWING (KEVIN MELLON), ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To close the hearing and authorize staff to prepare Findings and Resolution for the revocation of the Conditional Use Permit on Lot 3, Block 1, Halley's 1st Addition located at 4871 Biscayne Avenue. Or To close the hearing and authorize staff to prepare a Resolution directing no revocation of the Conditional Use Permit on Lot 3, Block 1, Halley's 1st Addition located at 4871 Biscayne Avenue. FACTS: > On December 17, 1985, the City of Eagan approved a Conditional Use Permit for outside storage of impounded and/or towed vehicles for Kevin Mellon of Magnum Towing for Lot 3, Block 1, Halley's 1st Addition at 4871 Biscayne Avenue. > The original approval called for periodic reviews of the CUP which were performed through 1992. The City Attorney subsequently advised that CUP's cannot have set terms and, as a consequence, the most recent action relative to the property was the City Council action on March 2, 1992. A copy of the CUP reflecting that action is included in the attachments below. > On the basis of a complaint received in 2000, the City performed an investigation of operations at the property and found violations resulting in the issuance of citations that were heard in District Court in 2001. The court at that time found Mr. Mellon to be in violation of two counts under the citation, a fme was imposed. > In May of 2005, the City again received a formal complaint regarding storage alleged to be in violation of the CUP and other zoning violations at the site. An investigation was performed, violations, some existing since 2001, were identified and the property owner was given an opportunity to correct the violations. Upon re -inspection after the correction deadline of September 5, 2005, a substantial number violations remained. aoa > At their regular meeting of September 20, 2005, the City Council scheduled a hearing to consider the possible revocation of the CUP for November 1, 2005. ➢ An additional inspection of the site was performed in preparation for the November 1 Council meeting and the conditions that gave rise to the notice of non-compliance remain to be corrected. ISSUES: D The Conditional Use Permit approved in 1985 and the subsequent updates stipulated that the permit would have an expiration date. While this illustrates that the City Council intended the use to be temporary, the City Attorney has since advised that time limits cannot be placed on a CUP and, as a consequence, CUPs continue in force until such time as they are abandoned for one year or more or the City Council determines that the conditions of the CUP are not being met. D The property owner has had over two months to respond specifically to the August 5, 2005 violation warning and several years to correct the situation that resulted in a conviction and fine in 2001. ATTACHMENTS: (4) ➢ October 5, 2005 letter to theyroperty owner outlining existing violations and notice of revocation hearing on page/ 0 through ?/14. > Minutes of December 17, 1985 Council action on CUP on page p[ IS > CUP issued on March 2, 1992 on pages of / 6 through > District Court Judge Lacey's 2001 Findings of Fact and Order on pages ,through > Hard copy of PowerPoint presentation attached w/out page number. ao9 `) City of Eaall Pat Geagan MAYOR Peggy Carlson Cyndee Fields Mike Maguire 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. October 5, 2005 Kevin S. Mellon Rita A. Mellon DB/A/ Magnum Towing 4871 Biscayne Avenue Eagan, Minnesota 55123 NOTICE OF CUP VIOLATIONS AND NOTICE OF REVOCATION HEARING Dear Mr. Kevin Mellon and Ms. Rita Mellon: The City of Eagan sent to you a letter, dated August 5, 2005, notifying you of continuing violations of the Conditional Use Permit (hereinafter "CUP") for your property located at 4871 Biscayne Avenue in the City of Eagan, Minnesota, (hereinafter "Property"). The City demanded that you bring the Property into compliance with the CUP and Eagan City Code. On September 6, 2005, City staff inspected the property to determine compliance and found that violations of the Eagan City Code and the CUP continue to exist on the property. The purpose of this letter is two -fold: (1) you are hereby notified of the violations of the CUP and Eagan City Code which exists on the Property as set forth in detail below; and (2) a hearing will be held on November 1, 2005 at 6:30 p.m. or as soon thereafter as Council business permits to consider revocation of the CUP for the Property. BACK GROUND INFORMATION: On March 2, 1992, the Eagan City Council granted a Conditional Use Permit ("CUP") for the Property, legally described as Lot 3, Block 1, Halley's First Addition, according to the duly recorded plat thereof. The CUP allows for outdoor storage, subject to the following conditions: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) The permit shall expire two (2) years from the date of Council approval; Only storage of impounded and/or towed vehicles shall be allowed; No "For Sale" sign shall be displayed and no sales or repair operations shall be conducted at this site; The Conditional Use Permit and the City Council Resolution shall be recorded with the Dakota County Recorder within sixty (60) days of approval; and All other City Codes shall be applicable. A copy of the CUP is enclosed for your review and reference. NOTICE OF VIOLATIONS: On September 6, 2005 and on many occasions over the past several years prior thereto, the Eagan Code Enforcement staff inspected the Property and observed numerous violations of the CUP, as well as violations of the City Code, which constitute violations of the CUP. alo Mellon October 5, 2005 Page 2 Specifically, you are hereby notified of the following violations which presently exist on the Property: A. Eight specific vehicles are currently being stored on the property that have been on the property since 2002. The following vehicles have been continually stored on the property after they became eligible for sale or other disposition by an impound lot under Minnesota statutes, thereby constituting the storage of junk or abandoned vehicles or the operation of a junk yard in violation of the CUP and the City Code's zoning regulations*: 1) Yellow sedan with black bra, no visible plates, stored along west fence line 2) Older model rusted white sedan, no visible plates, stored along west fence line 3) Black hearse, no visible plates, stored along south fence line 4) Pale blue/yellow rusted van with blue & white round sticker in passenger -side rear window, no visible plates, stored one row in from west fence line 5) CWD 473, maroon/brown sedan, stored along west fence line 6) FMG 012, yellow/wood side station wagon with car top carrier, stored along north fence line 7) LQB 825, green Chevrolet, Corvair, stored along west fence line 8) AEP 033, white with blue GMC Sonoma pick up with rail bed. Stored along south fence line B. Numerous items, other than towed or impounded vehicles, are being stored on the property in violation of the CUP and in violation of the City Code**, including, but not limited to the following: 1) Tires, approximately 17 stacks, with approximately 8 tires per stack, stored between two semi trailers along the north fence line 2) Tires, approximately 15 stacks, with approximately 7 tires per stack, stored 1-2 rows south of the north fence line 3) One Yamaha and one Polaris snowmobile, both stored on a trailer along the north fence line 4) Trailer stored at northeast corner of the property, containing wheel and axle 5) Two cargo/semi trailers stored at northeast corner of the property 6) Trailer stored at northeast corner of the property, containing wire and scrap metal 7) Scrap metal and plastic stored in pickup truck beds along north fence line; truck plate numbers BTR 889 and 452 BEH 8) Metal U-shaped frame stored against north fence line 9) Scrap plastic and metal stored in truck topper and bed along south fence line 10) Tire rim stored on top of vehicle by tires noted in (1) 11) Blue tarp along north fence line 12) Engine hoist or metal framework stored in center of lot Mellon October 5, 2005 Page 3 13) Plastic items stored in bed of white GMC pickup, plate number AEP 033 along south fence line 14) Four bumpers stored in engine compartment of black and gold vehicle parked along east fence line (next to engine hoist or metal frame) 15) Large green wooden trailer with scrap metal stored along south fence line 16) Travel trailer stored in southeast corner of property 17) Metal racks stored on top of yellow truck in northeast corner of property C. Outdoor storage of junk vehicles (unlicensed, unregistered, or inoperable vehicles or vehicles displaying expired registration tabs), or vehicle parts and tires, and other refuse, as noted above, is in violation of City Code, Sections 10.01 and 10.51. The City of Eagan has been required to repeatedly address outdoor storage on the Property in violation of the CUP and the City Code. Additionally, in October 2001, Mr. Mellon was convicted of two misdemeanor criminal charges for unlawful outdoor storage without a conditional use permit and unlawful storage of junk vehicles and parts on the Property. City Code enforcement inspections of the Property since October 2001 have revealed continuing violations of the CUP and City Code on the Property. NOTICE OF CUP REVOCATION HEARING. You are hereby notified that based upon the September 6, 2005 inspection of the Property, the City Council, at its September 20, 2005 City Council meeting, set a Hearing to consider revocation of the Conditional Use Permit for the Property on its regular Council meeting agenda for November 1, 2005. Accordingly, the Eagan City Council will hold a hearing to consider revocation of the Conditional Use Permit for the Property on November 1, 2005 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 hearing 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) 675-5653 should you have any questions regarding this matter. Very truly yours, ohenstein Community Development Director cc: Tom Hedges, City Administrator Mary Granley, Senior Code Enforcement Technician Mellon October 5, 2005 Page 4 Sharon K. Hills, City Attorney *Outdoor storage of junk or abandoned vehicles without a CUP is in violation of the CUP and Section 11.60, subd. 14 of the City Code. Operation of a junk yard or an automobile reduction yard or auto wrecking is not a permitted, conditional or accessory use in an I-1 zone ** Outdoor storage of any moveable property is a conditional use requiring a CUP pursuant to Section 11.60, subd. 14 (C)(11) and 11.50, subd. 4. Hc lgir j Mrss co�cn. GAN CITYG COMPANY Page 8( March 2, 1992 BOTTLING pERMTT Inc.,to allow CONDITIONAL pormi dwelt B�Boulevard m' tforNU e a Conditional Use P the east side s ore the gn, t p w a used this item trill hated nem had t side aL Director Midwest Mayor E 40' tall in aLI t Industrial) Pledges �eY had recommended�c height ° f thebuslope.ilding,Norm balding over won 3• City Administrator meeting and noted that becauseening, with the airport B 1/4 of their gwith the d the application to avoid interfering Cola ked Commission at est viation Agency , applicant.it for Coca t Settling had word tions, was present represetntio approve Ind�tr`�dsstr' locatedalong the ens Suomi' Director ndding ov a motion an Ll moved, Wachter over 40' tall m condition: ante Recorder's officewithin Pawlenty Inc., to allow abs. to the follow Midawndal o�evazd and subject at the .Dakota Co Bottling it m� be recorded side of Eng This conditional actio 1' 60 days °f CouncilNAL USE PERMIT Aye: 5 Nay. 0 OOR S'TORA`GE/CONDO Towing, to allowin the SE /4 O ion at MAGNUM TOWING/OUTDOOR Use perms for 'Magnum Biscayne To Alam Commission d this item i a located along the west side of the Advisory t was not prose introduce Addition, had been tree Advisory Mayor Egan Kalley's 1st es said � item royal. 1, Hedges mm d a t for Malum Towing Block endo PP a t w conditions: tdoor n Lot 3, City Administrator had reco storage ° McCrea move , Awada and they conditional o the following con of Section to approve the COd subject t. thou February Avrada seconded, a motions lst Addition, an McCrea moved, Lot 3, Block 1, Hall Y' Council approval e on the date of ears from to allow outdoor story expire two y allowed it shall exp Iles shay � � inducted at 1. The perm ended and/or towed vehicles ratios shah / displayed and no sales or repair opo Only storage °f rmP° the Dakota 2 No Tor Sale sib` shall resolution shall be recorded °' 3• this site. it and City Council conditional use 60 days of approval This 4. CountyRecorder applicable. other City Codes shall 5. be 5 Nay 0 TAt� �S�IA,TES Aye: : .MIDWEST RES ADDITION own Centre PRELIMINARY Wt C/ 70 - tlT' ates%r enter} Mayor LIMlN�O CENTRE for Midwest Restaurant (ComAssociates �icth��e d vest of Preliminary Plat,district, E introduced this lot and one on t ouo approximately 32 }peer or veno, m a CSC item � of • 10 -12th Addrttont consisting � � gpermit to allow on sal if , acres and a conditional Ond' nal P 17 Council Minutes December 17, "985 GROUP W UPDATE Jim Commers of Group W was present, as was Burnsville/Eagan Cable Administrator to update the progress of the cable installation within the City of noted that about 200 miles of underground cable installed and 122 miles of overhead construction had Ralph ..Campbell, the City Council regarding Eagan.' Mr. Commers installation had been been completed. As of November 24, 1985, there were 3,368 customers in Eagan with 7,855 subscribers in both Burnsville and Eagan. Mr Commers also discussed possible extension of City offerings, and noted that the Eagan Report had been very successful, starring Pam Wold and City Administrator Tom Hedges. He noted also that there had been an inter -connect contract entered into with WCCO to offer connection to neighboring communities. Ralph Campbell also made a presentation and updated the Council on activities of the Cable Administrator. MAGNUM TOWING - CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - HALLEY'S 1ST ADDITION The application of Kevin Mellon of Magnum Towing for conditional use permit for outside storage on Lot 3, Block 1, Halley's 1st Addition came to the Council. Tom Colbert introduced the application and Mr. Mellon was present. Councilman Thomas suggested that a yearly renewal be required of the applicant to insure compliance with City requirements. The Advisory Planning Commission recommended approval, subject to certain conditions at its meeting on November 26, 1985. The police chief strongly recommended a chain link fence around the installation and that no towing operations be allowed until the fence is installed. Mr. Mellon indicated that he could only accomplish temporary installation at the present time, because of the frozen ground. Upon motion by Egan, seconded Thomas, it was resolved that the application be approved, subject to the following: 1. The chain link fence shall be temporarily installed before any vehicles are towed onto the property and further, subject to the police department's approval, and that permanent fencing be installed by April 1, 1986. 2. Adequate dust control measures shall be provided to the City staff's satisfaction. 3. The parcel shall include storage of vehicles and other impounded items only. 4. All applicable City ordinances shall be adhered to. 5. The conditional use permit shall be renewable annually. 6. In the event that the conditions are not complied with, that the City Council may then automatically revoke the conditional use permit. All members voted in favor. oWS 8 1 IRA -A: OF MINUTES OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EAGAN DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA 1043018 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 March 2, 1992, at 7:00 p.m. The following members were present: Egan, Wachter, Awada, McCrea, and Pawlenty; the following were absent: none. * McCrea introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: CITY OF EAGAN Resolution approving a Conditional Use Permit allowing outdoor storage for the property described on Exhibit A attached hereto, and attaching conditions thereto WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes 462.357 the City of Eagan has adopted zoning regulations to control land uses and performance standards throughout the City. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, that a Conditional Use Permit is hereby approved subject to the conditions as set forth in the Conditional Use Permit attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference. DATED this 2nd day of March, 1992. (Seal) CITY OF EAGAN By: Its J. VanOverbeke ty Clerk The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Awada and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor: Egan, Wachter, Awada, McCrea, and Pawlenty; and the following voted against the same: none. a�� STATE OF MIN NESU i A) : ss COUNTY OF DAKOTA ) On this Z/F7 day of /71,,.CW , 19, before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared E.J. VanOverbeke to me personally known, who being by me duly sworn, did say that he is the City Clerk of the City of Eagan, the municipality named in the foregoing instrument, and that the seal affixed on behalf of said municipality by authority of its City Council and said City Clerk acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deed of said municipality. This ✓v^^cumen~i waS drafted by: City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Box 21199 Eagan, MN 55121 a/ 7 EXHIBIT A CITY OF EAGAN CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WHEREAS, Magnum Towing has complied with all the requirements of the City of Eagan necessary for obtaining a Conditional Use Permit. NOW THEREFORE, By order of the City Council of the City of Eagan, Dakota County,Minnesota, and by virtue hereof a Conditional Use Permit is authorized as follows: 1. Permitting a Conditional Use for outdoor storage within the confines of a "Light Industrial" zone. 2. Said Conditional Use Permit shall apply to the following described property: Lot 3, Block 1, Halley's 1st Addition 3. Said Conditional Use Permit shall be for a period of two (2) years starting March 2, 1992. 4. Said Conditional Use Permit shall be subject to conformance with the Eagan City Code and with the conditions set forth herein to include, but not limited to: a. This Conditional Use Permit shall become effective upon the recording of said permit and Council resolution with the Dakota County Recorder and documentation of said recording provided to the City. b. The permit shall expire two years from the date of Council approval. c. Only storage of impounded and/or towed vehicles shall be allowed. aig d. No "For Sale" signs shall be displayed and no sales/repair operations shall be conducted at this site. e. This Conditional Use Permit and City Council Resolution shall be recorded with the Dakota County Recorder within 60 days of approval. f. All other City Codes. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 2nd day of March, 1992. CITY OF EAGAN A Minnesota Municipal Corporation By: James L. Sturm Its City Planner STATE OF MINNESOTA) :ss. COUNTY OF DAKOTA) On this 2nd day of March, 1992, before me a Notary Public within and for said County, personally appeared JAMES L. STURM, to me personally known, who being by me duly sworn, did say that he is the City Planner of the City of Eagan, the municipality named in the foregoing instrument, and said City Planner acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deed of said municipality. !JM— Fa Q.1!'.OTA n Exp '. ° - I hereby verify that the above said Conditional Use Permit was recorded at the County Recorder's Office on , 19 • BY: ITS: aao 0 00 CC �H U W '10* 0 LL. 0 0;� _ 2 c U OZ Z }- j,w0 c2 a c=nQLL w ¢=w O 00= DO NOT REMOVE 10/24/2005 16:03 9524323780 SEVERSON SHELDON 12/11/01 15:08 FAX 952 891. 7285 DAKOTA CTY DISTRICT CT i AV CITY ATTY PAGE 09/13 2002/006 STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF DAKOTA FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT State of Minnesota, File No.: T1-01-63020 City of Eagan, Plaintiff, -vs- Kevin -vs-Itevin S. Mellon, Defendant. FINDINGS OF FACT AND ORDER The above -captioned matter came on for trial to the Court on petty misdemeanor charges. The matter was heard by the undersigned or. the let day of October 2001 at the Judicial Center, Hastings, Minnesota. The plaintiff appeared represented by Assistant City Attorney Sharon Hills; the defendant appeared pro se. The Couet having heard the evidence produced at trial does now make the following: Findings of Fact 1. That for a period between September 26, 2000 and April 5, 2001 the defendant stored motor vehicles other than impounded or towed vehicles without first obtaining a. conditional use permit therefore for the premises at 4871 Biscayne Avenue, Eagan a a a FlLEO MOW VAN A. BROSTROM, Coun Anil OCT, 2 2011 8Y .,ifiir k . 10/24/2005 16:03 9524323780 12/11/01 '15:09 FAX 962 891 7285 SEVERSON SHELDON DAKOTA CTY DISTRICT CT -► AV CITY ATTY PAGE 10/13 1 1003/006 Minnesota, legally described as Lot 3, Block 1, Halleye First Addition according to the plat thereof upon file and on the record in• the Office of the County Recorder, Dakota County, Minnesota. That between the period between September 2000 and April 5, 2001 the defendant intentionally parked or stowed motor vehicles that were unlicensed, unregistered, inoperable, or displayed expired registration tabs at the premises located at. 4871 Biscayne Avenue, Eagan, Minnesota, legally described as set forth in Finding 1 above. 3. That the defendant is guilty of unlawful outdoor storage under Count Two of the Complaint and unlawful storage of junk vehicles and parts under Count Five of the Complaint. 4. The defendant is not guilty of the charges in Counts One, Three and Four of the Complaint. Order 1. Counts One, Three and Four of the Complaint are herewith dismissed. 10/24/2005 16:03 9524323780 SEVERSON SHELDON 12/11/01 15:09 FAX 952 891 7285 DAKOTA CTX JTSTRICT CT 4 AV CPTY A:tTX 2. The defendant herein is found guilty of the violation -of unlawful storage; Count Two, and unlawful storage of junk vehicles and parts, Count Five. LET JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION.BE ENTERED HEREIN. 3. The defendant shall appear for sentencing by the Court on October 31, 2001 at 9:00 a.m. at the Judicial Center, Hastings, Minnesota. 4. The Court finds that the offenses in Counts One and Two arose out of the same set. of facts and that sentence shall be imposed only on Count Two and that no sentence shall be imposed on Count Five. The defendant may submit a monetary fine in the amoiunt of $300.00 prior to. October 31, 2001.. In the event that such fine is paid prior -to that date and time the defendant need not appear for sentencing. 5. The Memorandum herewith attached forms a part of �t:1:5 ter -,Order . DAT.fT,a' rt' K» 2 001. r _ . i •r- . ., 1 - BY T COURT e omas R. La y District Court PAGE 11/13 Q004/006 aav 10/24/2005 16:03 9524323780 SEVERSON SHELDON 12/11/01 16:09 FAX 962 891 7255 DAKOTA CTY DISTRICT CT 4 AV CITY ATTY Memorandum The defendant was issued a Conditional Use Permit for the property legally described as Lot 3', Block 1, Baileys First Addition, Dakota County, Minnesota according to the plat thereof upon'file and of record in the Office of the County Recorder. The street address of this property is 4871 Biscayne Avenue, Eagan, Minnesota. The Conditional Ube Permit was issued on March.2, 1992 and has been in existence since such time. The Conditional Use Permit, hereinafter "CUP," provided in Section 4(c) that "Only storage of impounded and/or towed vehicles shall be allowed." in Section 4(d) the CUP provided that "no 'for sale' signs shall be displayed and no sales/repair operations shall be conducted at this site." No evidence has been produced which indicates that the motor vehicles that are stored upon defendant's property and the other vehicles' such as trailers were not brought there as either impounded or towed vehicles. However, Minnesota Statute SS 1688.01--1688.101 provides for the handling and disposition of abandoned or junk vehicles. Minnesota Statute § 1688.051 provides for the sale of impounded vehicles forty-five days after notice to the owner it the vehicle is determined to be an unauthorized vehicle that was not impounded by the City of Minneapolis aas PAGE 12/13 0006/006 10/24/2005 16:03 9524323780 SEVERSON SHELDON 12(11/0.1 15:09 FAX 952 891 7285 DAKOTA CTY DISTRICT CT 4 AV CJ,:1,'Y Arry • Saint Paul. Minnesota Statute § 168E1.08 covers disposition of.abandoned-or junk vehicles by the Impound Lot. The statute provides that after forty-five days the owner -of an Impound Lot may dispose of the impounded vehicle. In this case the evidence shows that vehicles remained on the lot owned by defendant from September 26, 2000 through April 3, 2001, and, in fact, were still present on September 18, 2001, the last date the plaintiff's code enforcement technician inspected the defendant's property. The continued storage of these motor vehicles after they became eligible for sale and disposition by the Impound Lot owner converts the vehicles from a permitted . use under the CUP issued herein to an outdoor storage - facility of abandoned vehicles. This converts the defendant's property -into a junkyard that is not a permitted use under its CUP. T.R.L. PAGE 13/13 fJ oos/oos Agenda Information Memo November 1, 2005 Eagan City Council Meeting IX. NEW RUNWAY/AIRPORT UPDATE ACTIONS TO BE CONSIDERED: This item is for informational purposes only. No formal action is needed. FACTS: ➢ Runway 17/35, also referred to as the North/South Runway, went into operation at noon on Thursday, October 27, 2005. ➢ On the afternoon of the 27th, the City received approximately 10 calls and one e-mail from residents concerned about the noise. • Residents who contact the City are encouraged to file an official noise complaint through the MAC. The MAC tracks the complaints and provides a monthly report showing the locations of the complaints within the City. The ARC reviews this report monthly. > The City is currently assisting the MAC staff as they prepare to host their quarterly public input meeting on Thursday, November 10. • Per the direction of the Council, this is the final time that the New Runway /Airport Update is scheduled to appear as a standing item on the regular City Council agenda since the runway is now in operation. Staff will continue to provide updates about the new runway through the Informative and Administrative Memos. AGENDA CITY OF EAGAN REGULAR MEETING OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY EAGAN MUNICIPAL CENTER NOVEMBER 1, 2005 A. CALL TO ORDER B. ADOPT AGENDA aa.% Agenda Information Memo Eagan Economic Development Authority Meeting November 1, 2005 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. APPROVE MINUTES ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the minutes of the October 18, 2005 EDA meeting as presented or modified. ATTACHMENTS: • Minutes of the October 18, 2005 EDA meeting on pages c2 30 ."0.) 3/ 0 MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE EAGAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Eagan, Minnesota October 18, 2005 A meeting of the Eagan Economic Development Authority was held on Tuesday, October 18, 2005 at the Eagan Municipal Center. Present were President Geagan, Commissioner Fields, Commissioner Tilley, and Commissioner Maguire. Commissioner Carlson was absent. Also present were Executive Director Hedges, Community Development Director Hohenstein, City Planner Ridley, City Engineer Matthys, and City Attorney Dougherty. ADOPT AGENDA Commissioner Tilley moved, Commissioner Fields seconded a motion to approve the agenda as presented. Aye: 4 Nay:0 APPROVE MINUTES Commissioner Tilley moved, Commissioner Maguire seconded a motion to adopt a resolution approving the minutes of the September 20, 2005 EDA meeting as presented. Aye: 4 Nay:0 NEW BUSINESS CEDAR GROVE REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT AUTHORIZE STAFF TO ENTER INTO NEGOTIATIONS FOR THE POTENTIAL ACQUISITION OF THE BUILDING D PROPERTY OF THE CEDARVALE PROFESSIONAL BUILDINGS (EAGAN EYE CLINIC), 3908 CEDARVALE DRIVE Community Development Director Hohenstein discussed the potential acquisition of the Eagan Eye Property at 3908 Cedarvale Drive. Commissioner Fields moved, Commissioner Tilley seconded a motion to authorize staff to enter into negotiations for the possible acquisition of the Eagan Eye Clinic, 3908 Cedarvale Drive as a voluntary sale to the EDA for future redevelopment purposes, subject to the acquisition of the other condo unit(s) in the same building. Aye: 4 Nay: 0 CEDAR GROVE REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT WAIVER OF PARTIAL MONTH'S RENT, EAGAN PET CLINIC 3990 CEDAR GROVE PARKWAY Community Development Director Hohenstein discussed the waiver of a partial month's rent under the lease agreement for the Eagan Pet Clinic. X3 0 Commissioner Fields moved, Commissioner Maguire seconded a motion to approve a waiver of a partial month's rent under the lease agreement for the Eagan Pet Clinic for property located at 3990 Cedar Grove Parkway to permit occupancy through November 7, 2005. Aye: 4 Nay: 0 CEDAR GROVE REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT DIRECTION REGARDING CORE AREA MASTER DEVELOPER DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT SCHAFER RICHARDSON Community Development Director Hohenstein reviewed the current status of negotiations with Schafer Richardson for the Core Area redevelopment of the Cedar Grove Redevelopment District. Commissioner Fields moved, Commissioner Tilley seconded a motion to approve the master development agreement in concept, on the basis of the deal points outlined on pages 178A -178C in the EDA packet, with the qualification that the developer fee be paid in two parts (half after the completion of Phase 3 and the balance at the end of Phase 5), that the minimum building height for the structure in Phase 5 be 85 feet and that the project not include single family detached housing (that the residential units conform to the Cedar Grove District requirement that housing be in buildings of four or more units). Aye: 4 Nay: 0 There was no other business. OTHER BUSINESS ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Fields moved, Commissioner Tilley seconded a motion to adjourn the meeting at 8:40 p.m. Aye: 4 Nay: 0 Date Executive Director If you need these minutes in an alternative form such as large print, Braille, audio tape, etc, please contact the City of Eagan, 3830 Pilot Knob Road, Eagan, MN 55122, 651-675-5000. The City of Eagan is committed to the policy that all persons have equal access to its programs, services, activities, facilities and employment without regard to race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, disability, age, sexual orientation, marital status or status with regard to public assistance. t3/ Agenda Memo Eagan Economic Development Authority Meeting November 1, 2005 1. NORTHEAST EAGAN REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT — PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH MCGOUGH COMPANIES AND THE PUBLIC PURPOSE OF THE ACOUISITION AND ASSEMBLY OF PROPERTY LOCATED ON BLUE GENTIAN ROAD AND BLUE GENTIAN CIRCLE ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To hold and close the public hearing to consider a development agreement with McGough Companies including consideration of the public purpose of acquisition of property located on Blue Gentian Road and Blue Gentian Circle and to direct preparation of findings of fact for approval or denial of the agreement to be considered at a future City Council -EDA meeting. FACTS: • The City has taken steps to bring about the redevelopment of the Northeast Eagan Redevelopment Area, including public improvements, environmental reviews, comprehensive plan and zoning modifications and the initiation of redevelopment activity in a portion of the district consistent with the City's plans for the area. • The City has been in discussion with the McGough Development regarding the redevelopment of the portion of the district that lays between Blue Gentian Road and the I -494/I -35E interchange for the possible construction of a multi -story class A office building. Under the TIF development plan's general terms, staff and the developer have negotiated a draft development agreement to be considered by the EDA and City Council. • McGough Development has begun to acquire and assemble properties in the redevelopment area. Several properties have yet to be acquired and their acquisition is expected to be necessary for the successful redevelopment of the overall site. • The development agreement covers issues including the level of TIF assistance that may be provided to the developer and the potential for the developer to request that the City use eminent domain to acquire the remaining parcels upon presentation of evidence of good faith efforts to do so. In cases in which property may be acquired for resale to a private entity and in which eminent domain may be necessary to do so, the local unit of government must hold a public hearing to take testimony and to make findings as to the public purpose of entering into the agreement. • At its meeting of September 20, 2005, the EDA and City Council scheduled a public hearing for its meeting of November 1, 2005 to consider the development agreement. Notices have been mailed and published. Several of the property owners have been in contact with staff and one property owner has submitted written comments to date. • General facts concerning the redevelopment area and the redevelopment agreement are as follows: • The City performed an analysis of properties in northern Eagan in the general area of Hwy 55, Hwy 149 and I-494 and found that properties within the area met the standards necessary under Minnesota statutes to qualify as a redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District. • On the basis of those findings, the City created TIF District 2-4 on February 9, 2002. The purpose for the District under the TIF Plan is to provide consistency of land use planning and improvement of existing conditions to bring about development consistent with the Comprehensive Guide Plan designation for Business Park. The proposed project would consist of a multi- story Class A Office Building ranging between 175,000 and 287,000 square feet and related site improvements. • The TIF District formed by that action included certain properties located on Blue Gentian Road and Blue Gentian Circle. McGough Development has begun to acquire property in the area and has proposed to implement a redevelopment of the area consistent with the purposes identified in the TIF Plan for the District. To date all but five of the properties within the District have been acquired by the company. • McGough Development is obligated under the agreement to demonstrate to the City that it has exhausted good faith efforts to acquire the properties within that portion of the Redevelopment District privately, before the City will consider participating in property acquisition. • The TIF Plan makes a finding that but -for creation of the District, the intended redevelopment activity would not happen. The City's Redevelopment Consultant has reviewed the financial proforma for the proposed development and has prepared a memo indicating, likewise, that the specific proposed redevelopment contemplated by the agreement would not occur but -for the assistance outlined in the TIF Development Agreement. • The TIF assistance to the project will range from $2.8 million to $4.8 million depending upon the size of the building constructed and whether structured parking is included as part of the project. • More detailed background is included in the City Attorney's memo, which is included in the attachments. • If the City Council and EDA determine on the basis of the record and the information available to them that the redevelopment should move forward under the terms of the agreement, they should direct the preparation of findings to that effect to be considered at the next City Council and EDA meeting. a33 ATTACHMENTS: • Redevelopment District map on page • City Attorney's background memo on pages –'09 • Documentation of McGough efforts to acquire the remaining properties in the redevelopment area covered by the agreement on pages ,c/f 9 —213 • Ci Redevelop 7 ntConsultant's memo regarding the "but -for" finding %Q on page , oC 7 • Development Agreement including Exhibits F& on pages 7 3 • Correspondence from Patricia Pavlik on pages 9� aa1 �' 1 r ■� wt 4 , 1 a- 1 � wg . 1 . � N L •'I $ SEVERSON, SHELDON, DOUGHERTY & MOLENDA, P.A. SUITE 600 7300 WEST 147TH STREET APPLE VALLEY, MINNESOTA 55124-7580 (952) 432-3136 TELEFAX NUMBER (952) 432-3780 E-MAIL huuskog@seversonsheldon.com TO: Jon Hohenstein, Community Development Director FROM: Gary Huusko, Assistant City Attorney DATE: October 27, 2005 RE: Background for Public Hearing on EDA — MG Eagan, LLC Development Agreement and condemnation of Properties. Our File No. 206-23506 The Notice of Hearing has been published and sent to the property owners pursuant to MINN. STAT. § 469.012, Subd. 6 (2002). On November 1st, the public hearing will be held. At that time, the EDA will be need to do the following: • Consider and approve the Development Agreement with MG Eagan, LLC; • Receive public comment on the acquisition of the Properties by eminent domain; • Make sufficient Findings and Conclusions to support the acquisition. The general relevant information that should be considered by the EDA includes the history of the establishment of the TIF District, the ensuing lawsuit and the Court's decision (attached), the good faith efforts by MG Eagan/McGough in acquiring the properties, and the City's plan for the development area. Specifically, relevant background to the discussion is as follows: Notice of Hearing • The Economic Development Authority published in the requisite legal newspaper the Notice of Hearing on October 15, 2005, which is no more than 30 days nor less than 10 days prior to the hearing by the Economic Development Authority to a 36 consider acquisition of the Properties identified above and below by exercise of the Economic Development Authority's powers of eminent domain and for approval of the Development Agreement with MG Eagan, LLC for property located in the Northeast Eagan Redevelopment District on Blue Gentian Road and Blue Gentian Circle. • The Economic Development Authority sent the Notice of Hearing to each Property owner, by Certified Mail and by First Class United States Mail on October 12, 2005, which is no more than 30 days nor less than 10 days prior to the hearing by the Economic Development Authority to consider acquisition of the Properties identified above and below by exercise of the Economic Development Authority's powers of eminent domain and for approval of the Development Agreement with MG Eagan, LLC for property located in the Northeast Eagan Redevelopment District on Blue Gentian Road and Blue Gentian Circle. Development Agreement — MG Eagan, LLC • The City has been in discussion with the MG Eagan, LLC regarding the redevelopment of a portion of the Northeast Eagan Redevelopment District for the possible construction of a multi -story class A office building. • The Economic Development Authority is considering entering into a Development Agreement with MG Eagan, LLC for the redevelopment of the Northeast Eagan Redevelopment District. • MG Eagan, LLC has begun to acquire and assemble properties in the redevelopment area. Several properties have yet to be acquired that are expected to be necessary for the successful redevelopment of the overall site, to wit: the properties located on Blue Gentian Circle and Blue Gentian Road, to wit: 990 Blue Gentian Circle - PID#: 100020004026; 1027 Blue Gentian Circle - PID#: 100020004032; 1020 Blue Gentian Circle - PID#: 100020001026; 1030 Blue Gentian Circle - PID #: 100020006032; PID#: 100020005032; and PID#: 100020003032 (the "Properties"). • The Development Agreement covers issues including the potential for the developer to request that the City use eminent domain to acquire the remaining parcels upon presentation of evidence of good faith efforts to do so. • The redevelopment will increase the tax base, increase employment, modernize outdated and incompatible buildings, and further the City's ultimate objective of creating an economically viable redevelopment project. • In order to make the Properties suitable and available for economic development uses and purposes, the Authority needs to develop and improve the Properties in the Northeast Eagan Redevelopment District on Blue Gentian Road and Blue Gentian Circle. a37 • The conceptual development plan of the Developer for the Development District, including the Properties, is generally in conformance with the City's Comprehensive Guide Plan, zoning and land use ordinances and appears to be consistent with the surrounding development and development plans for the area. • The Redevelopment District, including the Properties on Blue Gentian Road and Blue Gentian Circle, is proper and desirable to establish and develop within the City. • The properties considered to be acquired by the Authority will be acquired for public uses and public purposes and that the taking is necessary and convenient in furtherance of a redevelopment project within the City. Best Efforts by MG Eagan to acquire Properties • McGough Development has made several offers to purchase the respective Properties, each at a higher dollar amount than the previous offer. • The final offers made by McGough ranged from 1.7 to 2.5 times the total assessed values of the respective Properties. • All of these offers were rejected by the respective Property owners. • During the course of negotiations, McGough Development requested assistance from the Mediation Center for Dispute Resolution. (At the time of packet preparation, we haven't received from McGoughMG Eagan, LLC or their attorney definitive information as to the acceptance or resolution of that offer). • MG Eagan, LLC has made substantial efforts to acquire the Properties by negotiated purchase, but has been unable to purchase the Properties. As part of its action, the Council will need to determine whether the developer has met the best efforts requirement in the agreement and will be unable to purchase the Properties without the assistance of the eminent domain authority of the Economic Development Authority. Structurally Substandard Properties • As a requirement in creating the TIF District, the City found that the Properties are structurally substandard and the resolution establishing the TIF district included the findings and supporting documentation required by Minn. Stat. § 469.175, subd. 3 (2000), including the property inspection report prepared by Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates, an engineering firm. • The Properties were the subject of litigation arising from the creation of the TIF District Meiling, et. al. v. City of Eagan, 664 NW2d 403 (Minn. Ct. App. 2003) wherein the Court concluded that the City's finding that the Properties are structurally substandard was supported by the record and was not arbitrary or capricious. • Relevant facts supporting the finding that the Properties are structurally substandard include: 3 - The Properties are not connected to City water or City sewer. - The Properties are all located on an unpaved street with no curbs, gutters, or storm drainage structures. - The Properties insulation and windows are substandard. - The buildings on the Properties have water provided by a well and each have a septic system. - The cost of modifying the buildings on the Properties to satisfy the building code applicable to new homes would be greater than 15% of the cost of constructing a similar building on each site. • The Properties located within the Redevelopment District on Blue Gentian Road and Blue Gentian Circle are blighted, that the buildings located on the properties are structurally substandard and that the redevelopment of the Properties will lead to substantial economic development. �3g Reiling, et. al. v. City of Eagan, 664 NW2d 403 (Minn. Ct. App. 2003) STATE OF MINNESOTA IN COURT OF APPEALS CX -03-249 Roger Reiling, et al., Appellants, vs. City of Eagan, Respondent. Filed July 1, 2003 Affirmed Robert H. Schumacher,. Judge Dakota County District Court File No. C4027356 Michael F. Swensen, 1721 Mount Curve Avenue, Minneapolis, MN 55403 (for appellants) George C. Hoff, Hoff, Barry & Kuderer, P.A., 160 Flagship Corporate Center, 775 Prairie Center Drive, Eden Prairie, MN 55344 (for respondent) Judge. Considered and decided by Kalitowski, Presiding Judge, Randall, Judge, and Schumacher, SYLLABUS Minn. Stat. § 469.1771, subd. 1 (2000), confers original jurisdiction upon the district court to review a municipality's determination of a tax -increment financing district. OPINION ROBERT H. SCHUMACHER, Judge Appellants Roger and Gladys Reiling, Ray and Marilyn Sandford, Patricia and Frank Pavlik, and Ray -Mar Rental challenge the district court's grant of summary judgment dismissing their claim, alleging that respondent City of Eagan improperly included their property in a redevelopment tax increment financing (TIF) district. By notice of review, respondent argues the district court lacked subject -matter jurisdiction to review respondent's quasi-judicial TIF determination. We affirm. FACTS By resolution passed in February 2002, the Eagan city council created a redevelopment TIF district pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 469.174, subd. 10 (2000). Minnesota State Highway 55 bisects the district into a northern area that includes primarily residential property owned and inhabited by appellants and a southern area occupied primarily by commercial and industrial property. A municipality may create a redevelopment TIF district only after finding by resolution that at least 70% of the parcels in the district are occupied by improvements covering at least 15% of the area of each parcel and that at least 50% of the buildings, excluding outbuildings, are "structurally substandard." Minn. Stat. § 469.174, subd. 10(a)(1)(e). A building is considered structurally substandard if the cost of modifying the building to satisfy the building code applicable to new buildings is greater than 15% of the cost of constructing a new structure of the same square footage and type on the site. Id., subd. 10(c). In determining whether a building is structurally substandard, a municipality may consider reasonably available evidence, such as the size, type, and age of the building, the average cost of plumbing, electrical, or structural repairs, or other similar reliable evidence. * * * An interior inspection of the property is not required, if the municipality finds.that (1) the municipality or authority is unable to gain access to the property after using its best efforts to obtain permission from the party that owns or controls the property; and (2) the evidence otherwise supports a reasonable conclusion that the building is structurally substandard. Id. A TIF redevelopment district can be comprised of "contiguous or noncontiguous" geographic areas. Id., subd. 9. If a redevelopment TIF district consists of two or more noncontiguous areas, each area must independently meet the statutory definition of a redevelopment district. Id., subd. 10(f). The terms "contiguous" and "noncontiguous" are not defined in any of the applicable statutes. Respondent's resolution establishing the redevelopment TIF district included the findings and supporting documentation required by Minn. Stat. § 469.175, subd. 3 (2000). Among the materials before the city council was a property inspection report prepared by Bonestroo, Rosene, Anderlik & Associates, an engineering firm. The Bonestroo report noted that appellants' residential parcels, on the north side of highway 55, are all located on an unpaved street with no curbs, gutters, or storm drainage structures and that none of appellants' residences are served by municipal sewer or water services. The report concluded the proposed redevelopment TIF district met the statutory criteria for a redevelopment district and that, without exception, the cost of modifying appellants' buildings to satisfy the building code applicable to new homes would be greater than 15% of the cost of constructing a similar building on each site. After respondent passed the resolution, appellants brought an action in district court seeking a temporary injunction prohibiting respondent from including their parcels in the redevelopment TIF district. Appellants argued highway 55 divides the district into noncontiguous areas and that each area must independently meet the statutory definition of a redevelopment district as required by section 469.174, subd. 10(f). Appellants contended their area, considered independently, did not meet the definition and must be excluded from the district. Appellants also challenged the methodology used by Bonestroo in determining appellants' properties were structurally substandard. The court issued the injunction. Respondent brought a motion for summary judgment, arguing the district court lacked subject -matter jurisdiction to review respondent's quasi-judicial TIF determination, and, if jurisdiction did lie, the court must uphold respondent's decision as reasonable and supported by the record. The district court granted respondent's motion and dismissed appellants' complaint as a matter of law, finding highway 55 does not divide the TIF redevelopment district into noncontiguous areas and there was a reasonable factual basis in the record to support respondent's findings in support of including appellants' property in the district. Appellants now challenge the grant of summary judgment and request a remand to the district court for further proceedings. By notice of review, respondent challenges the district court's jurisdiction to review respondent's TIF determination. ISSUES 1. Did the district court have subject -matter jurisdiction to review respondent's determination of a tax -increment fmancing district? 2. Was respondent's inclusion of appellants' property in the redevelopment tax - increment financing district reasonable and supported by substantial evidence? ANALYSIS 1. Respondent argues the district court lacked subject -matter jurisdiction to review respondent's inclusion of appellants' property within the redevelopment TIF district. We disagree. "Whenever it appears by suggestion of the parties or otherwise that the court lacks jurisdiction of the subject matter, the court shall dismiss the action." Minn. R. Civ. P. 12.08(c). We note that although the district court stated in its order that it would not address respondent's jurisdictional challenge, it nonetheless assumed jurisdiction by issuing an order resolving the dispute. Subject -matter jurisdiction is a question of law, which this court reviews de novo. Handicraft Block Ltd. P'ship v. City of Minneapolis, 611 N.W.2d 16, 19 (Minn. 2000). A municipality acts in a quasi-judicial capacity when it determines that property meets the definition of a redevelopment TIF district under Minn. Stat. §§ 469.174, subd. 10, 469.175, subd. 3 (2000). Walser Auto Sales, Inc. v. City of Richfield, 635 N.W.2d 391, 401 (Minn. App. 2001), affd, 644 N.W.2d 425 (Minn. 2002). "[A]bsent statutory authority for a different process," a party may obtain review of a quasi-judicial decision only by writ of certiorari to the court of appeals. Willis v. County of Sherburne, 555 N.W.2d 277, 282 (Minn. 1996). The authority of the district court to review such decisions is jurisdictional. Mowry v. Young, 565 N.W.2d 717, 719 (Minn. App. 1997), review denied (Minn. Sept. 18, 1997). In its appellate brief, respondent asserted no statute authorizes a process for review of municipal TIF decisions other than by writ of certiorari to this court. But the TIF statute's enforcement provision provides: The owner of taxable property located in the city * * * in which the tax increment financing district is located may bring suit for equitable relief or for damages * * * arising out of a failure of a municipality or authority to comply with the provisions of sections 469.174 to 469.1798, or related provisions of this chapter. Minn. Stat. § 469.1771, subd. 1(a) (2000). Respondent argued this provision does not confer jurisdiction upon the district court because the statutory authorization to "bring suit for equitable relief or for damages" does not specifically designate an action in district court. We do not find respondent's interpretation of the statute compelling. When statutory language is not reasonably susceptible to more than one interpretation, we must give effect to its plain meaning as a manifestation of legislative intent. Kersten v. Minn. Mut. Life. Ins. Co., 608 N.W.2d 869, 874-75 (Minn. 2000); Tuma v. Comm'r of Econ. Sec., 386 N.W.2d 702, 706 (Minn. 1986). It is true that section 469.1771, subd. 1(a), does not contain the words "district court." Cf Minn. Stat. § 462.361, subd. 1 (2000) (authorizing individuals aggrieved by municipal planning decisions to seek "an appropriate remedy in the district court"). We nonetheless believe the process and remedies contemplated by section 469.1771, subd. 1(a) — "bring[ing] suit for equitable relief or for damages" — reasonably permit only one interpretation, i.e., the district court has jurisdiction over a challenge to a municipal TIF determination in the first instance. Minnesota district courts have "original jurisdiction" to hear requests for equitable relief. Holmberg v. Holmberg, 588 N.W.2d 720, 724 (Minn. 1999); see also DeLa Rosa v. DeLa Rosa, 309 N.W.2d 755, 758 (Minn. 1981) (stating district court's equitable jurisdiction gives court "inherent power to grant equitable relief'). Similarly, the district court has broad discretion to determine damages and "will not be reversed except for a clear abuse of discretion." Admiral Merchs. Motor Freight, Inc. v. O'Connor & Hannan, 494 N .W.2d 261, 267 (Minn. 1992) (citation omitted). The statutory provision in section 469.1771, subd. 1(a) authorizing claimants to "bring suit" does not plainly, commonly, .or reasonably designate an appeal to this court, either by notice of review or by writ of certiorari. We therefore conclude the language of section 469.1771, subd. 1(a), unambiguously confers jurisdiction upon the district court to review municipal TIF determinations. 2. Appellants challenge the district court's grant of summary judgment to respondent, arguing that highway 55 divided the TIF district into noncontiguous parts and there ass was insufficient evidence in the record to support respondent's decision to include appellants' property in the redevelopment TIF district. Summary judgment is appropriate when a district court determines that "there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that either party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law." Minn. R. Civ. P. 56.03. This court reviews a grant of summary judgment de novo to determine whether there are any genuine issues of material fact and whether the district court erred in applying the law. Zip Sort, Inc. v. Comm'r of Revenue, 567 N.W.2d 34, 37 (Minn. 1997). No genuine issue of material fact exists "[w]here the record taken as a whole could not lead a rational trier of fact to fmd for the nonmoving party." DLH, Inc. v. Russ, 566 N.W.2d 60, 69 (Minn. 1997) (alteration in original) (quoting Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574, 587, 106 S. Ct. 1348, 1356 (1986)). Judicial review of respondent's quasi-judicial decision is limited to a determination of whether respondent "erred as a matter of law, issued a decision unsupported by substantial evidence, or acted arbitrarily or capriciously." Walser, 635 N.W.2d at 401 (quotation omitted). The reviewing court may consider only the evidence in the record before respondent when the decision was made. See Dietz v. Dodge County, 487 N.W.2d 237, 239 (Minn. 1992). Appellants argue the district court erred by concluding their parcels were contiguous with the rest of the redevelopment TIF district, as the term "contiguous" is used section 469.174, subd.10(f), despite the fact that highway 55 crosses the district. We review the district court's interpretation of a statutory term de novo. Brookfield Trade Ctr., Inc. v. County of Ramsey, 584 N.W.2d 390, 393 (Minn 1998). Although the statute does not define the term "contiguous," the word commonly means "[t]ouching at a point or along a boundary" or "adjoining." Black's Law Dictionary, 315 (7th ed. 1999). Similarly, "abut" means "[t]o join at a border or boundary." Id. at 10. An "abutter" is the "owner of adjoining land." Id The Eagan city code defines "abutting" as "making contact with or separated only by a public thoroughfare * * * ." Eagan, Minn., Code of Ordinances § 11.03 (2003). Given the synonymy of the terms "abutting" and "contiguous," we conclude contiguity is not affected by the presence of a public thoroughfare such as highway 55. As respondent argues, virtually every parcel within the district at issue here is separated from other parcels by public thoroughfares, which do not by their mere presence divide the district into so many noncontiguous districts. See Walser, 635 N.W.2d at 401 (observing that roadway may act as "a clear dividing line between * * * two groups of properties" in redevelopment TIF district without creating noncontiguous districts). We conclude highway 55 does not disrupt the contiguity of the district. Appellants also contend the methodology used by Bonestroo was flawed and argue respondent's inclusion of their properties in the district was unreasonable by virtue of its reliance on the Bonestroo report. We disagree and conclude respondent's TIF determination was reasonably based upon the record before it when the decision was made. Appellants argue Bonestroo did not make a sufficient effort to obtain their permission to conduct interior inspections of their residences. The record before respondent contained uncontroverted evidence that appellants were repeatedly contacted by Bonestroo and refused to allow interior inspections. Bonestroo found, and it is undisputed, that appellants' properties are not served by municipal water, sewer, and storm drainage systems. Appellants concede they have actively opposed respondent's past attempts to connect their homes to these services. Pursuant to section 469.174, subd. 10(c), Bonestroo included the cost of installing these services in its estimate of the costs of modifying appellants' residences to satisfy the current building code. Appellants challenge Bonestroo's claim that their insulation and windows were substandard, arguing their windows and insulation were recently replaced as part of an airport noise abatement program. There was no evidence of insulation and window improvements in the record before respondent. Finally, appellants cite no authority in support of their argument that respondent must encourage property owners to improve their buildings themselves before it conducts or commissions an assessment to determine whether the buildings are substandard. The record before respondent consisted of the Bonestroo report, the TIF plan, resolutions passed by both the Eagan Advisory Planning Commission and the Eagan Economic Development Authority approving the redevelopment TIF plan, a report from respondent's TIF financial consultant recommending approval of the plan, and testimony taken at the public hearing held on the redevelopment district. On this record, we conclude respondent's quasi- judicial determination that the redevelopment TIF district included appellants' properties and met the statutory defmition of a redevelopment district was supported by the record and was not arbitrary or capricious. DECISION Pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 469.1771, subd. 1(a) (2000), the district court has jurisdiction to review a municipality's inclusion of property within a tax -increment financing district. The district court correctly concluded that highway 55 does not disrupt the contiguity of the redevelopment TIF district at issue here and that respondent's inclusion of appellants' properties in the district was based upon evidence in the record and was reasonable. The court therefore did not err by granting respondent summary judgment and dismissing appellants' suit. Affirmed. JCFH, LLC July 6, 2001 Marvel Eggum 15708 Judicial Rd Burnsville, MM 55306-5210 RE: LEITER OF INTENT TO PURCHASE 2.41 Acres of land Parcel # 10-00200-030-32 Blue Gentian Road, Eagan, MN Dear Mr. Eggum, This letter constitutes our non-binding Letter of Intent with respect to the purchase of the above - referenced real property (the "Property"). Marvel Eggum is the owner of the Property (the "Owner"). JCFH, LLC (the `Buyer") desires to purchase the Property for the purpose of developing the same. Certain material aspects of the proposed agreement between Owner and Buyer are as set forth below: 1. Property. The land located on parcel # 10-00200-030-32, City of Eagan, Dakota County, State of Minnesota, legally described as: Section 2, TWN 27, Range 23 002750 2 2723 PT of NW 1/4 of NW1/4, Formerly known as PT of BLK 19 Kavanaugh & Dawsons SUB COM CEN RD 696 FT S of NE COR NW 1/4 of NW 1/4 (2-27-23) S 68D 30M W on CEN RD 165 FT to PT of BRG SW on RD 336 FTN 326 FTN 68D 30M E 336 FT to BEG (Vacated 6-24-1953) Section 2 TWN 27 Range 23. 2. Buyer. JCFH, LLC is a Minnesota, Limited Liability Company that is engaged in the business of purchasing and developing real property. 3. Purchase Agreement. Based upon the Letter of Intent, Owner and Buyer shall endeavor to enter into a definitive Sale and Purchase Agreement (the "Purchase Agreement") for the purchase of the Property. 4. Purchase Price. The Purchase Price to be paid by Buyer to Owner is THREE HUNDRED FOURTEEN THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED dollars [$314,900] (the "Purchase Price"). The Purchase Price shall be paid as follows: (a) upon execution of the Purchase Agreement, Buyer shall pay $10,000 earnest money (the "Earnest Money") aY9 to First American Title Company, an Escrow Agent; and (b) the remainder of the Purchase Price shall be paid at closing. The Earnest Money shall be fully credited against the Purchase Price, or otherwise distributed pursuant to the terms and conditions of the Purchase Agreement. 5. Closing. The closing transaction contemplated herein shall occur on or before 120 days after the purchase agreement is executed, unless postponed or extended in writing by Owner and Buyer. 6. Survey. Buyer, at its sole expense, shall have the Property surveyed within 60 days after execution of the Purchase Agreement. 7. Conditions. Buyer's obligations under the Purchase Agreement shall be contingent on certain conditions, including without limitation the following: Title. Owner holding Property, on the date of the closing, free and clear of all encumbrances except as approved by Buyer, as evidence by a Title Commitment from First American Title Company to be obtained by Buyer within 60 days after execution of the Purchase Agreement. Tests. Buyer being satisfied with the results of soil tests, engineering and environmental inspections, and other inspections and tests conducted on the Property as deemed necessary by Buyer. Buyer shall obtain all tests and reports at its expense within 60 days after execution of the Purchase Agreement. Acreage Confirmation. Buyer's confirmation that the Property consists of approximately 2.41 acres (gross). 8. Real Estate Taxes. Owner shall pay real estate taxes due and payable in the years prior to the year of closing, including deferred and Green Acres taxes. Buyer will pay Real Estate taxes due and payable in all years after the year of closing. Real estate taxes due and payable in the year of closing will be prorated to the date of closing between Owner and Buyer. Seller shall pay all levied, pending and deferred special assessments. 9. Acceptance. Seller shall notify buyer, not later than June 18, 2001, if the terms of this Letter of Intent are acceptable, at which time Buyer will prepare the Purchase Agreement for signatures of Owner and Buyer. If the terms are acceptable, please execute the copy of this Letter of Intent enclosed herewith (where indicated below), and retum the executed copy to Colliers Towle Real Estate at 330 Second Avenue South, Minneapolis, MN 55401. Attention: Don Letsch, (Fax 612-347-9389). 10. Confidentiality. No disclosure of the execution and delivery of this agreement or the terms and provisions of this agreement shall be made by seller without the prior written approval of Buyer. The provisions of this section shall survive closing and delivery of the deed and the earlier termination of this agreement. ase) This Letter of Intent is intended to be for discussion purposes and is not binding on Owner or ICH!, LLC. If you have any questions or concerns, please calI Don Letsch at Colliers Towle Real Estate (612-341-4444). Sincerely, Mark Fabel JCFH, LLC Accepted this clay: By: It's JCFH, LLC September 6, 2001 Ray and Marilyn Sandford 1020 Blue Gentian Road Eagan, MN 55121 RE: Commercial Appraisal Firms Dear Ray and Marilyn Sandford: Pursuant to our conversation on September 6th I have included three companies for you to choose from regarding the appraisal of your property. I only included commercial appraisal firms because I believe they would be the most appropriate for your land. However, feel free to contact a residential real estate agent if you are interested in receiving a residential appraisal. I have not contacted any of the firms to let them know that you may be calling. I would prefer that the appraisal be conducted without any involvement from JCFH, LLC. However, if you would like to share the cost of the appraisal, please feel free to ask me and we could discuss that further. Shenehon & Associates, Inc. Robert Strachota 219 South Fourth Street, Suite 400 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Phone: 612-333-6533 Bettendorf Rohrer Knoche Wall Inc. Marc Knoche 1600 University Avenue St. Paul, MN 55104 Phone: 651-646-6114 Please call if you have any questions. Sincerely, lei 7" Mark Fabel JCFH, LLC 612-481-1616 Lunz, Massopust, Reid, DeCaster & Lammers Robert Lunz 431 South Seventh Street, Suite 2540 Minneapolis, MN 55415 Phone: 612-340-1236 December 10, 2001 Roger and Gladys Reiling 1877 Gluek Lane Roseville, MN 55113 RE: Eagan Property: 1030 Blue Gentian Road Dear Roger and Gladys: I think it is time that I officially introduce myself to you. I am the project manager at McGough Development working on the land assemblage in Eagan on Blue Gentian Circle. As you are well aware by now McGough Development is the owner of the shell company, JCFH, LLC, that was created to shelter McGough in the early stages of the property assemblage. Early on in the project Don Letsch and Rich Ragatz, from Colliers Towle Real Estate Company, conducted most of the contact between McGough Development and the individual owners of the property on Blue Gentian Circle. As the negotiations continued I realized that I had a negotiation approach that may better represent the ideals that McGough Companies would like to convey to the community. After taking over a majority of the negotiations I am proud to say that there continues to be a mutual respect between both parties even after the properties were closed. I look forward to meeting you both and am convinced that we will be able to find an acquisition price that works for both of us. I will be out of the country from December 22 to January 11 and hope to refocus my energy on this project when I return. If you would like to meet before I leave for my vacation I would be glad to visit with you. I recognize your address and realized that McGough is less than one mile north of you at Fairview Avenue and County Road C. Please feel free to give me a call at any time. We will have the most success in this negotiation if we are able to keep the lines of communication open. If we do not speak before I leave, have a Happy Holidays, Mark Fabel McGough Development DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP MINNEAPOLIS NEW YOP K SEATTLE DENVER WASHINGTON, D.C. NORTHERN VIRGINIA DES MOINES LONDON ANCHORAGE SATr LAIGf CITY BRUSSELS Michael Swensen, Esq. 1721 Mount Curve Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55403 Sums 1500 50 SOUTH SIXTH STREET MINNEAPOLIS. MINNESOTA 55402-1498 TELEPHONE: (612) 340-2600 FAx: (612) 340-2868 www dorsaylaw com JAY F. COOK (612) 340-2922 FAX (612) 340-2644 cookjay®dorseylaw.com March 12, 2002 COSTA MESA BILLINGS PARGO HONG KONG GREAT PALS ROCHESTER TOKYO MISSOULA VANCOUVER TORONTO SHANGHAI Re: Eagan, Minnesota Property; Settlement Communication Dear Mr. Swensen: We represent McGough Development, LLC ("McGough"), which has been trying to negotiate the purchase of the following properties owned by the following persons: 1. 990 Blue Gentian Circle, Eagan, Minnesota owned by Pat and Frank Pavlik; 2. 1020 Blue Gentian Circle, Eagan, Minnesota owned by Ray and Marilyn Sandford; 3. 1027 Blue Gentian Circle, Eagan, Minnesota owned by Ray -Mar Rental (Ray Nutzmann); and 4. 1030 Blue Gentian Circle, Eagan, Minnesota owned by Roger and Gladys Reiling. We understand that you represent the Pavliks, the Sandfords, Mr. Nutzmann and the Reilings, and that your clients have requested that all negotiations be conducted through you. This letter is to advise you that, assuming that title is good and marketable, our client is prepared to pay a total price of $1,203,158 (with total earnest money of $25,000) in the aggregate for the four parcels described above, subject to the terms and conditions of a purchase agreement in the form enclosed, with appropriate adaptations depending upon whether one or more of your clients desire to occupy the property owned by them after closing. If the offer is asp DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP Michael Swensen, Esq. March 12, 2002 Page 2 acceptable to your clients and the parties enter into a purchase agreement, our client would like to close the purchase as soon as possible and in any event on or before April 30, 2002. Our client is willing to permit those of your clients who desire to do so to continue to occupy the property currently owned by them after closing and until December 31, 2002, pursuant to a post - closing occupancy agreement to be signed at closing in the form attached to the form of Purchase Agreement enclosed herewith which is marked "(Residential)" in the upper right hand corner of page 1. The aggregate offer price set forth in this letter is higher than the aggregate of the most previous offers made to your clients. I understand that your clients have their own views on what their individual properties are worth, both on a stand alone basis as well as in relation to the other properties which our client has purchased or is attempting to purchase. Our client believes that the offer price set forth in this letter is above the market value of the properties, and with that in mind hopefully your clients will be able to agree among themselves as to how much each should receive for his and/or her individual parcel. Please communicate this offer to your clients and provide me with their response at your earliest convenience. This offer will be null and void and deemed withdrawn if not accepted by the close of business on Friday, March 29, 2002. Incidentally, I would like to note that the offer made in this letter is in the nature of a settlement offer made in the hope that we can avoid protracted negotiations and/or possible condemnation proceedings, and should not be used or construed as indicative of the fair market value of the properties in question. JFC:vn cc: Mr. Gregory S. Miller (via fax and regular mail w/enc) Mr. Mark Fabel (via fax and regular mail w/enc) Thank you for your consideration. Hook forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, Cook ass Mediation Center for Dispute Resolution In Affiliation with Hemline University Law & Graduate Schools Strengthen Relationships °Enhance Communication °Manage Decisions March 29, 2002 Michael Swensen 1721 Mount Curve Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55403 e''-`� K 1 ( `CA �1 ` J ✓ RE: Ray and Marilyn Sanford/McGough Development Dear Mr. Swensen: McGough Development requested that the Mediation Center write to you to offer your client the opportunity to use a neutral person to facilitate negotiations regarding the purchase of property as a part of the Blue Gentian Circle redevelopment project. If your client and McGough have not mutually agreed to terms, this process could be of assistance. If your client is satisfied with the progress of your negotiations, there is no need to use mediation. If mediation might be helpful, McGough will pay for the cost of obtaining a mediator through Mediation Center for Dispute Resolution. To ensure neutrality, you will select the mediators from a panel provided by Mediation Center. The mediators are contractors for Mediation Center and will not be paid by McGough directly. The mediator is a neutral party who facilitates negotiations to assist parties in making agreements. The mediator does not tell parties what to do. Instead, the mediator assists the parties in exploring their interests, looking realistically at the strengths and weaknesses of their positions, generating options for settlement, facilitating communications, and arriving at terms that are mutually agreeable. Enclosed are brief descriptions of the process and mediators. For more information, or to schedule a meeting between you and your client, Mark Fabel from McGough Development and a mediator, please contact me (651-523-2359) or Eric Kestin (651-523-2880) at Mediation Center by April 9, 2002. All discussions between you and Mediation Center staff are confidential unless you agree otherwise. Aimee Gourlay Executive Director cc: Mark Fabel Enc. E-MAi1.: MediationCcnlcria!!gw.hamlinc.cdu WEB- www.hamtine.edu/law/center 1536 HEwrrr AVENUE Sr. PAUL, MN 55104-1284 ash PnoNl•:: (65 1) 523-2i90 FAX: (651) 523-2967 DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP MINNEAPOLIS NEW VORI: SEATTLE DENVER WASHINGTON, DC NORTHERN VIRGINIA DES MOINES LONDON ANCHORAGE SALT LAKE CITY BRUSSELS Michael Swensen, Esq. 1721 Mount Curve Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55403 SUITS 1500 50 SOUTH SIXTH STREET MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402-1498 TELEPHONE: (612) 340-2600 FAX: (612) 340-2868 www.dorseylaw.com JAY F. COOK (612) 340-2922 FAX (612) 340-2644 cook.jay a@dorsaylaw.com April 1, 2002 Re: Eagan, Minnesota Property; Settlement Communication Dear Mr. Swensen: cOsw MESA BILLINGS TARGO HONG KONG GREAT PALLS ROCHESTER TOKYO MISSOULA VANCOUVER TORONTO SHANGHAI I understand that your clients have rejected the offer 1 made on behalf of our client, McGough Development, LLC ("McGough"), in my letter to you dated March 12, 2002. That offer was made with respect to four (4) properties owned by your clients. The purpose of this letter is to set forth a separate offer for the purchase of 1027 Blue Gentian Circle, Eagan, Minnesota owned by Ray -Mar Rental (Ray Nutzmann). We understand that you represent Mr. Nutzmann and that Mr. Nutzmarm has requested that all negotiations be conducted through you. This letter is to advise you that, assuming that title is good and marketable, our client is prepared to pay a total price of $250,000 (with total earnest money of $10,000) for the parcel described above, subject to the terms and conditions of a purchase agreement in the form enclosed, with appropriate adaptations depending upon whether Mr. Nutzmann desires to occupy the property owned by him after closing. If the offer is acceptable to Mr. Nutzmann and the parties enter into a purchase agreement, our client would like to close the purchase as soon as possible and in any event on or before April 30, 2002. Our client is willing to permit Mr. Nutzmann to continue to occupy the property currently owned by him after closing and until December 31, 2002, pursuant to a post -closing occupancy agreement to be signed at closing in the form attached to the form of Purchase Agreement enclosed herewith which is marked "(Residential)" in the upper right hand comer of page 1. The offer price set forth in this letter is higher than the most previous offer made to Mr. Nutzmann. Our client believes that the offer price set forth in this letter is above the market DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP Michael Swensen, Esq. April 1, 2002 Page 2 value of the property, and with that in mind hopefully our respective clients can come to an agreement. Please communicate this offer to your client and provide me with his response at your earliest convenience. This offer will be null and void and deemed withdrawn if not accepted by the close of business on Monday, April 15, 2002. Incidentally, I would like to note that the offer made in this letter is in the nature of a settlement offer made in the hope that we can avoid protracted negotiations and/or possible condemnation proceedings, and should not be used or construed as indicative of the fair market value of the property in question. Also, the offer is made on a confidential basis, and you should not disclose the contents of this letter to any of your other clients with whom McGough Development, LLC has been negotiating. Thank you for your consideration. I look forward to hearing from you. JFC:vn cc: Mr. Gregory S. Miller (via fax and regular mail w/enc) Mr. Mark Fabel (via fax and regular mail w/enc) �S� DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP MINNEAPOLIS NEW YORK SEATTLE DENVER WASHINGTON, D.C. NOR1M ORN VIRGINIA DES MOINES LONDON ANCHORAGE SA= LAKE CITY BRUSSELS Michael Swensen, Esq. 1721 Mount Curve Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55403 SUITE 1500 50 SOUTH SIXTH STREET MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402-1498 TELEPHONE: (612) 340-2600 Emu (612) 340-2868 www.dorscylaw com JAY F. COOK (612) 340-2922 FAX (612) 340-2644 cookjaygdorseylaw.com April 1, 2002 Re: Eagan, Minnesota Property; Settlement Communication Dear Mr. Swensen: COSTA MESA BILLINGS PARGO HONG KONG GREAT FALLS ROCHESTER TOKYO MISSOULA VANCOUVER TORONTO SHANGHAI I understand that your clients have rejected the offer I made on behalf of our client, McGough Development, LLC ("McGough"), in my letter to you dated March 12, 2002. That offer was made with respect to four (4) properties owned by your clients. The purpose of this letter is to set forth a separate offer for the purchase of 990 Blue Gentian Circle, Eagan, Minnesota owned by Pat and Frank Pavlik. We understand that you represent the Pavliks and that the Pavliks have requested that all negotiations be conducted through you. This letter is to advise you that, assuming that title is good and marketable, our client is prepared to pay a total price of $250,000 (with total eamest money of $10,000) for the parcel described above, subject to the terms and conditions of a purchase agreement in the form enclosed, with appropriate adaptations depending upon whether the Pavliks desire to occupy the property owned by them after closing. If the offer is acceptable to the Pavliks and the parties enter into a purchase agreement, our client would like to close the purchase as soon as possible and in any event on or before April 30, 2002. Our client is willing to permit the Pavliks to continue to occupy the property currently owned by them after closing and until December 31, 2002, pursuant to a post -closing occupancy agreement to be signed at closing in the fonn attached to the form of Purchase Agreement enclosed herewith which is marked "(Residential)" in the upper right hand corner of page 1. Our client believes that the offer price set forth in this letter is above the market value of the property, and with that in mind hopefully our respective clients can come to an agreement. a51 DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP Michael Swensen, Esq. April 1, 2002 Page 2 Please communicate this offer to your clients and provide me with their response at your earliest convenience. This offer will be null and void and deemed withdrawn if not accepted by the close of business on Monday, April 15, 2002. Incidentally, I would like to note that the offer made in this letter is in the nature of a settlement offer made in the hope that we can avoid protracted negotiations and/or possible condemnation proceedings, and should not be used or construed as indicative of the fair market value of the properties in question. Also, the offer is made on a confidential basis, and you should not disclose the contents of this letter to any of your other clients with whom McGough Development, LLC has been negotiating. JFC:vn cc: Mr. Gregory S. Miller (via fax and regular mail w/enc) Mr. Mark Fabel (via fax and regular mail w/enc) Thank you for your consideration. I look forward to hearing from you. incerely, y . Cook DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP MINNEAPOLIS NEW YORK SEATTLE DENVER. WASHINGTON. D.C. NORTHERN VIRGINIA DES MOINES LONDON ANCHORAGE SALT LAKE CITY BRUSSELS Michael Swensen, Esq. 1721 Mount Curve Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55403 SUITE 1500 50 SOUTH SIXTH STREET MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402-1498 TELEPHONE: (612) 340-2600 FAX: (612) 340-2868 www.dorseylaw.com JAY F. COOK (612) 340-2922 FAX (612) 340-2644 coo k. j ay@dorseylaw. com May 2, 2002 Re: Eagan, Minnesota Property; Settlement Communication Dear Mr. Swensen: COSTA MESA BEIINGS FORGO HONG KONG GREAT PALLS ROCHESTER TOKYO MISSOUL► VANCOUVER TORONTO SHANGHAI I understand that your client, Ray -Mar Rental (Ray Nutzmann), has rejected the offer I made on behalf of our client, McGough Development, LLC ("McGough"), in my letter to you dated April 1, 2002, for the purchase of your client's property located at 1027 Blue Gentian Circle, Eagan, Minnesota. Our client has asked us to make a final offer on its behalf in order to try to avoid the trouble and expense that would be involved for both of our clients in the event the City of Eagan eventually acquires your client's property by condemnation. This letter is to advise you that, assuming that title is good and marketable, our client is prepared to pay a total price of $275,000 (with total earnest money of $10,000) for the parcel described above, subject to the terms and conditions of a purchase agreement in the form enclosed with my April 1, 2002 letter to you, with appropriate adaptations depending upon whether Mr. Nutzmann desires to occupy the property owned by him after closing. If the offer is acceptable to Mr. Nutzmann and the parties enter into a purchase agreement, our client would like to close the purchase as soon as possible and in any event on or before May 31, 2002. Our client is willing to permit Mr. Nutzmann to continue to occupy the property currently owned by him after closing and until December 31, 2002, pursuant to a post -closing occupancy agreement to be signed at closing in the form attached to the form of Purchase Agreement enclosed with my April 1, 2002 letter to you and marked "(Residential)" in the upper right hand comer of page 1. DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP Michael Swensen, Esq. May 2, 2002 Page 2 Our client believes that the offer price set forth in this letter is significantly above the market value of the property. The total assessed value of the property is $120,300, and therefore our client's offer is roughly 2.3 times the assessed value. If the City of Eagan condemns the property, there is a significant chance that your client will receive significantly less than the $275,000 offer price contained in this letter. In addition, if your client contests or appears in the condemnation proceeding, your client will incur attorneys' fees and court costs which are not recoverable, and if your client engages an appraiser in connection with the condemnation proceeding, your client will be entitled to recover only $500 of the appraisal costs. These =reimbursed costs would reduce the net condemnation award received by your client. In light of the $275,000 purchase price being offered by our client, and these other considerations, hopefully your client will accept our client's offer. Please communicate this offer and a copy and the contents of this letter to your client and provide me with his response at your earliest convenience. This offer will be null and void and deemed withdrawn if not accepted by the close of business on Friday, May 10, 2002. Incidentally, I would like to note that the offer made in this letter is in the nature of a settlement offer made in the hope that we can avoid protracted negotiations and/or possible condemnation proceedings, and should not be used or construed as indicative of the fair market value of the property in question. Also, the offer is made on a confidential basis, and you should not disclose the contents of this letter to any of your other clients with whom McGough Development, LLC has been negotiating. JFC:vn cc: Mr. Gregory S. Miller (via fax and regular mail) Mr. Mark Fabel (via fax and regular mail) Thank you for your consideration. I look forward to hearing from you. aba DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP MINNEAPOLIS NEW YOR1L SEATTLE DENVER WASHINGTON, O.C. NORTHERN VIRGINIA DES MOINES LONDON ANCHORAGE SALT LAKE CITY BRUSSELS Michael Swensen, Esq. 1721 Mount Curve Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55403 SUITE 1500 50 SOUTH SIXTH STREET MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402-1498 TELEPHONE: (612) 340-2600 FAx: (612) 340-2868 www.dorseylaw.com JAY F. COOK (612) 340-2922 FAX (612) 340-2644 cook.Jay@dorseylaw.com May 2, 2002 Re: Eagan, Minnesota Property; Settlement Communication Dear Mr. Swensen: COSTA MESA BILLINGS FARGO HONG KONG GREAT PALLS ROCHESTER TOKYO MISSOULA VANCOUVER. TORONTO SHANGHAI I understand that your clients, Pat and Frank Pavlik, have rejected the offer I made on behalf of our client, McGough Development, LLC ("McGough"), in my letter to you dated April 1, 2002, for the purchase of your clients' property located at 990 Blue Gentian Circle, Eagan, Minnesota. Our client has asked us to make a final offer on its behalf in order to try to avoid the trouble and expense that would be involved for both of our clients in the event the City of Eagan eventually acquires your clients' property by condemnation. This letter is to advise you that, assuming that title is good and marketable, our client is prepared to pay a total price of $300,000 (with total earnest money of $10,000) for the parcel described above, subject to the terms and conditions of a purchase agreement in the form enclosed with my April 1, 2002 letter to you, with appropriate adaptations depending upon whether the Pavliks desire to occupy the property owned by them after closing. If the offer is acceptable to the Pavliks and the parties enter into a purchase agreement, our client would like to close the purchase as soon as possible and in any event on or before May 31, 2002. Our client is willing to permit the Pavliks to continue to occupy the property currently owned by them after closing and until December 31, 2002, pursuant to a post -closing occupancy agreement to be signed at closing in the form attached to the form of Purchase Agreement enclosed with my April 1, 2002 letter to you and marked "(Residential)" in the upper right hand corner of page 1. DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP Michael Swensen, Esq. May 2, 2002 Page 2 Our client believes that the offer price set forth in this letter is significantly above the market value of the property. The total assessed value of the property is $178,400 and therefore our client's offer is roughly 1.7 times the assessed value. If the City of Eagan condemns the property, there is a significant chance that your clients will receive significantly less than the $300,000 offer price contained in this letter. In addition, if your clients contest or appear in the condemnation proceeding, your clients will incur attorneys' fees and court costs which are not recoverable, and if your clients engage an appraiser in connection with the condemnation proceeding, your clients will be entitled to recover only $500 of the appraisal costs. These unreimbursed costs would reduce the net condemnation award received by your clients. In light of the $300,000 purchase price being offered by our client, and these other considerations, hopefully your client will accept our client's offer. Please communicate this offer and a copy and the contents of this letter to your clients and provide me with their response at your earliest convenience. This offer will be null and void and deemed withdrawn if not accepted by the close of business on Friday, May 10, 2002. Incidentally, I would like to note that the offer made in this letter is in the nature of a settlement offer made in the hope that we can avoid protracted negotiations and/or possible condemnation proceedings, and should not be used or construed as indicative of the fair market value of the property in question. Also, the offer is made on a confidential basis, and you should not disclose the contents of this letter to any of your other clients with whom McGough Development, LLC has been negotiating. JFC:vn cc: Mr. Gregory S. Miller (via fax and regular mail) Mr. Mark Fabel (via fax and regular mail) Thank you for your consideration. I look forward to hearing from you. r DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP MINNEAPOLIS NEW YORK SEATTLE DENVER WASHINGTON, D.C. NORTHERN VIRGINIA DSS MOINES LONDON ANCHORAGE SALT LACE CITY BRUSSELS Michael Swensen, Esq. 1721 Mount Curve Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55403 SUITE 1500 50 SOUTH SIXTH STREET MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402-1498 TELEPHONE: (612) 340-2600 FAX: (612) 340-2868 www.dorseylaw.com JAY F. COOK (612) 340-2922 FAX (612) 340-2644 cools jap®a dorseylaw.com May 2, 2002 Re: Eagan, Minnesota Property; Settlement Communication Dear Mr. Swensen: COSTA MESA BILLINGS PARGO HONG KONG GREAT PALLS ROCHESTER TOKYO MISSOUTA VANCOUVER TORONTO SHANGHAI Our client, McGough Development, LLC ("McGough"), has attempted on several occasions, unsuccessfully to date, to negotiate the purchase of property located at 1030 Blue Gentian Road, Eagan, Minnesota, owned by your clients, Roger and Gladys Reiling. I also made an offer on behalf of McGough, in my letter to you dated March 12, 2002, to purchase the Reilings' property and three other properties owned by clients whom you represent, for a total purchase price of $1,203,158; that offer was rejected. Our client has asked us to make a final offer on its behalf in order to try to avoid the trouble and expense that would be involved for both of our clients in the event the City of Eagan eventually acquires the Reilings' property by condemnation. This letter is to advise you that, assuming that title is good and marketable, our client is prepared to pay a total price of $396,658 (with total earnest money of $10,000) for the parcel described above, subject to the terms and conditions of a purchase agreement in the form enclosed with my March 12, 2002 letter to you, with appropriate adaptations depending upon whether the Reilings desire to occupy the property owned by them after closing. If the offer is acceptable to the Reilings and the parties enter into a purchase agreement, our client would like to close the purchase as soon as possible and in any event on or before May 31, 2002. Our client is willing to permit the Reilings to continue to occupy the property currently owned by them after closing and until December 31, 2002, pursuant to a post -closing occupancy agreement to be signed at closing in the form attached to the form of Purchase Agreement enclosed with my March 12, 2002 letter to you and marked "(Residential)" in the upper right hand corner of page 1. DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP Michael Swensen, Esq. May 2, 2002 Page 2 Our client believes that the offer price set forth in this letter is significantly above the market value of the property. The total assessed value of the property is $163,700, and therefore our client's offer is roughly 2.4 times the assessed value. If the City of Eagan condemns the property, there is a significant chance that your clients will receive significantly less than the $396,658 offer price contained in this letter. In addition, if your clients contest or appear in the condemnation proceeding, your clients will incur attorneys' fees and court costs which are not recoverable, and if your clients engage an appraiser in connection with the condemnation proceeding, your clients will be entitled to recover only $500 of the appraisal costs. These unreimbursed costs would reduce the net condemnation award received by your client. In light of the $396,658 purchase price being offered by our client, and these other considerations, hopefully your client will accept our client's offer. Please communicate this offer and a copy and the contents of this letter to your clients and provide me with their response at your earliest convenience. This offer will be null and void and deemed withdrawn if not accepted by the close of business on Friday, May 10, 2002. Incidentally, I would like to note that the offer made in this letter is in the nature of a settlement offer made in the hope that we can avoid protracted negotiations and/or possible condemnation proceedings, and should not be used or construed as indicative of the fair market value of the property in question. Also, the offer is made on a confidential basis, and you should not disclose the contents of this letter to any of your other clients with whop} McGough Development, LLC has been negotiating. JFC:vn cc: Mr. Gregory S. Miller (via fax and regular mail) Mr. Mark Fabel (via fax and regular mail) Thank you for your consideration. I look forward to hearing from you. X66 DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP MINNEAPOLIS NEW YORK SEATTLE DENVER. WASHINGTON, D.C. NORTHERN VIRGINIA DES MOINES LONDON ANCHORAGE SALT LAKE crTY BRUSSELS Michael Swensen, Esq. 1721 Mount Curve Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55403 SUITS 1500 50 SOUTH SIXTH STREET MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402-1498 TELEPHONE: (612) 340-2600 FAX: (612) 340-2868 www.dorseylaw.com JAY F. COOK (612) 340-2922 FAX (612) 340-2644 cookjay@dorseylaw.com May 2, 2002 Re: Eagan, Minnesota Property; Settlement Communication Dear Mr. Swensen: COSTA MESA BILLINGS FARGO HONG KONG GREAT PALLS ROCHESTER. TOKYO MISSOULA VANCOUVER TORONTO SHANGHAI Our client, McGough Development, LLC ("McGough"), has attempted on several occasions, unsuccessfully to date, to negotiate the purchase of property located at 1020 Blue Gentian Road, Eagan, Minnesota, owned by your clients, Ray and Marilyn Sandford. I also made an offer on behalf of McGough, in my letter to you dated March 12, 2002, to purchase the Sandfords' property and three other properties owned by clients whom you represent, for a total purchase price of $1,203,158; that offer was rejected. Our client has asked us to make a final offer on its behalf in order to try to avoid the trouble and expense that would be involved for both of our clients in the event the City of Eagan eventually acquires the Sandfords' property by condemnation. This letter is to advise you that, assuming that title is good and marketable, our client is prepared to pay a total price of $306,500 (with total earnest money of $10,000) for the parcel described above, subject to the terms and conditions of a purchase agreement in the form enclosed with my March 12, 2002 letter to you, with appropriate adaptations depending upon whether the Sandfords desire to occupy the property owned by them after closing. If the offer is acceptable to the Sandfords and the parties enter into a purchase agreement, our client would like to close the purchase as soon as possible and in any event on or before May 31, 2002. Our client is willing to permit the Sandfords to continue to occupy the property currently owned by them after closing and until December 31, 2002, pursuant to a post -closing occupancy agreement to be signed at closing in the form attached to the form of Purchase Agreement enclosed with my March 12, 2002 letter to you and marked "(Residential)" in the upper right hand corner of page 1. a�7 .1 DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP Michael Swensen, Esq. May 2, 2002 Page 2 Our client believes that the offer price set forth in this letter is significantly above the market value of the property. The total assessed value of the property is $155,000, and therefore our client's offer is roughly 2 times the assessed value. If the City of Eagan condemns the property, there is a significant chance that your clients will receive significantly less than the $306,500 offer price contained in this letter. In addition, if your clients contest or appear in the condemnation proceeding, your clients will incur attorneys' fees and court costs which are not recoverable, and if your clients engage an appraiser in connection with the condemnation proceeding, your clients will be entitled to recover only $500 of the appraisal costs. These unreimbursed costs would reduce the net condemnation award received by your client. In light of the $306,500 purchase price being offered by our client, and these other considerations, hopefully your client will accept our client's offer. Please communicate this offer and a copy and the contents of this letter to your clients and provide me with their response at your earliest convenience. This offer will be null and void and deemed withdrawn if not accepted by the close of business on Friday, May 10, 2002. Incidentally, I would like to note that the offer made in this letter is in the nature of a settlement offer made in the hope that we can avoid protracted negotiations and/or possible condemnation proceedings, and should not be used or construed as indicative of the fair market value of the property in question. Also, the offer is made on a confidential basis, and you should not disclose the contents of this letter to any of your other clients with whom McGough Development, LLC has been negotiating. JFC:vn cc: Mr. Gregory S. Miller (via fax and regular mail) Mr. Mark Fabel (via fax and regular mail) Thank you for your consideration. I look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, a . Cook MICHAEL F. SWENSEN ATTORNEY AT LAW 1721 MOUNT CURVE AVENUE M1NNEAPOLIS, MN 55403 612-377-3373 FAX 612-377-0033 May 31, 2002 Mr. Jay F. Cook Dorsey and Whitney 50 South Sixth Street Suite 1500 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Re: Roger and Gladys Reiling 1030 Blue Gentian Rd., Eagan, MN 55121 Ray and Marilyn Sanford 1020 Blue Gentian Rd., Eagan, MN 55121 Dear Mr. Cook: You have asked me to provide a counteroffer for my client's property at 1030 Blue Gentian Rd. and 1020 Blue Gentian Rd., Eagan, MN. My client's currently have their property on the market for $10.00 per square foot. While they may be willing to come off of their asking price somewhat, your client's will need to significantly increase the price they are willing to offer. Michael F. Swensen MFS/krs cc: Roger and Gladys Reiling Ray and Marilyn Sanford X69 MICHAEL F. SWENSEN ATTORNEY AT LAW 1721 MOUNT CURVE AVENUE MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55403 612-377-3373 FAX 612-377-0033 May 31, 2002 Mr. Jay F. Cook Dorsey and Whitney 50 South Sixth Street Suite 1500 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Re: Patricia and Frank Pavlik 990 Blue Gentian Rd., Eagan, MN 55121 Dear Mr. Cook: You have asked me to provide a counteroffer for my client's property at 990 Blue Gentian Rd. I have been authorized to communicate a counter offer for the sale of my client's property for $500,000.00. The offer, if accepted will require earnest money of $10,000.00. The other provision my clients would require would be to continue to occupy the property until December 31, 2002. Please present this offer to your clients and get back to me. This offer will expire on June 7, 2002. Very truly yours, Michael F. Swensen MFS/krs cc: Ms. Patricia Pavlik ago MICHAEL F. SWENSEN ATTORNEY AT LAW 1721 MOUNT CURVE AVENUE MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55403 612-377-3373 FAX 612-377-0033 May 31, 2002 Mr. Jay F. Cook Dorsey and Whitney 50 South Sixth Street Suite 1500 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Re: Ray -Mar Rental, LLC 1027 Blue Gentian Rd., Eagan, MN 55121 Dear Mr. Cook: I have been authorized to communicate a counter offer for the sale of my client's property at 1027 Blue Gentian Circle, Eagan, MN. Ray -Mar Rental, LLC will accept the equivalent of $7.00 per square foot for its property. The parcel is approximately 1.16 acres. The exact amount will depend on a survey. The offer, if accepted will require earnest money of $10,000.00. The other provision my clients would require would be to continue to operate as rental property until December 31, 2002. Please present this offer to your clients and get back to me. This offer will expire on June 7, 2002. Very truly yours, MFS/krs cc: Mr. Raymond C. Nutzmann a �i DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP MINNEAPOLIS NEW YORE SEATTLE DENVER. WASHINGTON, D.C. NORTHERN VIRGINIA DES MOINES LONDON ANCHORAGE SALT LAKE CITY BRUSSELS VIA FAX AND U. S. MAIL Michael Swensen, Esq. 1721 Mount Curve Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55403 SUITE 1500 50 SOUTH SIXTH STREET MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55402-1498 TELEPHONE: (612) 340-2600 FAx:(612) 340-2868 www.dorseylaw.com JAY F. COOK (612) 340-2922 FAX (612) 340-2644 cookjay©dorseylaw.com June 21, 2002 Re: Eagan, Minnesota Property; Settlement Communication Dear Mr. Swensen: COSTA MESA II/LUNGS FARGO HONG KONG GREAT PALLS ROCHESTER TOKYO MISSOULA VANCOUVER TORONTO SHANGHAI You and your client, Ray -Mar Rental (Ray Nutzmann), have rejected the offer I made on behalf of our client, McGough Development, LLC ("McGough"), in my letter to you dated May 2, 2002, for the purchase of your client's property located at 1027 Blue Gentian Circle, Eagan, Minnesota. You and your client countered with a purchase price of $7.00 per square foot (assuming 1.16 acres or 50,530 square feet, the purchase price would be $353,710), and McGough rejected the counteroffer. Our client has asked us to make another offer on its behalf in order to try to avoid the trouble and expense that would be involved for both of our clients in the event the City of Eagan eventually acquires your client's property by condemnation. This letter is to advise you that, assuming that title is good and marketable, our client is prepared to pay a total price of $300,000 (with total earnest money of $10,000) for the parcel described above, subject to the terms and conditions of a purchase agreement in the form enclosed with my April 1, 2002 letter to you, with appropriate adaptations depending upon whether Mr. Nutzmann desires to occupy the property owned by him after closing. If the offer is acceptable to Mr. Nutzmann and the parties enter into a purchase agreement, our client would like to close the purchase as soon as possible and in any event on or before July 31, 2002. Our client is willing to permit Mr. Nutzmann to continue to occupy the property currently owned by him after closing and until December 31, 2002, pursuant to a post -closing occupancy agreement to be signed at closing in the form DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP Michael Swensen, Esq. June 21, 2002 Page 2 attached to the form of Purchase Agreement enclosed with my April 1, 2002 letter to you and marked "(Residential)" in the upper right hand comer of page 1. Our client believes that the offer price set forth in this letter is significantly above the market value of the property. The total assessed value of the property is $120,300, and therefore our client's offer is roughly 2.5 times the assessed value. If the City of Eagan condemns the property, there is a significant chance that your client will receive significantly less than the $300,000 offer price contained in this letter. In addition, if your client contests or appears in the condemnation proceeding, your client will incur attorneys' fees and court costs which are not recoverable, and if your client engages an appraiser in connection with the condemnation proceeding, your client will be entitled to recover only $500 of the appraisal costs. These unreimbursed costs would reduce the net condemnation award received by your client. In light of the $300,000 purchase price being offered by our client, and these other considerations, hopefully your client will accept our client's offer. Please communicate this offer and a copy and the contents of this letter to your client and provide me with his response at your earliest convenience. This offer will be null and void and deemed withdrawn if not accepted by the close of business on Monday, July 8, 2002. Incidentally, I would like to note that the offer made in this letter is in the nature of a settlement offer made in the hope that we can avoid protracted negotiations and/or possible condemnation proceedings, and should not be used or construed as indicative of the fair market value of the property in question. Also, the offer is made on a confidential basis, and you should not disclose the contents of this letter to any of your other clients with whom McGough Development, LLC has been negotiating. JFC:vn cc: Mr. Gregory S. Miller (via fax and regular mail) Mr. Mark Fabel (via fax and regular mail) Thank you for your consideration. I look forward to hearing from you. a �3 O W z EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC To: Jon Hohenstein Community Development Director, City of Eagan From: Sid Inman, Ehlers & Associates Rebecca Kurtz, Ehlers & Associates Date: October 27, 2005 Subject: Blue Gentian Corporate Center (McGough) — But -For Analysis The City has received from the developers of the Blue Gentian Corporate Center (McGough) a request for Tax Increment assistance. The City has asked Ehlers & Associates to review the developer's project feasibility analysis to determine if the level of the assistance requested is needed to make the project financially feasible. The developer provided to Ehlers financial information on three different options of building size that contained details regarding expenses, revenues and other pertinent operational financial information. After we reviewed this material, we met with the developer's representatives to discuss and review the information provided. Using the information provided to us, we prepared a Return on Cost Analysis for each of the three options. Based on the information provided, we have determined that the return on cost requested was within'acceptable ranges of industry standards, and the level of assistance requested is needed to make the project financially feasible. Please let me know if you have any questions or comments, or if we can be of further assistance on this matter. LEADERS IN PUBLIC FINANCE 3060 Centre Pointe Drive 9iy Phone: 651-697-8507 Fax: 651-697-8555 Ro vile MN 55113 1105 Vshlers-inc.com se l DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Dated , 2005 Relating to TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 2-4 Between EAGAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY CITY OF EAGAN and MG EAGAN, LLC This Instrument Drafted by: Faegre & Benson LLP 2200 Wells Fargo Center 90 South Seventh Street Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402-3901 Telephone: (612) 766-7000 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of this day of 2005, by and between the EAGAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, a Minnesota municipal corporation (the "EDA"), the CITY OF EAGAN, a Minnesota municipal corporation (the "City"), and MG EAGAN, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company (the "Developer"): WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the EDA has created and established a Tax Increment Financing District referred to as Tax Increment Financing District No. 2-4 (the "TIF District") in connection with that part of the Development Program for Northeast Eagan Development District No. 2 which has been established as a Redevelopment Project pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.028 (the "Redevelopment Project Area") and pursuant to the authority granted by Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.090 to 469.1081 and 469.001 to 469.047 and Sections 469.174 through 469.179 (collectively, the "Acts"); and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Acts, the EDA has adopted and the City has approved a Redevelopment Plan (the "Redevelopment Plan") and a tax increment financing plan (the "TIF Plan") to finance a portion of the public redevelopment costs of the Redevelopment Project Area; and WHEREAS, in order to achieve the objectives of the Redevelopment Plan and the TIF Plan, the EDA has determined to provide substantial aid and assistance through the financing of certain land acquisition, demolition, soil correction and public improvement costs in the Redevelopment Project Area; and WHEREAS, the Developer proposes to develop certain office and other commercial facilities within the Redevelopment Project Area and the TIF District which the EDA has determined will promote and carry out the Redevelopment Plan and TIF Plan; and WHEREAS, the Developer has purchased the Acquired Developer's Parcels and will agree to purchase the Other Parcels which the EDA acquires hereunder substantially in accordance with the form of Purchase Agreement attached as Exhibit E for use in connection with the Improvements; and WHEREAS, the EDA has the right to repurchase the Other Parcels which the EDA acquires and conveys to the Developer in the circumstances described in the Repurchase Agreement attached as Exhibit B to the Purchase Agreement; and WHEREAS, this Agreement has been approved by the governing bodies of the EDA and the City following a public hearing duly called and held; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and obligations of the EDA, the City and the Developer, the parties hereby represent, covenant and agree, as follows: ARTICLE I. DEFINITIONS, EXHIBITS, RULES OF INTERPRETATION Section 1.1 Definitions. In this Agreement, the following terms have the following respective meanings unless the context hereof clearly requires otherwise: (a) Acquired Developer's Parcels. The parcels of property heretofore acquired by the Developer as described in Exhibit F. (b) Certificate of Completion. The certificate of completion to be executed and delivered pursuant to Section 3.4, in the form of Exhibit B hereto. (c) City. The City of Eagan, Minnesota. (d) Completion Percentage. The completed portion of the Minimum Improvements, as the case may be expressed as a percentage determined by dividing the square footage of completed improvements by the aggregate square footage of the Minimum Improvements. (e) Demolition and Soil Correction Costs. The costs of the City, the EDA and Developer of demolition of existing structures on the Property and soil correction associated with the Improvements. (f) Developer. MG Eagan, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, its successors and assigns. (g) Developer Acquisition Costs. The actual costs to the Developer of acquiring the Acquired Developer's Parcels and any of the Other Parcels which are acquired by the Developer, together with interest paid by the Developer on financing incurred to purchase such property. (h) Development. The Property and the Minimum Improvements to be constructed thereon according to the Development Plans approved by the EDA and the City. (i) Development Plans. Collectively, the preliminary plans, drawings and related documents referred to in Exhibit D, as the same may be amended or supplemented from time to time by the Developer and approved by the EDA and the City, which establish certain design and construction standards for the Improvements. (j) EDA. The Economic Development Authority of the City of Eagan, Minnesota. (k) Improvements. The Minimum Improvements and any additional improvements which may be constructed on the Development Property in accordance with the Development Plans. (1) Other Parcels. The parcels of property to be acquired by the EDA or the Developer which are described in Exhibit G hereto. (in) Minimum Improvements. Each and all of the improvements to be constructed on the Development Property, which shall include an office building of at least 175,000 square feet, as specified in the Development Plans, but excluding any and all personal property. (n) Mortgage and Holder. The term "mortgage" shall include the mortgage or mortgages referenced in Article IV of this Agreement and any other instrument creating an encumbrance or lien upon the Development or any part thereof as security for a loan. The term "holder" in reference to a mortgage includes any insurer or guarantor (other than the Developer) of any obligation or condition secured by such mortgage or deed of trust. (o) Property. The real property which is included within the TIF District and which is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto. (p) Public Acquisition Costs. The costs to the City and the EDA of acquiring the Other Parcels. (q) Public Development Costs. The costs of the Public Improvements described in Section 3.10. (r) Public Improvements. The roads and other public infrastructure improvements described in Exhibit H. (s) Purchase Agreement. The Purchase Agreement between the EDA and Developer to be entered into in connection with the purchase by the Developer of the those Other Parcels which the EDA may acquire, which Purchase Agreement is attached as Exhibit E. (t) Redevelopment Plan. The Redevelopment Plan for the Redevelopment Project Area, as amended from time to time. (u) Relocation Costs. The relocation costs required by law or agreement to be paid to the owners and tenants of the Other Parcels. (v) Repurchase Agreement. The Repurchase Agreement between the EDA and the Developer relating to the parcels purchased by the Developer under a Purchase Agreement, which form of Repurchase Agreement is attached as Exhibit B to the Purchase Agreement. (w) Structured Parking Costs. Any costs paid or incurred by the Developer to construct structured parking (which may include underground parking or ramp parking or both) as part of the Improvements. (x) Substantially All. 85%, measured by square footage, of the Minimum Improvements. (y) Tax Increment Note (TIF Note). The Tax Increment Revenue Note to be issued by the EDA to finance a portion of the costs of the TIF District, in substantially the form attached as Exhibit C. (z) Tax Increment Financing District (TIF District). Tax Increment Financing District No. 2-4 created by the EDA pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Sections 469.174 through 469.179 and described in the TIF Plan adopted therefor. (aa) Tax Increment Financing Plan (TIF Plan). The plan for development of the TIF District adopted by the EDA pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Sections 469.174 through 469.179 and approved by a resolution of the City Council adopted March 5, 2002. (bb) Other Terms. Terms defined in other sections of this Agreement have the meanings given them. (cc) Unavoidable Delays. Delays which are the direct result of strikes, fire or other casualty, war, material shortage, weather, causes beyond the constructing party's control, or acts of God, or acts of any federal, state or local government unit, except those acts anticipated or contemplated under this Agreement. Section 1.2 Exhibits. The following Exhibits are attached to and by reference made a part of this Agreement: A. Legal Description of Development Property B. Certificate of Completion. C. Form of Tax Increment Note. D. Development Plan Documents. E. Forms of Purchase Agreement and Repurchase Agreement. F. Legal Description of Acquired Developer's Parcels. G. Legal Description of Other Parcels. H. Description of Public Improvements. I. Required Soil Correction Activities. Section 1.3 Rules of Interpretation. (a) This Agreement shall be interpreted in accordance with and governed by the laws of the State of Minnesota. 0.0.4 8' v (b) The words "herein" and "hereof " and words of similar import, without reference to any particular section or subdivision, refer to this Agreement as a whole rather than any particular section or subdivision hereof. (c) References herein to any particular section or subdivision hereof are to the section or subdivision of this Agreement as originally executed. (d) Any titles of the several parts, articles and sections of this Agreement are inserted for convenience and reference only and shall be disregarded in construing or interpreting any of its provisions. ARTICLE II. REPRESENTATIONS AND COVENANTS Section 2.1 By the Developer. The Developer makes the following acknowledgements, representations and covenants: (a) The Developer has the legal authority and power to enter into this Agreement. (b) The Developer has acquired the Acquired Developer's Parcels and has the necessary financial resources for construction of the Minimum Improvements. (c) The Developer will, to the extent required by this Agreement, construct or cause the construction of the Minimum Improvements in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, the TIF Plan and all local, state and federal laws and regulations, and will construct or cause the construction of or pay the costs of construction of any site improvements, utilities, parking facilities, or landscaping improvements which are necessary in connection with the construction and operation of the Improvements. (d) At such time or times as may be required by law, the Developer will have complied with all local, state and federal environmental laws and regulations, will have obtained any and all necessary environmental reviews, licenses or clearances under, and will be in compliance with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, the Minnesota Environmental Policy Act, and the Critical Area Act of 1973. (e) The Developer will obtain, in a timely manner, all required permits, licenses and approvals, and will meet, in a timely manner, all requirements of all local, state and federal laws and regulations which must be obtained or met before the Improvements may be constructed. (f) The Developer has conducted such investigation as it has deemed necessary with respect to the establishment of the TIF District and the basis for the inclusion of the Property therein and, with respect to this Development Agreement and its acceptance of the TIF Notes, is not relying on any representation or warranty of the EDA or the City with respect to the due establishment thereof or its qualification as a "redevelopment district". ,4 T/ (g) The Developer's investment in the purchase of the Property and site preparation, after giving effect to the TIF Notes, will be at least 70% or more of the assessor's current year's estimated market value and, accordingly, Minnesota Statutes, Sections 116J.993 to 116J.995, do not apply to this Development Agreement or the assistance provided by the TIF Notes. (h) The Developer has paid Developer Acquisition Costs in excess of $2,400,000 in contemplation of the Development. Section 2.2 By the EDA and City. The EDA and City make the following representations as the basis for the undertaking on its part herein contained: (a) The EDA and City are authorized by law to enter into this Agreement and to carry out their respective obligations hereunder; (b) The City is in the process of considering zoning modifications for the Property to accommodate the Development as proposed, and the City has conducted and completed all environmental reviews and assessments required to be undertaken by it under applicable law. (c) The EDA intends to treat the issuance of the TIF Note as payment or reimbursement for eligible costs under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.176, Subd. 4; and, unless a subsequent allocation is made, to allocate for purposes of Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.1763, the payment or reimbursement to eligible costs in the following order: (a) Developer Acquisition Costs, (b) Public Acquisition Costs, (c) Relocation Costs, (d) Demolition and Soil Correction Costs, (e) Public Development Costs and (f) any Structured Parking Costs. The Property was determined by the EDA's consultants to include parcels which contain structurally substandard buildings and adjacent parcels necessary to provide a site of sufficient size to permit an integrated development. ARTICLE III. CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS; PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS; OTHER DEVELOPER OBLIGATIONS Section 3.1 Construction of Minimum Improvements. The Developer agrees that it will construct or cause to be constructed the Minimum Improvements and any other improvements which the Developer elects to construct on the Property substantially in accordance with the Development Plans. Section 3.2 Building Plans. Final Development Plans for the Improvements shall be subject to approval by the City. Section 3.3 Completion of Construction. Subject to Unavoidable Delays, construction of the Minimum Improvements shall be commenced no later than December 31, 2008 and construction of Substantially All of the Minimum Improvements shall be completed no later than 18 months from the date of commencement of construction. All construction shall be in conformity with the approved Development Plans. Periodically during construction, but at intervals of not less than 60 days, the Developer shall make reports in such detail as may reasonably be requested by the EDA concerning the actual progress of construction. Section 3.4 Certificate of Completion. Promptly after notification by the Developer of completion of Substantially All of the Minimum Improvements, the EDA shall inspect the construction to determine whether it has been substantially completed in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, including the date for the completion thereof. In the event that the EDA determines that the construction has been completed substantially in accordance with the Development Plans and applicable regulations, the EDA shall furnish the Developer with a Certificate of Completion in the form of Exhibit C. Such certification by the EDA shall be a conclusive determination of satisfaction and termination of the agreements and covenants in this Agreement with respect to the obligations of the Developer to construct or cause to be constructed the Minimum Improvements, and shall constitute a release of the Developer's obligations hereunder. Section 3.5 Property Acquisition. The real property necessary to be acquired for the Development consists of the Acquired Developer's Parcels and the Other Parcels. The EDA will hold public hearings in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.012, Subd. 6, and, prior to the execution hereof, has made the findings and determinations which were necessary to authorize acquisition of the Other Parcels by condemnation. At such time as the EDA determines that reasonable efforts by the Developer to acquire the Other Parcels have been exhausted the EDA shall acquire by condemnation such of the Other Parcels as the Developer has not acquired. With respect to the Other Parcels which the EDA determines to acquire, the EDA may at its option either (a) authorize all or any designated Other Parcels to be acquired by the Dakota County Housing and Redevelopment Authority as its agent or (b) directly acquire such Other Parcels by negotiation or condemnation; provided, however, that the EDA shall have no obligation to pursue condemnation or to purchase or pay for any of the Other Parcels until the Developer has delivered the Letter of Credit to the EDA pursuant to Section 3.9 hereof. If the EDA acquires any of the Other Parcels, the EDA and Developer shall, no later than the closing date of the EDA's purchase of the parcel, enter into a Purchase Agreement substantially in the form of Exhibit E. The form of Purchase Agreement shall be completed with (a) a description of the parcel acquired by the EDA and to be reconveyed to the Developer, (b) a purchase price equal to the purchase price paid by the EDA, (c) a description of encumbrances revealed by a title investigation, (d) specification of a closing date not later than 30 days after acquisition by the EDA of the parcel or such later date as the EDA may agree to, and (e) specification of the amount of the Letter of Credit to cover Relocation Costs reasonably estimated by the EDA to be payable with respect to the parcel. Upon delivery of the Quit Claim Deed contemplated by the Purchase Agreement the EDA and Developer shall enter into the Repurchase Agreement which shall specify a purchase price equal to the purchase price specified in the Purchase Agreement. The EDA makes no representation or warranty as to the status of title to the Property or as to the suitability of the Property for the Developer's purposes. Section 3.6 Demolition. Within nine months after the right to occupy any parcel of Property, the Developer shall demolish all the buildings and other improvements thereon. Any demolition costs paid by the Developer or EDA with respect to the Property shall be 4S'3 deemed Demolition and Soil Correction Costs hereunder to the extent accompanied by evidence of the reasonableness thereof. Section 3.7 Relocation. The EDA shall pay any relocation costs required to be paid by the EDA under Chapter 117, Minnesota Statutes, or any other law and shall be promptly reimbursed by the Developer as provided by the Purchase Agreement relating thereto. Any relocation costs paid by or on behalf of the EDA (including those reimbursed by the Developer) shall be considered Relocation Costs hereunder to the extent accompanied by evidence of the reasonableness thereof. Section 3.8 Soil Correction. Any costs paid by the Developer to remedy any soil correction problems described in Exhibit L hereto shall be deemed Demolition and Soil Correction Costs hereunder to the extent accompanied by evidence of the reasonableness thereof. Section 3.9 Letter of Credit; Cash Deposit. As security for the Developer's obligation to reimburse the EDA for payment of Public Acquisition Costs, Relocation Costs and other costs hereunder, the Developer shall, prior to commencement by the EDA of any condemnation proceeding, (i) reimburse the EDA for any appraisal, consultant or legal fees paid or incurred by the EDA with respect to such parcel prior to such date and (ii) deliver to the EDA a cash security deposit or a Letter of Credit issued by a bank acceptable to the EDA which has an office in Minnesota. The cash deposit or a Letter of Credit shall be in an amount equal to the amount of the Public Acquisition Costs, Relocation Costs and Demolition and Soil Correction Costs incurred or reasonably estimated to be incurred by the EDA in connection with its activities hereunder and shall otherwise be in a form acceptable to the EDA. The amount of the cash deposit or Letter of Credit shall be increased upon identification of a parcel to be acquired by the EDA hereunder. Upon reimbursement of the EDA by the Developer or direct payment of costs by the Developer in accordance with Sections 3.5, 3.6, 3.7 and 3.8 or the applicable Purchase Agreement, the amount of the cash deposit or Letter of Credit shall be reduced by a corresponding amount. Upon reimbursement to the EDA of all Public Acquisition Costs, Relocation Costs and Demolition and Soil Correction Costs incurred by the EDA the EDA shall return the cash deposit or Letter of Credit to the Developer. The EDA may draw on the Letter of Credit on the earlier of (i) 20 days prior to its expiration date, or (ii) the occurrence of an Event of Default hereunder. Section 3.10 Construction of Public Improvements. Provided the Developer has executed a waiver to any special assessment, the City shall construct the Public Improvements as a local improvement under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429 by (i) the earlier of (A) the date two (2) years after the EDA has acquired the last of the EDA Parcels, or (B) the date ninety (90) days prior to the date on which the Developer commences construction of the Minimum Improvements; or (ii) such later date as may be approved by the Developer. Section 3.11 Assessments. The City may assess all or any portion of the Property and other benefited properties pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, for that portion, if any, of the cost of the Public Improvements which may be lawfully assessed against such 4gv property, except as otherwise provided by agreement of the City. The parties agree that no provision of this Agreement shall limit the right of the City to assess the Property for its respective lawful share of the assessable costs of the Public Improvements. In addition, the property owners shall pay the cost of the usual charges for water and sewer utility service for the Property. Section 3.12 Vacation of Blue Gentian Circle. Within three months of the acquisition by the EDA of the last of the Other Parcels the City shall hold the necessary public hearings to consider the vacation of Blue Gentian Circle. Section 3.13 Marketing Plan. Prior to the commencement of any eminent domain action by the EDA to acquire the Other Parcels the Developer shall prepare and submit to the EDA a marketing plan reasonably satisfactory to the EDA describing efforts to be made by the Developer to obtain tenants for the Development. After the acquisition of the last of the Other Parcels, the Developer shall submit to the EDA at the end of each calendar quarter a description of efforts made and progress made in implementing the plan. Section 3.14 Conveyance of Acquired Developer's Parcels. In lieu of an acquisition by the EDA of the Acquired Developer's Parcels for an amount equal to the Developer Acquisition Cost and reconveyance of such parcels for a nominal amount subject to this Development Agreement, the parties agree that the Developer will be reimbursed for its Developer Acquisition Cost by delivery of the TIF Note upon issuance of the Certificate of Completion as provided by Section 5.1 hereof. ARTICLE IV. LIMITATION UPON ENCUMBRANCE; PROHIBITIONS AGAINST ASSIGNMENT AND TRANSFER; SUBORDINATION Section 4.1 Limitation Upon Encumbrance of Development. Prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Completion, neither the Developer nor any successor in interest to the Property or any part thereof shall engage in any financing or any other transaction creating any mortgage or other encumbrance or lien upon the Property, whether by express agreement or operation of law, or suffer any encumbrance or lien to be made on or attached to the Property other than the mortgages, liens or encumbrances attached for the purposes of obtaining funds to the extent necessary for acquiring and developing the Property and constructing the Improvements and such additional funds, if any, in an amount not to exceed the costs of developing the Development without the prior written approval of the EDA. The EDA shall not approve any Mortgage which does not contain terms which conform to the tern -is of this Article IV of this Agreement. The EDA shall respond to any request under this Article IV within 45 days. Section 4.2 Representation as to Development. The Developer represents and agrees that its undertakings pursuant to this Agreement are for the purpose of implementation of the Development. The Developer further recognizes that, in view of the importance of the Development to the general welfare of the EDA and the substantial financing and other public aids that have been made available by the EDA and the City for the purpose of gs- making the Development possible, the qualifications and identity of the Developer are of particular concern to the EDA. The Developer further recognizes that it is because of such qualifications and identity that the EDA is entering into this Agreement, and, in so doing, is further willing to rely on the representations and undertakings of the Developer for the faithful performance of all undertakings and covenants agreed by Developer to be performed. Section 4.3 Prohibition Against Transfer of Property and Assignment of Agreement. For the reasons set out in Section 4.2 of this Agreement, the Developer represents and agrees that, prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Completion: (a) Except only transfers to affiliated entities in which MG Eagan, LLC has an ownership interest and management control and transfers or encumbrances for the purpose of obtaining financing necessary to enable the Developer or any successor in interest to the Property, or any part thereof, to acquire and develop the Property and perform the Developer's obligations with respect to the Development under this Agreement, and any other purpose authorized by this Agreement, the Developer, except as so authorized, has not made or created, and will not make or create, or suffer to be made or created, any total or partial sale, assignment, conveyance, or any trust or power, or transfer in any other mode or form of or with respect to this Agreement or the Development or any part thereof or any interest therein, or any contract or agreement to do any of the same, without the prior written approval of the EDA, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld; and (b) The EDA shall be entitled to require, except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, as conditions to any such approval under this Section 4.3 that: (i) any proposed transferee shall have the qualifications and financial responsibility, as determined by the EDA, necessary and adequate to fulfill the obligations undertaken in this Agreement by the Developer, or, in the event the transfer is of or relates to part of the Development, such obligations to the extent that they relate to such part; (ii) any proposed transferee, by instrument in writing satisfactory to the EDA and in form recordable among the land records, shall for itself and its successors and assigns, and specifically for the benefit of the EDA, have expressly assumed all of the obligations of the Developer under this Agreement and agreed to be subject to such obligations, restrictions and conditions or, in the event the transfer is of or relates to part of the Development, such obligations, conditions, and restrictions to the extent that they relate to such part; provided, that the fact that any transferee of, or any other successor in interest whatsoever to, the Development or any part thereof, shall, for whatever reason, not have assumed such obligations or agreed to do so, shall not, unless and only to the extent otherwise specifically provided in this Agreement or agreed to in writing by the EDA, relieve or except such transferee or successor from such obligations, conditions, or restrictions, or deprive or limit the EDA of or with respect to any rights or remedies or controls with respect to the Development or the construction of the Improvements; it being the intent of this Section 4.3, together with other provisions of this Agreement, that to the fullest extent permitted by law and equity and excepting only in the manner and to the extent specifically provided otherwise in the Agreement no transfer of, or change with respect to, ownership in the Development or any part thereof, or any interest therein, however consummated or occurring, whether voluntary or involuntary, shall operate, legally or practically, to deprive or limit the EDA, of any rights or remedies or controls provided in or resulting from this Agreement with respect to the Development and the �6 construction of the Improvements that the EDA would have had, had there been no such transfer or change; and (iii) there shall be submitted to the EDA for review all instruments and other legal documents involved in effecting transfers described herein, and, if approved by the EDA, its approval shall be indicated to the Developer in writing. In the absence of specific written agreement by the EDA to the contrary, no such transfer or approval by the EDA thereof shall be deemed to relieve the Developer from any of its obligations with respect thereto which are not expressly assumed by the transferee approved by the EDA. Section 4.4 Subordination and Modification for the Benefit of Mortgagees. (a) In order to facilitate the obtaining of temporary or permanent financing for the acquisition and development of the Property and construction or purchase of the Improvements by the Developer or others, the EDA agrees to subordinate its rights under this Agreement to the holder of any mortgage entered into for the purpose of obtaining such financing, except its right to repurchase the Other Parcels under the Repurchase Agreement. (b) In order to facilitate the obtaining of financing for the acquisition and development of the Property and construction or purchase of the Improvements, the EDA agrees that it shall agree to any reasonable modification of this Article IV or waiver of its rights hereunder to accommodate the interests of the holder of the Mortgage, provided, however, that the EDA determines, in its reasonable judgment, that any such modification(s) will adequately protect the legitimate interests and security of the EDA with respect to the Development. ARTICLE V. TAX INCREMENT NOTE Section 5.1 Issuance of Tax Increment Note. Subject to the further provisions of this Section, the EDA shall, upon completion of Substantially All of the Minimum Improvements and the issuance of a the Certificate of Completion therefor, issue to the Developer a Tax Increment Note substantially in the form of Exhibit C. The principal amount of the TIF Note issued upon completion of Substantially All of the Minimum Improvements shall be (1) if the Improvements consist of an office building of at least 175,000 square feet but not more than 233,000 square feet, $2,800,000; (2) if the Improvements consist of an office building of at least 233,000 square feet but not more than 287,000 square feet, $2,800,000 plus, (a) if the Improvement includes at least 250 spaces of structured parking, the lesser of (i) $1,000,000 or (ii) the Structured Parking Costs; or (b) if the Improvements consist of an office building of at least 287,000 square feet and at least 250 spaces of structured parking, the lesser of (i) $2,000,000 or (ii) the Structured Parking Costs. The TIF Note shall bear interest at the rate of 6.75% per annum, and shall be payable in semiannual installment payments payable on each February 1 and August 1 to and including February 1, 2029. Semi-annual installment payments shall be applied first to interest and then to a reduction in outstanding principal. Interest on the outstanding balance of the TIF Note shall accrue from the date of issue or most recent installment payment date and, if not paid on an installment payment date, shall be added to principal. The TIF Note shall be dated as of the Completion Date of the Minimum Improvements and shall mature on February 1, 2029. The Developer covenants and agrees not to sell, transfer or convey the TIF Note without the express written consent of the EDA; provided, however, that the Developer may, without such consent, (i) pledge or grant a security interest in the TIF Note to a lender as security for a loan or (ii) after 10 days' prior written notice to the EDA, transfer a TIF Note to an institutional investor which has acknowledged in writing that (a) it is acquiring the TIF Note for purposes of investment and not for resale, (b) it is not relying on any representations or warranties of the EDA or City, express or implied, as to the availability or adequacy of the tax increment to pay principal and interest or upon any funds of the City or EDA and (c) all subsequent transfers shall meet such conditions. The Developer acknowledges that the EDA makes no representations as to the adequacy of tax increments available to pay the TIF Note. The TIF Note shall be payable solely from the available tax increment from a portion of the TIF District received by the EDA to the extent provided in Section 5.2 hereof and the EDA shall have no other liability on either TIF Note, nor shall either TIF Note be payable out of any funds or properties of the EDA or City other than tax increment from the TIF District. Section 5.2 Tax Increment Available for TIF Note. The semi-annual installments due on the TIF Note shall be paid solely from the tax increment actually received by the EDA from collections of ad valorem taxes from the Property, after deducting 25% of such increment for allowable administrative expenses and other purposes. Available tax increment shall be applied first to accrued and unpaid interest and then to principal. No installments on the TIF Note are required to be paid after February 1, 2029, regardless of whether the TIF Note has been paid in full. Neither the EDA nor City shall pledge or appropriate any available tax increment from the Property to the payment of any other obligation until the TIF Note has been paid in full. ARTICLE VI. EVENTS OF DEFAULT Section 6.1 Events of Default Defined. The following shall be deemed Events of Default under this Agreement and the term shall mean, whenever it is used in this Agreement, unless the context otherwise provides, any one or more of the following events: (a) Failure by the Developer to observe and substantially perform any material covenant, condition, obligation or agreement on its part to be observed or performed hereunder, if such failure shall continue for a period of thirty (30) days after written notice of such failure is given by the EDA or the City to the Developer; provided , however, that if such failure is of such nature that it cannot with diligence be cured within thirty (30) days, and provided further that within such thirty (30) -day period the Developer has commenced such cure and thereafter diligently prosecutes such cure, such thirty (30) -day period shall be extended to the period reasonably necessary to cure such failure; (b) If the Developer shall admit in writing its inability to pay its debts generally as they become due, or shall file a petition in bankruptcy, or shall make an assignment for the benefit of its creditors, or shall consent to the appointment of a receiver of itself or of the whole or any substantial part of the Development; (c) If the Developer shall file a petition under the federal bankruptcy laws; or (d) If the Developer, on a petition in bankruptcy filed against it, be adjudicated a bankrupt, or a court of competent jurisdiction shall enter an order of decree appointing, without the consent of the Developer, a receiver of the Developer or of the whole or substantially all of its property, or approve a petition filed against the Developer seeking reorganization or arrangement of the Developer under the federal bankruptcy laws, and such adjudication, order or decree shall not be vacated or set aside or stayed within 120 days from the date of entry thereof. Section 6.2 Remedies on Default. Whenever any Event of Default occurs, the EDA and the City may, in addition to any other remedies or rights given the EDA and the City under this Agreement, take any one or more of the following actions: (a) suspend their performance under this Agreement until they receive assurances from the Developer, deemed reasonably adequate by the EDA or the City, that the Developer will cure its default and continue its performance under this Agreement; (b) cancel or rescind this Agreement; (c) if the Event of Default relates to failure to reimburse the EDA for Relocation Costs or other costs hereunder, draw on the Letter of Credit or cash deposit provided for in Section 3.9 hereof; (d) withhold the Certificate of Completion; or (e) take whatever action at law or in equity may appear necessary or desirable to the EDA or the City to enforce performance and observance of any obligation, agreement, or covenant of the Developer under this Agreement. Once a Certificate of Completion has been issued, Developer has no further obligations hereunder, and no remedy shall affect the right of the Developer to receive payment under the TIF Note. Section 6.3 No Remedy Exclusive. No remedy herein conferred upon or reserved to the EDA is intended to be exclusive of any other available remedy or remedies, but each and every such remedy shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to every other remedy given under this Agreement or now or hereafter existing at law or in equity or by statute. No delay or omission to exercise any right or power accruing upon any default shall impair any such right or power or shall be construed to be a waiver thereof, but any such right and power may be exercised from time to time and as often as may be deemed expedient. In order to entitle the EDA or the Developer to exercise any remedy reserved to it, it shall not be necessary to give notice, other than such notice as may be required in this Article VI. Section 6.4 No Additional Waiver Implied by One Waiver. In the event any agreement contained in this Agreement should be breached by any party and thereafter waived by another party, such waiver shall be limited to the particular breach so waived and shall not be deemed to waive any other concurrent, previous or subsequent breach hereunder. ARTICLE VII. ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS Section 7.1 Conflicts of Interest; Representatives Not Individually Liable. No EDA officer who is authorized to take part in any manner in making this Agreement in his or her official capacity shall voluntarily have a personal financial interest in this Agreement or benefit financially therefrom. No member, official, or employee of the EDA shall be personally liable to the Developer, or any successor in interest, in the event of any default or breach by the EDA or for any amount which may become due to the Developer or successor or on any obligations under the terms of this Agreement. Section 7.2 Non -Discrimination. The provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 181.59, which relate to civil rights and non-discrimination, shall be considered a part of this Agreement and binding on the Developer as though fully set forth herein. Section 7.3 Notice of Status and Conformance. At such time as all of the provisions of this Agreement have been fully performed by the Developer, the EDA and the City shall, upon not less than ten days prior written notice by Developer, execute, acknowledge and deliver without charge to Developer or to any person designated by Developer a statement in writing in recordable form certifying that this Agreement has been fully performed and the obligations hereunder fully satisfied. Section 7.4 Notices and Demands. Except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement, a notice, demand or other communication under this Agreement by either party to the other shall be sufficiently given or delivered if it is sent by mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested or delivered personally: (a) As to the EDA: Executive Director Eagan Economic Development Authority 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 90 (b) As to the City: City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 (c) As to the Developer: MG EAGAN, LLC c/o McGough Development, LLC 2737 Fairview Avenue North St. Paul, MN 55113 Attn: Gregory S. Miller (d) with a copy to: Dorsey & Whitney LLP 50 South Sixth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402-1498 Attn: Jay F. Cook or at such other address with respect to any party as that party may, from time to time, designate in writing and forward to the others as provided in this Section 7.4. Section 7.5 Counterparts. This Agreement may be simultaneously executed in any number of counterparts, all of which shall constitute one and the same instrument. LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF ACQUIRED DEVELOPER'S PARCELS EAGAN PROPERTY LIST Closed (yes or no) > >, 6) >, ai >, ai >, v >, ai >, >, > ai >, ca >, aai >, Legal Description (ot complete/for identification only) Pt. of NW 'A of Section 2, Township 27, Range 23, Dakota County, MN Pt. of NE 1/4 of NW '''A, Section 2, Township 27, Range 23, Dakota County, MN Commencing at SW corner of Lot 8, The Robert O'Neill Homestead Addition in Section 2, Township 27, Range 23, Dakota County, MN W'ly 170' beginning N line of Section 2, Township 27, Range 23, 1884.4' E of NW corner of said Section 2, Dakota County, MN E 79' of part of the NE 'A of the NW '/ of Section 2, Township 27, Range 23, Dakota County, MN Part of NE % of NW '/< of Section 2, Township 27, Range 23, Dakota County, MN J Commencing at NW comer of Section 2, Township 27, Range 23, Dakota County, MN Pt. of NE % of NW 'A of Section 2, Township 27, Range 23, Dakota County, MN NW % of NW ''A of Section 2, Township 27, Range 23, Dakota County, MN Pt. of the NW ''A of the NW 'A of Section 2, Township 27, Range 23, Dakota Cty. Ownership Steven & Julie Chapple James & Mary Kay Hanson Joan Hymanson (Barjo, Inc.) Thomas & Geraldine Benson Edith Drake Dan & Barbara Nord Gregory & Corrine Herrmann George & Geraldine Weinhandl Loy & Avis Bergh State of Minnesota Address 988 Blue Gentian Rd. 1000 Blue Gentian Rd. 999 Blue Gentian Rd. 1003 Blue Gentian Rd. 1011 Blue Gentian Rd. 1015 Blue Gentian Rd. 1023 Blue Gentian Rd. N (-4 N N v, N N kr) N kr) N kei N 41e C> kr) Mo N vol Mo N Car 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r. .-+ .-. r. .-, .-. .... r. .-. aa� EXHIBIT G LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF OTHER PARCELS EAGAN PROPERTY LIST Closed (yes or no) Legal Description (not complete/for identification only) Pt. of NW '% Com. 1358.6' N & N 74D 55 1/2M E 687' of SW cor. L 8 R O'Neill Hstd. N 74D 55 1/2M E 128' N 15D 04 1/2M W 328.87' to Center Rd. W on Rd. 128' S 15D 04M 30S E 328.87' to pt. of beg., Section 2, Township 27, Range 23, Dakota County, Mn Pt. of NW '% of NW '' f/k/a Pt Block 19, Kavanaugh & Dawson's Sub Com. 370' S of NE comer S 326' to Center Rd. S. 63D 30M W 165' N & Parr to E. Line 326' N 68D 30M E 165' to Beg., Section 2, Township 27, Range 23, Dakota Cty. Pt. of NW '% Com. 1358.6' N of SW corner L 8 R O'Neill Hstd. N 74D 55 1/2M E 303' N 15D 04 V2 M W 349.15' to Center Rd W on Rd to Pt 352.63' N of Beg. S 352.63' to Beg., Section 2, Township 27, Ran_e 23, Dakota Count , MN Part of NW % of NW % f/k/a all of Lot 1 & Lot 2, Block 22 E 85.5' of Lot 3, Block 22 of Kavanaugh & Dawson's Sub, Section 2, Township 27, Range 23, Dakota County, MN Pt. of NW '% of NW ''4 f/k/a all S. of Rd. of Block 19 of Kavanaugh & Dawson Sub, Section 2, Township 27, Range 23, Dakota Cty. Pt. of NW ''4 of NW '/ f/k/a Pt. of Blk. 19 Kavanaugh & Dawson's Sub com. Cen. Rd. 696' S of NE cor. NW '4 of NW '/ S 68D 30M W on Cen. Rd. 165' to Pt. of beg. SW on Rd. 336' N 326' N 68D 30M E 336' S 326' to beg., Section 2, Township 27, Range 23, Dakota County, MN Ownership Frank & Patricia Pavlik Ray -Mar Rental Marilyn Sandford Roger & Gladys Reiling Roger & Gladys Reiling Marvel Eggum rn h isa it TS b 990 Blue Gentian Rd. 1027 Blue Gentian Rd. 1020 Blue Gentian Rd. 1030 Blue Gentian Rd. CCS Czs N M Cl M M M �O 0 0 0 0 0 el N N el el 0 0 00 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 X9 3 os It-o-vT- An 0-.-11 3:, frAA-P Alkyva- jp-if/tre-v:i tom- A,,;, oo h-wvc-4. 4.47c. ArAA:14- ei-v4 G ‘ei-<:;:y:4 (F 4, re. I,. , Tit, .J(4144-4- ,fr:A. ,;11044, c....4 &A p_eAfrt-t4A-4 ,t,ge-e cam, $ 3 �„� � 2.- /-0-44-0 • -. c-LrA:ei--, 0, 0 5 ,.,,,i,,,., ,ktriA-LA, 4:o h;#1 ir4c2•P AA•Cit.. API A;14 A•Ail$1,1 -riL6'11 4044-""•• 0%4-P- 6 tt,44 14.14 • 11%/2..0) C jitly. ,0„.. kt,ar of,. 23.4 Itall.". AA41'4‘A •tot) -k. -e•td g'defkle*..• I/111 I z'- . COAVI VVVII.CL4 if&'VVLAI Aoa-t-gte:Z 1 ow,. „N.-0"Al r„,, -,*4..) --c It.„ A,t-ciA..yr•-v--4 ct-.,c. f.:,,, .(r.d L4.1-12- .aw , 9.:Adt-iA\ 1 0./0-1AucAS". .wu- 7 14.A_. 6-1-.-mt Ars‘c-e-v.4-i-4- ifc, 4.. 4.)L.dv 4.40-74. ct te.,bizea A4,,..,f- , eil... xfre-v,..„-vi ,4.4..,-1,:i ,vvt-ik...A.L,.:._4,. , z, &4A^`-4 JC-. 11L- c)Arld' 041 tAldtV> '114-t /itfvvt-t_ 4-ys4fLt-dx0L-.4 az.42JL,d-44())-e'L crsr-t. 6-6-C1A 64,tV ‘01110-°1'4' &n-,0( klgt^,-40 A,0(4)-3 o2A_ (yea. -04-" AI44-AL 4-L A;, brirt- 04-t_ be,L4S6,, dea4e-o L•6A;'S"Itil-Ajl • a.Ltx,1,_ two •LA- •Lkirk ,t; qut kA31 q �� --� PAA., � . °n.` p,T-r94AA-e. ,ems � AA4, )4Ary4- ,.tea .qA4A,Lt144 JLA44 A4114. vuA_ a<;„ e,vv-DATA\ a-JL kk) bu.„1 nMtsuz, , "� - n niv,� Agenda Information Memo Eagan Economic Development Authority Meeting November 1, 2005 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. aq� January 2006 Legislative POLICIES Association of Metropolitan Municipalities 145 University Ave. W. • St. Paul, Minnesota 55103-2044 Phone: (651) 215-4000 • Fax: (651) 281-1299 E-mail: amm@amm145.org Table of Contents Municipal Revenue & Taxation (I) I -A Levy Limits 1 I -B Local Government Aid (LGA) 1 I -C Market Value Homestead Credit (MVHC) 1 I -D Fiscal Disparity Fund Distribution 2 I -E Limited Market Value (LMV) 2 I -F Constitutional Tax and Expenditure Limits 2 I -G State Property Tax: Oppose Extension to Other Property 2 I -H Class Rate Tax System 2 I-1 Personal Property Taxation: Electric Utility 3 I -J Revenue Diversification 3 I -K Sales Tax on Local Government Purchases 3 I -L City Revenue Stability & Fund Balance 3 I -M Public Employees' RetirementAssociation (PERA) 4 I -N Aggregate Mining Fee 4 1-0 State Program Revenue Sources 4 General Legislation (II) II -A Mandates & Local Authority 5 II -B City Enterprise Activities 5 II -C Firearms on City Property 5 II -D 911 Telephone Tax 5 II -E 800 MHz Radio System 5 II -F Impaired Waters 6 II -G Building Codes 6 Housing & Economic Development (III) IIIA City Role in Housing 7 III -B City Role in Affordable and Lifecycle Housing 7 III -C Livable Communities 8 III -D Inclusionary Housing 8 III -E State Role in Affordable Housing 9 III -F Federal Role in Affordable Housing 9 III -G Cities Role in Economic Development 10 111-H Development 10 III -I Redevelopment 11 IH -J Tax Increment Financing 11 111-K Eminent Domain 12 2006 Legislative Policies Contents III -L "This Old House" / "This Old Shop" 12 III -M Business Subsidy Policy 12 Metropolitan Agencies (IV) IV A Purpose of Metropolitan Governance 13 IV -B Roles & Responsibilities of the Metropolitan Council 13 IV -C Selection of Metropolitan Council Members 14 IV D Funding Regional Services 14 IV -E Regional Systems 14 IV -F Review of Local Comprehensive Plans 15 IV -G Local Zoning Authority 15 IV -H Regional Growth 16 MI Comprehensive Planning Schedule 16 IV J Natural Resource Protecton 17 IV -K Federal Clean Water Mandates 17 IV L Inflow and Infiltration (I/I) 18 IV -M Water Supply 18 IV N Funding Regional Parks & Open Space 19 Transportation (V) V-A Transportation and Transit Funding 21 V B Regional Transit System 21 V C Transit Operating Subsidies 22 V -D Road Access Fee 22 V -E Street Utility 22 V -F HighwayTurnbacks & Funding 22 V G `3C' Transportation Planning Process: Elected Officials Role 23 V -H Red Light Cameras 23 V I Airport Noise Mitigation 23 V -J Cities Under 5,000 Population 24 V -K County State Aid Highway (CSAH) Distribution Formula 24 V L Municipal Input (Consent) for Trunk Highways and County Roads 24 V -M PlatAuthority 25 V -N City Speed Limit Control 25 V -O Municipal State Aid 25 Committee Rosters Municipal Revenue Policy Committee 27 Housing and Economic Development Policy Committee 28 Metropolitan Agencies Policy Committee 28 Transportation and General Government Policy Committee 29 ii Association of Metropolitan Municipalities AMM MISSION STATEMENT To serve as the primary representative of the collective interests of all metropolitan cities on metropolitan issues and statewide issues with metropolitan significance. 1. Albertville * 2. Anoka 3. Apple Valley 4. Arden Hills 5. Bayport 6. Blaine 7. Bloomington 8. Brooklyn Center 9. Burnsville 10. Champlin 11. Chanhassen 12. Chaska 13. Circle Pines 14. Columbia Heights 15. Coon Rapids 16. Cottage Grove 17. Crystal 18. Eagan 19. Eden Prairie 20. Edina 21. Excelsior 22. Falcon Heights 23. Farmington 24. Forest Lake 25. Fridley AMM MEMBERS 26. Golden Valley 27. Hastings 28. Hopkins 29. Hugo 30. Independence 31. Inver Grove Heights 32. Lake Elmo 33. Lakeville 34. Long Lake 35. Mahtomedi 36. Maplewood 37. Medicine Lake 38. Mendota Heights 39. Minneapolis 40. Minnetonka 41. Mound 42. New Brighton 43. Newport 44. North St. Paul 45. Northfield* 46. Oak Park Heights 47. Oakdale 48. Orono 49. Osseo 50. Plymouth 51. Prior Lake 52. Ramsey 53. Richfield 54. Robbinsdale 55. Rosemount 56. St. Anthony 57. St. Francis 58. St. Louis Park 59. St. Michael* 60. St. Paul 61. St. Paul Park 62. Savage 63. Shakopee 64. Shorewood 65. South St. Paul 66. Spring Park 67. Sunfish Lake 68. Three Rivers Park District* 69. Wayzata 70. West St. Paul 71. White Bear Lake 72. Woodbury 73. Woodland * = Associate Member 2006 Legislative Policies iii Municipal Revenue & Taxation (1) I -A Levy Limits The AMM strongly opposes levy limits and urges the legislature to not re-enact them. The AMM also opposes the imposition of artificial mechanisms such as valuation freezes, payroll freezes, reverse referenda, super majority requirements for levy, or other limitations to the local government budget and taxing process. Expenditures for capital improvements such as infrastructure reconstruction should not be subject to levy limits. I -B Local Government Aid (LGA) Local Government Aid (LGA), the only remaining form of general purpose state aid to Minnesota cities, has been systematically reduced and modified by previous legislatures, at a significant cost to most metropolitan communities. As a result of these changes a majority of the metropolitan area's 183 cities no longer receive any LGA. • AMM supports the restoration of previous LGA cuts to fully fund the current LGA formula. • AMM supports the continuation of LGA to assist those cities whose public service needs and costs exceeds their ability to pay. • AMM supports modifying LGA formula floors and caps for the purpose of reducing annual payment distribution volatility. • AMM supports a state -conducted analysis of the impact of including the unique needs of rapidly growing cities on the LGA formula. • AMM supports the inclusion of inflationary factors in the LGA formula. I -C Market Value Homestead Credit (MVHC) The Market Value Homestead Credit is intended to be a state aid to individual homestead property taxpayers. However, the MVHC reimbursement structure undermines accountability in a number of ways, most directly by enabling the state to reduce or even eliminate the reimbursement to local units of government while preserving the benefit of the credit to the homeowner. To promote transparency, the credit should be structured as a direct credit to the taxpayer rather than a reimbursement to local units of govemment. Further, any savings to the state resulting from reductions in the MVHC should be spread proportionally to all benefiting taxpayers. As funding levels are restored for LGA, the same consideration should be given to the Market Value Homestead Credit. 2006 Legislative Policies 1 Revenue & Taxation I -D Fiscal Disparity Fund Distribution TheAMM opposes the use of fiscal disparities to fund social or physical metropolitan programs since it results in a metropolitan -wide property tax increase hidden from the public. The AMM supports the continuation of the fiscal disparities program until such time as an appropriate replacement is developed. I -E Limited Market Value (LMV) The AMM strongly opposes extension of artificial limits in valuing property at market for taxation purposes to additional property classes since such limitations shift tax burdens to other classes of property and create disparities between properties of equal value. The Legislature should monitor the effects of the LMV phase-out to avoid excessive tax burden increases to currently benefiting properties. The AMM believes that enhanced targeting for special circumstances better serves the tax system. I -F Constitutional Tax and Expenditure Limits The AMM strongly opposes including tax and expenditure limits in the state constitution. This would eliminate any flexibility on the part of the Legislature or local governments to respond to unanticipated critical needs, emergencies, or fluctuating economic situations. When services such as education, public safety and health care require increased funding beyond the overall limit, experiences in at least one other state indicate that other publicly funded services receive less than adequate resources. Constitu- tional limits result in a reduced base during times of economic downturn and the inability to recover to previous service levels when economic prosperity returns. I -G State Property Tax: Oppose Extension to Other Property The 2001 Property Tax Reform Act shifted general education funding to the state, and funded it, in part, with a state property tax on commercial/industrial and cabin property. Since cities' only source of general funds is the property tax, the AMM strongly opposes extension of a state -levied property tax to additional classes of property. I -H Class Rate Tax System The AMM opposes elimination of the class rate tax system, or applying future levy increases to market value, since this would further complicate the property tax system. 2 Association of Metropolitan Municipalities Revenue & Taxation I-1 Personal Property Taxation: Electric Utility The Minnesota Department of Revenue is reviewing is regulations for calculating the taxable market value of electric and natural gas utility property. This affects property taxes paid by investor-owned utilities (IOUs) not only to the state, but also to local governments. Provisions in the current regulations, such as depreciation limits and prescribed weights for the cost and income approaches to value, help to preserve the taxable value of this property over the many decades it is in service. IOUs enjoy a guaranteed rate of return on their capital investments, but host cities experience the costs of environmental damage, nuisance and lost economic development as the result of this property. IOUs argue that their property is over -valued and that depreciation limits should be removed. However, substantial changes to the utility property valuation rules could drastically reduce the taxable market value that helps compensate host cities for hosting base load electric generation facilities. The AMM opposes changes to the utility property valuation rules that would result in a significant decline in the taxable market value of utility property. In the event new utility valuation rules produce a decline, the Legislature should step in to help keep host cities financially whole as a way of compensat- ing for the economic and environmental costs of hosting base load electric generation facilities, rather than through increases in property class rates or other mechanisms. I -J Revenue Diversification The AMM supports revenue diversification for cities in order to reduce reliance on the property tax. The AMM opposes legislated reduction or limitation of various license fees, development fees or other general fees, which would force increased property taxes to pay for related services. I -K Sales Tax on Local Government Purchases The Legislature should reinstate the sales tax exemption for all local government purchases without requiring a reduction in other aids. I -L City Revenue Stability & Fund Balance The AMM opposes state attempts to control or restrict city fund balances. These funds are necessary to maintain fiscal viability, meet unexpected or emergency resource needs, purchase capital goods and infrastructure, provide adequate cash flow and maintain high level bond ratings. 2006 Legislative Policies 3 Revenue & Taxation I -M Public Employees' Retirement Association (PERA) The AMM supports employees and cities sharing equally in the cost of necessary contribution increases. The AMM also supports state assistance to local governments to cover any additional contribution burdens placed on cities over and above contribution increases required by employees. Cities should receive sufficient notice of these increases so that they may take them into account for budgeting pur- poses. Further, the AMM will monitor legislative proposals and when necessary and appropriate, respond in a manner that supports this policy and provides for the fair treatment of employees and the protection ofmunicipalities' interests. I -N Aggregate Mining Fee In order to provide an incentive for the extraction of local aggregate resources prior to urbanized development, and in order to help offset the negative impacts of aggregate mining on local communities, the state should authorize cities and townships to collect a per ton host community fee from the opera- tors of aggregate mines with the fee proceeds to be deposited in the municipality's general fund. 1-0 State Program Revenue Sources The AMM supports continued development of the Metro area in a manner that is responsive to the market, but is cognizant of the need to protect the water resources of the state and the Metro area. Consequently, the AMM supports the goals and objectives of the proposed Clean Water Legacy Act. However, the AMM opposes any attempt by the state to finance state agencies, personnel, programs or services through municipal utility collection or municipal property tax mechanisms. Municipal utility rates are created to operate and maintain municipal utilities. Local property taxes are created to finance local government programs and services. The programs and services financed through the Clean Water Legacy Act, or any future state program, should be financed through traditional state revenue raising sources such as income or sales taxes. 4 Association of Metropolitan Municipalities General Legislation (11) IIA Mandates & Local Authority The AMM opposes statutory changes which erode local control and authority or create mandated additional tasks requiring new or added local costs without a corresponding state appropriation or funding mechanism. New unfunded mandates cause increased property taxes which impede cities' ability to fund traditional service needs. II -B City Enterprise Activities The AMM supports cities' authority to establish city enterprise operations in response to community need, local preferences, state mandates or to ensure resident's quality of life. Creation of an enterprise operation allows a city to provide the desired service while maintaining financial and management control. The state should refrain from infringing on this ability to provide and control services for the benefit of community residents. II -C Firearms on City Property Cities should be allowed to prohibit handguns in city -owned buildings, facilities and parks. This would allow locally elected officials to determine whether to allow permit -holders to bring guns into municipal buildings, liquor stores, city council chambers and city sponsored youth activities. It is notAMM's intention for cities to have the authority to prohibit legal weapons in parking lots, on city streets or city sidewalks. II -D 911 Telephone Tax Public Safety Answering Points (PSAP's) must be able to rely in the future on a continuing source of 911 revenues at the state level to pay for upgrades and modifications to local 911 systems, maintenance and operational support, and dispatcher training. State funding should also support the technology and training needed to provide number and location of wireless and VoIP calls to 911 on computer screens and transmit that data to police, fire and first responders. II -E 800 MHz Radio System The AMM supports the work of the Metropolitan Emergency Services Board (previously the Metro- politan Radio Board) in implementing and maintaining the 800 MHz radio system, as long as cities are 2006 Legislative Policies 5 not forced to modify their current systems or become a part of the 800 MHz Radio System until they so choose. The AMM further urges the Legislature to provide cities with the financial means to acquire infrastructure and subscriber equipment (portable and mobile radios) required, since the prime purpose of this system is to allow public safety agencies and other units of government the ability to communicate effectively. II -F Impaired Waters The AMM supports continued development of the Metropolitan area in a manner that is responsive to the market, but is cognizant of the need to protect the water resources of the state and Metro Area. Insufficient resources for impaired water assessments, total maximum daily load (TMDL) analysis, and capital projects threaten the Metro Area's ability to respond to market demands for development and redevelopment. Consequently, AMM supports the goals of the proposed Clean Water Legacy Act, with an on-going review to assure that Clean Water Legacy Act funds are properly distributed between assessment, TMDL development and capital projects to ensure both protection for our water resources and support for future development and redevelopment of the Metro Area. AMM further supports the use of capital funds for both storm water and wastewater projects. II -G Building Codes Approximately 20,000 new housing units are constructed annually in the Metro Area. Structural and water intrusion problems have surfaced in many homes and commercial buildings that have been built within the past 20 years. These problems have resulted in dissatisfied homeowners and conflict be- tween the state, builders and cities. At the same time, the building permit surcharge, a fee collected by cities and deposited with the state for the purpose of financing building related information, research and training, has been diverted to the state general fund for budget balancing purposes. The AMM supports the rededication of the building permit surcharge for local building and construction management purposes. AMM further supports a joint effort by the state, cities and builders to collec- tively identify the appropriate uses ofthe fund including education and analysis of new materials and construction techniques, building code updating, building inspector training, development of performance standards and identification of construction "best practices". AMM does not support legislative solu- tions that fail to recognize the interrelationships between builders, state building codes and cities. 6 Association of Metropolitan Municipalities Housing & Economic Development (I11) Introduction While the provision of housing is predominantly a private sector, market-driven activity, all levels of government — federal, state and local — have a role to play in facilitating the production and preservation of affordable housing in Minnesota. AMM's housing policies recognize the intergovernmental nature of this issue — starting with policies A through D, which outline the role of cities. Cities are responsible for much of the ground -level housing policy in Minnesota — including land -use planning, building code enforcement, and often times the packaging of financial incentives. However, the state must also play a major role by empowering local units of government and providing a variety of funding programs and tools. Policy E addresses the state's responsibility to provide financial resources and establish a general direction for housing policy. Finally, Policy F speaks to the urgent need for the federal government to increase its financial support for the production and preservation of affordable housing. III -A City Role in Housing In the state of Minnesota, the provision of housing is predominantly a private sector, market-driven activity. However, all cities facilitate the development of housing via responsibilities in the areas of land - use planning, zoning ordinances and subdivision regulations. Many cities choose to play an additional role by providing financial incentives and regulatory relief, participating in state and regional housing programs and supporting either local or countywide Housing and Redevelopment Authorities. Cities are also responsible for ensuring the health and safety of local residents and the structural soundness and livability of the local housing stock via building permits and inspections. AMM strongly opposes any effort to reduce, alter or interfere with cities' authority to carry out these functions in a locally determined manner. III -B City Role in Affordable and Life Cycle Housing AMM supports affordable and life cycle housing and recognizes that it is key to the economic and social well being of individual communities and the region. Cities can facilitate the production and preservation of affordable and lifecycle housing by: • Applying for funding from applicable grant and loan programs; 2006 Legislative Policies 7 Housing and Economic Development • Working with developers and local residents to blend affordable housing into new and existing neighborhoods; • Expediting review processes; and ♦ Working to reduce locally imposed development costs. III -C Livable Communities The Livable Communities Act (LCA) is operated by the Metropolitan Council and provides a voluntary, incentive -based approach to affordable housing development, brownfield clean up and mixed-use, transit -friendly development and redevelopment. AMM strongly supports the continuation of this approach, which has been widely accepted and is fully utilised by local communities. Currently the LCA program is primarily funded via a Metropolitan Council property tax levy, which is subject to levy limits. AMM supports the loosening or removal of these levy limits as well as the appro- priation of additional state funds for this program in order to allow it to more fully meet the demon- strated need that currently exists in the metropolitan area. Use of interest earnings from LCA funds should be limited to covering the costs of administering the program. Remaining interest earnings not used for program administration should be considered part of the LCA funds and used to fund grant requests from the established LCA accounts, according to established funding criteria. AMM supports the increased funding in the livable communities demonstration account in order to assist communities with development that may not be exclusively market driven or market proven in their particular location and in order to support important development and redevelopment goals. III -D Inclusionary Housing AMM supports the location of affordable housing in residential and mixed-use neighborhoods through- out a city and would support enabling legislation that authorizes cities to utilize new and innovative means of achieving this goal. However, AMM does not support passage of a mandatory inclusionary housing law that would require a certain percentage of units in all new housing developments to be affordable to households at a particular income level. Advocates of a mandatory inclusionary housing law often point to its use in Montgomery County, Maryland. However, AMM does not believe the situation or experiences of Montgomery County are broadly applicable or transferable to the Twin Cities metropolitan region, given this area's development stage, housing market and state -local government structure. Furthermore, a close look at the Mont- gomery County experience shows that the production of affordable housing units has fallen-offsignifi- 8 Association of Metropolitan Municipalities Housing and Economic Development cantly from the levels achieved in the mid -1980's to the point where, today, it is not achieving large- scale production of affordable housing units. Mandatory inclusionary housing policies are based on the assumption that in every new housing devel- opment cities are capable of providing enough regulatory relief, via such methods as density bonuses and/or fee waivers, for the developer to produce below market rate units without a direct financial subsidy or cross -subsidization from the other houses in the development. While AMM does believe there are cost savings to be achieved through regulatory reform, density bonuses, and fee waivers, AMM does not believe a mandatory inclusionary housing approach can achieve the desired levels of affordability solely through these steps. III -E State Role in Affordable Housing Primarily through the programs of the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (MHFA), the state estab- lishes the general direction and prioritization of housing issues. The state financially supports a variety of housing types including homeless shelters, transitional housing, supportive housing, senior housing, and family housing. The state must continue to be an active partner in addressing affordable and lifecycle housing issues. Particularly, the state should: • Increase funding, including state general funds, for programs that support lifecycle and affordable housing; • Support housing programs that assist housing development throughout the low -to -moderate income range; • As a means of reconciling affordable housing with community development goals, AMM supports housing programs designed to develop market rate housing in areas with high concentrations of affordable housing; • Continue the policy of using MHFA's investment earnings for housing programs; • Amend the tax exempt bond allocation statute to maximize its availability for affordable rental housing; • Provide exemptions from, or reductions to sales, use and transaction taxes applied to the develop- ment and production of affordable housing; and • Authorize cities to amend their comprehensive plans in order to facilitate increased lifecycle and affordable housing, with a simple majority vote of the city council, rather than a super majority. III -F Federal Role in Affordable Housing AMM encourages the federal govemment to maintain and increase current levels of funding for afford- able housing. Federal investment in affordable housing will increase the supply of affordable and life 2006 Legislative Policies 9 Housing and Economic Development cycle housing as well as increase the inter jurisdictional collaboration between the two levels of govern- ment. Federal funding plays a critical role in aiding the state and local governments in their efforts to maintain and increase affordable housing throughout the state. AMM strongly encourages the following: • To preserve and increase funding for the Community Development Block Grant Program, which is a catalyst for creating more affordable housing; • To create and implement a more streamlined procedural method for local units of government to participate and access federal funding and services dealing with grants, loans, and tax incentive programs for economic and community development efforts; and • To commit resources to Section 8 funding. It is a flexible, cost effective, and successful program that has helped nearly two million families find housing through promotion of self-sufficiency and stability. III -G City Role in Economic Development The State of Minnesota should continue to recognize cities as the primary unit of government respon- sible for the implementation of economic development and redevelopment policies and land use con- trols. However, the state should begin to shift its focus from addressing economic needs based on population or location to a broader statewide perspective, which is based on economic development strategies, economic development priorities and economic impact. The state should also recognize the additional cost cities bear when undertaking redevelopment vs. development projects. HI -H Development It should be the goal of the State Legislature to champion development throughout the state providing enough sustainable funding to assure that the state remains competitive in a global marketplace. AMM supports the following: • Increased funding for the Contamination Cleanup Grant Account; • Increased funding for the Metropolitan Council Tax Base Revitalization Program; • Reinstated funding for the Minnesota Investment Fund; • Continued funding for the Urban Initiative Program; • Continued support for the Bioscience partnerships between cities, companies, and the University of Minnesota. • Increased funding in the livable communities demonstration account in order to assist communities with development that may not be exclusively market driven or market proven in their particular location. 10 Association of Metropolitan Municipalities Housing and Economic Development III -1 Redevelopment Redevelopment allows local communities to adjust to changing market conditions, better utilize existing public infrastructure, and maintain a viable local tax base. However, due to the higher up -front costs of redevelopment, as compared to greenfield development, desirable redevelopment projects often require public assistance. The State of Minnesota has a responsibility to provide cities with practical and flexible resources that will address the challenges and take advantage of redevelopment opportunities. AMM supports: • Increased and sustained funding of a statewide redevelopment fund, administered by the Depart- ment of Employment and Economic Development (DEED), with grants proportionally awarded on a competitive basis to the Metropolitan Area and Greater Minnesota. AMM also supports a provi- sion that any unused allocation be transferred back into the account and redistributed based on need; • Increased and sustained funding for the Contamination Cleanup Account for cleanup of polluted land and the recycling of previously developed land. III -J Tax Increment Financing Tax Increment Financing (TIF) has been and continues to be the primary tool available to local commu- nities for assisting economic development, redevelopment and housing. Over time, several statutory changes have made this critical tool increasingly difficult to use. In addition, recent property tax reform has resulted in a decreased state financial stake in city TIF decisions. In response the state should authorize increased flexibility in local TIF decisions. During the 2006 session, AMM urges the Legislature to: • Not adopt any statutory language that would further constrain the use of TIF; • Incorporate the Soils Correction District criteria into the Redevelopment District criteria so that a Redevelopment District can be comprised of blighted and contaminated parcels in addition to railroad property; • Continue to monitor the impacts of tax reform on TIF districts and, if warranted, provide cities with additional authority to pay for possible TIF shortfalls. Finally, the AMM encourages the State Auditor to continue to work towards a more efficient and streamlined reporting process. 2006 Legislative Policies 11 IH -K Eminent Domain Current Minnesota law gives cities the authority to exercise eminent domain in pursuit of a public purpose with the responsibility of balancing the rights of private landowners and the public's best interest. In recent years the Legislature has considered changes to municipal eminent domain powers that would impose a significantly higher standard of proof of public purpose, institute judicial review over the deference currently given to local elected officials and authorize payment of a challenger's legal fees by cities and their taxpayers. • AMM opposes any changes that would severely limit cities' ability to ensure the health, safety and welfare of its citizens or increase the cost born by cities during the eminent domain process; • AMM supports efforts to maintain and strengthen cities' ability to exercise the power of eminent domain for economic development and redevelopment purposes with the intent to reduce blight and increase the local tax base and create jobs; • AMM also supports the recognition that the vast majority of condemnations conducted by munici- palities are considered friendly and non -adversarial; • AMM opposes any changes that would significantly increase the likelihood of expensive and time- consuming lawsuits against cities. III -L This Old House/ This Old Shop AMM supports the reenactment of the "This Old House" law, which allowed owners of older home- stead property to defer an increase in their tax capacity resulting from repairs or improvements to the home. AMM also supports passage of similar legislation for owners of older commercial/industrial property who make improvements that increase the property's market value by at least 12%. III -M Business Subsidy Policy Without a thorough study, the Legislature should not make any substantive changes to the Business SubsidyAct during the next legislative session, but should look to technical changes that would stream- line state and local processes and procedures 12 Association of Metropolitan Municipalities Metropolitan Agencies (IV) IV -A Purpose of Metropolitan Governance The statutorily -defined Twin Cities metropolitan region is made up of 193 cities and townships covering over 3,000 square miles in seven counties. The effective and efficient delivery of certain public services and the continued economic growth of this region is enhanced by the existence of a regional entity to provide coordination and facilitate cooperation. Therefore, AMM supports the continued existence of a metropolitan governance system for the pur- pose of: • Facilitating long-term region -wide planning with the cooperation and consideration of the affected local units of government; and • Planning for and providing those public services that are needed by the region, but cannot be effectively and efficiently provided by local governments or the state. With or without the Metropolitan Council as it exists today, the region needs some entity to perform these functions. However, the Twin Cities' metropolitan governance structure should not be granted, nor should it assume, general local government or state agency powers. IV -B Roles & Responsibilities of the Metropolitan Council The primary responsibilities of the Metropolitan Council are to: • Plan for the orderly and economical development of the metropolitan area by preparing a compre- hensive development guide that includes long-range comprehensive policy plans for the transporta- tion/aviation, wastewater treatment and recreational open space systems. • Review local comprehensive plans for compatibility with the plans of neighboring communities, consistency with Metropolitan Council policies and conformity with metropolitan system plans. • Provide specific regional services and administer select regional grant programs as assigned by state or federal law. 2006 Legislative Policies 13 Metropolitan Agencies • Provide technical assistance, research and information to local units of government. Overall, it is the Metropolitan Council's role, through the regional development guide and its accompa- nying policy plans, to set broad regional goals and then provide cities with technical assistance and incentives to achieve those goals. Local governments are ultimately responsible for zoning, land use planning and development decisions within their borders. Any additional responsibilities taken on by, or authority granted to, the Metropolitan Council should be the result of a specific statutory assignment or grant. IV -C Selection of Metropolitan Council Members Members of the Metropolitan Council should be selected via an open process that includes an opportu- nity for local governments and other stakeholders to provide meaningful input. Council members should be understanding of and responsive to the districts they represent while also serving the best interests of the region. Metropolitan Council members should serve fixed, staggered terms. IV -D Funding Regional Services The Metropolitan Council should continue to fund its regional services and activities through a combina- tion of user fees, property taxes, and state and federal grants. • The Metropolitan Council should set user fees via an open process that includes public notices and public hearings. User fees should be uniform by type of user and set at a level that supports effective and efficient public services based on commonly accepted industry standards, and allows for sufficient reserves to ensure long-term service and fee stability. • AMM supports the use of user fees and property taxes to fund regional projects so long as the benefit conferred on the region is proportional to the fee or tax, and the fee or tax is compa- rable to the benefit cities receive in return. • AMM supports user fees for regional projects so long as the fees are not used to coerce a particular response from cities. • Fee proceeds should be used to fund regional services or programs for which they are collected. IV -E Regional Systems Regional systems are currently defined in statute as transportation (with aviation), wastewater treatment and recreational open space. The purpose ofthese regional systems and the Metropolitan Council's authority for them is clearly outlined in state statute. In order to alter the focus or expand the reach of any of these systems, the Metropolitan Council must seek a statutory change. 14 Association of Metropolitan Municipalities Metropolitan Agencies The system plans/statements prepared by the Metropolitan Council for these regional systems should be specific in terms ofthe size, location and timing of regional investments in order to allow for consider- ation in local comprehensive planning. System plans should clearly state the criteria by which local plans will be judged for consistency and the criteria that will be used to find that a local plan is more likely than not to have a substantial impact on or contain a substantial departure from metropolitan system plans. Additional regional systems should only be established if there is a compelling metropolitan problem or concern that can best be addressed through the designation. Common characteristics of the four existing regional systems include public ownership ofthe system and its components and an established regional or state funding source. These characteristics should be present in any new regional system that might be established. Water supply does not meet these criteria. IV -F Review of Local Comprehensive Plans In reviewing local comprehensive plans and plan amendments, the Metropolitan Council should: • Recognize that its role is to review and comment, unless it is found that the local plan is more likely than not to have a substantial impact on or contain a substantial departure from one of the four system plans. • Be aware of the statutory time constraints imposed by the Legislature on plan amendments and development applications. • Provide for immediate effectuation of plan amendments that have no potential for substantial impact on systems plans. • Require the information needed for the Metropolitan Council to complete its review, but not pre- scribe additional content or format beyond that which is required by the Metropolitan Land Use Planning Act (LUPA). • Not impose sanctions or monetary penalties when local comprehensive plans are deemed incom- patible with the systems plans or fails to meet a statutory deadline but where cities have demon- strated a good faith effort. IV -G Local Zoning Authority Local governments are responsible for zoning. Local zoning decisions, which are the implementation of cities' comprehensive plans, should not be conditioned upon the approval of the Metropolitan Council or any other governmental agency. AMM strongly opposes the creation of any appeals boards with the authority to supersede city zoning decisions. 2006 Legislative Policies 15 Metropolitan Agencies IV -H Regional Growth The most recent regional population forecasts project an additional 930,000 people and 460,000 households for the seven -county metropolitan area by the year 2030. In order to accommodate this growth in a mariner that preserves the region's high quality of life: • natural resource protection will have to be balanced with growth and development/reinvestuient; • significant new resources will have to be provided for transportation and transit; and • new households will have to be incorporated into the core cities, first and second -ring suburbs, and developing cities through both development and redevelopment. In order for regional and local planning to result in the successful implementation of regional policies: • the state of Minnesota must contribute additional financial resources — particularly in the areas of transportation and transit, reinvestment, affordable housing development, and the preservation of parks and open space. If funding for regional infrastructure is not adequate, cities should not be responsible for meeting the growth forecast set forth by the Metropolitan Council. • the Metropolitan Council must recognize the limitations of its authority and continue to work with cities in a collaborative, incentives -based manner; and • metropolitan counties and school districts must be brought more thoroughly into the discussion due to the critical importance of facilities and services such as county roads and public schools in accommodating forecasted growth. • greater recognition must be given to the fact that the "true" metropolitan region extends beyond the traditional seven -county area and the need to work collaboratively with the twelve adjacent counties in Minnesota and Wisconsin, and the cities within those counties. The region faces environmental, transportation and land -use issues that connot be solved by the seven -county area alone. IV -I Comprehensive Planning Schedule Cities are scheduled to review their comprehensive plans and submit any necesssary updates to the Metropolitan Council in 2008. The adoption of a new metropolitan development guide does not warrant a change in this schedule. Any future changes to the schedule for local comprehensive planning should be accompanied by the statutory establishment of a complementary schedule for regional planning. This schedule should: 16 Association of Metropolitan Municipalities Metropolitan Agencies (1) protect cities from being forced into a state of perpetual planning in response to regional actions; and (2) ensure sufficient time for cities to understand and incorporate regional policies into their local plan- ning efforts. IV -J Natural Resource Protection The Association of Metropolitan Municipalities supports the Metropolitan Council's efforts to compile and maintain an inventory and assessment ofregionally significant natural resources for the purpose ofprovid- ing local communities with additional information and technical assistance. However, any additional steps taken by the Metropolitan Council regarding the protection of natural resources must recognize that: • The state has a significant role to play in the protection of natural resources — especially when those resources are significant to a multi -county area that is home to more than 50 percent of the state's population and a travel destination for many more. Given the limited availability of resources and the artificial nature of the metropolitan area's borders, neither the region nor individual metropolitan com- munities would be well served by assuming primary responsibility for financing and protecting these resources. AMM urges the state and/or the Metropolitan Council to provide financial assistance for the preservation ofregionally signficant natural resources. • The completion of local Natural Resource Inventories and Assessments (NRUA) is not a regional system nor is it a required component of local comprehensive plans under the Metropolitan Land Use Planning Act. ♦ The protection of natural resources will have to be balanced with the need to accommodate growth and development, reinvest in established communities, encourage more affordable housing and pro- vide transportation and transit connections. Decisions about the zoning or land -use designations of specific parcels of land not already contained within a public park, nature preserve or other protected area are, and should remain, the responsibility of local units of government. IV -K Federal Clean Water Mandates Recent legal action related to impaired waters poses a significant threat to the development and redevel- opment interests of the Twin Cities. However, because the Environmental ProtectionAgency measures compliance on a statewide basis, and because watersheds and river basins transcend political bound- aries, meeting clean water standards is a statewide issue. Clean water requirements will affect both wastewater treatment and storm water systems. The Metropolitan Council should partner with federal and state agencies, as well as Metropolitan Area cities, to arrive at solutions to current legal challenges associated with the federal Clean Water Act that are both financially and environmentally appropriate for cities, the region and the state. 2006 Legislative Policies 17 IV -L Inflow and Infiltration (1/I) The Metropolitan Council's Water Resources Management Plan establishes an I/1 surcharge on cities that are determined to be contributing unacceptable amounts of clear water to the MCES wastewater treatment system. Currently 35 cities have been identified as excessive I/1 contributors. AMM recog- nizes the importance of controlling I/I because it affects the size, and therefore the cost, of wastewater treatment systems and because excessive I/1 in one city can affect development capacity of another city that lies down pipe. Yet, AMM opposes an I/1 surcharge until such time that the Metropolitan Council, in conjunction with cities, establishes criteria for the surcharge. At a minimum, the criteria should include: • A data supported definition of"excessive I/1" that includes data over a five year period with periodic updates that reflect municipal mitigation efforts • Flow data that verifies that the origin of the I/1 is within a city's collection system and not a MCES interceptor, or not from another jurisdiction • The amount of the surcharge is commensurate with the cost of solving the problem • The surcharge is levied as a last resort and will not be charged unless a city fails to develop amitigation plan in atimely manner • The surcharge is discontinued when the city adopts a construction schedule to implement their I/I mitigation plan • All money collected from an individual city via the surcharge is returned to the city for their mitigation efforts AMM encourages the Metropolitan Council to support state financial assistance for Metro Area I/1 mitigation through a future Clean Water LegacyAct or similar legislation. IV -M Water Supply The 2005 Legislature authorized the Metropolitan Council to carry out planning activities to address the water supply needs of the Metro Area. These activities must include: • Technical ground water supply and use data • A master Metro Area water supply plan • Recommendations for clarifying the roles of local, regional and state governments • Recommendations for streamlining and consolidating decision making and approval processes • Recommendations for funding future planning and capital investments In addition, the Legislature created a MetropolitanArea Water Supply Advisory Committee, with five municipal members, to assist the Council with its planning activities. In addition to the Metropolitan Council, there are currently at least five state agencies with water related jurisdiction. There are also several federal agencies involved in water issues. AMM supports the 18 Association of Metropolitan Municipalities Metropolitan Council activities associated with clarifying local, regional and state water supply roles. AMM also supports any analytical work that will help streamline and consolidate the myriad and often conflicting water supply permitting processes. AMM further supports efforts to identify capital funding sources to assist with municipal water supply projects. However, AMM opposes the insertion of the Metropolitan Council as another regulator in the water supply arena. The AMM further opposes the elevation of water supply to "Regional System" status, or the assumption of Met Council control and management of municipal water supply infrastructure. At this time, we oppose any regional taxes or fees for water supply planning. IV -N Funding Regional Parks & Open Space In the seven -county metropolitan area, regional parks essentially serve the role of state parks. There- fore, the state should continue to provide capital funding for the acquisition, development and improve- ment of these parks. State funding should equal 40 percent of the operating budget for regional parks. 2006 Legislative Policies 19 Transportation (V) V-A Transportation and Transit Funding AMM strongly supports increased funding for transit and highways, both of which are a critical need in the metropolitan area. In addition, funding for mass transit, including transit ways, light rail or heavy rail in existing corridors, should be dedicated in a manner consistent with current highway funding. Funds allocated to the metropolitan area should be flexible so that the most efficient and cost effective trans- portation solution may be chosen and the main metropolitan problem (congestion relief) can be ad- dressed. AMM supports full funding of the transportation and transit needs based on projected growth over the next twenty-five years. The Metro Area is predicted to grow by one million people by 2030 with a funding need for transportation and transit of over one billion dollars per year for the next fifteen years. AMM feels it is important to join a coalition of organizations to better address the transportation financ- ing needs of the entire state and will be cooperating with groups with the same mission. AMM supports the following list of revenue raising options in any combination, that has the political and financial viability to produce improved roads and transit. • Gas Tax • Additional Highway Bonding ♦ License Tab Fee Restoration ♦ Motor Vehicle Sales Tax Increase • Wheelage Tax • Street Utility Fee • Road Access Fee AMM supports the constitutional dedication of the MV ST, as passed by the 2005 legislature. AMM will oppose any effort to change the current language. All non -transportation programs should be funded from sources other than currently dedicated transportation funds. V -B Regional Transit System The Twin Cities Metropolitan Area needs a multi -modal regional transit system that serves both com- muters and the transit dependent. The transit system should be comprised of a mix of HOV lanes, express and regular route bus service, exclusive transit ways, light rail transit and commuter rail corri- 2006 Legislative Policies 21 Transportation dors designed to connect residential, employment, retail and entertainment centers. The system should be regularly monitored and adjusted to ensure that routes of service correspond to the region's changing travel patterns. In order to slow the growth in congestion and provide regional residents and visitors with a realistic alternative to the automobile, the regional transit system needs a funding source that is both stable and capable of growing with the region. The AMM is opposed to legislative directives that constrain the ability of metropolitan transit providers to provide a full range of transit services, including reverse commute routes, suburb -to -suburb routes, transit hub feeder services or new, experimental services that may show a low rate of operating cost recovery from the fare box. V -C Transit Operating Subsidies The Twin Cities MetropolitanArea is served by a regional transit system that is now expanding to include rail transit and dedicated bus ways. Any operating subsidies necessary to support this system should come from a regional or statewide funding source. The property taxpayers of individual cities and counties should not be singled out to fund the operation of specific transit lines or routes of service within this regional system. V -D Road Access Fee In order to fairly provide for major street improvements of primary benefit to a particular subdivision development but not directly assessable and to allocate cost so that new growth pays its fair share, the Legislature should authorize cities to establish, at their option, a road development access charge to be collected at the time that subdivisions are approved and/or at the time building permits are issued similar to park dedication fees. V -E Street Utility The AMM supports legislation to authorize cities to establish a street utility for street construction and reconstruction of aging infrastructure, similar to the existing storm water utility, so that costs of improved facilities can be more fairly charged to the users rather than the general population as a whole. V -F Highway Turnbacks & Funding The AMM supports jurisdictional reassignment or turnback of roads on a phased basis using functional classification and other appropriate criteria subject to a corresponding mechanism for adequate funding of roadway improvements and continuing maintenance. 22 Association of Metropolitan Municipalities Transportation Cities do not have the financial capacity, other than significant property tax increase, to absorb addi- tional roadway responsibilities without new funding sources. The existing municipal turnback fund is not adequate based on contemplated turnbacks. The AMM supports, through the state bonding process, additional funds for local roads and bridges. Additional funding would begin to ease the burden munici- palities are bearing due to the increased costs of road maintenance. The AMM supports additional funding for municipalities who are assuming the role of maintenance and upkeep on city streets, which maintain a level of traffic consistent with state highways. Cities should be compensated for providing a service that traditionally has been borne by the state. The state has abro- gated its responsibility for maintaining major roads throughout the state by requiring, through omission, that cities bear the burden of maintenance on major state roads. V -G "3C" Transportation Planning Process: Elected Officials Role The AMM supports continuation of the Transportation Advisory Board (TAB), with a majority of locally elected officials as members and participating in the process. TAB was developed to meet federal requirements designating the Metropolitan Council as the organization that is responsible for the continu- ous, comprehensive and cooperative (3C) transportation planning process to allocate federal funds among metropolitan area projects. This process requirement was reinforced by the 1991 Intermodal Surface Transportation EfficiencyAct (ISTEA) and the 1998 Transportation EfficiencyAct for the 21st Century (TEA21). V -H Red Light Cameras Cities should be allowed to enforce traffic laws and promote public safety on Minnesota's streets and highways through the use of photo enforcement technology, including motion imaging recording system technology. V -I Airport Noise Mitigation AMM supports noise abatement programs and expenditures designed to minimize the impacts of the MetropolitanAirports Commission (MAC) operated facilities on neighboring communities. The MAC should determine the design and geographic reach of these programs only after a thorough public input process that considers the priorities and concerns of the impacted cities and their residents. The MAC and state should seek long-term solutions to fund the full mitigation package as adopted in 1996 for all homes in the 64-60 DNL impact area. Noise abatement efforts should be paid for by fees and charges collected from airport users, as well as state and federal funds. 2006 Legislative Policies 23 Transportation V -J Cities Under 5,000 Population Cities under 5,000 population do not receive any non -property tax funds for their collector and arterial streets. Citing this fact, the 2005 Legislature appropriated $4 million in additional local govemment aid (LGA) to be distributed to cities under 5,000 population. Current CSAH distributions to metropolitan counties are inadequate to provide for the needs of smaller cities in the metropolitan area. Criteria such as the number of average daily trips should be established in a small city local road improvement pro- gram for funding qualification and a distribution method devised. Possible funding sources include the five -percent set-aside account in the Highway User Tax Distribution Fund, modification to county municipal accounts and/or state general funds. V -K County State Aid Highway (CSAH) Distribution Formula The AMM supports modification of the County State Aid Highway (CSAH) distribution formula to more fairly account for total vehicle miles traveled on metropolitan county CSAH funded roads. Al- though only 10% of the CSAH roads are in the metro area they account for nearly 50% of the vehicle miles traveled. The metro counties receive less than 20% of the CSAH distribution and have instituted city cost participation, so that cities are now forced to pay up to 45% of the CSAH road proj ect cost in some areas. V -L Municipal Input (Consent) for Trunk Highways and County Roads Minnesota Statute directs MnDOT to submit detailed plans with city cost estimates at a point one and a half to two years prior to bid letting, at which time public hearings are held for citizen/business/municipal input. If MnDOT does not concur with requested changes, MnDOT may appeal. Currently, that process would take a maximum of three and a half months and the results of the appeal board are binding on both the city and MnDOT. The AMM opposes any changes to the current statute that would allow MnDOT to totally disregard the appeal board ruling for state trunk highways. The result of such a change would significantly minimize MnDOT's desire or need to negotiate in good faith with the city for appropriate project access and alignment. It would make the public hearing and appeal process meaningless. The AMM opposes elimination of the county road municipal consent and appeal process for the same reasons we oppose changing the process as it applies to MnDOT trunk highway projects. 24 Association of Metropolitan Municipalities V -M Plat Authority AMM supports the current law granting counties review and comment authority for access and drainage issues for city plats abutting county roads. AMM opposes any statutory change that would grant the county veto power or shorten the 120 -day review and permit process time. V -N City Speed Limit Control The AMM supports uniform speed limit control of city roads and streets as currently provided by law and opposes changes allowing different speeds especially in contiguous cities. V-0 Municipal State Aid AMM supports an increase in the percentage of Municipal State Aid dollars that may be used for street operations and maintenance. 2006 Legislative Policies 25 Committee Rosters (VI) Municipal Revenue Policy Committee Jerry Splinter, City Manager, Coon Rapids (Committee Chair) Clark Arneson, Asst. City Manager, Bloomington Patrick Born, Chief Financial Officer, Minneapolis Tom Burt, City Manager, Golden Valley Teresa Daly, Councilmember, Burnsville Jerry Faust, Councilmember, St. Anthony Tony Feffer, Councilmember, White Bear Lake Walt Fehst, City Manager, Columbia Heights Rick Getschow, City Manager, Hopkins Marcia Glick, City Manager, Robbinsdale Pat Harris, Councilmember, St. Paul Alice Hulbert, Councilmember, Edina Eric Johnson, Administrator, Oak Park Heights Nicholas Juarez, Councilmember, West St. Paul Jim Keinath, City Administrator, Circle Pines Tom Lawell, City Administrator, Apple Valley Linda Masica, Councilmember, Edina Bruce Nawrocki, Councilmember, Columbia Heights Tammy Omdal, Chief Financial Officer, Burnsville Martin Rafferty, Administrator, Lake Elmo Don Rambow, Finance Director; White Bear Lake Gene Ranieri, IGR Director, Minneapolis Ryan Schroeder, Administrator, Cottage Grove Steven Sinell, City Assessor, Eden Prairie Matt Smith, Dir. Office of Financial Services, St. Paul Steve Stahmer, Administrator, Long Lake Ralph Teschner, Finance Director, Prior Lake Wendy Underwood, Legislative Liaison, St. Paul David Urbia, Administrator; Farmington Robert Williams, Councilmember, Columbia Heights Jim Willis, Administrator; Inver Grove Heights Jim Willis, Councilmember, Plymouth Wendy Wulff, Councilmember, Lakeville 2006 Legislative Policies 27 Committee Rosters Housing and Economic Development Policy Committee Tom Goodwin, Councilmember, Apple Valley (Committee Chair) Bonnie Balach, Contract Consultant, Minneapolis Janis Callison, Councilmember, Minnetonka Tom Daniel, Mgr. Econ. Dev., Minneapolis Walt Fehst, City Manager, Columbia Heights Christy Jo Fogarty, Councilmember, Farmington Bryan Hartman, Program Manager; Bloomington Dean Johnston, Mayor; Lake Elmo Lynn Moratzka, Councilmember, Hastings Anne Norris, City Manager, Crystal Tammy Omdal, Chief Financial Offcr./Dep. City Mgr, Burnsville Ron Rankin, Community Development Director, Minnetonka Mark Sather, City Manager, White Bear Lake Steve Stahmer, Administrator, Long Lake Bob Streetar, Community Development Director, Columbia Heights John Sullivan, Community Development Dir., Prior Lake Wendy Underwood, Legislative Liaison, St. Paul Craig Waldron, Administrator, Oakdale Robert Williams, Councilmember, Columbia Heights Liz Workman, Councilmember, Burnsville Metropolitan Agencies Policy Committee Anne Hurlburt, Community Development Director, Plymouth (Committee Chair) Charlie Crichton, Councilmember, Burnsville Craig Dawson, Administrator, Shorewood Charles Dillerud, Planner, Lake Elmo Dean Johnston, Councilmember, Lake Elmo Jane Kansier, Planning Director, Prior Lake Myrna Kragness, Mayor, Brooklyn Center Larry Lee, Community Dev. Dir. Bloomington Tom Link, Community Development Director, Inver Grove Heights Steve Menden, Councilmember, Shakopee Tammy Omdal, Chief Financial Officer, Burnsville Terry Schneider, Councilmember, Minnetonka James Smith, Councilmember, Independence Barb Sporlein, Planning Director, Minneapolis Continued.... 28 Association of Metropolitan Municipalities Committee Rosters Pierre Willette, Gov 't Relations Rep., Minneapolis Steve Wilson, Councilmember, Farmington Ron Wood, City Manager, Blaine Wendy Wulff, Councilmember, Lakeville Transportaton and General Government Policy Committee Dave Osberg, Administrator, Hastings (Committee Chair) Steve Albrecht, Dir. of Public Wks./City Eng, Prior Lake Chuck DeVore, Councilmember, White Bear Lake Pam Dmytrenko, Asst. to City Manager, Richfield Steve Elkins, Councilmember, Bloomington Klara Fabry, Dir. ofPublic Works/Engr, Minneapolis Matt Fulton, City Manager; New Brighton Dan Gustafson, Councilmember, Burnsville Chuck Haas, Councilmember, Hugo Mary Hamann -Roland, Mayor, Apple Valley Bill Hargis, Mayor, Woodbury Jon Haukaas, Director ofPublic Works, Fridley Mary Johnson, Mayor, Independence Dave Kelso, Councilmember, Circle Pines Mike Klassen, St. Paul Steve Lillehaug, Asst. City Eng./Traffic Eng. Karen Lowery Wagner, Gov't Relations, Minneapolis John Maczko, Transportation Dir.--Pulic Works Dept. Mary McComber, Councilmember, Oak Park Heights Mark McNeill, Administrator; Shakopee Veid Muiznieks, Councilmember, St. Paul Park Dave Pokorny, Manager, Chaska David Pritzlaff, Councilmember, Farmington Martin Rafferty, Administrator, Lake Elmo Jim Smith, Councilmember, Independence Dick Swanson, Councilmember, Blaine Wendy Underwood, Legislative Liaison, St. Paul Michelle Wolfe, Administrator, Arden Hills Wendy Wulff, Councilmember, Lakeville 2006 Legislative Policies 29 CITY OF EAGAN RESOLUTION Council Member introduced the following Resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION PROPOSING VETERAN FOR DISCHARGE WHEREAS, The City conducted an Organizational Study to assist with identifying future operational strategies and long range plans as they relate to service delivery to Eagan residents. WHEREAS, The City concurs with the finding from the Organizational Study that the parks planning position was created in the 1980's, a high growth period in which the City was experiencing tremendous growth in terms of residential development. As the City has matured to a build out level of approximately 95%, there is no longer a need for the position of Parks Planner/Landscape Architect. WHEREAS, the Organizational Study indicated several operational recommendations for the Parks & Recreation Department, which included the recommendation that the position of Parks Planner/Landscape Architect be eliminated. WHEREAS, the City Council supports the recommendation to eliminate the Park Planner/Landscape Architect position effective November 2, 2005. WHEREAS, the City does not have any other duties for which the incumbent employee is qualified that would constitute a regular part-time or full-time position. WHEREAS, the employee is an honorably discharged veteran, entitled to a notice of the City's intent and the right to request a hearing or to acquiesce to the City's proposal; NOW THEREFORE I3E IT RESOLVED by the Eagan City Council as follows: 1. That the position of Park Planner/Landscape Architect be and hereby is discontinued effective November 2, 2005. 2. That CJ Lilly, an honorably discharged veteran, be and hereby is proposed for termination by lay-off. Further, that Mr. Lilly be placed and remain on paid administrative leave pending a decision as to whether a hearing will be requested and if so, pending the hearing proceedings and decision. 3. That the Notice of Intent to Terminate by Lay-off to be served upon the employee be and hereby is approved substantially in the following form: To: CJ Lilly, Park Planner/Landscape Architect From: Tom Hedges, City Administrator, Lori K. Peterson, Human Resources Manager CC: Eagan City Council Date: November 2, 2005 Subject: Notice of Proposed Termination by Lay Off You have been proposed for termination by lay-off as the result of the discontinuance of the position of Parks Planner/Landscape Architect to which you have been assigned while employed by the City of Eagan. As an honorably discharged veteran, you may have the right to a hearing regarding the good faith of the proposed termination by lay-off under the Minnesota Veterans' Preference Act by either a right of mandamus (SEE Minnesota Statute 197.46) or by a petition the Commissioner of Veterans' Affairs (SEE Minnesota Statute 197.481). To have a hearing under either option, you must act within sixty (60) days of this notice of intent to terminate you by lay-off. Your failure to so act within sixty (60) days constitutes a waiver of your rights to a hearing on the City's intent to terminate you by lay-off under the Veterans' Preference Act and all other remedies. For your information, Minnesota Statute 197.46 states in part: The failure of a veteran to request a hearing within the provided 60 -day period shall constitute a waiver of the right to a hearing. Such failure shall also waive all other available legal remedies for reinstatement. Request for a hearing concerning such a discharge shall be made in writing and submitted by mail or personal service to the employment office of the concerned employer or other appropriate office or person. You are aware the City of Eagan underwent an extensive organizational study that was completed in recent months. One reason for the study was to help management identify operational strategies and long range plans as they relate to the development of future service delivery to Eagan residents. The study indicated several operational recommendations for the Parks & Recreation Department, which included the recommendation that the position of Parks Planner/Landscape Architect be eliminated. This recommendation was shared with you on April 29, 2005 and later presented to the Personnel Committee of the City Council on May 24, 2005. After careful and thoughtful consideration, the City Council supports the recommendation to eliminate the position Parks Planner/Landscape Architect effective November 2, 2005. This letter serves as your formal notice of the City's intent to terminate you by layoff. 4. That the City's Human Resources Manager, Lori K. Peterson is authorized to sign the Notice on behalf of the City. 5. That the City's Human Resources Manager, Lori K. Peterson is directed to serve the Notice and a copy of this resolution on the employee, either personally or by mail and to place a copy of the notice and this Resolution in the employee's personnel file. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing Resolution was duly seconded by and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: And the following voted against the same: Whereupon said Resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. 79586 October 14, 2005 Dear City Council Members: I respectfully request that the Eagan City Council waive the $150.00 application fee for a temporary liquor license on January 28, 2006. We are holding our sixth Annual Live and Silent Auction at Faithful Shepherd Catholic School and Tri -Parish Center. The purpose of the Live and Silent Auction is fundraising. All proceeds from the Auction will go to the school. Faithful Shepherd Catholic School will follow the City of Eagan's ordinance amendment by incorporating procedures that will be followed to engage in the temporary sale of alcohol beverages. • The designated property of the event will be limited to the school grounds, which includes through out the school's building. The following security measures will be taken to ensure proper safety in enforcing alcohol beverage sale and consumption laws, crowd control, public safety, and check the ages and identification of all attendees. • No person under the age of 21 will be sold or served alcoholic beverages. ■ No person will sell or give alcohol beverages to an obviously intoxicated person. ■ All persons who consume, purchase, or possess an alcoholic beverage in the licensed area will be issued and required to wear a wristband. (Wristbands will be purchased from an approved vendor list provided from the City of Eagan.) • The Welcome Committee will verify proper photograph identification for those individuals that are under the age of 21. • No person selling alcohol shall be intoxicated during his or her work shift. • Licensee will post signs at all entrances of the school to notify the public that sales to and consumption of alcoholic beverages by person's under the age of 21 or to persons intoxicated is prohibited. • Licensee will provide volunteer private security to monitor the licensed area. • Licensee will follow the designated hours listed in the City of Eagan procedures. • Licensee will designate an on-site manager of the licensed area who shall be within the licensed designated area at all times during the hours of sale. The onsite manager will complete training in alcohol beverage service and will train servers and security personnel in the same. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 651.406.4747. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully submitted, Christine Edinger Director of Finance Faithful Shepherd Catholic School 4IP City of Eagan CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 Bi Halley's First Add'n Magnum Towing CUP ❑ Magnum Towing is located at 4871 Biscayne Ave ❑ Property is owned by Kevin & Rita Mellon ❑ CUP allowing outdoor storage was approved in 1985 and 1992, subject to conditions CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 Bi Halley's First Add'n 40' City of Eagan CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 B1 Halley's First Add'n 1992 CUP Conditions 1. The permit shall expire two years from the date of Council approval; 2. Only storage of impounded and/or towed vehicles shall be allowed; 3. No "For Sale" signs shall be displayed and no sales or repair operation shall be conducted at this site; 4. The CUP and the City Council resolution shall be recorded with the Dakota County Recorder within sixty days of approval; and 5. All other City Codes shall be applicable. 401` City of Eakal CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 B1 Halley's First Add'n Violation History ❑ In 2001, the City filed a misdemeanor complaint with the District Court concerning CUP violations occurring on this property from 2000-2001 0 The owner was found guilty of Counts 2 and 5: Count 2. Count 5. Unlawful outdoor storage of items other than impounded vehicles; Unlawful outdoor storage of junk vehicles and parts. 411P City of Eapl CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 Bi Halley's First Add'n CUP Conditions of Concern Today: Condition 2 Only storage of impounded and/or towed vehicles shall be allowed; Condition 5 All other City Codes shall be applicable. 2001 Misdemeanors: Count 2 Unlawful outdoor storage of items other than impounded vehicles; Count 5 Unlawful outdoor storage of junk vehicles and parts. City of Etai CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 Bi Halley's First Add'n 2005 CUP Violations ❑ Notice was sent to the property owner August 5, 2005 outlining continued violations of the CUP as noted during the July 2005 inspection ❑ Second notice was sent to the property owner on October 5, 2005 outlining violations of the CUP as noted during the September 2005 inspection, and notifying the property owner of the revocation hearing 491 City of Eaia CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 Bi Halley's First Add'n 2005 CUP Violations - Eight Vehicles ❑ At least eight specific vehicles are being stored on the property that have been on the property since 2001-2002, after they became eligible for sale or other disposition by an impound lot under Minnesota statutes, thereby constituting the storage of junk or abandoned vehicles or the operation of a junk yard in violation of the CUP and the City Code's zoning regulations*: 49//` City of Eagan CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 Bi Halley's First Add'n 2005 CUP Violations — Eight Vehicles (cont'd) ❑ *Outdoor storage of junk or abandoned vehicles without a CUP is in violation of the CUP and Section 11.60, Subd. 14 of the City Code. Operation of a junk yard or an automobile reduction yard or auto wrecking is not a permitted, conditional or accessory use in an I-1 district (prior zoning designation) nor in an NB district (current zoning designation). City of Eaaal Vehicle 1 ❑ Sep 2001 CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 Bi Halley's First Add'n City of Eaaan Vehicle 1 ❑ Sep 2005 CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 Bi Halley's First Add'n City of Cap 11 II Vehicle 2 CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 Bi Halley's First Add'n City of Cap Vehicle 2 0 Sep 2005 CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 B1 Halley's First Add'n 41P City of Eaton Vehicle 3 ❑ Jan 2002 CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 Bi Halley's First Add'n emb it' City of Eaton CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 Bi Halley's First Add'n Vehicle 3 *City of Cap CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 B1 Halley's First Add'n Vehicle 4 0 Sep 2001 49/1` City of Eapi Vehicle 4 0 Sep 2005 CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 Bi Halley's First Add'n City of EaOan CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 Bi Halley's First Add'n Vehicle 5 ❑ Jan 2002 4 City of Eagan Vehicle 5 ❑ Sep 2005 CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 Bi Halley's First Add'n CUP Revocation Hearing November 1., 2005 L3 Bi Halley's First Add'n City of kali Vehicle 6 0 Sep 2005 CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 B1 Halley's First Add'n 41911 City of Evan CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 Bi Halley's First Add'n Vehicle 7 ❑ Jan 2002 City of Evan Vehicle 7 ❑ Sep 2005 CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 Bi Halley's First Add'n City of EaOaa Vehicle 8 ❑ Apr 2001 CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 Bi Halley's First Add'n 441/ City of Eaaaa Vehicle 8 ❑ Sep 2005 CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 Bi Halley's First Add'n City of Ekon CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 B1 Halley's First Add'n 2005 CUP Violations - Junk vehicles, vehicle parts and other refuse ❑ Junk vehicles (unlicensed, unregistered or inoperable vehicles, or vehicles displaying expired registration tabs), or vehicle parts or tires are being stored on the property in violation of the City Code Sections 10.01 and 10.51 4411 City of Cain Junk Vehicles CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 B1 Halley's First Add'n ❑ Numerous vehicles are stored on the site that do not have license plates displayed. ❑ Of the vehicles displaying plates and visible from off-site, the following were found to be expired or not on file as of September 6, 2005: 411911` City of Cap CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 B1 Halley's First Add'n Junk Vehicles CPX 500 LBT 613 874 NWL NBX 242 AEP 033 KNE 862 GLP 080 452 GPH ETE 381 932 ENR JSM 305 JVA 406 LXU 942 KNE 531 BTR 889 BYE 511 FMG 012 LQB 825 FND 862 CXN 517 KNL 796 094 LRM JVN 797 KAP 910 HAK 670 JSA 865 4P City of Ekal CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 Bi Halley's First Add'n 2005 CUP Violations - Junk vehicles, vehicle parts and other refuse 0 Numerous items, other than towed or impounded vehicles, are being stored on the property in violation of the CUP and in violation of the City Code** **Outdoor storage of any moveable property is a conditional use requiring a CUP pursuant to Section 11.60, Subd. 14.C.11 and 11.50, Subd. 4 City of Etau Semi/cargo trailers 0 Feb 2002 CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 B1 Halley's First Add'n *City of Cap Semi/cargo trailers; Tires 0 Sep 2005 CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 Bi Halley's First Add'n *City of Evan CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 Bi Halley's First Add'n Tires *City of Evan CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 Bi Halley's First Add'n Ti res City of Etsi Personal Watercraft 0 July 2005 CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 B1 Halley's First Add'n 41' City of Eaton Personal Watercraft 0 Sep 2005 CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 Bi Halley's First Add'n 4111 City of Emil Trailer with wheel & axle ❑ May 2005 CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 Bi Halley's First Add'n 4911` City of Eago Trailer with wheel & axle ❑ Sep 2005 CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 B1 Halley's First Add'n L City of Cap CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 B1 Halley's First Add'n Trailer with wire & scrap metal 0 May 2005 City of Eapa CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 B1 Halley's First Add'n Trailer with wire & scrap metal 0 Sep 2005 *City of Eke CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 B1 Halley's First Add'n Refuse stored in pick up truck bed *City of Eagal CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 Bi Halley's First Add'n Refuse stored in pick up truck bed ❑ Sep 2005 *City of Eap Engine hoist/metal frame 0 July 2005 CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 B1 Halley's First Add'n City of WI Engine hoist/metal frame 0 Sep 2005 CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 B1 Halley's First Add'n CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 Bi Halley's First Add'n 491/` City of Faun Bumpers ❑ Sep 2005 CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 B1 Halley's First Add'n 44/1` City of Eaaal Scrap stored in trailer ❑ July 2005 CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 B1 Halley's First Add'n 4111` City of Eaaaa Scrap stored in trailer ❑ Sep 2005 CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 B1 Halley's First Add'n CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 61 Halley's First Add'n CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 —L3 81 Nalleys First Add•n City of EaOal Metal racks ❑ Sep 2001 CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 B1 Halley's First Add'n City of Eaga CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 Bi Halley's First Add'n Metal racks ❑ Sep 2005 City of Evan CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 B1 Halley's First Add'n City Code Chapter 11.50 Subd. 4.D. states: " In reviewing applications of conditional use permits, the advisory planning commission and the council may attach whatever reasonable conditions they deem necessary to mitigate anticipated adverse impacts associated with these uses, to protect the value of other property within the district, and to achieve the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan." 4 City of Evan CUP Revocation Hearing November 1, 2005 L3 B1 Halley's First Add'n City Code Chapter 11.50 Subd. 4. H. states: "Failure to comply with any condition set forth in a conditional use permit or any other violation of Code provisions shall also constitute sufficient cause for the termination of the conditional use permit by the council following a public hearing."