Loading...
05/18/2004 - City Council RegularAGENDA EAGAN CITY COUNCIL — REGULAR MEETING EAGAN MUNICIPAL CENTER BUILDING May 18, 2004 6:30 P.M. I. ROLL CALL AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Q.\ II. ADOPT AGENDA III. RECOGNITIONS AND PRESENTATIONS IV. CONSENT AGENDA • oZ A. PIaB. p.04 c. p.IS D. p•000 E. T?.I' F. p.a3 G. 1 H. SI. 'AD J. ',7a-/ K. os L. p. a9 M. r.$11)0. Q• Q.3 Q. .,G R. APPROVE MINUTES PERSONNEL ITEMS CHECK REGISTERS APPROVE Designation of all Enterprise Funds as "Major" funds in the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report RECEIVE Final Assessment Roll and Set Public Hearing for Project 759R, (Cedar Grove Parkway — Street Rehabilitation Improvements) RECEIVE Petition and Order Public Hearing for Public Right -of -Way Vacation for Gun Club Road (Long Acres) AUTHORIZE Plans and Specifications, Contract 04-05 (Wells #20 & #21 — Development and Pumping Equipment) APPROVE Final Payment for Contract 03-05 (Pond JP -47 — Water Quality Improvements) APPROVE Plans and Specifications / Authorize Ad for Bids, Contract 04-08 (Sewer Line Renovation) APPROVE Change Order No. 1 for Contract 04-02, City -Wide Overlays South APPROVE Change Order No. 1 for Contract 04-03, City -Wide Overlays North APPROVE Plans and Specifications/Authorize Ad for Bids, Contract 04-04 (Lexington Avenue, Lone Oak Road to TH 55) APPROVE Plans and Specifications / Authorize Ad for Bids, Contract 04-07 (Lexington Ridge Court) ADOPT Findings of Fact for Denial for a Conditional Use Permit — Cedarvale Business Center REJECT Proposal for Sale of City Property at the Northwest Corner of Highway 3 and Diffley Road APPROVE Change Order 18 for Eagan Community Center APPROVE Final Payments for Eagan Community Center Contracts AUTHORIZATION to Continue to Defer its Entitlement Status and Participate in the Dakota County Entitlement CDBG Programs V. PUBLIC HEARINGS {).45 A. VARIANCE — WRIGHT HOMES, INC. — A Variance request to the individual lot coverage requirement of 20% for Lots 3, 4, 6, 7, 8 12, 13, 14, Block 1 in the Marcella Woods Addition, located on Grace Drive in the SW 'A of Section 34. 9.G3 B. VARIANCE — TODD JOHNSON — A Variance request to exceed the 20% building coverage allowed in an R-1, (Single Family Residential) Zoning District on Lot 3, Block 1, Autumn Ridge 2"d Addition, located at 4387 Bent Tree Lane in the NE '/4 of Section 25. .11)3 C. VARIANCE — KEITH & LORI ZIERDEN — A Variance request to the building code setbacks for an addition on Lot 4, Block 1, Johnny Cake Ridge Addition, located at 4757 Penkwe Circle in the NW 1/4 of Section 33. 1).1D D. VARIANCE — CHRIS NEWMANN — A Variance request to exceed the 20% building coverage allowed for a single family residence on Lot 17, Block 1, Lexington Pointe Tenth Addition, located at 981 Trillium Court in the NW 1/4 of Section 26. VI. OLD BUSINESS REZONING — CEDARSTONE DEVELOPMENT — A Rezoning of approximately five acres from A, Agriculture to R-2 Residential Double located at 1055 Wescott Road in the SW 1/4 of Section 14. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT — WAL-MART — A Conditional Use Permit to allow a check cashing service on Lot 1, Block 1, Town Centre 70`h Eleventh Addition, located at 1360 Town Centre Drive in the NW 1/4 of Section 15. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT — ALLIANT ENGINEERING — A Planned Development Amendment to allow a drive-thru on Part of Lot 3, Hadler Park, located at 2010 Cliff Road (Walgreen's) in the NE '/4 of Section 31. VII. NEW BUSINESS i " ,,0 31 A. NO PARKING SIGNS ON TRAILS END ROAD - Receive Petition and Consider Authorization 19,1 B. REZONING, PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION & PRELIMINARY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT — METROPOLITAN OFFICE CONDOS LLC — A Rezoning from LB, Limited Business to PD, Planned Development, a Preliminary Subdivision (Northwood Office Condos) to create six Lots and a Preliminary Planned Development to allow multiple office condos on property located between Pilot Knob Road and Interstate 35E in the SW '/4 of Section 10. 4 ),114' C. REZONING, PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION AND VARIANCES TO SETBACKS, CURB AND GUTTER REQUIREMENTS, AND PUBLIC STREET FRONTAGE REQUIREMENTS — EPIC DEVELOPMENT, LLC — A Rezoning of approximately 7.7 acres from A, Agriculture to R -1, Single Family Residential and a PRELIMINARY � SUBDIVISION (Evergreen Enclave) to create 12 lots, located at 4195 Lexington Way S. in the SE' 'A of Section 22. D. INTERIM USE PERMIT — SOWLES PROPERTIES, L.P. — An Interim Use Permit to allow outdoor storage on Part ^ �� of Government Lot 2, located at 3045 Highway 13 in the NW ''/ of Section 9. 11'' j) d3U E. COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN AMENDMENT & PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT — LOAN OAK DEVELOPMENT, LLC — A Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment of approximately 83 acres from Special Area/Office Service to Special Area/Medium Density Residential, located on Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Silicon Graphics First Addition and Outlot D, Cray Second Addition, located in the East half of Section 1. F. COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN AMENDMENT & PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT — LAUKKA-BECK EAGAN PARTNERSHIP — A Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment of approximately 26.9 tf JC acres from Special Area/Office Service to Special Area/Medium Density Residential, located on Outlot N, Lone Oak in the NE 'A of Section 1. VIII. LEGISLATIVE /INTERGOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS UPDATE IX. ADMINISTRATIVE AGENDA X. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY '2/ l A. CALL TO ORDER B. ADOPT AGENDA C. APPROVE MINUTES D. OLD BUSINESS E. NEW BUSINESS F. OTHER BUSINESS G. ADJOURNMENT XI. OTHER BUSINESS XIII. CLOSED SESSION 1. Public Hearing for the Consideration of the Amended and Restated Development Agreement between the City and Grand Oaks LLC for the Redevelopment of Property for the Grand Oaks V Office Park and to Consider the Sale of Property to Grand Oaks LLC for that Purpose. * A. RESOLUTION to Approve Amended and Restated Development Agreement between the City and Grand Oaks LLC for the Redevelopment of Property for the Grand Oaks V Office Park and to Consider the Sale of Property to Grand Oaks LLC for that Purpose. * XII. VISITORS TO BE HEARD (for those persons not on the agenda) XIV. ADJOURNMENT 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. 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. city of eagan MEMO TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: MAY 14, 2004 SUBJECT: AGENDA INFORMATION FOR MAY 18, 2004 CITY COUNCIL MEETING An MEMO After approval is given to the May 18, 2004 City Council agenda, the following items are in order for consideration. Agenda Information Memo May 18, 2004 Eagan City Council Meeting 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. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the minutes of the April 15, 2004 and April 19, 2004 Special City Council meetings, the May 4, 2004 regular City Council meeting and the May 4, 2004 Listening Session, as presented or modified. ATTACHMENTS: A. APPROVE MINUTES • Minutes of the April 15, 2004 Special City Council meeting are enclosed on page 3 . • Minutes of the April 19, 2004 Special City Council meeting are enclosed on page . • Minutes of the May 4, 2004 Regular City Council meeting are enclosed on pages 5 through 10 . • Minutes of the May 4, 2004 Listening Session are enclosed on page (I . City staff present: City Administrator Hedges There was no other business. MINUTES SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING / ADVISORY COMMISSION APPLICANT INTERVIEWS THURSDAY APRIL 15, 2004 5:30 P.M. CONFERENCE ROOM 2AB — EAGAN MUNICIPAL CENTER City Councilmembers present: Mayor Geagan, Councilmembers Carlson, Fields, Maguire and Tilley. Mayor Geagan called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m., which was convened for the purpose of interviewing the advisory commission applicants. I. INTERVIEWS OF ADVISORY COMMISSION APPLICANTS The City Council continued the second of the three nights of interviews of advisory commission applicants. II. OTHER BUSINESS III. ADJOURNMENT The interviews and the meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m. 3 City staff present: City Administrator Hedges MINUTES SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING / ADVISORY COMMISSION APPLICANT INTERVIEWS MONDAY APRIL 19, 2004 5:30 P.M. CONFERENCE ROOM 2AB — EAGAN MUNICIPAL CENTER City Councilmembers present: Mayor Geagan, Councilmembers Carlson, Fields, Maguire and Tilley. Mayor Geagan called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m., which was convened for the purpose of interviewing the advisory commission applicants. I. INTERVIEWS OF ADVISORY COMMISSION APPLICANTS The City Council continued their interviews of advisory commission applicants for the third and final evening. There was no other business. II. OTHER BUSINESS III. ADJOURNMENT The interviews and the meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m. 1 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE EAGAN CITY COUNCIL Eagan, Minnesota May 4, 2004 A regular meeting of the Eagan City Council was held on Tuesday, May 4, 2004 at 6:30 p.m. at the Eagan Municipal Center. Present were Mayor Geagan, Councilmembers, Carlson, Fields, Tilley and Maguire. Also present were City Administrator Tom Hedges, Community Development Director Jon Hohenstein, City Planner Mike Ridley, Public Works Director Tom Colbert, Assistant to City Administrator Miller, City Attorney Mike Daugherty and Administrative Secretary / Deputy Clerk Mira McGarvey. AGENDA City Administrator Hedges noted that Mayor Geagan wished to add discussion of Arbor Day under Recognitions and Presentations. Councilmember Tilley moved, Councilmember Maguire seconded a motion to approve the agenda as modified. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 RECOGNITIONS AND PRESENTATIONS SWEARING IN OF POLICE OFFICERS Chief of Police Therkelsen introduced newly appointed Police Officers Tom Weinzettel and Ben Koenke. Mayor Geagan administered the Oath of Office to the officers. 2004 HONORABLE MENTION AWARD — DAKOTA COUNTY PUBLIC HEALTH DEPARTMENT Pat Stieg of the Dakota County Public Health Department made a presentation regarding the 2004 Honorable Mention Award in the community category made to the City of Eagan for the City's adoption of a park policy in 2003 to restrict tobacco use during youth activities and it's commitment to a healthy environment for the community. ARBOR DAY Mayor Geagan discussed the Arbor Day festivities and commended Greg Hove and the Parks and Recreation Department for their work on the event. CONSENT AGENDA City Administrator Hedges noted that item Y would be continued. Items J, U, and W were pulled from the Consent Agenda for discussion. Councilmember Carlson moved, Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to approve the balance of the Consent Agenda. Aye:5 Nay: 0 A. Minutes. It was recommended to approve the minutes of the April 20, 2004 regular City Council meeting as presented. B. Personnel Items. 1. It was recommended to approve the hiring of Abby Korte as a seasonal water resources assistant. 2. It was recommended to approve the hiring of Erik Johnsen as a part-time building attendant/concessions worker at the Community Center. 3. It was recommended to accept the letter of resignation from Stan Lexvold, Construction Supervisor. C. Check Registers. It was recommended to ratify the check registers dated April 22, 2004, and April 29, 2004 as presented. s- Eagan City Council Meeting Minutes May 4, 2004 Page 2 D. Shows License. It was recommended to approve a Shows License for the Eagan Lions Club to hold the 4 of July Funfest at the Eagan Community Center on July 2nd -4 and waive application fees. E. Parade Permit. It was recommended to approve a Parade Permit for the Eagan Lions Cub to hold a parade on July 3, 2004 and waive the application fee. F. Donation. It was recommended to adopt a Resolution Accepting Donation of a Panasonic LCD Projector for use by the City of Eagan from TBS Office Automations. G. Donation. It was recommended to approve the acceptance of a donation from the Eagan Lioness for the purchase of a park bench to be installed in Central Park. H. Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants for Thresher Fields. It was recommended to approve the submission of the required "Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants" for Thresher Fields as required by the MPCA and authorize the signature of the Mayor. I. Joint Powers Agreement. It was recommended to approve a Joint Powers Agreement with Dakota County for the Anderson Property. J. Purchase Agreement. Pulled for discussion. K. Development Contract. It was recommended to approve the Development Contract, subject to modifications as deemed reasonable and necessary by the City Administrator and City Attorney. L. Ordinance Amendment. It was recommended to direct the City Attorney to prepare an Ordinance Amendment to Chapter 11 regarding Accessory Structures in a PF- Public Facility Zoning District. M. Sale of City Property. It was recommended to continue consideration of the sale of City Property at the northwest corner of Highway 3 and Diffley Road to the May 18, 2004 City Council meeting. N. Easement Vacation. It was recommended to receive the petition to vacate a portion of a public drainage and utility easement on Lot 7, Block 1, Fairway Hills and schedule a public hearing to be held on June 1, 2004. O. Project 790R. It was recommended to approve the Final Assessments for Project 790R (Central Parkway — Streets and Utilities) for Parcels 10- 22471 - 010 -01 & 10- 22471 - 010 -02 and authorize its certification to Dakota County for collection. P. Contract 02 -17. It was recommended to approve Change Order No. 4 to Contract 02 -17 (Central Parkway and Cedar Grove Area — Streetscaping and Lighting Improvements) and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. Q. Wescott Woodlands "No Parking" Petition. It was recommended to receive the petition to install "No Parking" signs on the cul -de -sac at the south end of Wescott Woodlands and schedule a public hearing to be held on June 1, 2004. R. Change Order. It was recommended to approve Change Order #4, Contract 03 -09 (Water Treatment Plant Expansion) and authorize the mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. S. Project 778. It was recommended to authorize the solicitation of Request for Proposals for professional engineering services for the design, bid and construction phases of Project 778 (Trunk Highway 149 Upgrade — Divided 4 -Lane Highway). T. Lease / Leaseback Transaction. It was recommended to authorize staff to discontinue evaluation of any potential lease /leaseback transaction for City water and wastewater assets. U. Ordinance Amendment. V. Assignment of Judgments. It was recommended to approve Assignment of Judgments obtained in the lawsuit captioned Roger Reiling, et. Al. v. City of Eagan, and authorize the Mayor and Clerk to execute the Assignment of the Judgments in favor of the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust. W. Revocation of Permit. X. Project 669. It was recommended to receive the Official Mapping proposal for Project 669 (Duckwood Drive — Ring -Road Concept) and schedule a public hearing to be held on June 1, 2004. Y. Project 759R. It was recommended to continue consideration of the final Assessment Roll for Project 759R (Cedar Grove Parkway — Street Improvements) until the May 18, 2004 City Council meeting. Eagan City Council Meeting Minutes May 4, 2004 Page 3 J. Purchase Agreement for the Anderson property. Councilmember Maguire discussed the process leading to the purchase agreement for the Anderson property. He commended Councilmember Carlson, the Friends of the Eagan Core Greenway and others for their work towards this purchase. Councilmember Maguire moved, Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to approve the Purchase Agreement for the Anderson Property and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 Councilmember Maguire moved, Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to approve the public hearing for the NDR Natural and Scenic Area Grant application and authorize appraisals on parcels selected for application. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 U. Ordinance Amendment which requires retailers of non - explosive and non - aerial fireworks to obtain a permit from the City of Eagan subject to the rules of M.S. 624.20 to 624.25. Discussion was held regarding the establishment of permit fees for the sale of fireworks. W. Revocation of Permit No. UT -03 -09503 (Eagandale Boulevard) issued to Xcel Energy on September 29, 2003. Councilmember Fields moved, Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to adopt an ordinance amendment requiring retailers of non - explosive and non - aerial fireworks to obtain a permit from the City of Eagan subject to the rules of M.S. 624.20 to 624.25 and establish fees of $100 for existing businesses that wish to sell fireworks along with other product lines and $350 for new businesses that will be sole distributors of fireworks. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 Collette Urick, Xcel Energy, addressed the revocation of a permit to work within public right of way which, she stated, actually expired in December, 2003. Councilmember Fields moved, Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to approve the revocation of a permit to work within the public right -of -way (UT -03- 09503, Xcel Energy). Aye: 5 Nay: 0 PUBLIC HEARINGS CERTIFICATION OF DELINQUENT UTILITIES City Administrator Hedges discussed this item stating that the City currently has approximately 315 delinquent utility bill accounts with an assessable amount of $56,194.24. Mayor Geagan opened the public hearing. There being no pubic comment, he closed the public hearing and turned discussion back to the City Council. Councilmember Tilley moved, Councilmember Maguire seconded a motion to certify delinquent utility bills and authorize its certification to Dakota County. CERTIFICATION OF DELINQUENT FALSE ALARM BILLS City Administrator Hedges discussed this item stating there is currently eleven delinquent false alarm bills with an assessable amount of $2,750.00. Mayor Geagan opened the public hearing. There being no public comment, he closed the public hearing and turned discussion back to the Council. Eagan City Council Meeting Minutes May 4, 2004 Page 4 Councilmember Tilley moved, Councilmember Fields seconded a motion to approve the final assessment roll for delinquent false alarm bills and authorize its certification to Dakota County. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 PROJECT 806R City Administrator Hedges introduced this item regarding the final assessment roll for Project 806R — Kennerick Addition / Pond HDP -1 — Storm Sewer Improvements. Public Works Director Colbert gave a staff report. Mayor Geagan opened the public hearing. There being no public comment, he closed the public hearing and turned discussion back to the Council. Councilmember Fields moved, Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to approve the Final Assessment Roll for Project 806R (Kennerick Addition/Pond HDP -1 — Storm Sewer Improvements) and authorize its certification to Dakota County for collection. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 LOTS 3, 4, 5, BLOCK 4, EAGANDALE CENTER INDUSTRIAL PARK NO. 3 — EASEMENT VACATION City Administrator Hedges introduced this item regarding the vacation of a portion of public drainage and utility easement on Lots 3, 4, and 5, Block 5 Eagandale Center Industrial Park No. 3. Public Works Director Colbert gave a staff report. Mayor Geagan opened the public hearing. There being no public comment, he closed the public hearing and turned discussion back to the Council. Councilmember Carlson moved, Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to approve the vacation of a portion of public drainage and utility easement on Lots 3, 4, 5, Block 5, Eagandale Center Industrial Park No. 3 and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 NEW BUSINESS REZONING — CEDARSTONE DEVELOPMENT City Administrator Hedges stated the applicant is requesting consideration of this item regarding a request for a rezoning of five acres from Agriculture to R -2, Residential Double district for property located at 1055 Wescott Road be continued to the May 18, 2004 City Council meeting. Councilmember Maguire moved, Councilmember Fields seconded a motion to continue consideration of a rezoning of five acres from Agriculture to R -2, Residential Double District for property located at 1055 Wescott Road to the May 18, 2004 City Council meeting. Aye: 4 Nay: 0 Tilley abstained. REZONING — ROBERT F. MCDONALD O Rq F City Administrator Hedges introduced this item regarding a request for rezoning of five acres from Agriculture to R- 1, Single Family Residential District for property located at 1085 Wescott Road. City Planner Ridley gave a staff report. Robert McDonald, applicant, requested that the item be continued until after consideration of the rezoning at 1055 Wescott Road. Councilmember Maguire moved, Mayor Geagan seconded a motion to continue consideration of a Rezoning of five acres from Agriculture to R -1, Single Family Residential District for property located at 1085 Wescott Road until the June 1, 2004 City Council meeting. Aye: 4 Nay: 0 Tilley abstained. S Eagan City Council Meeting Minutes May 4, 2004 Page 5 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT — YOCUM OIL COMPANY City Administrator Hedges introduced this item regarding a Planned Development Amendment to allow outdoor storage on Lot 5, Block 1, Thomas Lake Center, located at 1579 Cliff Road. City Planner Ridley gave a staff report. Wes Holberg, representing the Yocum family was present to answer questions. Councilmember Fields moved, Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to approve a Planned Development Amendment to allow outdoor storage on Lot 5, Block 1, Thomas Lake Center, located at 1579 Cliff road in the SW '/ of Section 28. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW PAYROLL CHECK CASHING — WAL -MART City Administrator Hedges introduced this item regarding a Conditional Use Permit to allow payroll check cashing at the check out registers at Wal -Mart located at 1360 Town Centre Drive. Charlene Walls, Manager of Wal -Mart store was present to answer questions. Councilmember Carlson suggested this item be continued to allow for the submittal of further information regarding specific locations for the check cashing operation within the store. Councilmember Carlson moved, Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to continue consideration of a Conditional Use Permit to allow payroll check cashing at the check out registers at Wal -mart located at 1360 until the May 18, 2004 City Council meeting. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT — ALLIANT ENGINEERING Councilmember Fields moved, Councilmember Carlson seconded a motion to approve a Planned Development Amendment to allow a drive -thru for the pharmacy at Walgreen's located at 2010 Cliff Road . Aye: 0 Nay: 5 Councilmember Maguire moved, Councilmember Fields seconded a motion to reconsider the previous motion. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 °RAFT City Administrator Hedges introduced this item regarding a Planned Development Amendment to allow a drive -thru for the pharmacy at Walgreen's located at 2010 Cliff Road. City Planner Ridley gave a staff report. Discussion was held with John Dillingham and Clark Wiklund ofAiliant Engineering regarding stacking space for the drive -thru. It was agreed that additional information was needed regarding the stacking space, circulation and the projected number of trips that would occur daily at the drive -thru. Councilmember Carlson moved, Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to continue consideration of a Planned Development Amendment to allow a drive -thru for the pharmacy at Walgreen's located at 2010 Cliff Road until the May 18 Council meeting. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 ADMINISTRATIVE AGENDA City Administrator Hedges discussed the approval by the Council of a Technology Task Force and the hiring of a wireless broadband consultant to assist the work of the Task Force. Councilmember Tilley moved, Councilmember Fields seconded a motion to approve an agreement with a selected vendor to perform agreed upon work to assist the Technology Task Force in completing its charge as specified by the Eagan City Council. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 City Administrator Hedges discussed a recommendation by the Operations Committee to allow Community Center staff members that meet set criteria to be permitted to use the Community Center fitness facility. 9 Eagan City Council Meeting Minutes May 4, 2004 Page 6 CRAF Councilmember Tilley moved, Councilmember Carlson seconded a motion to authorize the inclusion of the use of the Community Center Fitness Facility as a benefit to Community Center employees whose positions are funded via the Community Center operating budget (subject to minimum criteria based upon position). Aye: 5 Nay: 0 Councilmember Carlson moved, Councilmember Maguire seconded a motion to recess the regular City Council meeting at 8:00 p.m. and immediately convene a meeting of the Economic Development Authority. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 Councilmember Fields moved, Councilmember Tilley seconded a motion to reconvene the regular City Council meeting at 8:05 p.m. OTHER BUSINESS RESOLUTION TO APPROVE AMENDED AND RESTATED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH GRAND OAKS LLC FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT OF PROPERTY FOR THE GRAND OAKS FIVE OFFICE PARK AND TO CONSIDER THE SALE OF CITY OWNED PROPERTY FOR THAT PURPOSE City Administrator Hedges briefly discussed this item which was continued at the Economic Development Authority meeting. Councilmember Carlson moved, Councilmember Maguire seconded a motion to continue consideration of a Resolution To Approve Amended and Restated Development Agreement with Grand Oaks LLC for the Redevelopment of Property For The Grand Oaks Five Office Park and to Consider the Sale of City Owned Property for that Purpose. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 RESOLUTION APPROVING BUSINESS RELOCATION AGREEMENT FOR MINNESOTA WATERPROOFING TO FACILITATE THE REDEVELOPMENT OF PROPERTY IN NORTHEAST EAGAN REDEVELOPMENT TIF DISTRICT #2 -4 City Administrator Hedges briefly discussed this item which had been reviewed at the Economic Development Authority meeting. Councilmember Tilley moved, Councilmember Maguire seconded a motion to adopt a Resolution Approving the Relocation Agreement between the City of Eagan, Eagan Economic Development Authority and Waterproofing Inc., a Minnesota Corporation. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 There were no visitors who wished to be heard. VISITORS TO BE HEARD ADJOURNMENT Councilmember Maguire moved, Councilmember Fields seconded a motion to adjourn the regular City Council meeting at 8: 07 p.m. Date 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. /b CITY OF EAGAN LISTENING SESSION EAGAN ROOM — MUNICIPAL CENTER MAY 4, 2004 6:00 P.M. A Listening Session was held prior to the regular City Council meeting at 6:30 in the Eagan Room of the Municipal Center. There were no visitors who wished to be heard. Councilmember Fields moved, Mayor Geagan seconded a motion to acknowledge June as Gay, Lesbian, Bisesxual, Transgender Pride Celebration Month. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 Respectfully submitted: Mira McGarvey Administrative Secretary / Deputy Clerk 11 Agenda Information Memo May 18, 2004 Eagan City Council Meeting B. PERSONNEL ITEMS Item 1. Community Service Officers ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of Ray Kingsley and Anna Volk as Community Service Officers in the Police Department, contingent upon successful completion of physical, psychological and drug testing requirements.. Item 2. Clerical Tech III/Community Development ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of Joy McLean as a Clerical Technician III in Community Development. Item 3. Construction Inspector ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of Leon Weiland for the position of Construction Inspector. Item 4. Police Dispatcher ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of Jennifer Lockie as a Police Dispatcher. Item 5. Building Attendant /Concessions Workers /Community Center ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of Steven Jezusko, Alex Kabakov and Laura Schannach as part-time Building Attendant/Concession Workers at the Community Center. Item 6. Seasonal Part -Time Recreation Leaders ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of Jackie Carlson, Jenifer Culbertson, Lindsey Dulin. Laura Eide, Maggie Elliott, Nicole Farlee, Jennifer Gerde, Katie Gerloff, Kristin Giles, Michelle Hanninen, Kalin Laurent, Travis Laurent, Katherine Maruish, Dana Mueller, Carissa Schindle, Jennifer Sparks, Amber Stevenson, and Stephanie Westerlund. As seasonal part-time Recreation Leaders. 13. Agenda Information Memo May 18, 2004 Eagan City Council Meeting Item 7. Seasonal Part -Time Recreation Assistants ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of Cherie Anderson, Erick Bertelsen, Steven Bringgold, Kelly Colbert, Katy Donnedelinger, Lauren Donovan, Angelea Dooley, Laura Farlee, Luke Garrison, Allison Girres, Paul Hanninen, Nicholas Landauer, Kathryn Mustonen, Natalie Norenberg, Emily Pollock, Alicia Schindle, Kelli Schlittler, Kevin Stevenson, Aaron Strey, Angelle Theriot, Aleecia Svien, Megan Williams and Kelli Wood as seasonal part-time Recreation Assistants. Item 8. Seasonal Part -Time Recreation Site Coordinators ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of Christie Mason and Erin Stevenson as seasonal part-time Recreation Site Coordinators. Item 9. Seasonal Part -Time Recreation Leader /Site Coordinator ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of Alyssa Kane as a seasonal part-time Recreation Leader /Site Coordinator. Item 10. Seasonal Part -Time Recreation Program Assistant ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the hiring of Meghan Chappuis as a seasonal part-time Recreation Program Assistant. Item 11. Detective ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve the transfer of Officer Joe Marshall from the patrol division to the detective unit to assume the responsibilities as a School Resource Officer. 1 3 Agenda Information Memo May 18, 2004 Eagan City Council Meeting C. RATIFY CHECK REGISTERS ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To ratify the check registers dated May 6, 2004 and May 14, 2004 as presented. ATTACHMENTS: • Check registers dated May 6, 2004 and May 14, 2004 are enclosed without page number. Agenda Memo May 18, 2004 Eagan City Council Meeting CONSENT AGENDA: D. Approve designation of all Enterprise Funds as "major" funds in the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To designate all of the City's Enterprise Funds as "major" funds in the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. FACTS: • The City will have five Enterprise Funds reported in the December 31, 2003 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR): > Public Utilities ➢ Civic Arena ➢ Aquatic Facility (Cascade Bay) ➢ Community Center > Central Park Sliding Hill (fund closed during 2003) • New accounting standards (GASB 34) make a reporting distinction between major and non- major funds, based primarily on the level of revenues, expenses, assets and/or liabilities of the fund. Major funds are reported singly in the main financial section of the CAFR; non- major funds are grouped together and reported in total in one column labeled "Other." • Funds of a certain size must be reported as major funds under GASB 34, but the City Council has discretion to report smaller funds as major funds if it so designates. • Because of their size, the Public Utilities Fund and the Community Center Fund must be reported as major funds. • The Civic Arena Fund and the Cascade Bay Fund do not qualify as major funds based on size, so they would be grouped together as "Other" in 2003 and in the future without the designation as major. The Sliding Hill Fund, closed in 2003, does not qualify as a major fund without so designating. • Because of the high interest among financial statement users in the Civic Arena and Cascade Bay enterprises and the results of their operations, Staff recommends reporting all Enterprise Funds as major in the main financial statements. ISSUES: None ATTACHMENTS: None. 15 Agenda Memo May 18, 2004 ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Receive the Final Assessment Roll for Project 759R (Cedar Grove Parkway — Street Improvements) and schedule a public hearing to be held on June 15, 2004. FACTS: • Project 759R provided for the resurfacing of Cedar Grove Parkway (formerly Beau D'Rue), including the installation of a center median and reconfiguration with one lane of traffic in each direction. The construction of an off - street trail was also included, all as outlined and discussed in the feasibility report. However, the trail segment from Rahn to Nicols was removed from Contract 01 -05 due to difficulties in getting timely access easements from some adjacent property owners. • The project as constructed under Contract 01 -05, has been completed, all costs tabulated and the final assessment roll prepared. • Although this project was constructed in conjunction with the Cedar Grove Access Modifications (Project 800R) and Streetscaping (Project 866) improvements, this project was scheduled in accordance with the City's Pavement Management Program and was not constructed due to the redevelopment area efforts. • 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. ATTACHMENTS: E. PROJECT 7598, CEDAR GROVE PARKWAY FINAL ASSESSMENT ROLL • Final Assessment Roll Summary Sheet, page 1Co 17 . PROJECT HEARING DATES NUMBER - 759R ASSESSMENT - June 15, 2004 NAME - Cedar Grove Parkway AKA Beau D' Rue Dr IMPROVEMENT - December 11, 2001 Street Reclamation IMPROVEMENTS INSTALLED AND /OR ASSESSED F.R. =Feasiblity Report SANITARY SEWER ❑ Trunk — Unplatted Trunk- Platted ❑ Lateral- ❑ Service 4 inch ❑ Service 8 inch ❑ Lat. Benefit/Trunk WATER ❑ Trunk - Unplatted Trunk- Platted ❑ Lateral ❑ Service 1 inch ❑ Service 6 inch ❑ Lat. Benefit/Trunk ❑ WAC SERVICES COMMENTS: FINAL F.R RATE RATE UNITS FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING 0 0 ❑ STORM SEWER STREET ❑ Gravel Base Ea Reclamation Residential $31.13 $35.04 /F.F. Multi. Equiv. Includes Median 63.47 81.83 /F.F. C/I Equiv. Includes Median 63.47 81.83 /F.F. ❑ Trail/Sidewalk STREET LIGHTS ❑ Installation ❑ Energy Charge FINAL F.R RATE RATE UNITS CONTRACT NO. OF INTEREST AMOUNT CITY NO PARCELS TERMS RATE ASSESSED FINANCED $429,465 F.R. $472,035 F.R. 01 -05 31 15 Year 4.50% $311,058.55 $314,297.25 Agenda Memo May 18, 2004 ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Receive the petition to vacate public right -of -way and schedule a public hearing to be held on July 6, 2004. FACTS: • On May 4, 2004, City staff received a letter from Robert Kriha, Development Supervisor for Manley Land Development, Inc., requesting the vacation of a portion of the existing public right -of -way for Gun Club Road, south of Biscayne Avenue in southeast Eagan. • Gun Club Road will be realigned in conjunction with the proposed Long Acres development. The purpose of the request is to allow the incorporation of the vacated right -of -way area into the subdivision plat, while replacement right -of -way will be dedicated over the re- alignment of Gun Club Road. • The City Council has preliminarily approved the Long Acres preliminary subdivision. The City has received an application for final subdivision, but it has not yet been scheduled for consideration by the Council. The vacation of this right -of -way would clean up the proposed plat by avoiding an underlying recorded dedication. • Notices will be published in the legal papers and sent to all potentially affected and/or interested parties for comment prior to the scheduled public hearing. ATTACHMENTS: F. GUN CLUB ROAD RIGHT -OF -WAY VACATION • Legal Description, graphic, page Pi .1 • Location Map, page • Letter requesting vacation, page Id Description Sketch for: MANLEY LAND DEVELOPMENT 1 I A 1 I E `'I ^ n ** k * PIONEER * engineering 103017506.DWG LIJ LIJ •C : (.) G1 (r) rY} <C 66 N JK N O Z p COP I — ¢ 101 LL 0 E W Z J J = 1 1V 1 1 n /'I, ` j l.V 1 BLOCK S89 ° 49'18 "W 246.25 A ^ 1._,i MEMSITAIrall .y S89 °49'18 "W 246.25 � 1 PROPOSED VACA11ON OF O ° p ) 117TH STREET EAST « Proposed legal descriotion to vacate a portion of 117TH STREET EAST (A.K A. Gun Club Rood) All that part of 117TH STREET EAST as delineated and dedicated on HALLEY'S 1ST ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Dakota County, Minnesota, lying easterly of the southerly extension of the west line of Lot 1, Block 2. said HALLEY'S 1ST ADDITION * THIS SKETCH DOES NOT PURPORT TO SHOW THE EXISTENCE OR NONEXISTENCE OF ANY ENCROACHMENTS FROM OR ONTO THE HEREON DESCRIBED LAND, EASEMENTS OF RECORD OR UNRECORDED EASEMENTS WHICH AFFECT SAID LAND OR ANY IMPROVEMENTS TO SAID LAND. WE HEREBY CERTIFY TO MANLEY LAND DEVELOPMENT THAT THIS SURVEY, PLAN OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME. OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION, AND THAT I AM A DULY LICENSED LAND SURVEYOR UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA, DATED 1115 22ND DAY OF APRIL, 2004. SIGN BY: A rlfllTInI.I nvvl I Iv' EER ENGINEER' L 30 c 0 cc _3 0 `' \: ohn C. Larson, Professional Land Surveyor Minnesota License No. 19828 LAND SURVEYORS • CIVIL ENGINEERS LAND PLANNERS. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS I 9 1 Inch = 100 Feet 11 r-e IP 1, ITC/\i SCHOOL IPV . n1 1111 '1fl LL.LIVILII I Il I vl�r1V VL. 11 V. S0 0c°8 2g "E 7 1 1. 1 E T 1 r r I 11 L 1 I_ l_ 0 R ` S 2422 Enterprise Drive Mendota Heights, MN 55120 (651) 681 -1914 FAX: 651 -9488 625 Highway 10 N.E. Blaine, MN 55434 (763) 783 -1860 FAX: 783 -1883 103017 04 -121 3471 z bJ 0 _J bJ 0 0 UJ _J z L.: 0 4- k311,1 JO 31 n 0 - G: \Vacations \Gun Club DIFFLEY ROAD H �� L S ` RE k o w a- PA CLIFF ROAD Proposed Vacation ROSEMOUNT City of Eagan Gun Club Road Proposed Right -of -Way Vacation Location Map of 5/12/04 MJa L E y Land Development, Inc. 2113 Cliff Drive Eagan, MN 55122 Phone 651.454.4933 Fax 651.454.9371 www.manleybrothers.com City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Re: Gun Club Road To Whom It May Concern: Manley Land Development, Inc. is requesting a vacation of road easement on Gun Club Road. This will enable us to redirect Gun Club Road into Biscayne Avenue per approval of the plans for our Long Acres development. Thank you for your cooperation with this matter. Sincerely, Robert Kriha Development Supervisor Manley Land Development, Inc. aa� Agenda Memo May 18 2004 G. CONTRACT 04 -05, WELLS #20 & 21 (DEVELOPMENT AND PUMPING EQUIPMENT) ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Authorize the preparation of Detail Plans and Specs by WSB & Associates for Contract 04 -05 (Wells #20 & 21 — Development and pumping Equipment). FACTS: • Well #20 is located adjacent to the new Central Park Picnic Pavilion along Pilot Knob Rd. It was drilled and developed in 2002 as part of the Park shelter building complex under the economies of scale and to avoid the related construction mess after the park was opened to the public in `03. It did not have the pump equipment installed as it would have been premature prior to the completion of the Coachman Water Treatment Plant expansion (scheduled for June, 2005). • Well #21 will be drilled and developed adjacent to existing Well #11 on Ashbury Road. (They will be tapping two distinct and different aquifers for source ground water but making use of the same existing raw water transmission main.) This location for the next well to be developed in the City's north well field was a recommendation contained in the Feasibility Report for Project 901 and will be the closest well to both existing and future homes (Terra Glen). • It is desirable to have both new wells completed and available for the added supply demands associated with the new Coachman Water Treatment Plant expansion (June '05). • WSB & Associates is one of the City's pre- approved consulting firms with resources capable of performing the required professional services. Agenda Memo May 18, 2004 11. CONTRACT 03-05, POND JP -47 — WATER QUALITY IMPROVEMENTS ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve the final payment for Contract 03 -05 (Pond JP -47 Water Quality Improvements) in the amount of $19,380 to Veit and Company, Inc. and accept the improvements for perpetual City maintenance subject to warranty provisions. FACTS: • Contract 03 -05 provided for the alum sludge removal and water quality improvements within Pond JP -47, east of Denmark Avenue and north of Wescott Road, as authorized by the City Council under City Project 873. • The work has been completed, inspected by representatives of the Engineering and Water Resources Departments and found to be in compliance with the approved plans and specifications, and is in order for favorable Council action of final payment and acceptance for perpetual maintenance subject to warranty provisions. aq- Agenda Information Memo May 18, 2004 I. CONTRACT 04 -08, 2004 CITY -WIDE SANITARY SEWER LINING ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve the plans and specifications for Contract 04 -08 (2004 City -Wide Sanitary Sewer Lining) and authorize the advertisement for a bid opening to be held at 11:00 a.m. on Thursday, June 10, 2004. FACTS: • The rehabilitation of various existing sanitary sewer pipes throughout the City by the installation of lining was programmed for 2004 in the City of Eagan's 5 -Year Capital Improvement Program (2004- 2008). • The City Council authorized the sanitary sewer lining improvements of about 5,000 linear feet of existing pipe for various areas within the City with the approval of the Sanitary Sewer Operations and Facilities portion of the 2004 -2008 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and 2004 operating budget. • All of the construction activity for said improvements has been designed to occur within existing public right -of -way or easements. • The plans and specifications have been completed and are being presented to the City Council for their approval and authorization of the advertisement for bids. Agenda Memo May 18, 2004 J. CHANGE ORDER #1, CONTRACT 04 -02, LAKESIDE ESTATES/ WILDERNESS PARK 2 & 3 LAKE PARK SHORES/ D1FFLEY FRONTAGE ROADS STREET IMPROVEMENTS ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve Change Order #1, Contract 04 -02 (Lakeside Estates/Wilderness Park 2 & 3 Park Shores/Diffley Frontage Roads - Street Improvements) and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. FACTS: • Contract 04 -02 provides for the bituminous overlay of the streets within the Lakeside Estates, Wilderness Park 2n & 3' Additions, Lake Park Shores, and Diffley Frontage Roads neighborhoods. • Change Order No. 1 consists of the removal and replacement of two storm sewer structures in the Wilderness Park 2 & 3 Additions, not originally anticipated with the original contract. The structures are in disrepair and require replacement. The work will be completed in conjunction with project storm sewer work in the area. • The replacement of the storm sewer structures will be the responsibility of the City's Storm Sewer Trunk Fund. • The total of this change order is an ADD of $9,450.00 ( +3.6 %) to the original contract amount. • All work and costs associated with this change order have been reviewed by the Engineering Department and found to be in order for favorable Council consideration. Agenda Memo May 18, 2004 K. CHANGE ORDER #L CONTRACT 04 -03 COACHMAN ROAD/ TERMINAL DRIVE/ BORCHERT LANE STREET & UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve Change Order #1, Contract 04 -03 (Coachman Road/Terminal Drive/Borchert Lane - Street & Utility Improvements) and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute all related documents. FACTS: • Contract 04 -03 provides for the bituminous overlay of Coachman Road, Four Oaks Road, Farnum Drive, Century Point, Donald Court, and Terminal Drive. It also provides for the street upgrade and utility improvements on Borchert Lane. • Change Order No. 1 consists of the following items: o Part 1 - Borchert Lane (Project 884): Construction of an 8' wide bituminous trail along the west side of Borchert Lane, at the request of the City Parks & Recreation Department, and repair a severely settled and broken section of existing sanitary sewer on Borchert Lane (Add $ 9,425.50 for the trail & $19,616.00 for the sanitary sewer repair for a total of $29,041.50). o Part 2 — Coachman Road/ Donald Court: Change in pavement rehabilitation for Donald Court from mill & overlay to full pavement replacement. (Add 15,360) o Part 3 — Civic Arena: Repair badly cracked sidewalk near the main entrance to the arena at the request of the Parks & Recreation Department (Add $8,621.20). • The construction of the trail on Borchert Lane (Part 1) and the repair of the cracked sidewalk (Part 3) will be paid for by dedicated funds for the Parks & Recreation Department. • The repair of the settled and broken sanitary sewer pipe on Borchert Lane (Part 1) will be paid through the Sanitary Sewer Trunk Fund. • The change in pavement rehabilitation (Part 2) for Donald Court is the responsibility of the City's Major Street Fund and assessed to the adjacent benefiting properties as outlined in the feasibility report for Project 894. The change adds 2% to the estimated assessments (approximately $5 to the $250 single- family home assessment and $4 to the $188 town home assessment) in the feasibility report presented at the public hearing for this project. • The net total of this change order is an ADD of $53,022.70 (11.07 %) to the original contract amount. • All work and costs associated with this change order have been reviewed by the Engineering Department and found to be in order for favorable Council consideration. Agenda Information Memo May 18, 2004 L. CONTRACT 04 -04, LEXINGTON AVENUE — TH 55 TO LONE OAK ROAD STREET & UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve the plans and specifications for Contract 04 -04 (Lexington Avenue, Trunk Highway 55 to Lone Oak Road — Street and Utility Improvements) and authorize the advertisement for a bid opening to be held at 10:30 a.m. on Thursday, June 10, 2004. FACTS: • Contract 04 -04 provides for the reconfiguration of the TH 55/Lexington Ave/Blue Gentian Road intersection and the rehabilitation of Lexington Avenue to Lone Oak Road. The improvements include full access to TH 55 from Blue Gentian Road, two dedicated left -turn lanes to TH 55 from Lexington Avenue and traffic signal modifications as outlined and discussed in the feasibility report for Project 859. Street resurfacing, striping modifications and off - street bituminous trails are provided on Lexington Avenue as indicated in the feasibility report for Project 877. • On March 1, 2004, the City Council held a Public Hearing for Project 859. After the staff presentation, there were no comments specifically related to the intersection reconfiguration, so the council approved the project and authorized the preparation of detail plans and specifications. A Public Hearing for Project 877 was continued. • On March 16, 2004, the City Council held the continued Public Hearing for Project 877. After the staff presentation, the property owners adjacent to the proposed improvements on Lexington Avenue presented concerns regarding the proposed striping modifications and trail installation included in the feasibility report. Dakota County staff discussed the traffic volume projections and the relationship to the lane design. The City Council addressed the property owners' concerns by directing staff to send communication to the area residents explaining that Lexington Avenue is a County highway so related concerns should be directed accordingly and therefore approved the project and authorized the preparation of a cost participation agreement with Dakota County. • Dakota County staff has prepared the plans for the improvements associated with Project 877 and have combined those plans with the City's plans and specifications for Project 859 to be constructed jointly under Contract 04 -04. • All of the construction activity for said improvements has been designed to occur within the existing public right -of -way or easements. • The plans and specifications have been completed and are being presented to the City Council for their approval and authorization of the advertisement for bids. Agenda Memo May 18, 2004 M. CONTRACT 04 -07, LEXINGTON RIDGE COURT STREET IMPROVEMENTS ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve the plans and specifications for Contract 04 -07 (Lexington Ridge Court — Street Improvements) and authorize the advertisement for a bid opening to be held at 11:00 a.m. on Thursday, June 10, 2004. FACTS: • Contract 04 -07 provides for the public street improvements within the Lexington/Diffley Athletic Facilities to serve the Lexington Ridge development proposal. • On April 6, 2004, the City Council received a petition for public street improvements from the Lexington Ridge developer, Mr. Ray Miller. The City Council approved preparation of detailed plans and specifications for the project. • All of the construction activity for said improvements has been designed to occur within existing public property or right -of -way. • The plans and specifications have been completed by the City Engineer and are being presented to the City Council for their approval and authorization for the advertisement of bids. Agenda Information Memo May 18, 2004 Eagan City Council Meeting N. FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS & RESOLUTION OF DENIAL — CEDARVALE BUSINESS CENTER ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To adopt the Findings of Fact, Conclusions & Resolution of Denial for a Conditional Use Permit and setback Variance for a pylon sign requested by Realty Designs, Inc. for property located at 3902 — 3938 Cedar Grove Parkway. FACTS: > At its regular meeting of March 1, 2004, the City Council directed staff to prepare Findings of Fact, Conclusions & Resolution of Denial regarding the Conditional Use Permit and setback Variance requested by Realty Designs, Inc. to be considered at the March 16, 2004 regular Council meeting. > The item has been continued several times at the applicant's request in order to allow the applicant to meet with City staff to see if a solution that meets everyone's needs could be worked out. Negotiations have been on- going. > The matter was before the City Council on December 1 and 18, 2003, January 6, 2004, and March 1, 2004. > The CUP and Variance request was heard by the Advisory Planning Commission on November 25, 2003. ISSUES: > The Cedarvale Business Center currently has an alternate CUP application pending (May 25, 2004 APC) for a pylon sign w /out a setback Variance. A decision on the current CUP and setback Variance will be necessary before the pending application can be heard by the City Council on June 1St ATTACHMENTS: (1) Findings of Fact, Conclusions & Resolution of Denial, page 31 through . BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL CITY OF EAGAN, DAKOTA COUNTY, MINNESOTA In Re: Application of Realty Designs, Inc. FINDINGS OF FACT, for a Conditional Use Permit and Variance to CONCLUSIONS AND Erect a Pylon Sign at the Cedarvale Business RESOLUTION Center This matter came before the Eagan City Council at its meetings of December 1 and 18, 2003, January 6, 2004 and March 1, 2004. The Council received and considered the November 14, 2003, Planning Report; input from City staff; minutes of the public hearing held by the Advisory Planning Commission on November 25, 2003; together with all existing files, records and prior proceedings and material as presented to the Council. Representatives of the landowner appeared at the public hearing held by the Advisory Planning Commission or at the meetings of the City Council. Based upon all the files, records and input which were presented at the meeting, the City Council makes the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions and Resolution. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The application by Realty Designs, Inc. (the "Applicant ") for a Conditional Use Permit to erect a pylon sign at 3902 — 3938 Cedar Grove Parkway (the "Property ") and a Variance of ten feet to the minimum required ten -foot setback for a pylon sign (the "Project ") is properly brought before the Eagan City Council. 2. The property is legally described as being a part of Lot 1, Block 1, Stryker Addition, and over, across and upon Lot 1, abutting Cedar Grove Parkway, is a ten foot drainage and utility easement dedicated to the public on the plat of Stryker Addition (the "Easement "). 31 3. The Property is owned by Cedarvale Business Center and is designated SA, Special Area within the City's Comprehensive Guide Plan Land Use and is zoned CSC, Community Shopping Center. 4. The Property is developed with a mixed use, there are commercial uses on the ground level and apartments above. There exists a parking lot in front of the building along Cedar Grove Parkway, that is owned by Cedarvale Business Center, while an additional parking area to the rear of the building is owned by Cedarvale Highlands Apartments. 5. There currently exists a monument sign in front of the building, that is located in the public right of way for Cedar Grove Parkway. The monument sign is approximately in the middle of the lot between the east and west property lines for the Property. 6. A portion of the parking lot located along Cedar Grove Parkway extends into the dedicated Easements. 7. The Applicant's project includes the removal of the existing monument sign and the placement of a pylon sign near the same location. 8. Applicant's proposed sign would be located within the Easement. 9. The Applicant intends to provide a sign panel for each of the tenants Located within the business center. 10. Section 11.70, subd. 28(3)(a) defines a business sign as any sign upon which there is any name or designation that has as its purpose business identification. 11. Section 11.0, subd. 28(c)(3) provides: "no business sign shall be located nearer than ten feet from any property or dividing line. 12. Applicant's proposed sign does not satisfy the minimum ten foot setback and therefore, a variance has been requested. 3D, 13. Section 11.40, subd. 8 prohibits the location of any structure in or on any public lands or right of way without approval by the City Council. 14. Section 11.30 of the City Code defines a public right of way as: "the entire area dedicated to public use or contained in an easement or other conveyance or grant to the state, county or city..." 15. Section 11.50 of the City Code provides the evaluation criteria for the issuance of a conditional use permit, and includes that such permit shall issue only if the council finds that the use at the location will be harmonious with the objectives of the comprehensive plan and code provisions. 16. Section 11.50, subd. 3, of the City Code sets forth the requirements for the Council to consider in the review of an application for a variance. 17. The Advisory Planning Commission recommended approval of the conditional use permit and variance, subject to conditions as found in the Minutes of November 25, 2003. 18. The Advisory Planning Commission's recommendation stated that the drainage and utility easement must be vacated prior to the issuance of the conditional use permit and if such vacation is denied, the sign shall be located outside of the drainage and utility easement area. CONCLUSIONS 1. The matter is properly brought before the Eagan City Council. 2. Under Section 11.50, subd. 3, the Council shall consider the following factors in its review of an application for a variance: a. Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances apply to the Property which do not apply generally to other properties in the same vicinity and result from lot size or shape, topography or other circumstances of which the owners of the Property have no control. 33 b. The literal interpretations of the provisions of this Code would deprive the Applicant proper use, commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same district. c. Special conditions or circumstances do not result from actions of the Applicant. d. The granting of the variance 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. 3. The Applicant's narrative submitted in connection with the variance application states that they are asking to place the sign at the curb line because: "this location is the best for visibility and requires the least amount of modification of the trees on the property, and we already have power to this location to the existing sign." 4. Section 11.50, subd. 3 of the City Code states that the purpose for variances is to relax a strict application of the Code where practical difficulties or particular hardships result in carrying out the letter of the regulations. 5. The Applicant has failed to establish a hardship that would result from the placement of the sign in accordance with City ordinances. 6. Locating the sign on the Applicant's Property in conformance with City ordinances would not result in the removal of any significant vegetation, nor impact existing trees on the Property. 7. Enforcement of the City's regulations would not deprive the applicant of the enjoyment of any right held by other properties in the same district; however, the granting of a variance would confer the Applicant with a special privilege of having a structure in a City easement, a privilege not enjoyed by other owners of property in the same district. 8. The Property retains a viable use in its existing condition with a sign that meets City standards. 3�- RESOLUTION The City Council of the City of Eagan does hereby resolve that the Applicant's requests for a Conditional Use Permit and Variance is hereby denied. Dated at Eagan, Minnesota this day of , 2004. CITY OF EAGAN By: Pat Geagan Its: Mayor By: Maria Petersen Its: City Clerk Agenda Information Memo May 18, 2004 Eagan City Council Meeting CONSENT o I REJECT THE PROPOSAL FOR THE SALE OF CITY PROPERTY AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 3 AND DIFFLEY ROAD ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To reject the only proposal for sale of City Property at the northwest corner of Highway 3 and Diffley Road authorize staff to engage the services of a commercial real estate broker to sell the property. FACTS: • The City Council previously authorized the distribution of requests for proposal to sell the City owned property at Diffley Road and Hwy 3. Availability of the RFPs was noticed in the official newspaper and copies of the request were distributed by mail and posted on the City website. • In response, only one proposal was received. It appears that the proposal meets the general technical requirements of the RFP, but proposes a purchase price below what staff believes to be the fair market price of the property. The respondent proposes to purchase the property for a multi - tenant neighborhood center that would conform with the use covenants on the site for $475,000. • While the City has not performed a formal appraisal, the proposed purchase price is substantially below the estimated value of the property of $600,000 to $705,000 that was provided to the City by an area real estate broker. Under state law, government entities are obligated to sell property at a fair market price. If the City had received more than one proposal and all were in a similar price range, it could be argued that the quote process established the fair market price. Since only one proposal was received, we do not believe that we can fairly make that assertion. • Staff and the City Attorney are requesting that the proposal for the sale of the Highway 3- Diffley property be rejected as not representing a fair market value for the property and that authorization be given for the retention of a commercial real estate broker to establish a fair market sale price and sell the property. Nothing in the requested action would preclude the proposer from making an offer at fair market through the broker. 3tQ COR1163 Lay additional tile and re -float drains in catering kitchen 03- Kellington (370) COR1148 Wash floors and apply concrete sealer to 12 rooms 03- Kellington (1,491) CORI 134 Cut down door frames & doors due to curb heights being off. 03- Kellington (504) COR1084 Complete work in accordance with CCD2 to make changes to group exercise room 03- Kellington 2,241 COR1191 Add interior door sweeps to multiple doors to cover gap caused by uneven thresholds 03- Kellington (1,082) Agenda Memo May 18, 2004 Eagan City Council Meeting CONSENT AGENDA II 9, APPROVE CHANGE ORDER #18 FOR EAGAN COMMUNITY CENTER BUILDING. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Approve Change Order #18, which is a total deduct amount of $1,206.00 for the Eagan Community Center building. FACTS: • Final payment requests have been submitted for almost all contracts pertaining to the Community Center building. • The last of the change orders reflects work that has been absorbed by other contractors resulting in a deduction to the original contract. • There is no net change to the overall community center building contract. • The changes include: ATTACHMENTS: • None 31 Agenda Memo May 18, 2004 Eagan City Council Meeting CONSENT AGENDA 11 APPROVE FINAL PAYMENT FOR COMMUNITY CENTER BUILDING AND BAND SHELL CONTRACTS. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve final payment for contracts completed for the Community Center and band shell project. FACTS: • Several contracts have been completed and final payments have been requested. • The following contracts have been reviewed by the Construction Management firm and staff to verify that their work has been substantially completed. Band Shell #2/3 Gresser Concrete/Masonry #4 Ben's Tool & Iron Community Center building #2 Keller Fence #3 Kellington Construction #5 Ben's Tool & Iron #7 KG, Inc. #20 Twin City Acoustics #21 Building Material Supply #31 Performance Sports Systems #35 Summit Fire Protection #36 Peoples Electric • There are 2 contracts that have not received final payment to date and are still open. It is expected that those contracts will be finalized within the next 30 days. ATTACHMENTS: • None 3E? Agenda Information Memo May 18, 2004 Eagan City Council Meeting CONSENT � • `S % AUTHORIZATION TO CONTINUE TO DEFER ITS ENTITLEMENT STATUS AND PARTICIPATE IN THE DAKOTA COUNTY ENTITLEMENT CDBG PROGRAMS ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To authorize continuation of the City election to defer its individual Community Development Block Grant entitlement status to Dakota County and participate in the Dakota County Entitlement CDBG Program and the Dakota County Consortium HOME Program for federal fiscal years 2005 -2007. FACTS: • Dakota County is an entitlement County and the City of Eagan is an entitlement city under the Department of Housing and Urban Development standards for Community Development Block Grant Funding. In the past, the City of Eagan has elected to defer its status to the County as a part of a cooperative effort to meet HUD and CDBG goals as together with the County and other cities. • The City of Eagan is entitled to the same CDBG allotment in either case and its citizens have slightly greater access to HOME fund assistance than would be the case if the City were to elect to exercise its entitlement separately. • The benefits of participating in this way is that certain goals, targets and percentages can be met on a county wide basis, rather than on a city by city basis. That way cities that have needs that meet one type of CDBG goal can be balanced with cities that have other types of needs and still meet the overall goal percentages. • To the extent that the City of Eagan has set a priority on the use of its CDBG funds for removal of substandard conditions in the Cedar Grove redevelopment district, it will benefit by partnering with the County and other cities that choose to meet other goals. • Staff has not identified specific benefits of electing the separate entitlement at this time. BACKGROUND: • CDA Letter on pages qv -41-1' CDA April 23, 2004 Dakota County Community Development Agency Mr. Thomas Hedges, Administrator City of Eagan 3830 Pilot Knob Rd. Eagan, MN 55122 RE: Dakota County Qualification for Participation in the Entitlement Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program for Federal Fiscal Years 2005 -2007 Dear Mr. Hedges: The Dakota County Community Development Agency (CDA), acting on behalf of Dakota County, is initiating the process of requalifying the County for participation in the Entitlement CDBG Program for the period covering Federal Fiscal Years 2005 through 2007 (Program Years 7/01/05- 6/30/08). Key to this process is the renewal of Cooperation Agreements with all units of local government that are eligible to participate in the Dakota County CDBG Program. The city of Eagan, while it could qualify as an Entitlement CDBG grantee independently, as a Metropolitan City, has previously elected to defer its Entitlement status and participate in the County's Entitlement CDBG Program. Eagan now has the option of electing one of the following three options: APR 2 6 2004 1. Continue to defer its Entitlement status and participate in the Dakota County Entitlement CDBG Program, and the Dakota County Consortium HOME Program (participation in the County's Entitlement CDBG Program automatically includes a unit of local government in the HOME Program). 2. Accept its Entitlement status and be excluded from the Dakota County CDBG Program. You would be able, in that case, to continue to participate in the HOME Program through the Dakota County Consortium, but the city would not qualify as a separate HOME grantee at this point in time. 3. Accept its Entitlement status and request that HUD approve the inclusion of the city in the County's Program for purposes of planning and implementing a joint community development and housing assistance program. In this case, Eagan would be considered to be part of the County Program by HUD, the County would be the grant recipient, and the grant amount would be the sum of the amounts authorized for the city and the county as individual recipients. There might be, however, significant effects for both the city and county regarding the areas of each qualifying as low- and moderate - income (LMI) areas under the "exception rule" under the CDBG regulations (whereby the upper quartile of census tracts ordered by percentage of LMI residents are eligible for area benefit activities). If you would like, we can request a rank ordering computer run to be made available by HUD to show these impacts. 1228 Town Centre Drive • Eagan, MN 55123 -1066 tel 651-675-4400 •fax 651-675-4444 Eagan's choice will remain in effect for the entire three -year qualification period. If you choose to continue to participate in the Dakota County Entitlement CDBG Program and defer your Entitlement status, your Cooperation Agreement with the County will automatically be renewed. You must inform both the CDA (as the County's CDBG administrator) and the U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development of your choice in writing no later than May 28, 2004. If you cannot respond by that date, please inform this office as soon as possible, so we can request an extension from HUD. Correspondence in this matter should be sent to: Dakota County: The CDA sincerely hopes that Eagan will continue its participation in the Dakota County Entitlement CDBG Program. During the past 21 years that Dakota County has been a recipient of CDBG funding, it has received nearly $36 million. Your city alone received $738,333 in total CDBG funds during this current three -year cooperation period. Recent benefits of this program in Eagan include acquiring and clearing property in Cedar Grove, providing downpayment assistance to first -time homebuyers, and its swapping CDBG with HOME funds to help finance the CDA's latest senior rental housing project. Please review the attached summary of accomplishments resulting from the CDBG and HOME Programs in Dakota County. Since 1992, Dakota County has received nearly $9 million in HOME Program funding, which is used primarily for new construction of affordable housing and financing for first -time homebuyers. If you have any further questions about the information in this letter, or about the CDBG and HOME Programs, please contact me at (651) 675 -4464 or at drognessadakotacda .state.mn.uus. I will also contact you within the next two weeks in order to make sure that you have no further questions or concerns regarding this process. Sincerely, Dakota County CDA 1228 Town Centre Dr. Eagan, MN 55123 Attn: Dan Rogness Dan Rogness Director of Commum alization Enclosure cc: Mark Ulfers, CDA Executive Director HUD: U.S. Dept. of Housing & Urban Development Minnesota State Office, CPD Division 920 Second Ave. So., Suite 1300 Minneapolis, MN 55402 q-1 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANTS (CDBG) Summary of Program Requirements Every CDBG- funded activity must qualify as meeting one of three national objectives of HUD's program (with the exception of administration and planning). The three objectives are: • Benefiting low and moderate (L/M) income persons, • Preventing or eliminating blight, or • Meeting urgent community development needs. Eligible CDBG- funded activities include the following: • Acquisition of real property • Disposition of real property • Clearance • Relocation • Public Facilities and Improvements • Public Services • Housing Rehabilitation • Homeownership Assistance • Code Enforcement • Economic Development • Microenterprise Assistance • Planning • Program Administration CDBG funds must meet HUD's "overall benefit" requirements: 1. At least 70% of grant funds must be used for activities principally benefiting L/M income persons. 2. No more than 15% of grant funds can be used for Public Service activities. 3. No more than 20% of grant funds can be used for Planning and /or Administration. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANTS (CDBG) Summary of Program Accomplishments in Dakota County CDBG Funding Levels: • Current year funding level = $ 2,058,000 (2004) • Past 10 -year average = $ 2,045,000 (1995 -2004) • Total 21 years of funding = $ 36 million (1984 -2004) County -wide Accomplishments: • Housing Rehab Loans: 95 homes per year average. $1.25 million /year average for all loans. $425,000 avg. revolving fund balance. • Well - sealing Grants: 30 grants per year average. $20,000 per year average for all grants. • Affordable Rental Land acquisition for CDA's senior housing. Housing: Land acquisition for CDA's family housing. Community Accomplishments (Examples): • Replace older mobile homes, using CDBG for demolition, downpayment assistance and set -up costs (homeownership assistance activity). • Install a new municipal water well, using CDBG to benefit the whole community (public facility activity). • Subsidize lease payments for non - profit groups leasing space within a community's resource center (public service activity). • Acquire property from willing sellers in a floodplain area, using CDBG for acquisition and demolition (acquisition & clearance activities). • Complete plans related to well -head protection, comprehensive planning, housing, and redevelopment (planning activities). • Renovate and restore downtown historic structures, using CDBG funds for correcting code non - compliance items (commercial rehab activity). • Pay assessments for low /moderate income households related to newly installed public infrastructure (public facility activity). 4-3 HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS (HOME) PROGRAM Summary of Program Accomplishments in Dakota County HOME Funding Levels: • Current year funding level = $ 923,580 (2004) • Total 13 years of funding = $ 9 million (1992 -2004) Accomplishments: • Financed some of the acquisition and development costs for numerous CDA- managed affordable family townhome projects, including locations in Apple Valley, Burnsville, Eagan, Lakeville, Mendota Heights and Inver Grove Heights. • Financed some of the acquisition and development costs for a CDA owned and managed affordable senior housing project in Eagan. • Provided downpayment and closing cost assistance for first -time homebuyers throughout Dakota County. • Provided tenant -based rental assistance to seniors on the CDA's Section 8 Housing Voucher waiting list. • Funded various Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO) and non - profit projects, including locations in Apple Valley, Burnsville, Eagan, Hastings and South St. Paul. • Provided tenant -based rental assistance for the homeless population through Dakota County's Supportive Housing Unit (SHU). • Provided additional funds for the CDA's single family housing rehab loan program. • Provided funding to various private developers that constructed mixed - income rental housing projects, including developments in Apple Valley, Burnsville and Eagan. 41) Agenda Information Memo May 18, 2004, Eagan City Council Meeting A. VARIANCES TO EXCEED THE 20 PERCENT LOT COVERAGE FOR MARCELLA WOODS (WRIGHT HOMES, INC) ACTIONS TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve (OR direct findings of fact for denial) Variances to exceed the 20 percent lot coverage for Lots 3,4,6,7,8,12,13, and 14, Block 1, Marcella Woods Addition, located on Grace Drive in the SW % of Section 34; subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. REQUIRED VOTE FOR APPROVAL • Majority of quorum FACTS: V. PUBLIC HEARINGS • The subdivision was approved in Spring 2003, which created 15 lots, at that time, the applicant indicated the R -1 standards could be met. • The site is currently under construction. • The applicant is requesting that the 20 percent building coverage be applied to the development as a whole rather than on an individual lot basis. As a whole the 20 percent lot coverage is achieved. • The proposed lots are exceeding the lot coverage by 1 to 4 percent. • The subject lots are vacant, it appears the proposed houses may be too big for the lots, based on the 20 percent building coverage standard. • The situation and hardship presented by the applicant shall be determined by City policy makers. 60 DAY AGENCY ACTION DEADLINE • A waiver has not been signed • Deadline is June 28, 2004 ATTACHMENTS (1): Planning staff report, pages4lQ to sL REPORT DATE: May 3, 2004 APPLICANT: Wright Homes PROPERTY OWNER: Ev Wright REQUEST: Variance LOCATION: Marcella Woods COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: LD, Low Density ZONING: R -1, Single Family Residential SUMMARY OF REQUEST PLANNING REPORT CITY OF EAGAN CASE: 34- VA- 04 -04 -04 HEARING DATE: May 18, 2004 APPLICATION DATE: April 29, 2004 PREPARED BY: Sheila Cartney The applicant is requesting approval of a Variance to the 20 percent building coverage for Lots 3,4,6,7,8,12,13,14 for property known as Marcella Woods in the SW 1 /4 of Section 34. AUTHORITY FOR REVIEW City Code Chapter 11, Section 11.50, Subdivision 3, B., 3, states that the 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 actions of the applicant. d. That granting of the variance 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. Planning Report — Marcella Woods Variance May 18, 2004 Page 2 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. CODE REQUIREMENTS Section 11.60 Subdivision 5E allows a maximum of 20 percent building coverage in the R -1, Single Family residential zoning district. BACKGROUND /HISTORY The subject property was rezoned from Agriculture to R -1, Single Family residential, re- guided from Park to LD, Low density residential and subdivided in Spring 2003. The subdivision (Marcella Woods) created 15 single family lots. At the time of subdivision the applicant indicated that all R -1 minimum standards could be met. EXISTING CONDITIONS The site is currently under construction. APPLICANT'S ESTIMATE OF HARDSHIP The applicant is requesting that the 20 percent building coverage be applied to the development as a whole rather than on an individual lot basis. Overall as a whole the site meets the 20 percent lot coverage, because of the varying lot sizes. The applicant states "this change will help the integrity and appearance of our development." EVALUATION OF REQUEST Typically, the R -1 zoning standards are based on a per lot basis where the 20 percent lot coverage is applied to each lot in a subdivision. The City has allowed developments to calculate the building coverage as a whole for the development in the past, these developments however, were part of a Planned Development, not straight R -1 zoning. The proposed lots are exceeding the lot coverage by 1 to 4 percent. The subject lots are vacant, it appears the proposed houses maybe too big for the lots, based on the 20 percent building coverage standard. The situation and hardship presented by the applicant shall be determined by City policy makers. SUMMARY /CONCLUSION The site was subdivided for development of single family homes in 2003. At the time of the subdivision the developer anticipated the lots would comply with R -1 standards. The variance 4� Planning Report — Marcella Woods Variance May 18, 2004 Page 3 request is for eight of the 15 lots. The building coverage exceeds 20 percent by 1 to 4 percent. The lots are vacant, the applicant maybe creating the hardship by proposing homes too large to meet the zoning standards. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED To approve a Variance to the 20 percent lot coverage for Lots 3,4,5,7,8,12,13, and 14, Block 1, Marcella Woods in the SW 1 /4 of Section 34; subject to the following conditions: 1. If within one year after approval, the variance shall not have been completed or utilized, it shall become null and void unless a petition for extension has been granted by the council. Such extension shall be requested in writing at least 30 days before expiration and shall state facts showing a good faith attempt to complete or utilize the use permitted in the variance. 2. The variance shall apply only to Lots 3, 4, 5,7,8,12,13, and 14, Block 1, Marcella Woods. 3. The lot coverage for each lot shall be as indicated on Exhibit B. tie City of Eagan 2004 Planning Department 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 -1897 Wright Homes, Inc. Please be advised that the Marcella Woods Partnership is requesting a variance pertaining to the House Impervious Coverage. Rather than an individual per lot coverage of 20% we are requesting an overall coverage of 20 %. This change will help the integrity and appearance of our development. Zoning classification will remain R -1 and existing land uses on subject property will remain the same. Surrounding land uses and zoning within 660 feet will be unaffected. 4- 9 April 16, rMc APR . 6 2004 Wrieht Homes, Inc. • 14420 Glenda Drive • Apple Valley, MN 55124 • 952 - 431 -9864 • fax 952- 432 -8372 Location Map ''. Eagan Boundary Street Centerline Parcel Area Budding Footprint 0 0 Q� r epW. a 03 03 Subject Site x b ti ! , Y/V4 1� * ;j ® °� Jl r 4 4 j :boo® T 1 � Rio �+G® 0 �• �= a s oCG��I �® f �a W#i'n ��• o�� il�` ® e .- ty 6 ®ow © . �5 a � [�71 r fl��t ® ®� •i,1 1000 0 1000 2000 Feet Development /Developer: Wright Homes Application: Variance Case No.: 34- VA- 04 -04 -04 city of eagan Community Oevdopment Departnsnt Map Prepared using ERSI ArcView 3.1. Parcel base map data provided by Dakota County Office 01 015 and is current as of January 2004. THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY The City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this information and are not responsible for errors or omissions. 1 - aoi }ou }no4 - wAI °S. [ Ya?iv t i n % %roz %rzz %8'ZZ %OW %P'ZZ %V91 j %6'61 f %O01 %OPZ. 1 % ror %6'S 1 I %O 1 MAX HOUSE AREA 1 0O LI' -- 1 rte' — _ i 11. S£8 j� £ti`£ EEI'E CUT r£1t P06'f } 5 COE frl'E fat I i . : . I '10US AREA CALCULATION ( %I V ,.. 1 { - %0 %W , - - -] %P'61 [- %0'6 1 °9'81 %6'61 %0 "61 %L'6 %COE %6'Sl 1 I 1 WHY aSnOH] . SS6'Z 859 13;9 [ OL8't . { 8!!9'Z [ 8S 9`Z [ sot 1 Of t ---- 1 P06'£ 009'Z 1 OO9'Z [� OO9'Z 0 � f OS 1MPERV iiiiiiiiu lad�1. { Y 3dA.1. S 3dx.L S MILL madam 1 e 3dA1 { a 3dA.L a acAi. V 3dA.1. p d v { SOU 111 3dA.L paIOdaa 1 1 j 'MAL ALLOWABLE IMP. £x4%) 1 948'P 0011 601't j "- 96L'Z 1 OL 9't (- 94L'Z let 9;f t 09$'£ I'V6'E ._ [ 5011 v i' 519'Z 01 6£9'Z IO9'L { rLS`f -1 ! I i ■ I van alsoaj 0 0 15 a ge. cs o el 0 E5/ !� LP6'1-- I cp es O 1 0 es . 1,01 dtr'1NZ 1 ms's _1 9W(1 1 110471 SZG`f 1_7 LS6'£1 1 { Term 1 10£'61 {_ 9Z8`91 T 940t1 _ 1 £6I'C1 _1+9f61- 1111: 101 ...s VA Ell CP: 1 141- f_z1 I. I P8 711 °S. Agenda Information Memo May 18, 2004, Eagan City Council Meeting B. VARIANCE TO EXCEED 20 PERCENT LOT COVERAGE FOR A LIVING SPACE ADDITION BY 1.26 PERCENT LOCATED AT 4387 BENT TREE LANE (TODD & SUSAN JOHNSON) ACTIONS TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve (OR direct findings of fact for denial) a Variance to exceed 20 percent lot coverage by 1.26 percent for an addition to the principal structure at 4387 Bent Tree Lane; subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. REQUIRED VOTE FOR APPROVAL • Majority of quorum FACTS: • The applicant submitted an application for a building permit for an addition to their existing home and discovered their proposal would exceed allowed lot coverage by 1.26 percent. • The property is zoned R -1 Single Family Residential; R -1 standards limit lot coverage to 20 percent. • The 12,005 square foot lot has a house and attached garage with a 2,210 square foot footprint creating lot coverage of 18.4 %. • An existing 385 square foot deck is attached to the rear of the home and would be removed to accommodate the proposed 112 square foot deck and a 342 square foot footprint basement and first floor addition. 60 DAY AGENCY ACTION DEADLINE • A waiver has not been signed • Deadline is June 21, 2004 ATTACHMENTS (1): Planning Staff Report pagesS through 53 REPORT DATE: May 4, 2004 APPLICANT: Todd & Susan Johnson PROPERTY OWNER: Same REQUEST: Building Coverage Variance ZONING: R1, Residential Single SUMMARY OF REQUEST AUTHORITY FOR REVIEW PLANNING REPORT CITY OF EAGAN LOCATION: 4387 Bent Tree Lane (Lot 3, Block 1, Autumn Ridge 2nd Addition) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: LD, Low Density (0 -4 units /acre) CASE: 25- VA- 05 -04 -04 HEARING DATE: May 18, 2004 APPLICATION DATE: April 22, 2004 PREPARED BY: Mary Gran ley Todd and Susan Johnson are requesting a 1.26 percent Variance from the 20 percent maximum building coverage standard in Residential zoning districts for the construction of a 342 square foot living space addition on property located at 4387 Bent Tree Lane (Lot 3, Block 1, Autumn Ridge 2 11a Addition) in the NE 1 /4 of Section 25. City Code Chapter 11, Section 11.50, Subdivision 3.B.3 states that the Council may approve, approve with conditions or deny a request for a variance. In considering all requests for a variance, the City Council shall consider the following factors: a. Exceptional of 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. GL-J- Planning Report — Todd Johnson Variance May 18, 2004 Page 2 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. CODE REQUIREMENTS City Code Section 11.60 Subd. 5.E allows for a maximum building lot coverage of 20% in an R1 zoning district. Only covered structures and buildings are considered when calculating building lot coverage. BACKGROUND /HISTORY The subject site was platted as part of Autumn Ridge 2nd Addition. The Autumn Ridge development, approved in 1989, rezoned 38.6 Agricultural acres to R -1 for development of 99 single family lots. A condition of plat approval was phase two of the project could not proceed without a second access to the development. Because the property owner was not willing to sell to provide for this access, an Amendment of Plat to add 20 additional lots for Autumn Ridge 2nd Addition was approved in 1992. The smallest lot size in the Autumn Ridge development is 12,000 square feet. The minimum lot area in the R -1 (Residential Single Family) zoning district is 12,000 square feet. The subject site is 12,005 square feet in area. EXISTING CONDITIONS An existing single family dwelling and three -stall attached garage built in 1992 is present on the site. The home has a building footprint of 2,210 square feet creating building lot coverage of 18.4 %. An existing 385 square foot deck is attached to the rear of the home. EVALUATION OF REQUEST The applicants are proposing to remove the existing 385 square foot deck at the rear of the home and replace it with a 112 square foot deck and a 342 square foot footprint basement and first floor addition. The existing home and proposed 342 square foot addition would total 21.26% lot coverage, exceeding the 20% lot coverage allowed by code. The lot in question is 12,005 square feet in area, comparatively small in size to other lots in this development which range from 12,000 square feet to 28,000 square feet. The four adjacent Planning Report — Todd Johnson Variance May 18, 2004 Page 3 properties to the subject site vary in size from 12,070 square feet to 16,980 square feet. There have been no applications for lot coverage variances within this development. The proposed addition meets all required setbacks, according to the site plan. The elevation plan indicates the proposed addition blends with the existing architecture and materials of the home. The addition would consist of a lower level office and study room and an upper level family room. APPLICANT'S ESTIMATE OF HARDSHIP The applicants have stated they do not want to leave their home, but they would like to increase their living space and work space to accommodate their family's growth, their changing lives and the employment and educational requirements for their family. They have concluded that were their home and proposed addition located on other typical lots in the area, such as the adjacent property next door (a lot measuring 12,846 square feet in size), the total lot coverage would be less than 20% and their proposed project would be allowed without a variance approval. SUMMARY /CONCLUSION Todd and Susan Johnson are requesting a building coverage Variance to construct a living space addition. A single family dwelling with a three -stall attached garage is present on the site. According to the survey, the addition meets all other minimum and maximum bulk standards. The proposed addition will exceed the maximum allowable 20% building coverage for a single family lot. It is calculated that the proposed addition will exceed the maximum building coverage by approximately 1.26 %. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED To approve a Variance from the 20 percent maximum building coverage standard in Residential zoning districts for the construction of a 342 square foot addition located at 4387 Bent Tree Lane (Lot 3, Block 1, Autumn Ridge 2 Addition) in NE 1 /4 of Section 25. 1. If within one year after approval, the variance shall not have been completed or utilized, it shall become null and void unless a petition for extension has been granted by the council. Such extension shall be requested in writing at least 30 days before expiration and shall state facts showing a good faith attempt to complete or utilize the use permitted in the variance. 2. The finish materials and color of the addition shall match the existing principle structure. 3. The addition shall be located as indicated on the site plan dated April 22, 2004. 4. Lot coverage shall not exceed 21.26 percent. April 18, 2004 City of Eagan Planning Commission 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Re: 4387 Bent Tree Lane Proposed Addition Autumn Ridge 2n Addition Variance Application Written Narrative In 2003, my wife and I decided to add on to our home. During our submittal process for a building permit we were informed that our proposed addition put us over the foundation square footage allowed for our lot size. Therefore, we are requesting a variance to the percentage of foundation size to lot size. In our subdivision, there is a 20% foundation to lot size allowance. With the proposed addition, the total finished foundation square footage calculates out to 20.65 %. We are asking for a variance of less than 1% (0.65 %). Of the six adjacent lots to our property, our lot is the smallest. Our proposed house footprint would be within the 20/80 Ratio on five of the six adjacent properties hence not requiring a variance application. We would ask that the planning commission consider this hardship and grant a variance for our property. Our family has grown since 1992 when we purchased our home here. Due to economic reasons, moving to a larger home is not an option. This planned additional living and workspace would satisfy our growth, our changing lives and the employment and educational requirements for our family. To meet our needs we would like to remove our existing deck and build a lower level office /study room and an upper level family room within this deck area. Comprehensive Plan Existing structure: Approximate deck size of 385 square feet. Proposed Structure: 342 square foot 4- Season family room with a full office /study below. 112 square foot deck. Proposed Schedule: Demolition of existing of existing deck. Construction of New Addition. Total Construction Time of 3 Months. Start Date of June 1s Sincerely Thank you for y Todd Johnson nsideration. Susan OrandilJohnson 2 2 n0 ?J NARRATIVE Location Man Eagan Boundary Street Centerline Ell StreetCeea Building Footprint w ,.0,31 0 , 44 ;4 gulp OW 4 vP Vi Rti '-& ' 0 * 4:AN B I & , A 7. , 8 aux. rag aammumn. �— ,0•1 YYaa VI dir IM • iml iMigi • rkfir ttke" IA a ligebi4NLA TE1.512. valtumenos 41111 vim l o Ot ' iairiii 6 110 4 rindlgaic'li►iz '" 4 111 0 - -- r ��nts m :An 1.1 r rs ro!rir.i � - MI � � nu f�amel imi VAC* �...... a " u e➢ n r7 nu rah, 1111 41 , la 7 „. u i 17 . n l ib D I ® �� °: f '447 ® 'Q �+ � Sub'ect Site �` � Vt:41,1* 1 1 ;S 1°A d ii Fla °,i t. r ®N� w 171 BIM URI /Sr tallerso A tullfpg; 4001 era rmraw i ' 1 *: 1 714 1 . 13 co 1.4 4 ft- in p4, -444-„. it° Pe 1 4 PriPillr* ® . irli ."‘e:-4114; VtGl o 6- INN � -- l ogt, �.�! cra ,� try n itansts 4:p.M. L J J . '■;';' STAllt TRUNK Hl0RW*j 5 P. fl R SOO UNE RAM • MIMI roaxelanall lh 1� I. WI IL ----it>. p,,,, di. Awarix.,..op,cmoviiir on” / ....wommilli / / 1/ / / • M ®/ ® ` " --... _,. ..,,,,,,,,,,, IFA, gam // 7 Ai a .2 we Walt' ®iu ® ® e�4 t a ®Q2 ii Q ®r ®� ®iiir®a CHIN . • - y ,part• ° �r ®FA I 1 ® ®Ir ./� • ; sato / ....e.. - t.a.aut. xe. oz d ®. ° imspe ra, 1 *7 / , p la 4�® i/10 �® if* .�■� 1� a■ � c� v o� � a ` w Q ° GD- b� c. � 11C 1000 0 1000 2000 Feet Development/Developer: Todd Johnson Application: Variance Case No.: 25- VA- 05 -04 -04 C i t Ol: en cin v Community Development Department Map Prepared using ERSI ArcView 3.1. Parcel base map data provided 5 ,, by Dakota County ONce of GIS and is current as of January 2004 The Cit THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY y of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this Information and are not responsible for errors or omissions. N W E S 7 .T.7 71111)4. qr\ f 37 SITE PLAN ,,. /E , -.S ..*it 6 -.1 ¢ moue m CO cJ 1 0 -,Y t -L insll! 9 400 0 \/ � / .0,� I I • . �/ I _ `rte I I % -r I Z WV N N �:" g w Q F L 81 f 1 I zw - \ u'i I iVN1A pp Z LI N I W'- 1 �_ W - - - J rW0 :I uLL. ''°E N ¢ _ I / / O n' Q' � m o¢ wo ¢—.. N m V ° /c, _ m j � N In / U� OI gW" d •1 O J Fz2 n •I / =J m zo xw >76.= I I I - - - '- io _ o I I - 1tl - m io a .W e ¢ N - - - >aa m N -� 1 sc ¢ 4./C fr -.S z ..1 E -.N ,.L /[ 6 -.E m r Er - - 6' •.. BI ril _ W :� o mNial ,,. /E , -.S ..*it 6 -.1 ¢ moue m CO cJ 1 0 -,Y t -L insll! 9 400 0 e3 \= 2 � 0 C " ) & /f Ea EY 0b 0 (0/ r a} /} zrt 2 1 9 7\ Cr 0 a 0 z 0 > uj 2 c 6514546103 05/07/2004 13:21 6514546103 RE: Ms. Granley: Thank you, FACSIMILE 77LkI•TSM1TTAL. g-TFRT TO: Mary Graniey VOICE: 651 -675 -5685 COMPANY: City of Eagan FAX: 651 - 675 -5694 FROM: Bob Anderson DATE: May 7, 2004 TOTAL NO. Olt PAGES LNCLUDING COVER: I Message: Regarding Development Todd Johnson, Case Number 25- VA- 05 -04 -04 I have no problems or Issues with the Johnson addition and recommend you approve it. I live directly next door. Robert Anderson 4391 Bent Tree Lane Eagan, MN 55123 �a BOBANDERSON Voice: (651 452 -1959 Fax: (651) 454 -6103 PAGE 01 Agenda Information Memo May 18, 2004, Eagan City Council Meeting C. VARIANCE TO THE FRONT YARD SETBACK FOR AN ADDITION TO PROEPRTY AT 4757 PENKWE CIRCLE (KEITH & LORI ZIERDEN) ACTIONS TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve (OR direct findings of fact for denial) a three foot Variance to the front yard setback to allow an addition to an existing house, located at 4757 Penkwe Circle, subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. REQUIRED VOTE FOR APPROVAL • Majority of quorum FACTS: • The existing single family home was built in 1984. The lot size is about 19,200 square feet. • According to the applicant, "Part of the lot is located within the cul -de -sac, "which causes loss of lot frontage. The home will still be positioned behind the neighbor's house." • The subject lot has 128 feet of street frontage, partially on a cul -de -sac bubble. The house is positioned at an angle on the lot closer to the southwest side of the lot. • The location of the lot on the cul -de -sac, the corresponding setback requirements, and the orientation of the home on the lot require a setback variance to accommodate the proposed expansion area. • The situation and hardship presented by the applicant shall be determined by City Policy makers. 60 DAY AGENCY ACTION DEADLINE • A waiver has not been signed • Deadline is June 28, 2004 ATTACHMENTS (1): Planning staff report, pages to ( Q co3 REPORT DATE: May 7, 2004 CASE: 33- VA- 06 -04 -04 APPLICANT: Keith & Lori Zierden HEARING DATE: May 18, 2004 PROPERTY OWNER: Same APPLICATION DATE: April 24, 2004 REQUEST: Variance PREPARED BY: Sheila Cartney LOCATION: 4757 Penkwe Circle COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: LD, Low Density residential ZONING: R -1, Single Family Residential SUMMARY OF REQUEST PLANNING REPORT CITY OF EAGAN The applicant is requesting approval of a Variance to the front setback for a room addition to the existing house located at 4757 Penkwe Circle. AUTHORITY FOR REVIEW City Code Chapter 11, Section 11.50, Subdivision 3, B., 3, states that the 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 actions of the applicant. d. That granting of the variance 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. Planning Report — Zierden Variance May 18, 2004 Page 2 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. CODE REQUIREMENTS Section 11.60 Subdivision 5E requires a minimum setback of 30 feet from the public right -of- way for property zoned R -1, Single Family residential. BACKGROUND /HISTORY The property is platted as part of the Johnny Cake Ridge Addition and developed as single family residential. EXISTING CONDITIONS The existing single family home was built in 1984. The lot is about 19,170 square feet. APPLICANT'S ESTIMATE OF HARDSHIP The addition to the front of the home is to the master bedroom. According to the applicant a bathroom will be added and the plumbing is located in the front of the house, it is ideal for the bathroom to be located as proposed. Part of the lot is located within the cul -de -sac, "which causes loss of lot frontage." If there was not a cul -de -sac in this location the lot would be squared and the variance would not be necessary. "The home will still be positioned behind the neighbor's house." EVALUATION OF REQUEST The subject lot has 128 feet of street frontage, partially on a cul -de -sac bubble. The house is positioned at an angle on the lot closer to the southwest side of the lot. A portion of the proposed addition does not meet the 30 foot setback. The location of the lot on the cul -de -sac, the corresponding setback requirements, and the orientation of the home on the lot require a setback variance to accommodate the proposed expansion area. Other than the front setback, all other setbacks are met with this proposal. The applicant is proposing many upgrades to their existing home that meet code requirements. SUMMARY /CONCLUSION The request is for a variance to the front yard setback. The applicant proposes to add on to the master bedroom and include a new bathroom. The plumbing is on the south side of the house causing the addition to be located as proposed. The applicant indicates that the cul -de -sac is prohibiting them to meet the setback requirement. The applicant believes that even with the toG- Planning Report — Zierden Variance May 18, 2004 Page 3 addition the house will still be positioned behind the neighbor's house, so it will not feel closer than the other houses in the cul -de -sac. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED To approve a three foot Variance to the front yard setback for a building addition for property located at 4757 Penkwe Circle, subject to the following conditions: 1. If within one year after approval, the variance shall not have been completed or utilized, it shall become null and void unless a petition for extension has been granted by the council. Such extension shall be requested in writing at least 30 days before expiration and shall state facts showing a good faith attempt to complete or utilize the use permitted in the variance. 2. The variance shall only apply to the addition as indicated on the site plan dated received April 23, 2004. 3. Building materials shall match existing materials. We would like to complete an addition/remodel project to our home which was built in 1984. We want to enlarge our home in the front (southeastern end) where the master bedroom is located to create a `master suite' by adding a bathroom and enlarging the bedroom. All of the plumbing is located at the front of the house and therefore it is more feasible to add a master bathroom in this area. The survey shows that two corners of the addition encroaches the setback by 1'4" and 2'5 ". Because our home is located in a circle, we lose some frontage because of the curve in the street. As you can see by the attached site map, even with this addition, our home is still positioned behind our neighbor's house. In addition, we will be adding 2 gables to the front of the home which will also improve the overall curb - appeal. 107 Location Map Eagan Boundary Street Centerline Parcel Area Building Footprint I I aTon � �J�i o'er' [r•`" j 9 ' 6; �!- . ®„e >,���am._ tics _ _ [+� J i,�A® 074100, Wei MALO U. le re" 411,4 via IN& 6 1 10 14144 : 4 4 4 ca V9A smas n / Vd as co o 4%, ra ggittaig INE 521 S C LIEN wa-- 4 IN rpm s *`rill ` ® it a wi u® V Min It Airlvfitatzevol $ ��® r 211 tale. g el @INA 474% *OW ®� a © ®r' l eg T y ®.1 ® $I : ®®. OAS ,$ Y� ®� 4 4"AO P leg ®Va GA t�,• Fc! G� OVUM 44 taniati 4 4 44,44 ift4k- Adi ft `s r 6 loom: DWJ � i auk �a A A Gl1Gaf1A (� a neJL9 y mdryb i![4'�Ga[� � aildi leo wax; �ec'� -41 r ' Irsatetu EEEB 0 r.Q • ge • v RV coo t at/ ii■its .�� Pte 4 ,11 �,1' && coo v° JEW Firer tatS COM Airmi CPV J14111 likasip maw IN A MEM .47111 la 111 P 1 u m® lestrA °am" ato olice wilbAN m ulga VOINAL 210EZZCZnitilalP -----... ARIL, 4111m- vb 9 1000 0 1000 2000 Feet Development/Developer: Keith & Lori Zierden Application: Variance Case No.: 33- VA- 06 -04 -04 city of cagan V r Map Prepared using ERSI ArcVlew 3.1. Parcel base map data provided by Dakota County Office of GIS and is current as of January 2004. THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY The City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this information and are not responsible for errors or omissions. N W E Sketch for Proposed C,R, WINDEN & ASSOCIATES, INC, / LAND PLANNING, SURVEYS & SITE DESIGN H ouse Addition 2380 Wycliff Street - Suite 200 St. Paul, MN 55114 Tel. 651 - 731 -7702 For: Lori Zierden Lot 4, Block 1, Johnny Cake Ridge Addition, Dakota County, Minnesota 7 8.71 R -60,00 D-75. 0 25 50 100 i Scale: 1 " =30' ND Q C Bearing System assumed, N 7 8 ' g 3`E E CIRC PENK 6.6 \ PROPOSED ADDITION 2 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS SURVEY, PLAN OR REPORT WAS PREPARED BY ME OR UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A DULY REGISTERED LAND SURVEYOR UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. Dated this 5th day of April 2004 Setbacks based on as -built survey dated 4 -20 -1984 D -3313 L4B 1 JKRIGE.FC7 111 R E C T , w _E D L " C. R. WINDEN & ASSOCIATES, INC. 4 Registration No,7726 � � w Agenda Information Memo May 18, 2004, Eagan City Council Meeting D. VARIANCE TO EXCEED 20 PERCENT LOT COVERAGE FOR A LIVING SPACE ADDITION BY JUST UNDER 1 PERCENT LOCATED AT 981 TRILLIUM COURT (CHRIS NEUMANN) ACTIONS TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve (OR direct findings of fact for denial) a Variance to exceed 20 percent lot coverage by just under 1 percent for an addition to the principal structure at 981 Trillium Court; subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. REQUIRED VOTE FOR APPROVAL • Majority of quorum FACTS: • The property is zoned Planned Development; the intention of the Planned Development was to meet all R -1 standards except for lot size and side -yard setbacks. • The lot is 10,789 square feet in area with 5 foot side yard setbacks. • R -1 standards require a minimum 12,000 square foot lot with 10 foot side yard setbacks on the principal structure side, and 5 foot side yard setbacks on the garage side. • R -1 standards limit lot coverage to 20 percent; the home has a building footprint of 2,040 square feet creating lot coverage of 18.9 %. • An existing 224 square foot deck is attached to the rear of the home and would be removed to accommodate the proposed 224 square foot footprint screen porch. 60 DAY AGENCY ACTION DEADLINE • A waiver has not been signed • Deadline is June 25, 2004 ATTACHMENTS (1): Planning Staff Report pages7l through ' 70 PLANNING REPORT CITY OF EAGAN REPORT DATE: May 7, 2004 CASE: 26- VA- 07 -04 -04 APPLICANT: Chris Neumann HEARING DATE: May 18, 2004 PROPERTY OWNER: Chris & Carrie Neumann APPLICATION DATE: April 26, 2004 REQUEST: Building Coverage Variance PREPARED BY: Mary Granley LOCATION: 981 Trillium Court (Lot 17, Block 1, Lexington Point 10 Addition) COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: LD, Low Density (0 -4 units /acre) ZONING: PD, Planned Development SUMMARY OF REQUEST Chris Neumann is requesting a Variance to exceed the 20 percent maximum building coverage standard in Residential zoning districts by just under 1% for the construction of a 224 square foot screened porch addition on property located at 981 Trillium Court (Lot 17, Block 1, Lexington Pointe 10 Addition) in the NW 1 /4 of Section 26. AUTHORITY FOR REVIEW City Code Chapter 11, Section 11.50, Subdivision 3.B.3 states that the Council may approve, approve with conditions or deny a request for a variance. In considering all requests for a variance, the City Council shall consider the following factors: a. Exceptional of 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. 1 1 Planning Report — Neumann Variance May 18, 2004 Page 2 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. CODE REQUIREMENTS City Code Section 11.60 Subd. 5.E allows for maximum building lot coverage of 20% in a residential zoning district. Only covered structures and buildings are considered when calculating building lot coverage. BACKGROUND/HISTORY The Lexington Pointe 10 Addition was platted as part of the Lexington Pointe 8 Addition, part of the Lexington South Planned Development established in 1976. Originally designated for commercial use, the City approved a Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment changing the land use designation and zoning of approximately 49 acres from commercial to single family residential. The Lexington Pointe 8th Addition includes 167 single family lots ranging in size from approximately 10,220 square feet to 19,500 square feet. The development was approved for lot sizes less than 12,000 square feet in area and 5 foot side -yard setbacks. All other residential City Code standards were to be maintained. EXISTING CONDITIONS An existing single family dwelling and three -stall attached garage built in 1995 is present on the site. The home has a building footprint of 2,040 square feet on a 10,789 square foot lot, creating lot coverage of 18.9 %. An existing 224 square foot deck is attached to the rear of the home. A bituminous path is located along the east side lot line. "7a Planning Report — Neumann Variance May 18, 2004 Page 3 EVALUATION OF REQUEST The applicants are proposing to remove the existing 224 square foot deck at the rear of the home and replace it with a 224 square foot footprint screen porch. The existing home and proposed 224 square foot addition would total 20.98% lot coverage, exceeding the 20% lot coverage allowed by code. The proposed addition meets all required setbacks, according to the Site Plan. The elevation plan indicates the proposed addition blends with the existing architecture and materials of the home. A 1% variance for lot coverage was approved in November 2003 on Wildflower Court for the construction of a 29 x 17 addition on an 11,495 square foot lot in the Lexington Pointe 8` Addition. APPLICANT'S ESTIMATE OF HARDSHIP The applicant has stated they would like to increase the recreational space of their home, allowing for an area which provides some relief from the weather and insects yet allows a space with some feeling of the outdoors for their family. They have concluded that were their home and proposed addition located on a Iot typical to Rl zoning, which is 12,000 square feet in area, the total lot coverage would be 19% and their proposed project would be allowed without a variance approval. Mr. Neumann has indicated no objection from neighbors on the east and west sides of his property. SUMMARY /CONCLUSION Chris Neumann is requesting a building coverage Variance to construct a screen porch addition. A single family dwelling with a three -stall attached garage is present on the site. According to the survey, the addition meets all other minimum and maximum bulk standards. The proposed addition will exceed the maximum allowable 20% building coverage for a single family lot. It is calculated that the proposed addition will exceed the maximum building coverage by just under 1%. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED To approve a Variance from the 20 percent maximum building coverage standard in Residential zoning districts for the construction of a 224 square foot addition located at 981 Trillium Court (Lot 17, Block 1, Lexington Pointe 10th Addition) in NW 1 /4 of Section 26. If approved, the following conditions should apply: 1. If within one year after approval, the variance shall not have been completed or utilized, it shall become null and void unless a petition for extension has been granted by the council. Such extension shall be requested in writing at least 30 days before expiration and shall state -73 Planning Report — Neumann Variance May 18, 2004 Page 4 facts showing a good faith attempt to complete or utilize the use permitted in the variance. 2. The finish materials and color of the addition shall match the existing principle structure. 3. The addition shall be located as indicated on the site plan dated April 26, 2004. 4. Lot coverage shall not exceed 20.98 percent. -7q_ We are requesting a 1% variance to the building coverage ordinance in order to build a 14' by 16' screened porch attached to our existing house. Currently, we have a 14' by 16' deck (to be removed) in the location where the proposed screen porch would be built. The variance request is necessary due to the small size of our lot, which is common throughout our neighborhood. However, our lot is even smaller than similar shaped lots along our street due to a bituminous path placed between our house and our neighbor to the east. This path reduces our lot and our neighbors lot by 3 feet each (6 feet total). Our lot is 70 feet by 154.12 feet, which is 10,789 square feet. Based on records received from the City of Eagan Planning Commission and Dakota County, our house currently has 2,040 square feet of building coverage. Using the 20% building coverage ordinance on our lot size, this allows for approximately 2,157 square feet of building coverage; leaving 117 square feet available for additions. Our proposed porch would be 224 square feet, which would require a 1% variance. Attached is a Plat drawing obtained from the Dakota County website, which displays the standard lot size of those houses just to the east and west of our property. Most of these houses have a width of at least 73 feet. Without the bituminous path, our lot size would be similar to our neighbors, and provide a 20% building coverage allowance of 2,250 square feet as detailed below 154.12 x 73 = 11,250 sq. ft 11,250 x 20% = 2,250 sq. ft. Narrative Based on these numbers, we would have 210 square feet of available space for additions. Our proposed porch in this situation, would total 20.12% of building coverage on the lot. Further, our development does not have lot sizes that are common to typical R1 zoning guidelines, which prefer 12,000 square feet for lot sizes. If the Lexington Pointe Tenth Addition development had utilized this guideline, our existing house and proposed porch would be well under the 20 percent building coverage ordinance. Finally, the 3 parties most impacted by our proposed porch are my neighbors just to the east and west of my property (985 Trillium Court and 977 Trillium Court) as well as the owner of Out lot A. (The land just to the North of our property, which is currently zoned RC and is undeveloped). Both of my neighbors have indicated that they do not have concerns about our proposed porch. I have not had contact with the owner of the undeveloped land to our North, as they reside in Pennsylvania. I appreciate your time in evaluating our request. 7s MARRATIVF RECE a VED AP2 2 6 2004 Location Map Eagan Boundary ^.. Street Centerline Parcel Area rI Building Footprint ittliLGGa®la LEXIIIIITON &&&& Q sio MUM EMMEN Ale. 4 CI dab ° um nun OM II .1 I.II I MIMI =IN INIIMIp SCI lam ma Ems all L u 12U MOM "MINE] In Una Min NOM 111 MIMIn a" NW 110,11111w ". i lkstififtfolifhTE ■ falk ennem 1 S o ®�'� 1 u •4 pri 4MP,, /IOW az 44V4ft mow, 4•4 EktVENMPA. a 411 Sor ___W a- pe 0 v omr - 4 1.-porgaziEckvialZa Subject Site LIALI DLL , 4. 444470 � ®_'J i1. p moo �:'c IUL =4 II Pi raw .�� 4we as �-t ' ' � € � � Gltt41 9�] riCi ®® " many le a motto l .— or 110 ii. 0 iZPAGEG i�® a ., ® ®�► , NE IIMOISIVAr Oi CC r�riiia G 06 a��,00t`,� a 47 411X4 48) �' e+ v ctgraktiziazialfil 1 Fig ��® 0 r1 Vic•' * 1 s j 4 4 MA T �, X E MI IN MI EMI Fitll rittr ostsatiiiiiii; mul lowf41111N g oaf* - -- to 4. 4410 slip OWNS ' D G =WO 1000 0 '\11 41 449 4 481244 41,4* alett'a min ' j 1I Mi El G it °1� ' a ® dam® ® a® ® ® Wi Tr ia ti lati„.6.144 O PARR 1000 2000 Feet 0 Development /Developer: Chris Newman Application: Variance Case No.: 26- VA- 07 -04 -04 city of eclgcln Community Development Department Map Prepared using ERS! ArcView 3.1. Parcel base map data provided by Dakota County Office of GIS and is current as of January 2004. THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY The City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this information and are not responsible for errors or omissions. W E K PIONEER r Etna near rig zk ertificate of Survey for: Tt N HOMES z INC. 16 W V In 980.7 Z w Q x x 7.0"c 980.9 BENCH MARK TOP OF PIPE ELEV.979.06- ----- ` y �. cf 64. 'S' 986.5 S89 08 23 W 70.00 980.2 979.4 8. • 979.2 r4gZI) tit t7 ,3) 977,4 N89°06 23 "E MO ' 97.6 977.0 976.9 f���l• 77 LAND SURVEYORS • cnn. MOWERS LAND PLANNERS • LANDSCAPE ARCHOECTS 961 TRILLIUM COURT 977.1 2422 Enterprise Drive Mendota Heights, MN 55120 (612) 881 - -1914 FAx:1381 --9488 625 Highway 10 N.E. Blaine. MN 55434 (812) 783 -1880 FAX: 783-1883 C7 980.6 Ch W 980.1 SITE PLAN -- -BENCH MARK TOP OF PPE El V. =97 .36 j t 1 ...;••= 3 7e NORTH ELEVATION . _...._ ...D ....1 a I \ s svn`) T ...,_ ..ez„ ..... A- li 7. - ) . o 1,bh ± ..q, Q.) 2 sr ,,...) S5 1 4 1 , r - 4 SSkiq 41 1 j t 1 ...;••= 3 7e NORTH ELEVATION 4 2 ta • O 0 79 M tc. 9 .mot N 3 3 3 L 3 :-7 Li ... = 5' \D c 1.-rid l. -,g 0 r 4 ...I) ND L'i ,.) t 7 c) . __ .nr 4 ..z.) d .1. * -- s - cs 5 0 La.) di 6 LA) QD 4 V") -ak. 41 1 EAST ELEVATION r■S (7 --r ts.3 v4N � v cf' 1 2 a r` • 9 k cs _9'Q -JP 7 .G' c M 1 L v 0 5 cam► 2 . - a = T ' c ' ::4 f S N h 8 1- u r , 1+ o 1 0 4- Agenda Information Memo May 18, 2004, Eagan City Council Meeting Nirk REZONING — CEDARSTONE DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve (OR to direct findings of fact for denial) a Rezoning of five acres from Agriculture to R -2, Residential Double district for property located at 1055 Wescott Road. REQUIRED VOTE FOR APPROVAL • Majority of Quorum FACTS: • This item was continued to the May 18, 2004 City Council as requested by the applicant. • No development is proposed at this time; however, the conceptual site plan shows a twin home development that is consistent with low density guide plan designation of 0 -4 units /acre. • Property surrounding the subject site contains single family detached uses. • Property to the west is currently requesting rezoning to R -1, Single family residential. • The Advisory Planning Commission held a public hearing on April 27, 2004 and is recommending denial. ISSUES: • The APC had concerns about twin homes compatibility and consistency with the surrounding single family uses. • There was significant opposition from the surrounding neighbors. 60 DAY AGENCY ACTION DEADLINE • June 28, 2004 — City extended 60 day deadline ATTACHMENTS (2): Advisory Planning Commission Minutes — CR Planning Staff Report pagesnthrough9 A regular meeting of the Eagan Advisory Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, April 27, 2004 at 6:30 p.m., at the Eagan Municipal Center in the Eagan Room. Present were Chair Heyl, Members Hansen, Bendt, and Leeder. Also present were Community Development Director Jon Hohenstein, Planner Sheila Cartney, City Attorney Bob Bauer, Assistant Engineer John Gorder, and Recording Secretary Camille Yungerberg. Chair Heyl stated Item D has been withdrawn and Item F.has been continued until the May 25, 2004 Advisory Planning Commission Meeting. Member Leeder moved, Member Bendt seconded motion todopt the Agenda �amended. All voted in favor. Motion carried 4 -0. Council Member and Advisory Planning Commission Liaison Mike McGuire expressed thanks to Commissioner Greg Steininger for his contributions to the Eagan`Avisory Planning Commission. He also thanked the Commission for.'their: patience withthe shortage of Staff. He explained that at the May 25, 2004 meeting, there should be a full°idvisory Planning Commission board. He also thanked Chair Heyl for her contributions to the Eagan Advisory Planning Commission - k ,; Chair Heyl stated..amendmernt to her com ent o t page ten (10): Chair Heyl stated agreement with the conservation easement due to the'benefit for the City and the residents of Eagan. She explained that there is a nexus tha the developer will gain benefits of the new subdivision with his property next to the park ., Member Beridtmoved, Member Hansen seconded a motion to approve the March 22, 2004 Advisory Planning Commission Meeting minutes as amended. All voted in favor. Motion carried 4 -0. III. PUBLIC HEARINGS MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE EAGAN ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION EAGAN, MINNESOTA April 27, 2004 PLANNINGCCOMMISSION MEETING MINUTES A. REZONING — CEDARSTONE DEVELOPMENT A Rezoning of approximately five acres from A, Agriculture to R -2 Residential Double, located at 1055 Wescott Road in the SW' of Section 14. AGENDA City of Eagan Advisory Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 27, 2004 Page 2 Planner Cartney introduced this item and highlighted the information presented in the City Staff report dated April 22, 2004. She noted the background and history. Clark Wicklund, Alliant Engineering addressed the following concerns that were expressed at the neighborhood meeting: prevention of additional rezoning to commercial or retail by other applicants, this project being a multifamily home project, and traffic volumes on Lexington Avenue and Wescott Road. Patrick , Cedarstone Development Company explained that the project would be an upscale development. He discussed his intention to preserve trees during the development process and also explained that the surrounding property values would not be negatively affected. Cletus , Cedarstone Development Company expled he design of their product and stated the project would be an up scaled development Chair Heyl opened the public hearing. Bob McDonald of McDonald Construction and ro p p e rty''c to the west stated concern with the size of the proposed homes, amount of impervious surface; and flexibility of home design. Fred Ruppe, 3704 Cardinal Way stated concern with the Iocatio fthe proposed roadway in the rear of his home. Sue Vruno, 3708 Cardinalpay stated concern with possible future development, if this proposal is used as an example � Jerry Westbrook, 37129ardinal Way stated concerrtfor the illusion that "empty- nesters" would be the only buyers of the , omen. e also stated 'concern for the pathway that emergency vehicles would be expected t use. Steve Wotfrath, 3720 Cardinal Ways explained that he purchased his property based on the current zoning, therefore stated object o r too the proposal. Dan Enders. 3716 Cardinal Way stated objection to the rezoning of the property. Monique Clark, 3753, Greensboro Drive stated concern for the natural ponds and drainage in the area. Steven Faith, 3700 Cardinal Way agreed with previous statements from residents and stated additional concern for the preservation of vegetation. Chuck Levin, Project Architect discussed the design of the project. He displayed the current location of the 200 trees that are six inches or larger. Kathryn Rudd, 3690 Cardinal Way asked for details on Eagan's commitment to preserving the greenways. City of Eagan Advisory Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 27, 2004 Page 3 There being no further public comment, Chair Heyl closed the public hearing and turned the discussion back to the Commission. Chair Heyl expressed that in order for all three areas to blend together, the proposed area should be developed as a single family development. Member Leeder explained the demand for "empty- nester" type developments; however he stated this area is not the right fit for that type of development. He agreed with Chair Heyl in that all developments in this area should blend together. Member Bendt stated agreement with Chair Heyl and Member Leeder. Member Hansen stated there is a perceived need for the proposed typeofhousing, however, he questions if the need is truly present. Community Development Director Jon Hohenstein explained that there is a market interest for this type of development, however there is not a spec fic study tth°-at determines the heed for this type of home. Chair Heyl stated her reason for denial of the proposal will bed; a development is not compatible with surrounding developments noris it consistent kthe area She stated the three remaining areas should work together,to determine access, a ® traffic levels. Member Bendt moved, Member Leeder seconded a rnotionto: recommend denial of a Rezoning of approximately five acres from A, Agriculture =to R -2 Residential Double, located at 1055 Wescott Road in the SW;'% of Section 14. All voted in favor. Motion carried 4 SUMMARY OF REQUEST BACKGROUND/HISTORY The subject property is not platted. EXISTING CONDITIONS PLANNING REPORT CITY OF EAGAN REPORT DATE: April 22, 2004 CASE: 14- RZ- 05 -03 -04 APPLICANT: Cedarstone Development Co. HEARING DATE: April 27, 2004 PROPERTY OWNER: Meg Tilley APPLICATION DATE: March 19, 2004 REQUEST: Rezoning PREPARED BY: Sheila Cartney LOCATION: 1055 Westcott Road COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: LD, Low Density Residential ZONING: A, Agriculture The applicant is requesting approval of a Rezoning of five acres from Agriculture to R -2, Residential Double on property located at 1055 Wescott Road in the SW 1 /4 of Section 14. AUTHORITY FOR REVIEW Rezoning: City Code Chapter 11, Section 11.50, Subd. 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 City Council shall not rezone any land or area in any zoning district or make any other proposed amendment to the zoning ordinance without first having referred it to the planning commission for its consideration and recommendation. Planning Report — 1055 Wescott Rd April 27, 2004 Page 2 The site is heavily wooded; a single family home and a pole barn are present. Access is via Wescott Road. There is a large pond in the middle of the site. SURROUNDING USES The following existing uses, zoning, and comprehensive guide plan designations surround the subject property: * The property to the west of the subject site is also requesting approval of a rezoning, the request is to rezone to R -1, Single family residential. EVALUATION OF REQUEST Proposal — Development is not proposed at this time, but a concept plan was submitted with this application. The concept plan shows eight twin homes around the existing pond. Access via Wescott Road with three private roads, the main private road would access the other two private roads that would access the twin homes. Compatibility with Surrounding Area - The subject site is currently surrounded with single family residential uses. Properties to the north and south are fully developed. The property to the east and west are zoned Agriculture and have potential to be developed further. Rezoning the subject property to R -2 allows for further development of this lot. The subject site has a Comprehensive Land Use Designation of Low Density Residential (0- 4u/a). The concept plan indicates the twin home proposal can achieve the required density. While a twin home development maybe compatible with the area, it would introduce twin homes into an area completely surrounded by detached single family. SUMMARY /CONCLUSION The applicant is requesting to rezone five acres from Agriculture to R -2, Residential Double with intentions of a future twin home development. The proposed density is consistent with the land use designation of 0 -4 unit/acre. The properties to the north and south are fully developed with detached single family residences. The property to the east and west are zoned Agriculture and have potential for future development. The property directly to the west is requesting a rezoning to R -1, Single Family Residential. The concept plan demonstrates compatibility with the 90 Existing Use Zoning Land Use Designation North Single family residential PD, Planned Development LD, Low Density residential 0 -4 u/a South Single family residential PD, Planned Development LD, Low Density residential 0 -4 u/a East Single family residential A, Agriculture LD, Low Density residential 0 -4 u/a West* Single family residential A, Agriculture LD, Low Density residential 0 -4 u/a Planning Report — 1055 Wescott Rd April 27, 2004 Page 2 The site is heavily wooded; a single family home and a pole barn are present. Access is via Wescott Road. There is a large pond in the middle of the site. SURROUNDING USES The following existing uses, zoning, and comprehensive guide plan designations surround the subject property: * The property to the west of the subject site is also requesting approval of a rezoning, the request is to rezone to R -1, Single family residential. EVALUATION OF REQUEST Proposal — Development is not proposed at this time, but a concept plan was submitted with this application. The concept plan shows eight twin homes around the existing pond. Access via Wescott Road with three private roads, the main private road would access the other two private roads that would access the twin homes. Compatibility with Surrounding Area - The subject site is currently surrounded with single family residential uses. Properties to the north and south are fully developed. The property to the east and west are zoned Agriculture and have potential to be developed further. Rezoning the subject property to R -2 allows for further development of this lot. The subject site has a Comprehensive Land Use Designation of Low Density Residential (0- 4u/a). The concept plan indicates the twin home proposal can achieve the required density. While a twin home development maybe compatible with the area, it would introduce twin homes into an area completely surrounded by detached single family. SUMMARY /CONCLUSION The applicant is requesting to rezone five acres from Agriculture to R -2, Residential Double with intentions of a future twin home development. The proposed density is consistent with the land use designation of 0 -4 unit/acre. The properties to the north and south are fully developed with detached single family residences. The property to the east and west are zoned Agriculture and have potential for future development. The property directly to the west is requesting a rezoning to R -1, Single Family Residential. The concept plan demonstrates compatibility with the 90 Planning Report — 1055 Wescott Rd April 27, 2004 Page 3 neighborhood but is not consistent with the surrounding detached single family developments. The appropriateness of the rezoning is a policy matter for City Officials to determine. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED To recommend approval (Or denial) of Rezoning of five acres from A, Agriculture to R -2, Residential Double with the intention to develop with twin homes in the future for property located at 1055 Wescott Road. q) Location Map Eagan Boundary A Street Centerline Parcel Area Building Footprint i t' Sub'ect Site Ir .� 5 MN It ` 4 7 4 M Ori MA Lal WM reli qt., ww rem �f 17 p VAS 1 LIo uu u DISC./000 MOM MINI 431 1111511 :3713 yelajal carA � p ; ° ®BOA ® v► regalia MEI Ezi 110 rEISZ/k MG EMU CCI5 E2 17 P ®ia ►®ate U L? J Neop v!• cOtiNO trad ite.444' Into r� NG 1000 0 1000 2000 Feet Development /Developer. Cedarstone Development Application: Rezone Case No.: Case No. 14- RZ- 05 -03 -04 Map Prepared using ERSI fvcView 11. Parcel base map data provided by Dakota County Office of GIS and is current as of January 2004. THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY The City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this information and are not responsible for errors or omissions. N WE Current Zoning and Comprehensive Guide Plan Land Use Map Current Zoning: A Agriculture 600 Zoning Map 600 1200 Feet PF II*IIIUMION : iin,. i am :Int 11114 - __ = bit II. -. .��ii. /► P v • 4 1. Comprehensive Guide Plan Land Use Map Current Land Use Designation: LD Low Density Residential 0 -4u /a 600 600 1200 foot City of Eagan r-- .....s nsnorfmonf Parcel base map information providedby Dakota County Land Survey Department June 2003. Zoning information maintained byCity Staft 2 , THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY rtaketa County do not guarantee the accuracy of this information. Cedarstone Development Case No. 14- RZ- 05 -03 -04 b 0 TREE KEY TYPE SIZE 0" - 9' DIA • NY • /9" DIA 4 20" • 29* DIA • • 40" AND ovER SEE STA VE Y F EXACTSIZE ARO SPCGICS TAM 122110VAL I A CRT M' PERCENTAGE OF ,CtiP0E4 INCHES C.VE 2. IMES SPIAPN.INITIlldrAno OP WILDING PERRAEleFIS TIE REMOVED BUILDABLE AREA 148200 SF AREA WITHIN se 41,180 SF PONDISETBACK 107.020 SF USEABLE UNIT SIZE UNITS SHOWN VARY IN SIZE FROM ,458$ • 1.883 SF SITE AREA TOTAL SITE AREA 217.808 SF = 5.0 aClei 0.800 SE SITE AREA 1407 INCLUDING ROAD RIGHTS OF WAY WETLAND x 90 90% 01 WETLAND DEDUCTION 45457 SF AREA AVAILABLE FOR LOT SIZE CALCULATION (3 34 acres) AT 7,503 SF PER UNIT, 19 UNITS ARE PERMITTED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ALLOWS 4 UNITSIACRE 20 UNITS 100" SETBACK FROM RIGHT OF WAY 2 CFDARSTONF. DEVELOP 9A1KICF:1LA.LrIL 50*-0" ROAD R-044 30'-0 SEWER EASEMENT 330"-Cr F.—GUEST PARKING AND TURNAROUND -WESCOTT ROAD--- irr-T SETBACK EXISTING STORM WALKING PATH 30'-0 r SETBACK FROM POND ..... ■ .............................. 94 CEDARSTONE OF WESCO TT it EC D V 1 7 20 it NORTH Wescott Oaks Project Narrative Comprehensive Guide Plan designation (existing and proposed) The subject property currently has a Comp Plan designation of LD -Low Density (0 -4 units /acre). The development plan proposes to construct 16 residential double housing units on approximately 5.0 acres, which results in a density of 3.2 units /acre. Therefore, the project complies with the existing land use designation and an amendment will not be required. Zoning classification (existing and proposed) The subject property is currently zoned A — Agricultural. The development plan proposes to rezone to PD- Planned Development due to multiple housing units located within a single parent parcel and adhere to an underlying R -2 (Residential Double) zoning for net buildable area analysis and setback criteria. What you want to do; timing/phasing The project proposes to commence with clearing and grubbing of the subject area upon City Council approval of the Preliminary plat and Development Agreement. A September start date would allow for construction of footing and foundation systems for the most southerly units adjacent to Wescott Road. Construction of the remaining units would be market driven, though would most likely be completed within 1 -2 years due to anticipated demands. Existing land uses on subject property The majority of the subject area is primarily undeveloped and heavily wooded. A large wetland area occupies the central portion of the project site and amounts to approximately 0.7 acres. A one -story walkout single family home is located near the southwest corner of the property and a pole barn is located immediately west of the wetland adjacent to the midsection of the west property line. A single driveway has access onto Wescott Road. Surrounding land uses and zoning within 660 feet Review of the Comprehensive Land Use plan indicates that the subject area is surrounded by LD -Low Density residential on all sides except for approximately 3 -4 acres of QP- Quasi- Public/Institutional to the southwest in the southeast corner of the intersection of Lexington Avenue and Wescott Road. 6 15 - RECEIVED MAR 1 7 7004 Review of the Zoning Map indicates the subject area is bordered by two 5 acre parcels both zoned Agricultural to the east and west. That entire area of approximately 15 acres, which is zoned Agricultural, is surrounded PD- Planned Development to the north, south and east. A limited area of R -1- Residential Single Family is located to the north and west and an area of approximately 3 -4 acres is zoned PF- Public Facility to the southwest. What impact does the rezoning have on surrounding property and land uses? The proposed development plan will impact the adjacent properties in a manner typical of any property being converted from an undeveloped to developed state. City services currently serving the adjacent properties will not be adversely affected due to the projects limited scope, identical zoning and similar density. Review of the Zoning Map indicates that only 46.6 acres or 0.2% of the City of Eagan is zoned R -2 Residential Double. Therefore, the proposed development will offer another housing type not readily available in the City of Eagan. Home Owners who want to remain in the City and relieve themselves of the responsibilities associated with maintaining a larger home will have an opportunity to do so. The rezoning to Planned Development will allow adjacent land owners and members of the community to input into the ultimate design of the project given the submittal requirements for a PD, which requires building elevations and floor plans. As such, the project will be able to address individuals concerns regarding building heights and screening of vehicular movements within the site. The submittal requirements for properties zoned R -1 (Residential Single Family) does not require individual building information. What impact does the rezoning have on the subject property? Rezoning of the subject property to PD will allow for the construction of multiple two - family homes atop individual lots all located within a single parent parcel. The proposed zoning is identical to approximately 75% of the surrounding zoning and is therefore compatible. What impact does the rezoning have on City services, such as sewer, water, stormwater run -off and roads? Sanitary Sewer The proposed development will be served by an existing 8 inch diameter lateral sewer line which runs the length of the property and parallels the west property line. It is not 91v anticipated that the 16 units proposed will exceed the available capacity of the existing system and will be verified with City Staff prior to design of the sewer system. Water The proposed development will be served by an existing watermain located in Wescott Road. An 8 inch diameter line will be extended northerly into the subject area and provide for fire suppression and domestic services. It is not anticipated that the proposed 16 units will exceed the available capacity of the existing watermain and will be verified with City Staff prior to design of her the northerly lateral extension. Stormwater The current development plan proposes to route storm water captured in common drive areas to a pond located near the northwest corner of the existing wetland. The pond will be designed in accordance with National Urban Runoff Program (NURP) design criteria and will provide both water quality and rate control functions. Rezoning to a Planned Development will require that an association maintain the common areas. As such, one entity will be responsible for the maintenance of lawns and the associated costs. Research indicates that stormwater runoff from larger areas having a single entity responsible for lawn care generally reduces the concentration of pollutants when compared to areas managed by individual lot owners, given the financial impact of providing excessive lawn fertilizer applications. As such, contaminants such as nitrogen and phosphorous typically associated with lawn maintenance will be reduced down stream from the project site. The current development plan proposes to design buildings to fit within the parameters defined by the sites natural features such as significant trees and wetlands. Furthermore, the project anticipates an "empty nest" target market, which generally prefers less lawn area and more vegetation for privacy. As such, the quantity of runoff should be equal to or less than the amount generated form a typical single family residential developments, which generally prefer larger open areas required for children. Traffic/Roads Review of the Trip Generation manual indicates that approximately 6 trips per day per unit can be anticipated for unit types similar to two- family homes. Therefore, approximately 96 trips per day (48 in /48 out) is anticipated for the current development plan of 16 two - family housing units. This is an increase of approximately 16 trips per day (8 in/8 out) or and additional 18% when compared to an 8 unit single family development, which produces 10 trips per day per unit. Due to the projects proposed access onto Wescott Road near Lexington Avenue and the minor increase in the percentage of trips beyond single family residential, the project should not adversely affect traffic. q7 Does the requested land use proposed by the rezoning result in a better use of the land? Explain. The requested land use proposed by the rezoning is compatible with the surrounding properties and in compliance with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. The approval process required for the requested zoning will allow adjacent property owners and residents of the community to input into the design of the project. The project will provide residents of the community wanting to remain in the City with an alternate housing type not readily available in the Community. City services will not be adversely affected. The quality and quantity of stormwater runoff may be improved when compared to a typical single family development due to the reduction in sodded areas and the associations maintenance of the common areas. Rezoning to the requested Planned Development with an underlying R -2 zoning will result in low impact, secluded neighborhood friendly, environmentally sensitive project that protects the Neighbors' values and standard of living they are accustomed to. 9d' 11 Agenda Information Memo May 18, 2004, Eagan City Council Meeting CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW PAYROLL CHECK CASHING — • WAL -MART ACTIONS TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve (OR to direct findings of fact for denial) a Conditional Use Permit to allow payroll check cashing at the check out registers at Wal -Mart located at 1360 Town Centre Drive; subject to the conditions in the Advisory Planning Commission minutes. REQUIRED VOTE FOR APPROVAL • Majority of Quorum FACTS: • This item was continued from the May 4, 2004 City Council meeting in order to obtain a site plan of the proposed area within the store to be dedicated to check cashing. • Three CUP's on the subject site exist: Christmas tree sales, produce sales, green house in parking lot. • There are eight performance standards in the Code regarding currency exchange, all eight standards are proposed to be met. • The checks cashed are limited to Payroll checks. • The Advisory Planning Commission held a public hearing on April 27, 2004 and is recommending approval, subject to the conditions in the minutes. ISSUES: • Wal -Mart is a 24 hour operation, the code limits check cashing hours to lam to 7:59pm, APC members spoke about the hours of operation within a 24 hour store and staff is concerned with the enforcement of these hours. • The applicant has submitted a plan illustrating the store layout and depicting the check cashing operation at all 20 checkout station and the customer service area. 60 DAY AGENCY ACTION DEADLINE • July 22, 2004 — City extended 60 day deadline ATTACHMENTS (2): Advisory Planning Commission Minutes page(s)100-101 Planning Staff Report pagesip through City of Eagan Advisory Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 27, 2004 Page 13 G. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT — WAL -MART A Conditional Use Permit to allow a check cashing service on Lot 1, Block 1, Town Centre 70th Eleventh Addition, located at 1360 Town Centre Drive in the NW % of Section 15. Planner Cartney introduced this item and highlighted the information presented in the City Staff report dated April 14, 2004. She noted the background and history. Chair Heyl opened the public hearing. There being no public comment, Chair Heyl closed the public hearing and turned the discussion back to the Commission. Charlene Walls, WaI -Mart Store Manager stated there v lilge signs posted and proper training to ensure that there will be no check cashing firing the times prohibited by the City Code. Planner Cartney explained City Code Requirements're me Member Leeder asked what type of checks would be cas edd 'i this permit would prevent other businesses in the area from doing the same. Ms. Walls explained that it is her understanding that only business or government issued checks would be cashed at the Wal -Mart store. She "stated all other Wal Martstores in Minnesota provide this service. other business could provide the same service as long as all City Attorney Bob B a .la th at the City Code defines the currency exchange business, and WaI -Mart does fit into° h6.definit n Member Bendt moved, Member 1Leeder se onded a motion to recommend approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow a check cashing service on Lot 1, Block 1, Town Centre 70th Eleventh Addition, located at 1360 Town Centre Drive in the NW % of Section 15 subject to the following c. onditions: 1. The Conditional Use Permit shall be recorded with Dakota County within 60 days of the date of approval and proof of its recording be provided to the City. 2. The operation of the currency exchange business shall comply and be operated in accordance with all state laws and regulations relating to the operation of currency xchange business. 3. The currency exchange business shall be operated in accordance with the zoning regulations of this Code. 4. The currency exchange business shall comply with all provisions of this Code and other applicable state laws. � City of Eagan Advisory Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 27, 2004 Page 14 5. The currency exchange business shall not engage in any services in which money or funds are Tended, borrowed or pledged to or by a customer. 6. The premises shall be open for inspection by the City and the City shall have the right to inspect the premises. 7. The currency exchange business shall not be open or operated during the hours of 8:OOpm and 6:59 am. All voted in favor. Motion carried 4 -0. 10/ PLANNING REPORT CITY OF EAGAN REPORT DATE: April 14, 2004 CASE: 15- CU- 04 -02 -04 APPLICANT: Wal -Mart Stores HEARING DATE: April 27, 2004 PROPERTY OWNER: Frances Coberly APPLICATION DATE: March 24, 2004 REQUEST: Conditional Use Permit PREPARED BY: Sheila Cartney LOCATION: 1360 Town Centre Drive COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: SA, Special Area ZONING: CSC, Community Shopping Center SUMMARY OF REQUEST The applicant is requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow check cashing services upon check out at Wal -Mart located at 1360 Town Centre Drive. The applicant is requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit AUTHORITY FOR REVIEW City Code Chapter 11, Section 11.50, Subdivisions 4C and 4D provide the following. Subdivision 4C states that the Planning Commission shall recommend a conditional use permit and the Council shall issue such conditional use permits only if it finds that such use at the proposed location: 1. Will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, or general welfare of the neighborhood or the City. 2. Will be harmonious with the general and applicable specific objectives of the Comprehensive Plan and City Code provisions. 3. Will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so as to be compatible in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area, nor substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. I�� Planning Report — WalMart April 27, 2004 Page 2 4. Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems and schools. 5. Will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be hazardous or detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. 6. Will have vehicular ingress and egress to the property which does not create traffic congestion or interfere with traffic on surrounding public streets. 7. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature of major importance. Subdivision 4D, Conditions, states that in reviewing applications of conditional use permits, the 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. In all cases in which conditional uses are granted, the Council shall require such evidence and guarantees as it may deem necessary as proof that the conditions stipulated in connection therewith are being and will be complied with. BACKGROUND /HISTORY The property was platted in 1991 and the store constructed in 1992. A Conditional Use Permit for outdoor sales and display for the garden center was approved with the initial plans, with the stipulation that the outside sale and display be restricted to garden items only. In 1998, Wal -Mart constructed an addition to the front of the store and extended the screening wall at the rear of the store to enclose and screen the storage area for trash dumpsters, wood pallets and bundled boxes. A CUP allowing Christmas tree sales on the Wal -Mart property also exists. The Christmas tree sales are located on the far end of the parking lot from the building. A CUP for a produce stand was also approved for Wal -Mart in 1997. In 2002 a CUP was approved to allow a temporary greenhouse in the parking lot from May to July. EXISTING CONDITIONS The site is developed with a 120,000 square foot retail building. The building is located on the east end of the site, with parking to the west. The site is bounded by Town Centre Drive to the west, Duckwood Drive to the south and other retail to the north and south. A storm drainage pond is located between the building and Duckwood Drive. SURROUNDING USES /c3 Planning Report — WalMart April 27, 2004 Page 3 The following existing uses, zoning, and comprehensive guide plan designations surround the subject property: EVALUATION OF REQUEST Compatibility with Surrounding Area — The City Zoning Code allows currency exchange operations as a Conditional Use within the Community Shopping Center district, subject to adopted standards. The zoning ordinance states that the currency exchange operation is subject to regulations in Chapter 6 of the City Code. Chapter 6 establishes that a state license for currency exchange is required, in addition to the zoning approval from the City. Evaluation — Chapter 6 establishes eight performance standards that apply to currency exchange businesses. Each of these items are evaluated below: 1) The operation of the currency exchange business shall comply and be operated in accordance with all state laws and regulations relating to the operation of currency exchange business. 2) A currency exchange business shall be operated only in the zoning districts as set forth in this Code and in accordance with the zoning regulations of this Code. The proposed site is zoned Community Shopping Center, currency exchange is permitted via Conditional Use Permit. 3) No currency exchange business shall be located closer than 200 feet to any existing currency exchange business, secondhand goods store or pawnshop, daycare facility, on or off -sale liquor establishments, park or public facility or residential property, including R- 4(residential multiple) properties. The distance set forth herein shall be measured from any point of the exterior area of the structure in which the currency exchange business is located and the closest point on the property line of the other use. Wal -Mart is not within 200 feet of any of the uses listed above. Existing Use Zoning Land Use Designation North Kohl's CSC, Community Shopping Center SA, Special Area South Retail CSC, Community Shopping Center SA, Special Area East Companion Animal hospital/Cornerstone self storage CSC, Community Shopping Center/PD, Planned Development SA, Special Area West Eagan Auto mall Paradise car wash CSC, Community Shopping Center SA, Special Area Planning Report — WalMart April 27, 2004 Page 3 The following existing uses, zoning, and comprehensive guide plan designations surround the subject property: EVALUATION OF REQUEST Compatibility with Surrounding Area — The City Zoning Code allows currency exchange operations as a Conditional Use within the Community Shopping Center district, subject to adopted standards. The zoning ordinance states that the currency exchange operation is subject to regulations in Chapter 6 of the City Code. Chapter 6 establishes that a state license for currency exchange is required, in addition to the zoning approval from the City. Evaluation — Chapter 6 establishes eight performance standards that apply to currency exchange businesses. Each of these items are evaluated below: 1) The operation of the currency exchange business shall comply and be operated in accordance with all state laws and regulations relating to the operation of currency exchange business. 2) A currency exchange business shall be operated only in the zoning districts as set forth in this Code and in accordance with the zoning regulations of this Code. The proposed site is zoned Community Shopping Center, currency exchange is permitted via Conditional Use Permit. 3) No currency exchange business shall be located closer than 200 feet to any existing currency exchange business, secondhand goods store or pawnshop, daycare facility, on or off -sale liquor establishments, park or public facility or residential property, including R- 4(residential multiple) properties. The distance set forth herein shall be measured from any point of the exterior area of the structure in which the currency exchange business is located and the closest point on the property line of the other use. Wal -Mart is not within 200 feet of any of the uses listed above. Planning Report — WalMart April 27, 2004 Page 4 4) A currency exchange business shall comply with all provisions of this Code and other applicable laws. 5) No bars, chains or other security devices on the structure in which a currency exchange is located shall be visible from a public street or sidewalk. 6) A currency exchange business shall not engage in any services in which money or funds are lended, borrowed or pledged to or by a customer. 7) The premises shall be open for inspection by the City and the City shall have the right to inspect the premises. 8) No currency exchange business shall be open or operated during the hours of 8:00 pm and 6: 59amn. Wal -Mart is open 24 hours; proposed hours of operation were not included with the application. SUMMARY /CONCLUSION Wal -Mart stores are requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow payroll check cashing at the check out counters. The currency exchange ordinance was adopted in July 2003, there is on other currency exchange location within the City of Eagan. The proposal satisfies the location standards of the ordinance. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED To recommend approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow payroll check cashing at the check out registers in the Wal -Mart store located at 1360 Town Centre Drive subject to the following conditions: 1. The Conditional Use Permit shall be recorded with Dakota County within 60 days of the date of approval and proof of its recording be provided to the City. 2. The operation of the currency exchange business shall comply and be operated in accordance with all state laws and regulations relating to the operation of currency exchange business. 3. The currency exchange business shall be operated in accordance with the zoning regulations of this Code. 4. The currency exchange business shall comply with all provisions of this Code and other applicable state laws. 5. The currency exchange business shall not engage in any services in which money or funds are lended, borrowed or pledged to or by a customer. 6. The premises shall be open for inspection by the City and the City shall have the right to inspect the premises. 7. The currency exchange business shall not be open or operated during the hours of 8:OOpm and 6:59 am. FINANCIAL OBLIGATION- 15- CU- 04- 02 -04, Lot 5, Block 1, Town Centre 70 Eleventh Addition W al_Mart There are pay -off balances of special assessments totaling $ -0- on the parcel proposed for the conditional use. At this time, there are pending assessments in the amount of $184,135 on the property for which the conditional use permit is requested. The pending assessments are related to Project 851, which provided for the reconstruction of streets, intersections, traffic lights and other improvements in the Town Centre 70` and 100 subdivisions. 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. IMPROVEMENT None Total USE RATE QUANTITY AMOUNT ADDENDUM #11 Description of Business: Wal -Mart Stores East, LP is a subsidiary of Wal -Mart Stores, Inc. (WSI). WSI is a national discount retailer offering a wide variety of general merchandise. Wal -Mart stores offer pleasant and convenient shopping in 36 departments including family apparel, health & beauty aids, household needs, electronics, toys, fabrics & crafts, lawn & garden, jewelry and shoes. In addition, some Wal -Mart Stores offer a pharmacy department, tire & lube express, garden center, snack bar or restaurant, vision center and one -hour photo processing for customer convenience. Business Plan: Wal -Mart Stores, Inc. is the world's largest retailer with $218 bullion in sales in the fiscal year ending January 31, 2002. The company employs more than 1.3 million associates worldwide through more then 3,200 facilities in the United States and more than 1,100 units in Mexico, Puerto Rico, Canada, Argentina, Brazil, China, Korea, Germany and the United Kingdom. More then 100 million customers per week visit Wal -Mart stores worldwide. Wal -Mart leases space in the stores to various industries, including banks. These banks pay a rental fee to Wal -Mart. Wal -Mart Stores, Inc. is going to begin conducting a payroll check cashing service for our customers from the cash registers only. Customers will be able to cash a payroll check from any employer for a small fee. A fee of 1% capped at $3.00 will be charged for the following states: Louisiana Pennsylvania Minnesota Connecticut New Jersey New York Vermont A fee of $3.00 will be charged to cash payroll checks in all other states. ri7CriiVF3 FEB 1 8 2094 Location Map Eagan Boundary A. "Street Centerline Parcel Area Building Footprint 1 V. 1111 M 1 Mill 'Er sl...emr Elmira wcmor TWOOF LAYS EIVIIIMIN LJUIIILI err N 11Z67 Igra el MM mm MU rime= LEM ILP EE 149 e zfp, %OS WOW* *a irpj, V/47 rilb, mob, alkjIlt v.- Asom. 11 icidiles il t a ■ grmiesw ISTIrtr rTNI v pas-, Hirdeltrel_ ,.. 6. 4 1 .1 7 3 3 111 Rralmra li k 43,41/0 al ai 161 0 allIVAISSP Ci MOP CR iivatti, l unamatal Ada rintirirsOkiti II p 11111111■1 rt, ca 0.0 0 PITY-ROAP-ND 7101•14 C•1■■•[ • Doom 0 ROADI TOWN GlIerrat MN. tAl% Qv ; L:404: ar' 44 4 4111."1 ■11 14 1 ‘74 / 1 4. 4144 :4 Ada ran no. CI aim isti oar. DO bYLK17000 1011■VS tiLt 1000 0 1000 2000 Feet 000 Development/Developer: Wal-Mart Application: CUP Case No.: 15-CU-04-02-04 city oF eagan los? Map Prepared using ERSI ArcView 11. Parcel base map data provided by Dakota County Office of GIS and is current as of January 2004. THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY The City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this information and are not resoonsible for errors or omissions. W E Current Zoning and Comprehensive Guide Plan Land Use Map City of Eagan fynvelonment Department 10? Parcel base map information providadby Dakota County LandSwey Department June 2003. Zoning information maintained byCity Staff. 2, THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY -rho City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this information. WaI -Mart Case No. 15- CU- 04 -02 -04 Zoning Map — r PD ' : ' + ill! PD 7 41141111111111 11011111 Current Zoning: CSC Shopping Center Current Land Use Designation: SA Special Area AV /M =W= PD ill At Community O A I 4I MI MI IIT■ LII VW ,i• . ,- R.. 600 0 000 1300 tact coo o coe fzoo Foot . ..., ,itist u , . mol„,,, `k ti oeOt �.. - PD SA El � i *P IMIr IMR - i--- ��` 1 �� MI6 __ MIMES tom_ I on Current Zoning and Comprehensive Guide Plan Land Use Map City of Eagan fynvelonment Department 10? Parcel base map information providadby Dakota County LandSwey Department June 2003. Zoning information maintained byCity Staff. 2, THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY -rho City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this information. WaI -Mart Case No. 15- CU- 04 -02 -04 Comprehensive Guide Plan Land Use Map —) i ' r ' ' : ' + 1 1"), SA kik Current Land Use Designation: SA Special Area =W= O A 7 i •vMi MI MI IIT■ LII VW ,i• . ,- . coo o coe fzoo Foot SA SA `k ti oeOt - SA SA � i *P IMIr IMR ��` 1 �� MI6 IIIIIIIIIl1111 'MI Current Zoning and Comprehensive Guide Plan Land Use Map City of Eagan fynvelonment Department 10? Parcel base map information providadby Dakota County LandSwey Department June 2003. Zoning information maintained byCity Staff. 2, THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY -rho City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this information. WaI -Mart Case No. 15- CU- 04 -02 -04 Agenda Information Memo May 18, 2004, Eagan City Council Meeting C, • PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT TO ALLOW A DRIVE -THRU - WALGREENS ACTIONS TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve (OR to direct findings of fact for denial) a Planned Development Amendment to allow a drive -thru for the pharmacy at Walgreen's located at 2010 Cliff Road; subject to the conditions in the Advisory Planning Commission minutes. REQUIRED VOTE FOR APPROVAL • Majority of Quorum FACTS: • This item was continued from the May 4, 2004 City Council meeting, in order for the applicant to address traffic concerns. • In 1992, a similar request was denied based on traffic circulation, since then the area to the west has developed. • The proposed drive -thru is located on the south side of the building with a canopy. • The City Code requires drive -thru stacking for five cars; the Site Plan indicates room for two cars. • The dumpster shall be attached to the building and enclosed with materials to match the building. • Any landscaping removed with the drive -thru shall be replaced onsite. • The Advisory Planning Commission held a public hearing on April 27, 2004 and is recommending approval, subject to the conditions in the minutes. ISSUES: • The City Council has requested additional information regarding traffic volumes and vehicle circulation. 60 DAY AGENCY ACTION DEADLINE • July 29, 2004 City extended 60 day deadline ATTACHMENTS (3): Advisory Planning Commission Minutes page(s)111 Planning Staff Report pages)(a through IRO Traffic information provided by the applicant on pages through 130 (1 City of Eagan Advisory Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 27, 2004 Page 19 I. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT — ALLIANT ENGINEERING A Planned Development Amendment to allow a drive -thru on Part of Lot 3, Nadler Park, located at 2010 Cliff Road (Walgreen's) in the NE 1/4 of Section 31. Planner Cartney introduced this item and highlighted the information presented in the City Staff report dated April 19, 2004. She noted the background and history. Chair Heyl opened the public hearing. There being no public comment, Chair Heyl closed the public hearing and turned the discussion back to the Commission. The Advisory Planning Commission discussed the stacking of cars in the drive through lane. The applicant stated he would provide plans indicating staAing for the City7Council meeting. Planner Cartney stated the City's policy on stackingn equires allowable distance for six cars. Member Hansen moved, Member Bendt seconded mots to , recommend - approval of a Planned Development Amendment to allow a drive -thru or it of Lot 3, Hadler Park, located at 2010 Cliff Road ( Walgreen's) in the NE'% of Section 31 sub leca to the following conditions: 1. The Planned Development Amendment Agreement must be executed and recorded. 2. A trash enclosure shall be constructed with similar materials as the principal building. All voted in fav Motion carried 4 -0. 111 3. A detailed awning plan shall be submittedfor the Planned Development Amendment Agreement. 4. Landscaping shall replace the painted bump out on the east side of the building. 5. The : landscaping materials removed for the drive -thru shall be transplanted on site 6. A revised site plan sfiall be submitted showing stacking for the drive -thru. SUMMARY OF REQUEST AUTHORITY FOR REVIEW BACKGROUND /HISTORY PLANNING REPORT CITY OF EAGAN REPORT DATE: April 19, 2004 CASE: 31- PA- 06 -03 -04 APPLICANT: Clark Wicklund HEARING DATE: April 27, 2004 PROPERTY OWNER: Dr. Yu Wang APPLICATION DATE: March 19, 2004 REQUEST: Planned Development Amendment PREPARED BY: Sheila Cartney LOCATION: 2010 Cliff Road COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: SA, Special Area ZONING: PD, Planned Development The applicant is requesting approval of a Planned Development Amendment to allow drive - thru window for the pharmacy of Walgreens, located at 2010 Cliff Road in the NE 1/4 of Section 31. 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. The Walgreens store was constructed in 1992 as part of the Hadler Park Planned Development. While under construction, Semper Holdings Inc. requested a Planned Development Amendment to allow a drive -thru window for Walgreens pharmacy. The drive -thru was proposed to be located on the south side of the store. The request was denied because the drive -thru changes the overall circulation of the Planned Development and does not lend itself to a safe configuration. At that time the Council suggested a drive -thru located at the back of the building or west side may be more appropriate. Planning Report — Walgreens April 27, 2004 Page 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS The site is currently developed with a Walgreens store. The site is surrounded with retail uses and boarders Cliff Road and Rahncliff Road. SURROUNDING USES The following existing uses, zoning, and comprehensive guide plan designations surround the subject property: EVALUATION OF REQUEST Proposal — Walgreens proposes to have a covered single lane drive -thru facility on the south side of the existing building. According to the submitted plans the drive -thru window is proposed to be covered with a fabric awning. The applicant should provide detailed plans of the canopy for the Planned Development Amendment Agreement. Site Plan - The City Code does not specifically address drive -thru windows for pharmacy's, but does require a six car stacking space for other drive -thru. The proposed drive -thru appears to have stacking space for about two cars (not indicated on the plans). If there were more than two cars at a time in line for the pharmacy drive thru they would stack west of the building in the drive aisle in front of parking spaces. The applicant should address stacking issues with this proposal. Trash Enclosure - Currently the dumpster is located within the proposed drive -thru area. The site plan indicates the dumpster will be relocated to the west of the building in an existing parking stall. The plans do not indicate an enclosure is proposed. In Commercial districts the City Code requires trash enclosures be attached to the principal building and constructed with similar building materials. An attached trash enclosure should be constructed with materials matching the principal building. Existing Use Zoning Land Use Designation North Taco Bell, Movie Theater PD, Planned Development RC, Retail Commercial East Gas station/retail PD, Planned Development RC, Retail Commercial South Retail PD, Planned Development RC, Retail Commercial West Retail PD, Planned Development RC, Retail Commercial Planning Report — Walgreens April 27, 2004 Page 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS The site is currently developed with a Walgreens store. The site is surrounded with retail uses and boarders Cliff Road and Rahncliff Road. SURROUNDING USES The following existing uses, zoning, and comprehensive guide plan designations surround the subject property: EVALUATION OF REQUEST Proposal — Walgreens proposes to have a covered single lane drive -thru facility on the south side of the existing building. According to the submitted plans the drive -thru window is proposed to be covered with a fabric awning. The applicant should provide detailed plans of the canopy for the Planned Development Amendment Agreement. Site Plan - The City Code does not specifically address drive -thru windows for pharmacy's, but does require a six car stacking space for other drive -thru. The proposed drive -thru appears to have stacking space for about two cars (not indicated on the plans). If there were more than two cars at a time in line for the pharmacy drive thru they would stack west of the building in the drive aisle in front of parking spaces. The applicant should address stacking issues with this proposal. Trash Enclosure - Currently the dumpster is located within the proposed drive -thru area. The site plan indicates the dumpster will be relocated to the west of the building in an existing parking stall. The plans do not indicate an enclosure is proposed. In Commercial districts the City Code requires trash enclosures be attached to the principal building and constructed with similar building materials. An attached trash enclosure should be constructed with materials matching the principal building. Planning Report — Walgreens April 27, 2004 Page 3 Access /Circulation — Staff suggests extending the median south of the drive -thru towards the entrance in order to guide traffic to go to the left when exiting the drive -thru. Providing a physical barrier forces traffic to go to the left alleviating some circulation concerns. Landscaping — The proposed drive -thru location results in the removal of some existing landscaping. Staff suggests that the landscaping proposed to be removed be replaced on the site and the proposed painted bump out on the east side of the building be landscaped. SUMMARY /CONCLUSION The applicant is requesting a Planned Development Amendment to allow a drive -thru for the pharmacy. In 1992, a similar request was before the City and was denied based on circulation issues. At that time the City suggested having the drive -thru on the west side of the building. With the proposed construction of a drive thru the garbage dumpster would be located to the west side of the building in an existing parking stall. The dumpster should be within an enclosure that is constructed of materials similar to the principal building. The drive thru appears to have stacking space for two cars, the remaining cars would be lined up in the drive aisle on the west side of the building and in front of parking spaces. The applicant should address stacking issues. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED To recorrnnend approval of a Planned Development Amendment to allow a drive -thru window for the pharmacy at Walgreens located at 2010 Cliff Road. If approved the following conditions shall apply: 1. The Planned Development Amendment Agreement must be executed and recorded. 2. A trash enclosure shall be constructed with similar materials as the principal building. 3. A detailed awning plan shall be submitted for the Planned Development Amendment Agreement. 4. Landscaping shall replace the painted bump out on the east side of the building. 5. The existing landscaping materials removed for the drive -thru shall be transplanted on site. 6. A revised site plan shall be submitted showing stacking for the drive -thru. ;zq Brief Description of Project Proposed Drive - Through Addition 2010 Cliff Road, Eagan, MN Walgreen Co. proposes to add a covered single lane drive - through facility for the convenience of Walgreens' pharmacy customers and for the benefit of the community. Walgreens expects the proposed project to be completed in approximately one month or less. The surrounding land uses within 660 feet are predominantly, if not entirely, commercial and retail uses. Brief Discussion of Impact of Project The proposed drive - through addition at this location will have no significant negative impacts, while enabling Walgreens to provide more convenient service to the community. The proposed drive - through addition will not impact the surrounding property or the land uses on the surrounding property, nor will the proposed drive - through have any significant impact on City services. The impact on the subject property will "be minimal. Specifically, some vehicular traffic will flow to the rear of the building for the use of the drive- through pharmacy. However, the proposed drive- through has been designed so that the vehicular traffic going to the rear of the building will not have any negative impact on the efficient flow and circulation of vehicular traffic on the subject property, nor will it have any significant impact on surrounding properties or on the flow of vehicular traffic on City roads. Conversely, the proposed drive - through will significantly improve the use of the subject land, as it will enable Walgreens to provide additional convenience to its customers and better serve the community. Location Map Eagan Boundary ,;\,/ Street Centerline Parcel Area Building Footprint 41 e atilt EtA NUJ D� l la ST. IM MR Ott 04044P461446Y re muecs MEV LEM Lima Ens es4i iQ ®� M MIA ISSEP 555 = ■rarr. �� i��.,_ 2 Le Ea Z2NETZIE 41ir�7 �� ailia G ^6 r w ve !Met 01 rm its o tri CLIFF DM, 5 eel a '�! ILIC Subject Site g j EINGIONzirj i� ®ta riONO. L7. itor riSMO ir) IMO INPV / nv � 'JAN D era o IJE 8 � ©` ® : � _ t r Zti 0 BRAY « 4 fJiDd i / 0 4 %431 'El ostq Pa 4,N,4.41 aboi om pa kloS ILA So • tottua I rI P OW N Eli su 411Prip. m (4.1 ®t 46 .,170 Sill 41) ifP AT 4 E ligik 4 44 IX% �� ®: 04 1 1re,, 0 14/21 d ft gli V 1 6 t ® eR ! I b oa it ike44 4/4 14 i g o @ <:�eo IN. oils= PANED r ""einusaiiiiiiivalw A 4104* ikwa • C 44b IN A! �e IWO / a Erb EIIT ° u, I B•!J IUD UI Zan IJ CIO 1000 0 1000 2000 Feet Development/Developer: Walgreens Application: PD Amendment Case No.: 31- PA- 06 -03 -04 city of ecigan Ili Map Prepared using ERSI ArcView 3.1. Parcel base map data provided by Dakota County Office of GIS and is current as of January 2004. THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY The City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this Information and are - -•�•--- ....v.e nr nmiSSionS. WE Current Zoning and Comprehensive Guide Plan Land Use Map City of Eagan 1 11 kernel base map information providedby Dakota County Land Survey Departmett June 2003. Zoning information maintained b2City Staff. 2 ' THIS MAP 1S INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY • - -- + nnknta Count/ do not guarantee the accuracy of this information. Walgreens Case No. 31- PA- 06 -03 -04 Comprehensive Guide Plan Land Use Map HD .'` \/ Zoning Map R.4 R` RC ois ^— PD PD PD PD c � Current Land Use Designation: RC Retail Commercial I - � Current Zoning: PD Planned Development PF R � �yw . PD RC PD _-, PD WS 4ya PD �� pk. t ° PD {' coo o soo 1200 r..t 4 ' 4 � 0 • 600 0 000 1200 Foot Er •■=.• 4 4' 11111 PD Rimy 0 .� PF �i� ., = } 'o ` Wit e iP ` ,•` so m T a e. i E ZS Ilidin L.A.. , 0 ii-,--..... oil ���� I kr 11116 Illill • ' Current Zoning and Comprehensive Guide Plan Land Use Map City of Eagan 1 11 kernel base map information providedby Dakota County Land Survey Departmett June 2003. Zoning information maintained b2City Staff. 2 ' THIS MAP 1S INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY • - -- + nnknta Count/ do not guarantee the accuracy of this information. Walgreens Case No. 31- PA- 06 -03 -04 Comprehensive Guide Plan Land Use Map HD .'` \/ R` RC ois ^— R c RC Current Land Use Designation: RC Retail Commercial QP R � �yw . RC t O/S r �' jok WS ,`" ois ��; �� . LLI I I III 4 ' 4 II: 600 0 000 1200 Foot illIOw •■=.• Aini 0 11111 III* �: �y— �i� ., = } 'o ` Wit e iP ` ,•` so m T LD ZS Ilidin L.A.. , 0 ii-,--..... 'I /l I Current Zoning and Comprehensive Guide Plan Land Use Map City of Eagan 1 11 kernel base map information providedby Dakota County Land Survey Departmett June 2003. Zoning information maintained b2City Staff. 2 ' THIS MAP 1S INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY • - -- + nnknta Count/ do not guarantee the accuracy of this information. Walgreens Case No. 31- PA- 06 -03 -04 iz ,105:14,01 P PPS Y31MIM% /y ▪ M.r�wr w r.+rr r n , 4 N.411 0 y1 4. 1 etoa r002 it ..w 0 .p. ;SI1ol\siys- 1 1a‘ 1 oOe3 s, ...6141n \.411.o41.c3 M..6141n\ NVId SIVAOY4 /SNOLLON00 ONLLSIX3 tl10S3NNIM 11000] OVON iau 0102 NOW6ar Omit 30160 03S0a06a )3VW21VHd S,N3321O1VM OVOt! J4R3NHV21 IR E y e .mleva d • ueo 0ur.e,q b b b n T V 0 a z E cc <Z z (C111 MOWN ma, •- A. '.- 114 HHD aVOd 4JI13NHV8 atg 1 Q L a ! +1 II j • 2t6 - 1002 '1C DWI 5.1.-61I0r \ i3 NYId ON10V110 /S1N3W3A0Mdf1 03S0dO2ld N0W000 NOHL 3000 03SOd00d JIOVWMVHd S,N33d 1VM VLOS3NNIA 'N0003 0000 4i110 0102 - uldsnO s.uanM 5•00 \•••• .+uw 1 aV021 JJI13NHVM 0 3 ; 0 0 0 N i U 0 CC Z . INOMIN IMINE 000 ni s V NI Alliant Engineering, Inc. MEMORANDUM DATE: May 12 , 2004 TO: John Gorder, Assistant Engineer, City of Eagan FROM: Bob Green, PE, PTOE SUBJECT: Walgreen's Pharmacy — Eagan, MN Proposed Drive -Thru Addition MAY 1 3 2004 By J Walgreen's Corporation is proposing a drive thru addition to the property located at 2010 Cliff Road in Eagan, Minnesota. The Walgreen's Property is located at the intersection of CSAH 32 (Cliff Road) and Rahncliff Road in Eagan, Minnesota (Figure 1). The previously submitted drive -thru plan includes a straight drive thru lane parallel to the south side of the building (Figure 2). Two potential issues were identified during the city council meeting: Conclusions (1) Traffic exiting the drive -thru and attempting to exit the site via the Rahncliff road entrance encounters limited sight distance with eastbound traffic along the frontage road. Drivers would be required to check for oncoming traffic directly behind the vehicle before exiting the drive -thru lane. (2) Traffic exiting the drive -thru lane would conflict with traffic entering and exiting the parking lot, potentially creating an unsafe situation. The purpose of this traffic study is to document the existing traffic patterns at and around the site, to identify the expected traffic characteristics of the Walgreens site, and to identify an appropriate design for the drive -thru lane which addresses the issues identified above. The conclusions of the study are described below, followed by the supporting analysis and discussion. • The access drive from Rahncliff Road (South Access Drive) is a relatively low volume road, with approximately 45 vehicles per hour in each direction during the PM peak period. This volume level results in approximately 1 vehicle every 40 seconds. • Information provided by Walgreens indicates that the expected drive -thru usage is approximately 80 vehicles per day, and 10 during the peak hour. The peak hour is 5 -6 pm. At the peak, there will be 1 vehicle every 6 minutes using the drive -thru. • Given the low volume levels on the South Access Drive and the drive -thru, there is no significant issue associated with the drive -thru operations, as long as the exit from the drive -thru is separated from entrance to the parking lot, and sufficient sight distance is provided. 233 Park Avenue South, Suite 200, Minneapolis Minnesota 55415 -1108 Phone 612.758.3080, Fax 612.758.3099 1 11 Mr. John Gorder May 12, 2004 Page 2 of 3 • The revised drive -thru design (Figure 4) separates the drive -thru exit from the parking lot and provides adequate sight distance by adding the following features: o Widening the median separating the drive -thru from the South Access Drive allows drivers to achieve a better angle, improving sight distance. o The drive -thru exits onto the South Access Drive, instead of into the parking lot, separating these conflicting movements. o Narrowing the South Access Drive to 24 feet and adding striping creates a consistent roadway width for the parking lot access drives, and will slow speeds through the parking lot. Existing Traffic Patterns A field review was performed on Friday, May 7, 2004 to identify key traffic flow issues associated with the proposed drive -thru plan. The North Hadler Park development can be accessed via an eastbound right -in / right -out onto CSAH 32 (Cliff Road), or a full access intersection at Rahncliff Road. From east to west the North Hadler Park development includes the Walgreens building, a building with a Hollywood Video Store and a Starbucks, and a building containing mixed retail. The Walgreens site has two access points, a primary access point off of Rahncliff Road and a secondary access point from a frontage road servicing the surrounding properties. The South Access Drive links the remaining businesses in Hadler Park with CSAH 32. The South Access Drive is 30 feet wide Along the Walgreens building,. West of the Walgreens building, the roadway narrows to 24 feet. The road is unmarked. Photos of the South Access Drive are included in the appendix. A traffic count was conducted to understand the level of traffic and flow patterns near the Walgreens site. Typically, the PM peak period is the highest generator of traffic. Since one of the key traffic generators in the development is the video rental business, the count was performed on a Friday evening in order to estimate peak traffic generation. Turning movement counts were conducted at both entrances to the Walgreens facility from 3:30 — 6:00 PM, on Friday, May 7, 2004. The peak hour volumes are shown in Figure 3. The South Access Drive near the drive -thru location has approximately 45 vehicles in each direction during the peak hour. This volume corresponds to less than one car per minute in each direction, a relatively light volume. Site Characteristics Based on the traffic count, the Walgreens site generates approximately 134 trips in and 111 trips out during the PM peak hour. Most of the vehicles utilize the Rahncliff Road entrance. An estimate of lot occupancy was also performed from 3:30 to 6:00. The review indicates that the lot was near capacity in the thirty minute interval between 4:30 and 5:00 PM. The remainder of the time lot occupancy remained at approximately 75% full. Data was obtained from Walgreens documenting their national averages for drive -thru prescription usage. The data indicates that approximately 80 vehicles per day utilize the drive -thru, with the peak being 10 vehicles during the 5:00 PM hour. This results in one vehicle every 6 minutes utilizing the drive -thru during the peak hour. Mr. John Gorder May 12, 2004 Page 3 of 3 Proposed Design Given the low volume levels on the South Access Drive and the drive -thru, there is no significant issue associated with the drive -thru operations, as long as the exit from the drive -thru is separated from entrance to the parking lot, and sufficient sight distance is provided. Based on theses parameters, the field review and data analysis, the drive -thru design was modified. The modified drive -thru design is shown in Figure 4 and includes the following features: • The median between the drive -thru is widened from 4 feet to 10 feet, allowing drivers to achieve a better angle, improving sight distance. • The South Access Drive is narrowed from 30 feet to 24 feet to match the section to the west. • The exit from the drive -thru is separated from the Walgreens parking lot, and is angled to provide better sight distance. ; t 0 1 pst WALGREEN'S EAGAN, MN co ! J RAHNCLIFF ROAD —__27.121S T1 DRIVE-THRU ADDITION lay z traz WALGREEN'S nry A ALLIANT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED 211 SECOND STREET SE ST. ANTHONY NM SURE 300 FIGURE 1 Project Location z z H W Z W `Z Q W eve M. .ios]NN4 lammed win. , 114 14 .,. v - " .4 .MANN.. . ua2G2 - P002 '21 . fi.P'soq- [ION \Paseae.1 \u s, aa.1filon\a }s.1o2.1ql suaa 01 \> e111a \d .4440 60104.10 HY1d naHi -3AWO 03SOdoad Z 3anOld 800S3NNm '88063 08011 iino oloz NOW00Y 011041 3M110 0350d00d AOYMIdYHd S.H33107YM 1 a5r 0 z (d) M„£5,04.00N (3) SO '04Z M.4£,04.00N 00'04Z M. 9S,9Z.00S 4'021 JJIIONHV H 0 z WALGREEN'S EAGAN, MN Jv / T RAHNCLIFF ROAD LEGEND: Traffic Flow Pattern XX Peak Hour Volume PARKING LOT MIXED RETAIL � aLp DRIVE -THRU ADDITION 94 1 ALLIANT ENGINEERING INCORPORATED Ili SECOND STREET SE ST. ANINONY NAM SUM SOO NINNChPOLS. NN S5416 (6111)61 -0431 (611 T6_1)RT PA% V v SOURCE: Alliant Engineering (May, 2004) FIGURE 3 Peak Hour Volumes & Traffic Flow PM Peak Q z t- CC z w J z <w 1 a alm V1053111.15 n .wu 11.134543 a.. 44 w. nw1••• 4 ..94 94 pamaa 44.• " 4.1 411 W4 1 4 u - 0002 21 2014 Dap ,I5d0a0- sop_II06 \paso0oa0 \4x043 s aaabi0,\a30a0da03 suaa.•BI q \1 0 0I 11 \.d .9404 501.540 NYId naH.L -3Naa 03 u YJOS3NNIN 14Y7Y3 anti Lino 0402 NOWOOY 00141 3AI00 a3SOdOOd A3YIflYHd S.N33dO1YM 0 Looking East along South Access Drive North View along West Edge of Building la? East View of Drive -Thru Entrance West View Along South Access Drive li 05/11/2004 13:13 IdALGREENS FPD &E 4 916127583099 014 .tdc„ 1. t' -41 ' C auou J 4141 "O /1 ?famed '✓boyoL • blond L . 4 0 ) . 4 ) 0 1 • 1.1 euoud 0 0 ►' t 1 d*aroo I NV G L9L aION XE J .31 0 co 0 tD 0 b, suond1J3s8Jd nay= -amap 0 CV 0 0 0 4 0 0) 0 v m N0.062 D01 I a w z Vi C oh s 0 L J U 4 .: >" co L bzia 0V021 NHV ` f L U I iu Z <0 Et 0 z J 0 v) a N 0 U J ( h 1w Z o o §ao 0 w v a 2 1 g F 1 1 1 J . 1 1 1 F 1 Y E 1 Agenda Memo May 18, 2004 ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: Receive the petition for "No Parking" signs and 1) Authorize the installation of "No Parking" signs on Trails End Road west of Elrene Road to Eagan Oaks Court on the north side and to Ivy Lane on the south side, OR 2) Deny the request. FACTS: • On May 4, 2004, City staff received a petition from Jerome Grundmayer, 832 Wescott Square, and 7 other signers, (totaling 8 residents representing 8 properties) requesting the installation of "No Parking" signs on Trails End Road, west of Elrene Road. • The request is based upon the following concerns: noise and lights of parking vehicles disturb adjacent residents, reduced `width' of street is undesirable for driving and adequate parking appears to be available on other street segments. • Only property owners on the north side of Trails End Road nearest to the segment of requested restricted parking have signed the petition requesting the "No Parking" signs, as indicated on the attached exhibit. • This street segment is surrounded by residential properties. There is an existing stop sign for east bound Trails End Road at the `T' intersection with Elrene Road. • Letters have been sent to all potentially affected and/or interested parties, namely adjacent property owners, notifying them of the Council's consideration of this request. • This request has been reviewed by Engineering and Police and found to be in order for favorable Council action. ATTACHMENTS: • Location Map, page!__. • Petition Request, page tS3 . NEW BUSINESS A. TRAILS END ROAD "NO PARKING" SIGN PETITION 1 3 TRAILS END ROAD YANKEE DOODLE ROAD G: RussMotthys \BruceA \NO_PARKING_TRAILS_END ►.... Petitioners . ., . Proposed No- parking Area c i3s City of Eagan 30, Trails End Road No - Parking Petition May 12, 04 9. 10. 4. city of aogan PETITION NO PARKING SIGNS I /We, the undersigned hereby petition the City Council of the City of Eagan to install No Parking Sign on Trails End Road west of Elreen Road to Eagan Oaks Court, preferrably on the north and south side, but at least on the north side. I /We, request this installation for the following reasons: 1. Noise and lights from cars parking there is disturbing to residents of 802, 804; and 806 Eagan Oaks Lane whose rear or private sides of their units face this road. 2. The street is too narrow to permit the easy flow of traffic when cars are parked on this section of Trails End Road. 3. Parking on this street section is used by residents of 800 through 810 Ivy Lane. They have adequate parking areas on their street, Ivy Lane. I /We, request that the City Council take this petition request under consideration at its earliest opportunity. NAME (Please print and initial) _ ADDRESS 1. Prabhjit Gujral 2. Rod Hulm 3. Jeanne Melius 4 ,Terome B Gnitrr5mayer, Pres of Thme Assoc' 5. Tom Frost, V. P, of Association —++ - 8. Jerome Rue, Bd Dir. of Associatio 7. Steve Bjorum, Bd Dir of Association e G v 8. Kenneth Veale, Bd Dir of Association FOR CITY USE ONLY DATE RECEIVED S 7" d DATE PRESENTED TO COUNCIL APPROVED ❑ DENIED ❑ 802 Eaqn Oaks Lane • 804 Eagan Oaks Lane 806 Eagan Oaks Lane 832 Wescott Square 813 Wescott Square 809 Trails End Road 805 Eaqn Oaks Lane 3422 Eagan Oaks Court all above in Aegan , Minnesota 55123 13?) i Agenda Information Memo May 18, 2004 Eagan City Council Meeting REZONING, PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION & PRELIMINARY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT — METROPOLITAN OFFICE CONDOS LLC ACTIONS TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve a Rezoning of four acres from LB, Limited Business to PD Planned Development for property located East of Pilot Knob Road at Marice Drive between Sherman Court and I -35E. To approve a Preliminary Planned Development to create 22 town offices, common area, and one dental office on property located East of Pilot Knob Road at Marice Drive between Sherman Court and I -35E; subject to the conditions in the APC minutes. To approve a Preliminary Subdivision (Northwood Office Condos) of 6.9 acres to create 7 lots at property located at East of Pilot Knob Road at Marice Drive between Sherman Court and I- 35E; subject to the conditions in the APC minutes. REQUIRED VOTE FOR APPROVAL • Majority FACTS: ISSUES: VIII. NEW BUSINESS • The subject site is currently vacant, wooded and contains a wetland. • The proposal is for 22 office condo units and one freestanding dental building, as part of a Planned Development a cohesive design is expected throughout the development. • Parking requirements are met. • Access is proposed with three access points onto Sherman Court and Marice Drive. • Tree mitigation is necessary. • Discussion occurred regarding the lack of design cohesiveness that is a typical expectation of the City for Planned Developments. • A public hearing was held at the April 27, 2004 Advisory Planning Commission meeting where they recommended approval. • The proposed signage for the office condos and dental site are not compatible with each other. The proposed pylon sign for the dental building is within 300 feet of another pylon sign. • The finished building materials for the two developments are inconsistent. • The original request is for two pylon signs, two entrance monuments and four small monuments for the office condos. The APC suggested one pylon sign for the entire Planned Development. 134 120 Agency Action Deadline • July 16 a waiver to the Rezoning and Preliminary PD has been signed ATTACHMENTS (2): Advisory Planning Commission Minutes pages % I9 Staff report on pages NO through 17 City of Eagan Advisory Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 27, 2004 Page 15 The Advisory Planning Commission took a five - minute recess and reconvened at 8:30 p.m. H. REZONING, PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION & PRELIMINARY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT — METROPOLITAN OFFICE CONDOS LLC A Rezoning of 4 acres from LB, Limited Business to PD, Planned Development, a Preliminary Subdivision of 6.29 acres (Northwood Office Condos) to create six Tots and a Preliminary Planned Development to allow multiple office condos on property located between Pilot Knob Road and Interstate 35 -E in the SW 1/4 of Section 10. Planner Cartney introduced this item and highlighted the information presented in the City Staff report dated April 22, 2004. She noted the background and hiss ry' Chair Heyl opened the public hearing. Clark Wicklund, Alliant Engineering discussed the trash enclosures. He stated the enclosure was proposed to be detached for the office condos because of the multiple ownership, and the enclosure for the dental site is attached, but was omitted from the plans. Gywen Secora, resident of the Commons on Marice Drive stated concern for the trees that house the birds, and the existing sidewalks Thompson, resident of the Commons on= Marice Drive also stated concern for the population of the birds, trees, along with the traffic on Sherman Court . Chair Heyl explained the tree mitigation particulars for this property. Mr. Wicklund explained that tree preservation may be''difficult in the area that the parking lot is proposed. He stated no impact to the, sidewalk in «question. He stated the traffic on Sherman Court and Marice Drive should be minimal. There being no further public comment, Chair Heyl closed the public hearing and turned the discussion back to the Commission Chair Heyl stated tree preservation is important because of the residential homes. She stated importance of the consideration of the neighbors. She stated she would be in favor of approval, including four monument signs and one pylon sign if all conditions are met. Jennifer Eisenhuth, Orthodontist that would possibly establish her business on this property stated the signage is very important for her business. Chair Heyl explained that signage that included a phone number, viewable from the freeway would not be effective due to high traveling speeds. Mr. Eisenhuth explained that the signage on the on -ramp is more important than the signage that would be visible from the freeway. City of Eagan Advisory Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 27, 2004 Page 16 Member Leeder stated the business operations are compatible with the area. He agreed that the buildings and signage should be compatible throughout the site. Member Bendt moved, Member Hansen seconded a motion to recommend approval of a Rezoning of four acres from LB, Limited Business to PD, Planned Development for property located East of Pilot Knob Road at Marice Drive between Sherman Court and I -35E. All voted in favor. Motion carried 4 -0. Member Leeder moved, Member Bendt seconded a motion to recomrneDd approval of a Preliminary Planned Development to create 22 town offices; ommon'aea, and one dental office on property located East of Pilot Knob Road at Marice Drive betweenSherman Court and -35E subject to the following conditions as amended nr 1. The applicant shall enter into a Preliminary Planned Development Agreement with the City that shall be recorded at the Dakota CountyRecorder's Office. 2. This Planned Development is for town offices and a dental building. Residential occupation /uses shall be prohibited. .., :. . 3. The applicant shall enter into a Final Planned Development Agreement with the City and shall be recorded at Dakota County Recorder's Office, The following exhibits are necessary for the agreement. a. Final Site Plarat b. Final Building Elevations P lan c. Final Tree Preservation Plan d. Final Landscape =Plan e. Final Lighting Plan f. Final Signage Plan — freestanding and building mounted e 4. All mechanical equipment sha11 be screened from public rights -of -way and properties with different land use designation. 5. If complaints are registered to City offices about a parking problem within this development the proof of parking shall be implemented and additional landscaping installed where necessary. 6. All trash enclosures shall be attached to the principal building and constructed with similar materials as the principal building. 7. Prior to final application, the applicant shall provide the City Council with: a. A detailed landscaping and tree preservation plan; b. An exterior building facade depiction showing compatibility with both the dental office and office condos; and City of Eagan Advisory Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 27, 2004 Page 17 c. A detailed sign plan depicting size and location of the one pylon sign and two (2) entrance monument signs as well as the individual business signage. All voted in favor. Motion carried 4 -0. Member Leeder moved, Member Bendt seconded a motion to recommend approval a Preliminary Subdivision (Northwood Office Condos) of 6.9 acres to create 7 Tots at property located at East of Pilot Knob Road at Marice Drive between Sherman Court and I -35E subject to the following conditions as amended: 1. The property shall be platted. 2. Maintenance of all retaining walls within the development shall be the responsibility of the development's association. 13� 3. The developer shall construct an outlet structure and pipe system from the wetland in accordance with City engineering standards 4. The developer shall be responsible for lowering the water main to ensure that there is 7% feet of ground cover between the final development grades and the top of the existing water main within the site 5. This development shall dedicate drainage and utility easements over the existing sanitary sewer Tines of a width equal to two times their depth, or 40 feet, whichever is less. 6. The developer shall be responsible for the pre- payment of the street assessment for the frontage of the proposed development adjacent to the future construction portion of Sherman Court (approximately 165 feet). 7. If any development construction or grading activity is to occur within I -35E right -of -way, the developer shall be responsible for obtaining the necessary MN Department of Transportation permits. 8. The developer shall petition, and Council action shall occur, on the vacation of Marice Drive right -of -way within the site prior to final subdivision approval. 9. The development shall satisfy any parks and trails dedications due by a cash dedication. 10. The applicant shall be required to fulfill tree preservation mitigation through the installation of fifty -four (54) Category B trees to be installed on site. 11. Tree Protective measures (i.e. orange colored silt fence or 4 foot polyethylene laminate safety netting) shall be required to be installed at the Drip Line or at the perimeter of the Critical Root Zone, whichever is greater, of significant trees /woodlands to be preserved. 12. The applicant shall contact the City Forestry Division and set up a pre- construction site inspection at least five days prior to the issuance of the grading permit to ensure City of Eagan Advisory Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 27, 2004 Page 18 compliance with the approved Tree Preservation Plan and placement of the Tree Protection Fencing. 13. This development shall meet the City's water quality requirements by creating stormwater treatment capacity through a minimum wet -pond volume of 0.22 acre -feet covering an area of about 0.15 acres. The stormwater treatment pond should be constructed according to NURP standards with a maximum depth of 10 feet, a 10:1 aquatic bench, and an outlet skimmer according to City design standards. 14. To the extent practicable, a 30 -foot wide buffer of natural, undisturbed vegetation outside the boundary of the wetland should be maintained before, during, and after construction. 15. A Property Owner's Homeowner's Association shall be established for the maintenance of common area and provide copies of the organizational documents for review and approval to the City Attorney. 16. Lot 5 shall be incorporated into Lot 1 for common area' All voted in favor. Motion carried 4 -0. ZONING: LB, Limited Business SUMMARY OF REQUEST PLANNING REPORT CITY OF EAGAN REPORT DATE: April 22, 2004 CASE: 10- PS- 04- 03 -04, 10- PD- 01- 03 -04, 10- RZ- 04 -03 -04 APPLICANT: Korey Bannermam HEARING DATE: April 27, 2004 PROPERTY OWNER: Lawrence Wenzel APPLICATION DATE: March 17, 2004 REQUEST: Rezoning, Preliminary Subdivision PREPARED BY: Sheila Cartney Preliminary Planned Development LOCATION: East of Pilot Knob Road at Marice Drive between Sherman Court and I -35E COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: SA, Special Area The applicant requested approval of a Rezoning of 4 acres from LB, Limited Business to PD, Planned Development and a Preliminary Subdivision of 6.29 acres (Northwood Office Condos) to create 7 lots, and a Preliminary Planned Development to create 22 town offices, common area, and one dental office on property located East of Pilot Knob Road at Marice Drive between Sherman Court and I -35E. AUTHORITY FOR REVIEW Rezoning: City Code Chapter 11, Section 11.50, Subd. 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 City Council shall not rezone any land or area in any zoning district or make any other proposed amendment to the zoning ordinance without first having referred it to the planning commission for its consideration and recommendation. 14D Planning Report — Northwood Office Condo's April 27, 2004 Page 2 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 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 141 Planning Report — Northwood Office Condo's April 27, 2004 Page 3 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." Planned Development: City Code Chapter 11.60, Subd. 18, A., states the intent of the Planned Development zoning district as follows: 1. Providing greater flexibility in environmental design and relaxation of strict application of the zoning ordinance in exchange for greater creativity and environmental sensitivity. 2. Recognizing the economic and cultural advantages that will accrue to the residents of a planned community. 3. Encouraging a more creative and efficient approach to the use of the land. 4. Encouraging the preservation and enhancement of desirable site characteristics, natural features, and open space. 5. Encouraging a development pattern that is consistent with land use density, transportation facilities and community facilities objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. BACKGROUND/HISTORY The proposed development overlays three parcels, all of which are platted and located adjacent to Interstate Highway 35E. The subject site is located within Special Area 4. Prior to receiving the Special Area 4 designation with the Comprehensive Guide Plan Update in 2001, the site was part of the Central Area, a similar small area land use plan that was adopted in 1994. The City recently adopted amendments to the Special Area 4 land use plan, which identifies the land use for this site as O /S, Office Service. The northerly parcel is a remnant that was acquired from MnDOT by the City in 2000 in conjunction with the development proposal for an expansion of the Glen Ponds apartment complex in 2000. This parcel is currently owned by Glen Ponds IlI, LLC, which acquired the land from the City in exchange for right -of -way dedication for Northwood Parkway. At the time the Planned Development for the expansion of the Glen Ponds Apartment complex was approved in 2000, this parcel was also zoned PD, and designated for uses and development standards consistent with the LB, Limited Business zoning district. The two southerly parcels remained zoned GB, General Business. 14 \ Planning Report — Northwood Office Condo's April 27, 2004 Page 4 The two southerly parcels have been zoned GB, General Business, as far back as the mid- 1970s. The adjacent property to the west had also been zoned GB until it was redeveloped as Limited Business uses (Commons on Marice) in 1997. With a Zoning map update in September 2003, the parcels were rezoned to LB, Limited Business. Until recently, the southern two parcels subject land was owned by MnDOT. It is currently owned by Glen Ponds III, LLC, the owner /developer of the Glen Pond Apartments north of the future Northwood Parkway. Northwood Parkway has been constructed at its intersection with Pilot Knob Road, and exists as right -of -way extending to the east, but has not been constructed to the I -35E right -of -way. A future bridge overpass is planned in this location over I -35E, but funding has not been available and the project remains unscheduled to date. It is anticipated that Northwood Parkway will be constructed to its full extent in conjunction with the installation of this overpass. In 2003, a residential development proposal for the subject site was submitted and withdrawn. EXISTING CONDITIONS The site is vacant and wooded, and contains a wetland in the east central portion of the site. SURROUNDING USES The following existing uses, zoning, and comprehensive guide plan designations surround the subject property: EVALUATION OF REQUEST I. Preliminary Planned Development Proposal — The applicant proposes to develop the site with six two level walkout "Town office" units, and one dental office. The offices will be housed in units that have a similar appearance as attached town homes. The units are in a 5 -plex and 6 -plex formation. Each unit will be individually platted and the remaining land will be managed by a self - governed association, which will oversee the maintenance of the area. 143 Existing Use Zoning Land Use Designation North Future Northwood Parkway; Glen Pond Apartments PD, Planned Development HD, High Density South Hotel, bank, daycare PD, Planned Development O /S, Office Service East Interstate 35E West Senior assisted living apartment/restaurant/office LB, Limited Business O /S, Office Service Planning Report — Northwood Office Condo's April 27, 2004 Page 4 The two southerly parcels have been zoned GB, General Business, as far back as the mid- 1970s. The adjacent property to the west had also been zoned GB until it was redeveloped as Limited Business uses (Commons on Marice) in 1997. With a Zoning map update in September 2003, the parcels were rezoned to LB, Limited Business. Until recently, the southern two parcels subject land was owned by MnDOT. It is currently owned by Glen Ponds III, LLC, the owner /developer of the Glen Pond Apartments north of the future Northwood Parkway. Northwood Parkway has been constructed at its intersection with Pilot Knob Road, and exists as right -of -way extending to the east, but has not been constructed to the I -35E right -of -way. A future bridge overpass is planned in this location over I -35E, but funding has not been available and the project remains unscheduled to date. It is anticipated that Northwood Parkway will be constructed to its full extent in conjunction with the installation of this overpass. In 2003, a residential development proposal for the subject site was submitted and withdrawn. EXISTING CONDITIONS The site is vacant and wooded, and contains a wetland in the east central portion of the site. SURROUNDING USES The following existing uses, zoning, and comprehensive guide plan designations surround the subject property: EVALUATION OF REQUEST I. Preliminary Planned Development Proposal — The applicant proposes to develop the site with six two level walkout "Town office" units, and one dental office. The offices will be housed in units that have a similar appearance as attached town homes. The units are in a 5 -plex and 6 -plex formation. Each unit will be individually platted and the remaining land will be managed by a self - governed association, which will oversee the maintenance of the area. 143 Setback Building Parking Ordinance Proposed Ordinance Proposed Front yard: 135E 50 feet 50 feet 20 feet 20 feet Front yard: Sherman Ct 30 feet 45 + feet 20 feet 20 feet Side yard: north property line 10 feet 50 feet 5 feet 20 feet Side yard: south property line 10 feet 90 feet 5 feet 20 feet Planning Report — Northwood Office Condo's April 27, 2004 Page 5 Access to the townoffices is proposed via Sherman Court on the south side of the development. Access to the dental office is proposed via Sherman Court near the cul -de -sac and possibly using the service drive to the Extendastay. Compatibility with Surrounding Area — This site is located within an area of mixed use with both low intensity commercial uses, and medium to high density residential uses. The proposed office land use appears compatible with the adjacent uses. Northwood Parkway will create a physical barrier between uses in the future. Consequently, the land uses north of Northwood Parkway are designated residential, consistent with already established apartments, twin homes and single family. Land uses south of Northwood Parkway are designated commercial, consistent with the light commercial uses that exist there - office, daycare, restaurant, and assisted living. Planned Development Zoning — The Planned Development zoning district allows the developer to have greater flexibility in the design of the development and the City to require higher standards in exchange for that flexibility. Typically, specific minimum and maximum zoning standards do not apply. However, the LB (Limited Business) zoning district standards are used as a basis for comparison with this proposal. Bulk Standards — Since the property is currently zoned LB (Limited Business) and Planned Development, this proposal is reviewed under the LB zoning district minimum and maximum standards. Although the rezoning request is for Planned Development zoning. Setbacks — As the table below indicates the proposal meets all of the LB standard setback requirements. Setback requirements are not established in a Planned Development zoning. Building Coverage — A maximum of 20 percent of the lot is allowed to be covered with buildings. The site plan indicates the total building coverage is about eleven percent. Green Area — A minimum of 30 percent of the site is required to be green area. The proposal will maintain 66 percent green area for the entire site. Building Height — Building height is limited to 30 feet in height. The Elevation Plans indicate the building height will be 30 feet in height for the townoffices and 34 feet in height for the dental office. Landscaping — The landscape plan submitted appears adequate for the site. The existing trees Planning Report — Northwood Office Condo's April 27, 2004 Page 6 seem to provide a natural buffer around the site. If the proof of parking is implemented then additional screening would be required to buffer the parking. Parking — The site plan indicates 202 stalls are proposed for this development and 41 stalls shown as proof of parking. The zoning ordinance requires one stall for every 150 square feet of gross net leasble floor area. Thus, this development would require 224 stalls. The majority of the proof of parking stalls are on the town office side of the development. There are about 33 proof of parking stalls proposed for the town offices. The proposed stalls meet the 10 feet by 19 feet requirement. The city does not have a policy in place as to when proof of parking should be implemented. Staff suggests that when complaints are registered to our offices about a parking problem within this development that proof of parking be implemented and additional landscaping installed where necessary. Trash Enclosure — The trash enclosure is proposed to be detached from the principle structures for the office condos. The Zoning Ordinance requires that trash enclosures within commercial zoning districts be attached to the principal building. It appears the proposed trash enclosure occupies a parking space. The applicant did not indicate why the trash enclosure is not attached to the building. The trash enclosure should be attached to one of the buildings. The plans do not indicate the trash enclosure building materials. The materials are required to match the principle building. The site plan for the dental site does not show a trash enclosure, if there is a trash enclosure outside it should be attached to the building and match the existing buildings materials. Lighting — The office condo site is proposed to have 16 freestanding lights. The lights around the perimeter will have external rear glare shields. The lights will be 24 feet in height. The lighting plan does not indicate any light fixtures attached to the buildings. The buildings should have some type of entrance light whether that be building mounted light at each entrance or throughout the development. A revised lighting plan is required with Final Planned Development approval. The dental site is proposing seven freestanding lights, 20 feet in height. The lights around the perimeter are to have external rear glare shields. The plan does not indicate any building mounted lights. The entrances should have more lighting. A revised lighting plan is required with Final Planned Development approval. Signage Typically, signage within a Planned Development is uniform and materials match those used on the building(s). The subject site is being developed with office uses that are consistent with the Limited Business Zoning District. Office Condos — Six ground signs are proposed for the office condo portion. One pylon sign, one monument sign and four small monument/directional signs. The monument sign is located near the main entrance and is six feet in height with a sign height of five feet three inches. The Code allows a sign height up to four feet. The proposed monument sign is more of an identification sign, Birchwood Office Park of Eagan will be on the face. The sign has cultured stone columns I ds Planning Report — Northwood Office Condo's April 27, 2004 Page 7 to match the building and the face is recessed with sandblasted letters that are to be painted the sign is a limestone sign. This sign appears compatible with the proposed office condos. The four freestanding monument/directional signs will be located in front of each building. These signs are about five feet tall and 6.75 square feet. The sign has six tenant spaces on each sign. These signs will be the same design as the monument sign at the entrance. The Code allows signs over the entrance to a place of business or used to identify the parking area of a place of business, not to exceed three square feet. The monument/directional signs are to provide information as to what tenants are in each building. Although not specifically address in the Sign Ordinance it seems appropriate for some type of directional signage for this office park. The pylon sign is 27 feet tall and 107 square feet meeting code requirements. The sign is not within 300 feet of any other pylon sign. The sign will be an aluminum cabinet with poles that will be painted green. The sign identifies the office park. The sign seems to be compatible with the other signs on the site. Dental Site - The dental site is proposing two ground signs, a monument and a pylon. The double faced monument sign is located near the entrance and is five feet from the property line; freestanding signs are required to be 10 feet from the property line. The monument sign is six feet eight inches tall and 10 feet wide. The sign has one large space for the orthodontist and four tenant spaces. The proposed sign is a cabinet style that will be internally lit. The base of the sign is brick. The proposed sign does not appear to be compatible with the finished materials of the principal building. The building materials are EFIS and stone veneer. The sign should tie in architectural features of the building. The pylon sign is proposed to be located on the southeast side of the site. The sign is an aluminum cabinet with two poles and a white panaflex face. The cabinet will be backlit with high output fluorescent lighting. The sign will be painted blue. The pylon sign gives the impression of being a billboard by advertising with the phone number and being a bold color. The sign is 27 feet tall and 124.5 square feet. The pylon sign appears to be located within 90 feet of the pylon sign to the south. The City code states that "no pylon sign should be located within 300 feet of any other pylon sign, measure on the same side of the street." The pylon sign and monument sign are inconsistent in color and materials, signage in a Planned Development should be complementary of each other and have some type of uniformity. Building signage is proposed for the east and west side of the building for one tenant name on each side. A specification for building signage was not submitted and should be part of the Final Planned Development Agreement. As a Planned Development, it is expected to have a cohesive design throughout the site with architecture, signage, lighting etc. There is no consistency with the signage proposed for this site. The applicant should submit revised signage plans that reflect a uniform theme that incorporates the proposed exterior building materials throughout the site. Architecture/Building Design — According to the elevation plans for the dental building the finished materials will be EFIS and stone veneer. Colors were not identified. The office condos are proposing asphalt shingles, cement trim, culture stone around the bottom, and hard surfaced siding. Considering this is a Planned Development proposal the exterior materials should be Planning Report — Northwood Office Condo's April 27, 2004 Page 8 similar and complimentary to each other. Staff suggests the hard surface siding be used for both proposals. The stone veneer and culture stone should be compatible. Detailed plans are required with the Final Planned Development the plans should include a color scheme. Mechanical Equipment — The site plan does not indicate the location of mechanical equipment. All such equipment shall be screened from public rights -of -way and properties with a different land use designation. Homeowner's Association - A homeowner's Association should be established for the maintenance of common area. Lot one should be conveyed to the Homeowner's Association. II. Preliminary Subdivision Lots — The applicant proposes to subdivide 6.29 acres into seven lots, five of which are for town offices, one for a dental office. Lot 1, Block 1, is proposed to be the remainder of the site and is to be maintained by the Association. No buildings are proposed for Lot 1, Block 1. Lot 5 should be combined with Lot 1 (common area). Noise Abatement — A noise abatement plan is required when a plat abuts a freeway, major arterial or other area that generates high volumes of noise. Abatement shall be accomplished by the use of berms, vegetation, walls or combination of the three. Since the site abuts I -35E, a plan should be prepared; however, the landscape plan does not appear to address noise abatement. Grading — The preliminary grading plan is acceptable. The existing site generally slopes toward the existing wetland in the east - central portion of the site with elevations ranging from approximately 898 to 876. Several retaining walls throughout the site are proposed to accommodate the development. Maintenance of these retaining walls should be the responsibility of the development's association. The proposed development grades are compatible with the planned future grades of Northwood Parkway. Storm Drainage — The preliminary storm drainage plan is acceptable with modifications. A majority of the storm water runoff from the development is proposed to drain via public storm sewer to the existing wetland in the center of the site. This wetland will then flow to an existing storm sewer system within Sherman Court, which drains to Pond CP -5 (as identified in the City Storm Water Management Plan — 1990) north of Marice Drive. The developer should construct an outlet structure and pipe from the wetland in accordance with City engineering standards. Utilities — The preliminary utility plan is acceptable with modifications. Sanitary sewer and water main of sufficient size and capacity are available within Sherman Court and the vacated right -of- way of Marice Drive for connection by the development. The grade elevation over the existing water main may be lowered with the development. The developer should be responsible for lowering the water main to ensure that there is 7 %2 feet of ground cover between the final 147 Planning Report — Northwood Office Condo's April 27, 2004 Page 9 development grades and the top of the water main, to reduce the possibility of the freezing of the main. Streets/ Access/ Circulation — Street access is proposed throughout the development with three access points onto Sherman Court and Marice Drive to the west. Sherman Court will intersect with the future construction of Northwood Parkway. Northwood Parkway, along the north edge of the site, is identified for future street and bridge construction in the City's current Capital Improvement Program (2004 - 2008). In conjunction with this construction, Sherman Court, a local street along the west edge of the site from Marice Drive to Northwood Parkway, will also be constructed. The public right -of -way providing for the construction of Northwood Parkway and Sherman Court has been dedicated or acquired. In anticipation of this construction, the developer should be responsible for the pre - payment of the street assessment for the frontage of the proposed development adjacent to this portion of Sherman Court (approximately 165 feet). The estimated street assessment is $24,750. No assessments are proposed on Northwood Parkway, a planned major collector roadway. Easements/ Permits / Right -of -Way — Relatively deep sanitary sewer lines currently run through the site. This development should dedicate drainage and utility easement over these existing lines of a width equal to two times their depth, or 40 feet, whichever is less. The proposed development is adjacent to I -35E right -of -way. If any development construction or grading activity is to occur within I -35E right -of -way, the developer should be responsible for obtaining the necessary permits to allow for the activity. The developer's survey of the property indicates that a portion of Marice Drive right -of -way from High Site Drive to Sherman Court within the site was not vacated by previous Council action as intended with the Effress 2 Addition development in 2001. The developer should petition, and Council action should occur, on the vacation of this right -of -way prior to final subdivision approval. Wetlands /Water Quality - This 6.3 -acre development would be located in the C- watershed, in the northeast sector of the City. The developer proposes to meet the City's water quality requirements entirely by directing stormwater runoff to a treatment pond to be constructed next to a wetland on the parcel. Requirements for the volume of water quality treatment ponds are based on the imperviousness of proposed developments (i.e., the proportion of land covered by buildings, parking lots, driveways, and walks). With a proposed impervious cover of 64 percent, this development would need a pond with a minimum volume of 0.56 acre -feet to treat stormwater runoff. A wetland delineation report indicates there is a 2.9 -acre wetland on this parcel. The wetland is under jurisdiction of the Minnesota Wetland Conservation Act (WCA), which regulates draining and filling of all natural wetlands and excavation of certain types of natural wetlands. The developer proposes no impacts to the wetland. Planning Report — Northwood Office Condo's April 27, 2004 Page 10 Tree Preservation - A tree inventory submitted with this application indicates that there are one hundred sixty -three (163) significant trees in the inventory. Most of the significant vegetation (with the exception of the oak trees) on site appears to be regrowth having occurred on a past disturbed site. The development as proposed will result in the removal of one - hundred four (104) significant trees (63.8 % of the total). According to the City of Eagan Tree Preservation Ordinance allowable tree removal for this type of development proposal (single - phase, multiple -unit commercial) is set at 47.5% of the total significant trees. With a proposed removal greater than the allowable amount, there is a required tree mitigation for this proposal. The required tree mitigation calculates to fifty -four (54) Category B trees. The applicant has submitted a tree preservation plan that indicates the fulfillment of the required tree mitigation through the installation of fifty -nine trees, (53 Category B trees, and 6 Category A trees, for an equivalent amount of 65 Category B trees). Parks and Recreation — The development is subject to cash park and trail dedication. This item was a consent item for the Advisory Park and Recreation Commission they recommended approval. SUMMARY /CONCLUSION The request is to Rezone four acres of the subject property from Limited Business to Planned Development, and a Preliminary Subdivision of 6.29 acres to create 7 lots, and a Preliminary Planned Development to create 22 town offices, common area and one dental site to the south. The offices will be part of an office park with individual ownership for each space. The site is currently vacant, wooded, and contains a wetland. The trash enclosure for the office condos is proposed to be detached and the dental site did not show an enclosure. Revised plans showing enclosures attached to the principal buildings should be submitted. The site lighting is acceptable, but should provide some type of entrance lighting. The dental site proposes a monument sign and a pylon sign. The pylon sign is within 300 feet of another pylon sign. The pylon and monument signs are inconsistent in color and building materials. The office condos are proposing six ground signs. One monument at the entrance with no tenant names and four small monuments in front of each building identifying the tenants and a pylon sign. The proposed signage for the dental site and office condo site are not compatible with each other, as part of a Planned Development a cohesive design is expected. The building materials proposed for the two developments are inconsistent. Detailed plans are required with the Final Planned Development. The proposal was reviewed against Limited Business standards because it is partially zoned LB. The majority of the standards are met with the exception of the height of the dental building, 34 feet rather than 30 feet. The site meets the parking requirements with 41 stalls as proof of 149 Planning Report — Northwood Office Condo's April 27, 2004 Page 11 parking. Staff suggests that when/if complaints are registered to City offices about a parking problem within this development that proof of parking be implemented and additional landscaping installed where necessary. Street access is proposed throughout the development with three access points onto Sherman Court and Marice Drive to the west. Sherman Court will intersect with the future construction of Northwood Parkway. In anticipation of this construction, the developer should be responsible for the pre - payment of the street assessment for the frontage of the proposed development to this portion of Sherman Court (approximately 165 feet). There are 163 significant trees onsite. The developer proposes to remove 104 significant trees 63.8 percent the ordinance allows a removal of up to 47.5 percent, tree mitigation is necessary. A cash park and trail dedication is required with this development. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED To recommend approval of Rezoning of four acres from LB, Limited Business to PD, Planned Development for property located East of Pilot Knob Road at Marice Drive between Sherman Court and I -35E. To approve a Preliminary Planned Development to create 22 town offices, common area, and one dental office on property located East of Pilot Knob Road at Marice Drive between Sherman Court and I -35E. 1. The applicant shall enter into a Preliminary Planned Development Agreement with the City that shall be recorded at the Dakota County Recorder's Office. 2. This Planned Development is for town offices and a dental building. Residential occupation/uses shall be prohibited. 3. The applicant shall enter into a Final Planned Development Agreement with the City and shall be recorded at Dakota County Recorder's Office. The following exhibits are necessary for the agreement. a. Final Site Plan b. Final Building Elevations Plan c. Final Tree Preservation Plan d. Final Landscape Plan e. Final Lighting Plan f. Final Signage Plan — freestanding and building mounted 4. All mechanical equipment shall be screened from public rights -of -way and properties with different land use designation. 5. If complaints are registered to City offices about a parking problem within this development the proof of parking shall be implemented and additional landscaping installed where necessary. 6. All trash enclosures shall be attached to the principal building and constructed with similar materials as the principal building. IsL Planning Report — Northwood Office Condo's April 27, 2004 Page 12 To approve a Preliminary Subdivision (Northwood Office Condos) of 6.9 acres to create 7 lots at property located at East of Pilot Knob Road at Marice Drive between Sherman Court I- 35E. If approved, the following conditions should apply. The developer shall comply with these standards conditions of plat approval as adopted by Council on February 2, 1993: Al, B1, 4, Cl, 2, 4, D1,and El 1. The property shall be platted. 2. Maintenance of all retaining walls within the development shall be the responsibility of the development's association. 3. The developer shall construct an outlet structure and pipe system from the wetland in accordance with City engineering standards. 4. The developer shall be responsible for lowering the water main to ensure that there is 71/2 feet of ground cover between the final development grades and the top of the existing water main within the site. 5. This development shall dedicate drainage and utility easements over the existing sanitary sewer lines of a width equal to two times their depth, or 40 feet, whichever is less. 6. The developer shall be responsible for the pre - payment of the street assessment for the frontage of the proposed development adjacent to the future construction portion of Sherman Court (approximately 165 feet). 7. If any development construction or grading activity is to occur within I -35E right -of -way, the developer shall be responsible for obtaining the necessary MN Department of Transportation permits. 8. The developer shall petition, and Council action shall occur, on the vacation of Marice Drive right -of -way within the site prior to final subdivision approval. 9. The development shall satisfy any parks and trails dedications due by a cash dedication. 10. The applicant shall be required to fulfill tree preservation mitigation through the installation of fifty -four (54) Category B trees to be installed on site. 11. Tree Protective measures (i.e. orange colored silt fence or 4 foot polyethylene laminate safety netting) shall be required to be installed at the Drip Line or at the perimeter of the Critical Root Zone, whichever is greater, of significant trees /woodlands to be preserved. 12. The applicant shall contact the City Forestry Division and set up a pre - construction site inspection at least five days prior to the issuance of the grading permit to ensure compliance with the approved Tree Preservation Plan and placement of the Tree Protection Fencing. 13. This development shall meet the City's water quality requirements by creating stormwater treatment capacity through a minimum wet -pond volume of 0.22 acre -feet covering an area of about 0.15 acres. The stormwater treatment pond should be constructed according to NURP standards with a maximum depth of 10 feet, a 10:1 aquatic bench, and an outlet skimmer according to City design standards. 14. To the extent practicable, a 30 -foot wide buffer of natural, undisturbed vegetation outside the boundary of the wetland should be maintained before, during, and after construction. 151 Planning Report — Northwood Office Condo's April 27, 2004 Page 13 15. A Homeowner's Association shall be established for the maintenance of common area and provide copies of the organizational documents for review and approval to the City Attorney. 16. Lot 5 shall be incorporated into Lot 1 for common area. 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 volume requirements. C. Plans and Specifications STANDARD CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL 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. Is 3 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 Dedication G. Water Quality Dedication 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 LTS #5 STANOARD.CON 1. This development shall fulfill its park and trail dedication requirements as recommended by the Advisory Parks, Recreation and Natural Resource Commission and approved by Council action. 1. This development shall be responsible for providing 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, Recreation and Natural Resource Commission and approved by Council action. Revised: February 2, 1993 FINANCIAL OBLIGATION- Preliminary Subdivision - Northwood Office Condo There are pay -off balances of special assessments totaling $-O-on the parcels proposed for subdivision. The pay -off balance will be allocated to the lots created by the subdivision. At this time, there are no pending assessments on the parcel proposed for subdivision. This estimated financial obligation is subject to change based upon the areas, dimensions and land uses contained in the final subdivision. 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 Storm Sewer Trunk Total USE RATE QUANTITY AMOUNT C.I. $.02325/Sq. Ft. 117,090 Sq. Ft. $2,722 1 ss $2,722 Sub ect Site 11:7=11ZC/ .0..orrv-eosn-tin-se-msffkFs nnnol F 110401 1000 2000 Feet 01.0.001, Fi 1 city oF eagan Development/Developer: Northwood Office Condo Application: Prelim subdivision, Rezoning Case No.: 10-PS-04-03-04 Location Map Map Prepared using ERSI ArcView 3.1. Parcel base map data provided by Dakota County Office of GIS and is current as of January 2004. THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY The City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this information and are ....cnonsible for errors or omissions. Eagan Boundary / Street Centerline Parcel Area Building Footprint L I 1114 Current Zoning and Comprehensive Guide Plan Land Use Map Northwoods Office Condo Case No. 10- PS- 04 -03 -0 City of Eagan Parcel base map information providenby Dakota County Land Survey Department June 2003. Z Zoning information maintained byCity Staff T HIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY - - - - - -- -. . + n.rnta County do not guarantee the accuracy of this information. Zoning Map e : ; ∎ R -3 SA P R-2 I`,d /A, R-4 PD C SA 1 Current Zoning: PD, Planned Development LB, Limited Business SA PD PD r L� �P " All i r D I e ri It LB SA t COUNTY PD 600 0 600 1200 Feat RD 600 0 600 1200 Feet . PD _ SA / L NTY R ROAD NO.28 ( YANKFE 010!11) ROAD NO Te !YANKEE NorO r 0` `\ I i 1 - ;, 1 1 rn ri2 �3 /11 1 I71 el , Current Zoning and Comprehensive Guide Plan Land Use Map Northwoods Office Condo Case No. 10- PS- 04 -03 -0 City of Eagan Parcel base map information providenby Dakota County Land Survey Department June 2003. Z Zoning information maintained byCity Staff T HIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY - - - - - -- -. . + n.rnta County do not guarantee the accuracy of this information. Comprehensive Guide Plan Land Use Map ■ ����,� —$ PIP + MD SA m SA c 0 o z J SA 4' ° Current Land Use Designation: SA Special Area SA ir 111N I tiP All i r o I SA It COUUNTY SA 600 0 600 1200 Feet SA / I NTY R ROAD NO.28 ( YANKFE 010!11) r 0` `\ I i 1 - ;, 1 1 rn Current Zoning and Comprehensive Guide Plan Land Use Map Northwoods Office Condo Case No. 10- PS- 04 -03 -0 City of Eagan Parcel base map information providenby Dakota County Land Survey Department June 2003. Z Zoning information maintained byCity Staff T HIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY - - - - - -- -. . + n.rnta County do not guarantee the accuracy of this information. __ rtsz mso n N - NORTHWOOD OFFICE CONDOS MARICE DRIVE AND SHERMAN COURT EACAN, MINNESOTA PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, REZONING AND PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION SUBMITTAL rge . r..,. ..I .. fl .p..,..,... Or f w.i baRm. u.W1 .. w.. M Zr p r M 1 2 0 EA n c CO E II NORTHWOOD OFFICE CONDOS MARICE DRIVE AND SHERMAN COURT EAC4N MINNESOTA PLANNED DEVELOPMENT. REZONING AND PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION SUBMITTAL et II M ..A4 w At Mr. Amato.. r no. no and ,. d. . ,. 1 I am Gld,� a.11 :: `^ 1.w.. .d. « ..N ..d *3 m a r m4 2 ,.. • ... „ .. I I I 1+T1117,3 NORTHWOOD r., PARKWAY X E F 3 i 3 r 1 F A 7 N$ 5 i Iiirl'Il fifitiVrilligiiiii1/11101 g# E 6 B 0 R R! i ; I! 1 I 1 Ip 4 g P e ; 3 . � 6., 1 E e T. o; € ? €F 3 g g 3 r% " � � I g F l i R g i l i F � � � I R e e e ii g E e ° E e °I 't °t E °E c °t 2 2 °E a k' E 6 p 6 g a tq e¢ qq{{�� of *S,�V pe{[' F y c { , yFp. 9( g� 9 Vs 9 v4 pR S° µ ^! n' FC Fa "5. ^'', RA ?0 °0 � a 66y s � s 4 � { 4� Y� �� f i f NORTHWOOD OFFICE CONDOS PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, REZONING AND PREIJMINARY SUEID1151ON SUBMITTAL MARICE DRIVE AND SNERMAN COURT CAGAN, MINNESOTA Mr wolf, ww - pen, ..NM.l. vm M i�.. er.r Mos °.1. nq wn Nu.or - m a Z mz m —E Z 0 - N..3 I law a r a a tg E 6 a e s a! E C E 42/. 1 s a L , oQ 11P � E!P E/ ! If E! 1 1If1 P i ! gg lip' p � � T Ff f r g? 3 3 3 3 8 3 3 3 1 5 o N s E E !E Ell EE E E E n ad id ?I "d �d ddd 'd 'd q ld EI 11 if � e{ ? R { t NORTHW00D OFFICE CONDOS A AND AN SHCRMAN COURT C � ^� CAGAN. AN, MILAN NINNCS ND (1) PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, REZONING AND PRELIMINARY sUBDIWSION SUBMITTAL 7 rss M a I by mo sr us. ssy N.Nis N I em a dull n/lil.�y p- SN got 61.0.7.50.1• une.. r l... n l» IND Z — ID zz 0 R { t NORTHW00D OFFICE CONDOS A AND AN SHCRMAN COURT C � ^� CAGAN. AN, MILAN NINNCS ND (1) PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, REZONING AND PRELIMINARY sUBDIWSION SUBMITTAL 7 rss M a I by mo sr us. ssy N.Nis N I em a dull n/lil.�y p- SN got 61.0.7.50.1• une.. r l... n l» IND Z — ID zz 0 c gq p gl itiFds VlOG NNIW `NV9V3 391WWO f� 1N31A1dO1 Aga SdOM3WH :Jo} u6isap ID (O cs .,..,, ..,..w., ,y aft M ••• w .Yr p — y r .. /.• ... 1 .... ••■•• ww r ai.*M.r 133HS 1I3A03 1vulnans so1swaans A/04 nd aNv 91NNOZ3tl 'LN3Nd013A30 03NNV1d Y10S)NN111 11P71 LIMO 01137314 ONY 3.LN0 37OIYN SOON00 30(430 QOOMH.WON I 'I3 ;' a C? z O C, Ow a 5 C) z Z W. a C Q L z 0 U 0 J M M H r1 M \ \ \ \ N 0 M Y N Z .- N W 0 Y U U > Z Z O O N W 02 m Z W Z 0 < d ° ' (7, 5 5 0 zzz o- c_ z >: W Z 0 >- W 5 Z Clt < W U , z ad CL 5 W W W 0 to 0 z g 0 0 A. < i ._ s Z 2 a.zcc > . � — U U 7 U W W Q Z J 0 0 0 W W O Z Z W W 0 C.7 W d V1 U U O N 5 5 H 0 N 1 < N 10 n N M V U C) U O U U J J J J LIDUIt - 1,OO2 RC . w 6np' +o1220Y \S1.4S- ulOwoN 220YO.S>iol o.aiSN\iu 010\:d J' Ow.nJp 0,/ M M M M \ \ O N H 10 n m ffl a O N n a. L i O z B o z o X W 6 0 • LOA U , C r z 0 L4 <2. S Ct Storm Sewer Trunk PHOTOMETRIC PLAN — PHOTOMETRIC PLAN — SHEET INDEX 7r77.7=q4 Ntl 2^1 4 : .14.91Wati Mg/ /..1=---x 3 r 1, g '� i1 1 cs .,..,, ..,..w., ,y aft M ••• w .Yr p — y r .. /.• ... 1 .... ••■•• ww r ai.*M.r 133HS 1I3A03 1vulnans so1swaans A/04 nd aNv 91NNOZ3tl 'LN3Nd013A30 03NNV1d Y10S)NN111 11P71 LIMO 01137314 ONY 3.LN0 37OIYN SOON00 30(430 QOOMH.WON I 'I3 ;' a C? z O C, Ow a 5 C) z Z W. a C Q L z 0 U 0 J M M H r1 M \ \ \ \ N 0 M Y N Z .- N W 0 Y U U > Z Z O O N W 02 m Z W Z 0 < d ° ' (7, 5 5 0 zzz o- c_ z >: W Z 0 >- W 5 Z Clt < W U , z ad CL 5 W W W 0 to 0 z g 0 0 A. < i ._ s Z 2 a.zcc > . � — U U 7 U W W Q Z J 0 0 0 W W O Z Z W W 0 C.7 W d V1 U U O N 5 5 H 0 N 1 < N 10 n N M V U C) U O U U J J J J LIDUIt - 1,OO2 RC . w 6np' +o1220Y \S1.4S- ulOwoN 220YO.S>iol o.aiSN\iu 010\:d J' Ow.nJp 0,/ M M M M \ \ O N H 10 n m ffl a O N n a. L i O z B o z o X W 6 0 • LOA U , C r z 0 L4 <2. S Ct Storm Sewer Trunk PHOTOMETRIC PLAN — PHOTOMETRIC PLAN — SHEET INDEX 16.5' TENANT SIGN Reg- - - -.- r•rim^v DA D V - PAGAN. MINNESOTA PYLON SIGN, ALUMINUM CABINET, RETAINERS & POLES WILL BE PAINTED GREEN. CABINET WILL BE BACK LIT. SCALE: 1 /4 " =1 ' -0" DATE: 4.19.04 ALLIANT ENGINEERING 1 IID Minneapolis, MN • 612- 758 -3080 Engineers • Surveyors • Landscope Architects BIRCHWOOD OFFICE PARK OF EAGAN I I r 1- --- I I L J RECEIVED APR 1 9 2004 MONUMENT SIGN urpriTivaxm OFFICE PARK - FAGAN, MINNESOTA LIMESTONE SIGN RECESSED AREA (NOTE: SANDBLASTED LETTERS ARE TO BE PAINTED) PRECAST CAP CULTURED STONE COLUMNS TO MATCH BUILDING CONCRETE FOOTING SCALE: 3/8 " =1' -0" DATE: 4.19.04 ALLIANT ENGINEERING Minneapolis. MN • 612 -758 -3080 Engineers • Surveyors • Landscape Architects TENANT SIGN I Cn7 r _A RTR(11W OD OFFICE PARK - FAGAN, MINNESOTA PRECAST CAP LIMESTONE TENANT SIGN CULTURED STONE COLUMNS TO MATCH BUILDING CONCRETE FOOTING SCALE: 3/8 " =1 ' -0" DATE: 4.19.04 ALLIANT ENGINEERING I N C O R P O R A T E D Minneapolis. MN • 612- 758 -3080 Engineers • Surveyors • Londseape Architects N Op 20 <m• 7Z Ow 0 = p 0 ZV� Z OO J 0 N F VD Wcc O I ! i ti if 11111l L 0 P- a r o; I— W W J. W cc Q 7 Q' U7 N 4 N 1 A 41.10...1 • Q W p Zp 6 W C W O W ti W Z p w >,t4la=la Rl-p p2 Sa m _Z2 m 0 0, .- 1 - 4 =th W Y ¢ =C : W Z ZZY 64¢ Z yF p 44Z ' p W - p 0.10 4 XIC 22 Z F . = S J W WJ W,ZWpm WIC p .1 -V a. FZ W ZC.4p bj Y IyW O 6010~100 JQ W Ilp L W` ,. 4 .... a p W ri b Q p W 2 p j 4 I-0 SWr W Sp mp 4=WIC J W p� SW _ 07 Z p' II ■ 1� _ - LL 1C LL W '�' 2 O 1:;: it% : I- LL lc YU ^ w S p m 2 W WY Q ls ==, O C a C p iG F ,d 6 ¢10 100. RY C. p V V ICCI W 60 W . L ^ �g p WpWpW 0 > ¢ G1p 10 gm3 LL V M. I - . .RQ I-W p 11 1 _Mi JGC3 W iI Northwood Office Condo's Project Narrative Comprehensive Guide Plan designation (existing and proposed) The subject property currently has a Comp Plan designation of SA — Special Area. The proposed development complies with the current Comprehensive Plan. Zoning classification (existing and proposed) The subject property is currently zoned LB- Limited Business. The development plan proposes to rezone to PD- Planned Development in order to allow for the construction of multiple office condos within a larger parent parcel. What you want to do; timing/phasing The project proposes to commence with clearing and grubbing of the subject area upon City Council approval of the Preliminary plat and Development Agreement. A September start date would allow for construction of footing and foundation systems for the units proposed adjacent to the existing wetland and in the northwest corner of the project site. Construction of the remaining units would be market driven, though would most likely be completed within 1 -2 years due to anticipated demands. Existing land uses on subject property The majority of the subject area is primarily undeveloped and heavily wooded. A large wetland area occupies the central portion of the project site and amounts to approximately 1.0 acres. Existing utilities currently traverse through the site and are within an associated easement. No building currently exist on -site. Surrounding land uses and zoning within 660 feet Review of the Comprehensive Land Use plan indicates that the subject area is surrounded entirely by SA- Special Area land use. Review of the Zoning Map indicates the subject area is surrounded by Limited Business to the west, Planned Development to the north and south and State right -of -way to the east. What impact does the rezoning have on surrounding property and land uses? The proposed development plan will impact the adjacent properties in a manner typical of any property being converted from an undeveloped to developed state. City services I7 1,� currently serving the adjacent properties will not be adversely affected due to the projects limited scope, similar zoning and similar density. What impact does the rezoning have on the subject property? Rezoning of the subject property to PD will allow for the construction of multiple office condos atop individual lots all located within a single parent parcel. A secondary lot, identified as Lot 1/ Block 2 on the preliminary plat, will have a dental office and associated parking in compliance with the requested zoning. What impact does the rezoning have on City services, such as sewer, water, stormwater run -off and roads? Sanitary Sewer The proposed development will be served by an existing 8 inch diameter lateral sewer line which runs through the northern portion of the project site. It is not anticipated that the project as proposed will exceed the available capacity of the existing system and will be verified with City Staff prior to final design of the sewer system. Water The proposed development will be served by an existing 8 inch diameter watermain which parallels the sanitary sewer. It is not anticipated that the project as proposed will exceed the available capacity of the existing watermain and will be verified with City Staff prior to final design. Stormwater The current development plan proposes to route storm water captured in common drive areas to a regional retention facility located to the west of the existing wetland area. The pond will outlet into the wetland area, though not exceed criteria specified in the Wetland Conservation Act. Both the wetland area and the pond will ultimately outlet via an existing 24 inch diameter storm pipe located near the central portion of the west property line. All lower building elevations have been provided with three feet of fre -board beyond the 100 year rainfall event in accordance with City requirements. �7� Does the requested land use proposed by the rezoning result in a better use of the land? Explain. The requested land use proposed by the rezoning is compatible with the surrounding properties and in compliance with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. The approval process required for the requested zoning will allow adjacent property owners and residents of the community to input into the design of the project. The project will allow smaller business owners with an opportunity to office in the City of Eagan and own their building space. The rezoning will also allow for the creation of an association responsible for property management and maintenance of common areas. X 73 «/ Agenda Information Memo May 18, 2004 Eagan City Council Meeting , C.. REZONING, PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION (EVERGREEN ENCLAVE) — EPIC DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve a Rezoning of 7.7 acres from A, Agriculture to R -1, Single Family residential for property located at 4195 Lexington Way South. To approve a Preliminary Subdivision (Evergreen Enclave) of 7.7 acres to create 12 lots at property located at 4195 Lexington Way South; subject to the conditions in the APC minutes. To approve a Variance to the front setback on Diffley Road of 0 feet for the existing home and an 18 foot front setback from the private road on Lot 12, Block 1, Evergreen Enclave; subject to the conditions in the APC minutes. To approve a Variance to allow Lots 2 through 6, Lots 9 and 10 without public street frontage; subject to the conditions in the APC minutes. To approve a Variance to allow construction of drives without curb and gutter for Evergreen Enclave Addition; subject to the APC minutes. REQUIRED VOTE FOR APPROVAL • Majority FACTS: • The subject site is heavily wooded and has a ravine that dissects the property in an east/west fashion. • An existing single family home (built in 1964) is present on proposed Lot 12 and will remain with development, two variances apply specifically to this lot/structure. • Storm water runoff is proposed to be accommodated by on -site "low- impact development" which include rain gardens, infiltration basins, and grassy swales. • The rain gardens will be in the side yard yards and will have a conservation easement over them as well as the ravine. • Two sanitary sewer lift stations are proposed, which will be maintained by the City of Eagan. • Proposed Outlot A will be donated as park land, but will not fulfill park land dedication. • A public hearing was held at the April 27, 2004 Advisory Planning Commission and they recommended approval. ISSUES: • Staff has concerns with the existing house being out of character within this development and the number of variances necessary for the home to be preserved. • The hardship for all the variance requests appears to be self - created by the developer. • The City of Eagan does not have a policy in place for "low impact development" and the APC and staff have concerns regarding the effectiveness for frozen grounds conditions, high intensity runoff and the ongoing future maintenance of the rain gardens on private property. UTILITIES • This development proposal requires the installation of two (2) SANITARY SEWER LIFT STATIONS, each serving only 6 single family (SF) homes. Currently, there are only 12 lift stations (LS) throughout the entire City, each serving much larger populations. The City recommends that a minimum population of 15 — 20 SF homes should be served by a single LS. Smaller stations do not operate as efficiently under low flow conditions resulting in a longer sewage collection time to build up to the minimum volume necessary to be efficiently handled by the pumps. This can result in build up of hydrogen sulfide gases, which accelerate the corrosion of the controls and equipment and also requires greater maintenance. • The development is proposing to install RAIN GARDENS (RG) along common lot lines to handle low intensity runoff events (1' - 1' /2 "). While the south private street will be required to connect to the storm sewer in Diffley Rd, the northern private street runoff and RG's will overflow down a steep side hill into the ravine which drains through the Caponi property before it reaches Pond JP -8 in Patrick Eagan Park (1/4 mile northwest). The RG concept, while having its merits, does not seem well suited for this location. Due to the steep topography, the houses will be stepped down along a side hill on each side of the ravine with the RG's being located on side slopes between house foundations, which could cause seepage concerns for the downstream structure. To function efficiently, they require good soil percolation rates, proper vegetation, and constant protection and maintenance from sediment build up (especially during initial development/construction). • This proposal requires the installation of 350' — 400' of DEAD END WATERMAIN in each of the 2 private streets to serve only 6 homes each. Due to the ravine, the water mains will not be looped resulting in low flow usage and the need for greater frequency of flushing by City crews to clear the lines of stagnant water. This high flow flushing at the end of the private street will not have access to a storm drainage system on the northern street and will have to flow unrestricted down a steep hillside into the ravine. • Due to the location of this development adjacent to a steep RAVINE, the increased runoff is expected to create erosion problems in an area extremely difficult to access for repairs. It is approximately 1300' to the nearest water body (JP -8 within Patrick Eagan Park) at an elevation differential of 140'. Although requirements are proposed for some type of "ditch blocks" or increased vegetation to detain the flow, these features will be difficult to maintain, whether performed by the development's Homeowners Association or by the City. STREETS • The streets designed to serve this development do not meet public street standards for width (26' vs. 32'), concrete curb & gutter (none shown on preliminary site plan) and cul -de -sac (none proposed). Subsequently, the developer is proposing them as PRIVATE DRIVES, and they could be built to the City's private street standards. The proliferation of private streets has resulted in Homeowners' Associations, being unable to adequately maintain them for optimum life expectancy. Increasingly, the City has been requested to take their maintenance over in consideration of the same taxes that they pay as property owners located on public streets. 1-75- 120 Agency Action Deadline • July 17 - a waiver to the Rezoning and variances has been signed ATTACHMENTS (2): Advisory Planning Commission Minutes on page l77 —)01 Staff report on pages I> throughaC City of Eagan Advisory Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 27, 2004 Page 5 C. REZONING & PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION — EPIC DEVELOPMENT, LLC A Rezoning of approximately 7.7 acres from A, Agriculture to R -1, Single Family Residential and Preliminary Subdivision (Evergreen Enclave) to create 12 lots, located at 4195 Lexington Way S. in the SE 1 /4 of Section 22. Planner Cartney introduced this item and highlighted the information presented in the City Staff report dated April 22, 2004. She noted the background and history. &:ate Rich Ragatz, Epic Development stated the site is heavily wroodedand needs special considerations during development. He stated two lift stations - .,being installed, along with other efforts to reduce tree loss. He stated maximum allowable density was not met. He stated the Dakota County Plat Commission thought the continued Foccupancy of the existing home would be acceptable with appropriate setbacks. Chair Heyl opened the public hearing. Jane Payfer, attended the meeting in representation of her parents, Floyd & Margaret Rodmyre who reside at: 4145 Lexington Way. She stated concern with the process of development due to the fact that she was not properly notified of the application. She explained that the illustration that she was given to depict the placement of the proposed homes does not give details as to the height of the homes and other dimensional information. She read the letter written by her parents contesting Lot 6, along with other objections including preservation of the particular trees that show the history of the area. Pete Ramstead stated support of the R1 zoning designation. There being no further public comment, Chair Heyl closed the public hearing and turned the discussion back to the Commission. Mr. Ragatz explained the size and styles of the proposed homes. He compared the proposed development to the Waters Edge Development, possibly a little smaller. He explained that the homes would be designed to fit the iots,and an association would manage general maintenance of the development. I 1 7 Assistant Engineer John Gorder stated the Fire Marshall has reviewed and deemed the proposed acceptable. Planner Cartney stated the City Forester will determine which tress may be removed. Chair Heyl stated concern for erosion control for the ravine specifically. She also stated she is skeptical of the rain garden concept in this development. Mr. Ragatz explained that he does not have experience with rain gardens; however they are being extensively researched. He stated the installation of a typical retention pond would consume additional trees. He explained that there is not much more maintenance required for rain gardens verses a retention pond. City of Eagan Advisory Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 27, 2004 Page 6 Ms. Payfer asked for clarification on the variance request for curb and gutters. Mr. Ragatz explained that the lack of curb and gutters is to assist the rain gardens. He stated the roadways would be angled; therefore the runoff would be sheeted towards the gardens. He stated there would be conservation easements over the raingardens and a conservation easement over the ravine. Assistant Engineer John Gorder stated the rain garden concept works if it is built and maintained properly for smaller rains, however larger rains will bypass the gardens. He stated Staffs concern for the larger rains that would in turn collect in the ravine. He suggested measures be required at development that insure the ravine will have assistance with water retention during the larger rains. Member Leeder explained that he visited some rain gardens In Maplewood and is in favor of them in the City of Eagan. He expressed the need for enforcement of condition number 19. Assistant Engineer John Corder stated the rain gardens have been successfully built on larger lots and in the public right -of -ways in other communit e; Chair Hey! stated concerns for erosion, however hopes that e, developers and engineers are capable of developing the property properly. She stated importance of the ensured maintenance of the rain gardens. She explained that if Dakota County approved existing home remaining on the property with the proper right-of-way, she is comfortable with it as well. Member Leeder suggested deleting condition number 12. Member Bendt moved, Member Leeder seconded a motion to recommend approval of a Rezoning of approximately 7.7 acres from A, Agriculture to R -1, Single Family Residential for property located at 4195 Lexington /flay S. in the SE %4 of Section 22. All voted in favor. Motion carriei Member Leeder moved, Member Bendt seconded a motion to recommend approval of a preliminary Subdivision (Evergreen :Enclave) to create 12 single family lots on property located at 4195 Lexington Way Sout subject to the following conditions as amended: 1. The property shall be platted. 2. The Development shall be responsible for a cash trails and park dedication 3. Outlot A shall be dedicated to the City in a form acceptable to the City Attorney. 4. Tree Protective measures (i.e. orange colored silt fence or 4 foot polyethylene laminate safety netting) be installed at the Drip Line or at the perimeter of the Critical Root Zone, whichever is greater, of significant trees /woodlands to be preserved. 5. The applicant contact the City Forestry Division and set up a pre- construction site inspection at least five days prior to the issuance of the grading permit to ensure City of Eagan Advisory Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 27, 2004 Page 7 compliance with the approved Tree Preservation Plan and placement of the Tree Protection Fencing. 6. To meet City water quality requirements, the development should create a series of "rainwater gardens" or "infiltrations basins" to collect and infiltrate stormwater runoff from both streets. Technical designs and details of such structures should be acceptable to and approved by Eagan Water Resources and Engineering staff. 7. A cash dedication in lieu of ponding should be applied to impervious area of the development that contributes stormwater that is not captured in "rainwater gardens" or "infiltrations basins." 8. The developer shall construct sanitary sewer lift stations and force main pipe to serve the development in accordance with City standards. 9. The developer shall construct public storm sewer, and provide utility easements for the same in a form acceptable to the City Attorney in accordance with City Engineering standards, from the southern private street to the existingstorm sewer within Diffley Road. 10. The developer shall construct two lift stations to pump sanitary flows to the existing sanitary sewer. The sanitary sewer lift station and forced pipe should be constructed in accordance with City Public Works standards and public`, easements, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney, shall be provided concerning the subject lift stations and forced main pipe. 11. The developer shall construct measures within the ravine to limit post - development runoff rates of flow off-site to pre - eelopment rates. These measures shall cause minimal disturbance to the area 12. The existing septic nd'welt ystems within the site shall be abandoned in accordance with City and;County standard 1 7q 13. If the development is not granted the variance, the private streets shall be constructed in accordance with Cityngineeringtandards by one of two options: 1) concrete curb & gutter' with a piped stot�i1;:,sewer system, or 2) concrete curb & gutter with curb cuts allowing' discharge to the ain gardens or infiltration basins. 14. The private streets shall be constructed with a vehicle turnaround in accordance with City engineering an Afire apartment standards. 15. The driveway access for the existing house on Lot 12 shall be relocated from Lexington Way to the adjacent private street. 16. The developer shall be responsible for obtaining all necessary permits for work associated with this development within Dakota County right -of -way. 17. The driveway way access to Lots 5 and 6 should be widened to 15 feet at the entrance from the private street along with the driveway to Lot 7 for fire truck access. City of Eagan Advisory Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 27, 2004 Page 8 18. The developer shall provide a declaration establishing the private streets, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney. 19. The developer shall establish a homeowner's association for the maintenance of the private streets, rain gardens and ravine stabilization and provide evidence of the same in a form acceptable to the City Attorney. 20. The developer shall grant the City a conservation easement over the ravine area in a form acceptable to the City Attorney. All voted in favor. Motion carried 4 -0. Member Hansen moved, Member Leeder seconded a motion to recommend approval of a Variance to the front Setback on Diffley Road of 0 feet for the existing home and an 18 foot front setback from the private road on Lot 12, Block 1, Evergreen Enclave subject to the following conditions: 1. If within one year after approval, the variance shall not have been completed or utilized, it shall become null and void unless a petition for extension has been granted by the council. Such extension shall be requested in writing at least 30 days before expiration and shall state facts showing a good faith attempt to complete or utilize the use permitted in the variance. w , 2. The variance shall only apply to the existing building onLot 12, Block 1, Evergreen Enclave. All voted in favor. Motion carried 4-0. All voted in favor. Motion carried 4 -0. Member Leeder moved, Member Bendt seconded a motion to recommend approval of a Varianceto allow construction of drives without curb and gutter for Evergreen Enclave Addition, subject to the following conditions: 1. If within" one year after approval, the variance shall not have been completed or utilized, it shall b null and'void unless a petition for extension has been granted by the council. Such extension s hall'be requested in writing at least 30 days before expiration and shall state facts showin a good faith attempt to complete or utilize the use permitted in the variance. l �b City of Eagan Advisory Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 27, 2004 Page 9 Member Leeder moved, Member Bendt seconded a motion to recommend approval of a Variance to allow lots 2 through 6, lots 9 and 10, without public street frontage, subject to the following conditions: 1. If within one year after approval, the variance shall not have been completed or utilized, it shall become null and void unless a petition for extension has been granted by the council. Such extension shall be requested in writing at least 30 days before expiration and shall state facts showing a good faith attempt to complete or utilize the use permitted in the variance. 2. The variance only applies to Lots 2 through 6, 9 and 1 All voted in favor. Motion carried 4 -0. Mv REPORT DATE: April 22, 2004 CASE: 22- PS- 03 -03 -04 22- EZ- 03 -03 -04 APPLICANT: Rich Ragatz HEARING DATE: April 27, 2004 PROPERTY OWNER: The Krisnik's APPLICATION DATE: March 18, 2004 REQUEST: Rezoning, Preliminary Subdivision PREPARED BY: Sheila Cartney LOCATION: 4195 Lexington Way South COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: LD, Low Density ZONING: A, Agriculture SUMMARY OF REQUEST The applicant requested approval of a Rezoning of 7.62 acres from Agriculture to R -1, Single Family Residential and a Preliminary Subdivision (Evergreen Enclave) to create 12 single family lots at property located at 4195 Lexington Way South, in the SE 1 /4 of Section 22. 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 City Council shall not rezone any land or area in any zoning district or make any other proposed amendment to the zoning ordinance without first having referred it to the planning commission for its consideration and recommendation. PLANNING REPORT CITY OF EAGAN AUTHORITY FOR REVIEW Rezoning: City Code Chapter 11, Section 11.50, Subd. 5 states in part, 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: I go, Planning Report — Evergreen Enclave April 27, 2004 Page 2 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 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." I73 Planning Report — Evergreen Enclave April 27, 2004 Page 3 BACKGROUND/HISTORY The site is a legal tax parcel that is not platted. The site contains 7.6 acres. EXISTING CONDITIONS The site is heavily wooded and is split with a steep ravine running east -west draining through the Caponi Art Park into Patrick Eagan Park. There is a single family home, built in 1968, located on the southeast corner of the lot and a detached accessory structure on the northeast corner of the lot. Access is via Lexington Way, each structure has a separate entrance from Lexington Way. The house is currently connected to City sewer and water. SURROUNDING USES The following existing uses, zoning, and comprehensive guide plan designations surround the subject property: EVALUATION OF REQUEST Staff is concerned that the preservation of the existing home will be out of character with the new homes. Preserving the existing home requires variances to hardships that are created by the developer. Compatibility with Surrounding Area — The property to the north is zoned R -1, single family residential. The property to the south is parkland and the proposed town home development of Lexington Ridge. Rezoning the property to R -1, single family residential would be consistent with the zoning and development of the west side of Lexington Way. The proposed use is consistent with the Land Use Designation of Low Density 0 -4 units /acre. Airport Noise Considerations — The subject site does not fall within an airport noise area. Existing Use Zoning Land Use Designation North Single Family Residential R -1, Single family residential LD, Low Density South Lexington/Diffley Athletic fields/ Lexington Ridge P, Park/ PD, Planned Development P, Park/LD, Low Density East . Commercial /retail PD, Planned Development RC, Retail Commercial West Park P, Park P, Park Planning Report — Evergreen Enclave April 27, 2004 Page 3 BACKGROUND/HISTORY The site is a legal tax parcel that is not platted. The site contains 7.6 acres. EXISTING CONDITIONS The site is heavily wooded and is split with a steep ravine running east -west draining through the Caponi Art Park into Patrick Eagan Park. There is a single family home, built in 1968, located on the southeast corner of the lot and a detached accessory structure on the northeast corner of the lot. Access is via Lexington Way, each structure has a separate entrance from Lexington Way. The house is currently connected to City sewer and water. SURROUNDING USES The following existing uses, zoning, and comprehensive guide plan designations surround the subject property: EVALUATION OF REQUEST Staff is concerned that the preservation of the existing home will be out of character with the new homes. Preserving the existing home requires variances to hardships that are created by the developer. Compatibility with Surrounding Area — The property to the north is zoned R -1, single family residential. The property to the south is parkland and the proposed town home development of Lexington Ridge. Rezoning the property to R -1, single family residential would be consistent with the zoning and development of the west side of Lexington Way. The proposed use is consistent with the Land Use Designation of Low Density 0 -4 units /acre. Airport Noise Considerations — The subject site does not fall within an airport noise area. Planning Report — Evergreen Enclave April 27, 2004 Page 4 Density — The proposed development has a net area of 6.24 acres. The proposal is for development of 12 single family lots, the net density is 1.98 units /acre. The proposed density is consistent with the guide plan of 0 -4 units /acre. Lots — The lots range from12,563 square feet to 27,133 square feet. The minimum lot size in an R -1 development is 12,000 square feet all 12 lots comply with this minimum standard. The existing house is proposed to stay on Lot 12, with a 0 foot building setback off Diffley Road right -of -way if the County approves a variance from the right -of -way dedication requirement. The proposed 0 foot setback also requires a variance from City setback requirements. The applicant did not provide a hardship for this request. The existing house was built in 1968, staff has some concerns with the existing house being out of character within this development, in addition by keeping the house there is a need for setback variances from Diffley Road, the proposed private road and a deviation from the County right -of- way dedication standards. The applicant indicated the current home owners will not be residing at the existing home. Outlot A will be dedicated as park property. The code also requires that each lot have a minimum of 50 feet of public street frontage. Because proposed lots 2 -6, 9 and 10 do not have any public street frontage, a variance is necessary to allow lots without public street frontage. Setbacks — All R -1 setbacks are proposed to be met with this development, with the exception of Lot 12. Lot 12 proposes to have a 0 foot setback from Diffley Road where a 50 foot setback is required, and an 18 foot setback from the private Road where a 20 foot setback is required. The proposed 0 foot setback requires a variance. A front setback of 20 feet is proposed, the roads are private dead end roads (with turnarounds in lieu of cul -de -sacs, which allow for a 20 foot setback. The principal structure side yard setback is 10 feet and rear yard setback of 15 feet. Any accessory structure side yard and rear yard setback is five feet. Building Coverage — The City Code limits overall building coverage in an R -1 district to 20 percent. All of the proposed lots should easily comply with this standard. Grading — The site is heavily wooded with steep topography in areas, with elevations ranging from 980 to 900. The areas of steep topography include the existing ravine that extends through the middle of the site from east to west. Due to the steep topography, City staff is concerned about the ability to maintain adequate temporary and permanent erosion control measures with development. The developer should be responsible for installing and maintaining erosion control measures in accordance with City engineering standards. The development is subject to the City's codified land disturbance and erosion control regulations. Storm Drainage — Storm water runoff is proposed by the developer to be accommodated by on- site "low- impact development" measures in an attempt to eliminate the traditional storm sewer piping that may concentrate the runoff to the ravine area, causing erosion problems. The low lgs Planning Report — Evergreen Enclave April 27, 2004 Page 5._ impact options proposed to reduce storm water runoff from this development include rain water gardens, infiltration basins, and grassy swales. These options create low areas within the development that are designed to hold and slowly infiltrate runoff, but their efficiency is highly dependent upon the site's soil type, detention time and the proper on -going maintenance such as sediment removal and vegetation preservation. These features are generally not utilized within a typical suburban development, the City of Eagan does not currently have a policy in place, and staff has concerns regarding their effectiveness and future maintenance assurance. The staff has concerns that high intensity runoff will not infiltrate as designed and will discharge to the ravine area of the site, potentially causing significant erosion. This development proposes to construct a series of rain water gardens, approximately 1 to 3 feet deep, along the street edges and between houses to capture runoff and allow it to infiltrate. Information has not been provided as to how they would be maintained in the future to ensure their effectiveness. If the development is approved with low- impact storm drainage options, the design, construction and provisions for future maintenance should be reviewed and approved by City staff. To divert storm water runoff from the southern private street away from the ravine area, the developer should construct public storm sewer, in accordance with City engineering standards, from the private street to existing storm sewer within Diffley Road. To reduce the potential for downstream erosion, the developer should construct measures within the ravine to limit post - development runoff rates of flow off -site to pre- development rates. These measures should cause minimal disturbance to the ravine, and may include periodic rock checkdams and vegetation plantings within the ravine. Utilities — A sanitary sewer pipe of sufficient size and capacity is available along the east edge of the site within Lexington Way right -of -way. The depth of the sanitary sewer stub is not sufficient to accommodate gravity flow to any of the basement levels of the proposed houses. In order to accommodate the sanitary flow of the proposed development and to reduce any construction disturbance to the ravine area of the site, the developer will be required to construct two lift stations to pump sanitary flows to the existing sanitary sewer. The developer should construct sanitary sewer lift stations and force main pipe to serve the development in accordance with City public works' standards. The developer shall provide public utility easements, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney, concerning the subject lift stations and forced main pipe. An existing water main stub is available along the east edge of the site for connection and extension of two individual water mains down each private street. They will not be looped into the development to avoid construction disturbance of the ravine. Streets/ Access/ Circulation — The developer is proposing two 26 -foot wide private streets from Lexington Way to serve all proposed properties. Pursuant to City Code 13.20, subd. 9, the City, as a general rule, does not permit landlocked parcels or parcels that are served only with private easements. The drives are proposed to be constructed without curb & gutter, allowing for the un- concentrated flow of runoff to the low - impact development rain water gardens, or infiltration basins, before discharging to the ravine area. Constructing drives without curb & gutter requires a Planning Report — Evergreen Enclave April 27, 2004 Page 6 variance from the City Code. If the variance is not granted, the drives should be constructed in accordance with City engineering standards by one of two options: 1) concrete curb & gutter with a piped storm sewer system, or 2) concrete curb & gutter with curb cuts allowing discharge to the rain water gardens or infiltration basins. The private drives should be constructed with a vehicle turnaround in accordance with City engineering and fire department standards. The driveway way access to Lots 5 and 6 should be widened to 15 feet at the entrance from the private street along with the driveway to Lot 7 for fire truck access. The driveway access for the existing house on Lot 12 should be relocated from Lexington Way to the adjacent private street. The developer shall provide evidence of a declaration establishing the private streets, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney. The developer shall also establish a Homeowner's Association for the maintenance of these private streets and provide documentation of such Homeowner's Association in a form acceptable to the City Attorney. Easements/ Permits / Right -of -Way — The proposed development is adjacent to Diffley Road (County Road 30), and therefore, subject to Dakota County plat ordinances. County right -of -way dedication guidelines indicate that the development is required to dedicate a total of 75 feet of one -half public road right -of -way for the future expansion of Diffley Road. The dedication of 75 feet of right -of -way will cause the existing house on Lot 12 to be approximately 5 feet into the right -of -way. The developer is proposing a dedication of 70 feet of right -of -way along Diffley Road. This deviation from the right -of -way guidelines will require a variance from Dakota County. If the variance is not granted, the County will not record the plat as presented. The developer should be responsible for obtaining all necessary permits for work associated with this development within Dakota County right -of -way. Water Quality /Wetlands - For this development, it is proposed to construct a series of rain water gardens, approximately 1 to 3 feet deep, along the street edges and between houses to capture runoff and allow it to infiltrate. Information has not been provided as to how they would be maintained in the future to ensure their effectiveness. If the development is approved with low - impact storm drainage options, their design, construction and provisions for future maintenance should be reviewed and approved by City staff. This proposed 7.6 -acre single - family subdivision is located in the City's J- watershed. Stormwater generated by the development will drain to the west toward Patrick Eagan Park. Because of the size and location of the parcel, this project is subject to City water quality requirements. A stormwater treatment pond with a minimum volume of 0.3 acre -feet covering a minimum area of 0.2 acres is required. Originally, the developer was proposing to route stormwater from both proposed streets to the very steep ravine that traverses the parcel from east to west. With this strategy, storm pipes would have to be buried very deep (via a wide trench) to reach the bottom of the ravine, and ley Planning Report — Evergreen Enclave April 27, 2004 Page 7 would have delivered stormwater to a retention area that would have to be created by damming the natural ravine. Construction of this infrastructure would have been extremely disruptive to the site, its trees and steep slopes. The likelihood of significant erosion and tree impacts with this strategy appears to be quite high. Thus, on -site stormwater treatment is not practical here. However, there is a relatively unique opportunity to explore uncommon strategies to address stormwater runoff. After consultation with City Water Resources, Forestry, and Engineering staff, the developer is now proposing to create a series of low -lying "rainwater gardens" or "infiltrations basins" between homes to collect and infiltrate stormwater runoff from both streets. The idea is to separate versus consolidate stormwater runoff —which more closely mimics natural watershed properties —and to significantly reduce runoff from a "design storm" that typically requires construction of a stormwater treatment pond. Technical designs and details of this proposal would need to be acceptable to and approved by Eagan Water Resources and Engineering staff. As is standard practice, the City requires a cash dedication in lieu of ponding for stormwater that drains off -site untreated. In this case, stormwater from impervious area of the parcel that is not captured in the "rainwater gardens" or "infiltrations basins" would be subject to a cash dedication. There are no jurisdictional wetlands associated with development of this site. Tree Preservation - A tree inventory submitted with this application indicates that there are eight hundred thirty seven (837) significant trees in the inventory. The development as proposed will result in the removal of two hundred fifty nine (259) significant trees (30.9 % of the total). According to the City of Eagan Tree Preservation Ordinance allowable tree removal for this type of development proposal (single- phase, single -unit residential) is set at 40% of the total significant trees. With a proposed removal less than the allowable amount, tree mitigation is not required for this proposal. Parks and Recreation - The proposed development is located immediately adjacent to the "Caponi East 10" parcel and across the road from Lexington - Diffley and Goat Hill Parks The current owner, Tony Caponi, has offered to sell the 10 acre parcel to the City. The Caponi parcel is located immediately adjacent to Patrick Eagan Park. The City Council previously approved the allocation of $720,000 from the Park Site Fund to go towards the acquisition of the parcel for the purpose of its preservation and potential to enhance Patrick Eagan Park. The City, in collaboration with the Trust For Public Land, recently applied for State grant funding to make up the difference between the purchase price and the approved City allocation. The westerly portion of the development site is heavily wooded and has much of the same character of the Caponi parcel. The topography of the site would greatly inhibit the development of any recreational facility or amenity. Residents of the new development would be well served by the existing park facilities located only across the road. For purposes of preservation and /eV Planning Report — Evergreen Enclave April 27, 2004 Page 8 buffering staff originally suggested to the Developer that a Park Dedication consisting of 10% (.76 acres) be made along the west boundary of the site. The Developer has since suggested that the Park Dedication be made in cash in lieu of a land dedication, however, the Developer would simultaneously donate approximately 1.39 acres of land to the City (outlot A) for park purposes. Outlot A is located along the west boundary of the site and encompasses the area originally proposed for dedication. The Development shall be responsible for a cash trails and park dedication. Homeowner's Association — Because of the private roads a Homeowner's Association is necessary for maintenance purposes. The development proposes to have rain gardens throughout the development; the association should be responsible for these gardens as well. The combination of private roads, rain garden drainage features and ravine erosion control will result in a large and non - typical maintenance burden to these 12 properties. Advisory Park and Recreation Commission — The APrC heard this development item on April 19, 2004 and recommended approval of the Preliminary Subdivision. SUMMARY /CONCLUSION The proposal is to rezone the property from Agriculture to R -1, Single Family Residential and a Preliminary Subdivision to create 12 single family lots with a density of 1.98 units /acre. The lots will be served by private streets via Lexington Way. In order to approve this proposal, four variances are necessary: Diffley Road right -of -way dedication, no public street frontage, no curb and gutter, and the setbacks from Diffley and the private street for the existing house. The developer has not provided any hardship for these variances. Other than the variances stated above, the lots comply with R -1 standards. The existing home is planned to remain on Lot 12, staff has concerns with the existing house being out of character within this development and the number of variances necessary for the home to be preserved. The hardship for the variance appears self - created by the developer. The site is heavily wooded and has a ravine that dissects the property in an east/west fashion. Storm water runoff is proposed to be accommodated by on -site "low- impact development" measures in an attempt to eliminate the traditional storm sewer piping that may concentrate the runoff to the ravine area, causing erosion problems. Low impact options exist to reduce storm water runoff from a development area, including rain water gardens, infiltration basins, and grassy swales. These features are generally not utilized within a typical suburban development, on a steep side hill. The City of Eagan does not have a policy in place, and staff has concerns regarding their effectiveness for frozen ground conditions, high intensity runoff and future maintenance. If they are not properly built or maintained, runoff will not infiltrate as designed and will discharge to the ravine area of the site, potentially causing significant erosion. Planning Report — Evergreen Enclave April 27, 2004 Page 9 ._ The developer should construct sanitary sewer lift stations and force main pipe to serve the development in accordance with City public works' standards. County right -of -way dedication guidelines indicate that the development is required to dedicate a total of 75 feet of one -half public road right -of -way for the future expansion of Diffley Road. The dedication of 75 feet of right -of -way will cause the existing house on Lot 12 to be approximately 5 feet into the right -of- way. The developer is proposing a dedication of 70 feet of right -of -way along Diffley Road. This deviation from the right -of -way guidelines will require a variance from Dakota County. If the variance is not granted, the County will not record the plat as presented. Outlot A will be donated as park land, but will not fulfill the park land dedication. The proposed tree removal is 30.9 percent the code allows up to 40 percent removal; therefore, tree mitigation is not necessary. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED To recommend approval of a Rezoning of 7.62 acres from Agriculture to R -1, Single Family residential for property located at 4195 Lexington Way South. To recommend approval of a Preliminary Subdivision (Evergreen Enclave) to create 12 single family lots on property located at 4195 Lexington Way South. If approved, the following conditions should apply. The developer shall comply with these standards conditions of plat approval as adopted by Council on February 2, 1993: Al, Bl, 2, 3, Cl, 2, Dland El 1. The property shall be platted. 2. The Development shall be responsible for a cash trails and park dedication 3. Outlot A shall be dedicated to the City in a form acceptable to the City Attorney. 4. Tree Protective measures (i.e. orange colored silt fence or 4 foot polyethylene laminate safety netting) be installed at the Drip Line or at the perimeter of the Critical Root Zone, whichever is greater, of significant trees /woodlands to be preserved. 5. The applicant contact the City Forestry Division and set up a pre - construction site inspection at least five days prior to the issuance of the grading permit to ensure compliance with the approved Tree Preservation Plan and placement of the Tree Protection Fencing. 6. To meet City water quality requirements, the development should create a series of "rainwater gardens" or "infiltrations basins" to collect and infiltrate stormwater runoff from both streets. Technical designs and details of such structures should be acceptable to and approved by Eagan Water Resources and Engineering staff. 7. A cash dedication in lieu of ponding should be applied to impervious area of the development that contributes stormwater that is not captured in "rainwater gardens" or "infiltrations basins." 8. The developer shall construct sanitary sewer lift stations and force main pipe to serve the development in accordance with City standards. Planning Report — Evergreen Enclave April 27, 2004 Page 10 9. The developer shall construct public storm sewer, and provide utility easements for the same in a form acceptable to the City Attorney, in accordance with City Engineering standards, from the southern private street to the existing storm sewer within Diffley Road. 10. The developer shall construct two lift stations to pump sanitary flows to the existing sanitary sewer. The sanitary sewer lift station and forced main pipe should be constructed in accordance with City Public Works standards and public utility easements, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney, shall be provided concerning the subject lift stations and forced main pipe. 11. The developer shall construct measures within the ravine to limit post - development runoff rates of flow off -site to pre- development rates. These measures shall cause minimal disturbance to the ravine area. 12. The existing septic and well systems within the site shall be abandoned in accordance with City and County standards. 13. If the development is not granted the variance, the private streets shall be constructed in accordance with City engineering standards by one of two options: 1) concrete curb & gutter with a piped storm sewer system, or 2) concrete curb & gutter with curb cuts allowing discharge to the rain gardens or infiltration basins. 14. The private streets shall be constructed with a vehicle turnaround in accordance with City engineering and fire department standards. 15. The driveway access for the existing house on Lot 12 shall be relocated from Lexington Way to the adjacent private street. 16. The developer shall be responsible for obtaining all necessary permits for work associated with this development within Dakota County right -of -way. 17. The driveway way access to Lots 5 and 6 should be widened to 15 feet at the entrance from the private street along with the driveway to Lot 7 for fire truck access. 18. The developer shall provide a declaration establishing the private streets, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney. 19. The developer shall establish a homeowner's association for the maintenance of the private streets, rain gardens and ravine stabilization and provide evidence of the same in a form acceptable to the City Attorney. To recommend Approval of a Variance to the front setback on Diffley Road of 0 feet for the existing home and an 18 foot front setback from the private road on Lot 12, Block 1, Evergreen Enclave, if approved the following conditions shall apply: 1. If within one year after approval, the variance shall not have been completed or utilized, it shall become null and void unless a petition for extension has been granted by the council. Such extension shall be requested in writing at least 30 days before expiration and shall state facts showing a good faith attempt to complete or utilize the use permitted in the variance. 2. The variance shall only apply to the existing building on Lot 12, Block 1, Evergreen Enclave. To recommend Approval of a Variance to allow construction of drives without curb and gutter for Evergreen Enclave Addition, if approved the following conditions apply: Planning Report — Evergreen Enclave April 27, 2004 Page 11 1. If within one year after approval, the variance shall not have been completed or utilized, it shall become null and void unless a petition for extension has been granted by the council. Such extension shall be requested in writing at least 30 days before expiration and shall state facts showing a good faith attempt to complete or utilize the use permitted in the variance. To recommend Approval of a Variance to allow lots 2 through 6, lots 9 and 10, without public street frontage, if approved the following conditions apply: 1. If within one year after approval, the variance shall not have been completed or utilized, it shall become null and void unless a petition for extension has been granted by the council. Such extension shall be requested in writing at least 30 days before expiration and shall state facts showing a good faith attempt to complete or utilize the use permitted in the variance. 2. The variance only applies to Lots 2 through 6, 9 and 10. 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 -Wav 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 volume requirements. C. Plans and Specifications STANDARD CONDITIONS OF PLAT APPROVAL 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. 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 Dedication G. Water Quality Dedication 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 Revised: February 2, 1993 LTS#5 STANDARD.CON 1. This development shall fulfill its park and trail dedication requirements as recommended by the Advisory Parks, Recreation and Natural Resource Commission and approved by Council action. 1. This development shall be responsible for providing a cash dedication, pending, or a combination thereof in accordance with the criteria identified in the City's Water Quality Management Plan, as recommended by the Advisory Parks, Recreation and Natural Resource Commission and approved by Council action. FINANCIAL OBLIGATION - Preliminary Subdivision- Evergreen Enclave There are pay -off balances of special assessments totaling $ -0- on the parcels proposed for subdivision. At this time, there are no pending assessments on the property for which the subdivision is requested. 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. IMPROVEMENT USE RATE QUANTITY AMOUNT Sanitary Sewer Trunk S.F. $7,468 Water Lateral S.F. 24.85/F.F. 490 F.F. 12,176 Water Trunk S.F. 7,717 $27,361 a 0 tOty 0 f 0 Er, e-MII' Alp" .g run ®�i" mph 'CGJ.. En.laserue��s.11is® N.i ram sum Ito illom w- EMI .Mel MUM �® RaE omom mr�� rU l lowly. aim i 14 ) O r r® � �GP° v4 - 4,44 atilraW 'uila u►� o . �t 4--' b9 mr A u ' ua`►l o iV E ;Ea 9+ @UGC ° Lir IOW t: Lama LMI r aw Marl aw ris Subject Site If►�o ®,ruin fa jig ` , e] � I& ■n Ls e2 ask ��® w` I&■ LLA �:ig o rtear � 4� � q u a ® a� r, :qp. o �►� YA La7 t]sfJ® ssi tli a ra �.. ■, �._® � ®gi ®® I :en la cz i . ix1 111D MN 3 0, 61 EN 28 P likiallpro mi L n $ n tti 4 % , C1 CitkearimeGII ?bilk Illt EA Nis t PliCatpAti corni cam ma CAM LIU ®n OHM i 1r311141 tz rtroltiPzi \\ j= 0' ra 4 C fl GLICS GGC LuCEEdLC f3 C S1G:Nr7 C �C�] C I iiim stm ' ra 005:5M 5250 seam P ACM t L'G'7I' '�i. k d 4 d ^ a c ®c��c w GP 0 f? d C 0 ralIM PARKWAY er , 4 ,0,9 4 teo htt?tirita 1 a� 11 1411! ,;;Nziour •., vip its ooti illor t..4, orai s10 esemomos GGGEEIMMG C Od * VOA MINN ow *KR... 1000 0 1000 2000 Feet Development/Developer: Evergreen Enclave Application: Prelim Subdivision Case No.: Case No. 22- PS- 03 -03 -04 city of aagan Map Prepared using ERSI ArcVtew 3.1. Parcel base map data provided by Dakota County Office of GIS and is current as of January 2004. THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY The City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this information and are not responsible for errors or omissions. W�E Location Map Eagan Boundary Street Centerline Parcel Area Building Footprint Current Zoning and Comprehensive Guide Plan Land Use Map City of Eagan /lonartrnent ('7 Prcel bse mp infomation providedby Dkota Conty Land Srvey Deprtmrt Jue 2003. 2. Zoning information maintained byCity Staff. THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY Ts ^ 2 of Fa non and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this information. Evergreen Enclave Case No. 22- PS- 03 -03 -04 Zoning Map LD N_-_9 R_, o PF all P c`_' o It P 9 110 PD y � PF R -1 RC Current Zoning: A Agriculture 1 Current Land Use Designation: LD Low Density Residential 0 -4u /a A PD PF LD U .uiii P � 600 0 000 1200 Feat . a di in1 t WNW D/S v. Iragli P R -1 P U I lit II P a e ��II P ao �i,P . Current Zoning and Comprehensive Guide Plan Land Use Map City of Eagan /lonartrnent ('7 Prcel bse mp infomation providedby Dkota Conty Land Srvey Deprtmrt Jue 2003. 2. Zoning information maintained byCity Staff. THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY Ts ^ 2 of Fa non and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this information. Evergreen Enclave Case No. 22- PS- 03 -03 -04 Comprehensive Guide Plan Land Use Map LD l P c`_' 1 <� iO HD QP A LD RC UP 1 Current Land Use Designation: LD Low Density Residential 0 -4u /a LD U .uiii P � 600 0 600 120D Fsat . a di in1 t WNW D/S v. Iragli ' IIII P 1 1110 1, I L /J, J Current Zoning and Comprehensive Guide Plan Land Use Map City of Eagan /lonartrnent ('7 Prcel bse mp infomation providedby Dkota Conty Land Srvey Deprtmrt Jue 2003. 2. Zoning information maintained byCity Staff. THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY Ts ^ 2 of Fa non and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this information. Evergreen Enclave Case No. 22- PS- 03 -03 -04 a I - r'I i ii i eli I ' 1 �.6, T fr ( _ .�. -,+., r .� i I I I •I 1 1 J F a I L �! It i L I i k kn. II I I I II Ir I I 0 0 I I I 1 1 �I : r ; SS SS R" I I r- --1 / I I ( I / / I I I1I I I I 1 I' / . r — ter .- - - - � \ o — — �_ c •. 5 :cr•. 1 • '1SIX3 1 � /� 4 t. 1 1 I /// / / „ .''' // J / // / // /// • I 4 / / / / e \ ``\ I I I I I r / _ l / ,/ / ,/ , / / / / / , t '� / / / I / / / \,r , hJ / /, ; / \\ 4 2 ' Sri , r Ir/ /ll / 1� / l l , / 0 { . 44 \ � *04 / ' / i l' 44 / I I I / 5 ,',/ = I'r . ( s J. R / / Sc . a� "°l !1, ���...I • Fr w.0 Wa 4w agns, , Pim —�L .. . •'1 '1 '1'1 + ... .: :: : 0PCuC /4 ,. NIYN231YM 4:11 .-501 (,4) a1 MO-OW at.) Ix. M 4443 41 ,q n W Mt ASSLANIT 001/72.010 SM.,/ ON/)70:7H N(YYI IF— Mii.w 75 _ " 9 - 51X3 - -- �' r — f ._ r1 \\ f 0 I J T - -- , { jI II 11 1 II iI� III II I •d'1'O .OZ 'W1,41(3173 .*+a .^ "41 WPC ).111 377 NZ '1NdOT7d70 .214Z v. 17775 .SWOLLMW0.1 3N725727 Z4TTON7 Nr^31(Y5d7 TAN OM J � \. l \a \'1� b 1 11 1 x i I S w w I I RI'S11 :- a . a a/aUte MOO ■••••••• •••• • 4. 1 MI M. 00 .160. 4. .0 .0 H. km* ■00.1.02 00110-00, OM . 00.0-00 CM) 0 .04 CMG 001.05.• .01 SOOS 0.3102, .0.0.000 01.0020 01111770.7H IaV 1.0 1000 317 :LAWG/0721.747 O1d7 00.4.0 .tru .01170141731(dAIZZZSEM400 £4973N1 NI1710ViAS It 11 - -12. Noolnyn. r s. &mound_ E 6 Ara AVO.LOALDCZT ‚ 3 1 • I 's 1 1 1 147.2. 0041 144.13 aWtW 111.111.0.0011 7t'41, 010:00 0_01..,001 ss ..,- --- - \ / ' a -- ., .. ...-- \ r ;-.\ — ,.. \\ 1 \ . ,..-. , .g• \ t I \ . 00'M 4.10.1.1.0011 ( I 1 I I I I L _1 — — — — — — I r 1 1 1 A N r 1 f 1 1 1 I .. •.-', 1 i I L _____ ---r-1-1-1 l i cP. .........-. 00 3 ...... I ; I I I I I : I I :i I I J__ 51 -, r 31 1 I 1 F. I 11 I o ..a i I o I ,%-" 1 I i r ___ ___, ‘ ..3.0....\ 0.00.0.... IN.......0 ..... i 0,00 ... I I I i . . ▪ ..04.r.n.......1 ▪ A.. y7, 19q lea awn .,a.....,.. ,t •. J ztr Anl.•1•15 fq M . tr. • ••• VI I.y ,_ .a,.a.m I j SIN s ,a te, sass M +W3 m1101/n a �a ON 170,7N MN .i I .• r∎ 1.4 r u .n7 K 'lN3Xd073d3Q JId3 IOW 8.L7S 1.4172N3 N338o83,15 TM CPR .1 Iwo my d rr lto. mx37 1« h : It e • J I r r If ; 1 15 if jt Q00 II 11 1 .1 11 I I I I I I I II f I a� a .....- ,n+�n..w —.n r..nr■••••••• V.= 3.8 Alp .4 .■■•••■ 1:1110.601 •1 1 MI - .III . 1...16.11 = A•• • ••• •••• ine =.1 aloWatal.103 ,::- HE)! . I 1101•1-0.70 (l51) 00 (IS) •••••• w• ••••,, .4.0 md Sate Sroaairma wow", 171110703H Qc. 9 *kr -acc W •s•If 1.1.3 Wye 777 7.411270(07,74.7N MJ Lu an.aut NY7d ON70710 LITIJNZ mazarawas 13.6 I I I I • • / % e', ••••:`, „ , ---,\ , , reel • t 141,1* Vi , ' \\ -\ /I II r-t .4‘ r 4"411 W 1 .4 4 2 41 -Ar i d i r ) .1-- , „ , / „ „ .„- „ „ _ , „ „ _ , - , , „ — II I I . I I I I I 1° w•m bourfli .,..� .� 1....11 L m 411.. .4 i .W. -sat (WO .141 ON/7703H .. m..aul II 1 \_ I I — y .,..s ft...m+r..mor e .w U.6 .717 waxdo�adaQ orda Nrrd 7O211NO3 MOfSONa a4YTJNZ N23011342 St. Ms Y, / / 111 1 ;1I I I ' Ovt I t 1 �gk-!e•Fa ` r j j 11 \ \ \ I 1 \1 ! / 1 Q I tl 0t T. .1{2.31 fir .Anw .M.1 rrf,- flIa,+n a sale r .r 0 4 m Al c Wv tt �Irr- !� iMl• •r . r, - ^4w w �s+ assn al 33 ..•• 707 -I m: at aar saya a mes •• ■-ws ON 17707N ...] -s- VI:: a D3 e rarer. WS MO, 3 LNzXdo'I 7 u 7 anaig N=71 72IS 7dT7]N7 N77777774.7 „•. �7. = m = == == = == i 2707 MILIM277 U w • aa3 =m I MP ■ - h AC 0 MIMS J n r c I 'N rI 1 I s II 0 II 0 It 0 II II II II 0 e0 PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION SUBMITTAL Preliminary Subdivision Plan: 1. Proposed subdivision name is Evergreen Enclave, vicinity map see attached map for details. Owner: Joseph & Yvonne Krisnik 4195 Lexington Way South Eagan, MN 55123 (651) 454 -6418 Developer: Rich Ragatz EPIC Development, LLC 3441 St. Paul Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55416 (612) 730 -2814 Surveyor/ Engineer: Randy Hedlund Hedlund Engineering 2005 Pin Oak Drive Eagan, MN 55122 (952) 203-6610 Contact Person: Rich Ragatz Epic Development, LLC 3441 St. Paul Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55416 (612) 730 -2814 Preparation Date: March 17, 2004 This is a preliminary subdivision application for Evergreen Enclave. The layout is comprised of 12 single - family residential lots (one lot will have the existing house). The only variances that I am asking for are the front yard setback of 20 feet (in order to save as many mature trees as possible) and the side yard setback (house side), for the existing house. One foot of the house will be in the future deeded right -of -way for Diffley Road and 10 feet of the house will be in the setback area. All of the lots meet the frontage width minimum of 85 feet and the minimum lot size of 12,000 square feet. As part of this development, I will be donating 1.20 acres to the City for additional parkland. In addition, a conservation easement will be placed over the ravine area behind the homes in order to preserve the significant trees. I have tried to be sensitive to the significant trees and topography by single loading the roads, using retaining walls to push the roads away from the ravine and trees, and using the ravine as a natural drainage area. C : krisnikprelimsubdiveagan. v l aa+ 2. See plan for benchmark, proposed subdivision boundary line is the entire site; see plan for lot boundaries, and 12 low density single family lots are proposed. See preliminary subdivision plan for details. 3. The site is comprised of one tax parcel. See site survey for dimensions. The site will consist of two private roads that cul -de -sac with 6 lots along each road. The roads are private and single loaded in order to preserve as many trees as possible. 4. Black Cherry Court is the proposed name of the southerly private road and White Oak Way is the northerly private road. Both are proposed to be 22 feet face to face with 60 -foot cul -de -sacs. 5. The site has the typical water, sewer, and electrical easements along Diffley and Lexington Way South. In addition, Dakota County is going to take 70 feet from the centerline as right -of -way. 6. Even though I am dedicating land for a City park, I plan on making a cash payment anyways. The City prefers this, and I can get a tax right off from the federal government. 7. The minimum building setback lines will be: 20 foot front yard, 10 foot side yard (house side), 5 foot side yard (garage side), and 15 foot rear yard. The width at minimum front yard setback will be 85 feet. The front yard setback is less than the typical 30 -foot setback, however, I am doing this to save as many of the mature trees as possible. Subdivision summary: Lot 1 16,784 square feet Lot 2 16,463 square feet Lot 3 17,706 square feet Lot 4 18,950 square feet Lot 5 12,354 square feet Lot 6 20,971 square feet Lot 7 27,342 square feet Lot 8 21,132 square feet Lot 9 16,174 square feet Lot 10 15,457 square feet Lot 11 14,422 square feet Lot 12 13,800 square feet (existing house) Average: 17,630 square feet High: 27,342 square feet Low: 12,354 square feet 9. Right -of -Way area will be 50 feet along Lexington Way South and 70 feet along Diffley Road. The ponding area will the natural ravine with a bermed portion with a pond outlet skimmer for rate control. See Drainage Plan for details. The parkland area will be along the western portion of the site. C: krisnikprelimsubdiveagan. v 1 aCt5 /), Existing Conditions Plan: 1. The subject site does not currently have any streets, however, access is available off of Lexington Way South (two curb cuts). 2. The site is encumbered with the typical public easements such as: water, sewer, and electrical. 3. The site is currently a single - family home on a heavily wooded. The existing home will remain. 4. The site is heavily wooded. See Existing Conditions Plan and legend for details. 5. The site does not have any water bodies or wetlands within close proximity. Preliminary Site Layout: 1. Boundary lines of property with dimensions and area are on the Preliminary Site Layout. 2. Minimum building setbacks are all per the code, except for the front yard setback is 20 feet that has been reduced to save more mature trees. See Preliminary Site Layout for details. 3. The site is a proposed low density single - family development comprised of 12 high quality single - family homes with finished square footages of 2,500 square feet or more. 4. There are no on -site streets. Lexington Way South is adjacent to the east and is 100 feet wide including the right of way. Diffley Road is adjacent to the south and is 140 feet wide including the right of way. 5. The only easements on -site are the typical water, sewer, and electrical easements that are along Diffley Road and Lexington Way South in the right - of -way. 6. Parking areas will consist of on- street parking and the driveways of the single - family homes. 7. The total site area is comprised of 331,716 square feet or 7.62 acres. 8. See plan for the total green space area. 9. Impervious surface is 81,491 square feet or 24.54 % of the site. See plan for the total impervious surface area. 10. The site currently has a trail along the south side of the site along Diffley Road. No other trails or sidewalks are planned. 11. The site will not have any monument signage. 12. The site will have the typical exterior lighting. 13. The site will have three retaining walls so that more mature trees are saved. See Grading Plan for details. 14. Garbage and recyclable containers will be kept in the single -family garages. 15. Exterior air - conditioning units will be ground mounted along the sides of the homes. C : krisnikprelimsubdiveagan.v 1 Preliminary Grading/Drainage /Erosion Control Plans 1. See Plan for detailed existing and proposed contour lines. 2. See Plan for details. All units will be walkouts. 3. The site does not contain any ponds, wetlands, lakes, streams, or marshes. 4. See Plan for details. 5. See Plan for details. 6. See Tree Preservation Plan for details. 7. There are no Delineated wetlands on -site. 8. See Plan for details. Preliminary Utility & Street Plan 1. There will be two private roads on the subject property that will end in cul -de- sacs. The southerly road is proposed to be called Black Cherry Court and the northerly is proposed to be called White Oak Way with roads that are 22 feet face -to -face and 60 -foot cul -de -sacs. 2. See plan for existing utilities. 3. See plan for the proposed utilities. Park Dedication: 1. Even though dedicating parkland is not a requirement, I plan on dedicating 1.2 acres to the City for parkland and pay the park dedication fees, in addition. The City would like this and I also can get a tax benefit. Tree Preservation Plan: 1. The site contains 570 mature trees and this development will result in the loss of 249 trees for a total percentage lost of 43.7 %. 2. Any potential mitigation will be replaced on site. 3. See Tree Preservation Plan for details. Water Quality Requirements: 1. See handout for details. Wetlands Inventory/Replacement Plan: 1. There are no jurisdictional wetlands on the site (see letter for details) C: kri snikprelimsubdiveagan. v 1 aLTI / Z-. WRITTEN NARRATIVE BACKGROUND Comprehensive Guide Plan designation: The existing and proposed comprehensive zoning is LD -Low Density (0 -4 units /acre). Zoning classification: The existing zoning classification is A- Agriculture and the proposed zoning is the same has the Comprehensive Guide Plan that is LD -Low Density (0 -4 units /acre). What I, the developer, want to do: Develop a 12 lot low density residential development that preserves as many trees as possible and uses the ravine to create natural walk -out lots that highlight this beautiful area. I want to create an eye appealing development that fits in with the neighborhood. The timing of this development is planned for the spring of 2004 and the phasing is planned for one phase due to the relatively small size. Existing land uses on the subject property: The subject property is currently comprised of a single - family home on a large heavily wooded parcel. Surrounding land uses and zoning within 660 feet: Adjacent to the east of the subject property is Lexington Way South with retail related uses across the street; adjacent to the south is an existing paved sidewalk/trail and Diffley Road; adjacent to the west is a 20 acre parcel that will be a City park soon; adjacent to the north is existing single- family homes on larger lots. Written Narrative Addressing the following questions: What impact does the rezoning have on surrounding property and land uses? It fits in well because I am being sensitive to the trees, topography and not trying to maximize the density. What impact does the rezoning have on the subject property? It allows the subject to be developed to its highest and best use. What impact does the rezoning have on City services, such as sewer, water, stormwater run -off and roads? Minimal impact. Does the requested land use proposed by the rezoning result in a better use of the land? Explain. Yes it does! It is a sensitive development that the Seller, City, and Developer can be proud of when it is all finished. 6235444739 04/26/2004 08:38 6235444739 April 25, 2004 ADVENT PRINTING Community Development Dept. Development Name: Evergreen Enclave 3830 Pilot Knob Road, Eagan Case # 22- PS- 03 -03 -04 FAX #651- 675 -5694 Almost 36 years ago we purchased the property at 4145 Lexington Way. We wanted a tranquil space and a location as far away from traffic noise as possible. Though there have been several inroads of commercialization we still feel that our idealistic locale cannot be matched anywhere else. Now we have been advised that the Evergreen Enclave is proposed for right "next door" and our pleasant surroundings will be drastically changed. We are puzzled because this project seems to be well on the way and there is no word of an environmental impact study or habitat study? This in an area where deer trails are so frequently used that anyone can see them! Assuming that those studies pass the projects requirement, we have three statements to make: (1) we contest the need for lot #6, because it appears to encroach on our property line. (2) There should be a sound barrier fence as effective as those on the freeways. It should be at least 10 feet tall and for the entire length of our common boundary. There should be brick/stone columns every 1 or 12 feet. The Developer should let us choose the style and materials. The Developer should pay its entire construction cost. The Association should pay for its maintenance and repair. This fence should be built PRIOR TO ANY DEVELOPMENT. (3)We want the right of the city council review before final determination of house placement. (At this point we have no information on house sizes, location on lot, etc.) Please be certain that this letter is read at the April 27 meeting. S incerely, Flloyd J. Rodmyre Margaret Rodmyre abet PAGE 01/01 Agenda Information Memo May 18, 2004, Eagan City Council Meeting b. INTERIM USE PERMIT — SOWLES PROPERTIES ACTIONS TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve (OR direct findings of fact for denial) an Interim Use Permit to allow outdoor storage of, equipment, materials, and current/late model cars, and a 113 foot tower crane, associated with a site plan and item list, dated March 2, 2004 Part of Government Lot 2, Section 9, Township 27, Range 23, located at 3045 Sibley Memorial Highway; subject to the conditions in the Advisory Planning Commission minutes. REQUIRED VOTE FOR APPROVAL • Majority of Quorum FACTS: • This item was continued from the April 20, 2004 City Council at the applicant's request. • At the City Council Workshop on April 13, 2004 there was a discussion regarding the height of the tower crane and the term of the IUP. • The site is largely encompassed with outdoor storage of miscellaneous items. • The majority of the storage items are directly related to Sowles business and other tenants in the building. Outdoor storage should be related to the uses on the property. • Three of the five outdoor storage Code Requirements are met, the storage items are not proposed in an enclosure, additional screening is not proposed. • The Advisory Planning Commission held a public hearing on March 23, 2004, and is recommending approval; subject to the conditions in the APC minutes. ISSUES: • The APC added conditions including that outdoor storage of items be limited to tenants of the principal building and a landscape plan be submitted to City staff for approval. 60 DAY AGENCY ACTION DEADLINE • June 29, 2004 — extended by continuing ATTACHMENTS (2): Advisory Planning Commission Minutes pagesof l throug j Planning Staff Report on pagesjlthrough 9 QID City of Eagan Advisory Planning Commission Meeting Minutes March 23, 2004 Page 4 B. INTERIM USE PERMIT — SOWLES PROPERTIES, L.P. An Interim Use Permit to allow outdoor storage on Part of Government Lot 2, located at 3045 Hwy 13 in the NW 1 /4 of Section 9. Planner Cartney introduced this item and highlighted the information presented in the City Staff repor dated March 3, 2004. She noted the background and history. Chair Heyl opened the public hearing. There being no public comment, Chair Heyl closed the public hearing and turned the discussion bacl to the Commission. City Planner Ridley stated condition two should be, amended to read: April 7, 2009 and an additiona condition should be added that states: Storage must be related to a tenant of the building. Member Leeder stated he would rather see the cars stored in an orderly fashion with natura screening, rather than a chain link fence. Dan Sowles, son of the property owner sated he would not be opposed to adding landscaping to the property. He requested that a condition not be added at this time regarding the landscaping. City Planner Ridley suggested that the Advisory Planning Commission add the condition at this time and the City Council could remove it if they see fit. Member Hansen moved, Member :ceder, seconded a motion to recommend approval of an Interir Use Permit to allow outdoor storage and= 'storage of a 113 foot tower crane as depicted on the sit plan dated March 2, 2004 on Part of Government Lot 2, located at 3045 Hwy 13 in the NW 1/4 c Section 9 subject to the following conditions as amended: 1. The Interim Use Permit shall be recorded at Dakota County Recorder's office within 60 days of it approval by the City Council. & 1 2) The permit shall terminate upon the earlier of April 7, 2009. 3) The Interim Use Permit shall be subject to an annual administrative review. The purpose of such review shall be to determine that the conditions of the permit are within compliance. The Interim Use Permit may be revoked for failure to comply with any condition of the permit following notice of the noncompliance and a hearing by the City Council with all interested parties being given an opportunity to be heard. 4) All parking and storage areas shall be properly maintained and surfaced to prevent deterioration. City of Eagan Advisory Planning Commission Meeting Minutes March 23, 2004 Page 5 5) The outdoor storage items shall be limited to what is provided for with the site plan. 6) Trash receptacles shall be kept either inside the building or within an enclosure constructed according to City Code. 7) Subject to site plan dated March 2, 2004. 8) Upon recording the Interim Use Permit all other Conditional Use Permits for the property shall terminate. 9) Storage must be related to a tenant of the building. 10) Applicant must submit a landscaping plan prior to recording the IUP All voted in favor. Motion carried 5 -0. ��a REPORT DATE: March 3, 2004 APPLICANT: Sowles Properties PROPERTY OWNER: Larry Sowles REQUEST: Interim Use Permit LOCATION: 3045 Sibley Memorial Hwy COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: IND, Industrial ZONING: I -1, Limited Industrial SUMMARY OF REQUEST AUTHORITY FOR REVIEW PLANNING REPORT CITY OF EAGAN CASE: 09-IN-01-02-04 HEARING DATE: March 23, 2004 APPLICATION DATE: February 19, 2004 PREPARED BY: Sheila Cartney The applicant is requesting approval of a five year Interim Use Permit to allow outdoor storage of a 113 foot tall crane, equipment, materials, and current/late model cars associated with a site plan on the 24 acre site, Part of Government Lot 2, Section 9, Township 27, Range 23, located at 3045 Sibley Memorial Highway. City Code Chapter 11, Section 11.50 Subdivision 6C states: The Council may issue interim use permits for an interim use of property if: 1. The use is deemed to be temporary in light of the Comprehensive Guide Plan designation for the property site on which the use is located and the use conforms to the bulk and performance standards of the zoning regulations herein; 2. The date or event that will terminate the use can be identified with certainty; 3. Permission of the use will not impose additional costs on the public if it is necessary for the public to take the property in the future; and 4. The user agrees to any conditions that the Council deems appropriate for permission of the use; and Planning Report — Sowles NP March 23, 2004 Page 2 5. The use meets the standards set forth in the zoning regulations herein governing conditional use permits. City Code Chapter 11, Section 11.40, Subdivisions 4C and 4D provide the following. Subdivision 4C states that the Planning Commission shall recommend a conditional use permit and the Council shall issue such conditional use permits only if it fords that such use at the proposed location: 1. Will not be detrimental to or endanger the public health, safety, or general welfare of the neighborhood or the City. 2. Will be harmonious with the general and applicable specific objectives of the Comprehensive Plan and City Code provisions. 3. Will be designed, constructed, operated and maintained so as to be compatible in appearance with the existing or intended character of the general vicinity and will not change the essential character of that area, nor substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. 4. Will be served adequately by essential public facilities and services, including streets, police and fire protection, drainage structures, refuse disposal, water and sewer systems and schools. 5. Will not involve uses, activities, processes, materials, equipment and conditions of operation that will be hazardous or detrimental to any persons, property or the general welfare because of excessive production of traffic, noise, smoke, fumes, glare or odors. 6. Will have vehicular ingress and egress to the property which does not create traffic congestion or interfere with traffic on surrounding public streets. 7. Will not result in the destruction, loss or damage of a natural, scenic or historic feature of major importance. Subdivision 4D, Conditions, states that in reviewing applications of conditional use permits, the 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. In all cases in which conditional uses are granted, the Council shall require such evidence and guarantees as it may deem necessary as proof that the conditions stipulated in connection therewith are being and will be complied with. Planning Report — Sowles IUP March 23, 2004 Page 3 BACKGROUND/HISTORY The subject site has been known as the Lull Industries property, which is now owned by Sowles Properties Limited Partnership. In 1994, a Conditional Use Permit was issued for Lull Industries for outdoor storage of parts and equipment based on the a site plan submitted at that time. All of the outdoor storage with this CUP was related to Lull's fork truck manufactoring operations. The main building was completed in 1957. It appears outdoor storage has been part of operations at this location since the site was developed; however, a CUP for this storage was not obtained until 1994. In 2001 Sowles requested a CUP to allow a 100 foot tall crane on a site, also adjacent to Highway 13, just south of the subject property. The CUP was denied for the following reasons: A tower crane three times the height of permitted building height is not harmonious in appearance with the character of the general vicinity and the natural features of the Minnesota River Valley. Due to size and profile the tower crane cannot be screened. In November 2003, Sowles requested a CUP to allow outdoor storage of a 113 foot tower crane, equipment, materials, and current/late model cars; and a Variance to the required 40 foot setback to the front property line for outdoor storage. The Variance and CUP for the tower crane were denied by Council action on February 3, 2004, and Sowles withdrew the remaining outdoor storage application (acknowledged by the City Council on March 1, 2004) in order to apply for an Interim Use Permit. EXISTING CONDITIONS The site is largely encompassed with outdoor storage of miscellaneous items. The items range from trucks, trailers, cranes to current/late model cars. The existing buildings are surrounded with some type of outdoor storage. Tennant parking is located in front of the main building along Highway 13. SURROUNDING USES The following existing uses, zoning, and comprehensive guide plan designations surround the subject nropertv: ass Existing Use Zoning Land Use Designation North Park P, Park P, Park and Recreation open space South Various industrial uses I -1, Limited Industrial IND, Industrial East Hwy 13, Single family residences R -1, Residential Single LD, Low Density residential West Single family home I -1, Limited Industrial IND, Industrial Planning Report — Sowles IUP March 23, 2004 Page 3 BACKGROUND/HISTORY The subject site has been known as the Lull Industries property, which is now owned by Sowles Properties Limited Partnership. In 1994, a Conditional Use Permit was issued for Lull Industries for outdoor storage of parts and equipment based on the a site plan submitted at that time. All of the outdoor storage with this CUP was related to Lull's fork truck manufactoring operations. The main building was completed in 1957. It appears outdoor storage has been part of operations at this location since the site was developed; however, a CUP for this storage was not obtained until 1994. In 2001 Sowles requested a CUP to allow a 100 foot tall crane on a site, also adjacent to Highway 13, just south of the subject property. The CUP was denied for the following reasons: A tower crane three times the height of permitted building height is not harmonious in appearance with the character of the general vicinity and the natural features of the Minnesota River Valley. Due to size and profile the tower crane cannot be screened. In November 2003, Sowles requested a CUP to allow outdoor storage of a 113 foot tower crane, equipment, materials, and current/late model cars; and a Variance to the required 40 foot setback to the front property line for outdoor storage. The Variance and CUP for the tower crane were denied by Council action on February 3, 2004, and Sowles withdrew the remaining outdoor storage application (acknowledged by the City Council on March 1, 2004) in order to apply for an Interim Use Permit. EXISTING CONDITIONS The site is largely encompassed with outdoor storage of miscellaneous items. The items range from trucks, trailers, cranes to current/late model cars. The existing buildings are surrounded with some type of outdoor storage. Tennant parking is located in front of the main building along Highway 13. SURROUNDING USES The following existing uses, zoning, and comprehensive guide plan designations surround the subject nropertv: ass Area Items 1 Short Term Parking — 40 units up to 14 feet tall. Boom trucks, semi tractors, trailers, jobsite office trailers, Truck cranes, Rough Terrain Cranes, Fork trucks, Man lifts, Pick- ups and Service Trucks. 2 Rental Equipment — 400 individual stored up to a maximum of 40 feet high. Tower Crane components, Cabs, Tower Sections, Jib Sections, Machinery decks. 3 Rental and Contracting Equipment — 200 individual pieces stored up to a maximum of 40 feet tall. Still Leg Derricks, Trailers, Tower Sections, steel Beams. 4 Rental and Contracting Equipment — 300 individual pieces stored up to a maximum of 32 feet tall. Shipping Containers, Electrical Cages, Bolt Boxes, Crane Mats, Man Baskets, Tower Crane Components, Cabs, Tower Sections, Jib Sections, Machinery decks, Steel Beams. 5 Short Term Rental and Contracting Equipment — 20 units up to 16 feet tall. Short term storage of cranes, Crane components, and construction equipment as described above. Locked cages for propane and acetylene tanks. Possible parking for future building tenants. 6 Outdoor Storage Area — Up to 200 Current/Late model cars, trailers and Sowles equipment as described in area 1, up to 14 feet tall. 7 Outdoor Storage Area — Up to 480 Current/Late model cars up to 8 feet tall. Planning Report — Sowles IUP March 23, 2004 Page 4 and Park uses P, Park P, Park and Recreation open space EVALUATION OF REQUEST Compatibility with Surrounding Area — The site has had miscellaneous items stored outdoors for many years. The present request is largely for equipment and vehicles associated with the Sowles operation. Items not related to Sowles operations is also being requested. The permanent crane is 113 feet tall and may cause the same concerns as the previously proposed crane. The compatibility of the proposed outdoor storage uses and crane is a policy matter for City Officials to determine. Site Plan — The applicant proposes outdoor storage in various locations throughout the site. No new landscaping is proposed. Trash areas are not shown; trash receptacles should be kept inside a building or within an enclosure constructed according to City Code standards. The submitted site plan breaks the property up into seven areas each area has certain items associated with it. The request is also for the installation of a 113 foot tower crane at the north end of the property to assist with loading and unloading of crane components and other equipment onto trucks. According to the applicant, this type of crane is essential to the site because mobile cranes lack the required radius coverage, require set up and dismantle time and are usually at another job site. The crane would be painted a similar color as the mono towers in the area. The base of the crane would be secured to prevent unauthorized access. a Le Planning Report — Sowles IUP March 23, 2004 Page 5 There appear to be no specific provisions in the City Code that apply to the proposed crane. Therefore, the proposed crane is addressed in the report as one element of the outside storage, and is subject to the City Code standards for outdoor storage. In addition, the APC and City Council may attach other reasonable conditions deemed necessary to mitigate adverse impacts, protect the value of other properties in the district, and achieve the goals and polices of the Comprehensive Guide Plan. Airport Considerations — The airspace obstruction zone section of the Minneapolis St. Paul International Airport Zoning Ordinance defines protected airspace areas. The subject site does not fall within a Land Use Safety Zone according to Minneapolis St. Paul (MSP) Zoning Map, Safety Zones Plate SZ -29. Section IV. The airspace obstruction zone is considered an imaginary conical surface extending upward and outward from the surface level of the airport at a slope of 20 to one for a distance of 4,000 feet measured radically outward from the periphery of the airport. The airspace obstruction zone that applies to the subject site prohibits structures higher than 1010 -1020 feet above sea level. The surface elevation at which the crane will be located is approximately 750 feet above sea level and the crane is 113 feet tall, which is an approximate height of 863 feet above sea level. As such, it does not fall into the airspace zone and does not require additional restrictions. The subject site is within Noise Zone 4. As an industrial land use, the proposed activity is permitted within this zone. Engineering Comments - The applicant is proposing to maintain the storage areas labeled as Area 2 with conventional gravel aggregate surfacing. The applicant is not proposing to construct the perimeter of the outdoor stage areas with concrete curb and gutter. City code requires that all off - street parking and storage areas be surfaced with a material to control dust and drainage, and that the surface shall be properly maintained to prevent deterioration. Bituminous asphalt is the most - widely -used surfacing material to accomplish this requirement and is required for off - street parking areas. There are a number of outdoor storage lots within the City that have been allowed to use recycled asphalt aggregate surfacing for outside storage areas under conditional or interim use permits. Those permits that have allowed recycled asphalt aggregate have included a condition for a periodic staff review of the condition of the surfacing to determine its adequacy for dust and drainage control. If recycled bituminous aggregate or the conventional gravel aggregate is continued to be used, such periodic review should be a condition of approval. If, upon review, the recycled bituminous aggregate surface is determined to be inadequate, the City will require the storage lot to be resurfaced with bituminous asphalt. Outdoor Storage — In addition to the requirements for a conditional use permit listed previously, City Code Section 11.70, Subdivision 22, C2, lists performance standards for outdoor storage as follows: Z17 Planning Report — Sowles NP March 23, 2004 Page 6 a) Outdoor storage items shall be placed within an enclosure. All such enclosures shall be attached to the principal building except in the Limited Industrial district. The proposed outdoor storage is not within an enclosure. b) The storage area shall be located in the side or rear yards and shall not encroach into any required front building setback area or other required setbacks. According to the site plan the front setback of 40 feet is met and the side yard setback of 20 feet is met for outdoor storage. Since the property is adjacent to Highway 13 the required building setback is 50, the I -1 zoning district requires a 40 foot building setback from the public right -of- way, the area of storage is consistent with a 40 foot setback. c) The outdoor storage area shall be screened from view from the public right -of -way and from any adjacent property which is designated for residential uses in the comprehensive guide plan. There are no adjacent properties designated for residential use. No screening is proposed and the items are visible from highway 13; some items are screened by trees and the main building. d) The storage area shall not interfere with any pedestrian or vehicular movement. The proposed storage areas consists of parking stalls, and gravel areas. The items are stored in an orderly fashion, which should not interfere with pedestrian or vehicular movement. Pedestrian and vehicular movement is limited throughout the site. e) The storage area shall not take up required parking spaces or landscaping areas. Based on the use of the property the availability of off street parking is met. The proposed storage areas are not landscaped. f) The storage area shall be surfaced with concrete or an approved equivalent to control dust and erosion. The surface shall be properly maintained to prevent deterioration. The proposed storage area is surfaced with bituminous and gravel, both appear acceptable for this type of storage. SUMMARY /CONCLUSION The applicant is requesting a five year term for an Interim Use Permit to allow outdoor storage of a 113 foot tall crane, miscellaneous equipment, parts, trailers, cranes, current/late model cars and items related to the various businesses onsite. The proposed storage areas are compatible with setback requirements. The IUP request is also for a 113 foot crane to be permanently stored on -site. All storage areas are defined by a site plan and should be included with the IUP. The outdoor storage surface area aye Planning Report — Sowles NP March 23, 2004 Page 7 is questionable; City code requires that all off - street parking and storage areas be surfaced with a material to control dust and drainage, some areas for the proposed storage are on a gravel aggregate surface. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED To recommend approval of a five year Interim Use Permit to allow outdoor storage of a 113 foot tall crane, equipment, materials, and current/late model cars associated with a site plan on the 24 acre site dated March 2, 2004, Part of Government Lot 2, Section 9, Township 27, Range 23, located at 3045 Sibley Memorial Highway. Subject to the following conditions: 1) The Interim Use Permit shall be recorded at Dakota County Recorder's office within 60 days of it approval by the City Council. 2) The permit shall terminate upon the earlier of April 8 2008. 3) The Interim Use Permit shall be subject to an annual administrative review. The purpose of such review shall be to determine that the conditions of the permit are within compliance. The Interim Use Permit may be revoked for failure to comply with any condition of the permit following notice of the noncompliance and a hearing by the City Council with all interested parties being given an opportunity to be heard. 4) All parking and storage areas shall be properly maintained to prevent deterioration. 5) The outdoor storage items shall be limited to what is provided for with the site plan. 6) Trash receptacles shall be kept either inside the building or within an enclosure constructed according to City Code. 7) Subject to site plan dated March 2, 2004. 8) Upon recording the Interim Use Permit all other Conditional Use Permits for the property shall terminate. al H 4 Sub'ect Site GEM IOW 0D m 6 m e „Ins PODInn In Afrizera saw i �6Q� CM , EN HUME . 11-1 I 4 7 41 .e zP 411; iTa 812 4 Fig b r ►. ��raarma kin 1 CiE u a ra pmn I 83 Ea Gs CD Cr WIM NS. it • Development/Developer: Sowles Properties Application: Interim Use Permit Case No.: 09- IN- 01 -02 -04 Location Map a 1000 ■ 0 Map Prepared using ERSI ArcView 3.1. Parcel base map data provided by Dakota County Office of GIS and is current as of January 20D4. Ca 1000 THIS MAP 15 INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY - • - nnt auarantee the accuracy 'Atha Information and are €' Eagan Boundary /^ \/ Street Centerline n Parcel Area pv ?'. Building Footprint 2000 Feel Current Zoning and Comprehensive Guide Plan Land Use Map f Eagan an g - a-a\ .7 Parcel base map information provided'' Dakota County Land Survey Departmo t June 2003. Zoning information maintained b)City Start THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY - -- ae. *h* accuracy of this information. Sowles Case No. 09- IN- 01 -02 -04 W E Zoning Map P R -,: LD Ilit IN ■ il ■■�� All • `V alraV Current Zoning: Limited Industrial 1 , 1-1 = '� ♦, L ��// ; smog lliv i iii Imo ■■■■ coo 0 cos 1200 r.•1 _ r LD 10 Current Land Use Designation: IND Industrial IND 2 Nall ♦, � Q • 1 PA# R-4 : n ,` 7� Current Zoning and Comprehensive Guide Plan Land Use Map f Eagan an g - a-a\ .7 Parcel base map information provided'' Dakota County Land Survey Departmo t June 2003. Zoning information maintained b)City Start THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY - -- ae. *h* accuracy of this information. Sowles Case No. 09- IN- 01 -02 -04 W E Comprehensive Guide Plan Land Use Map P LD Ilit IN ■ - ■■�� /d ‚I,' P _ r LD 10 Current Land Use Designation: IND Industrial IND 2 Nall ♦, � Q i 1 I I) IN z LD ® ®® ®®:: 1111 EB il k 11 000 0 600 12,00 r..t Irar HD HD Current Zoning and Comprehensive Guide Plan Land Use Map f Eagan an g - a-a\ .7 Parcel base map information provided'' Dakota County Land Survey Departmo t June 2003. Zoning information maintained b)City Start THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY - -- ae. *h* accuracy of this information. Sowles Case No. 09- IN- 01 -02 -04 W E March 2, 2004 SOWLES PROPERTIES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP VALLEY BUILDING PRODUCTS CO. 3045 HIGHWAY 13 EAGAN, MINNESOTA 55121 -1602 Re: Interim Use Permit Application Legal Description Part of Government Lot 2, Section 9, Township 27, Range 23. P.I.D. #10- 00900 -10 -26 located 3045 Highway 13. MAR 0 3 [ � U04 ' I Background/History Sowles Properties L.P. purchased 3045 Highway 13 in December of 2002. Our affiliated companies Sowles Company (steel erector), Northwest Tower Cranes (crane rental and service) and Valley Building Products Co. (material supplier), moved office, shop and yard operations to this location May 2003. The main Lull Industries building was constructed in 1957; outdoor storage has been part of fork truck manufacturing operations at this location since the site was developed. In 1994 Lull Industries was granted the current CUP to allow outdoor storage of equipment and materials. At that time the site was improved with; water main system with hydrants, bituminous paving on the south portion of the site for dust control, concrete curbs, gutters and catch basins for erosion control, free standing lighting and building mounted lights for safety and security. Lull Industries, Inc. employed up to 250 people on site and at peak production had 2 and sometimes 3 shifts. We currently have approximately 30 employees and approximately 10 tenant employees that work on site. Our work hours are 6 AM to 5 PM and there are minimal after hours /weekend traffic coming and going from our site. Sowles Properties L.P. is requesting a (5) Year Interim Use Permit to allow; A.) Outdoor storage of construction equipment, materials, trailers and vehicles, see attached. B.) Installation of a yard tower crane, see attached. After a Public Hearing on this application, we request a "Workshop" meeting prior to the City Council meeting to discuss the issues within this application in more detail. Page Two Interim Use Permit Application March 2, 2004 A.) OUTDOOR STORAGE — Seven (7) Outdoor Storage areas, see attached site plan. 1.) SHORT TERM PARKING - used by Sowles/NWTC for their own operations, vehicles are coming and going on a daily /weekly basis. 40 units, up to 14 feet high. Boom Trucks, Semi Tractors, Trailers, Jobsite Office Trailers, Truck Cranes, Rough Terrain Cranes, Fork trucks, Man Lifts, Pick -ups and Service Truck. 2.) RENTAL EQUIPMENT — Used by Sowles/NWTC for their own operations. 400 individual pieces stored up to a maximum of 40 feet high. Tower Crane Components, Cabs, Tower Sections, Jib Sections, Machinery Decks. 3.) RENTAL AND CONTRACTING EQUIPMENT — Used by Sowles for their own operations. 200 individual pieces stored up to a maximum of 40 feet high. Stiff Leg Derricks, Trailers, Tower Sections, Steel Beams. 4.) RENTAL AND CONTRACTING EQUIPMENT — Used by Sowles/NWTC for their own operations. 300 individual pieces stored up to a maximum of 32 feet high. Shipping Containers, Electrical Cages, Bolt Boxes, Crane Mats, Man Baskets, Tower Crane Components; Cab, Tower Sections, Jib Sections, Machinery Decks, Steel Beams. 5.) SHORT TERM RENTAL AND CONTRACTING EQUIPMENT -. Used by Sowles/NWTC for their own operations. 20 units up to 16 feet high. Short term storage of Cranes, Crane Components, and Construction Equipment as described above. Locked Cages for Propane and Acetylene Tanks. Possible parking for future building tenants. 6.) OUTDOOR STORAGE AREA Up to 220 Current/Late Model Cars, Trailers and Sowles Equipment as described above in area (1.) one, up to 14 feet high. 7.) OUTDOOR STORAGE AREA Up to 480 Current/Late Model Cars up to 8 feet high. B.) YARD TOWER CRANE We propose installation of a tower crane at the north end of the site. This tower crane is needed for loading and unloading of crane components and other equipment onto trucks. A yard tower crane is essential to our operation because it is the most efficient and safe way to handle heavy components and properly store them, see attached illustration comparing a tower crane with a mobile crane. Mobile cranes lack the required radius coverage, require set -up and dismantle time and are usually away from our yard working at construction job sites. The crane would be painted a similar color as the mono towers in the area. The base of the crane would be secured to prevent unauthorized access. See attached site plan and site sections describing our proposed tower crane installation. i s r 1, ! 1. V: Rv1AR 0 3 LtiU4 Page Three Interim Use Permit Application March 2, 2004 Zoning Classification Currently zoned Industrial 1 (I -1), we are not requesting re- zoning. Existing Land Uses The 24 acre site contains several wooded areas and a grade drop of approximately 50' from southeast to northwest. The site has one main office /warehouse building, several accessory buildings, employee parking and outside storage areas. Surrounding Land Uses North — Zoned Industrial, undeveloped. South — Zoned Industrial, Eagan Transport and Water Heater Innovations East — Highway 13/ McCarthy Ridge Subdivision, Residential West — Zoned Industrial, SF home, gravel/dirt storage. ilt.. ij 1- �I '4 r'' 'I J MAR 0 3 L004 „ , 02 • or 2.27 •.0.8 206.28 8.81 .ter- /• A -- -S 89'55'59” W 587.2 --- SOVTN uNE or M•t /a OF NWI /a SEC. f. T. 27. R.2.2. EAGAN -13 INDUSTRIAL PAR 7 1 . . / , 1 \.L" r — nf1°1w IINE Or (AY)", Rr ?lW ,,I +R• 1 •.U. —N 89'46'12' E 1197.00 - -- - - - N 89'46'12" E 741.04 - �4. Sowles Properties Limited Partnership 3045 Highway 13 Eagan, Minnesota 55121 (z) March 2, 2004 DPI i l i ii FE r 4 4-/ F .\ MAR 0 OUTSIDE STORAGE K$ 07 1.23 .ri N N W N 0 0 ap MW Cpl. Or Pros /4 Or Hwy. 9r N111. 7.11. 1t . iJ r.0.21 - 206.28. 8.81 • .. 1 4 —5 89'55'59 "_ W 587.2 — — SOU711 UNE Cr Nwl /. ar 11w1 /a AC. 9, 7. 27, 9.23. EAGAN -13 INDUSTRIAL. PAR / , I \ .�.� Volt Or Nyfl /4 of m 3 /4 gC o r - -N 89"46'12" E 1197.00 - -- - - 89'46'1 2 - E 741.04 - • Sowles Properties Limited Partnership 3045 Highway 13 Eagan, Minnesota 55121 I 71 i TOWER CRANE LOCATION e 'T "I1 A I II' PI I Q 4 4 4 1 4 ■ ■ ■ 3 1 b( ,S9 NORT.HWEST 'TOWER CRANES! 3045 Sibley Memorial Hwy (Hwy 13) Suite 100 Eagan, Minnesota 55121-1602 Phone: (651) 287-9775 Fax: (651) 287-9710 1!ie -• i P 411 • 4 dayAVAIRWelirewAwawAwAtx gt—st rsi■ as rairVALVASTAVMVAR f ;IN Lir ta.a 1.1 ra „ 1,21kg Equal Opportunity Employer t r ' J 6 LI MAR 0 3 2.004 it it Marilyn Wucherpfennig From: svotel [svotel @frontiernet.net] Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2004 12:22 PM To: Marilyn Wucherpfennig Subject: Hwy 13 Site per our discussion Marilyn, Page 1 of 1 I would like to reiterate, my concern for the land use and visual appearance of the Sowle's property site on Hwy 13 that was formerly Lull Engineering. I have been a resident of Eagan for almost 30 years. My home sits on a hill on McCarthy Ridge and has ovelooked that site for as many years. Whereas, there were times when the summer evening noise at the site was loud, it was always a good neighbor and conscientious about excessive noise complaints. Most recently, it is hard, for community residents, to define the primary usage and business being operated on the site. It looks like a "little bit of this & a little bit of that!" I am not totally sure, but is there any company identification signage on the building? For months they have had a huge crane, swaying in the wind and dangling over the edge of the front property, very near Hwy.13 for no apparent purpose. At one time there was a sign aloft, on the top of it, that said either FOR SALE or HELP WANTED. I understand, the crane is used for moving deliveries around. I would highly recommend to the Planning Commission that they look closely at what the site is going to be used for. And if possible be specific in the scope of diversification for the site. I don't want to look out over a "Sanford and Son" operation. I would also suggest that their crane be moved further back on the property for visual and safety reasons. I don't know all the codes, variances or zoning restrictions, but I am a neighbor that wants to maintain the integrity of my view and property for another 30 years! Businesses need to step up to the plate and be good neighbores, too. That's all I am asking. If there is a copy of the proposal or a report, could you please e-mail or mail it to me? Thank you, Sue Votel 3040 McCarthy Ridge Eagan MN 5512 (651 - 454 -2324) 03/17/2004 Agenda Information Memo May 18, 2004 Eagan City Council Meeting > To direct the preparation of Findings of Fact for denial of a Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment for approximately 80 acres in northeast Eagan, specifically for Special Area 1 (The Waters) from Special Area Office /Service to Special Area Medium Density ➢ To direct staff to submit the Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment for approximately 80 acres in northeast Eagan, specifically for Special Area 1 (The Waters) from Special Area Office /Service to Special Area Medium Density and Park to the Metropolitan Council for review and approval. E. COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN AMENDMENT — LOAN OAK DEVELOPMENT, LLC ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: FACTS: OR > The zoning (Planned Development) for the Loan Oak, LLC property does not permit residential uses. > The Comprehensive Guide Plan discourages additional residential uses and long -term continuation of existing residential uses in Special Areas 1, 2 and 3. ➢ The applicant's desired development request requires a Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment and a Planned Development Amendment. ➢ The Special Areas were created as part of the Comprehensive Guide Plan Update that was initiated in 1998 and resulted in the adoption Eagan's Comprehensive Plan 2000 in February of 2001. ➢ The City Council amended the Guide Plan in December 2001 by adopting the Goals and Policies for Special Areas 1, 2 and 3. > The applicant is requesting approval of Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment to change the land use designation in Special Area 1 from Office /Service to Medium Density (MD) residential (4 -12 units /acre) and Park (P) for approximately 80 acres of undeveloped land located north of Lone Oak Road, west of the Inver Grove Heights (IGH) corporate boundary, in the SE '/4 of Section 1. > When a change to a City's Comprehensive Guide Plan is requested, it is the City's responsibility to determine if the change is in the best long -range interests of the city and future property owners. The standard of review of a City's action in approving or denying a Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment is whether there exists a rational basis for the decision to modify the present plan. > The site is adjacent to the area commonly referred to as The Waters office park. Adjacent properties include the 480,000 SF Ecolab (originally Cray Research) Campus to the west and the 264,000 SF Northwest Airlines (NWA) Corporate Headquarters and the 279,000 SF NATCO training facility to the northwest. ➢ Cray Research acquired and rezoned the subject site, approximately 80 acres, adjacent to the east boundary of the existing campus in the early 1990's for a buffer, to control future development adjacent to its campus, and for possible future expansion. ➢ The applicant's submittals allow the City to review the Guide Plan Amendment in relation to the pending amendment application for the 27 acre Laukka -Beck parcel north of the site. Additionally, it stands to reason that if the Guide Plan is amended for the two pending applications, the 38 acre parcel that lies between the two would likely follow the same path. As such, policy makers will want to be cognizant of the potential for far more than the subject 110 acres to ultimately be influenced. ➢ The MD Comp Guide designation category provides areas for medium density attached housing units, including two - family dwellings, townhomes, and condominiums. Under certain circumstances, small lot detached single family units may also be appropriate. Allowable gross densities within this land use category range from 4 -12 units /acre, including common area. > As proposed, Lone Oak Development, LLC envisions 488 total housing units on approximately 80 acres for a gross density of 6 units /acre and 48,000 SF of office condo on approximately 5 acres. The conceptual housing proposal, including senior housing, consists of a mix of single family, a mix of townhome products and condominiums. Because a formal application for a Planned Development Amendment is not before the Council, there is no assurance that the applicant will pursue or that the Council supports the proposed density or uses. > As proposed, the residential unit count exceeds the threshold requiring a mandatory Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) to be prepared prior to consideration of rezoning and/or subdivision application. > Historically, the City has attempted, where possible, to minimize land uses that would be in conflict with operations at MSP. In response to anticipated aircraft noise, the applicant's noise consultant states that interior noise attenuation can be /52 / accommodated easily with good building practices. The Metropolitan Council Aircraft Noise Policies defines specific findings that need to be made in addition to the development's capacity to achieve noise attenuation for individual entry residential development. The City will need to determine whether it concurs or differs with the applicant's position regarding the appropriateness of residential uses in Noise Zone 4. ISSUES: GENERAL ISSUES AND OVERVIEW > The issues before the Council are primarily legislative and policy issues and the Council has latitude to make findings to approve or deny the proposals provided that it has a rational basis for the decision based on the health, safety and public welfare of the community now and in the future. The applicants have indicated that they want the City Council to address the threshold question of whether it would consider residential uses in this area. The City has advised the applicants that any application for a planned development amendment is incomplete until an EAW is completed. > The applicants have indicated that they wish to pursue a method of review that would not require costs associated with the preparation of detailed plans or the preparation of an environmental assessment worksheet, which would be mandatory for a planned development amendment application or a subdivision. Given that request and those parameters, the method of review that is appropriate and is properly before the City is a Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment application. AIRPORT NOISE ISSUES ➢ The City has a long standing policy of guiding, zoning and developing property in the northern part of the City for commercial and industrial land that are compatible with overflights associated with the operational standards at the Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport. The City has and continues to promote the maintenance of airport operating procedures that take advantage of that land use policy by concentrating aircraft in those areas to minimize overflights of other areas of the City planned for residential uses. The applicant is proposing a modification of that policy. There is clear guidance in regional policy as to how consideration of such a modification would be undertaken. If the Council wishes to modify the policy, it would be appropriate to apply those standards of review and determine an appropriate process by which to assess the standards. > The City's Airport Relations Commission typically advises the City Council in regard to matters affecting airport policy, including monitoring operations standards and policies related to the Eagan- Mendota Heights Corridor. In most cases, Comprehensive Guide Plan amendments have not been presented to the A 0 Airport Relations Commission and the group has not been asked to provide input on this item to date. The Council may wish to consider whether to direct the item to the ARC for its review and comment or for the oversight of a more detailed analysis of the City's Policies in this regard. MARKET FORCES > The applicants state that the current market does not support immediate build out of commercial industrial uses in the near future. One of the primary purposes of land use planning is to look beyond the market at any one time and to identify the land uses and interrelationship of land uses that are in the best interests of the City. Market forces may be a factor in land use decisions, but it is up to the City Council to determine the weight of that factor in relation to other factors. > Since the submission of the applications, the former Cray campus has been sold to Ecolab for the relocation and expansion of the company's research and development and information center activities. While Ecolab purchased the property for substantially less than the original construction cost or initial asking price of the property, the Council may wish to consider whether the occupancy of the site has the potential to affect market forces in the area. TIMEFRAME FOR DEVELOPMENT > The two forty acre parcels were acquired by Cray in the early 1990's to serve as a buffer for their campus. Loan Oak, LLC acquired this property in 2002 and is proposing in its application to convert its land use at this time. FINANCIAL ANALYSIS > The applicants state that the proposal would generate tax revenue in excess of that which could be anticipated in the short term for commercial - industrial development. This statement is related to the market forces issue above. The City's Reviewing Consultant states that the applicant did not analyze the service or capital cost differentials associated with their proposed development alternative. The applicant's consultant has not addressed other factors the City may consider in planning and developing commercial industrial uses, such as the creation and expansion of jobs, the encouragement of spin off development, vertical and horizontal integration of the local economy and so on. If the Council does not find that a financial analysis is a compelling aspect of a land use decision, no further analysis needs to be done in this area. If the Council finds such analysis to be compelling, it may wish to authorize the preparation of a more detailed fiscal impact analysis by a firm qualified to consider such factors. ATTACHMENTS: (3) Draft APC Minutes on pages a4 through atik Staff Report on pages 2V3 through Memo from developer's Fiscal Consultant on pages p( 3 through 0/0 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: BACKGROUND Loan Oak Development, LLC Kirstin Barsness May 5, 2004 City of Eagan Tax Analysis Report Barsness Consulting Services, -Inc. The initial tax analysis I completed was reviewed by Springsted, Inc., acting as financial advisors to the City of Eagan. Springsted examined four different development scenarios and identified the financial impact to the city for each scenario. Their analysis indicated that development of the site as a research and development facility provides the city with the highest positive cash flow. The mixed -use development proposed by Loan Oak yields the second greatest cumulative cash flow. Springsted raised a number of questions related to my analysis in their review. The majority of the comments related to market conditions, however, they did not consider the market when estimating the research and development cash flow. This memorandum will clarify the assumptions used in my analysis and identify concerns I have with the Springsted memorandum. BASE ASSUMPTIONS As a base of comparison, I generated two tax calculations. The first is an example of the site with the proposed mixed -use development by Loan Oak. The second example is with office warehouse under the current Planned Development Zoning. Springsted added the third scenario of research and development. In order to compare the three I have made the below assumptions 1. For direct comparison, this memo will focus on two key financial measurements: Market Value and Net Local Taxes (city, county, school, misc.). 2. The net developable property is 84.50 acres. The remaining property is considered wetland and protected by the Shoreline Ordinance. 3. The 2003 market value for the site is 3,954,900 and the original taxes (payable 2004) are $130,450.50. The information is gathered from the Dakota County Real Estate Inquiry system. 4. Fiscal Disparities and the State Wide Taxes will be considered in calculating commercial taxes. 5. For commercial development in the mixed -use site a 35% coverage ratio is used. This is less than the 40% used by Springsted in their analysis of Lowest -Land- Use. Thus, under- representing the potential amount of commercial development on the site. LONE OAK MIXED DEVELOPMENT The project is comprised of: • 648 owner- occupied housing units, including single family, townhomes, condos, and senior housing. • 48,000 square foot office condo component with a construction value of $175 per square foot. This cost includes tenant improvements and has been verified by two construction firms and a market research firm. • Approximately 69 acres of green space. Anticipated build out is within five years. The site would begin contributing taxes upon building completion, and the majority of the site is not impacted by fiscal disparities and the state -wide tax. New Market Value (building only) is estimated at $241,750,000. Net local taxes for the five year period are $9,637,815. Both are highlighted in the tables below. PROJECT INFORMATION Phase 1 -A 1 -A 1 -A 1 -A USE URBAN TOWNHOMES VILLAS EX. SINGLE FAMILY CONDOS 1 -A TWIN HOMES 1 -A SENIOR CO -OPS 1 - ADULT MANOR HOMES 1 -A OFFICE CONDOS 1 -B TOWN HOMES B2B 1 -B TOWN HOME SEE THRU 2 -A URBAN TOWNHOMES 2 -A VILLAS 2 -A EX. SINGLE FAMILY 2 -A CONDOS 2 -A TWIN HOMES 2 - ADULT MANOR HOMES 2 - OFFICE CONDOS 2 -B TOWN HOMES B2B 2 - TOWN HOME SEE THRU 3 -A VILLAS 3 -A EX. SINGLE FAMILY Prepared by l arsh ess CCTasul6ng Strviczs, t . Market Value Total Market Class New Year Date Sq. Ft. /Units Sq. Ft./Units Taxes Value Rate Tax Capacity Built Payable 53 350,000.00 $ 166,952 18,550,000 1.00% 185,500 2005 2007 17 600,000.00 $ 114,751 10,200,000 1.25% 127,500 2005 2007 7 800,000.00 $ 63,001 5,600,000 1.25% 70,000 2005 2007 20 300,000.00 $ 54,001 6,000,000 1.00% 60,000 2005 2007 15 450,000.00 $ 60,751 6,750,000 1.00% 67,500 2005 2007 150 250,000.00 $ 337,504 37,500,000 1.00% 375,000 2005 2007 36 250,000.00 $ 81,001 9,000,000 1.00% 90,000 2005 2007 25,000 175.00 $ 147,098 4,375,000 2.00% 87,500 2005 2007 55 350,000.00 $ 173,252 19,250,000 1.00% 192,500 2005 2007 29 400,000.00 $ 104,401 11,600,000 1.00% 116,000 2005 2007 54 350,000.00 $ 170,102 18,900,000 1.00% 189,000 2006 2008 24 600,000.00 $ 162,002 14,400,000 1.25% 180,000 2006 2008 9 800,000.00 $ 81,001 7,200,000 1.25% 90,000 2006 2008 20 300,000.00 $ 54,001 6,000,000 1.00% 60,000 2006 2008 15 450,000.00 $ 60,751 6,750,000 1.00% 67,500 2006 2008 36 250,000.00 $ 81,001 9,000,000 1.00% 90,000 2006 2008 23,000 175.00 $ 135,330 4,025,000 2.00% 80,500 2006 2008 55 350,000.00 $ 173,252 19,250,000 1.00% 192,500 2006 2.008 29 400,000.00 $ 104,401 11,600,000 1.00% 116,000 2006 2008 17 600,000.00 $ 114,751 10,200,000 1.25% 127,500 2007 2009 7 800,000.00 $ 63,001 5,600,000 1.25% 70,000 2007 2009 2 TOTAL 2,502,302 ,, . 241,750,000 2,634,500 LOWEST LAND USE - OFFICE WAREHOUSE Springsted calculated the tax revenue generated on the site for the lowest possible land use: office warehouse. For sake of comparison, we will use their example instead of the one developed by my firm. Their example allows for a higher building coverage (40% vs. 35 %) and lower cost per square foot of approximately $42.00. I did adjust their number for site size (84.5 acres) and to represent fiscal disparities and state -wide tax. YEAR COMMERCIAL TAX CALCULATION YEAR 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 TOTAL BASE BASE MV NEW MV TAXES LOCAL TAXES F/D TAXES MN STATE TAXES MV TAXES NEW NET NEW TAXES LOCAL TAXES 3,954,900 11,343,024 130,451 129,249 110,630 123,519 17,981 476,723 (1,202) 3,954,900 26,345,088 130,451 333,541 256,948 286,882 41,762 1,107,228 203,090 3,954,900 37,322,208 130,451 425,269 364,009 406,416 59,163 1,568,573 294,819 3,954,900 51,226,560 130,451 583,703 499,620 557,827 63,223 2,152,943 453,253 3,954,900 61,837,776 130,451 704,613 603,113 673,376 98,025 2,598,909 574,163 652,253 2,176,375 1,834,320 2,048,020 280,155 7,904,375 1 1524,123 Prepared by Dat melt Cztmul'tiat ; Se -v EeS, h 0 ) A7 3 _ 5:YEAR HOUSING TAX CALCULATION PROJECT - I, INFORMATION BASE LOCAL F/D MN STATE MV NEW NET NEW Total Taxes BASE Class Rate New Tax Capacity Year Built Date Payable 1 -A Office Warehouse 15.5 270,072 YEAR MV NEW MV TAXES TAXES TAXES TAXES TAXES TAXES LOCALTAXES 2007 3,954,900 128,825,000 130,451 $ 1,205,464 $ 42,670 $ 47,641 $ 6,935 $ 1,302,710 $ 1,075,013 2008 3,954,900 225,950,000 130,451 $ 2,137,837 $ 81,926 $ 91,471 $ 13,316 $ 2,324,550 $ 2,007,386 2009 3,954,900 241,750,000 130,451 $ 2,315,589 $ 81,926 $ 91,471 $ 13,316 $ 2,502,302 $ 2,185,138 2010 3,954,900 241,750,000 130,451 $ 2,315,589 $ 81,926 $ 91,471 $ 13,316 $ 2,502,302 $ 2,185,138 2011 3,954,900 241,750,000 130,451 $ 2,315,589 $ 81,926 $ 91,471 $ 13,316 $ 2,502,302 $ 2,185,138 TOTAL 2009 4 -A 652,253 $ 10,290,067 $ 370,376 413525 $ 60,198 $ 11,134,166 ' 9,637,815 TOTAL 2,502,302 ,, . 241,750,000 2,634,500 LOWEST LAND USE - OFFICE WAREHOUSE Springsted calculated the tax revenue generated on the site for the lowest possible land use: office warehouse. For sake of comparison, we will use their example instead of the one developed by my firm. Their example allows for a higher building coverage (40% vs. 35 %) and lower cost per square foot of approximately $42.00. I did adjust their number for site size (84.5 acres) and to represent fiscal disparities and state -wide tax. YEAR COMMERCIAL TAX CALCULATION YEAR 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 TOTAL BASE BASE MV NEW MV TAXES LOCAL TAXES F/D TAXES MN STATE TAXES MV TAXES NEW NET NEW TAXES LOCAL TAXES 3,954,900 11,343,024 130,451 129,249 110,630 123,519 17,981 476,723 (1,202) 3,954,900 26,345,088 130,451 333,541 256,948 286,882 41,762 1,107,228 203,090 3,954,900 37,322,208 130,451 425,269 364,009 406,416 59,163 1,568,573 294,819 3,954,900 51,226,560 130,451 583,703 499,620 557,827 63,223 2,152,943 453,253 3,954,900 61,837,776 130,451 704,613 603,113 673,376 98,025 2,598,909 574,163 652,253 2,176,375 1,834,320 2,048,020 280,155 7,904,375 1 1524,123 Prepared by Dat melt Cztmul'tiat ; Se -v EeS, h 0 ) A7 3 _ PROJECT - I, INFORMATION Phase USE Acres Total Sq. FtJUnits Market Value Sq. Ft/Units Total Taxes Market Value Class Rate New Tax Capacity Year Built Date Payable 1 -A Office Warehouse 15.5 270,072 42.00 $ 476,723.03 11,343,024 2.00% 226,860 2005 2007 2 -A Office Warehouse 11.5 200,376 42.00 $ 353,697.73 8,415,792 2.00% 168,316 2006 2008 2 -A Office Warehouse 9 156,816 42.00 $ 276,806.92 6,586,272 2.00% 131,725 2006 2008 3 -A Office Warehouse 7 121,968 42.00 $ 215,294.27 5,122,656 2.00% 102,453 2007 2009 3 -A Office Warehouse 3 52,272 42.00 $ 92,268.97 2,195,424 2.00% 43,908 2007 2009 3 -A Office Warehouse 5 87,120 42.00 $ 153,781.62 3,659,040 2.00% 73,181 2007 2009 4 -A Office Warehouse 4 69,696 42.00 $ 123,025.30 2,927,232 2.00% 58,545 2008 2010 4 -A Office Warehouse 5 87,120 42.00 $ 153,781.62 3,659,040 2.00% 73,181 2008 2010 4 -B Office Warehouse 10 174,240 42.00 $ 307,563.24 7,318,080 2.00% 146,362 2008 2010 5 -B Office Warehouse 7 121,968 42.00 $ 215,294.27 5,122,656 2.00% 102,453 2009 2011 5 -B Office Warehouse 7.5 130,680 42.00 $ 230,672.43 5,488,560 2.00% 109,771 2009 2011 TOTAL 85 1,472,328 2,598,909 $61,837,776 1,236,756 TOTAL 2,502,302 ,, . 241,750,000 2,634,500 LOWEST LAND USE - OFFICE WAREHOUSE Springsted calculated the tax revenue generated on the site for the lowest possible land use: office warehouse. For sake of comparison, we will use their example instead of the one developed by my firm. Their example allows for a higher building coverage (40% vs. 35 %) and lower cost per square foot of approximately $42.00. I did adjust their number for site size (84.5 acres) and to represent fiscal disparities and state -wide tax. YEAR COMMERCIAL TAX CALCULATION YEAR 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 TOTAL BASE BASE MV NEW MV TAXES LOCAL TAXES F/D TAXES MN STATE TAXES MV TAXES NEW NET NEW TAXES LOCAL TAXES 3,954,900 11,343,024 130,451 129,249 110,630 123,519 17,981 476,723 (1,202) 3,954,900 26,345,088 130,451 333,541 256,948 286,882 41,762 1,107,228 203,090 3,954,900 37,322,208 130,451 425,269 364,009 406,416 59,163 1,568,573 294,819 3,954,900 51,226,560 130,451 583,703 499,620 557,827 63,223 2,152,943 453,253 3,954,900 61,837,776 130,451 704,613 603,113 673,376 98,025 2,598,909 574,163 652,253 2,176,375 1,834,320 2,048,020 280,155 7,904,375 1 1524,123 Prepared by Dat melt Cztmul'tiat ; Se -v EeS, h 0 ) A7 3 RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT OFFICE In order to be consistent throughout the comparison, a realistic market view is necessary. Springsted adjusted the office warehouse scenario to better represent market conditions, i.e. reduced cost per square foot and higher coverage ratio. The research and development analysis is definitely skewed. A five year build -out of 3,798,432 square feet is unrealistic for the following reasons: • For the past twenty (20) years the site has been zoned for this particular use and development has not occurred. • In the last five years, Dakota County has had one research and development facility constructed and it has been converted to offices. Source: Gloria Pinke, Dakota County Assessing Services. • The five year absorption rate for the East Bloomington & South of River Region has been 101 ,613 square feet annually according to 2003 NAIOP Annual Office Market Update. • The site would be competing with other locations in the market that are ready to be developed. • A project with 3.8 million feet would be heavily sought and the likelihood that it would be in a tax increment district for at least 8 years is high. If Eagan does not offer TIF, other municipalities would for this type of project. • Large corporate project, such as Best Buy and Medtronic have required financial assistance. • Best Buy is 2.5 million square feet and is currently 25% vacant. The analysis completed by Springsted does not take into consideration fiscal disparities or the state -wide tax. Additionally, the $13.4 million of cumulative cash flow does not represent the possibility of a tax increment district which would negatively impact the projection. I adjusted Springsted's analysis to represent the 85 acres of developable property, fiscal disparities impact, and state wide taxes. PROJECT INFORMATION Total Value Sq. Sq. Phase USE Acres Ft. /Units Ft. /Units Taxes Total Market Class New Year Date Value Rate Tax Capacity Built Payable R &D 1-A Office 22.5 759,686 70.00 476,723 53,178,020 2.00% 1,063,560 2005 2007 R &D 2 -A Office 22.5 759,686 70.00 353,698 53,178,020 2.00% 1,063,560 2006 2008 R &D 3 -A Office 22.5 759,686 70.00 215,294 53,178,020 2.00% 1,063,560 2007 2009 R &D 4 -A Office 17.5 759,686 70.00 123,025 53,178,020 2.00% 1,063,560 2008 2010 TOTAL 85 3,038,744 1,168,740 212,712,080 4,254,242 Prepared by liars aes Ctolst ltireg Service, IBC. n�X 4 SUMMARY The three scenarios outlined above represent the possible development alternatives for the site. With the exception of the Loan Oak preferred mixed -use scenario, the other two have utilized the optimal conditions and market expectations stipulated by Springsted. I have compensated for amount of actual developable land (84.5 acres) and the necessary additional commercial taxes not included in the original analysis: fiscal disparities and state wide taxes. Scenario Increase Market Value Net Local Taxes (5 years) Mixed Use $ 241,750,000 $ 9,637,815 Office Warehouse $ 61,837,776 $ 1,524,123 Research & Development $ 212,712,080 $ 9,244,730 Looking at the two key revenue generating factors Market Value and local taxes, the Mixed Use Development is the best alternative. It is important to note that the Research and Development analysis used the optimal amount of square feet in the valuation, although the assumptions used for the size of the development are not market driven. Prepared by axsness Cortsiaitaa>g Services, Inc 5 5 YEAR R& D; TAX CALCULATION.: YEAR BASE MV NEW MV BASE TAXES LOCAL TAXES F/D TAXES MN STATE TAXES MV TAXES NEW TAXES NET NEW LOCAL TAXES 2007 3,954,900 53,178,020 130,451 605,939 518,653 579,077 84,298 476,723 475,489 2008 3,954,900 106,356,040 130,451 2,019,775 1,555,959 1,737,230 252,893 830,421 1,889,324 2009 3,954,900 159,534,060 130,451 2,423,756 2,074,612 2,316,307 337,191 1,045,715 2,293,306 2010 3,954,900 212,712,080 130,451 2,423,756 2,074,612 2,316,307 252,893 1,168,740 2,293,306 2011 3,954,900 212,712,080 130,451 2,423,756 2,074,612 2,316,307 337,191 1,168,740 2,293,306 TOTAL 652,253 9,896,983 8,298449 9,265,228 1,264,467 4,690,339 $9,244,730 SUMMARY The three scenarios outlined above represent the possible development alternatives for the site. With the exception of the Loan Oak preferred mixed -use scenario, the other two have utilized the optimal conditions and market expectations stipulated by Springsted. I have compensated for amount of actual developable land (84.5 acres) and the necessary additional commercial taxes not included in the original analysis: fiscal disparities and state wide taxes. Scenario Increase Market Value Net Local Taxes (5 years) Mixed Use $ 241,750,000 $ 9,637,815 Office Warehouse $ 61,837,776 $ 1,524,123 Research & Development $ 212,712,080 $ 9,244,730 Looking at the two key revenue generating factors Market Value and local taxes, the Mixed Use Development is the best alternative. It is important to note that the Research and Development analysis used the optimal amount of square feet in the valuation, although the assumptions used for the size of the development are not market driven. Prepared by axsness Cortsiaitaa>g Services, Inc 5 City of Eagan Advisory Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 27, 2004 Page 22 K. COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN AMENDMENT & PLANNED DEVELOPMENTAMENDMENT — LOAN OAK DEVELOPMENT, LLC A Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment of approximately 83 acres from Special Area /Office Service to Special Area /Medium Density Residential, located on Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Silicon Graphics First Addition and Outlot D, Cray Second Addition, located in the East half of Section 1. Community Development Director Jon Hohenstein introduced this item and discussed the information presented in the City Staff report dated April 22, 2004, including the background and history. Assistant Engineer John Gorder stated the infrastructure impact is less with the proposed application. Peter Coyle, Attorney for Loan Oak Development, LLC stated the City Code provides that the underlying residential resides. He explained that the property owners have held on to the property as commercial property for over 20 years and should: be able to develop the property. He stated the commercial expectations for this area have�changed. Gary Tushie, Architect for the proposal described the type of homes as being luxury and upscale. He stated there would be a variety of lifecycle homes i the development. He stated Charles Cudd Homes and Wooddale Homes are two of the builders for the villa and single - family homes. He stated the single family homes would be priced in the one million dollar range. Ryland Homes would be e g buildin urban and senior manor homes in the center of the � development. He discussed t#he proposed transit facility that would include several retail components such asp a hair salon, coffee shop, and bagel shop. He stated the natural environment would be :preserved along with the creation of a butterfly garden, and other gardens for resident usa Chair Heyl opened the public hearing. Jon Todd, 6689 Argenta Trail, Inver Grove Heights stated he has lived in the area for 36 years. He stated there is already electric wiring in the platted streets. He stated preference that the property be zoned residential. Roy Fuhrmann, Director of Environment for the Metropolitan Airports Commission discussed perception of airport noise and effects on different people at different distances around the airport. There being no further public comment, Chair Heyl closed the public hearing and turned the discussion back to the Commission. The Advisory Planning Commission took a five- minute recess and reconvened at 10:35 p.m. Nick Dragisich of Springsted, the City's financial consulting firm indicated that, in their report, taxes, stated revenue and expenditures affecting the City of Eagan only were reviewed, and broad averages based on City experiences only were considered. City of Eagan Advisory Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 27, 2004 Page 23 Chair Heyl asked if the Planned Development had expired. City Attorney Bob Bauer explained that the Planned Development has not expired because the City did not pass resolution implementing it. He stated the Cray Campus Planned Development is still in effect along with conditions that do not have expiration dates. Community Development Director Jon Hohenstein explained that Ecolab has acquired almost everything of the Cray Campus. Chair Heyl explained that the City Council adopted the Comprehensive Guild Plan- special area that included this area in 2001. She asked if they wanted to change the Comprehensive Guild Plan. She asked what had changed since 2002 that would make this medium density better for the area and the City now, and in the long run. She explained that the Advisory Planning Commission looks at the applications for future as well s the present time. She stated the airport noise was contoured, all of north Eagan is industrial /commercial, and they have avoided residential developments in these areas. Office /service areas must be on the northeast side of Eagan. She discussed possible future residential properties such as Diamond T Ranch, and golf courses that have requested zoning changes She stated the proposed area as industrial /commercial has not become less desirable since 2002; therefore it should be kept that way. She lastly stated that this is the last area for office /service: in the City of Eagan Member Leeder stated agreement with Chair Heyl. He explained that this area has always been seen as office /service designation. He stated 20 years is a long time'to hold property, however some hold land for longer and want no change to the zoning. The airport researched a possible move, however did not, therefore they will be in there current location for a long time. He stated there have been different impacts the noise contours, including the September 11` attacks. He stated the desire to kee ' p �nighttime flights the same, develop the proposed area as office /service, and : keep :residentiat development away from this area. He lastly stated that residential developments: should not be placed near a runway that may grow in the future, and the value of the property to Eagan will b higher if developed as commercial and or industrial. Member Bendt stated i t is reasonable to expect development after 20 years. He stated without the airport noise, this are a:would be a great area for residential development. He stated the proposal iska good looking developmentand he is in favor of approval. Member Hansen, agreed with Member Bendt and stated favor of approval, however he is concerned with t*airport noi and the City's responsibility for the noise. He stated if people are educated and buy homes in the airport noise contours, that is there choice. He lastly stated he would not like to see theCity exclude the possibility of residential development in this area. Peter Coyle, Attorneyfor Loan Oak Development, LLC discussed the measures taken to assure the qualification for residential development in the area. He stated the economy has drastically changed since 2002. Community Development Director Jon Hohenstein stated in regard to airport noise issues, the City has been very clear on the current airport noise policy. He explained that the area would still be in noise contour four (4) even if the noise policy were to be reconfigured. City of Eagan Advisory Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 27, 2004 Page 24 Member Heyl moved, Member Leeder seconded a motion to recommend denial of a Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment to change the land use designation in Special Area 1 from Office /Service to Medium Density (MD) residential and Park (P) for approximately 27 acres of undeveloped land located south of 1 -494, west of the IGH corporate boundary, in the NE 1/4 of Section 1. Chair Heyl stated her reasons for denial of the proposal as being: 1. The limited area remaining in Eagan for office /service designation, and the fit for that use in this area. 2. All of north Eagan has been consistently developed as of 2002, the time when the area was last Comprehensive Guided, specifically Ecolab and The Waters development. 3. The City had other office /service area, which was partially dedicated to a Community Center. 4. The surrounding major roadways make since for big businesses such as Ecolab. 5. The airport noise fits better with office /service designation, rather than residential designation. 6. The City is considering the present time, along with 10 years from now, and 15 years from now. 7. Time has not expired on the Planned Development; therefore it is still in effect, and the conditions under the Planned Development should still be supported. Member Bendt explained that he is looking at it from the land owner's perspective in that the owner should be allowed to develop his land A vote was taken. Aye: Chair Heyl and Member Leeder Nay: Member Bendt and Member Hansen Motion= °failed 2 -2. IV. OTHER BUSINESS VI. ADJOURNMENT There was no Other Business discuss at this time. '4, et, ,_.. V. VISITORS TO BE HEARD (FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA) There were no visitors to be heard for items not on the agenda. Member Heyl moved, and Member Leeder seconded a motion to adjourn the Advisory Planning Commission meeting at 11:30 p.m. PLANNING REPORT CITY OF EAGAN REPORT DATE: April 22, 2004 CASE: 01- CG- 02 -02 -04 APPLICANT: Jon Blanchar HEARING DATE: April 27, 2004 PROPERTY OWNER: Loan Oak Development APPLICATION DATE: February 18, 2004 REQUEST: Comp. Guide Plan Amendment PREPARED BY: City Staff LOCATION: SE 1/4 of Section 1 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: SA # 1 ZONING: PD — Planned Development SUMMARY OF REQUEST Based on the application and supporting information submitted, the City is reviewing the request to amend the Comprehensive Guide Plan to support Medium Density residential and Park. The applicant's submittal also references an office condominium product on five acres that the current Guide Plan designation allows. The applicant is requesting a meeting with the Advisory Planning Commission (APC) to present a concept plan to discuss the feasibility of a Planned Development and approval of Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment to change the land use designation in Special Area 1 from Office /Service to Medium Density (MD) residential (4 -12 units /acre) and Park (P) for approximately 80 acres of undeveloped land located north of Lone Oak Road, west of the Inver Grove Heights (IGH) corporate boundary, in the SE 1/4 of Section 1. AUTHORITY FOR REVIEW The attorney representing the applicant submitted a narrative that asserts that the existing Planned Development zoning can be amended to accommodate the residential use without amending the Comprehensive Guide Plan. Despite that, they have applied for a Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment which is being processed at this time. The narrative also states that the City will be liable of acting in a way that is arbitrary and capricious if a denial of the applicant's request is based on the Waters Plan (Special Area 1). The City Attorney and staff have reviewed the zoning and Comprehensive Guide Plan history of the subject site and found that the site had a zoning of R -1, Single Family with the 1964 subdivision known as Delaware Estates. The property retained the R -1 zoning until Cray Planning Report — Loan Oak Development, LLC. April 27, 2004 Page 2 Research acquired and rezoned it to Planned Development in the early 1990's; the R -1 zoning district definition allowed a density of 0 -3 units /acre. Also, since the City's first Comprehensive Guide Plan in 1974, the property has been guided for retail, office, office /showroom and research and development. Planned Development Concept There is no APC or City Council action associated with the presentation of a concept plan. Chapter 11, Section 11.60, Subd. C, 2 Concept Plan states: ...any person may request a meeting with the APC to present a concept plan to discuss the feasibility of a Planned Development. Such request shall be made by addressing a letter to the APC where upon said request shall be heard at a subsequent meeting. Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment The City's Comprehensive Guide Plan was prepared pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.864. As defined by statute, the Land Use Plan is a guide and may be amended from time to time as conditions change. The City's Guide Plan is to be implemented by official controls such as zoning and other fiscal devices. The creation of land use districts and zoning is a formulation of public policy and a legislative act. As such, the classification of land uses must reasonably relate to promoting the public health, safety, morals and general welfare. When a change to a City's Comprehensive Guide Plan is requested, it is the City's responsibility to determine if the change is in the best long -range interests of the city and future property owners. The standard of review of a city's action in approving or denying a Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment is whether there exists a rational basis for the decision as to whether to modify the present plan. A rational basis standard has been described to mean having legally sufficient reasons supportable by the facts which promote the general health, safety and welfare of the City. EXISTING CONDITIONS The site is undeveloped and consists of varying topography, trees /woodlands, and wetlands. The site is adjacent to the area commonly referred to as The Waters office park. Adjacent properties include the 480,000 SF Ecolab (originally Cray Research) Campus to the west and the 264,000 SF Northwest Airlines (NWA) Corporate Headquarters and the 279,000 SF NATCO training facility to the northwest. BACKGROUND/HISTORY Except for a small portion, the subject site is located outside of the 1985 Laukka -Beck Eagan Planned Development that incorporated approximately 450 acres in northeast Eagan. Cray Research acquired and rezoned the subject site, approximately 80 acres, adjacent to the east boundary of the existing campus in the early 1990's for a buffer, to control future development adjacent to its campus, and for possible future expansion. Year Zoning Guide Plan Designation Pre -1960 Ag N/A 1961 -64 R -1 (Delaware Estates) N/A 1969 -70 R -1 N/A 1973 -74 R -1 RSC 1985 R -1 Discussion re: residential (no action) 1988 R -1 CPD 1991 PD and R -1 CPD 1999 PD CPD 2002 PD Special Area 1 — 0/S (Office /Service) Planning Report — Loan Oak Development, LLC. April 27, 2004 Page 3 ZONING & COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE GUIDE PLAN The Zoning and Guide Plan history for the bulk of the site (approx. 80 acres) is listed below: SURROUNDING USES The site is adjacent to the 1985 Laukka -Beck Eagan Planned Development that incorporated approximately 450 acres in northeast Eagan. This Planned Development called for the establishment of office /retail, office retail /showroom, and research development uses throughout the site. Existing development in the proximity of the subject site consists of large scale corporate office (Ecolab, NWA, and the USPS) and a significant amount of office, office - showroom and office - warehouse development. The following existing uses, zoning, and comprehensive guide plan designations surround the subject property: North - Undeveloped; zoned Ag; guided Special Area - 0/S (Office /Service). South - Lone Oak Road/Gift of Mary/large lot homesteads zoned PD (Gift of Mary) and Ag; guided Special Area - 0/S (Office /Service). East - Inver Grove Heights; zoned Ag; guided low density residential. West - Ecolab (formerly Cray) campus; zoned PD; guided Special Area - 0/S (Office /Service). Planning Report — Loan Oak Development, LLC. April 27, 2004 Page 4 EVALUATION OF REQUEST The applicant's submittals allow the City to review the Guide Plan Amendment in relation to the pending amendment application for the 27 acre Laukka -Beck parcel north of the site. Additionally, it stands to reason that if the Guide Plan is amended for the two pending applications, the 38 acre parcel that lies between the two would likely follow the same path. As such, policy makers will want to be cognizant of the potential that a total of 148 acres may ultimately be influenced. MD — MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE DESIGNATION The MD Comp Guide designation category provides areas for medium density attached housing units, including two - family dwellings, townhomes, and condominiums. Under certain circumstances, small lot detached single family units may also be appropriate. Allowable gross densities within this land use category range from 4 -12 units /acre, including common area. LOAN OAK, LLC. PROPOSAL If the requested land use amendment is approved, Loan Oak Development, LLC proposes 488 total housing units on approximately 80 acres for a gross density of 6 units /acre and 48,000 SF of office condo on approximately 5 acres. The proposed housing, including senior housing, consists of a mix of single family, a mix of townhome products and condominiums. The 48,000 SF of office condo portion of the proposal is located on property originally included with the 1985 Laukka -Beck Eagan Planned Development and would not require a Comp Plan amendment to develop as proposed. TAX BASE IMPACTS The applicant has submitted Tax Benefit Study. The information presents a five -year tax analysis that, based on the consultant's assumptions, concludes that "The housing scenario provides a significant tax revenue advantage over the commercial option." The City's fiscal consultant, Springsted, has reviewed the study and has provided an analysis, which is attached, of the assumptions and alternatives outlined in the applicant's study. Springsted's analysis indicates that the relative tax revenue and service cost impacts of residential and commercial development alternatives are highly sensitive to the assumptions applied and that residential development typically places a higher demand on local government services than comparable values or intensities of commercial development. Ordinarily, tax base comparisons have not been presented the City's analyses of land use applications. It is included in this case because it was included in the applicant's submittal. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Any development of the subject site will be required to address the physical and environmental factors that could influence the development potential of the property. As proposed, the Planning Report — Loan Oak Development, LLC. April 27, 2004 Page 5 residential unit count exceeds the threshold requiring a m andatory Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) to be prepared. Planning Report — Loan Oak Development, LLC. April 27, 2004 Page 6 Grading /Topography The site is generally open with varying topography and wooded areas around natural lowlands and wetlands. Trees/Vegetation Much of the site consists of open grassland or water and approximately 30% of the site is wooded. As such, development should be possible with minimal impact to the existing vegetation. The City's Tree Preservation Ordinance will apply to any development of the site. Wetlands A large portion of the northern 40 acre parcel is occupied by an unnamed DNR designated water body that has the DNR ID# 19 -54 and approximately 2/3 of the 80 acre site lying within a Shoreland Zoning area. Storm Water Drainage /Water Quality Ponds and wetland complexes within the site could be utilized for storm water management, along with constructed water quality ponding, for development of this site. Airport Noise Considerations The proposed development site is located 4 %2 miles from the parallel runways at MSP, in line with the primary departure flight tracks and adjacent to the primary arrival tracks for those runways. As such, the site is located in Noise Zone 4 as defined by the Metropolitan Council Policy Contours adopted in 1996. Within Noise Zone 4, office, commercial and industrial development is considered compatible. The development of residential uses with individual entrances is considered conditional and the development of residential uses with shared entrances, such as typical apartments, is considered provisional. The definitions of those terms are discussed more completely in the staff's aircraft noise report, which is attached. Historically, the City has attempted, where possible, to minimize land uses that would be in conflict with operations at MSP. To that end, it has guided and zoned much of the northeastern portion of the City for compatible office, commercial and industrial uses in what is commonly referred to as the Eagan- Mendota Heights Corridor. The Corridor and the related policies of the City of Eagan, the Metropolitan Council and the Metropolitan Airports Commission are based on the concept that noise compatible land uses are the most effective means of preventing noise nuisance. As noted above, the City's adopted Comprehensive Guide Plan currently designates the area as Special Area — 0/S (Office /Service). If residential uses are to be considered as proposed, the threshold question is whether residential uses would be appropriate in this area and, if the City determines that to be the case, regional policy provides guidance in gauging whether such uses can be provisionally or conditionally acceptable. Planning Report — Loan Oak Development, LLC. April 27, 2004 Page 7 Summary — Environmental Impacts As proposed, the residential unit count exceeds the threshold for a mandatory EAW to be prepared prior to consideration of rezoning and/or subdivision application. Development of the site should be possible with minimal impact to the existing vegetation. A large portion of the northern 40 acre parcel is occupied by an unnamed water body that has the DNR ID# 19 -54 and approximately 2/3 of the 80 acre site lying within a Shoreland Zoning area. Historically, the City has attempted, where possible, to minimize land uses that would be in conflict with operations at MSP. In response to anticipated aircraft noise, the applicant's noise consultant states that interior noise attenuation can be accommodated easily with good building practices. The Metropolitan Council Aircraft Noise Policies defines specific findings that need to be made in addition to the development's capacity to achieve noise attenuation for individual entry residential development. The City will need to determine whether it concurs or differs with the applicant's position regarding the appropriateness of residential uses in Noise Zone 4. INFRASTRUCTURE Streets /Access /Circulation Public street access for the site is available onto Lone Oak Road (Dakota County Road 26). Access for a specific development proposal to Lone Oak Road will need to be reviewed and approved by Dakota County. Traffic Impacts The developer has submitted a traffic study that concludes "...that the proposed concept development plan would cause less traffic impact on nearby roadways than would occur if the property developed in accordance with the existing zoning." The City's traffic engineer concurs that the proposed residential use will result in less peak and less total daily trips being generated in comparison to a development consistent with Office /Service Guide Plan designation. Storm Water Drainage The entire site lies within Drainage District F (as designated in the City Storm Water Management Plan — 1990), and ultimately drains to the west toward O'Neil Pond near Highways 55 and 149. Ponds and wetland complexes within the site could be utilized for storm water management, along with constructed water quality ponding, for development of this site. Utilities Lateral sanitary sewers have been stubbed to serve the sites from the Cray Research and NWA campuses, and at the Lone Oak Drive and Lone Oak Road intersection, to the west. Sanitary sewer District N (as designated in the City's Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan — 2000) serves Planning Report — Loan Oak Development, LLC. April 27, 2004 Page 8 the entire site. The wastewater flows associated with a possible medium density residential development are estimated to be less than those anticipated with commercial/ industrial development in the 2000 Sewer Plan. Therefore, the lateral and trunk sanitary sewer lines serving the area would have sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed land use change. The City's Comprehensive Water Supply and Distribution Plan (1996) identifies the need for a trunk water line extension along Lone Oak Road, and associated connection to water lines within the Cray Research property, to serve development of the southern portion of the subject site. Summary - Infrastructure Development of the proposed residential use will result in less peak and less total daily trips being generated from the site in comparison to a development consistent with Office /Service Guide Plan designation. The lateral and trunk sanitary sewer lines serving the area would have sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed land use change. COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE IMPACTS This section includes information on the City's residential land supply, major office land supply and development goals. Residential Land Supply The applicant has submitted a Housing Study prepared by a consultant that states, in part, that "Eagan is a highly desirable residential community with a substantial amount of employment." The applicant's Housing Study also states the type of amenities sought by likely buyers of the proposed residential units and concludes with "We believe that your respective residential developments will provide today's buyers with the features and amenities they are seeking." An update of Eagan's housing mix was completed in October 2003. The update shows that the City is maintaining an excellent mix of housing types and life cycle housing choices. As indicated in the City's 2000 Comprehensive Plan, the City achieved a strong diversity of housing types by 1998. At that time, 47% of Eagan's housing consisted of attached, multi - family units, where the metropolitan average and Metropolitan Council Livable Community goal for attached housing was around 38 %. The October 2003 breakdown shows a small increase in percentage of single family detached housing since 1998; however, when planned units are factored in, the total mix of housing remains nearly identical to 1998 levels. The proposed residential development on the subject site and the Laukka -Beck site to the north will result in an attached unit percentage of 48.4 %. In addition to City -wide land use and housing supply, the housing balance and density within the surrounding area should be considered. Approved but not yet built, Gift of Mary was determined to be an institutional use and the rezoning to Planned Development was deemed consistent with Planning Report — Loan Oak Development, LLC. April 27, 2004 Page 9 the Office /Service Guide Plan designation which provides Limited Business as a compatible zoning district. The subject site is isolated from other Eagan residential neighborhoods. The nearest existing residential use is the large -lot Rural Residential area (Special Area 3) located south of Lone Oak and north of Highway 55. Similar to the subject site, the Special Area 3 Comprehensive Guide Plan for this area stipulates the ultimate development being commercial in nature, consistent with the Office /Service Guide Plan designation. Major Office Land Supply One of the larger "major office" parcels (80 acres) has been developed for activities other than major office. In the mid- 1990's, an application to change the Guide Plan designation to mid - density residential was considered for the 80 acre Argosy /Central Park parcel (formerly owned by Sperry). The City's Commercial Land Use Study Background Report (February 1994) includes goals adopted by the City's Economic Development Commission to promote and retain a strong and diverse tax base and employment base. The report also cautioned that "as Eagan continues to grow, suitable land for corporate offices could become scarce if allowed to develop with whatever is "hot" on the market at the time. As such, the City must consider how much land to set aside for corporate office parks in the long run, to prevent an erosion of our supply of suitable land. !Y The Commercial Land Use Study Interim Report Working Policies (April 1994) concluded that Eagan's geographic location in the region makes the City a prime candidate for attracting major corporate offices and recommends that large tracts of suitable land (e.g. adjacent to major roadways) should be preserved and promoted for major corporate office or institutional facilities. The relevance of the Commercial Land Use Study goals /policies stated above is a determination for City policy makers. Special Area 1 Conclusions and Land Use Policies Special Area 1 (The Waters), adopted in December 2001, concludes that in recognition of surrounding land uses, traffic volumes and the area's inclusion in the aircraft noise zone, the long -term desirability of residential uses (several existing agriculturally and residentially zoned properties scattered throughout the area) in the area is considered questionable. Adopted policies include that the City will discourage any additional residential development, including further subdivision of any existing residential property and that the City ultimately expects the entire area, save for the Trinity Lutheran Church property, to develop as office, office showroom, research and development, and neighborhood business uses. Planning Report — Loan Oak Development, LLC. April 27, 2004 Page 10 The existing residential uses are considered transitional; however, the transition from residential to commercial would occur via private market forces. Summary — Comprehensive Land Use Impacts An Eagan housing mix review (as of October 2003) illustrates that the City is maintaining an excellent mix of housing types and life cycle housing choices. As indicated in the City's 2000 Comprehensive Plan, the City achieved a strong diversity of housing types by 1998. At that time, 47% of Eagan's housing consisted of attached, multi - family units, where the metropolitan average and Metropolitan Council Livable Community goal for attached housing was around 38 %. The October 2003 breakdown shows a small increase in percentage of single family detached housing since 1998; however, when planned units are factored in, the total mix of housing remains nearly identical to 1998 levels. The proposed residential development on the subject site and the Laukka -Beck site to the north will result in an attached unit percentage of 48.4 %. The Commercial Land Use Study cautioned that "as Eagan continues to grow, suitable land for corporate offices could become scarce if allowed to develop with whatever is "hot" on the market at the time. As such, the City must consider how much land to set aside for corporate office parks in the long run, to prevent an erosion of our supply of suitable land." The existing supply of land available for office /research and development is extremely limited, particularly 40+ contiguous acres. The Commercial Land Use Study Interim Report Working Policies concluded that Eagan's geographic location in the region makes the City a prime candidate for attracting major corporate offices and recommends that Iarge tracts of suitable land (e.g. adjacent to major roadways) should be preserved and promoted for major corporate office or institutional facilities. In keeping with the City's effort to avoid compatibility issues with operations at MSP, the Waters Plan discourages residential development in northeast Eagan. SCHOOL SYSTEM This section will provide information regarding the potential impact of the proposed land use change on the public school system. The subject site is located in ISD 196 and, according to the district; the subject area has not previously been considered an area that would generate students for 196. The evaluation includes the existing capacity and enrollment projections for the schools that would serve this area and an estimated demand for school services with the additional students from the proposed and potential residential development. Capacity and Enrollment Projections The area is served by three schools, Glacier Hills Elementary, Dakota Hills Middle School and Eagan High School. Glacier Hills has a capacity of 615 and is projected at 455 for the 2004 -05 Planning Report — Loan Oak Development, LLC. April 27, 2004 Page 11 school year. Dakota Hills has a capacity of 1,255 and is projected at 1,369 for 2004 -05. Eagan HS has a capacity of 1,915 but has a projected enrollment of 2,202 for 2004 -05. Estimated Impacts Based on the unit/housing type proposed by the applicant, ISD 196 would expect the Loan Oak proposal to generate 34 elementary students, 17 middle school students and 22 high school students or a total of 73 students. While there are clearly capacity issues being experienced at the Middle School and High School serving this area, the anticipated increase in students generated from the proposed development does not appear to exacerbate the situation in a significant way. Summary — School System The area is served by three schools, Glacier Hills Elementary, Dakota Hills Middle School and Eagan High School. Although capacity issues exist with Dakota Hills and Eagan HS, the anticipated increase in students due to the proposed development does not appear to impact the situation in a significant way. PARKS AND RECREATION SYSTEM The park section reviews the implications of the proposed land use change on the parks and recreation system at both the neighborhood and City -wide levels. Under the existing Comprehensive Plan, the City would have no need for a park in this area and would assume a cash park dedication for development in this area. Policy makers should consider the costs associated with improving and perpetually maintaining a new park facility in relation to a cash park dedication (with commercial development) that would enhance the City's Park Site fund. Park Systems Plan The current park System Plan, updated in 1994, does not designate any parks in this area of the City. The property has long been designated for office, research and development, etc. There are not any City -wide park facilities in the immediate area and no convenient facilities in the general area. Policy 4 of the Comprehensive Guide Plan, Chapter 7 (Parks), "Land Acquisition, Facility Development and Maintenance," states: The City will pursue the acquisition and development of neighborhood parks in order that each neighborhood service area, as illustrated in the Park System Plan, is adequately served with appropriate recreational facilities. Planning Report — Loan Oak Development, LLC. April 27, 2004 Page 12 Neighborhood Parks The proposed development site is within Park Planning District 4 of the Systems PIan and is indicated as an area "not served" by a park. With the residential units proposed, there will be a need to provide park services to the area. The City has always attempted to adhere to a policy of providing a park within a half mile of every residential unit. The nearest neighborhood park to the development area would be Bur Oaks Park which is anywhere from %2 to nearly 1 '/z miles from units in the development. To get to Bur Oaks Park, residents of the proposed development would either have to drive to the park or have pedestrians crossing Lone Oak Road and Highway 55, a four -lane arterial carrying highway traffic loads. There currently is no trail connection. Improvement costs would naturally vary depending on how the land was used and what the open space was used for, but a very preliminary number for turning flat ground into green space is $8,000 to $10,000 per acre. The cost can fluctuate depending on topography. The cost of developing park amenities is highly variable. For a neighborhood park, $75,000 to $100,000 is a reasonable estimate. Routine maintenance, also a variable, can run about $800 to $1,000 per acre/ per annum. This includes both the value cost of labor and equipment and the actual cost of materials. Supporting information provided by the applicant includes reference to the creation of an executive nine hole golf course as part of the design. At this time, the Parks and Recreation Department is not in a position to operate such a golf feature because the maintenance responsibilities and costs of a golf facility are very significant. The department is not currently in a position to accept either operational or financial responsibility for a course. This does not preclude the developer from creating and operating a golf facility. Also, such a narrowly focused use of park land appears to conflict with the Comprehensive Guide Plan and Park Systems goals of providing a `neighborhood park' for each neighborhood service area, and the recreation goal of activity diversity and all- inclusiveness. Thus, the development of a golf course would not be considered as a means to fulfill the park dedication requirement. Park Dedication The standard park land dedication for the density suggested on the property, greater than 3.5 units /acre, is 12% of the gross area. It is a sliding scale that decreases to 8% where the density is <2 units per acre. Where ponding has been determined to have a "park function," credit is given at 50 %, though a minimum of 70% of the dedication must be above the normal high water level. This formula is based upon there being 15 acres of parks and open space per 1,000 residents, of which, 12 acres is designated as "neighborhood parks." If the park dedication is to be met with land, there would be no cash dedication required. Summary — Parks and Recreation System Planning Report — Loan Oak Development, LLC. April 27, 2004 Page 13 The proposed development site is within Park Planning District 4 of the Systems Plan and is indicated as an area "not served" by a park. With the residential units proposed, there will be a need to provide park services to the area. There is an opportunity cost associated with a land versus cash park dedication in this area. In addition to foregoing an infusion of cash into the Park Site Fund that would be associated with a commercial development, the City would assume the expense of improving a park feature and the resource responsibility for on -going maintenance. Supporting information provided by the applicant includes reference to the creation of an executive nine hole golf course as part of the design. The Parks and Recreation Department is not currently in a position to accept either operational or financial responsibility for a course. However, this does not preclude the developers from creating and operating a private golf facility. The standard park land dedication for the proposed density, greater than 3.5 units per acre, is 12% of the gross area. The necessary land dedication would also reduce the net area available for private development. If the park dedication is to be met with land, there would be no cash dedication required. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS In evaluating this proposal, the following items should be considered: GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS > Loan Oak Development, LLC is requesting approval of a Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from Special Area Office /Service to Medium Density residential for approximately 80 acres located in northeast Eagan. > The MD Comp Guide designation category provides areas for medium density attached housing units, including two - family dwellings, townhomes, and condominiums. Under certain circumstances, small lot detached single family units may also be appropriate. Allowable gross densities within this land use category range from 4 -12 units /acre, including common area. > The Waters (Special Area 1) plan, adopted in December 2001, concludes that in recognition of the surrounding land uses, traffic volumes and the area's inclusion in the aircraft noise zone, the long -term desirability of residential uses (several existing agriculturally and residentially zoned properties scattered throughout the area) in the area is considered questionable. Planning Report — Loan Oak Development, LLC. April 27, 2004 Page 14 ➢ Cray Research acquired and rezoned the subject site, approximately 80 acres, adjacent to the east boundary of the existing campus in the early 1990's for a buffer, to control future development adjacent to its campus, and for possible future expansion. > The conceptual proposal presented by Loan Oak Development, LLC includes 488 total housing units on approximately 80 acres for a gross density of approximately 6 units /acre. The proposed housing, including senior housing, consists of a mix of single family, a mix of townhome products and condominiums. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ➢ The site contains some natural features that include varying topography, trees /woodlands, and wetlands. Development of the site should be possible with minimal impact to the existing vegetation. A large portion of the northern 40 acre parcel is occupied by an unnamed water body that has the DNR ID# 19 -54 and approximately 2/3 of the 80 acre site lying within a Shoreland Zoning area. > Ponds and wetland complexes within the site could be utilized for storm water management, along with constructed water quality ponding, for development of this site. > The applicant has stated that indoor noise impacts within the proposed residential property could be attenuated through appropriate building techniques. The applicant does not address other findings outlined within the regional aircraft noise policy and the housing market consultant suggests that outdoor uses /activities are desirable within the market group identified. The primary decision is whether residential use would be desirable for the City in the context of airport noise. If so, appropriate design and construction considerations would be essential. > The proposed residential unit count exceeds the threshold for a mandatory Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) to be prepared. The City Council will need to make a declaration on the need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) before any rezoning and/or subdivision application can be considered. INFRASTRUCTURE > Public street access to the site is available to Lone Oak Road (Dakota County Road 26). Access for a specific development proposal to Lone Oak Road will need to be reviewed and approved by Dakota County. ➢ Development of the proposed residential use will result in less peak and less total daily trips being generated from the site in comparison to a development consistent with Office /Service Guide Plan designation. > The lateral and trunk sanitary sewer lines serving the area would have sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed land use change. Planning Report — Loan Oak Development, LLC. April 27, 2004 Page 15 COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE IMPACTS > According to the City's 2000 Comprehensive Plan, the City achieved a strong diversity of housing types by 1998.At that time, 47% of Eagan's housing consisted of attached, multi- family units, where the metropolitan average and Metropolitan Council Livable Community goal for attached housing was around 38 %. D The October 2003 breakdown shows a small increase in percentage of single family detached housing since 1998; however, when planned units are factored in, the total mix of housing remains nearly identical to 1998 levels. The proposed residential development on the subject site and the Loan Oak Development site to the south will result in an attached unit percentage of 48.4 %. ➢ The Commercial Land Use Study Interim Report Working Policies (1994) concluded that Eagan's geographic location in the region makes the City a prime candidate for attracting major corporate offices and recommends that large tracts of suitable land should be preserved and promoted for major corporate office or institutional facilities. ➢ The City's Commercial Land Use Study Background Report (February 1994) states the goal "to promote and retain a strong and diverse tax base and employment base." The report also cautioned that "as Eagan continues to grow, suitable land for corporate offices could become scarce if allowed to develop with whatever is "hot" on the market at the time. As such, the City must consider how much land to set aside for corporate office parks in the long run, to prevent an erosion of our supply of suitable land." ➢ The Commercial Land Use Study Interim Report Working Policies (April 1994) concluded that Eagan's geographic location in the region makes the City a prime candidate for attracting major corporate offices and recommends that large tracts of suitable land (e.g. adjacent to major roadways) should be preserved and promoted for major corporate office or institutional facilities. > Special Area 1 concludes that the City will discourage any additional residential development in the area, including further subdivision of any existing residential property > In keeping with the City's effort to avoid land use compatibility issues with operations at MSP, the Waters Special Area Plan discourages residential development in northeast Eagan. The Metropolitan Council Airport Noise Policies provide guidance for the factors to be reviewed in considering whether to permit residential development within the Noise Zones. SCHOOL SYSTEM ➢ Three schools, Glacier Hills Elementary, Dakota Hills Middle School and Eagan High School serve this portion of ISD #196; although capacity issues exist with Dakota Hills Planning Report — Loan Oak Development, LLC. April 27, 2004 Page 16 and Eagan HS, the anticipated increase in students due to the proposed development does not appear to impact the situation in a significant way. PARKS SYSTEM D The proposed development site is within Park Planning District 4 of the Systems Plan and is indicated as an area "not served" by a park. With the residential units proposed, there will be a need to provide park services to the area. ➢ Consideration should be given to the opportunity cost associated with improving and perpetually maintaining a new park facility in relation to a cash park dedication (with commercial development) that would enhance the City's Park Site fund. ➢ Supporting information provided by the applicant includes reference to the creation of an executive nine hole golf course as part of the design. The Parks and Recreation Department is not currently in a position to accept either operational or financial responsibility for a course. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED To provide comment on the Planned Development Concept Plan. To recommend approval (or denial) of a Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment to change the land use designation in Special Area 1 from Office /Service to Medium Density (MD) residential for approximately 80 acres of undeveloped land located north of Lone Oak Road, west of the IGH corporate boundary, in the SE 1 /4 of Section 1. Planning Report — Loan Oak Development, LLC. April 27, 2004 Page 17 TABLE OF ATTACHMENTS LOCATION MAP PAGE 18 ZONING & COMP GUIDE MAP PAGE 19 APPLICANT NARRATIVE PAGES 20 — 29 LOAN OAK SKETCH PLAN PAGE .30 LONE OAK MIXED -USE SKETCH PLAN... RAG .31. LONE OAK MIXED -USE DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY.... 32 SPRINGSTED TAX BENEFIT ANALYSIS... Enclosed separately STAFF AIRPORT MEMO .PAG.S. 3.3 - 44 WATERS (SPECIAL AREA 1) PLAN PAGES 45 — 52 Mendota Hei • hts 1000 0 1000 2000 Feet city of eagan Development/Developer: Loan Oak Development Application: Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment Case No.: 01- CG- 02 -02 -04 Map Prepared using ERSI AreViiew 3.1. Parcel base map data provided by Dakota County Office of GIS and is current as of January 2004. THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY The City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this Information and are not responsible for errors or omissions. Location Map ........._.. Eagan Boundary /\, Street Centerline n Parcel Area OrT Building Footprint Current Zoning and Comprehensive Guide Plan Land Use Map Current Zoning: Zoning Map PD Planned Development 0 600 1200 5•.t Loan Oak Development Case No. 01- CG- 02 -02 -04 City of Eagan Community Development Department Parcel base map Information provlded.y Dakota County Land Survey Departmee .hne 2003. Zoning Information maintained byClty Start THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY The City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this Information. Comprehensive Guide Plan Use Map -' O Ge ./-'\ SA-0/S SA / SA-0/S A M Low ensity Res • e Current Land Use Designation: SA Special Area - Office /Service 13 <0 SA -0/S PD Agricul Subject Area r * Low Density Residential Subject -1 tt 1 000 0 600 1200 F »[ # ... - A is r *"."1".' S AI -O! 1 Current Zoning and Comprehensive Guide Plan Land Use Map Current Zoning: Zoning Map PD Planned Development 0 600 1200 5•.t Loan Oak Development Case No. 01- CG- 02 -02 -04 City of Eagan Community Development Department Parcel base map Information provlded.y Dakota County Land Survey Departmee .hne 2003. Zoning Information maintained byClty Start THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY The City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this Information. 1 a. Agricultural ./-'\ PD PD Agricul Subject PD \s Area # ... - A is Current Zoning and Comprehensive Guide Plan Land Use Map Current Zoning: Zoning Map PD Planned Development 0 600 1200 5•.t Loan Oak Development Case No. 01- CG- 02 -02 -04 City of Eagan Community Development Department Parcel base map Information provlded.y Dakota County Land Survey Departmee .hne 2003. Zoning Information maintained byClty Start THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY The City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this Information. ter_ - - r.:. -.e. `� t - _ � •-� - �"� Larkin Ho, ff man February 18, 2004 Ms. Carla Heyl, Chair Advisory Planning Commission City of Eagan City Hall 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Re: Loan Oak Development, LLC Mixed Use Development Dear Ms. Heyl: ATTORNEYS Larkin Hoffman Daly & Lindgren Ltd. 1500 Wells Fargo Plaza 7900 Xerxes Avenue South Minneapolis; Minnesota 55431 -1194 GENERAL: 952 - 835 -3800 FAX: 952- 896 -3333 WEB: www.larlcinhoffman.com Loan Oak Development, LLC ( "Loan Oak ") seeks approval from the City of Eagan ( "the City") to designate residential use rights under an existing Planned Development Agreement in order to pursue development of a mixed -use project on an 83.45 -acre parcel at the intersection of Lone Oak Road and Paradise Lane ( "the Site "). The mixed -use development will include: (1) low to medium density owner - occupied housing, (2) commercial office and office/showroom, (3) an executive -play nine (9) hole golf course and putting green, and (4) a public trail network around preserved wetlands and a protected lake. Alternatively, the existing Cray Research Agreement governing the use of the Site has expired and pursuant to City Ordinance, the underlying residential zoning of the Site is reinstated. Loan Oak is the successor to a Planned Development Agreement between the City and Cray Research, Inc. ( "the Cray PDA "). Loan Oak is pursuing an amendment as authorized by the Cray PDA to support its mixed -use development plan. The City Council can adopt this amendment without amending the Comprehensive Plan, since the right of amendment is contractually provided for by negotiated agreement of the parties, and Loan Oak's proposed uses conform with either the existing agreement or the underlying zoning. Cray PDA, para. 8. Moreover, by this request, Loan Oak is not seeking to rescind or alter the existing Planned Development ( "PD ") zoning of the Site and, therefore, the zoning remains consistent with Land Use Map of the City. However, staff believes an amendment is appropriate and has requested that Loan Oak process a Comprehensive Plan amendment with its PDA amendment request. Without conceding this point, Loan Oak proposes to amend the City's Comprehensive Plan to reflect the proposed residential uses on the Site. Loan Oak has completed several studies regarding the Project at the Site. These studies evaluated traffic, airport noise, housing demand and tax impacts. In each case, the impacts can be safely managed or represent an improvement over the uses contemplated by the City for the Site. Ms. Carla Heyl, Chair February 18, 2004 Page 2 Development History In 1987, Cray Research sought and received City approval of Planned Development zoning, and the City and Cray entered into a Planned Development Agreement relating to a 116 -acre corporate campus. Cray constructed its corporate headquarters on this property. The original Cray PD approval was a carve -out from the 458 -acre Laukka -Beck Planned Development Area. Subsequently, Cray acquired and rezoned two separate 40 -acre parcels, which together comprise the Loan Oak Site. This Planned Development zoning is reflected in a Planned Development Agreement dated February 2, 1987, but which apparently was not executed until 1992. The respective Planned Development rezonings affecting the Loan Oak Site are summarized below. 1989 PD Rezoning: Cray sought a rezoning of a 40 -acre parcel directly adjacent to the east of the original Cray 116 -acre campus. The 40 -acre parcel fronted on Lone Oak Road. The zoning application sought to amend the zoning designation of the subject property from R -4/R -1 to Planned Development. At the time, Cray did not propose, nor did the City commit to a specific use of this parcel in rezoning it. No development agreement was executed at the time of approval. This 40 -acre parcel continues to be zoned Planned Development on the City's Zoning Map, as an overlay to the pre - existing residential zoning. 1991 PD Rezoning: Cray rezoned a second 40 -acre parcel directly east of the original Cray campus and north of the 40 -acre parcel rezoned in 1989. As with the prior zoning change, Cray sought Planned Development zoning for this parcel, in place of R -1 zoning. As with the 1989 PD rezoning, neither Cray nor the City proposed specific uses for this property. This parcel continues to be zoned Planned Development on the City's Zoning Map, as an overlay to the pre- existing residential zoning. "1987" Planned Development Agreement The City has provided Loan Oak a copy of a Planned Development Agreement between the City and Cray bearing a date of February 2, 1987. However, it appears this document was not actually executed until the summer of 1992. It refers to the fact that "Cray has made application for rezoning of approximately 80 acres located at the northwest corner of Lone Oak Road and Argenta Trail...." The "1987" Cray PDA refers to a "Schedule C- Schedule of Development" to "be prepared and submitted to the City at the time of initial Development of the Property (sic)." It does not appear that this schedule was ever submitted or adopted given the lack of a defined use of the Site. No development activity has occurred on the Site since the respective actions in 1989 and 1991. While the Cray PDA was put in place to support Cray's business objectives, Cray has ceased operations at its original corporate headquarters location and the corporate campus has transferred to a series of successive owners. One of those owners, WAM!NET, has substantially downsized its business and the corporate building is again for sale. Loan Oak acquired the Site in 2002. 2/. Senior Cooperative Housing 150 units Active Adult Manor Homes 72 units Carriage Urban Townhomes 94 units Villas 69 units Condominiums 80 units Executive Single - Family Lots 23 units TOTAL 488 units (5.9 units per acre) Office Condo 48,000 square feet Wetland/Park Area 30.8 acres Usable Area 52.65 acres Greenspace (overall) 59 acres (69 %) TOTAL SITE AREA 83.45 acres Ms. Carla Heyl, Chair February 18, 2004 Page 3 Project Description The mixed -use project's total Site area is 83.45 acres with 59 acres of greenspace or 69% of the Site (30 acres of the Site is preserved wetland and park area). About 52 acres of the Site will actually be used for the mixed -use Project. Approximately 48,000 square feet of office -condo will be constructed on a 5 -acre parcel, directly adjacent to Lone Oak Road. Below is a summary of the mixed uses contemplated at the Site: The Cray PDA provides that it may be amended by mutual consent of the parties. Cray PDA, para. 8. The Cray PDA has been the basis of the City's regulatory regime for that area for more than a decade. Without waiving its right to rely on the underlying zoning, Loan Oak is seeking by this application to amend the Cray PDA to provide uses available in the underlying Residential Zoning District, together with commercial uses contemplated by the Cray PDA. Z. rte/ („T' Ms. Carla Heyl, Chair February 18, 2004 Page 4 City Comprehensive Plan — "The Waters Area Plan" The Site is guided Special Area ( "SA ") on the City's Land Use Map. According to the City's 2001 Land Use Plan, there were slightly more than 800 vacant acres designated as Special Area; an additional 124 acres are identified as `underutilized ". The Land Use Map notes that the Site is within the "Waters Area," with no elaboration of uses for this area. The Waters Plan and study "area is located in the extreme northeast corner of the City and overlays 640 acres of land. The area (is) bounded on the north by I -494 and on the east by the City of Inver Grove Height corporate limits. The vast majority of the study area is zoned PD, Planned Development." The Waters Plan, pg. 1 (2001). The Waters Area encompasses the so- called Laukka Beck Planned Development Area, which was established in 1985. According to the Waters Plan, "approximately 40 percent of the original [Laukka -Beck] Planned Development remains vacant or underutilized." The Loan Oak development footprint for the Site comprises less than ten percent (10 %) of the 640 -acre Waters Area. City Planned Development Ordinance The City's Planned Development Ordinance ( "the PD Ordinance ") does not enumerate permitted or conditionally permitted uses. Under the PD Ordinance, a Planned Development is intended to: • Provide greater flexibility in environmental design and relaxation of strict zoning standards in exchange for greater creativity and environmental sensitivity. • Recognize the economic and cultural advantages that will accrue to the residents of a planned community. • Encourage a more creative and efficient use of land. • Encourage the preservation and enhancement of desirable site characteristics, natural features, and open space. • Encourage a development pattern that is consistent with land use density, transportation facilities and community facilities objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. Zoning Ordinance, § 11.60, Subd. 18, A. (1 -5). Development which does not conform to an approved Final Development Plan requires an amendment to the existing Planned Development Agreement, processed in the same manner as a new Planned Development. Zoning Ordinance, § 11.60, Subd. 18, C. (15b). A Final Development Plan was never proposed or adopted for the Site. Loan. Oak, by this application, is seeking to designate the use rights for the Site, which were not specified either by Cray or by the City through prior approval of the Cray PDA. Ms. Carla Heyl, Chair February 18, 2004 Page 5 Finally, the Planned Development Ordinance provides as follows regarding termination of an approved Planned Development: Upon expiration of the specific time period approved by the city for total development of a planned development, the subject area shall become a permanent planned development district.... Provided, nevertheless, that if a planned development is not completed within the required time period, the planned development district classification shall automatically terminate as to that portion of the district that has not been developed. The requirements and provision of the underlying zoning classification in its entirety shall thereafter apply to the undeveloped area. Any factual disputes arising under this subsection shall be presented to and determined by a majority vote of the city council. Section 11.60, Subd. 18, C, 16 (emphasis supplied). Transportation Impacts Loan Oak and Laukka -Beck Eagan Partnership have jointly conducted a traffic study of their proposed developments. The analysis demonstrates total daily trips, along with peak hour traffic impacts which are substantially below those expected under the commercial- industrial development model endorsed in the Waters Plan. Addressing transportation impacts directly attributed to the proposed development would be the responsibility of the developer. The analysis by Benshoof & Associates is attached. Airport Noise Policies The Site is within the Metropolitan Airports Commission ( "the MAC ") Airport Noise Policy Area, Noise Exposure Zone 4. Noise Exposure Zone 4 is "best described as a transitional area where aircraft noise exposure might be considered moderate." Metropolitan Development Guide, Metropolitan Council, December, 1995. Under the Metropolitan Council's Airport Land - Use Compatibility Guidelines, single - family and multi- family uses, depending on their design, are either conditional or provisional uses. Conditional uses are conditionally acceptable upon review of the City Council. Provisional uses must comply with certain structured performance standards under the Metropolitan Area Aircraft Noise Attenuation Act, Minnesota Statutes § 473.192. Comprehensive Plan, § 5 (2001). Recently, the MAC published its new noise contour for the international airport. It demonstrates that the residential portion of the Loan Oak Site is entirely outside of both the 65 and 60 DNL noise contours. Consequently, noise impacts are not a factor affecting the viability of housing at the Site. Notwithstanding, both Loan Oak and Laukka -Beck have jointly undertaken an analysis of potential aircraft noise impacts. The analysis by David Braslau Associates confirms that noise Z 7 Ms. Carla Heyl, Chair February 18, 2004 Page 6 impacts are not a significant factor and can be dealt with through readily available sound attenuation technology. Land Supply/Market Pressure Loan Oak and Laukka -Beck have surveyed the market in the Waters Area to determine land supply and market demand. The commercial brokers we contacted believe that there is an oversupply of commercial/office /industrial property available within Eagan or adjacent communities. CSM currently owns approximately 70 acres within the Laukka -Beck Planned Development Area this property will support in excess of several hundred thousand square feet of new commercial or industrial space. The Twin Cities economy went through a significant expansion during the last decade and the Loan Oak Site was untouched. The Loan Oak Site is unattractive to the commercial/office market due to its remote location on the backside of the Laukka -Beck Planned Development Area. Laukka -Beck and Loan Oak Development have jointly retained Maxfield Research to evaluate the viability of residential development of their respective sites. The attached study documents the strong demand for "life- cycle" housing in the City, especially on the higher end. Given the market realities, Loan Oak believes, respectfully, that the proposed Project is a better use of the Site. Tax Impact of Proposed Development We have completed a five -year tax analysis for the Loan Oak/Laukka -Beck project in Eagan. The analysis used the following base information: • Tax information provided by the PID's • The 2003 net tax capacity rate for the City of Eagan • Proper class rates • The phasing and market values provided by Gary Tushie The housing scenario provides a significant tax revenue advantage over the commercial option. We have included copies of the analysis. 2 a67 Existing Vacant Land Commercial Housing_ 2,424,588 Total Taxes 154,954 971,855 Tax Capacity -- 1,104,355 2,656,500 Market Value 3,954,900 55,217,760 242,300,000 Five -Year Tax Revenue 774,621 3,029,589 10,743,848 Ms. Carla Heyl, Chair February 18, 2004 Page 6 impacts are not a significant factor and can be dealt with through readily available sound attenuation technology. Land Supply/Market Pressure Loan Oak and Laukka -Beck have surveyed the market in the Waters Area to determine land supply and market demand. The commercial brokers we contacted believe that there is an oversupply of commercial/office /industrial property available within Eagan or adjacent communities. CSM currently owns approximately 70 acres within the Laukka -Beck Planned Development Area this property will support in excess of several hundred thousand square feet of new commercial or industrial space. The Twin Cities economy went through a significant expansion during the last decade and the Loan Oak Site was untouched. The Loan Oak Site is unattractive to the commercial/office market due to its remote location on the backside of the Laukka -Beck Planned Development Area. Laukka -Beck and Loan Oak Development have jointly retained Maxfield Research to evaluate the viability of residential development of their respective sites. The attached study documents the strong demand for "life- cycle" housing in the City, especially on the higher end. Given the market realities, Loan Oak believes, respectfully, that the proposed Project is a better use of the Site. Tax Impact of Proposed Development We have completed a five -year tax analysis for the Loan Oak/Laukka -Beck project in Eagan. The analysis used the following base information: • Tax information provided by the PID's • The 2003 net tax capacity rate for the City of Eagan • Proper class rates • The phasing and market values provided by Gary Tushie The housing scenario provides a significant tax revenue advantage over the commercial option. We have included copies of the analysis. 2 a67 Ms. Carla Heyl, Chair February 18, 2004 Page 7 Project Discussion The City's PD Ordinance provides "[t]he advisory planning commission, in making a recommendation, and the council, in acting upon a plan, shall consider the following factors:" The consistency of the proposed Planned Development with the adopted or proposed Comprehensive Guide Plan of the City. The Waters Plan seeks to encourage the development of office and office /showroom uses, along with other commercial uses, in the Waters Area. A portion of the proposed mixed - use development will be office and/or office/showroom. While the Waters Plan . does not favor residential development, the market does not favor the guided uses. Cray Research itself, no longer exists; its successor owner, Wam!Net, likewise, is contracting in size. After 12 years, the Cray PDA should be revised or the underlying zoning reinstated. The residential component conforms to the underlying Residential zoning of the Site. The PD Ordinance provides for reinstatement of the underlying zoning when the PD lapses. The mixed development proposed is not inconsistent with overlaying the non - residential Waters Plan over an approved PD which does not specify uses and may revert to residential zoning. The Waters Plan seeks to promote development that presents an attractive image of the City and development which will retain the natural features of the area, including wetlands and mature vegetation. The proposed mixed -use development at the Site will establish an attractive image at an entrance to the City, while protecting the natural terrain of the Site. Development Stage review will confirm these protections. The Site is directly adjacent to the border of the City of Inver Grove Heights. Property in Inver Grove Heights adjacent to the Site is planned for residential development. Residential development on the Site will create an appropriate transition of uses between the two cities. The Waters Plan encourages new development in the Waters Area to incorporate sound attenuating construction techniques as suggested by the Metropolitan Council. Loan Oak will incorporate such construction techniques. Moreover, the Metropolitan Airports Commission has recently published its updated noise contours; the Site falls outside of the 60 DNL contour. This means that noise impacts attributed to aircraft do not pose a conflict with housing; in any event, whatever noise impacts exist can be addressed. The extent to which the proposed Planned Development is designed to form a desirable and unified environment within its own boundaries in terms of relationship of structures, patterns of circulation, visual character and sufficiency of drainage and utilities. The proposed master - planned mixed -use development will include owner - occupied low to medium density housing. The residential and commercial office and office /showroom uses and the executive nine (9) hole golf course will be designed to relate and function with one another, linked by trails and street systems. All aspects of the Project will be subject to City approvals, along with association management standards and requirements. Ms. Carla Heyl, Chair February 18, 2004 Page 8 The extent to which the proposed uses will be compatible with present and planned uses in the surrounding area. Residential and office commercial uses currently exist in the surrounding area. The Project is adjacent to land guided for residential in the City of Inver Grove Heights. Commercial property owners do not object to the Project. Residential customers place a premium on maintenance -free living, coupled with the goal of minimizing freeway commutes. The City's Cedarvale Plan is an example of the type of integration envisioned by Loan Oak's proposed Project. That any exceptions to the City Zoning Ordinance are justified by the design or the development. The PD Ordinance does not establish specific uses within a Planned Development. The proposed office, office/showroom uses are consistent with the provisions of the Agreement. The proposed residential uses are permitted at the Site on the basis of the underlying Residential zoning. Loan proposes to protect and dedicate substantial portions of the Site to the public through trails and active greenspace. The sufficiency of each Planned Development phase's size, composition, and arrangement in order that its construction and operation is feasible without dependence upon any subsequent phase. The proposed mixed -use development will be constructed in one phase. Each component of the Project will be self - sustaining. The burden or impact created by the Planned Development on parks, schools, streets, and other public facilities and utilities. The proposed mixed -use development will include the creation of City park and public trail network constructed by paid for by the developer. City utilities will be extended to the Site at the developer's cost. The impact of the Planned Development on environmental quality and on the reasonable enjoyment of the surrounding property. The proposed mixed -use development will protect the natural terrain of the Site as envisioned by the Waters Plan. Existing wetlands and lake area will be protected and shared with the public. The development will have no negative impact on the surrounding environment and will be beneficial to the City by creating an attractive entrance to the City. Legal Analysis Under Minnesota law, metropolitan communities, such as Eagan, are required to enact both Comprehensive Plan and regulatory controls, ie zoning and subdivision regulations. See generally Minn. Stat. 462.357 and 473.864, subd. 1. Minnesota law requires cities in the metropolitan area to zone land in conformity with their approved Comprehensive Plans. Minn. Stat. § 473.858, subd. 1. Notwithstanding the statutory directives, it is well established that the Comprehensive Plan remains "advisory" with "objectives, policies, standards and programs to guide public and private land use...." Minn. Stat. 473.859, subd. 1. Regulatory enforcement derives from the City's "official controls ", which include its Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance Z7. a�9 Ms. Carla Heyl, Chair February 18, 2004 Page 9 See PTL, LLC v. Chisago County Board of Commissioners, 656 N.W.2d 567 (Minn. App. 2003). The Minnesota Court of Appeals recently held that a County's Comprehensive Plan was merely an advisory device and did not, by itself, provide a substantive basis to deny a land use application which otherwise met the requirements of the County's official controls. PTL, LLC v. Chisago County Board of Commissioners, 656 N.W.2d 567 (Minn. App. 2003). The City's PD Ordinance cites compliance with the Comprehensive Plan as one of several factors to be considered in deciding whether to approve a specific Planned Development request. Given this fact, it would be improper to rely on the City's Comprehensive Plan to deny the Loan Oak request. See Amoco Oil Co. v. City of Minneapolis, 395 N.W.2d 115 (Minn. App. 1986). The City's obligations are satisfied by the existing Cray PDA, which was adopted in conformance with the City's Comprehensive Plan. Loan Oak does not propose to change the existing PD zoning. Instead, both the PDA and City PD Ordinance give the City broad discretion to approve uses within a PD Zoning District. The Cray PDA and the City's PD Ordinance expressly reserves the underlying residential zoning for the Site. Given the plain language of the City's PD Ordinance and the Cray PDA, City reliance on the Waters Plan to deny the Project would be arbitrary and capricious. The Cray PDA has never been considered conflicting with the Comprehensive Plan, even with unspecified uses and the residential use reversion rights. The PIanned Development Loan Oak proposes conforms with the Waters Plan or with the underlying zoning. Given the flexibility recognized by law in Comprehensive Planning, and given that the City's PD Ordinance only considers Comprehensive Plan conformity as a factor in evaluating a PD application, the Loan Oak proposal conforms with the City's PD Zoning Ordinance and does not conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. Conclusion Loan Oak requests: (1) an amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan to allow the development of a portion of the Site for residential use; and (2) an amendment to the Planned Development Agreement in force between the City and Loan Oak. Alternatively, Loan Oak contends that the Cray PDA is lapsed and that, according to the City's PD Ordinance, the underlying R -1/R -4 Zoning Districts are reinstated to the Site. Ms. Carla Heyl, Chair February 18, 2004 Page 10 Loan Oak respectfully requests the City's Advisory Planning Commission to recommend approval of its request to identify residential uses as allowed and compatible in connection with a mixed use development consisting of office, residential and recreational uses. 915995.1 Peter J. Coyle, for Larkin Hoffman Daly & Lindgren Ltd. cc: Mr. Jon Blanchar Mr. Jim Deanovic 9, a7i uirrryrwd1 it0rryrcai r.15[ mr t S i s - m wlawr(, I •E Y.. \ ( _\ tt •• utatimurs dIS1l ,, 6-\„."'.,,3\77,;___,.,;,,,c,-\\.c.,_. I ' iflaiik\%._ AL \J 11� = _- u 011 -75 Iva 26 (LONE OAK PD.> • 1 1J Kg Y i 33 r ■ / '11:: LONE OAK MIXED -USE Eagan, Minnesota ,►► � . ! 1 I - 86D c Ii•• 1, Ittwp • } $ 0 0 » NIP � � 2 {; ■ ' . g 9�2 G ! � _!�i!■ i f | §` | ■ | { | , 2 3 !. 73 LONE OAK MIXED-USE gan, M eo 32- a�� SITE DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY RESIDENTIAL 434 UNITS TOWNI -TOMES (SEE TIARU) 58 TOWNNOMES (BACK TO BACK) 110 CARRIAGE URBAN TOWNI -TOMES 94 VILLAS 61 EXECUTIVE SINGLE FAMILY LOTS 23 CONDOMINIUMS 80 SENIOR RESIDENTIAL 222 UNITS SENIOR COOP 150 ACTIVE ADULT " " MANOR .1-- 1011ES 72 TOTAL 1- 1OMES 656 UNITS COMMERCIAL OFFICE CONDO 48 SF COMBINED NORTH AND SOUTI -1 AREAS TOTAL (N- SIYE- 2G:91 ""�,C) "" " " " """" "110.35 ACRES (5 SITE 83.45 AC.) �REENSPACE 77 AC., 70% PARK 43.03 AC, 39% 32- a�� TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Overview city of eagan MEMO MAYOR GEAGAN AND CITY COUNCILMEMBERS CHAIR HEYL AND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS JON HOHENSTEIN, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR APRIL 23, 2004 LOAN OAK AND LAUKKA BECK PROPOSAL COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN AMENDMENT — REVIEW OF APPLICANT AIRCRAFT NOISE REPORT As a part of their application for an amendment of the City of Eagan Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment, the applicants have submitted an analysis of regional policy as it pertains to residential development in proximity to Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport. The purpose of this memo is to provide a review of that report for consideration by the Advisory Planning Commission and City Council. In lieu of hiring a consultant to perform this review, City staff prepared the information below, in consultation with staff of the Metropolitan Council and Metropolitan Airports Commission, to insure its accuracy. In addition to confirming representations made in this memo, the MAC staff has submitted additional comments regarding its policies and position relative to noise considerations in land use planning. The proposed development site is located 4 '/z miles from the parallel runways at MSP, in line with the primary departure flight tracks and adjacent to the primary arrival tracks for those runways. As such, the site is located in Noise Zone 4 as defined by the Metropolitan Council Policy Contours adopted in 1996 (In this memo, the terms Noise Zone and Policy Contours are used interchangeably). Within Noise Zone 4, office, commercial and industrial development is considered compatible with aircraft noise exposure. The development of residential uses with individual entrances is considered conditional and the development of residential uses with shared entrances, such as typical apartments, is considered provisional. The definitions of those terms are discussed more completely below. Historically, the City has attempted, where possible, to minimize land uses that would be in conflict with operations at MSP. To that end, it has guided and zoned much of the northeastern portion of the City for compatible office, commercial and industrial uses in what is commonly referred to as the Eagan- Mendota Heights Corridor. The Corridor and the related policies of the City of Eagan, the Metropolitan Council and the Metropolitan Airports Commission are based on the concept that noise compatible land uses are the most effective means of preventing noise nuisance. As noted in the primary staff report, the City's adopted Comprehensive Guide Plan currently designates the area as Special Area — O/S (Office /Service). If residential uses are to be considered as proposed, the threshold question is whether residential uses would be appropriate in this area and, if the City determines that to be the case, regional policy provides guidance in gauging whether such uses can be provisionally or conditionally acceptable. Applicants' Aircraft Noise Study The applicants have submitted an Aircraft Noise Study that acknowledges the subject site's proximity to the airport and relationship to the Noise Zones. The report compares the currently adopted 1996 policy contours to more recently published draft contours generated by the Metropolitan Airports Commission as a part of its Part 150 Noise Abatement Program. It also cites information within the Metropolitan Council's Builder's Guide relative to sound attenuation technologies and building techniques. On the basis of these citations of regional policy, the applicants' consultant's report concludes, "Single - family and multi - family development in Noise Zone 4 must meet 20 dBA exterior to interior noise attenuation for aircraft noise. This can be provided with standard good building practices with special attention to details that minimize intrusion of aircraft noise through openings and air leaks in the exterior building facade. Based upon (the applicants' consultant's) assessment of potential aircraft noise impacts and the applicable Metropolitan Council Guidelines, aircraft noise will not be an obstacle to development of residential land uses at either the Laukka -Beck or Loan Oak sites under the 1996, 2005 or 2007 noise contours." The application also includes exhibits, but does not provide narrative with respect to the City's Cedar Grove Redevelopment District and the City of Bloomington's Central Station Development. The developer has indicated in separate discussions that he believes that the consideration of residential land uses at the project site should be considered in light of the residential uses proposed or under development in those project areas. In the context of the City's Comprehensive Guide Plan and regional policy guidelines, the City will need to determine whether the representations made by the developer concerning the relationship of the proposed development to the effects of aircraft noise justifies a modification of the City's policies with respect to residential development in known areas of aircraft noise impact. Noise Contours With respect to the policy contours in effect for MSP, the adopted contours for land use planning purposes are the 1996 contours, which have been incorporated into the Metropolitan Council's Airport Noise Policies. As a consequence, the publication of other contours does not modify the current regional policy. While the consultant's report asserts that the 2005 contours have been adopted for the airport's Part 150 Land Use Program, they have not. The MAC discontinued the previous Part 150 Update following 9/11, because the effect of the tragedy on the future of the air travel industry threw all projections into doubt. The recently published 2007 contours are part of the reactivation of the Part 150 Update process, but neither the contours nor an update of the Part 150 Program has been submitted to or approved by the FAA. In addition, the Part 150 Program is separate from the Metropolitan Council Noise Policy process. While the Metropolitan Council utilized the 1996 contours that were generated by the MAC for the Part 150 program as the basis for the policy contours, the Council is not likely to consider an update of the Noise Policy Contours until the Part 150 update is completed. Even then, it is not certain whether the Metropolitan Council will adopt the new contours or not. The consultant report appears to assume that the Metropolitan Council will adopt the 2007 contours and replicate the one -mile radius methodology that was adopted with the 1996 contours. The report acknowledges that even if those modifications in regional policy occur, the development sites would remain in Noise Zone 4. The 2005 and 2007 contours are smaller than the 1996 contours in the area of the Eagan- Mendota Heights Corridor partially because of the increase in quieter generation Stage III aircraft in the fleet mix, a flattening of traffic growth in the aftermath of 9/11 and the fact that the current flight level projections are split between the parallel runways and the new 17 -35 (North- South) runway, due to open in 2005. As a consequence, the contours do not reflect the potential future effect of traffic growing to capacity on all available runways. Local and regional policy decisions about noise compatibility will need to consider whether the recently published contours represent a long term, stable contraction of noise impact or a snapshot in time representing a redistribution of short term projections of traffic. As a consequence, it may be premature to base any decision on the presumption that the policy contours will change or that the current contours reflect the long term noise environment around the airport. Further, it is important to note that the contours represent a series of gradients along a range of noise levels. It is well understood in the noise attenuation industry that it is not loud on one side of a contour and magically quiet on the other. The purpose for the one -mile radius around the DNL contours in regional and City policy is to acknowledge that noise nuisance is relative and receiver based and that local governments should carefully consider the impacts of noise over a broader area than the "boundaries" defined by a computer generated noise metric. It should also be noted that while the Part 150 Program requires compatibility of new land use developments to be addressed, that aspect of the program is largely addressed through the Metropolitan Council Noise Policies in the Regional Policy Plan's Aviation Guide Chapter. The bulk of the current debate with respect to the application of any updated noise contours focuses on those areas within which corrective noise abatement improvements will be applied. Properties that have been or will be developed since the Part 150 program was originally adopted are not eligible for such corrective improvements and, therefore, cities must carefully consider noise compatibility and/or provisions for noise attenuation and other noise related conditions in development decisions. Regional Guidelines and Policies The consultant's report references excerpts from several portions of the regional policies associated with the relative compatibility of land uses to aircraft noise within the various noise :s 77 contours and the guidance for noise attenuation if a local unit of government chooses to permit residential uses in the noise zones. The report does not reflect the specific policy language in the City of Eagan's Comprehensive Guide Plan for Special Area 1, in which the proposed development site is located, which states: "Due to the area's proximity to the airport and the fact that single family uses are considered transitional, the City shall discourage any additional residential development, including further subdivision of any existing residential property." While the consultant's report accurately indicates that a local government that chooses to locate residential uses in the noise zones can make findings and apply performance standards to make them less inconsistent with noise exposure, those policies do not suggest that the local government should be compelled to reguide or rezone properties, even if those standards are met. The basic decision is whether the local unit of government finds it appropriate to permit such land uses. If so, the appropriate findings should be made and the appropriate conditions and requirements should be applied to offset the noise impacts to the maximum extent possible. The consultant's report accurately indicates that if a city wishes to find that shared entrance residential developments are provisionally acceptable, regional policy suggests that an indoor sound level of 45 dBA, or a reduction of at least 20 dBA, must be achieved. The report inaccurately suggests that individual entrance residential development (such as the proposed single family detached and townhome uses) must only meet that sound attenuation standard to be acceptable. Indoor sound level reduction is only part of one of eight conditional land use review factors for individual entrance residential buildings, which are: 1. Specific nature of the proposed use, including extent of associated outdoor activities. 2. Relationship of proposed use to other planning considerations, including adjacent land use activities, consistency with overall comprehensive planning and relation to other metropolitan systems. 3. Frequency of exposure of proposed uses to aircraft overflight. 4. Location of proposed use relative to aircraft flight tracks and aircraft on- ground operating and maintenance areas. 5. Location, site design and construction restrictions to be imposed on the proposed use by the community with respect to reduction of exterior to interior noise transmissions, and shielding of outdoor activities. 6. Method community will use to inform future occupants of proposed potential noise from aircraft operations. 7. Extent to which community restricts the building from having facilities for outdoor activities associated with the use. 8. Distance of proposed use from existing or proposed runways, parallel taxiways, or engine run -up areas. If individual entrance residential development is to be considered, the Planning Commission and City Council will want to make favorable findings on each of these factors. The factors may be applied differently depending upon whether a development is simply in proximity to the airport or if it is exposed to overflights. A brief analysis of each in the context of the application follows: 1. Specific nature of the proposed use, including extent of associated outdoor activities. — The proposed use is a combination of residential uses, consisting of both individual entry housing types (338 units Loan Oak/168 units Laukka Beck) and two shared entry cooperative buildings (150 units Loan Oak). The outdoor uses would consist of those activities that would typically be associated with the use of residential yards and common ownership green spaces for attached single family and multifamily properties. The potential park improvements that would need to be anticipated for a new development of this scale are discussed below in the Parks section of this report. The applicants have indicated that the purchasing demographic they anticipate for the senior cooperative and other housing types will gravitate toward residents without children and modest needs for outdoor activities. However, the applicants' residential market study states that "households that choose an owner- occupied multi - family option particularly desire communities that will offer them additional outdoor and recreational amenities as they typically have limited space within their units. Features such as picnic/barbeque areas, outdoor pool, garden plots are features that are often desired among multi - family buyers." 2. Relationship of proposed use to other planning considerations, including adjacent land use activities, consistency with overall comprehensive planning and relation to other metropolitan systems. — The City's Comprehensive Guide Plan currently anticipates commercial and office park uses in this area. The uses adjacent to the development parcels and the relationship to the utilities and transportation systems and other planning considerations are discussed elsewhere in this report. The Metropolitan Council staff indicates that the adjacent low- density residential uses in the City of Inver Grove Heights Comprehensive Guide Plan will be reconsidered in the context of aircraft noise and other regional systems, during the 2008 Guide updates or at such time as sewer and water may become available to those areas. With respect to residential uses within the noise zones within the Eagan- Mendota Heights Corridor area, the City of Eagan has attempted, where possible, to minimize land uses that would be in conflict with operations at MSP. The City also has made a practice of making comments to neighboring cities discouraging the introduction of areas of new residential development within the corridor area. 3. Frequency of exposure of proposed uses to aircraft overflight. — The DNL contours discussed above are developed using a metric that combines factors including fleet mix, flight tracks, altitudes and frequency of operations. From a land use planning perspective, this policy factor focuses on the frequency of overflight of an area in particular. The MAC staff has prepared an analysis of current operations as they pertain to the proposed development location, a copy of which is attached to this report. Because of the preferences given to runway ends in the airport's runway operating system, either arrivals or departures can be expected to be over the Eagan- Mendota Heights Corridor throughout the day, regardless of which other runway ends may be in operation at any time. Given that fact, the City of Eagan has advocated for operations standards that further manage traffic within the noise compatible land use boundaries — specific permitted departure headings, three mile climb before turns to destination for departures, four mile final approach for arrivals, etc. Even with the opening of the North -South Runway, the corridor will be the preferred operating area for night time flights . While flight tracks are not flown with surgical precision, the airport's nighttime procedures call for operations to occur exclusively to and from the southeast whenever possible. In particular, the procedures call for departures to be given a heading north of the runway centerline to minimize overflight of existing residential areas in Eagan and Mendota Heights and take advantage of the commercial industrial uses and relatively undeveloped areas to absorb the greatest portion of the noise impact. The introduction of residential uses in the proposed development area would remove the non - residential alternative to overflying existing neighborhoods in Eagan. 4. Location of proposed use relative to aircraft flight tracks and aircraft on- ground operating and maintenance areas. — The proposed development area is directly under a number of the primary departure tracks and adjacent to the primary arrival tracks for the parallel runways. It will be regularly exposed to the effects of operations along and near those flight tracks. The site is approximately 4 '/2 miles from the closest ground operating and maintenance areas and would likely experience little noise impact from those noise sources. 5. Location, site design and construction restrictions to be imposed on the proposed use by the community with respect to reduction of exterior to interior noise transmissions, and shielding of outdoor activities. — The applicants have indicated an intention to apply sound attenuation building techniques to reduce outdoor to indoor noise transmission by the levels indicated in the Metropolitan Council Builder's Guide. No site design or other plans are indicated in the application to shield outdoor activities from noise impacts. 6. Method community will use to inform future occupants of proposed potential noise from aircraft operations. — While it is not noted in the submittals, the applicants have verbally indicated an intention to take steps to inform occupants of potential noise from aircraft operations. In order to effectively carry out this notification, it would need to be recorded against the title of all owner occupied uses and there would need to be an enforceable covenant for disclosure on any rental facilities. If residential development is to be considered in this area, the notification will need to be in a recordable form acceptable to the City Attorney and staff. 7. Extent to which community restricts the building from having facilities for outdoor activities associated with the use. — As proposed, the development would rely on outdoor areas for many of the recreation and social interaction activities typically associated with a residential neighborhood. As noted above, the applicants' market study indicates that outdoor uses are desirable for the demographic anticipated to be attracted to the development. If residential development is to be considered in this area, the City will need to determine whether restrictions on outdoor activities are necessary, feasible or appropriate. 8. Distance of proposed use from existing or proposed runways, parallel taxiways, or engine run -up areas. — This factor is intended to relate more specifically to ground noise for areas close in to the airport. Other Aircraft Noise Development Considerations As noted above, the applicants have indicated in separate discussions that they believe that the potential development of residential land uses at the project site should be considered in light of the residential uses proposed or under development in the City's Cedar Grove Redevelopment District and the City of Bloomington's Central Station Development. As to the Cedar Grove Redevelopment District, local governments may make different findings in different areas that will Lead to different conclusions about whether residential uses are provisionally or conditionally acceptable. In the case of Cedar Grove, the Cedar Avenue Corridor was not planned or developed in anticipation of direct aircraft overflights. As it relates to Runway 17/35, the Cedar Grove Redevelopment is not in a noise compatible corridor as the proposed development sites are. The context for Cedar Grove relates to fully developed residential areas and redevelopment priorities that will stabilize and support those areas. The City's Comprehensive Guide for the Cedar Grove special area specifically discusses noise exposure and concludes that a mixed use redevelopment consisting partially of attached residential uses is acceptable with appropriate performance standards, in consideration of all of the factors bearing on the area. In addition, the runway use patterns and priorities that apply to the Eagan- Mendota Heights Corridor are different from those that will apply to the other sides of the airport, such as the Cedar Avenue area. Specifically, departures are expected to fan from the end of the North -South Runway and they are concentrated over the commercial - industrial areas for several miles from the runway end in the Corridor. As such, any conclusion regarding the acceptability of residential uses in the area proposed may be made independent from the City's conclusions with regard to their development in the Cedar Grove Area. The Bloomington Central Station Development is intended to be a transit oriented area combining retail, employment, recreation and residential uses. The Metropolitan Council staff and the developer of the Bloomington project indicate that all of the residential uses are anticipated to be of masonry construction with shared entrances and the expectation is that many of the recreational and retail opportunities will be met indoors at the Mall of America. Even so, the City of Eagan made comments as a part of the City of Bloomington's Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment process expressing concern about the introduction of new residential uses within that proximity to the airport. Conclusion The City of Eagan has established policies that plan for noise compatible commercial and industrial uses in the Eagan- Mendota Heights Corridor area. The applicants propose to have the City modify those policies and plans as outlined above. The threshold question is whether or not residential uses would be appropriate for the area. If so, in what way would the performance and policy findings be defined to minimize the potential impact of that change on the residents of the proposed development and on residents of other residential areas of the City? If not, the City may make findings to that effect. 1111.■ Nil lea . ■ unity Development Director JH I Metropolitan Council Current Noise Policy Areas The Metropolitan C.0.d and the Metropolitan Aoporls Commission nuke no npresentalbn orwearies. ..press er reed. with reaped le Ile reuse el IM data provided hemmer, regardless of its bmel or dse means .5100000.01600. Its Determining pro opprepn.h .pflaallons for the use of this data set 10 dr. nspen.W6y of the army The user accepts the des 1s s', and assumes all rtasa associated with 4 use. By acceptance of this des. A use agrees nol s Innen* this data or provide ewes to It s we pen ail to .rueh.r Ply or Individusi. The Metropolitan Cornell and the Me topefan Airports Commission .slume no responsibility sr .t et consequential damage intend .s. null et ny users reliance on Bas data. 0 0.5 ?Miles Apr 22 04 09:48a April 21, 2004 METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION Jon Hohenstein City of Eagan Director of Community Development 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Minneapolis -Saint Paul International Airport 6040 - 28th Avenue South • Minneapolis, MN 55450 -2799 Phone (612) 726 -8100 Subject: Proposed Development of Loan Oak and Laukka -Beck Properties Dear Mr. Hohenstein, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed development of the Loan Oak and Laukka -Beck Properties. The proposed residential development project includes a total of 434 town home/single family units on 110 acres of land in the northeast corner of Eagan. This letter outlines the Metropolitan Airports Commission's (MAC) concerns with residential development on this site. Of particular concern is the development of single family and multi - family housing stock in an area presently zoned industrial/commercial and compatible with frequent aircraft operations and over - flights. The proposed development would expose numerous new residents to existing impacts associated with a large number of aircraft over - flights. The proposed development falls within the Metropolitan Council's Aviation Guide Plan Zone 4 (DNL 60 to 65). This area is within the 1996 60 DNL contour. Recently, the MAC developed updated Part 150 contours reflecting the projected 2007 noise environment. The proposed development site lies just outside of the draft 2007 60 DNL contour area. Although the site falls outside of the updated 2007 60 DNL contour area, the City of Eagan has made it clear that airport noise impacts occur beyond the 60 DNL contour area and these impacts should be considered by the communities and the MAC. The city outlines their position in a letter to the MAC regarding the Part 150 Update from the Eagan Assistant City Administrator dated November 15, 2000. "Although not directly pertinent to the Part 150 Document because of FAA criteria, MAC and the surrounding communities should take into consideration increased noise levels beyond the 60 DNL." (Appendix N, Public Involvement, Volume II, Part IV) The Metropolitan Airports Commission is an affirmative action employer. www.mspairport.com Reliever Airports: AIRLAKE • ANOKA COUNTY /BLAINE • CRYSTAL • FLYING CLOUD • LAKE ELMO • SAINT PAUL DOWNTOWN 4r3 • c- Apr 22 04 09:48a Another letter sent to the MAC by then Mayor Patricia Awada, received on December 3, 2002, reaffirms the city's position. "The basis for the unduly narrow FAA/MAC analysis of departure procedures for Runway 17 is apparently the application of an outdated and restrictive FAA theorem that the 60 dB DNL contour is the sole arbiter of noise impacts. There is no consideration of total community impact as measured in the frequency, saturation, and relative distance from the airport of aircraft operations." (Runway 17 Departure Procedure Final Environmental Assessment FONSUROD, pg. F -36) The MAC's concerns for the proposed development of this site are based upon the previously mentioned factors as well as compatibility planning issues, and actual experience in the area. These concerns include: • The area proposed for the development is located within the Metropolitan Council's Aviation Guide Plan Zone 4. This area often receives noise levels between 60 and 65 DNL according to the Guide. Residential development for single and multiplex units with individual entrances is conditional and must meet eight land use review factors. In particular, these factors consider the proposed use of the development, the extent of associated outdoor activities, the relationship of the proposed use to other planning considerations, adjacent land use activities and the frequency of exposure to aircraft over - flights. Residential development for multiplex/apartment units with shared entrances is provisional and must be acoustically constructed to achieve a 45 DNL interior sound level. • The proposed development site is located less than 4.5 miles from the airports runways and is directly in line with frequently used arrival and departure flight paths. • The average altitude of arriving aircraft over this property during March 2004 was approximately 1,550 feet above ground level (AGL), with operations occurring as low as 1,020 feet AGL. The average altitude of departing aircraft over this property was approximately 2,966 AGL, with operations occurring as low as 1,555 feet AGL (see attachment 4). • Based on a sampling of departing aircraft activity over this area (March 2004), 8.2% (708) of all departures from runways 12L and 12R flew directly over the development site. Additionally, 20.3% (1,745) of departures passed within one- quarter mile north of the property to one - quarter mile south of the property. In total there were 3,014 out of 8,596 departures that passed within one -half mile north of the property to one -half mile south of the property (see Attachment 1). • Based on a sampling of arriving aircraft activity over this area (March 2004), 2.7% (363) of all arrivals to runways 30L and 30R flew directly over the development site. Additionally, 47.6% (6,485) of arrivals passed within one - quarter mile north of the property to one - quarter mile south of the property. In total there were 6,575 out of 13,610 arrivals that passed within one-half mile north of the property to one -half mile south of the property (see Attachment 2). • Based on the March 2004 MSP Technical Advisor's Report showing the top ten noise events recorded that month, monitor site #24, which is approximately 0.54 aV 5 1 Apr 22 04 09:48a miles southwest of the proposed development area, recorded noise events as high as 92.6 dBA. Additionally, monitor site #26, which is approximately 0.31 miles east of the proposed development area, recorded noise events as high as 88.3 dBA. • A significant amount of airport noise complaints are generated from the cities of Eagan, Mendota Heights, and Inver Grove Heights (see attachment 3). In 2003, residents from the City of Eagan filed 1,205 airport noise complaints of which only 32 complaints were filed from residents located within the draft 2007 60 DNL contour area. In addition, a total of 2,628 complaints were generated from residents who lived within a 2 -mile radius of the proposed development site. • The city's existing zoning of this property as commercial, industrial and agricultural uses continue to be more appropriate for the property in question. Another important concern is the use of the Eagan- Mendota Heights Corridor and its implications on the proposed development site. The Corridor has been a long - standing noise mitigation operational procedure at the airport that dates back to 1968. The procedure purposely concentrates aircraft operations over the more noise compatible commercial/industrial land use areas of Eagan and Mendota Heights. Eagan has proactively addressed noise compatibility by zoning the underlying area of the Corridor for commercial and industrial uses. The south Conidor boundary extends 3 miles southeast (120° heading) from the departure end of the south parallel runway (12R) over Eagan. The proposed development site is approximately 1.5 miles east of the 3 -mile boundary and residents in this area would be impacted by frequent aircraft operations and aircraft over - flights. In addition, several noise mitigation operational procedures such as the Runway Use System, the head -to -head procedure (allows aircraft to arrive and depart over the Corridor during low - demand time periods, i.e. nighttime) and the crossing in the Corridor procedure have been implemented to maximize use of the Corridor. All of the previously mentioned procedures are part of the existing and proposed Part 150 NCP and as a result, these procedures will impact residents of the proposed development site. The MAC, the Metropolitan Council and the City of Eagan have all recognized the need to protect the Corridor area from incompatible development. Eagan's Comprehensive Guide Plan for where the development is located states, `Due to the area's proximity to the airport and the fact that single family uses are considered transitional, the City shall discourage any additional residential development, including further subdivision of any of the existing residential property." The Metropolitan Council's Aviation Guide Plan states that the Noise Policy Area for MSP (including Noise Zone 4) was designed to meet several objectives including: "Protect undeveloped/compatible land uses, especially in the Mendota Heights -Eagan Corridor, from market pressures to convert to incompatible land uses, by not using the year 2005 contour but the 1996 DNL 60+ one -mile contour." Successful airport noise impact reduction around our nation's airports can be primarily attributed to cooperative efforts on behalf of airlines, airports and communities. As a partner in these noise reduction efforts, the City of Eagan has done a tremendous job with previous land use zoning within the Comprehensive Guide Plan to prevent the introduction of non - compatible land uses around the airport. The MAC urges the city to continue with this exemplary standard. t/ 018'S Rpr 22 04 09:48a Once again, thank you for this opportunity to comment on the proposed development of the Loan Oak and Laukka -Beck Properties. Sincerely, ey Hamiel Executive Director Metropolitan Airports Commission An-perAiwt64.trs WtXEWc��r� tkt 1147s M6Ak0 kte-e. 6 w/e 14T rAzore.. NUmF3Gr„ P- CITY OF EAGAN COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN THE WATERS (AREA 1) Background: This area is located in the extreme northeast corner of the City and overlays 640 acres of land. The area bounded on the north by I-494 and on the east by the City of Inver Grove Heights corporate limits. The vast majority of the study area is zoned PD, Planned Development. Aside from the Planned Development zoning designations, several agriculturally and residentially zoned properties are scattered throughout the area. Additionally, the Trinity Lutheran Church property holds a PF, Public Facilities zoning designation. The vast majority of land within the study area (452 acres) lies within the "Laukka- Beck" Planned Development (a.k.a. "The Waters "). Originally approved in the spring of 1985, the Planned Development called for the establishment of office /retail, office retail /showroom, and research development uses throughout the site. Other than plans associated with the Northwest Airlines corporate headquarters, no specific development plans for the balance of the property (platted as outlots) were provided. Development within the "Waters" has however, progressed in past years in a manner consistent with uses specified in the original Planned Development. To date, approximately 40 percent of the original Planned Development area remains vacant or underutilized. General Area Description: Land Use The study area consists primarily of office, office /showroom, and research development type land uses that lie within the "Waters" Planned Development. Older single- family residential uses are however, scattered around the periphery of the study area. In addition, a church (Trinity Lutheran) exists in the southwest portion of the study area. Transportation Bordered by I -494, Trunk Highway 55/149 and Lone Oak Road, the study area is provided good visibility and access. Future access to I -494 and Trunk Highway 55/149 (to accommodate new development) is however, subject to approval by the State and is expected to be limited if not prohibited to ensure safe and efficient circulation. Within the interior of the study area, office /showroom, and research development uses are served primarily by Lone Oak Parkway and Lone Oak Drive. Existing single family residences within the study area are presently accessed via Lone Oak Road and O'Neil Drive. Airport Implications In addition to the high volumes of truck traffic inherent upon the surrounding high volume roadways, the study area is also subject to significant levels of airport related noise, which also reduce its desirability for new residential development. The study area lies approximately three miles southeast of the Minneapolis /St. Paul International Airport directly in line with Runways 11/29 and lies within Noise Zone IV of the noise contours established by the Metropolitan Council. Within this zone, commercial and industrial uses are considered consistent while residential uses are considered conditional. Conditional uses are those uses that should only be permitted if certain noise attenuation practices developed by the Metropolitan Council are followed. The City of Eagan has been evolving towards a policy to discourage residential development of those northern portions of the City especially affected by aircraft noise. Conclusions: 1. In recognition of surrounding land uses, high traffic volumes and the area's inclusion in the aircraft noise zone, the long -term desirability of residential uses in the area is considered questionable. 2. Market conditions, coupled with a limited supply of developable land in the City, dictate that planning efforts directed toward the highest and best use of the area should be immediate. 3. The study area is a major entrance to the City. As such, an opportunity exists to present an attractive entry image via development. Land Use Designations: Excepting the Trinity Lutheran Church property and adjacent parcels to the south, all land within the study area is designated Business Park and Office /Service. According to the Comprehensive Guide Plan, the Business Park land use category is intended to provide areas for a mix of office, research and development, and light industrial uses and the Office /Service land use category is intended to provide areas for offices and lower intensity service and retail businesses. The Plan states that zoning categories considered consistent with such category include Agricultural (A), Limited Business (LB), Neighborhood Business (NB), and Potentially Research and Development. Consistent with its use, the Trinity Lutheran Church property has been guided Public /Quasi Public (QP). To "mirror" forthcoming uses to the south, the land in the extreme southwest comer of the study area has been guided Neighborhood Business (NB). (( 7 , ��9 Zoning Designations: In recognition of the area's historical development approvals, the vast majority of land within study area is proposed to be zoned Planned Development (PD) and developed with uses directed by the Laukka -Beck and Cray Research Planned Development Agreements. Such agreements call for a range of office -based activities (i.e. standard office, office - showroom and research and development) similar to those presently existing within "The Waters" Planned Development. In those areas not governed by Planned Development Agreements, standard zoning designations are proposed. To avoid the creation of nonconforming uses, the City will support the continuance of agricultural zoning designations within the study area on an interim basis until redevelopment occurs. Under an agricultural zoning designation, existing homes in the area would be able to remain as "conforming" uses. To provide more specific land use directives (than that offered by the Land Use Map), a zoning map has been prepared which illustrates the "ultimate" designations of such agricultural parcels. This map incorporates Neighborhood Business (NB) in the southwest area of the site and Business Park (BP) zoning in the northwest portion of the study area. The larger agricultural tracts in the north and eastern areas of the study areas are proposed to infill with office /research type uses (similar to those in the Laukka -Beck Planned Development) and are proposed to ultimately be zoned Research and Development (RD). Policies: 1. Excepting the Trinity Lutheran Church property, the City ultimately expects the entire study area to develop as office, office showroom, research and development and neighborhood business uses. Existing residential uses are considered transitional. The timing of the transition of such uses should be a function of private market forces. 2. The City will support the continuance of existing residential uses in the area until there is a strong indication of market support for large -scale development with Research and Development and Neighborhood Business uses. The City will support the continuance of agricultural and single family residential zoning designations within the study area to allow single - family homes to exist as conforming uses until redevelopment occurs. 3. In the future, the City will support rezoning to Business Park, Research and Development and Neighborhood Business districts in areas of sufficient size to provide a cohesive development. The City will not support rezoning that would result in piecemeal; lot -by -lot redevelopment or that would result in further isolation of existing residential uses. 4. The City will strive to ensure new Research and Development and Neighborhood Business development does not negatively impact existing residential properties through the development review process, including enforcement of specific zoning standards and performance guidelines. 5. In recognition of the study area's location, the City will take full advantage of opportunities to present an attractive City image (via development quality, erection of City identification signage etc.). 6. Individual lot access to I -494, Truck Highways 55 and 149 will be prohibited. 7. Individual lot access to Lone Oak Road will be discouraged to the extent possible. 8. A uniform design element(s) providing an identity will be promoted in the study area. 9. To the extent possible, new development shall respond and strive to retain the natural features of the area including wetlands and mature vegetation. 10. New neighborhood Business uses in the southwest corner of the study area will utilize materials and design features compatible with those used in the adjacent Oakview Center Planned Development. 11. New Business Park and Research and Development uses will utilize materials and design features compatible with those utilized in the adjacent Laukka -Beck Planned Development. 12. Due to the area's proximity to the airport and the fact that single family uses are considered transitional, the City shall discourage any additional residential development, including further subdivision of any of the existing residential property. 13. New development within the study area shall incorporate sound attenuating construction techniques as suggested by the Metropolitan Council. �9i Comprehensive Plan 2000 - Special Area Special Area #1 - Land Use 9 .0A Exhibit 3.7.1.a 4 111' City of Eagan M I N N E S O T A Comment& Development Department Comprehensive Plan 2000 - Special Area Special Area #1 - Interim Zoning 3 Exhibit 3.7.1.b O iCity of Eagan M I N N E S O T A LbmmuMy DmebA tal DANA m at Comprehensive Plan 2000 - Special Area Special Area #1 - Ultimate Zoning // 85 E. SEVENTH PLACE, SUITE 100 SAINT PAUL, MN 55101 -2887 651 -223 -3000 FAX: 651-223-3002 MEMORANDUM TO: Jon Hohenstein FROM: Nick Dragisich Paul Steinman DATE: April 23, 2004 SUBJECT: Lone Oak Mixed Use Executive Summary SPRINGSTED .idrisors to the Public Sector We have reviewed the developer information you provided to David MacGillivray regarding the Lone Oak and Laukka -Beck Residential proposals. The purpose of this memorandum is to provide an analysis of the tax generation comparisons of various development scenarios that might be anticipated for the property proposed to be developed. The City has asked Springsted to review developer information related to the Lone Oak and Laukka -Beck Residential proposals. Our analysis included a review of developer assumptions, alternative development scenarios for the site, and the potential revenues and expenditures likely to result from each of these. The developer's property tax projections for the office warehouse products were based on a market value of $60.00 per square foot which would be within the range of typical values for office space, but considerably outside the range for warehouse space. If the units are predominantly warehouse space, the value seems high. One observation we did note was that the developer's projections for the office warehouses include development on only the 84.5 acres parcel. This leaves the 24.5 acre parcel or approximately 22.5% of the total area vacant. The developer has based his or her property tax projections for the proposed office condos on a taxable market value of $175.00 per square foot. While it is difficult to question the developer's market value projections given the limited information provided, this value seems relatively high when compared to the current market value of a number of other office space parcels in the vicinity of the development site. We would tend to believe the developer has satisfied himself or herself that a market does exist for the proposed residential units at the projected price and density. If this development were approved in consideration of the values and tax generation information provided, the City may wish to consider some type of agreement or restriction that would require the developer to CORPORATE OFFICE: SAINT PAUL, MN • Visit our website at www.springsted.com IOWA • KANSAS • MINNESOTA • VIRGINIA • WASHINGTON, DC • WISCONSIN a9S City of Eagan, MN April 23, 2004 Page 2 develop units with the market value projected in the rezoning request as a condition of the rezoning. To reflect a range of possible commercial development options, we have prepared both a low density office warehouse development scenario and a high density R & D scenario. We have made Tong -term financial projections of the two developments proposed by the developer and of three additional development scenarios to show the potential financial impacts to the City. The three additional developments include one for the office warehouse development proposed by the developer but with the entire 109 acres developed, one for the lowest value use of the property under the current City zoning and one for the highest value use of the property under the current City zoning. Of the five alternatives, an R & D office development as currently contemplated in the City's Comprehensive Plan is projected to generate approximately $13.4 million over the 15 year planning period, the greatest cumulative cash flow. The mixed residential /office condos development proposed by the developer is projected to generate approximately $4.8 million over the same period, the second greatest cumulative cash flow. Developer's assumption related to office warehouse products The developer provided projected property tax projections based on the development of a series of office warehouse units. The information provided to us did not include any market analysis to support the need for these units and there was no explanation relative to timing of the construction. Nonetheless, the City's current zoning would allow the construction of these types of units. They may not be the highest and best use of the property given the surrounding corporate office space and specialized facilities, but they would be permitted uses. The property tax projections are based on a market value of $60 per square foot for the office warehouse units. The $60 per square foot value is within the range of Building Valuation Data reported to the State of Minnesota Department of Administration for building permits for office space, but is considerably outside the range for warehouse space. If the units are predominantly warehouse space, the value seems high when compared to the Building Valuation data that shows warehouse cost per square foot ranging from $28.76 to $44.95 per square foot. One observation we did note was that the developer's projections for the office warehouses include development on only the 84.5 acres parcel. This leaves the 24.5 acre parcel or approximately 22.5% of the total area vacant. There was no explanation for why this area is undeveloped. Our analysis includes a variation of the developer's scenario that applies comparable values and densities to the full 109 acre site, instead of just the south 84.5 acre portion of the site. Developer's assumptions related to office condo development The developer has based his or her property tax projections for the proposed office condos on a taxable market value of $175.00 per square foot. While it is difficult to question the developer's market value projections given the limited information provided, this value seems relatively high when compared to the current market value of a number of other office space parcels, most of which are in the vicinity of the development site. The value is also high compared to the City of Eagan, MN April 23, 2004 Page 3 assumptions for the commercial industrial comparison the developer presented ($60.00 per square foot). We have recently become aware of a proposed office condo project in another metropolitan suburb where the market value is projected to be $135.00 per square foot. This value has been affirmed by the local assessor. However, this is still somewhat less than the $175.00 per square foot the Developer used in his or her projections. Developer's assumptions related to residential products We would tend to believe the developer has satisfied himself or herself that a market does exist for the proposed units at the projected price and density. We estimated the density of the housing at 6.28 units per acre. If this development were approved in consideration of the values and tax generation information provided, the City may wish to consider some type of agreement or restriction that would require the developer to develop units with the market value projected in the rezoning request as a condition of the rezoning. Alternative assumptions for development as contemplated by the City's Comprehensive Guide Plan To reflect a range of possible commercial development options, we have prepared both a low density office warehouse development scenario and a high density R & D scenario. The Building Valuation Data reported by the State of Minnesota Department of Administration shows values for office space ranging from approximately $62 per square foot to approximately $97 per square foot. Existing office space in the vicinity of the development site have taxable market values ranging from approximately $32 to $90 per square foot. It would seem likely that an office warehouse development would be at the lower end and an R & D development would be at the upper mid of this range because of the adjacent Waters development. Assumptions relative to five -year and Tong -term analysis We have made long -term financial projections of the two developments proposed by the developer and of three additional development scenarios to show the potential financial impacts to the City. The three additional developments include one for the office warehouse development proposed by the developer but with the entire 109 acres developed, one for the lowest value use of the property under the current City zoning and one for the highest value use of the property under the current City zoning. The projections for the proposed office /warehouse development and the three additional developments include projected revenues and operating expenditures likely to result from each of these developments. The financial projections for the mixed residential and office condos proposed by the developer include projected revenues, operating expenditures and capital expenditures. Capital expenditures are included in this projection because the development would require a change in land use that would generate a need for capital facilities to support the development above those currently anticipated by the City under the current land use plan. These capital expenditures include facilities for: parks & recreation, police, fire & rescue, general government, transportation, and library services. The financial projections for operating expenditures by land use type are based on Springsted's significant experience in fiscal impact Area Use Total Area in Acres Percent of Area Original Market Value Original Tax Capacity 2003 Original Taxes Original Market Value Taxes Total Original Taxes A Vacant 84.5 77.48% 2,797,200 55,194 50,376 524.00 50,899.56 B Vacant 24.56 22.52% 1,157,700 22,404 20,448 216.87. 20,665.00 109.06 100% 3,954,900 77,598 70,824 740.87 71,564.57 City of Eagan, MN April 23, 2004 Page 4 analysis and on a typical distribution of revenues, other than real property taxes, and operating expenditures between residents and employees. The distribution of these revenues and expenditures reflect the differences in the revenues generated and in the demand created for services between development scenarios based on the proposed land use. Revenues were projected on a line -item basis from the City's 2003 budget and included: • Licenses > Permits > Intergovernmental revenue > Charges for services > Recreation program fees > Other park fees > Fines & Forfeits > Miscellaneous Revenues > Program Revenues • Transfers Operating expenditures were projected from the City's 2003 budget for the following general fund categories: General Government, Public Safety, Public Works, Parks and Recreation, General Government Building Maintenance, and other. All property taxes projected are based on the City's 2003 tax capacity extension rate and other revenues and expenditures are based on the City's 2003 budget. Fiscal disparities were ignored to enable a comparison with the projections made by the Developer. However, a more refined analysis would need to include the impact of fiscal disparities. The proposed development site contains 109.06 acres. The market value of the site, tax capacity and original taxes are shown in the table below. Proposed Development Site — Base Information Our base information shows the 2003 taxes to be $71,564.57 which are local taxes only and do not include the state property taxes on the parcels. This is about half of the $154,924 amount shown in the information submitted by the Developer. It is possible the Developer is including the property taxes paid to the State, although it is of no value to the City for the purposes of these comparisons. Fiscal Impacts of Developer Projection 1 — Office Warehouse Development The developer presented a proposed office warehouse use for the site. The proposed development is shown in the table on the following page. 9g Year Projected Market Added Value Projected Tax Added Capacity Projected City Property Tax Revenue Projected City other Revenue Total City Revenue Projected City Operating Expenditures Annual Operating Cash Flow Cumulative Operating Cash Flow Projected Annual Capital Expenditures Combined Total Annual Cash Flow Combined Cumulative Cash Flow 2005 10,127,700 15.5 168,795 60.00 - - - - - - - 2006 23,527,860 - - - • - - - - - - 2007 33,328,860 201,804 36,704 3,782 40,486 (14,253) 26,233 26,233 107,862 26,233 26,233 2008 45,743,460 468,307 116420 8,786 125,206 (33,112) 92,095 118,327 - 92,095 118,327 2009 55,217,760 662,077 174,381 12,446 186,826 (46,905) 139,922 258,249 - 139,922 258,249 2010 55,217,760 908,119 247,977 17,082 265,058 (64,376) 200,682 458,931 - 200,682 458,931 2011 55,217,760 1,096,105 304,207 20,620 324,827 (77,710) 247,117 706,048 - 247,117 706,048 2012 55,217,760 1,096,105 304,207 20,620 324,827 (77,710) 247,117 953,165 • 247,117 953,165 2013 55,217,760 1,096,105 304,207 20,620 324,827 (77,710) 247,117 1,200,282 - 247,117 1,200,282 2014 55,217,760 1,096,105 304,207 20,620 324,827 (77,710) 247,117 1,447,399 • 247,117 1,447,399 2015 55,217,760 1,096,105 304,207 20,620 324,827 (77,710) 247,117 1,694,516 - 247,117 1,694,516 2016 55,217,760 1,096,105 304,207 20,620 324,827 (77,710) 247,117 1,941,633 • 247,117 1,941,633 2017 55,217,760 1,096,105 304,207 20,620 324,827 (77,710) 247,117 2,188,750 - 247,117 2,188,750 2018 55,217,760 1,096,105 304,207 20,620 324,827 (77,710) 247,117 2,435,867 - 247,117 2,435,867 2019 55,217,760 1,096,105 304,207 20,620 324,827 (77,710) 247,117 2,682,984 - 247,117 2,682,984 2020 55,217,760 1,096,105 304,207 20,620 324,827 (77,710) 247,117 2,930,101 • 247,117 2,930,101 2021 55,217,760 1,096,105 304,207 20,620 324,827 (77,710) 247,117 3,177,218 - 247,117 3,177,218 2022 55,217,760 1,096,105 304,207 20,620 324,827 (77,710) 247,117 3,424,335 • 247,117 3,424,335 4,225,968 289,530 4,515,498 (1,091,163) 3,424,335 • 3,424,335 Phase Use Acres Total Sq. FL/Units Market Value Sq. Ft/Units Total Market Value Total Tax Capacity Tax Capacity Taxes Market Value Taxes Total Taxes Year Constructe d Year Payable l -A Office Warehouse 15.5 168,795 60.00 10,127,700 201,804 184,187 1,897 186,084 2005 2007 2 -A Office Warehouse 11.5 125.235 60.00 7,514,100 149,532 136,478 1,408 137,885 2006 2008 2 -A Office Warehouse 9 98,101 60.00 5,886,060 116,971 106.760 1,103 107,862 2006 2008 3 -A Office Warehouse 7 76,230 60.00 4,573,800 90,726 82,806 857 83,662 2007 2009 3 -A Office Warehouse 3 32,670 60.00 1,960,200 38,454 35,097 367 35,464 2007 2009 3 -A Office Warehouse 5 54,450 60.00 3,267,000 64,590 58,951 612 59,563 2007 2009 4 -A Office Warehouse 4 43,560 60.00 2,613,600 51,522 47,024 490 47,514 2008 2010 4 -A Office Warehouse 5 54,450 60.00 3,267,000 64,590 58,951 612 59,563 2008 2010 4 -B Office Warehouse 10 108,900 60.00 6,534,000 129,930 118,587 1,224 119,811 2008 2010 5 -B Office Warehouse 7 76,230 60.00 4,573,800 90,726 82.806 857 83,662 2009 2011 5 -3 Office Warehouse 7.5 81,675 60.00 4,900,500 97,260 88,769 918 89,687 2009 2011 Totals 84.5 920,296 55,217,760 1,096,105 1,000,415 10,344 1,010,759 City of Eagan, MN April 23, 2004 Page 5 As we stated previously, it is unclear why these projections show development on only 84.5 of the 109.06 available acres on the site. The fiscal impacts of this proposal on the City is projected to have positive cash flow in each year and to have cumulative positive cash flow of approximately $3.4 million over a 15 year period. The fiscal impacts shown include the net increase in revenues to the City above those it currently receives from the site. These projections are shown in the table below. Fiscal Impacts of Developer's Proiection 1a - Office Warehouse Development on Entire Site We have added a financial projection to show the fiscal impacts of an office warehouse development on the entire 109 acres available. The fiscal impacts are projected using the same density of development and market values used by the developer in his or her proposed office warehouse development. The proposed development is shown in the table on the following page. a Year Projected Market Added Value Projected Tax Added Capacity Projected City Property Tax Revenue Projected City other Revenue Total City Revenue Projected City Operating Expenditures Annual Operating Cash Flow Cumulative Operating Cash Flow Projected Annual Capital Expenditures Combined Total Annual Cash Flow Combined Cumulative Cash Flow 2005 13,329,360 - _ 222,156 - • - - • - - - 2006 29,931,180 • - - - - - - - - - 2007 42,933,840 265,837 55,857 4,977 60,835 (18 759) 42,076 42,076 - 42,076 42,076 2008 58,550,100 596,374 154,727 11,177 165,904 (42,123) 123,781 165,857 - 123,781 165,857 2009 71,226,060 854,177 231,842 16,032 247,874 (60,422) 187,452 353,309 - 187,452 353,309 2010 71,226,060 1,164,252 324,591 21,864 346,455 (82,400) 264,056 617,365 - 264,056 617,365 2011 71,226,060 1,416,271 399,975 26,597 426,573 (100,239) 326,334 - 943,699 - 326,334 943,699 2012 71,226,060 1,416,271 399,975 26,597 426,573 (100,239) 326,334 1,270,033 - 326,334 1,270,033 2013 71,226,060 1,416,271 399,975 26,597 426,573 (100,239) 326,334 1,596,367 - 326,334 1,596,367 2014 71,226,060 1,416,271 399,975 26,597 426,573 (100,239) 326.334 1,922,700 - 326,334 1,922,700 2015 71,226,060 1,416,271 399,975 26,597 426,573 (100,239) 326,334 2,249,034 - 326,334 2,249,034 2016 71,226,060 1,416,271 399,975 26,597 426,573 (100,239) 326,334 2,575,368 - 326,334 2,575,368 2017 71,226,060 1,416,271 399,975 26,597 426,573 (100,239) 326,334 2,901,702 - 326,334 2,901,702 2018 71,226,060 1,416,271 399,975 26,597 426,573 (100,239) 326,334 3,228,036 - 326,334 3,228,036 2019 71,226,060 1,416,271 399,975 26,597 426,573 (100,239) 326,334 3,554,370 - 326,334 3,554,370 2020 71,226,060 1,416,271 399,975 26,597 426,573 (100,239) 326,334 3,880,704 - 326,334 3,880,704 2021 71,226,060 1,416,271 399,975 26,597 426,573 (100,239) 326,334 4,207,037 - 326,334 4,207,037 2022 71,226,060 1,416,271 399,975 26,597 426,573 (100,239) 326,334 4,533,371 - 326,334 4,533,371 5,566,721 373,220 5,939,941 (1,406,569) 4,533,371 - 4,533,371 Phase Use Acres Total Sq. FtJUnits Market Value Sq. Ft/Units Total Market Value Total Tax Capacity Tax Capacity Taxes Market Value Taxes Total Taxes Year Constructe d Year Payable 1 -A Office Warehouse 20.4 _ 222,156 60.00 13,329,360 265,837 242,630 2,497 245,127 2005 2007 2 -A Office Warehouse 16.4 178,596 60.00 10,715,760 213,565 194,921 2,007 196,928 2006 2008 2 -A Office Warehouse 9 98,101 60.00 5,886,060 116,971 106,760 1,103 107,862 2006 2008 3 -A Office Warehouse 11.9 129,591 60.00 7,775,460 154,759 141,249 1,457 142,705 2007 2009 3 -A Office Warehouse 3 32,670 60.00 1,960.200 38,454 35,097 367 35,464 2007 2009 3 -A Office Warehouse 5 54,450 60.00 3.267,000 64,590 58,951 612 59,563 2007 2009 4-A Office Warehouse 8.9 96,921 60.00 5,815,260 115,555 105,467 1,089 106,557 2008 2010 4 -A Office Warehouse 5 54,450 60.00 3,267,000 64,590 58,951 612 59,563 2008 2010 4 -B Office Warehouse 10 108,900 60.00 6,534,000 129,930 118,587 1,224 119,811 2008 2010 5 -B Office Warehouse 11.9 129,591 60.00 7,775,460 154,759 141,249 1,457 142,705 2009 2011 S -B Office Warehouse 7.5 81,675 60.00 4,900,500 97,260 88,769 918 89,687 2009 2011 Totals 109 1,187,101 71,226,060 1,416,271 1,292,631 13,343 1,305,974 City of Eagan, MN April 23, 2004 Page 6 The fiscal impacts of this proposal on the City is projected to have positive cash flow in each year and to have cumulative positive cash flow of approximately $4.5 million over a 15 year period. The fiscal impacts shown include the net increase in revenues to the City above those it currently receives from the site. These projections are shown in the table below. Fiscal Impacts of Developer Projection 2 - Mixed Residential and Office Condos The developer presented a proposed mixed residential and office condo development on the site. The proposed development is shown in the table on the following page. 3 ov Phase Use Total Sq. FL/Unit Projected City Property Tax Revenue Market Value Sq. Ft/Units Total Market Value Total Tax Capacity Tax Capacity Taxes Market Value Taxes Total Taxes Year Conslructe d Year Payable 1 -A Urban Townhomes 47 - 350,000.00 16,450,000 164,500 150,139 3,082 153,221 2005 2007 1 -A Villas 20 - 600,000.00 12,000,000 150,000 136,905 2,248 139,153 2005 2007 1 -A Ex. Single Family 7 384,564 800,000.00 5,600,000 70,000 63.889 1,049 64,938 2005 2007 1 -A Condos 40 704,697 300,000.00 12,000,000 120,000 109,524 2,248 111,772 2005 2007 1 -A Senior Coops 150 770,504 250,000.00 37,500.000 375,000 342,263 7,025 349,287 2005 2007 I -A Adult Manor Home -36 770,504 250,000.00 9,000,000 90,000 82,143 1,686 83,829 2005 2007 I -A Office Condos 25,000 770,504 175.00 4,375,000 86,750 79,177 820 79,996 2005 2007 1B Townhome See B2B 55 770,504 350,000.00 19,250,000 192,500 175,695 3,606 179,301 2005 2007 1B Townhome See Thru 29 770,504 400,000.00 11,600,000 116,000 105,873 2,173 108,046 2005 2007 2A Urban Townhomes 47 770,504 350,000.00 16,450,000 164,500 150.139 3,082 153,221 2006 2008 2A Villas 29 770,504 600,000.00 17,400,000 2/7,500 198,512 3,260 201,772 2006 2008 2A Ex. Single Family 9 770,504 800,000.00 7,200,000 90,000 B2,I43 1,349 83,492 2006 2008 2A Condos 40 770,504 300,000.00 12,000,000 120,000 109,524 2,248 111,772 2006 2008 2A Adult Manor Home 36 770,504 250,000.00 9,000,000 90,000 82,143 1,686 83,829 2006 2008 2A Office Condos 23,000 770,504 175.00 4,025,000 79,750 72,788 754 73,542 2006 2008 2B Townhomes B2B 55 770,504 350,000.00 19,250,000 192,500 175,695 3,606 179,301 2006 2008 2B TownhomesSeeThru 29 770,504 400,000.00 11,600,000 116,000 105,873 2,173 108,046 2006 2008 3A Villas 20 770,504 600,000.00 12,000,000 150,000 136,905 2,248 139,153 2007 2009 3A Ex. Single Family 7 11,876315 800,000.00 5,600,000 70,000 63,889 1,049 64,938 2007 2009 Totals 242,300,000 2,655,000 2,423,219 45 ,390 2,468,609 Year Projected Market Added Value Projected Tax Added Capacity Projected City Property Tax Revenue Projected City other Revenue Total City Revenue Projected City Operating Expenditures Annual Operating Cash Flow Cumulative Operating Cash Flow Projected Annual Capital Expenditures Combined Total Annual Cash Flow Combined Cumulative Cash Flow 2005 127,775,000 - - - - - - - (1,037,223) (1,037,223) (1,037,223) 2006 224,700,000 - - 51,640 51,640 (232,622) (180,983) (180,983) (726,226) (907,208) (1,944,431) 2007 242,300,000 1,364,750 384,564 86,239 470,803 (387,423) 83,380 (97,602) (84,333) (952) (1,945,384) 2008 242,300,000 2,435,000 704,697 91,499 796,197 (410,145) 386,052 288,449 - 386,052 (1,559,332) 2009 242,300,000 2,655,000 770,504 91,499 862,003 (410,145) 451,858 740,307 - 451,858 (1,107,474) 2010 242,300,000 2,655,000 770,504 91,499 862,003 (410,145) 451,858 1,192,166 - 451,858 (655,616) 2011 242,300,000 2,655,000 770,504 91,499 862,003 (410145) 451,858 1,644,024 - 451,858 (203,757) 2012 242,300,000 2,655,000 770,504 91,499 862,003 (410,145) 451,858 2,095,882 - 451,858 248,101 2013 242,300,000 2,655,000 770,504 91,499 862,003 (410,145) 451,858 2,547,740 - 451,858 699,959 2014 242,300,000 2,655,000 770,504 91,499 862,003 (410,145) 451,858 2,999,598 - 451,858 1,151,817 2015 242,300,000 2,655,000 770,504 91,499 862,003 (410,145) 451,858 3,451,457 - 451,858 1,603,675 2016 242,300,000 2,655,000 770,504 91,499 862,003 (410,145) 451,858 3,903,315 - 451,858 2,055,534 2017 242,300,000 2,655,000 770,504 91,499 862,003 (410,145) 451,858 4,355,173 - 451,858 2,507,392 2018 242,300,000 2,655,000 770,504 91,499 862,003 (410,145) 451,858 4,807,031 - 451,858 2,959,250 2019 242,300,000 2,655,000 770,504 91,499 862,003 (410,145) 451,858 5,258,889 - 451,858 3,411,108 2020 242,300,000 2,655,000 770,504 91,499 862,003 (410,145) 451,858 5,7)0,747 - 451,858 3,862,966 2021 242,300,000 2,655,000 770,504 91,499 862,003 (410,145) 451,858 6,162,606 - 451,858 4,314,824 2022 242,300,000 2,655,000 770,504 91,499 862,003 (410,145) 451,858 6,614,464 - 451,858 4,766,683 11,876315 1,510,368 13386,683 (6,772,219) 6,614,464 (1,847,781) 4,766,683 City of Eagan, MN April 23, 2004 Page 7 The fiscal impacts of this proposal on the City are projected to be positive overall resulting in a cumulative positive cash flow of approximately $4.8 million by the end of year 15. However, the combined total annual cash flow is projected to be negative in the first three years as a result of the capital expenditures that would be required to support the development. The combined cumulative cash flow is projected to be negative for the first seven years as the capital expenditures in the fires three years and negative operating cash flow in the first are offset by positive cash flows in subsequent years. Capital expenditures included in the fiscal impact projections were for parks & recreation, police, fire & rescue, general government, transportation, and library services. These projections are shown in the table below. Fiscal Impacts of Lowest - Land -Use Development - 30% Single -Story Offices and 70% Warehouse The City's current zoning would permit a range of land use on the site. The lowest -land -use development permitted on this site would be a combination of single -story offices and Year Projected Market Added Value Projected Tax Added Capacity Projected City Property Tax Revenue Projected City other Revenue Total City Revenue Projected City Operating Expenditures Annual Operating Cash Flow Cumulative Operating Cash Flow Projected Annual Capital Expenditures Combined Total Annual Cash Flow Combined Cumulative Cash Flow 2005 15,953416 - - - - - - - - - - 2006 31,906.832 - - - - - 144,922 - - - - 2007 47,860,248 317,568 71,331 12,520 83,851 (47,184) 36,667 36,667 - 36,667 36,667 2008 63,813,664 635,137 166,322 25,040 191,362 (94,368) 96,994 133,661 - 96,994 133,661 2009 79,767,080 952,705 261,313 37,559 298,873 (141,551) 157,321 290,983 - 157,321 290,983 2010 79,767,080 1,270,273 356,304 50,079 406,383 (188,735) 217,648 508,631 - 217,648 508,631 2011 79,767,080 1,587,842 451,295 62,599 513,894 (235,919) 277,975 786,606 - 277,975 786,606 2012 79,767,080 1,587,842 451,295 62,599 513,894 (235,919) 277,975 1,064,581 - 277,975 1,064,581 2013 79,767,080 1,587,842 451,295 62,599 513,894 (235,919) 277,975 1,342,557 - 277,975 1,342,557 2014 79,767,080 1,587,842 451,295 62,599 513,894 (235,919) 277,975 1,620,532 - 277,975 1,620,532 2015 79,767,080 1,587,842 451.295 62,599 513,894 (235,919) 277,975 1,898.507 - 277,975 1,898,507 2016 79,767,080 1,587,842 451.295 62,599 513,894 (235,919) 277,975 2,176,483 - 277,975 2176,483 2017 79,767,080 1,587,842 451,295 62,599 513,894 (235,919) 277,975 2,454,458 - 277,975 2,454,458 2018 79,767,080 1,587,842 451,295 62,599 513,894 (235,919) 277,975 2,732,433 - 277,975 2,732,433 2019 79,767,080 1,587,842 451,295 62,599 513,894 (235,919) 277,975 3,010,408 - 277,975 3,010,408 2020 79,767,080 1,587,842 451,295 62,599 513,894 (235,919) 277,975 3,288,384 - 277,975 3,288,384 2021 79,767,080 1,587,842 451,295 62,599 513,894 (235,919) 277,975 3,566,359 - 277,975 3,566,359 2022 79,767,080 1,587,842 451,295 62,599 513,894 (235,919) 277,975 3,844,334 - 277,975 3.844,334 6,270,816 876,385 7,147,200 (3 ,302,866) 3,844,334 - 3,844,334 Phase Use Acres Total Sq. Ft./Units Market Value Sq. Ft/Units Total Market Value Total Tax Capacity Tax Capacity Taxes Market Value Taxes Total Taxes Year Constructe d Year Payable 1 Office 6.5436 113,953 70.00 7,976,710 158,784 144,922 1,494 146,417 2005 2007 1 Warehouse 15.2684 265,890 30.00 7,976,706 158,784 144,922 1,494 146,417 2005 2007 2 Office 6.5436 113,953 7000 7,976,710 158,784 144,922 1,494 146,417 2006 2008 2 Warehouse 15.2684 265,890 30.00 7,976,706 158,784 144,922 1,494 146,417 2006 2008 3 Office 6.5436 113,953 70.00 7,976,710 158,784 144,922 1,494 146,417 2007 2009 3 Warehouse 15.2684 265,890 30.00 7,976,706 158,784 144,922 1,494 146,417 2007 2009 4 Office 6.5436 113,953 70.00 7,976,710 158,784 144,922 1,494 146,417 2008 2010 4 Warehouse 15.2684 265,890 30.00 7,976,706 158,784 144,922 1,494 146,417 2008 2010 5 Office 6.5436 113,953 70.00 7,976,710 158,784 144,922 1,494 146,417 2009 2011 5 Warehouse 15.2684 265,890 30.00 7,976,706 158.784 144,922 1,494 146,417 2009 2011 Totals 109.06 1,899,216 79,767,080 1,587,842 1,449,223 14,943 1,464,166 City of Eagan, MN April 23, 2004 Page 8 warehouses according to conversations with City staff. The floor area projected to be developed was based on 40% coverage (floor area to land) with 30% of the floor space allocated to offices and 70% allocated to warehouse. The office space was assumed to have a taxable market value of $70 /square foot and the warehouse space was assumed to have a taxable market value of $30 /square foot. These values are from those reported by the Building Valuation Data reported by the State of Minnesota Department of Administration. This development is shown in the table below. The fiscal impacts of this type of development on the City are projected to be positive overall resulting in a cumulative positive cash flow of approximately $3.8 million by the end of year 15. These projections are shown in the table below. Fiscal Impacts of Highest- Land -Use Development - R & D Office The highest land use development permitted under the City's current zoning would be a 45 foot tall R & D office with 20% land coverage (building foot print) according to conversations with City staff. We have projected a four -story building with 949,608 square feet per floor and a total floor area of 3,798,432. The office space was assumed to have a taxable market value of $70 /square foot. This development is shown in the table on the following page. g_ Year Projected Market Added Value Projected Tax Added Capacity Projected City Property Tu Revenue Projected City other Revenue Total City Revenue Projected City Operating Expenditures Annual Operating Cash Flow Cumulative Operating Cash Flow Projected Annual Capital Expenditures Combined Total Annual Cash Flow Combined Cumulative Cash Flow 2005 53,178,048 - - - - - - - 979,989 - - 2006 106,356,096 - - - - - - • - - - 2007 159,534,144 1,062,811 294,248 43,749 337,998 (164,880) 173,117 173,117 • 173,117 173,117 2008 212,712,192 2,125,622 612,156 87,499 699,655 (329,760) 369,895 543,012 - 369,895 543,012 2009 265,890,240 3,188,433 930,064 131,248 1,061,312 (494,641) 566,672 1,109,684 - 566,672 1,109,684 2010 265,890,240 4,251,244 1,247,972 174,998 1,422,970 (659,521) 763,449 1,873,133 • 763,449 1,873,133 2011 265,890,240 5,314,055 1,565,880 218,747 1,784,627 (824,401) 960,226 2,833,360 - 960,226 2,833,360 2012 265,890,240 5,314,055 1,565,880 218,747 1,784,627 (824,401) 960,226 3,793,586 - 960,226 3,793,586 2013 265,890,240 5,314,055 1,565,880 218,747 1,784,627 (824,401) 960,226 4,753,812 - 960,226 4,753,812 2014 265,890,240 5,314,055 1,565,880 218,747 1,784,627 (824,401) 960,226 5,714,039 - 960,226 5,714,039 2015 265,890,240 5,314,055 1,565,880 218,747 1,784,627 (824,401) 960,226 6,674,265 - 960,226 6,674,265 2016 265,890,240 5,314,055 1,565,880 218,747 1,784,627 (824,401) 960,226 7,634,492 - 960,226 7,634,492 2017 265,890,240 5,314,055 1,565,880 218,747 1,784,627 (824,401) 960,226 8,594,718 - 960,226 8,594,718 • 2018 265,890,240 5,314,055 1,565,880 218,747 1,784,627 (824,401) 960,226 9,554,944 • 960,226 9,554,944 20)9 265,890,240 5,314,055 1,565,880 218,747 1,784,627 (824,401) 960,226 10,515,171 • 960,226 10,515,171 2020 265,890,240 5,314,055 1,565,880 218,747 1784,627 (824,401) 960,226 11,475,397 • 960,226 11,475,397 2021 265,890,240 5,314,055 1,565,880 218,747 1,784,627 (824,401) 960,226 12,435,624 - 960,226 12,435,624 2022 265,890,240 5,314,055 1,565,880 218,747 1,784,627 (824,401) 960,226 13,395,850 - 960,226 13,395,850 21,875,004 3,062,459 24,937,463 (11,541,613) 13,395,850 • 13,395,850 Phase Use Acres Total Sq. FtJUnits Market Value Sq. Ft/Units Total Market Value Total Tax Capacity Tax Capacity Taxes Market Value Taxes Total Taxes Year Constructe d Year Payable 1 Office 21.812 759,686 70.00 53,178,048 1,062,811 970,028 9,962 979,989 2005 2007 2 Office 21.812 759,686 70.00 53,178,048 1,062,811 970,028 9,962 979.989 2006 2008 3 Office 21.812 759,686 70.00 53,178,048 1,062,811 970,028 9,962 979.989 2007 2009 4 Office 21.812 759.686 70.00 53,178,048 1,062,811 970,028 9,962 979,989 2008 2010 5 Office 21.812 759,686 70.00 53,178,048 1,062,811 970,028 9,962 979,989 2009 2011 Totals 109.06 3,798,432 265,890,240 5,314,055 4,850,138 49,809 4,899,947 City of Eagan, MN April 23, 2004 Page 9 The fiscal impacts of this type of development on the City are projected to be positive overall resulting in a cumulative positive cash flow of approximately $13.4 million by the end of year 15. These projections are shown in the table below. Summary The table on the following page shows the cumulative cash flows for each of the developments projected on the site. Of the five alternatives, an R & D office development as currently contemplated in the City's Comprehensive Plan is projected to generate approximately $13.4 million over the 15 year planning period, the greatest cumulative cash flow. The mixed residential /office condos development proposed by the developer is projected to generate approximately $4.8 million over the same period, the second greatest cumulative cash flow. It is important to note our earlier comments relative to the market values used by the developer for the office condos as they are the primary driver of the anticipated revenues resulting from the development. The values appear to be overstated, resulting in a projection of revenues greater than may likely be realized. ,303 Year Developer Office Warehouse Development Office Warehouse Full 109 Acres Mixed Residential/Office Condos Lowest -Land- Use Single -Story Offices and Warehouse Highest Land Use R & D Office 2005 - - (1,037,223) - - 2006 - - (1,944,431) - - 2007 26,233 42,076 (1,945,384) 36,667 173,117 2008 118,327 165,857 (1,559,332) 133,661 543,012 2009 258,249 353,309 (1,107,474) 290,983 1,109,684 2010 458,931 617,365 (655,616) 508,631 1,873,133 2011 706,048 943,699 (203,757) 786,606 2,833,360 2012 953,165 1,270,033 248,101 1,064,581 3,793,586 2013 1,200,282 1,596,367 699,959 1,342,557 4,753,812 2014 1,447,399 1,922,700 1,151,817 1,620,532 5,714,039 2015 1,694,516 2,249,034 1,603,675 1,898,507 6,674,265 2016 1,941,633 2,575,368 2,055,534 2,176,483 7,634,492 2017 2,188,750 2,901,702 2,507,392 2,454,458 8,594,718 2018 2,435,867 3,228,036 2,959,250 2,732,433 9,554,944 2019 2,682,984 3,554,370 3,411,108 3,010,408 10,515,171 2020 2,930,101 3,880,704 3,862,966 3,288,384 11,475,397 2021 3,177,218 4,207,037 4,314,824 3,566,359 12,435,624 2022 3,424,335 4,533,371 4,766,683 3,844,334 13,395,850 City of Eagan, MN April 23, 2004 Page 10 Please do not hesitate to call if you have any questions. Cc: David MacGillivray Agenda Information Memo May 18, 2004 Eagan City Council Meeting FACTS: F. COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN AMENDMENT — LAUKKA- BECK ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: > To direct staff to submit the Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment to change the land use designation in Special Area 1 from Office /Service to Medium Density (MD) residential (4 -12 units /acre) and Park (P) for approximately 27 acres of undeveloped land located south of I -494, west of the Inver Grove Heights (IGH) corporate boundary, in the NE 'A of Section 1. OR > To direct the preparation of Findings of Fact for denial of a Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment to change the land use designation in Special Area 1 from Office /Service to Medium Density (MD) residential (4 -12 units /acre) and Park (P) for approximately 27 acres of undeveloped land located south of I -494, west of the Inver Grove Heights (IGH) corporate boundary, in the NE 1/4 of Section 1. > The zoning (Planned Development) for the Laukka -Beck property does not permit residential uses. > The Comprehensive Guide Plan discourages additional residential uses and long -term continuation of existing residential uses for Special Areas 1, 2 and 3. > The applicant's desired development request requires a Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment and a Planned Development Amendment. > The Special Areas were created as part of the Comprehensive Guide Plan Update that was initiated in 1998 and resulted in the adoption Eagan's Comprehensive Plan 2000 in February of 2001. > The City Council amended the Guide Plan in December 2001 by adopting the Goals and Policies for Special Areas 1, 2 and 3. > The applicant is requesting approval of Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment to change the land use designation in Special Area 1 from Office /Service (O /S) to Medium Density (MD) residential (4 -12 units /acre) and Park (P) for approximately 27 acres of undeveloped land located south of I -494, west of the Inver Grove Heights (IGH) corporate boundary, in the NE 1 /4 of Section 1. > When a change to a City's Comprehensive Guide Plan is requested, it is the City's responsibility to determine if the change is in the best long -range interests of the city and future property owners. The standard of review of a City's action in approving or denying a Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment is whether there exists a rational basis for the decision to modify the present plan. > The site is located within the area commonly referred to as The Waters office park. Adjacent properties include the 480,000 SF Ecolab (originally Cray Research) Campus to the west and the 264,000 SF Northwest Airlines (NWA) Corporate Headquarters and the 279,000 SF NATCO training facility to the northwest. > Except for the small portion located in IGH, the subject site is located within the 1985 Laukka -Beck Eagan Planned Development that incorporated approximately 450 acres in northeast Eagan. This Planned Development called for the establishment of office /retail, office retail /showroom, and research and development uses throughout the site. > The applicant's submittals allow the City to review the Guide Plan Amendment in relation to the pending amendment application for the 80 acre Loan Oak, LLC parcel south of the site. Additionally, it stands to reason that if the Guide Plan is amended for the two pending applications, the 38 acre parcel that lies between the two and other vacant property in the area would likely follow the same path. As such, policy makers will want to be cognizant of the potential for far more than the subject 110 acres to ultimately be influenced. > The MD Comp Guide designation category provides areas for medium density attached housing units, including two - family dwellings, townhomes, and condominiums. Under certain circumstances, small lot detached single family units may also be appropriate. Allowable gross densities within this land use category range from 4 -12 units /acre, including common area. > As proposed, Laukka -Beck proposes 168 townhome units on 27 acres resulting in a density of 6.2 units /acre. Because a formal application for a Planned Development Amendment is not before the Council, there is no assurance that the applicant will pursue or that the Council supports the proposed density or uses. > The proposed amendment to residential is seen as connected to that requested by Loan Oak, LLC requiring a mandatory Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) to be prepared prior to consideration of rezoning and/or subdivision application. > Historically, the City has attempted, where possible, to minimize land uses that would be in conflict with operations at MSP. In response to anticipated aircraft noise, the applicant's noise consultant states that interior noise attenuation can be accommodated easily with good building practices. The Metropolitan Council Aircraft Noise Policies defines specific findings that need to be made in addition to the development's capacity to achieve noise attenuation for individual entry residential development. The City will need to determine whether it concurs or differs with the applicant's position regarding the appropriateness of residential uses in Noise Zone 4. ISSUES: GENERAL ISSUES AND OVERVIEW > The issues before the Council are primarily legislative and policy issues and the Council has latitude to make findings to approve or deny the proposals provided that it has a rational basis for the decision based on the health, safety and public welfare of the community now and in the future. The applicants have indicated that they want the City Council to address the threshold question of whether it would consider residential uses in this area. The City has advised the applicants that any application for a planned development amendment is incomplete until an EAW is completed. > The applicants have indicated that they wish to pursue a method of review that would not require costs associated with the preparation of detailed plans or the preparation of an environmental assessment worksheet, which would be mandatory for a planned development amendment application or a subdivision. Given that request and those parameters, the method of review that is appropriate and is properly before the City is a Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment application. AIRPORT NOISE ISSUES > The City has a long standing policy of guiding, zoning and developing property in the northern part of the City for commercial and industrial land that are compatible with overflights associated with the operational standards at the Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport. The City has and continues to promote the maintenance of airport operating procedures that take advantage of that land use policy by concentrating aircraft in those areas to minimize overflights of other areas of the City planned for residential uses. The applicant is proposing a modification of that policy. There is clear guidance in regional policy as to how consideration of such a modification would be undertaken. If the Council wishes to modify the policy, it would be appropriate to apply those standards of review and determine an appropriate process by which to assess the standards. ➢ The City's Airport Relations Commission typically advises the City Council in regard to matters affecting airport policy, including monitoring operations standards and policies related to the Eagan- Mendota Heights Corridor. In most cases, Comprehensive Guide Plan amendments have not been presented to the 3o7 Airport Relations Commission and the group has not been asked to provide input on this item to date. The Council may wish to consider whether to direct the item to the ARC for its review and comment or for the oversight of a more detailed analysis of the City's Policies in this regard. MARKET FORCES ➢ The applicants state that the current market does not support immediate build out of commercial industrial uses in the near future. One of the primary purposes of land use planning is to look beyond the market at any one time and to identify the land uses and interrelationship of land uses that are in the best interests of the City. Market forces may be a factor in land use decisions, but it is up to the City Council to determine the weight of that factor in relation to other factors. ➢ Since the submission of the applications, the former Cray campus has been sold to Ecolab for the relocation and expansion of the company's research and development and information center activities. While Ecolab purchased the property for substantially less than the original construction cost or initial asking price of the property, the Council may wish to consider whether the occupancy of the site has the potential to affect market forces in the area. TIMEFRAME FOR DEVELOPMENT ➢ Laukka Beck states that it has actively marketed the 450 acre Laukka Beck Planned Development for the development of the projects in the Waters Office Park. To date, over 420 acres of the site have been sold and/or developed. In its application, Laukka Beck is proposing to convert the land use of the remaining 27 parcel that has not been sold by the company over that time frame. FINANCIAL ANALYSIS ➢ The applicants state that the proposal would generate tax revenue in excess of that which could be anticipated in the short term for commercial - industrial development. This statement is related to the market forces issue above. The City's Reviewing Consultant states that the applicant did not analyze the service or capital cost differentials associated with their proposed development alternative. The applicant's consultant has not addressed other factors the City may consider in planning and developing commercial industrial uses, such as the creation and expansion of jobs, the encouragement of spin off development, vertical and horizontal integration of the local economy and so on. If the Council does not find that a financial analysis is a compelling aspect of a land use decision, no further analysis needs to be done in this area. If the Council finds such analysis to be compelling, it may wish to authorize the preparation of a more detailed fiscal impact analysis by a firm qualified to consider such factors. ATTACHMENTS: (3) 3 Draft APC Minutes on ages 3 3 / 5 through /4 Staff Report on pages / 7 through ?S . Memo from developer's Fiscal Consultant on pages J/0 througha3 /1. MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: BACKGROUND BASE ASSUMPTIONS Loan Oak Development, LLC Kirstin Barsness May 5, 2004 City of Eagan Tax Analysis Report The initial tax analysis I completed was reviewed by Springsted, Inc., acting as financial advisors to the City of Eagan. Springsted examined four different development scenarios and identified the financial impact to the city for each scenario. Their analysis indicated that development of the site as a research and development facility provides the city with the highest positive cash flow. The mixed -use development proposed by Loan Oak yields the second greatest cumulative cash flow. Springsted raised a number of questions related to my analysis in their review. The majority of the comments related to market conditions, however, they did not consider the market when estimating the research and development cash flow. This memorandum will clarify the assumptions used in my analysis and identify concerns I have with the Springsted memorandum. As a base of comparison, I generated two tax calculations. The first is an example of the site with the proposed mixed -use development by Loan Oak. The second example is with office warehouse under the current Planned Development Zoning. Springsted added the third scenario of research and development. In order to compare the three I have made the below assumptions 1. For direct comparison, this memo will focus on two key financial measurements: Market Value and Net Local Taxes (city, county, school, misc.). 2. The net developable property is 84.50 acres. The remaining property is considered wetland and protected by the Shoreline Ordinance. 3/0 Barsness Consulting Services, Inc. 3. The 2003 market value for the site is 3,954,900 and the original taxes (payable 2004) are $130,450.50. The information is gathered from the Dakota County Real Estate Inquiry system. 4. Fiscal Disparities and the State Wide Taxes will be considered in calculating commercial taxes. 5. For commercial development in the mixed -use site a 35% coverage ratio is used. This is less than the 40% used by Springsted in their analysis of Lowest -Land- Use. Thus, under- representing the potential amount of commercial development on the site. LONE OAK MIXED DEVELOPMENT The project is comprised of: • 648 owner- occupied housing units, including single family, townhomes, condos, and senior housing. • 48,000 square foot office condo component with a construction value of $175 per square foot. This cost includes tenant improvements and has been verified by two construction firms and a market research firm. • Approximately 69 acres of green space. Anticipated build out is within five years. The site would begin contributing taxes upon building completion, and the majority of the site is not impacted by fiscal disparities and the state -wide tax. New Market Value (building only) is estimated at $241,750,000. Net local taxes for the five year period are $9,637,815. Both are highlighted in the tables below. PROJECT INFORMATION Phase USE 1 -A URBAN TOWNHOMES 1 -A VILLAS 1 -A EX. SINGLE FAMILY 1 -A CONDOS Market Value Total Market Class New Year Date Sq. Ft. /Units Sq. Ft./Units Taxes Value Rate Tax Capacity Built Payable 53 350,000.00 $ 166,952 18,550,000 1.00% 185,500 2005 2007 17 600,000.00 $ 114,751 10,200,000 1.25% 127,500 2005 2007 7 800,000.00 $ 63,001 5,600,000 1.25% 70,000 2005 2007 20 300,000.00 $ 54,001 6,000,000 1.00% 60,000 2005 2007 1 -A TWIN HOMES 15 450,000.00 $ 60,751 6,750,000 1.00% 67,500 2005 2007 1 -A SENIOR CO -OPS 150 250,000.00 $ 337,504 37,500,000 1.00% 375,000 2005 2007 1 -A ADULT MANOR HOMES 36 250,000.00 $ 81,001 9,000,000 1.00% 90,000 2005 2007 1 -A OFFICE CONDOS 25,000 175.00 $ 147,098 4,375,000 2.00% 87,500 2005 2007 1 -B TOWN HOMES B2B 55 350,000.00 $ 173,252 19,250,000 1.00% 192,500 2005 2007 1 -B TOWN HOME SEE THRU 29 400,000.00 $ 104,401 11,600,000 1.00% 116,000 2005 2007 2 -A URBAN TOWNHOMES 54 350,000.00 $ 170,102 18,900,000 1.00% 189,000 2006 2008 2 -A VILLAS 24 600,000.00 $ 162,002 14,400,000 1.25% 180,000 2006 2008 2 -A EX. SINGLE FAMILY 9 800,000.00 $ 81,001 7,200,000 1.25% 90,000 2006 2008 2 -A CONDOS 20 300,000.00 $ 54,001 6,000,000 1.00% 60,000 2006 2008 2 -A TWIN HOMES 15 450,000.00 $ 60,751 6,750,000 1.00% 67,500 2006 2008 2 -A ADULT MANOR HOMES 36 250,000.00 $ 81,001 9,000,000 1.00% 90,000 2006 2008 2 -A OFFICE CONDOS 23,000 175.00 $ 135,330 4,025,000 2.00% 80,500 2006 2008 2 -B TOWN HOMES B2B 55 350,000.00 $ 173,252 19,250,000 1.00% 192,500 2006 2008 2 -B TOWN HOME SEE THRU 29 400,000.00 $ 104,401 11,600,000 1.00% 116,000 2006 2008 3 -A VILLAS 17 600,000.00 $ 114,751 10,200,000 1.25% 127,500 2007 2009 3 -A EX. SINGLE FAMILY 7 800,000.00 $ 63,001 5,600,000 1.25% 70,000 2007 2009 Prepared by al'srttss totrst34tia1 +,'Seervices, 2 31/ TOTAL 2,502,302 ;°241,750,600.r 2,634,500 LOWEST LAND USE - OFFICE WAREHOUSE Springsted calculated the tax revenue generated on the site for the lowest possible land use: office warehouse. For sake of comparison, we will use their example instead of the one developed by my firm. Their example allows for a higher building coverage (40% vs. 35 %) and lower cost per square foot of approximately $42.00. I did adjust their number for site size (84.5 acres) and to represent fiscal disparities and state -wide tax. Total Market Value Total Market Class New Tax Phase USE Acres Sq. Ft. /Units Sq. Ft. /Units Taxes Value Rate Capacity Built Payable 1 -A Office Warehouse 15.5 270,072 42.00 $ 476,723.03 11,343,024 2.00% 226,860 2005 2007 2 -A Office Warehouse 11.5 200,376 42.00 $ 353,697.73 8,415,792 2.00% 168,316 2006 2008 2 -A Office Warehouse 9 156,816 42.00 $ 276,806.92 6,586,272 2.00% 131,725 2006 2008 3 -A Office Warehouse 7 121,968 42.00 $ 215,294.27 5,122,656 2.00% 102,453 2007 2009 3 -A Office Warehouse 3 52,272 42.00 $ 92,268.97 2,195,424 2.00% 43,908 2007 2009 3 -A Office Warehouse 5 87,120 42.00 $ 153,781.62 3,659,040 2.00% 73,181 2007 2009 4 -A Office Warehouse 4 69,696 42.00 $ 123,025.30 2,927,232 2.00% 58,545 2008 2010 4 -A Office Warehouse 5 87,120 42.00 $ 153,781.62 3,659,040 2.00% 73,181 2008 2010 4 -B Office Warehouse 10 174,240 42.00 $ 307,563.24 7,318,080 2.00% 146,362 2008 2010 5 -B Office Warehouse 7 121,968 42.00 $ 215,294.27 5,122,656 2.00% 102,453 2009 2011 5 -B Office Warehouse 7.5 130,680 42.00 $ 230,672.43 5,488,560 2.00% 109,771 2009 2011 TOTAL 85 1,472,328 2,598,909 $61,837,776 1,236,756 Prepared by [Iarsne'ss C()malting Service, iaac. PROJECT INFORMATION d/A 3 Year Date 5,YEAR HOUSING! TAX CALCULATION BASE LOCAL F/D MN STATE MV NEW NET NEW NET NEW BASE BASE MV NEW MV TAXES TAXES TAXES TAXES TAXES TAXES YEAR MV NEW MV TAXES TAXES TAXES TAXES TAXES TAXES LOCALTAXES 2007 3,954,900 128,825,000 130,451 $ 1,205,464 $ 42,670 $ 47,641 $ 6,935 $ 1,302,710 $ 1,075,013 2008 3,954,900 225,950,000 130,451 $ 2,137,837 $ 81,926 $ 91,471 $ 13,316 $ 2,324,550 $ 2,007,386 2009 3,954,900 241,750,000 130,451 $ 2,315,589 $ 81,926 $ 91,471 $ 13,316 $ 2,502,302 $ 2,185,138 2010 3,954,900 241,750,000 130,451 $ 2,315,589 $ 81,926 $ 91,471 $ 13,316 $ 2,502,302 $ 2,185,138 2011 3,954,900 241,750,000 130,451 $ 2,315,589 $ 81,926 $ 91,471 $ 13,316 $ 2,502,302 $ 2,185,138 TOTAL 652,253 $ 10,290,067 $ 370,376 413,525 $ 60,198 $ 11,134,166 9,637,81$ TOTAL 2,502,302 ;°241,750,600.r 2,634,500 LOWEST LAND USE - OFFICE WAREHOUSE Springsted calculated the tax revenue generated on the site for the lowest possible land use: office warehouse. For sake of comparison, we will use their example instead of the one developed by my firm. Their example allows for a higher building coverage (40% vs. 35 %) and lower cost per square foot of approximately $42.00. I did adjust their number for site size (84.5 acres) and to represent fiscal disparities and state -wide tax. Total Market Value Total Market Class New Tax Phase USE Acres Sq. Ft. /Units Sq. Ft. /Units Taxes Value Rate Capacity Built Payable 1 -A Office Warehouse 15.5 270,072 42.00 $ 476,723.03 11,343,024 2.00% 226,860 2005 2007 2 -A Office Warehouse 11.5 200,376 42.00 $ 353,697.73 8,415,792 2.00% 168,316 2006 2008 2 -A Office Warehouse 9 156,816 42.00 $ 276,806.92 6,586,272 2.00% 131,725 2006 2008 3 -A Office Warehouse 7 121,968 42.00 $ 215,294.27 5,122,656 2.00% 102,453 2007 2009 3 -A Office Warehouse 3 52,272 42.00 $ 92,268.97 2,195,424 2.00% 43,908 2007 2009 3 -A Office Warehouse 5 87,120 42.00 $ 153,781.62 3,659,040 2.00% 73,181 2007 2009 4 -A Office Warehouse 4 69,696 42.00 $ 123,025.30 2,927,232 2.00% 58,545 2008 2010 4 -A Office Warehouse 5 87,120 42.00 $ 153,781.62 3,659,040 2.00% 73,181 2008 2010 4 -B Office Warehouse 10 174,240 42.00 $ 307,563.24 7,318,080 2.00% 146,362 2008 2010 5 -B Office Warehouse 7 121,968 42.00 $ 215,294.27 5,122,656 2.00% 102,453 2009 2011 5 -B Office Warehouse 7.5 130,680 42.00 $ 230,672.43 5,488,560 2.00% 109,771 2009 2011 TOTAL 85 1,472,328 2,598,909 $61,837,776 1,236,756 Prepared by [Iarsne'ss C()malting Service, iaac. PROJECT INFORMATION d/A 3 Year Date 5 YEAR COMMERCIAL TAX CALCULATION BASE LOCAL F/D MN STATE MV NEW NET NEW YEAR BASE MV NEW MV TAXES TAXES TAXES TAXES TAXES TAXES LOCAL TAXES 2007 3,954,900 11,343,024 130,451 129,249 110,630 123,519 17,981 476,723 (1,202) 2008 3,954,900 26,345,088 130,451 333,541 256,948 286,882 41,762 1,107,228 203,090 2009 3,954,900 37,322,208 130,451 425,269 364,009 406,416 59,163 1,568,573 294,819 2010 3,954,900 51,226,560 130,451 583,703 499,620 557,827 63,223 2,152,943 453,253 2011 3,954,900 61,837,776 130,451 704,613 603,113 673,376 98,025 2,598,909 574,163 TOTAL 652,253 2,176,375 1,834,320 2,048,020 280,155 7,904,375 1 $1,524,123 TOTAL 2,502,302 ;°241,750,600.r 2,634,500 LOWEST LAND USE - OFFICE WAREHOUSE Springsted calculated the tax revenue generated on the site for the lowest possible land use: office warehouse. For sake of comparison, we will use their example instead of the one developed by my firm. Their example allows for a higher building coverage (40% vs. 35 %) and lower cost per square foot of approximately $42.00. I did adjust their number for site size (84.5 acres) and to represent fiscal disparities and state -wide tax. Total Market Value Total Market Class New Tax Phase USE Acres Sq. Ft. /Units Sq. Ft. /Units Taxes Value Rate Capacity Built Payable 1 -A Office Warehouse 15.5 270,072 42.00 $ 476,723.03 11,343,024 2.00% 226,860 2005 2007 2 -A Office Warehouse 11.5 200,376 42.00 $ 353,697.73 8,415,792 2.00% 168,316 2006 2008 2 -A Office Warehouse 9 156,816 42.00 $ 276,806.92 6,586,272 2.00% 131,725 2006 2008 3 -A Office Warehouse 7 121,968 42.00 $ 215,294.27 5,122,656 2.00% 102,453 2007 2009 3 -A Office Warehouse 3 52,272 42.00 $ 92,268.97 2,195,424 2.00% 43,908 2007 2009 3 -A Office Warehouse 5 87,120 42.00 $ 153,781.62 3,659,040 2.00% 73,181 2007 2009 4 -A Office Warehouse 4 69,696 42.00 $ 123,025.30 2,927,232 2.00% 58,545 2008 2010 4 -A Office Warehouse 5 87,120 42.00 $ 153,781.62 3,659,040 2.00% 73,181 2008 2010 4 -B Office Warehouse 10 174,240 42.00 $ 307,563.24 7,318,080 2.00% 146,362 2008 2010 5 -B Office Warehouse 7 121,968 42.00 $ 215,294.27 5,122,656 2.00% 102,453 2009 2011 5 -B Office Warehouse 7.5 130,680 42.00 $ 230,672.43 5,488,560 2.00% 109,771 2009 2011 TOTAL 85 1,472,328 2,598,909 $61,837,776 1,236,756 Prepared by [Iarsne'ss C()malting Service, iaac. PROJECT INFORMATION d/A 3 Year Date RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT OFFICE In order to be consistent throughout the comparison, a realistic market view is necessary. Springsted adjusted the office warehouse scenario to better represent market conditions, i.e. reduced cost per square foot and higher coverage ratio. The research and development analysis is definitely skewed. A five year build -out of 3,798,432 square feet is unrealistic for the following reasons: • For the past twenty (20) years the site has been zoned for this particular use and development has not occurred. • In the last five years, Dakota County has had one research and development facility constructed and it has been converted to offices. Source: Gloria Pinke, Dakota County Assessing Services. • The five year absorption rate for the East Bloomington & South of River Region has been 101,613 square feet annually according to 2003 NAIOP Annual Office Market Update. • The site would be competing with other locations in the market that are ready to be developed. • A project with 3.8 million feet would be heavily sought and the likelihood that it would be in a tax increment district for at least 8 years is high. If Eagan does not offer TIF, other municipalities would for this type of project. • Large corporate project, such as Best Buy and Medtronic have required financial assistance. • Best Buy is 2.5 million square feet and is currently 25% vacant. The analysis completed by Springsted does not take into consideration fiscal disparities or the state -wide tax. Additionally, the $13.4 million of cumulative cash flow does not represent the possibility of a tax increment district which would negatively impact the projection. I adjusted Springsted's analysis to represent the 85 acres of developable property, fiscal disparities impact, and state wide taxes. PROJECT '; INFORMATION Market Total Value Total Sq. Sq. Phase USE Acres Ft. /Units Ft. /Units Taxes Market Class New Year Date Value Rate Tax Capacity Built Payable R &D 1-A Office 22.5 759,686 70.00 476,723 53,178,020 2.00% 1,063,560 2005 2007 R &D 2 -A Office 22.5 759,686 70.00 353,698 53,178,020 2.00% 1,063,560 2006 2008 R &D 3 -A Office 22.5 759,686 70.00 215,294 53,178,020 2.00% 1,063,560 2007 2009 R &D 4 -A Office 17.5 759,686 70.00 123,025 53,178,020 2.00% 1,063,560 2008 2010 TOTAL 85 3,038,744 1,168,740 212,712,080 4,254,242 Prepared by Bats ae'SS Comvytifig Services, I . 21 3 4 SUMMARY The three scenarios outlined above represent the possible development alternatives for the site. With the exception of the Loan Oak preferred mixed -use scenario, the other two have utilized the optimal conditions and market expectations stipulated by Springsted. I have compensated for amount of actual developable land (84.5 acres) and the necessary additional commercial taxes not included in the original analysis: fiscal disparities and state wide taxes. Scenario Increase Market Value Net Local Taxes (5 years) Mixed Use $ 241,750,000 $ 9,637,815 Office Warehouse $ 61,837,776 $ 1,524,123 Research & Development $ 212,712,080 $ 9,244,730 Looking at the two key revenue generating factors Market Value and local taxes, the Mixed Use Development is the best alternative. It is important to note that the Research and Development analysis used the optimal amount of square feet in the valuation, although the assumptions used for the size of the development are not market driven. Prepared by Bars es OM sttttaa Sep lies, 5 5'YEAR R& D TAX CALCULATIONd6 YEAR BASE MV NEW MV BASE TAXES LOCAL TAXES F/D TAXES MN STATE TAXES MV TAXES NEW TAXES NET NEW LOCAL TAXES 2007 3,954,900 53,178,020 130,451 605,939 518,653 579,077 84,298 476,723 475,489 2008 3,954,900 106,356,040 130,451 2,019,775 1,555,959 1,737,230 252,893 830,421 1,889,324 2009 3,954,900 159,534,060 130,451 2,423,756 2,074,612 2,316,307 337,191 1,045,715 2,293,306 2010 3,954,900 212,712,080 130,451 2,423,756 2,074,612 2,316,307 252,893 1,168,740 2,293,306 2011 3,954,900 212,712,080 130,451 2,423,756 2,074,612 2,316,307 337,191 1,168,740 2,293,306 TOTAL 652,253 9,896,983 8,298,449 9,265,228 1,264,467 4,690,339 $9,244,730 SUMMARY The three scenarios outlined above represent the possible development alternatives for the site. With the exception of the Loan Oak preferred mixed -use scenario, the other two have utilized the optimal conditions and market expectations stipulated by Springsted. I have compensated for amount of actual developable land (84.5 acres) and the necessary additional commercial taxes not included in the original analysis: fiscal disparities and state wide taxes. Scenario Increase Market Value Net Local Taxes (5 years) Mixed Use $ 241,750,000 $ 9,637,815 Office Warehouse $ 61,837,776 $ 1,524,123 Research & Development $ 212,712,080 $ 9,244,730 Looking at the two key revenue generating factors Market Value and local taxes, the Mixed Use Development is the best alternative. It is important to note that the Research and Development analysis used the optimal amount of square feet in the valuation, although the assumptions used for the size of the development are not market driven. Prepared by Bars es OM sttttaa Sep lies, 5 City of Eagan Advisory Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 27, 2004 Page 20 J. COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN AMENDMENT & PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT — LAUKKA -BECK EAGAN PARTNERSHIP A Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment of approximately 26.9 acres from Special Area /Office Service to Special Area /Medium Density Residential, located on Outlot N, Lone Oak in the NE %4 of Section 1. Community Development Director Jon Hohenstein introduced this item and presented the information in the City Staff report dated April 22, 2004, including the LLackground and history along with Item K. Chair Heyl opened the public hearing. There being no public comment, Chair Heyl closed the public hearing an back to the Commission. Chair Heyl explained that she is not in favor of the isolated concept and is concerned for airport noise. She stated the proposed homes would fit in other areas of Eagan. She also mentioned that there are areas of Eagan where the schools and roads would accommodate this type of development., ur�ned the discussion Member Leeder agreed with Chair Heyl and stated the proposed location and airport noise are the main problems. He also stated he is not favor the development being isolated from the � t . rest of Eagan. Chair Heyl referenced the current Planned Development that' the City has not terminated, along with the other following reasons as also listed for item K: 1. The limited area remaining in Eagan for office %service designation, and the fit for that use in this area., 2. All of=north Eagan has been consistently developed as of 2002, the time when the area was last Comprehensive Guided, specifically Ecolab and The Waters development. 3 The City had otherT;office /service area, which was partially dedicated to a Community Center. 4. The sur ounding major roadways make since for big businesses such as Ecolab. 5. The airport noise Mil better with office /service designation, rather than residential designation. t 6. The City is considering the present time, along with 10 years from now, and 15 years from now. 7. Time has not expired on the Planned Development; therefore it is still in effect, and the conditions under the Planned Development should still be supported. Member Bendt stated he prefers that the entire area remain as greenspace, however, that is not reasonable. He stated the proposed development could be one with character, along with the fact that the property will be developed one way or another. He stated: for the City to expect the property owner to wait 20 years to develop is unreasonable. City of Eagan Advisory Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 27, 2004 Page 21 Member Leeder explained that the property owner took a purchasing the property. Chair Heyl explained that a 20 year time period in Eagan development. A vote was taken. Aye: Chair Heyl and Member Leeder. Nay: Member Bendt and Member Hansen. Motion failed 2 -2. 3 /'- risk in regard to development when is not that long when considering Member Heyl moved, Member Leeder seconded a motion to recommend denial of a Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment to change the land use designation in Special Area 1 from Office /Service to Medium Density (MD) residential and Park *I for approximately 27 acres of undeveloped land located south of 1 -494, west of the IGHcorporate boundary, in the NE '/4 of Section 1. REPORT DATE: April 22, 2004 APPLICANT: Larry Laukka PROPERTY OWNER: Laukka -Beck REQUEST: Comp. Guide Plan Amendment LOCATION: NE 1/4 of Section 1 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: SA # 1 ZONING: PD — Planned Development SUMMARY OF REQUEST AUTHORITY FOR REVIEW PLANNING REPORT CITY OF EAGAN CASE: 01- CG- 01 -02 -04 HEARING DATE: April 27, 2004 APPLICATION DATE: February 18, 2004 PREPARED BY: City Staff Based on the application and supporting information submitted, the City is reviewing the request to amend the Comprehensive Guide Plan to support Medium Density (MD) residential and Park (P). The applicant is requesting a meeting with the Advisory Planning Commission (APC) to present a concept plan to discuss the feasibility of a Planned Development and approval of Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment to change the land use designation in Special Area 1 from Office /Service to Medium Density (MD) residential (4 -12 units /acre) and Park (P) for approximately 27 acres of undeveloped land located south of I -494, west of the Inver Grove Heights (IGH) corporate boundary, in the NE 1/4 of Section 1. The attorney representing the applicant submitted a narrative that asserts that the existing Planned Development zoning can be amended to accommodate the residential use without amending the Comprehensive Guide Plan. Despite that, they have applied for a Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment which is being processed at this time. The narrative also states that the City will be liable of acting in a way that is arbitrary and capricious if a denial of the applicant's request is based on the existing Waters Plan (Special Area 1). The City Attorney and staff have reviewed the zoning and Comprehensive Guide Plan history of the subject site and found that a portion of the site had a zoning of R -4, Multi - family in 1974 through 1986 and a review of the area in 1985 stated that the "current R -4 in the area was intended to create a buffer, but is not of a practical shape to allow development." Also, the 3/7 Planning Report - Laukka -Beck Eagan Partnership April 27, 2004 Page 2 City's first Comprehensive Guide Plan (1974) guided the property Regional Shopping Center (RSC) and it has been guided for retail and/or office, office /showroom, and research and development use since that time. Planned Development Concept There is no APC or City Council action associated with the presentation of a concept plan. Chapter 11, Section 11.60, Subd. C, 2 Concept Plan states: ...any person may request a meeting with the APC to present a concept plan to discuss the feasibility of a Planned Development. Such request shall be made by addressing a letter to the APC where upon said request shall be heard at a subsequent meeting. Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment The City's Comprehensive Guide Plan was prepared pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 473.864. As defined by statute, the Land Use Plan is a guide and may be amended from time to time as conditions change. The City's Guide Plan is to be implemented by official controls such as zoning and other fiscal devices. The creation of land use districts and zoning is a formulation of public policy and a legislative act. As such, the classification of land uses must reasonably relate to promoting the public health, safety, morals and general welfare. When a change to a City's Comprehensive Guide Plan is requested, it is the City's responsibility to determine if the change is in the best long -range interests of the city and future property owners. The standard of review of a city's action in approving or denying a Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment is whether there exists a rational basis for the decision as to whether to modify the present plan. A rational basis standard has been described to mean having legally sufficient reasons supportable by the facts which promote the general health, safety and welfare of the City. It is also important to note that a portion of the subject site is located in IGH and will require a separate Guide Plan amendment, rezoning and subdivision process and action by the IGH city council. EXISTING CONDITIONS The site is undeveloped and consists of varying topography, trees /woodland areas, and several wetlands. The site is within the area commonly referred to as The Waters office park. Adjacent properties include the 480,000 SF Ecolab (originally Cray Research) Campus to the west and the 264,000 SF Northwest Airlines (NWA) Corporate Headquarters and the 279,000 SF NATCO training facility to the northwest. BACKGROUND/HISTORY Except for the small portion located in IGH, the subject site is located within the 1985 Laukka- Beck Eagan Planned Development that incorporated approximately 450 acres in northeast Eagan. Ei Year Zoning Guide Plan Designation 1964 - 73 Industrial N/A 1974 PD -RSC & R -4 RSC 1980 PD -RSC & R -4 CPD (Dayton Hudson) 1983 PD -RSC & R -4 RSC 1985 PD -RSC & R -4 Discussion re: residential (no action) 1987 - 2001 PD — Office, Office /Showroom CPD 2002 PD Special Area — O/S (Office /Service) Planning Report - Laukka -Beck Eagan Partnership April 27, 2004 Page 3 This Planned Development called for the establishment of office /retail, office retail /showroom, and research and development uses throughout the site. ZONING & COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN The Zoning and Guide Plan history of the site is listed below: SURROUNDING USES Existing development in the proximity of the subject site consists of large scale corporate office (Ecolab, NWA, and the USPS) and a significant amount of office, office- showroom and office - warehouse development. The following existing uses, zoning, and comprehensive guide plan designations surround the subject property: North - O'Neil Drive/I-494. South - Undeveloped; zoned Ag; guided Special Area - O/S (Office /Service). East - Inver Grove Heights; zoned Ag; guided Office. West - Undeveloped NWA property; zoned PD; guided Special Area - O/S (Office /Service). EVALUATION OF REQUEST The applicant's submittals allow the City to review the Guide Plan Amendment in relation to the pending amendment application for the Loan Oak Development, LLC property south of the site. Additionally, it stands to reason that if the Guide Plan is amended for the two pending applications the 38 acre parcel that lies between the two would likely follow the same path. As Planning Report - Laukka -Beck Eagan Partnership April 27, 2004 Page 4 such, policy makers will want to be cognizant of the potential that a total of approximately 148 acres will ultimately be impacted. MD — MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE DESIGNATION The MD Comp Guide designation category provides areas for medium density attached housing units, including two- family dwellings, townhomes, and condominiums. Under certain circumstances, small lot detached single family units may also be appropriate. Allowable gross densities within this land use category range from 4 -12 units /acre, including common area. LAUKKA -BECK PROPOSAL If the requested land use amendment is approved, Laukka -Beck proposes 168 townhome units on 27 acres which results in a density of 6.2 units /acre. TAX BASE IMPACTS The applicant has submitted Tax Benefit Study. The information presents a five -year tax analysis that, based on the consultant's assumptions, concludes that "The housing scenario provides a significant tax revenue advantage over the commercial option." The City's fiscal consultant, Springsted, has reviewed the study and has provided an analysis, which is attached, of the assumptions and alternatives outlined in the applicant's study. Springsted's analysis indicates that the relative tax revenue and service cost impacts of residential and commercial development alternatives are highly sensitive to the assumptions applied and that residential development typically places a higher demand on local government services than comparable values or intensities of commercial development. Ordinarily, tax base comparisons have not been presented the City's analyses of land use applications. It is included in this case because it was included in the applicant's submittal. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Any development of the subject site will be required to address the physical and environmental factors that could influence the development potential of the property. The Laukka -Beck proposal is deemed a connected action to the Loan Oak Development proposal and results in a total residential unit count that exceeds the threshold requiring a mandatory Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) to be prepared. Grading /Topography The site is generally open with varying topography and wooded areas with natural lowlands and wetlands. �a o Planning Report - Laukka -Beck Eagan Partnership April 27, 2004 Page 5 Trees/Vegetation Much of the site consists of open grassland or water and approximately 25% of the site is wooded. As such, development should be possible with minimal impact to the existing vegetation. The City's Tree Preservation Ordinance will apply to any development of the site. Wetlands Although not designated by the DNR, the site does contain several wetland areas. Development impact, if any, to the wetland areas will be reviewed with a rezoning /subdivision request. Storm Water Drainage/Water Quality The entire site lies within Drainage District F (as designated in the City Storm Water Management Plan — 1990), and ultimately drains to the west toward O'Neil Pond near Highways 55 and 149. Ponds and wetland complexes within the site could be utilized for storm water management, along with constructed water quality ponding, for development of this site. Ponds and wetland complexes within the site could be utilized for storm water management, along with constructed water quality ponding, for development of this site. Airport Noise Considerations The proposed development site is located 4 '/2 miles from the parallel runways at MSP, in line with the primary departure flight tracks and adjacent to the primary arrival tracks for those runways. As such, the site is located in Noise Zone 4 as defined by the Metropolitan Council Policy Contours adopted in 1996. Within Noise Zone 4, office, commercial and industrial development is considered compatible. The development of residential uses with individual entrances is considered conditional and the development of residential uses with shared entrances, such as typical apartments, is considered provisional. The definitions of those terms are discussed more completely in the staff's aircraft noise report, which is attached. Historically, the City has attempted, where possible, to minimize land uses that would be in conflict with operations at MSP. To that end, it has guided and zoned much of the northeastern portion of the City for compatible office, commercial and industrial uses in what is commonly referred to as the Eagan- Mendota Heights Corridor. The Corridor and the related policies of the City of Eagan, the Metropolitan Council and the Metropolitan Airports Commission are based on the concept that noise compatible land uses are the most effective means of preventing noise nuisance. As noted above, the City's adopted Comprehensive Guide Plan currently designates the area as Special Area — O/S (Office/Service). If residential uses are to be considered as proposed, the threshold question is whether residential uses would be appropriate in this area and, if the City determines that to be the case, regional policy provides guidance in gauging whether such uses can be provisionally or conditionally acceptable. <3a Planning Report - Laukka -Beck Eagan Partnership April 27, 2004 Page 6 Summary — Environmental Impacts The Laukka -Beck proposal is a connected action to the Loan Oak Development proposal resulting in a total residential unit count that exceeds the threshold for a mandatory Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) to be prepared prior to consideration of rezoning and/or subdivision application. Development of the site should be possible with minimal impact to the existing vegetation. Historically, the City has attempted, where possible, to minimize land uses that would be in conflict with operations at MSP. In response to anticipated aircraft noise, the applicant's noise consultant states that interior noise attenuation can be accommodated easily with good building practices. The Metropolitan Council Aircraft Noise Policies defines specific findings that need to be made in addition to the development's capacity to achieve noise attenuation for individual entry residential development. The City will need to determine whether it concurs or differs with the applicant's position regarding the appropriateness of residential uses in Noise Zone 4. INFRASTRUCTURE Streets /Access /Circulation Access to the site is available from the west via O'Neil Drive that runs along the northern border of the property and connects to Argenta Trail in IGH. Traffic Impacts The developer has submitted a traffic study that concludes "...that the proposed concept development plan would cause less traffic impact on nearby roadways than would occur if the property developed in accordance with the existing zoning." The City's traffic engineer concurs that the proposed residential use will result in less peak and less total daily trips being generated in comparison to a development consistent with Office /Service Guide Plan designation. Storm Water Drainage The entire site lies within Drainage District F (as designated in the City Storm Water Management Plan — 1990), and ultimately drains to the west toward O'Neil Pond near Highways 55 and 149. Ponds and wetland complexes within the site could be utilized for storm water management, along with constructed water quality ponding, for development of this site. Utilities Lateral sanitary sewers have been stubbed to serve the sites from the Cray Research and Northwest Airlines campuses, and at the Lone Oak Drive and Lone Oak Road intersection, to the west. Sanitary sewer District N (as designated in the City's Comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Plan — 2000) serves the entire site. The wastewater flows associated with a possible medium density 3a a Planning Report - Laukka -Beck Eagan Partnership April 27, 2004 Page 7 residential development are estimated to be less than those anticipated with commercial/ industrial development in the 2000 Sewer Plan. Therefore, the lateral and trunk sanitary sewer lines serving the area would have sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed land use change. Summary - Infrastructure Development of the proposed residential use will result in less peak and less total daily trips being generated from the site in comparison to a development consistent with Office /Service Guide Plan designation. The lateral and trunk sanitary sewer lines serving the area would have sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed land use change. COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE IMPACTS This section includes information on the City's residential land supply, major office land supply and development goals. Residential Land Supply The applicant has submitted a Housing Study prepared by a consultant that states, in part, that "Eagan is a highly desirable residential community with a substantial amount of employment." The applicant's Housing Study also states the type of amenities sought by likely buyers of the proposed residential units and concludes with "We believe that your respective residential developments will provide today's buyers with the features and amenities they are seeking." An update of Eagan's housing mix was completed in October 2003. The update shows that the City is maintaining an excellent mix of housing types and life cycle housing choices. As indicated in the City's 2000 Comprehensive Plan, the City achieved a strong diversity of housing types by 1998. At that time, 47% of Eagan's housing consisted of attached, multi - family units, where the metropolitan average and Metropolitan Council Livable Community goal for attached housing was around 38 %. The October 2003 breakdown shows a small increase in percentage of single family detached housing since 1998; however, when planned units are factored in, the total mix of housing remains nearly identical to 1998 levels. The proposed residential development on the subject site and the Loan Oak Development site to the south will result in an attached unit percentage of 48.4 %. In addition to City -wide land use and housing supply, the housing balance and density within the surrounding area should be considered. Approved but not yet built, Gift of Mary was determined to be an institutional use and the rezoning to Planned Development was deemed consistent with the Office /Service Guide Plan designation which provides Limited Business as a compatible zoning district. Planning Report - Laukka -Beck Eagan Partnership April 27, 2004 Page 8 The subject site is isolated from other Eagan residential neighborhoods. The nearest existing residential use is the large -lot Rural Residential area (Special Area 3) located south of Lone Oak and north of Highway 55. Similar to the subject site, the Special Area 3 Comprehensive Guide Plan for this area stipulates the ultimate development being commercial in nature, consistent with the Office /Service Guide Plan designation. Major Office Land Supply One of the larger "major office" parcels (80 acres) has been developed for activities other than major office. In the mid- 1990's, an application to change the Guide Plan designation to mid - density residential was considered for the 80 acre Argosy /Central Park parcel (formerly owned by Sperry). The City's Commercial Land Use Study Background Report (February 1994) includes goals adopted by the City's Economic Development Commission to promote and retain a strong and diverse tax base and employment base. The report also cautioned that "as Eagan continues to grow, suitable land for corporate offices could become scarce if allowed to develop with whatever is "hot" on the market at the time. As such, the City must consider how much land to set aside for corporate office parks in the long run, to prevent an erosion of our supply of suitable land." The Commercial Land Use Study Interim Report Working Policies (April 1994) concluded that Eagan's geographic location in the region makes the City a prime candidate for attracting major corporate offices and recommends that large tracts of suitable land (e.g. adjacent to major roadways) should be preserved and promoted for major corporate office or institutional facilities. The relevance of the Commercial Land Use Study goals /policies stated above is a determination for City policy makers. Special Area 1 Conclusions and Land Use Policies The Waters (Special Area 1) area plan, adopted in December 2001, concludes that in recognition of surrounding land uses, traffic volumes and the area's inclusion in the aircraft noise zone, the long -term desirability of residential uses (several existing agriculturally and residentially zoned properties scattered throughout the area) in the area is considered questionable. Adopted policies include that the City will discourage any additional residential development, including further subdivision of any existing residential property and that the City ultimately expects the entire area, save for the Trinity Lutheran Church property, to develop as office, office showroom, research and development, and neighborhood business uses. The existing residential uses are considered transitional; however, the transition from residential to commercial would occur via private market forces. Planning Report - Laukka -Beck Eagan Partnership April 27, 2004 Page 9 Summary — Comprehensive Land Use Impacts An Eagan housing mix review (as of October 2003) illustrates that the City is maintaining an excellent mix of housing types and life cycle housing choices. As indicated in the City's 2000 Comprehensive Plan, the City achieved a strong diversity of housing types by 1998. At that time, 47% of Eagan's housing consisted of attached, multi - family units, where the metropolitan average and Metropolitan Council Livable Community goal for attached housing was around 38 %. The October 2003 breakdown shows a small increase in percentage of single family detached housing since 1998; however, when planned units are factored in, the total mix of housing remains nearly identical to 1998 levels. The proposed residential development on the subject site and the Loan Oak Development site to the south will result in an attached unit percentage of 48.4 %. The Commercial Land Use Study cautioned that "as Eagan continues to grow, suitable land for corporate offices could become scarce if allowed to develop with whatever is "hot" on the market at the time. As such, the City must consider how much land to set aside for corporate office parks in the long run, to prevent an erosion of our supply of suitable land." The existing supply of land available for office /research and development is extremely limited, particularly 40+ contiguous acres. The Commercial Land Use Study Interim Report Working Policies concluded that Eagan's geographic location in the region makes the City a prime candidate for attracting major corporate offices and recommends that large tracts of suitable land (e.g. adjacent to major roadways) should be preserved and promoted for major corporate office or institutional facilities. In keeping with the City's effort to avoid compatibility issues with operations at MSP, the Waters Special Area Plan discourages residential development in northeast Eagan. SCHOOL SYSTEM This section will provide information regarding the potential impact of the proposed land use change on the public school system. The subject site is located in ISD 196 and, according to the district; the subject area has not previously been considered an area that would generate students for 196. The evaluation includes the existing capacity and enrollment projections for the schools that would serve this area and an estimated demand for school services with the additional students from the proposed and potential residential development. Capacity and Enrollment Projections The area is served by three schools, Glacier Hills Elementary, Dakota Hills Middle School and Eagan High School. Glacier Hills has a capacity of 615 and is projected at 455 for the 2004 -05 school year. Dakota Hills has a capacity of 1,255 and is projected at 1,369 for 2004 -05. Eagan HS has a capacity of 1,915 but has a projected enrollment of 2,202 for 2004 -05. Planning Report - Laukka -Beck Eagan Partnership April 27, 2004 Page 10 Estimated Impacts Based on the unit/housing type proposed by the applicant, ISD 196 would expect the Laukka- Beck proposal to generate 16 elementary students, 8 middle school students and 10 high school students or a total of 34 students. While there are clearly capacity issues being experienced at the Middle School and High School serving this area, the anticipated increase in students generated from the proposed development does not appear to exacerbate the situation in a significant way. Summary — School System The area is served by three schools, Glacier Hills Elementary, Dakota Hills Middle School and Eagan High School. Although capacity issues exist with Dakota Hills and Eagan HS, the anticipated increase in students due to the proposed development does not appear to impact the situation in a significant way. PARKS AND RECREATION SYSTEM The park section reviews the implications of the proposed land use change on the parks and recreation system at both the neighborhood and City -wide levels. Policy makers should consider the costs associated with improving and perpetually maintaining a new park facility in relation to a cash park dedication (with commercial development) that would enhance the City's Park Site fund. Park Systems Plan The current park System Plan, updated in 1994, does not designate any parks in this area of the City. The property has long been designated for office, research and development, etc. There are not any City -wide park facilities in the immediate area and no convenient facilities in the general area. Policy 4 of the Comprehensive Guide Plan, Chapter 7 (Parks), "Land Acquisition, Facility Development and Maintenance," states: The City will pursue the acquisition and development of neighborhood parks in order that each neighborhood service area, as illustrated in the Park System Plan, is adequately served with appropriate recreational facilities. Neighborhood Parks The proposed development site is within Park Planning District 4 of the Systems Plan and is indicated as an area "not served" by a park. With the residential units proposed, there will be a need to provide park services to the area. 0210 Planning Report - Laukka -Beck Eagan Partnership April 27, 2004 Page 11 The City has always attempted to adhere to a policy of providing a park within a half mile of every residential unit. The nearest neighborhood park to the development area would be Bur Oaks Park which is anywhere from '/z to nearly 1 Y2 miles from units in the development. To get to Bur Oaks Park, residents of the proposed development would either have to drive to the park or have pedestrians crossing Lone Oak Road and Highway 55, a four -lane arterial carrying highway traffic loads. There currently is no trail connection. Improvement costs would naturally vary depending on how the land was used and what the open space was used for, but a very preliminary number for turning flat ground into green space is $8,000 to $10,000 per acre. The cost can fluctuate depending on topography. The cost of developing park amenities is highly variable. For a neighborhood park, $75,000 to $100,000 is a reasonable estimate. Routine maintenance, also a variable, can run about $800 to $1,000 per acre /per annum. This includes both the value cost of labor and equipment and the actual cost of materials. Supporting information provided by the applicant includes reference to approximately 9 acres of park being provided but does not define the feature. Park Dedication The standard park land dedication for the density suggested on the property, greater than 3.5 units per acre, is 12% of the gross area. It is a sliding scale that decreases to 8% where the density is <2 units per acre. Where ponding has been determined to have a "park function," credit is given at 50 %, though a minimum of 70% of the dedication must be above the normal high water level. This formula is based upon there being 15 acres of parks and open space per 1,000 residents, of which, 12 acres is designated as "neighborhood parks." If the park dedication is to be met with land, there would be no cash dedication required. Summary — Parks and Recreation System The proposed development site is within Park Planning District 4 of the Systems Plan and is indicated as an area "not served" by a park. With the residential units proposed, there will be a need to provide park services to the area. There is an opportunity cost associated with a land versus cash park dedication in this area. In addition to foregoing an infusion of cash into the Park Site Fund that would be associated with a commercial development, the City would assume the expense of improving a park feature and the resource responsibility for on -going maintenance. The standard park land dedication for the density suggested on the property, 3.5+ units per acre, is 12% of the gross area. The necessary land dedication would also reduce the net area available for private development. If the park dedication is to be met with land, there would be no cash dedication required. Planning Report - Laukka -Beck Eagan Partnership April 27, 2004 Page 12 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS In evaluating this proposal, the following items should be considered: GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS > Laukka -Beck Eagan Partnership is requesting approval of a Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment from Special Area Office /Service to Medium Density residential for approximately 27 acres located in northeast Eagan. > The Waters (Special Area 1) plan, adopted in December 2001, concludes that the recognition of surrounding land uses, traffic volumes and the area's inclusion in the aircraft noise zone, the long -term desirability of residential uses (several existing agriculturally and residentially zoned properties scattered throughout the area) in the area is considered questionable. > Except for the small portion located in Inver Grove Heights (IGH), the subject site is located within the 1985 Laukka -Beck Eagan Planned Development that incorporated approximately 450 acres in northeast Eagan. > The proposed MD Comp Guide designation category provides areas for medium density attached housing units, including two - family dwellings, townhomes, and condominiums. Under certain circumstances, small lot detached single family units may also be appropriate. Allowable gross densities within this land use category range from 4 -12 units /acre, including common area. > The conceptual proposal presented by Laukka -Beck includes 168 townhome units, with a density of 6.2 units /acre and approximately 9 acres of an undefined park feature. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS > The site contains some natural features that include varying topography, trees /woodlands, and wetlands. Development of the site should be possible with minimal impact to the existing vegetation. > Ponds and wetland complexes within the site could be utilized for storm water management, along with constructed water quality ponding, for development of this site. > The applicant has stated that indoor noise impacts within the proposed residential property could be attenuated through appropriate building techniques. The applicant does not address other findings outlined within the regional aircraft noise policy and the housing market consultant suggests that outdoor uses /activities are desirable within the market group identified. The primary decision is whether residential use would be desirable for the City in the context of airport noise. If so, appropriate design and construction considerations would be essential. da Planning Report - Laukka -Beck Eagan Partnership April 27, 2004 Page 13 > The proposed residential development is viewed as connected to the proposed Loan Oak LLC development which has a unit count that exceeds the threshold for a mandatory Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) to be prepared. The City Council will need to make a declaration on the need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) before any rezoning and/or subdivision application can be considered. INFRASTRUCTURE > Access to the site is available from the west via O'Neil Drive that runs along the northern border of the property and connects to Argenta Trail in IGH. > Development of the proposed residential use will result in less peak and total daily trips being generated from the site in comparison to a development consistent with Office /Service Guide Plan designation. > The lateral and trunk sanitary sewer lines serving the area would have sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed land use change. COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE IMPACTS > According to the City's 2000 Comprehensive Plan, the City achieved a strong diversity of housing types by 1998.At that time, 47% of Eagan's housing consisted of attached, multi- family units, where the metropolitan average and Metropolitan Council Livable Community goal for attached housing was around 38 %. ➢ The October 2003 breakdown shows a small increase in percentage of single family detached housing since 1998; however, when planned units are factored in, the total mix of housing remains nearly identical to 1998 levels. The proposed residential development on the subject site and the Loan Oak Development site to the south will result in an attached unit percentage of 48.4 %. > The City's Commercial Land Use Study Background Report (February 1994) states the goal "to promote and retain a strong and diverse tax base and employment base." The report also cautioned that "as Eagan continues to grow, suitable land for corporate offices could become scarce if allowed to develop with whatever is "hot" on the market at the time. As such, the City must consider how much land to set aside for corporate office parks in the long run, to prevent an erosion of our supply of suitable land." ➢ The Commercial Land Use Study Interim Report Working Policies (April 1994) concluded that Eagan's geographic location in the region makes the City a prime candidate for attracting major corporate offices and recommends that large tracts of suitable land (e.g. adjacent to major roadways) should be preserved and promoted for major corporate office or institutional facilities. �a9 Planning Report - Laukka -Beck Eagan Partnership April 27, 2004 Page 14 > The Waters (Special Area 1) plan, adopted in December 2001, concludes that due to surrounding land uses, traffic volumes and the area's inclusion in the aircraft noise zone, the long -term desirability of residential uses (several existing agriculturally and residentially zoned properties scattered throughout the area) in the area is considered questionable. > In keeping with the City's effort to avoid compatibility issues with operations at MSP, the Waters Special Area Plan discourages residential development in northeast Eagan. The Metropolitan Council Airport Noise Policies provide guidance for the factors to be reviewed in considering whether to permit residential development within the Noise Zones. SCHOOL SYSTEM > Three schools, Glacier Hills Elementary, Dakota Hills Middle School and Eagan High School serve this portion of ISD# 196; although capacity issues exist with Dakota Hills and Eagan HS, the anticipated increase in students due to the proposed development does not appear to impact the situation in a significant way. PARKS SYSTEM > The proposed development site is within Park Planning District 4 of the Systems Plan and is indicated as an area "not served" by a park. With the residential units proposed, there will be a need to provide park services to the area. > Consideration should be given to the opportunity cost associated with improving and perpetually maintaining a new park facility in relation to a cash park dedication (with commercial development) that would enhance the City's Park Site fund. > Supporting information provided by the applicant includes reference to the creation of an undefined park feature. ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED To provide comment on the Planned Development Concept Plan. To recommend approval (or denial) of a Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment to change the land use designation in Special Area 1 from Office /Service to Medium Density (MD) residential and Park (P) for approximately 27 acres of undeveloped land located south of I -494, west of the IGH corporate boundary, in the NE 1/4 of Section 1. 3 30 Location Map € Eagan Boundary t.,/ Street Centerline n Parcel Area Building Footprint 1000 0 1000 2000 Feet Development/Developer: Laukka -Beck Eagan Partnership Application: Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment Case No.: 01- CG- 01 -02 -04 city of eagan Community Development Department Map Prepared using ERSI ArcGew 3.1. Parcel base map data provided 33a- by Dakota County Office of GIS and is current as of January 2004. I Yi THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY The City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this information and are not responsible for errors or omissions. Current Zoning and Comprehensive Guide Plan Land Use Map Laukka -Beck Case No. 01- CG -02 -04 City of Eagan Community Development Department Parcel base map Information providedry Dakota County Land Survey Department June 2003. ` Zoning Information maintained byCity Stag : THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY The City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this information. W4 E Zoning Map - 1 1 I --- ill Current Zoning: PD Planned Development ,..,, /S PD W o x • f 40 0 n t a Office I A r, r Agricultural J A 606 0 600 170 Feel r PD I \ PD Current Zoning and Comprehensive Guide Plan Land Use Map Laukka -Beck Case No. 01- CG -02 -04 City of Eagan Community Development Department Parcel base map Information providedry Dakota County Land Survey Department June 2003. ` Zoning Information maintained byCity Stag : THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY The City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this information. W4 E Comprehensive Guide Plan Land Use Map 1 I ______ 1 111 SA• ,..,, /S Current Land Use Designation: SA Special Area - Office /Service W o x • f 40 0 n t a Office SA 660 0 660 1200 Feet SA -0/S Lo Residential Current Zoning and Comprehensive Guide Plan Land Use Map Laukka -Beck Case No. 01- CG -02 -04 City of Eagan Community Development Department Parcel base map Information providedry Dakota County Land Survey Department June 2003. ` Zoning Information maintained byCity Stag : THIS MAP IS INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY The City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this information. W4 E Larkin - Hoff ATTOR February 18, 2004 Ms. Carla Heyl, Chair Advisory Planning Commission City of Eagan City Hall 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Re: Laukka -Beck Eagan Partnership Planned Development Amendment Dear Ms. Heyl: Development History Larkin Hoffman Daly & L.indgren Ltd. 1500 Wells Fargo Plaza 7900 Xerxes Avenue South Minneapolis, Minnesota 55431 -1194 GENERAL: 952- 835 -3800 FAX: 952- 896 -3333 WEB: www.larkinhoffinan.com Laukka -Beck Eagan Partnership (" Laukka- Beck ") seeks approval from the City of Eagan ( "the City") of a mixed - residential development ( "the Laukka -Beck Project ") on a 26.9 -acre parcel in the northeast comer of the City along Blue Gentian Road ( "the Site "). The Site is directly adjacent to the City of Inver Grove Heights, south of Interstate 494 and west of Argenta Trail. The Site is encompassed within the 458 -acre Lankka -Beck Planned Development Area, as established by the 1985 Planned Development Agreement ( "Laukka -Beck PDA ") between Laukka -Beck and the City. Residential use of the Site is expressly reserved under the Laukka -Beck PDA. Laukka -Beck is seeking confirmation of its right to pursue residential development under the existing Laukka -Beck PDA. The City Council can approve the concept submitted by Laukka -Beck without amending the Comprehensive Plan, since the right of amendment is contractually provided for by negotiated agreement of the parties, and Laukka- Beck's proposed residential use conforms with either the existing PDA or the underlying zoning. Cray PDA, para. 8. Moreover, by this request, Laukka- Beck is not seeking to rescind the existing Planned Development ( "PD ") zoning of the Site. Therefore, the zoning remains consistent with Land Use Map of the City. However, staff believes an amendment is appropriate and has requested that Laukka -Beck process a Comprehensive Plan amendment with its PDA request. Without conceding this point, Laukka -Beck proposes to amend the City's Comprehensive Plan to reflect the proposed residential uses on the Site. Laukka -Beck has completed several studies regarding the Project at the Site. These studies evaluated traffic, airport noise, housing demand and tax impacts. In each case, the impacts can be safely managed or represent an improvement over the uses contemplated by the City for the Site. The City and Laukka -Beck are parties to the Laukka -Beck PDA, bearing the date of May 7, 1985. The Laukka -Beck PDA implements the City- approved rezoning of the Laukka -Beck Planned Development Area, from Regional Shopping Center ( "the RSC District ") and Residential Multiple ( "the R -4 Townhomes 58 units . Condominiums 110 units TOTAL 168 units (6.8 units per acre) Ms. Carla Heyl, Chair February 18, 2004 Page 2 District") to Planned Development District. The Laukka -Beck PDA provides as follows regarding the zoning amendment: The City of Eagan hereby approves the rezoning of the Subject Land to Planned Development District pursuant to the current Eagan City Code Chapter 11.... Such rezoning is supplemental to the former zoning of Regional Shopping Center Planned Development and Residential Multiple (R-4). Any removal of the superimposed planned (sic) Development District zoning or termination of this Agreement shall automatically result in the Subject Land being zoned Commercial Shopping Center (CSC). (emphasis added) The Laukka -Beck PDA established a 10 -year timeframe for final approval of the 156 -acre Northwest Airlines corporate campus. It also includes a 10 -year timeframe for completing development of the remainder of the land within the Laukka -Beck Planned Development Area. In 1987, Cray Research purchased 116 acres from Laukka -Beck and received City approval of a planned corporate campus, pursuant to a separate Planned Development Agreement. Additional commercial/office development has occurred within the original Laukka -Beck Planned Development Area, including a U.S. Post Office building. Approximately 70 acres remains undeveloped, in addition to the 26.9 -acre Laukka -Beck Site. The Site comprises about 5 percent of the original Laukka -Beck Planned Development Area. The Lankka -Beck PDA remains legally binding on the City and has been the governing regulatory document for nearly 20 years. In this regard, the underlying RSC/R -4 zoning remains in effect for the remaining undeveloped Laukka -Beck Planned Development Area, including the Site. No development proposal has ever been processed by the City relating to the Lankka -Beck Site. Project Description The Laukka -Beck Project will include 168 units of low to medium density owner- occupied residential uses: 110 condominium units and 58 townhome units. As described below, Lankka -Beck proposes to amend the Lankka -Beck PDA for the Project. Ron Clark is tentatively identified as the builder. This will be an upscale project, catering to the lifecycle housing needs of seniors, young couples and others that desire to live in a managed residential environment. Total Area 26.9 acres Wetland Area 2.97 acres Net Usable Area 23.93 acres Greenspace (overall) 12.09 acres (50 %) Park Area 9.12 acres (38 %) Ms. Carla Heyl, Chair February 18, 2004 Page 3 The proposed Laukka -Beck Project is permitted, either outright, subject to development -stage review or, alternatively, by amendment of the existing Laukka -Beck PDA. City Comprehensive Plan - "The Waters Area Plan" The Site is guided Special Area ( "SA ") on the City's Land Use Map. According to the City's 2001 Land Use Plan, there were slightly more than 800 vacant acres designated as Special Area in the City; an additional 124 acres are identified as "underutilized." The Land Use Map notes that the Site is within the Waters Area," with no elaboration of uses for this area. The Waters Plan and study "area is located in the extreme northwest corner of the City and overlays 640 acres of land. The area (is) bounded on the north by I -494 and on the east by the City of Inver Grove Height corporate limits. The vast majority of the study area is zoned PD, Planned Development." The Waters Plan, pg. 1 (2001). The Waters Area encompasses the Laukka -Beck Planned Development Area, which was established in 1985. According to the Waters Plan, "approximately 40 percent of the original [Laukka -Beck] Planned Development remains vacant or underutilized." The Laukka -Beck Project will consume less than 5 percent of the Waters Area. Staff is requesting that Laukka -Beck seek City approval of a Comprehensive Plan amendment expressly authorizing housing at the Site. Laukka -Beck believes that a Comprehensive Plan amendment is not required, based on the clear and specific language of the original Laukka -Beck PDA. Laukka -Beck has elected to honor staffs request for now. City Planned Development Ordinance The City's Planned Development Ordinance ( "the PD Ordinance ") does not list permitted or conditionally permitted uses. Under the PD Ordinance, a Planned Development is intended to: • Provide greater flexibility in environmental design and relaxation of strict zoning standards in exchange for greater creativity and environmental sensitivity. • Recognize the economic and cultural advantages that will accrue to the residents of a planned community. • Encourage a more creative and efficient use of land. 2.0 ,,c5 Ms. Carla Heyl, Chair February 18, 2004 Page 4 • Encourage the preservation and enhancement of desirable site characteristics, natural features, and open space. Encourage a development pattern that is consistent with land use density, transportation facilities and community facilities objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. Zoning Ordinance, § 11.60, Subd. 18, A. (1 -5). Development which does not conform to an approved Final Development Plan requires an amendment to the existing Planned Development Agreement, processed in the same manner as a new Planned Development. ZoninE Ordinance, § 11.60, Subd. 18, C. (15b). Finally, the Planned Development Ordinance provides as follows regarding termination of an approved Planned Development: Upon expiration of the specific time period approved by the city for total development of a planned development, the subject area shall become a permanent planned development district.... Provided, nevertheless, that if a planned development is not completed within the required time period, the planned development district classification shall automatically terminate as to that portion of the district that has not been developed. The requirements and provision of the underlying zoning classification in its entirety shall thereafter apply to the undeveloped area. Any factual disputes arising under this subsection shall be presented to and determined by a majority vote of the city council. Section 11.60, Subd. 18, C, 16 (emphasis supplied). This provision the City PD Ordinance applies to Laukka -Beck. Their contract with the City expressly provides for a 10 -year timeframe to complete development. The Site remains undeveloped, indeed has never been the subject of a Planned Development application since the original 1985 approval was granted. Laukka -Beck is entitled by its contract with the City to rely on the underlying residential zoning of the Site. Alternatively, Laukka- Beck is entitled to seek City approval of the proposed mixed residential use of the Site as part of the currently approved PDA. Transportation Impacts Laukka -Beck and Loan Oak Development, LLC have jointly conducted a traffic study of their proposed developments. The analysis demonstrates total daily trips, along with peak hour traffic impacts which are substantially below those expected under the commercial- industrial development model endorsed in the Waters Plan. Addressing transportation impacts directly attributed to the proposed development would be the responsibility of the developer. The analysis by Benshoof & Associates is attached. 337 � Ms. Carla Heyl, Chair February 18, 2004 Page 5 Airport Noise Policies The Site is within the Metropolitan Airports Commission ( "the MAC ") Airport Noise Policy Area, Noise Exposure Zone 4. Noise Exposure Zone 4 is "best described as a transitional area where aircraft noise exposure might be considered moderate." Metropolitan Development Guide, Metropolitan Council December, 1995. Under the Metropolitan Council's Airport Land -Use Compatibility Guidelines, single - family and multi- family uses, depending on their design, are either conditional or provisional uses. Conditional uses are conditionally acceptable upon review of the City Council. Provisional uses must comply with certain structured performance standards under the Metropolitan Area Aircraft Noise Attenuation Act, Minnesota Statutes § 473.192. Comprehensive Plan, § 5 (2001). Recently, the MAC published its new noise contours for the international airport. It demonstrates that the Laukka -Beck Site is entirely outside of both the 65 and 60 DNL noise contours. Consequently, noise impacts are not a factor affecting the viability of housing at the Site. Notwithstanding, both Laukka -Beck and Loan Oak Development have jointly undertaken an analysis of potential aircraft noise impacts. The analysis by David Braslau Associates confirms that noise impacts are not a significant factor and can be dealt with through readily available sound attenuation technology. Land Supply/Market Pressure Laukka -Beck has surveyed the market in the Waters Area to determine land supply and market demand. The commercial brokers we have contacted believe that there is an oversupply of commercial/office /industrial property available within Eagan or adjacent communities. CSM currently owns approximately 70 acres within the Laukka -Beck Planned Development Area; this property will support in excess of several hundred thousand square feet of new commercial or industrial space. The Twin Cities economy went through a significant expansion during the last decade and the Laukka- Beck Site was untouched. Over the past 20 years, Laukka -Beck has actively solicited proposals from dozens of prospective buyers for the Site. The Laukka Beck Site is unattractive to the commercial/office market due to its remote location in the northeast comer of the Laukka -Beck Planned Development Area. Meanwhile, Laukka -Beck has paid commercial taxes on the Site since 1985. Laukka -Beck and Loan Oak Development have jointly retained Maxfield Research to evaluate the viability of residential development of their respective sites. The attached study documents the strong demand for "life- cycle" housing in the City, especially on the higher end. Given the market realities, Laukka -Beck believes, respectfully, that it has fulfilled its obligations to the City and intends to pursue its residential development rights under the Laukka -Beck PDA. Tax Impacts of Proposed Development We have completed a five -year tax analysis for the Loan Oak/Laukka -Beck project in Eagan. The analysis used the following base information: Ms. Carla Heyl, Chair February 18, 2004 Page 6 • Tax information provided by the PID's • The 2003 net tax capacity rate for the City of Eagan • Proper class rates • The phasing and market values provided by Gary Tushie The housing scenario provides a significant tax revenue advantage over the commercial option. We have included copies of the analysis. Discussion The City's Planned Development Ordinance ( "the PD Ordinance ") does not enumerate permitted or conditionally permitted uses. Instead, the City's PD Ordinance allows a developer to propose a flexible land use plan. Under the City's PD Ordinance, a Planned Development is intended to: • Provide greater flexibility in environmental design and relaxation of strict zoning standards in exchange for greater creativity and environmental sensitivity. • Recognize the economic and cultural advantages that will accrue to the residents of a planned community. • Encourage a more creative and efficient use of land. • Encourage the preservation and enhancement of desirable site characteristics, natural features, and open space. • Encourage a development pattern that is consistent with land use density, transportation facilities and community facilities objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. Zoning Ordinance, § 11.60, Subd. 18, A. (1 -5). The Lank Project must be evaluated based on the existing Laukka -Beck PDA and the following PD Ordinance factors: The consistency of the proposed Planned Development with the adopted or proposed Comprehensive Guide Plan of the City. The City's Special Area Comprehensive Plan designation does not, by itself, address land uses. The Waters Plan seeks to encourage the development of office and office /showroom uses, along with other Existing Vacant Land Commercial Housing 2,424,588 Total Taxes 154,954 971,855 Tax Capacity -- 1,104,355 2,656,500 Market Value 3,954,900 55,217,760 242,300,000 Five -Year Tax Revenue 774,621 3,029,589 10,743,848 Ms. Carla Heyl, Chair February 18, 2004 Page 6 • Tax information provided by the PID's • The 2003 net tax capacity rate for the City of Eagan • Proper class rates • The phasing and market values provided by Gary Tushie The housing scenario provides a significant tax revenue advantage over the commercial option. We have included copies of the analysis. Discussion The City's Planned Development Ordinance ( "the PD Ordinance ") does not enumerate permitted or conditionally permitted uses. Instead, the City's PD Ordinance allows a developer to propose a flexible land use plan. Under the City's PD Ordinance, a Planned Development is intended to: • Provide greater flexibility in environmental design and relaxation of strict zoning standards in exchange for greater creativity and environmental sensitivity. • Recognize the economic and cultural advantages that will accrue to the residents of a planned community. • Encourage a more creative and efficient use of land. • Encourage the preservation and enhancement of desirable site characteristics, natural features, and open space. • Encourage a development pattern that is consistent with land use density, transportation facilities and community facilities objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. Zoning Ordinance, § 11.60, Subd. 18, A. (1 -5). The Lank Project must be evaluated based on the existing Laukka -Beck PDA and the following PD Ordinance factors: The consistency of the proposed Planned Development with the adopted or proposed Comprehensive Guide Plan of the City. The City's Special Area Comprehensive Plan designation does not, by itself, address land uses. The Waters Plan seeks to encourage the development of office and office /showroom uses, along with other Ms. Carla Heyl, Chair February 18, 2004 Page 7 commercial uses, in the 640 -acre Waters Area. The Waters Plan is not a regulatory tool, in the manner of a Zoning Ordinance. Compliance with the Waters Plan is identified as only one factor for the City Council to consider, among many factors. In any event, the approved Laukka -Beck PDA expressly recognizes that the underlying residential zoning remains in place. The Waters Plan seeks to promote development that presents an attractive image of the City and development which will retain the natural features of the area, including wetlands and mature vegetation. The proposed residential development at the Site will establish an attractive image at an entrance to the City, while protecting substantial natural terrain of the Site. Fifty percent (50 %) of the total Site area will be preserved as greenspace (12.09 acres); of this amount, about 9 acres will be dedicated park land, along with three (3) acres of protected wetland. The Site is directly adjacent to the border of the City of Inver Grove Heights. The adjacent property in Inver Grove Heights plans for residential development along Argenta Trail. High- quality low and medium density residential use of the Site will create an appropriate and desirable transition of uses between the two cities in this area. The Waters Plan encourages new development in the Waters Area to incorporate sound attenuating construction techniques. While the Metropolitan Airports Commission's proposed amended noise contours favorably affect the Site and project reduced noise impacts, Laukka -Beck will incorporate noise mitigation construction techniques into its building plans. The extent to which the proposed Planned Development is designed to form a desirable and unified environment within its own boundaries in terms of relationship of structures, patterns of circulation, visual character and sufficiency of drainage and utilities. The Project will include both townhome and condominium low to medium density housing. The units will be designed in accordance with City standards, to ensure high quality finish, protection of natural features and minimal offsite impacts. All aspects of the Project will be subject to City approvals and association management standards and requirements. The extent to which the proposed uses will be compatible with present and planned uses in the surrounding area. Residential and office commercial uses currently exist in the surrounding area. The Project is adjacent to land guided for residential in the City of Inver Grove Heights. Commercial property owners do not object to the Project. Residential customers place a premium on maintenance -free living, coupled with the goal of minimizing freeway commutes. The City's Cedarvale Plan is an example of the type of integration envisioned by Laukka - Beck's proposed Project. That any exceptions to the City Zoning Ordinance are justified by the design.or the development. The PD Ordinance does not, itself, establish specific uses within a Planned Development. The proposed residential uses are consistent with the provisions of the Laukka -Beck PDA as it recognizes the right to pursue residential development through the supplemental R-4 Zoning District. In any event, approval of residential uses on the Site does not detract from the primary objective of the original Laukka -Beck Planned Development Area. Ms. Carla Heyl, Chair February 18, 2004 Page 8 The sufficiency of each Planned Development phase's size, composition, and arrangement in order that its construction and operation is feasible without dependence upon any subsequent phase. The proposed development will be constructed in one phase by a single builder. Densities will be within accepted City standards. The burden or impact created by the Planned Development on parks, schools, streets, and other public facilities and utilities. Laukka -Beck or its builder will finance the cost of public utility, ponding and street improvements relating to the Project. Offsite impacts will be minimal or non - existent. The impact of the Planned Development on environmental quality and on the reasonable enjoyment of the surrounding property. The proposed Project will protect substantial portions of the natural terrain of the Site. Nearly 13 acres of the 26.9 acre Site will be dedicated as City parkland. The surrounding environment consists of office and residential uses which will not be affected by the proposed development. Surrounding commercial users do not object to the proposed Project. Legal Analysis Under Minnesota law, metropolitan communities, such as Eagan, are required to enact both Comprehensive Plan and regulatory controls, ie zoning and subdivision regulations. See generally Minn. Stat. 462.357, subd. 1 and 473.864, subd. 1. Minnesota law requires cities in the metropolitan area to zone land in conformity with their approved Comprehensive Plans. Minn. Stat. § 473.858, subd. 1. Notwithstanding the statutory directives, it is well established that the Comprehensive Plan remains "advisory" with "objectives, policies, standards and programs to guide public and private land use...." Minn. Stat. 473.859, subd. 1. Regulatory enforcement derives from the City's "official controls ", which include the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances. See PTL, LLC v. Chisago County Board of Commissioners, 656 N.W.2d 567 (Minn. App. 2003). The Minnesota Court of Appeals recently held that a County's Comprehensive Plan was merely an advisory device and did not, by itself, provide a substantive basis to deny a land use application which otherwise met the requirements of the County's official controls. PTL, LLC v. Chisago County Board of Commissioners, 656 N.W.2d 567 (Minn. App. 2003). The City's PD Ordinance cites compliance with the Comprehensive Plan as one of several factors to be considered in deciding whether to approve a specific Planned Development request. Given this fact, it would be improper to rely on the City's Comprehensive Plan to deny the Laukka -Beck request. See Amoco Oil Co. v. City of Minneapolis, 395 N.W.2d 115 (Minn. App. 1986). The City's obligations are satisfied by the existing Laukka -Beck Planned Development Area and related PDA, which were adopted in conformance with the City's Comprehensive Plan. La does not propose to change the existing PD zoning. Instead, both the PDA and City PD Ordinance give the City broad discretion to approve uses in a PD Zoning District. The Laukka -Beck PDA and the City's PD Ordinance expressly reserves the underlying residential zoning of the Site. Given the plain Ms. Carla Heyl, Chair February 18, 2004 Page 9 language of the City's PD Ordinance and the Laukka-Beck PDA, City reliance on the Waters Plan to deny the Project would be arbitrary and capricious. Conclusion Laukka -Beck respectfully requests the City's Advisory Planning Commission support housing within the existing Laukka -Beck PDA based either on the express contractual reservation of rights or those rights provided for in the City's PD Ordinance. The proposed residential development will reflect high- quality design and utilize the Site in an manner that is compatible with the rights established between the City and Laukka -Beck nearly 20 years ago. Peter J. Coyle, for Larkin Hoffman Daly & Lindgren Ltd. cc: Mr. Larry Laukka Mr. Warren Beck 916434.1 LONE OAK MIXED -USE • r th 11 •■••■•■•■•.. TE. -7 er I n • 2 f: 3R z,1 LONE OAK MIXED—USE Eagan, Minnesota noel 1.7■, 131111rai 1 SITE DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY RESIDENTIAL 434 UNITS TOWNI -TOMES (SEE TI-IRU) 58 TOWNI -TOMES (BACK TO BACK) HO CARRIAGE URBAN TOWNI -TOMES 94 VILLAS Gq EXECUTIVE SINGLE FAMILY LOTS 23 CONDOMINIUMS 80 SENIOR RESIDENTIAL 222 UNITS SENIOR COOP 750 ACTIVE ADULT - _ MANOR_ HONES 72 TOTAL HOMES 656 UNITS COMMERCIAL OFFICE CONDO 48, 000 SF COMBINED NORTH AND SOUTH AREAS TOTAL (N- SITE 2G AC) --- 110.35 ACRES (S SITE 83.45 AC. ) GREENSPACE 77 AC., 70% PARK 43.03 AC, 39% city of eagan MEMO MAYOR GEAGAN AND CITY COUNCILMEMBERS CHAIR HEYL AND ADVISORY PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS FROM: JON HOHENSTEIN, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR DATE: APRIL 23, 2004 TO: SUBJECT: LOAN OAK AND LAUKKA BECK PROPOSAL COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN AMENDMENT — REVIEW OF APPLICANT AIRCRAFT NOISE REPORT As a part of their application for an amendment of the City of Eagan Comprehensive Guide Plan Amendment, the applicants have submitted an analysis of regional policy as it pertains to residential development in proximity to Minneapolis -St. Paul International Airport. The purpose of this memo is to provide a review of that report for consideration by the Advisory Planning Commission and City Council. In lieu of hiring a consultant to perform this review, City staff prepared the information below, in consultation with staff of the Metropolitan Council and Metropolitan Airports Commission, to insure its accuracy. In addition to confirming representations made in this memo, the MAC staff has submitted additional comments regarding its policies and position relative to noise considerations in land use planning. Overview The proposed development site is located 4 1/2 miles from the parallel runways at MSP, in line with the primary departure flight tracks and adjacent to the primary arrival tracks for those runways. As such, the site is located in Noise Zone 4 as defined by the Metropolitan Council Policy Contours adopted in 1996 (In this memo, the terms Noise Zone and Policy Contours are used interchangeably). Within Noise Zone 4, office, commercial and industrial development is considered compatible with aircraft noise exposure. The development of residential uses with individual entrances is considered conditional and the development of residential uses with shared entrances, such as typical apartments, is considered provisional. The definitions of those terms are discussed more completely below. Historically, the City has attempted, where possible, to minimize land uses that would be in conflict with operations at MSP. To that end, it has guided and zoned much of the northeastern portion of the City for compatible office, commercial and industrial uses in what is commonly referred to as the Eagan- Mendota Heights Corridor. The Corridor and the related policies of the City of Eagan, the Metropolitan Council and the Metropolitan Airports Commission are based on the concept that noise compatible land uses are the most effective means of preventing noise nuisance. As noted in the primary staff report, the City's adopted Comprehensive Guide Plan currently designates the area as Special Area — O/S (Office /Service). If residential uses are to be considered as proposed, the threshold question is whether residential uses would be appropriate in this area and, if the City determines that to be the case, regional policy provides guidance in gauging whether such uses can be provisionally or conditionally acceptable. Applicants' Aircraft Noise Study The applicants have submitted an Aircraft Noise Study that acknowledges the subject site's proximity to the airport and relationship to the Noise Zones. The report compares the currently adopted 1996 policy contours to more recently published draft contours generated by the Metropolitan Airports Commission as a part of its Part 150 Noise Abatement Program. It also cites information within the Metropolitan Council's Builder's Guide relative to sound attenuation technologies and building techniques. On the basis of these citations of regional policy, the applicants' consultant's report concludes, "Single- family and multi - family development in Noise Zone 4 must meet 20 dBA exterior to interior noise attenuation for aircraft noise. This can be provided with standard good building practices with special attention to details that minimize intrusion of aircraft noise through openings and air leaks in the exterior building facade. Based upon (the applicants' consultant's) assessment of potential aircraft noise impacts and the applicable Metropolitan Council Guidelines, aircraft noise will not be an obstacle to development of residential land uses at either the Laukka -Beck or Loan Oak sites under the 1996, 2005 or 2007 noise contours." The application also includes exhibits, but does not provide narrative with respect to the City's Cedar Grove Redevelopment District and the City of Bloomington's Central Station Development. The developer has indicated in separate discussions that he believes that the consideration of residential land uses at the project site should be considered in light of the residential uses proposed or under development in those project areas. In the context of the City's Comprehensive Guide PIan and regional policy guidelines, the City will need to determine whether the representations made by the developer concerning the relationship of the proposed development to the effects of aircraft noise justifies a modification of the City's policies with respect to residential development in known areas of aircraft noise impact. Noise Contours With respect to the policy contours in effect for MSP, the adopted contours for land use planning purposes are the 1996 contours, which have been incorporated into the Metropolitan Council's Airport Noise Policies. As a consequence, the publication of other contours does not modify the current regional policy. While the consultant's report asserts that the 2005 contours have been adopted for the airport's Part 150 Land Use Program, they have not. The MAC discontinued the previous Part 150 Update following 9/11, because the effect of the tragedy on the future of the air travel industry threw all projections into doubt. The recently published 2007 contours are part of the reactivation of the Part 150 Update process, but neither the contours nor an update of the Part 150 Program has been submitted to or approved by the FAA. In addition, the Part 150 Program is separate from the Metropolitan Council Noise Policy process. While the Metropolitan Council utilized the 1996 contours that were generated by the MAC for the Part 150 program as the basis for the policy contours, the Council is not likely to consider an update of the Noise Policy Contours until the Part 150 update is completed. Even then, it is not certain whether the Metropolitan Council will adopt the new contours or not. The consultant report appears to assume that the Metropolitan Council will adopt the 2007 contours and replicate the one -mile radius methodology that was adopted with the 1996 contours. The report acknowledges that even if those modifications in regional policy occur, the development sites would remain in Noise Zone 4. The 2005 and 2007 contours are smaller than the 1996 contours in the area of the Eagan- Mendota Heights Corridor partially because of the increase in quieter generation Stage III aircraft in the fleet mix, a flattening of traffic growth in the aftermath of 9/11 and the fact that the current flight level projections are split between the parallel runways and the new 17 -35 (North- South) runway, due to open in 2005. As a consequence, the contours do not reflect the potential future effect of traffic growing to capacity on all available runways. Local and regional policy decisions about noise compatibility will need to consider whether the recently published contours represent a long term, stable contraction of noise impact or a snapshot in time representing a redistribution of short term projections of traffic. As a consequence, it may be premature to base any decision on the presumption that the policy contours will change or that the current contours reflect the long term noise environment around the airport. Further, it is important to note that the contours represent a series of gradients along a range of noise levels. It is well understood in the noise attenuation industry that it is not loud on one side of a contour and magically quiet on the other. The purpose for the one -mile radius around the DNL contours in regional and City policy is to acknowledge that noise nuisance is relative and receiver based and that local governments should carefully consider the impacts of noise over a broader area than the "boundaries" defined by a computer generated noise metric. It should also be noted that while the Part 150 Program requires compatibility of new land use developments to be addressed, that aspect of the program is largely addressed through the Metropolitan Council Noise Policies in the Regional Policy Plan's Aviation Guide Chapter. The bulk of the current debate with respect to the application of any updated noise contours focuses on those areas within which corrective noise abatement improvements will be applied. Properties that have been or will be developed since the Part 150 program was originally adopted are not eligible for such corrective improvements and, therefore, cities must carefully consider noise compatibility and/or provisions for noise attenuation and other noise related conditions in development decisions. Regional Guidelines and Policies The consultant's report references excerpts from several portions of the regional policies associated with the relative compatibility of land uses to aircraft noise within the various noise contours and the guidance for noise attenuation if a local unit of government chooses to permit residential uses in the noise zones. The report does not reflect the specific policy language in the City of Eagan's Comprehensive Guide Plan for Special Area 1, in which the proposed development site is located, which states: "Due to the area's proximity to the airport and the fact that single family uses are considered transitional, the City shall discourage any additional residential development, including further subdivision of any existing residential property." While the consultant's report accurately indicates that a local government that chooses to locate residential uses in the noise zones can make findings and apply performance standards to make them less inconsistent with noise exposure, those policies do not suggest that the local government should be compelled to reguide or rezone properties, even if those standards are met. The basic decision is whether the local unit of government finds it appropriate to permit such land uses. If so, the appropriate findings should be made and the appropriate conditions and requirements should be applied to offset the noise impacts to the maximum extent possible. The consultant's report accurately indicates that if a city wishes to find that shared entrance residential developments are provisionally acceptable, regional policy suggests that an indoor sound level of 45 dBA, or a reduction of at least 20 dBA, must be achieved. The report inaccurately suggests that individual entrance residential development (such as the proposed single family detached and townhome uses) must only meet that sound attenuation standard to be acceptable. Indoor sound level reduction is only part of one of eight conditional land use review factors for individual entrance residential buildings, which are: 1. Specific nature of the proposed use, including extent of associated outdoor activities. 2. Relationship of proposed use to other planning considerations, including adjacent land use activities, consistency with overall comprehensive planning and relation to other metropolitan systems. 3. Frequency of exposure of proposed uses to aircraft overflight. 4. Location of proposed use relative to aircraft flight tracks and aircraft on- ground operating and maintenance areas. 5. Location, site design and construction restrictions to be imposed on the proposed use by the community with respect to reduction of exterior to interior noise transmissions, and shielding of outdoor activities. 6. Method community will use to inform future occupants of proposed potential noise from aircraft operations. 7. Extent to which community restricts the building from having facilities for outdoor activities associated with the use. 8. Distance of proposed use from existing or proposed runways, parallel taxiways, or engine run -up areas. If individual entrance residential development is to be considered, the Planning Commission and City Council will want to make favorable findings on each of these factors. The factors may be applied differently depending upon whether a development is simply in proximity to the airport or if it is exposed to overflights. A brief analysis of each in the context of the application follows: 1. Specific nature of the proposed use, including extent of associated outdoor activities. — The proposed use is a combination of residential uses, consisting of both individual entry housing types (338 units Loan Oak/168 units Laukka Beck) and two shared entry cooperative buildings (150 units Loan Oak). The outdoor uses would consist of those activities that would typically be associated with the use of residential yards and common ownership green spaces for attached single family and multifamily properties. The potential park improvements that would need to be anticipated for a new development of this scale are discussed below in the Parks section of this report. The applicants have indicated that the purchasing demographic they anticipate for the senior cooperative and other housing types will gravitate toward residents without children and modest needs for outdoor activities. However, the applicants' residential market study states that "households that choose an owner- occupied multi - family option particularly desire communities that will offer them additional outdoor and recreational amenities as they typically have limited space within their units. Features such as picnic/barbeque areas, outdoor pool, garden plots are features that are often desired among multi - family buyers." 2. Relationship of proposed use to other planning considerations, including adjacent land use activities, consistency with overall comprehensive planning and relation to other metropolitan systems. — The City's Comprehensive Guide Plan currently anticipates commercial and office park uses in this area. The uses adjacent to the development parcels and the relationship to the utilities and transportation systems and other planning considerations are discussed elsewhere in this report. The Metropolitan Council staff indicates that the adjacent low - density residential uses in the City of Inver Grove Heights Comprehensive Guide Plan will be reconsidered in the context of aircraft noise and other regional systems, during the 2008 Guide updates or at such time as sewer and water may become available to those areas. With respect to residential uses within the noise zones within the Eagan- Mendota Heights Corridor area, the City of Eagan has attempted, where possible, to minimize land uses that would be in conflict with operations at MSP. The City also has made a practice of making comments to neighboring cities discouraging the introduction of areas of new residential development within the corridor area. 3. Frequency of exposure of proposed uses to aircraft overflight. — The DNL contours discussed above are developed using a metric that combines factors including fleet mix, flight tracks, altitudes and frequency of operations. From a land use planning perspective, this policy factor focuses on the frequency of overflight of an area in particular. The MAC staff has prepared an analysis of current operations as they pertain to the proposed development location, a copy of which is attached to this report. Because of the preferences given to runway ends in the airport's runway operating system, either arrivals or departures can be expected to be over the Eagan- Mendota Heights Corridor throughout the day, regardless of which other runway ends may be in operation at any time. Given that fact, the City of Eagan has advocated for operations standards that further manage traffic within the noise compatible land use boundaries — specific permitted departure headings, three mile climb before turns to destination for departures, four mile final approach for arrivals, etc. Even with the opening of the North -South Runway, the corridor will be the preferred operating area for night time flights . While flight tracks are not flown with surgical precision, the airport's nighttime procedures call for operations to occur exclusively to and from the southeast whenever possible. In particular, the procedures call for departures to be given a heading north of the runway centerline to minimize overflight of existing residential areas in Eagan and Mendota Heights and take advantage of the commercial industrial uses and relatively undeveloped areas to absorb the greatest portion of the noise impact. The introduction of residential uses in the proposed development area would remove the non - residential alternative to overflying existing neighborhoods in Eagan. 4. Location of proposed use relative to aircraft flight tracks and aircraft on- ground operating and maintenance areas. — The proposed development area is directly under a number of the primary departure tracks and adjacent to the primary arrival tracks for the parallel runways. It will be regularly exposed to the effects of operations along and near those flight tracks. The site is approximately 4 '/z miles from the closest ground operating and maintenance areas and would likely experience little noise impact from those noise sources. 5. Location, site design and construction restrictions to be imposed on the proposed use by the community with respect to reduction of exterior to interior noise transmissions, and shielding of outdoor activities. — The applicants have indicated an intention to apply sound attenuation building techniques to reduce outdoor to indoor noise transmission by the levels indicated in the Metropolitan Council Builder's Guide. No site design or other plans are indicated in the application to shield outdoor activities from noise impacts. 6. Method community will use to inform future occupants of proposed potential noise from aircraft operations. — While it is not noted in the submittals, the applicants have verbally indicated an intention to take steps to inform occupants of potential noise from aircraft operations. In order to effectively carry out this notification, it would need to be recorded against the title of all owner occupied uses and there would need to be an enforceable covenant for disclosure on any rental facilities. If residential development is to be considered in this area, the notification will need to be in a recordable form acceptable to the City Attorney and staff. 7. Extent to which community restricts the building from having facilities for outdoor activities associated with the use. — As proposed, the development would rely on outdoor areas for many of the recreation and social interaction activities typically associated with a residential neighborhood. As noted above, the applicants' market study indicates that outdoor uses are desirable for the demographic anticipated to be attracted to the development. If residential development is to be considered in this area, the City will need to determine whether restrictions on outdoor activities are necessary, feasible or appropriate. 8. Distance of proposed use from existing or proposed runways, parallel taxiways, or engine run -up areas. — This factor is intended to relate more specifically to ground noise for areas close in to the airport. Other Aircraft Noise Development Considerations As noted above, the applicants have indicated in separate discussions that they believe that the potential development of residential land uses at the project site should be considered in light of the residential uses proposed or under development in the City's Cedar Grove Redevelopment District and the City of Bloomington's Central Station Development. As to the Cedar Grove Redevelopment District, local governments may make different findings in different areas that will lead to different conclusions about whether residential uses are provisionally or conditionally acceptable. In the case of Cedar Grove, the Cedar Avenue Corridor was not planned or developed in anticipation of direct aircraft overflights. As it relates to Runway 17/35, the Cedar Grove Redevelopment is not in a noise compatible corridor as the proposed development sites are. The context for Cedar Grove relates to fully developed residential areas and redevelopment priorities that will stabilize and support those areas. The City's Comprehensive Guide for the Cedar Grove special area specifically discusses noise exposure and concludes that a mixed use redevelopment consisting partially of attached residential uses is acceptable with appropriate performance standards, in consideration of all of the factors bearing on the area. In addition, the runway use patterns and priorities that apply to the Eagan- Mendota Heights Corridor are different from those that will apply to the other sides of the airport, such as the Cedar Avenue area. Specifically, departures are expected to fan from the end of the North -South Runway and they are concentrated over the commercial- industrial areas for several miles from the runway end in the Corridor. As such, any conclusion regarding the acceptability of residential uses in the area proposed may be made independent from the City's conclusions with regard to their development in the Cedar Grove Area. The Bloomington Central Station Development is intended to be a transit oriented area combining retail, employment, recreation and residential uses. The Metropolitan Council staff and the developer of the Bloomington project indicate that all of the residential uses are anticipated to be of masonry construction with shared entrances and the expectation is that many of the recreational and retail opportunities will be met indoors at the Mall of America. Even so, the City of Eagan made comments as a part of the City of Bloomington's Comprehensive Guide Plan amendment process expressing concern about the introduction of new residential uses within that proximity to the airport. Conclusion The City of Eagan has established policies that plan for noise compatible commercial and industrial uses in the Eagan- Mendota Heights Corridor area. The applicants propose to have the City modify those policies and plans as outlined above. The threshold question is whether or not residential uses would be appropriate for the area. If so, in what way would the performance and policy findings be defined to minimize the potential impact of that change on the residents of the proposed development and on residents of other residential areas of the City? If not, the City may make findings to that effect. JH unity Development Director } � l � N � `` , � � i1 r"i - � � J t ,,1,!:::1:71: T A � � ice t / c.:::_ c _ 7� '/�' °; � � �_ "�� l ,,. � L.< <->v r , I,, ' ( �" ,�ver Grove � r �' .y 1 :.��( • �: it \ , \ J , j j - "r 'T ��. �� e r r ] ,., :4- + �•'rl+� �. l.a, ]%' . (,� e �r•i ) L _ r 1 % // ✓ • 1 • _ 1 ,,tea ,.. ,/,.....-- l t ,� ' -- 1✓, i' H a ' / , ' I rT --'L-'"-H. \L' i .. _i ,P +"y r ' >' y .'.:1" �j f I 01)__f7',/d1 r Metropolitan Council Current Noise Policy Areas The Metropolitan Council and the Metropolitan Airports Commission m.ke no repnsentahon or warranties. ..press or implied, with reaped to the rouse of the data provided herewith. n9rdless of as lomm.t or the means Wits transmission. Determining the appropnete applications tar the use of this data sat is the responslbil y =the user. The user accepts the data •as 4', and sumes WI risks sssod.bd with as use. By .cceplonce of Ms data, the user agrees not to Innsmit this data a or provide scan to a or any part of a to another party or mdwidusl The Metropolitan Coundl and the Metropolitan Airports Commission lissome no responsibility tor sot.] or consequential damage Ikuned es. result of any users reliance en this dere. j i 353 0 0.5 z Rpr 22 04 09:48a ,.,t,, 9 1. 0 . c P ? 5 54 t/4) 4 t 9` 3 z T t, O MAC t h e + 4. a, RPON SZ April 21, 2004 METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION Jon Hohenstein City of Eagan Director of Community Development 3830 Pilot Knob Road Eagan, MN 55122 Subject: Proposed Development of Loan Oak and Laukka -Beck Properties Dear Mr. Hohenstein, Minneapolis -Saint Paul International. Airport 6040 - 28th Avenue South • Minneapolis, MN 55450 -2799 Phone (612) 726 -8100 Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed development of the Loan Oak and Laukka -Beck Properties. The proposed residential development project includes a total of 434 town home /single family units on 110 acres of land in the northeast corner of Eagan. This letter outlines the Metropolitan Airports Commission's (MAC) concerns with residential development on this site. Of particular concern is the development of single family and multi - family housing stock in an area presently zoned industrial/commercial and compatible with frequent aircraft operations and over - flights. The proposed development would expose numerous new residents to existing impacts associated with a large number of aircraft over - flights. The proposed development falls within the Metropolitan Council's Aviation Guide Plan Zone 4 (DNL 60 to 65). This area is within the 1996 60 DNL contour. Recently, the MAC developed updated Part 150 contours reflecting the projected 2007 noise environment. The proposed development site lies just outside of the draft 2007 60 DNL contour area. Although the site falls outside of the updated 2007 60 DNL contour area, the City of Eagan has made it clear that airport noise impacts occur beyond the 60 DNL contour area and these impacts should be considered by the communities and the MAC. The city outlines their position in a letter to the MAC regarding the Part 150 Update from the Eagan Assistant City Administrator dated November 15, 2000. "Although not directly pertinent to the Part 150 Document because of FAA criteria, MAC and the surrounding communities should take into consideration increased noise levels beyond the 60 DNL." (Appendix N, Public Involvement, Volume II, Part IV) The Metropolitan Airports Commission is an affirmative action employer. ww tip•. m spa irport.com Reliever Airports: AIRI,.AKE • ANOKA COUNTY/ BLAINE • CRYSTAL • FLYING CLOUD • LAKE ELMO • SAINT PAUL DOWNTOWN p.2 Apr 22 04 09:48a Another Letter sent to the MAC by then Mayor Patricia Awada, received on December 3, 2002, reaffirms the city's position. "The basis for the unduly narrow FAA/MAC analysis of departure procedures for Runway 17 is apparently the application of an outdated and restrictive FAA theorem that the 60 dB DNL contour is the sole arbiter of noise impacts. There is no consideration of total community impact as measured in the frequency, saturation, and relative distance from the airport of aircraft operations." (Runway 17 Departure Procedure Final Environmental Assessment FONSI/ROD, pg. F -36) The MAC's concerns for the proposed development of this site are based upon the previously mentioned factors as well as compatibility planning issues, and actual experience in the area. These concerns include: • The area proposed for the development is located within the Metropolitan Council's Aviation Guide Plan Zone 4. This area often receives noise levels between 60 and 65 DNL according to the Guide. Residential development for single and multiplex units with individual entrances is conditional and must meet eight land use review factors. In particular, these factors consider the proposed use of the development, the extent of associated outdoor activities, the relationship of the proposed use to other planning considerations, adjacent land use activities and the frequency of exposure to aircraft over - flights. Residential development for multiplex/apartment units with shared entrances is provisional and must be acoustically constructed to achieve a 45 DNL interior sound level. • The proposed development site is located less than 4.5 miles from the airports runways and is directly in line with frequently used arrival and departure flight paths. • The average altitude of arriving aircraft over this property during March 2004 was approximately 1,550 feet above ground level (AGL), with operations occurring as low as 1,020 feet AGL. The average altitude of departing aircraft over this property was approximately 2,966 AGL, with operations occurring as low as 1,555 feet AGL (see attachment 4). • Based on a sampling of departing aircraft activity over this area (March 2004), 8.2% (708) of all departures from runways 12L and 12R flew directly over the development site. Additionally, 20.3% (1,745) of departures passed within one- quarter mile north of the property to one - quarter mile south of the property. In total there were 3,014 out of 8,596 departures that passed within one -half mile north of the property to one -half mile south of the property (see Attachment 1). • Based on a sampling of arriving aircraft activity over this area (March 2004), 2.7% (363) of all arrivals to runways 30L and 30R flew directly over the development site. Additionally, 47.6% (6,485) of arrivals passed within one - quarter mile north of the property to one - quarter mile south of the property. In total there were 6,575 out of 13,610 arrivals that passed within one -half mile north of the property to one -half mile south of the property (see Attachment 2). • Based on the March 2004 MSP Technical Advisor's Report showing the top ten noise events recorded that month, monitor site #24, which is approximately 0.54 p.3 Apr 22 04 09:48a miles southwest of the proposed development area, recorded noise events as high as 92.6 dBA. Additionally, monitor site #26, which is approximately 0.31 miles east of the proposed development area, recorded noise events as high as 88.3 dBA. • A significant amount of airport noise complaints are generated from the cities of Eagan, Mendota Heights, and Inver Grove Heights (see attachment 3). In 2003, residents from the City of Eagan filed 1,205 airport noise complaints of which only 32 complaints were filed from residents located within the draft 2007 60 DNL contour area. In addition, a total of 2,628 complaints were generated from residents who lived within a 2 -mile radius of the proposed development site. • The city's existing zoning of this property as commercial, industrial and agricultural uses continue to be more appropriate for the property in question. Another important concern is the use of the Eagan- Mendota Heights Corridor and its implications on the proposed development site. The Corridor has been a long - standing noise mitigation operational procedure at the airport that dates back to 1968. The procedure purposely concentrates aircraft operations over the more noise compatible commercial/industrial land use areas of Eagan and Mendota Heights. Eagan has proactively addressed noise compatibility by zoning the underlying area of the Corridor for commercial and industrial uses. The south Corridor boundary extends 3 miles southeast (120° heading) from the departure end of the south parallel runway (12R) over Eagan. The proposed development site is approximately 1.5 miles east of the 3 -mile boundary and residents in this area would be impacted by frequent aircraft operations and aircraft over- flights. In addition, several noise mitigation operational procedures such as the Runway Use System, the head -to -head procedure (allows aircraft to arrive and depart over the Corridor during low- demand time periods, i.e. nighttime) and the crossing in the Corridor procedure have been implemented to maximize use of the Corridor. All of the previously mentioned procedures are part of the existing and proposed Part 150 NCP and as a result, these procedures will impact residents of the proposed development site. The MAC, the Metropolitan Council and the City of Eagan have all recognized the need to protect the Corridor area from incompatible development. Eagan's Comprehensive Guide Plan for where the development is located states, "Due to the area's proximity to the airport and the fact that single family uses are considered transitional, the City shall discourage any additional residential development, including further subdivision of any of the existing residential property." The Metropolitan Council's Aviation Guide Plan states that the Noise Policy Area for MSP (including Noise Zone 4) was designed to meet several objectives including: `Protect undeveloped/compatible land uses, especially in the Mendota Heights -Eagan Corridor, from market pressures to convert to incompatible land uses, by not using the year 2005 contour but the 1996 DNL 60+ one -mile contour." Successful airport noise impact reduction around our nation's airports can be primarily attributed to cooperative efforts on behalf of airlines, airports and communities. As a partner in these noise reduction efforts, the City of Eagan has done a tremendous job with previous land use zoning within the Comprehensive Guide Plan to prevent the introduction of non - compatible land uses around the airport. The MAC urges the city to continue with this exemplary standard. p. 4 Apr 22 04 09:48a Once again, thank you for this opportunity to comment on the proposed development of the Loan Oak and Laukka -Beck Properties. Sincerely, of ey Hamiel Executive Director Metropolitan Airports Commission ,Qrp-pf s latefetf.n � �t 7"rfi s ME 1(124, 6"e_ietSe D Wits 1 4 - r jAtore NuMgGer— p.5 CITY OF EAGAN COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN THE WATERS (AREA 1) Background: This area is located in the extreme northeast comer of the City and overlays 640 acres of land. The area bounded on the north by I-494 and on the east by the City of Inver Grove Heights corporate limits. The vast majority of the study area is zoned PD, Planned Development. Aside from the Planned Development zoning designations, several agriculturally and residentially zoned properties are scattered throughout the area. Additionally, the Trinity Lutheran Church property holds a PF, Public Facilities zoning designation. The vast majority of land within the study area (452 acres) lies within the "Laukka- Beck" Planned Development (a.k.a. "The Waters "). Originally approved in the spring of 1985, the Planned Development called for the establishment of office /retail, office retail /showroom, and research development uses throughout the site. Other than plans associated with the Northwest Airlines corporate headquarters, no specific development plans for the balance of the property (platted as outlots) were provided. Development within the "Waters" has however, progressed in past years in a manner consistent with uses specified in the original Planned Development. To date, approximately 40 percent of the original Planned Development area remains vacant or underutilized. General Area Description: Land Use The study area consists primarily of office, office /showroom, and research development type land uses that lie within the "Waters" Planned Development. Older single- family residential uses are however, scattered around the periphery of the study area. In addition, a church (Trinity Lutheran) exists in the southwest portion of the study area. Transportation Bordered by I -494, Trunk Highway 55/149 and Lone Oak Road, the study area is provided good visibility and access. Future access to I-494 and Trunk Highway 55/149 (to accommodate new development) is however, subject to approval by the State and is expected to be limited if not prohibited to ensure safe and efficient circulation. Within the interior of the study area, office /showroom, and research development uses are served primarily by Lone Oak Parkway and Lone Oak Drive. Existing single family residences within the study area are presently accessed via Lone Oak Road and O'Neil Drive. Airport Implications In addition to the high volumes of truck traffic inherent upon the surrounding high volume roadways, the study area is also subject to significant levels of airport related noise, which also reduce its desirability for new residential development. The study area lies approximately three miles southeast of the Minneapolis /St. Paul International Airport directly in line with Runways 11/29 and lies within Noise Zone IV of the noise contours established by the Metropolitan Council. Within this zone, commercial and industrial uses are considered consistent while residential uses are considered conditional. Conditional uses are those uses that should only be permitted if certain noise attenuation practices developed by the Metropolitan Council are followed. The City of Eagan has been evolving towards a policy to discourage residential development of those northern portions of the City especially affected by aircraft noise. Conclusions: 1. In recognition of surrounding land uses, high traffic volumes and the area's inclusion in the aircraft noise zone, the long -term desirability of residential uses in the area is considered questionable. 2. Market conditions, coupled with a limited supply of developable land in the City, dictate that planning efforts directed toward the highest and best use of the area should be immediate. 3. The study area is a major entrance to the City. As such, an opportunity exists to present an attractive entry image via development. Land Use Designations: Excepting the Trinity Lutheran Church property and adjacent parcels to the south, all land within the study area is designated Business Park and Office /Service. According to the Comprehensive Guide Plan, the Business Park land use category is intended to provide areas for a mix of office, research and development, and light industrial uses and the Office /Service land use category is intended to provide areas for offices and lower intensity service and retail businesses. The Plan states that zoning categories considered consistent with such category include Agricultural (A), Limited Business (LB), Neighborhood Business (NB), and Potentially Research and Development. Consistent with its use, the Trinity Lutheran Church property has been guided Public /Quasi Public (QP). To "mirror" forthcoming uses to the south, the land in the extreme southwest corner of the study area has been guided Neighborhood Business (NB). Zoning Designations: In recognition of the area's historical development approvals, the vast majority of land within study area is proposed to be zoned Planned Development (PD) and developed with uses directed by the Laulcka-Beck and Cray Research Planned Development Agreements. Such agreements call for a range of office -based activities (i.e. standard office, office - showroom and research and development) similar to those presently existing within "The Waters" Planned Development. In those areas not governed by Planned Development Agreements, standard zoning designations are proposed. To avoid the creation of nonconforming uses, the City will support the continuance of agricultural zoning designations within the study area on an interim basis until redevelopment occurs. Under an agricultural zoning designation, existing homes in the area would be able to remain as "conforming" uses. To provide more specific land use directives (than that offered by the Land Use Map), a zoning map has been prepared which illustrates the "ultimate" designations of such agricultural parcels. This map incorporates Neighborhood Business (NB) in the southwest area of the site and Business Park (BP) zoning in the northwest portion of the study area. The larger agricultural tracts in the north and eastern areas of the study areas are proposed to infill with office /research type uses (similar to those in the Laukka -Beck Planned Development) and are proposed to ultimately be zoned Research and Development (RD). Policies: 1. Excepting the Trinity Lutheran Church property, the City ultimately expects the entire study area to develop as office, office showroom, research and development and neighborhood business uses. Existing residential uses are considered transitional. The timing of the transition of such uses should be a function of private market forces. 2. The City will support the continuance of existing residential uses in the area until there is a strong indication of market support for large -scale development with Research and Development and Neighborhood Business uses. The City will support the continuance of agricultural and single family residential zoning designations within the study area to allow single - family homes to exist as conforming uses until redevelopment occurs. 3. In the future, the City will support rezoning to Business Park, Research and Development and Neighborhood Business districts in areas of sufficient size to provide a cohesive development. The City will not support rezoning that would result in piecemeal; lot -by -lot redevelopment or that would result in further isolation of existing residential uses. 4. The City will strive to ensure new Research and Development and Neighborhood Business development does not negatively impact existing residential properties through the development review process, including enforcement of specific zoning standards and performance guidelines. 5. In recognition of the study area's location, the City will take full advantage of opportunities to present an attractive City image (via development quality, erection of City identification signage etc.). 6. Individual lot access to I -494, Truck Highways 55 and 149 will be prohibited. 7. Individual lot access to Lone Oak Road will be discouraged to the extent possible. 8. A uniform design element(s) providing an identity will be promoted in the study area. 9. To the extent possible, new development shall respond and strive to retain the natural features of the area including wetlands and mature vegetation. 10. New neighborhood Business uses in the southwest comer of the study area will utilize materials and design features compatible with those used in the adjacent Oakview Center Planned Development. 11. New Business Park and Research and Development uses will utilize materials and design features compatible with those utilized in the adjacent Laukka -Beck Planned Development. 12. Due to the area's proximity to the airport and the fact that single family uses are considered transitional, the City shall discourage any additional residential development, including further subdivision of any of the existing residential property. 13. New development within the study area shall incorporate sound attenuating construction techniques as suggested by the Metropolitan Council. 46 City of Eagan MINNESOTA Community Combo...NV DLIPMIMOrt Comprehensive Plan 2000 - Special Area Special Area #1 - Land Use ( 363 4P Exhibit 3.7.1.a 4 1111- City of Eagan MINNESOTA Co... Move leamont Dermnerd Comprehensive Plan 2000 - Special Area ‘‘.• If !•.1 \1/4 • te3 Special Area #1 - Interim Zoning - Exhibit 3.7.1..b MINNESOTA Comprehensive Plan 2000 - Special Area Special Area #1 - Ultimate Zoning // 85 E. SEVENTH PLACE, SUITE 100 SAINT PAUL, MN 55101 -2887 651- 223 -3000 FAX: 651-223-3002 MEMORANDUM TO: Jon Hohenstein FROM: Nick Dragisich Paul Steinman DATE: April 23, 2004 SUBJECT: Lone Oak Mixed Use Executive Summary SPRINGSTED I dr isors to the Public Sector We have reviewed the developer information you provided to David MacGillivray regarding the Lone Oak and Laukka -Beck Residential proposals. The purpose of this memorandum is to provide an analysis of the tax generation comparisons of various development scenarios that might be anticipated for the property proposed to be developed. The City has asked Springsted to review developer information related to the Lone Oak and Laukka -Beck Residential proposals. Our analysis included a review of developer assumptions, alternative development scenarios for the site, and the potential revenues and expenditures likely to result from each of these. The developer's property tax projections for the office warehouse products were based on a market value of $60.00 per square foot which would be within the range of typical values for office space, but considerably outside the range for warehouse space. If the units are predominantly warehouse space, the value seems high. One observation we did note was that the developer's projections for the office warehouses include development on only the 84.5 acres parcel. This leaves the 24.5 acre parcel or approximately 22.5% of the total area vacant. The developer has based his or her property tax projections for the proposed office condos on a taxable market value of $175.00 per square foot. While it is difficult to question the developer's market value projections given the limited information provided, this value seems relatively high when compared to the current market value of a number of other office space parcels in the vicinity of the development site. We would tend to believe the developer has satisfied himself or herself that a market does exist for the proposed residential units at the projected price and density. If this development were approved in consideration of the values and tax generation information provided, the City may wish to consider some type of agreement or restriction that would require the developer to CORPORATE OFFICE: SAINT PAUL, MN • Visit our website at www.springsted.com" IOWA • KANSAS • MINNESOTA • VIRGINIA • WASHINGTON, DC • WISCONSIN 6 City of Eagan, MN April 23, 2004 Page 2 develop units with the market value projected in the rezoning request as a condition of the rezoning. To reflect a range of possible commercial development options, we have prepared both a low density office warehouse development scenario and a high density R & D scenario. We have made long -term financial projections of the two developments proposed by the developer and of three additional development scenarios to show the potential financial impacts to the City. The three additional developments include one for the office warehouse development proposed by the developer but with the entire 109 acres developed, one for the lowest value use of the property under the current City zoning and one for the highest value use of the property under the current City zoning. Of the five alternatives, an R & D office development as currently contemplated in the City's Comprehensive Plan is projected to generate approximately $13.4 million over the 15 year planning period, the greatest cumulative cash flow. The mixed residential /office condos development proposed by the developer is projected to generate approximately $4.8 million over the same period, the second greatest cumulative cash flow. Developer's assumption related to office warehouse products The developer provided projected property tax projections based on the development of a series of office warehouse units. The information provided to us did not include any market analysis to support the need for these units and there was no explanation relative to timing of the construction. Nonetheless, the City's current zoning would allow the construction of these types of units. They may not be the highest and best use of the property given the surrounding corporate office space and specialized facilities, but they would be permitted uses. The property tax projections are based on a market value of $60 per square foot for the office warehouse units. The $60 per square foot value is within the range of Building Valuation Data reported to the State of Minnesota Department of Administration for building permits for office space, but is considerably outside the range for warehouse space. If the units are predominantly warehouse space, the value seems high when compared to the Building Valuation data that shows warehouse cost per square foot ranging from $28.76 to $44.95 per square foot. One observation we did note was that the developer's projections for the office warehouses include development on only the 84.5 acres parcel. This leaves the 24.5 acre parcel or approximately 22.5% of the total area vacant. There was no explanation for why this area is undeveloped. Our analysis includes a variation of the developer's scenario that applies comparable values and densities to the full 109 acre site, instead of just the south 84.5 acre portion of the site. Developer's assumptions related to office condo development The developer has based his or her property tax projections for the proposed office condos on a taxable market value of $175.00 per square foot. While it is difficult to question the developer's market value projections given the limited information provided, this value seems relatively high when compared to the current market value of a number of other office space parcels, most of which are in the vicinity of the development site. The value is also high compared to the City of Eagan, MN April 23, 2004 Page 3 assumptions for the commercial industrial comparison the developer presented ($60.00 per square foot). We have recently become aware of a proposed office condo project in another metropolitan suburb where the market value is projected to be $135.00 per square foot. This value has been affirmed by the local assessor. However, this is still somewhat less than the $175.00 per square foot the Developer used in his or her projections. Developer's assumptions related to residential products We would tend to believe the developer has satisfied himself or herself that a market does exist for the proposed units at the projected price and density. We estimated the density of the housing at 6.28 units per acre. If this development were approved in consideration of the values and tax generation information provided, the City may wish to consider some type of agreement or restriction that would require the developer to develop units with the market value projected in the rezoning request as a condition of the rezoning. Alternative assumptions for development as contemplated by the City's Comprehensive Guide Plan To reflect a range of possible commercial development options, we have prepared both a low density office warehouse development scenario and a high density R & D scenario. The Building Valuation Data reported by the State of Minnesota Department of Administration shows values for office space ranging from approximately $62 per square foot to approximately $97 per square foot. Existing office space in the vicinity of the development site have taxable market values ranging from approximately $32 to $90 per square foot. It would seem likely that an office warehouse development would be at the lower end and an R & D development would be at the upper mid of this range because of the adjacent Waters development. Assumptions relative to five -year and Tong -term analysis We have made Tong -term financial projections of the two developments proposed by the developer and of three additional development scenarios to show the potential financial impacts to the City. The three additional developments include one for the office warehouse development proposed by the developer but with the entire 109 acres developed, one for the lowest value use of the property under the current City zoning and one for the highest value use of the property under the current City zoning. The projections for the proposed office /warehouse development and the three additional developments include projected revenues and operating expenditures likely to result from each of these developments. The financial projections for the mixed residential and office condos proposed by the developer include projected revenues, operating expenditures and capital expenditures. Capital expenditures are included in this projection because the development would require a change in land use that would generate a need for capital facilities to support the development above those currently anticipated by the City under the current land use plan. These capital expenditures include facilities for: parks & recreation, police, fire & rescue, general government, transportation, and library services. The financial projections for operating expenditures by land use type are based on Springsted's significant experience in fiscal impact Area Use Total Area in Acres Percent of Area Original Market Value Original Tax Capacity 2003 Original Taxes Original Market Value Taxes Total Original Taxes A Vacant 84.5 77.48% 2,797,200 55,194 50,376 524.00 50,899.56 B Vacant 24.56 22.52% 1,157,700 22,404 20,448 216.87. 20,665.00 109.06 100% 3,954,900 77,598 70,824 740.87 71,564.57 City of Eagan, MN April 23, 2004 Page 4 analysis and on a typical distribution of revenues, other than real property taxes, and operating expenditures between residents and employees. The distribution of these revenues and expenditures reflect the differences in the revenues generated and in the demand created for services between development scenarios based on the proposed land use. Revenues were projected on a line -item basis from the City's 2003 budget and included: > Licenses > Permits > Intergovernmental revenue > Charges for services > Recreation program fees > Other park fees > Fines & Forfeits > Miscellaneous Revenues > Program Revenues > Transfers Operating expenditures were projected from the City's 2003 budget for the following general fund categories: General Government, Public Safety, Public Works, Parks and Recreation, General Government Building Maintenance, and other. All property taxes projected are based on the City's 2003 tax capacity extension rate and other revenues and expenditures are based on the City's 2003 budget. Fiscal disparities were ignored to enable a comparison with the projections made by the Developer. However, a more refined analysis would need to include the impact of fiscal disparities. The proposed development site contains 109.06 acres. The market value of the site, tax capacity and original taxes are shown in the table below. Proposed Development Site — Base Information Our base information shows the 2003 taxes to be $71,564.57 which are local taxes only and do not include the state property taxes on the parcels. This is about half of the $154,924 amount shown in the information submitted by the Developer. It is possible the Developer is including the property taxes paid to the State, although it is of no value to the City for the purposes of these comparisons. Fiscal Impacts of Developer Projection 1 — Office Warehouse Development The developer presented a proposed office warehouse use for the site. The proposed development is shown in the table on the following page. (,(e8 Year Projected Market Added Value Projected Tax Added Capacity Projected City Property Tax Revenue Projected City other Revenue Total City Revenue Projected City Operating Expenditures Annual Operating Cash Flow Cumulative Operating Cash Flow Projected Annual Capital Expenditures Combined Total Annual Cash Flow Combined Cumulative Cash Flow 2005 10,127,700 - - - - - - - - - - 2006 23,527,860 - - - - - - - - - - 2007 33,328,860 201,804 36,704 3,782 40,486 (14,253) 26,233 26,233 - 26,233 26,233 2008 45,743,460 468,307 116,420 8,786 125,206 (33,112) 92,095 118,327 - 92,095 118,327 2009 55,217,760 662,077 174,381 12,446 186,826 (46,905) 139,922 258,249 - 139,922 258,249 2010 55,217,760 908,119 247,977 17,082 265,058 (64,376) 200,682 458,931 - 200,682 458,931 2011 55,217,760 1,096,105 304,207 20,620 324,827 (77,710) 247,1)7 706,048 - 247,117 706,048 2012 55,217,760 1,096,105 304,207 20,620 324,827 (77,710) 247,117 953,165 - 247,117 953,165 2013 55,217,760 1,096,105 304,207 20,620 324,827 (77,710) 247,117 1,200,282 - 247,117 1,200,282 2014 55,217,760 1,096,105 304,207 20,620 324,827 (77,710) 247,117 1,447,399 - 247,117 1,447,399 2015 55,217,760 1,096,105 304,207 20,620 324,827 (77,710) 247,117 1,694,516 - 247,117 1,694,516 2016 55,217,760 1,096,105 304,207 20,620 324,827 (77,710) 247,117 1,941,633 - 247,117 1,941,633 2017 55,217,760 1,096,105 304,207 20,620 324,827 (77,710) 247,117 2,188,750 - 247,117 2,188,750 2018 55,217,760 1,096,105 304,207 20,620 324,827 (77,710) 247,117 2,435,867 - 247,117 2,435,867 2019 55,217,760 1,096,105 304,207 20,620 324,827 (77,710) 247,117 2,682,984 - 247,117 2,682,984 2020 55,217,760 1,096,105 304,207 20,620 324,827 (77,710) 247,117 2,930,101 - 247,117 2,930,101 2021 55,217,760 1,096,105 304,207 20,620 324,827 (77,710) 247,117 3,177,218 - 247,117 3,177,218 2022 55,217,760 1,096,105 304,207 20,620 324,827 (77,710) 247,117 3,424,335 - 247,117 3,424,335 4,225,968 289 ,530 4,515,498 (1,091,163) 3,424,335 - 3,424,335 Phase Use Acres Total Sq. Ft./Units Market Value Sq. Ft/Units Total Market Value Total Tax Capacity Tax Capacity Taxes Market Value Taxes Total Taxes Year Constructe d Year Payable 1 -A Office Warehouse 15.5 168,795 60.00 10,127,700 201,804 184,187 1,897 186,084 2005 2007 2 -A Office Warehouse 11.5 125,235 60.00 7,514,100 149,532 136,478 1,408 137,885 2006 2008 2 -A Office Warehouse 9 98,101 60.00 5,886,060 116,971 106,760 1,103 107,862 2006 2008 3 -A Office Warehouse 7 76,230 60.00 4,573,800 90,726 82,806 857 83,662 2007 2009 3 -A Offi Warehouse 3 32,670 60.00 1,960,200 38,454 35,097 367 35,464 2007 2009 3 -A Office Warehouse 5 54,450 60.00 3267,000 64,590 58,951 612 59,563 2007 2009 4 -A Office Warehouse 4 43,560 60.00 2,613,600 51,522 47,024 490 47,514 2008 2010 4-A Office Warehouse 5 54,450 60.00 3,267,000 64,590 58,951 612 59,563 2008 2010 4 -B Office Warehouse 10 108,900 60.00 6,534,000 129,930 118,587 1,224 119,811 2008 2010 5 -B Office Warehouse 7 76,230 60.00 4,573,800 90,726 82,806 857 83,662 2009 2011 5 -B Office Warehouse 7.5 81,675 60.00 4,900,500 97,260 88,769 918 89,687 2009 2011 Totals 84.5 920,296 55,217,760 1,096,105 1,000,415 10,344 1,010,759 City of Eagan, MN April 23, 2004 Page 5 As we stated previously, it is unclear why these projections show development on only 84.5 of the 109.06 available acres on the site. The fiscal impacts of this proposal on the City is projected to have positive cash flow in each year and to have cumulative positive cash flow of approximately $3.4 million over a 15 year period. The fiscal impacts shown include the net increase in revenues to the City above those it currently receives from the site. These projections are shown in the table below. Fiscal Impacts of Developer's Projection 1 a - Office Warehouse Development on Entire Site We have added a financial projection to show the fiscal impacts of an office warehouse development on the entire 109 acres available. The fiscal impacts are projected using the same density of development and market values used by the developer in his or her proposed office warehouse development. The proposed development is shown in the table on the following page. 370 Year Projected Market Added Value Projected Tax Added Capacity Projected City Property Tax Revenue Projected City other Revenue Total City Revenue Projected City Operating Expenditures Annual Operating Cash Flow Cumulative Operating Cash Flow Projected Annual Capital Expenditures Combined Total Annual Cash Flow Combined Cumulative Cash Flow 2005 13,329,360 - - - 13,329,360 - - - - - - 2006 29,931,180 - - - - - - - - 2006 - 2007 42,933,840 265,837 55,857 4,977 60,835 (18,759) 42,076 42,076 - 42,076 42,076 2008 58,550,100 596,374 154,727 11,177 165,904 (42,123) 123,781 165,857 - 123,781 165,857 2009 71,226,060 854,177 231,842 16,032 247,874 (60,422) 187,452 353,309 - 187,452 353,309 2010 71,226,060 1,164,252 324,591 21,864 346,455 (82,400) 264,056 617,365 - 264,056 617,365 2011 71,226,060 1,416,271 399,975 26,597 426,573 (100,239) 326,334 - 943,699 - 326,334 943,699 2012 71,226,060 1,416,271 399,975 26,597 426,573 (100,239) 326,334 1,270,033 - 326,334 1,270,033 2013 71,226,060 1,416,271 399,975 26,597 426,573 (100,239) 326,334 1,596,367 - 326,334 1,596,367 2014 71,226,060 1,416,271 399,975 26,597 426,573 (100,239) 326,334 1,922,700 - 326,334 1,922,700 2015 71,226,060 1,416,271 399,975 26,597 426,573 (100,239) 326,334 2,249,034 - 326,334 2,249,034 2016 71,226,060 1,416,271 399,975 26,597 426,573 (100,239) 326,334 2,575,368 - 326,334 2,575,368 2017 71,226,060 1,416,271 399,975 26,597 426,573 (100,239) 326,334 2,901,702 - 326,334 2,901,702 2018 71,226,060 1,416,271 399,975 26,597 426,573 (100,239) 326,334 3,228,036 - 326,334 3,228,036 2019 71,226,060 1,416,271 399,975 26,597 426,573 (100,239) 326,334 3,554,370 - 326,334 3,554,370 2020 71,226,060 1,416,271 399,975 26,597 426,573 (100,239) 326,334 3,880,704 - 326,334 3,880,704 2021 71,226,060 1,416,271 399,975 26,597 426,573 (100,239) 326,334 4,207,037 - 326,334 4,207,037 2022 71,226,060 1,416,271 399,975 26,597 426,573 (100,239) 326,334 4,533,371 - 326,334 4,533,371 5,566,721 373,220 5,939,941 (1,406,569) 4,533,371 - 4,533,371 Phase Use Acres Total Sq. Ft./Units Market Value Sq. Ft/Units Total Market Value Total Tax Capacity Tax Capacity Taxes Market Value Taxes Total Taxes Year Constructe d Year Payable 1 -A Office Warehouse 20.4 _ 222,156 60.00 13,329,360 265,837 242,630 2,497 245,127 2005 2007 2 - A Office Warehouse 16.4 178,596 60.00 10,715,760 213,565 194,921 2,007 196,928 2006 2008 2 -A Office Warehouse 9 98,101 6000 5,886,060 116,971 106,760 1,103 107,862 2006 2008 3 -A Office Warehouse 11.9 129,591 60.00 7,775,460 154,759 141,249 1,457 142,705 2007 2009 3 -A Office Warehouse 3 32,670 60.00 1,960,200 38,454 35,097 367 35,464 2007 2009 3 -A Office Warehouse 5 54,450 60.00 3,267,000 64,590 58,951 612 59,563 2007 2009 4-A Office Warehouse 8.9 96,921 60.00 5,815,260 115,555 105,467 1,089 106,557 2008 2010 4 - A Office Warehouse 5 54,450 60.00 3,267,000 64,590 58,951 612 59,563 2008 2010 4 -13 Office Warehouse 10 108,900 60.00 6,534,000 129,930 118,587 1,224 119,811 2008 2010 5 - 3 Office Warehouse 11.9 129,591 60.00 7,775,460 154,759 141,249 1,457 142,705 2009 2011 5 - 8 Office Warehouse 7.5 81,675 60.00 4,900,500 97,260 88,769 918 89,687 2009 2011 Totals 109 1,187,101 71,226,060 1,416,271 1,292,631 13,343 1,305,974 City of Eagan, MN April 23, 2004 Page 6 The fiscal impacts of this proposal on the City is projected to have positive cash flow in each year and to have cumulative positive cash flow of approximately $4.5 million over a 15 year period. The fiscal impacts shown include the net increase in revenues to the City above those it currently receives from the site. These projections are shown in the table below. Fiscal Impacts of Developer Proiection 2 - Mixed Residential and Office Condos The developer presented a proposed mixed residential and office condo development on the site. The proposed development is shown in the table on the following page. 37/ Phase Use Total Sq. Ft./Unit Projected City Property Tax Revenue Market Value Sq. Ft/Units Total Market Value Total Tax Capacity Tax Capacity Taxes Market Value Taxes Total Taxes Year Constructe d Year Payable I -A Urban Townhomes 47 - 350,000.00 16,450,000 164,500 150,139 3,082 153,221 2005 2007 1 -A Villas 20 - 600,000.00 12,000,000 150,000 136,905 2,248 139,153 2005 2007 1 -A Ex. Single Family 7 384,564 800,000.00 5,600,000 70,000 63,889 1,049 64,938 2005 2007 1 -A Condos 40 91,499 300,000.00 12,000,000 120,000 109,524 2,248 111,772 2005 2007 1 -A Senior Coops 150 91,499 250,000.00 37,500,000 375,000 342,263 7,025 349,287 2005 2007 1 -A Adult Manor Home 36 91,499 250,000.00 9,000,000 90,000 82,143 1,686 83,829 2005 2007 I -A Office Condos 25,000 91,499 175.00 4,375,000 86,750 79,177 820 79,996 2005 2007 111 Townhome See B2B 55 91,499 350,000.00 19,250,000 192,500 175,695 3,606 179,301 2005 2007 IB Townhome See Thru 29 91,499 400,000.00 11,600,000 116,000 105,873 2,173 108,046 2005 2007 2A Urban Townhomes 47 91,499 350,000.00 16,450,000 164,500 150,139 3,082 153,221 2006 2008 2A Villas 29 862,003 600,000.00 17,400,000 217,500 198,512 3,260 201,772 2006 2008 2A Ex. Single Family 9 862,003 800,000.00 7,200,000 90,000 82,143 1,349 83,492 2006 2008 2A Condos 40 862,003 300,000.00 12,000,000 120,000 109,524 2,248 111,772 2006 2008 2A Adult Manor Home 36 (410,145) 250,000.00 9,000,000 90,000 82,143 1,686 83,829 2006 2008 2A Office Condos 23,000 (410,145) 175.00 4,025,000 79,750 72,788 754 73,542 2006 2008 2B Townhomes B2B 55 (410,145) 350,000.00 19,250,000 192,500 175,695 3,606 179,301 2006 2008 2B Townhomes See Thru 29 (410,145) 400,000.00 11,600,000 116,000 105,873 2,173 108,046 2006 2008 3A Villas 20 (410,145) 600,000.00 12,000,000 150,000 136,905 2,248 139,153 2007 2009 3A Ex. Single Family 7 (6,772,219) 800,000.00 5,600,000 70,000 63,889 1,049 64,938 2007 2009 Totals 242,300,000 2,655,000 2,423,219 45,390 2,468,609 Year Projected Market Added Value Projected Tax Added Capacity Projected City Property Tax Revenue Projected City other Revenue Total City Revenue Projected City Operating Expenditures Annual Operating Cash Flow Cumulative Operating Cash Flow Projected Annual Capital Expenditures Combined Total Annual Cash Flow Combined Cumulative Cash Flow 2005 127,775,000 - - - - - - - (1,037,223) (1,037,223) (1,037,223) 2006 224,700,000 - - 51,640 51,640 (232,622) (180,983) (180,983) (726,226) (907,208) (1,944,431) (1,945,384) 2007 242,300,000 1,364,750 384,564 86,239 470,803 (387,423) 83,380 (97,602) (84,333) (952) 2008 242,300,000 2,435,000 704,697 91,499 796,197 (410,145) 386,052 288,449 - 386,052 (1,559,332) 2009 242,300,000 2,655,000 770,504 91,499 862,003 (410,145) 451,858 740,307 - 451,858 (1,107,474) 2010 242,300,000 2,655,000 770,504 91,499 862,003 (410,145) 451,858 1,192,166 - 451,858 (655,616) 2011 242,300,000 2,655,000 770,504 91,499 862,003 (410,145) 451,858 1,644,024 - 451,858 (203,757) 2012 242,300,000 2,655,000 770,504 91,499 862,003 (410,145) 451,858 2,095,882 - 451,858 248,101 2013 242,300,000 2,655,000 770,504 91,499 862,003 (410,145) 451,858 2,547,740 - 451,858 699,959 1,151,817 2014 242,300,000 2,655,000 770,504 91,499 862,003 (410,145) 451,858 2,999,598 - 451,858 2015 242,300,000 2,655,000 770,504 91,499 862,003 (410,145 451,858 3,451,457 - 451,858 1,603,675 2016 242,300,000 2,655,000 770,504 91,499 862,003 (410,145) 451,858 3,903,315 - 451,858 2,055,534 2,507,392 2017 242,300,000 2,655,000 770,504 91,499 862,003 (410,145) 451,858 4,355,173 - 451,858 2018 242,300,000 2,655,000 770,504 91,499 862,003 (410,145) 451,858 4,807,031 - 451,858 2,959,250 2019 242,300,000 2,655,000 770,504 91,499 862,003 (410,145) 451,858 5,258,889 - 451,858 3,411,108 2020 242,300,000 2,655,000 770,504 91,499 862,003 (410,145) 451,858 5,710,747 - 451,858 3,862,966 2021 242,300,000 2,655,000 770,504 91,499 862,003 (410,145) 451,858 6,162,606 - 451,858 4,314,824 2022 242,300,000 2,655,000 770,504 91,499 862,003 (410,145) 451,858 6,614,464 - 451,858 4,766,683 11,876,315 1,510,368 13,386,683 (6,772,219) 6,614,464 (1,847,781) 4,766,683 City of Eagan, MN April 23, 2004 Page 7 The fiscal impacts of this proposal on the City are projected to be positive overall resulting in a cumulative positive cash flow of approximately $4.8 million by the end of year 15. However, the combined total annual cash flow is projected to be negative in the first three years as a result of the capital expenditures that would be required to support the development. The combined cumulative cash flow is projected to be negative for the first seven years as the capital expenditures in the fires three years and negative operating cash flow in the first are offset by positive cash flows in subsequent years. Capital expenditures included in the fiscal impact projections were for parks & recreation, police, fire & rescue, general government, transportation, and library services. These projections are shown in the table below. Fiscal Impacts of Lowest- Land -Use Development - 30% Single -Story Offices and 70% Warehouse The City's current zoning would permit a range of land use on the site. The lowest -land -use development permitted on this site would be a combination of single -story offices and Year Projected Market Added Value Projected Tax Added Capacity Projected City Property Tax Revenue Projected City other Revenue Total City Revenue Projected City Operating Expenditures Annual Operating Cash Flow Cumulative Operating Cash Flow Projected Annual Capital Expenditures Combined Total Annual Cash Flow Combined Cumulative Cash Flow 2005 15,953,416 - - - - - - - - - - 2006 31,906,832 - - - - - - - - - - 2007 47,860,248 317,568 71,331 12,520 83,851 (47,184) 36,667 36,667 - 36,667 36,667 2008 63,813,664 635,137 166,322 25,040 191,362 (94,368) 96,994 133,661 - 96,994 133,661 2009 79,767,080 952,705 261,313 37,559 298,873 (141,551) 157,321 290,983 - 157,321 290,983 2010 79,767,080 1,270,273 356,304 50,079 406,383 (188,735) 217,648 508,631 - 217,648 508,631 2011 79,767,080 1,587,842 451,295 62,599 513,894 (235,919) 277,975 786,606 - 277,975 786,606 2012 79,767,080 1,587,842 451,295 62,599 513,894 (235,919) 277,975 1,064,581 - 277,975 1,064,581 2013 79,767,080 1,587,842 451,295 62,599 513,894 (235,919) 277,975 1,342,557 - 277,975 1,342,557 2014 79,767,080 1,587,842 451,295 62,599 513,894 (235,919) 277,975 1,620,532 - 277,975 1,620,532 2015 . 79,767,080 1,587,842 451,295 62,599 513,894 (235,919) 277,975 1,898,507 - 277,975 1,898,507 2016 79,767,080 1,587,842 451,295 62,599 513,894 (235,919) 277,975 2,176,483 - 277,975 2,176,483 2017 79,767,080 1,587,842 451,295 62,599 513,894 (235,919) 277,975 2,454,458 - 277,975 2,454,458 2018 79,767,080 1,587,842 451,295 62,599 513,894 (235,919) 277,975 2,732,433 - 277,975 2,732,433 2019 79,767,080 1,587,842 451,295 62,599 513,894 (235,919) 277,975 3,010,408 - 277,975 3,010,408 2020 79,767,080 1,587,842 451,295 62,599 513,894 (235,919) 277,975 3,288,384 - 277,975 3,288,384 2021 79,767,080 1,587,842 451,295 62,599 513,894 (235,919) 277,975 3,566,359 - 277,975 3,566,359 2022 79,767,080 1,587,842 451,295 62,599 513,894 (235,919) 277,975 3,844,334 - 277,975 3,844,334 6,270,816 876,385 7,147,200 (3,302,866) 3,844,334 - 3,844,334 Phase Use Acres Total Sq Ft./Units Market Value Sq. Ft/Units Total Market Value Total Tax Capacity Tax Capacity Taxes Market Value Taxes Total Taxes Year Constructe d Year Payable 1 Office 6.5436 113,953 70.00 7,976,710 158,784 144,922 1,494 146,417 2005 2007 1 Warehouse 15.2684 265,890 30.00 7,976,706 158,784 144,922 1,494 146,417 2005 2007 2 Office 6.5436 113,953 70.00 7,976,710 158,784 144,922 1,494 146,417 2006 2008 2 Warehouse 15.2684 265,890 30.00 7,976,706 158,784 144,922 1,494 146,417 2006 2008 3 Office 6.5436 113,953 70.00 7,976,710 158,784 144,922 1,494 146,417 2007 2009 3 Warehouse 15.2684 265,890 30.00 7,976,706 158,784 144,922 1,494 146,417 2007 2009 4 Office 6.5436 113,953 70.00 7,976,710 158,784 144,922 1,494 146,417 2008 2010 4 Warehouse 15.2684 265,890 3000 7,976,706 158,784 144,922 1,494 146,417 2008 2010 5 Office 6.5436 113,953 70.00 7,976,710 158,784 144,922 1,494 146,417 2009 2011 5 Warehouse 15.2684 265,890 30.00 7,976,706 158,784 144,922 1,494 146,417 2009 2011 Totals 109.06 1,899,216 79,767,080 1,587,842 1,449,223 14,943 1,464,166 City of Eagan, MN April 23, 2004 Page 8 warehouses according to conversations with City staff. The floor area projected to be developed was based on 40% coverage (floor area to land) with 30% of the floor space allocated to offices and 70% allocated to warehouse. The office space was assumed to have a taxable market value of $70 /square foot and the warehouse space was assumed to have a taxable market value of $30 /square foot. These values are from those reported by the Building Valuation Data reported by the State of Minnesota Department of Administration. This development is shown in the table below. The fiscal impacts of this type of development on the City are projected to be positive overall resulting in a cumulative positive cash flow of approximately $3.8 million by the end of year 15. These projections are shown in the table below. Fiscal Impacts of Highest- Land -Use Development - R & D Office The highest land use development permitted under the City's current zoning would be a 45 foot tall R & D office with 20% land coverage (building foot print) according to conversations with City staff. We have projected a four -story building with 949,608 square feet per floor and a total floor area of 3,798,432. The office space was assumed to have a taxable market value of $70 /square foot. This development is shown in the table on the following page. 313 Year Projected Market Added Value Projected Tax Added Capacity Projected City Property Tax Revenue Projected City other Revenue Total City Revenue Projected City Operating Expenditures Annual Operating Cash Flow Cumulative Operating Cash Flow Projected Annual Capital Expenditures Combined Total Annual Cash Flow Combined Cumulative Cash Flow 2005 53,178,048 - - - - - - - - - - 2006 106,356,096 - - - - - - - - - - 2007 159,534,144 1,062,811 294,248 43,749 337,998 (164,880) 173,117 173,117 - 173,117 173,117 2008 212,712,192 2,125,622 612,156 87,499 699,655 (329,760) 369,895 543,012 - 369,895 543,012 2009 265,890,240 3,188,433 930,064 131,248 1,061,312 (494,641) 566,672 1,109,684 - 566,672 1,109,684 2010 265,890,240 4,251,244 1,247,972 174,998 1,422,970 (659,521) 763,449 1,873,133 - 763,449 1,873,133 2011 265,890,240 5,314,055 1,565,880 218,747 1,784,627 (824,401) 960,226 2,833,360 - 960,226 2,833,360 2012 265,890,240 5,314,055 1,565,880 218,747 1,784,627 (824,401) 960,226 3,793,586 - 960,226 3,793,586 2013 265,890,240 5,314,055 1,565,880 218,747 1,784,627 (824,401) 960,226 4,753,812 - 960,226 4,753,812 2014 265,890,240 5,314,055 1,565,880 218,747 1,784,627 (824,401) 960,226 5,714,039 - 960,226 5,714,039 2015 265,890,240 5,314,055 1,565,880 218,747 1,784,627 (824,401) 960,226 6,674,265 - 960,226 6,674,265 2016 265,890,240 5,314,055 1,565,880 218,747 1,784,627 (824,401) 960,226 7,634,492 - 960,226 7,634,492 2017 265,890,240 5,314,055 1,565,880 218,747 1,784,627 (824,401) 960,226 8,594,718 - 960,226 8,594,718 2018 265,890,240 5,314,055 1,565,880 218,747 1,784,627 (824,401) 960,226 9,554,944 - 960,226 9,554,944 2019 265,890,240 5,314,055 1,565,880 218,747 1,784,627 (824,401) 960,226 10,515,171 - 960,226 10,515,171 2020 265,890,240 5,314,055 1,565,880 218,747 1,784,627 (824,401) 960,226 11,475,397 - 960,226 11,475,397 2021 265,890,240 5,314,055 1,565,880 218,747 1,784,627 (824,401) 960,226 12,435,624 - 960,226 12,435,624 2022 265,890,240 5,314,055 1,565,880 218,747 1,784,627 (824,401) 960,226 13,395,850 - 960,226 13,395,850 21,875,004 3,062,459 24,937,463 (11,541,613) 13,395,850 - 13 ,395,850 Phase Use Acres Total Sq. Ft/Units Market Value Sq. Ft/Units Total Market Value Total Tax Capacity Tax Capacity Taxes Market Value Taxes Total Taxes Year Constructe d Year Payable 1 Office 21.812 759,686 70.00 53,178,048 1,062,811 970,028 9,962 979,989 2005 2007 2 Office 21.812 759,686 70.00 53,178,048 1,062,811 970,028 9,962 979,989 2006 2008 3 Office 21.812 759,686 70.00 53,178,048 1,062,811 970,028 9,962 979,989 2007 2009 4 Office 21.812 759,686 70.00 53,178,048 1,062,811 970,028 9,962 979,989 2008 2010 5 Ofli ce 21.812 759,686 70.00 53,178,048 1,062,811 970,028 9,962 979,989 2009 2011 Totals 109.06 3,798,432 265,890,240 5,314,055 4,850,138 49,809 4,899,947 City of Eagan, MN April 23, 2004 Page 9 The fiscal impacts of this type of development on the City are projected to be positive overall resulting in a cumulative positive cash flow of approximately $13.4 million by the end of year 15. These projections are shown in the table below. Summary The table on the following page shows the cumulative cash flows for each of the developments projected on the site. Of the five alternatives, an R & D office development as currently contemplated in the City's Comprehensive Plan is projected to generate approximately $13.4 million over the 15 year planning period, the greatest cumulative cash flow. The mixed residential /office condos development proposed by the developer is projected to generate approximately $4.8 million over the same period, the second greatest cumulative cash flow. It is important to note our earlier comments relative to the market values used by the developer for the office condos as they are the primary driver of the anticipated revenues resulting from the development. The values appear to be overstated, resulting in a projection of revenues greater than may likely be realized. Year Developer Office Warehouse Development Office Warehouse Full 109 Acres Mixed Residential/Office Condos Lowest -Land- Use Single -Story Offices and Warehouse Highest Land Use R & D Office 2005 - - (1,037,223) - - 2006 - - (1,944,431) - - 2007 26,233 42,076 (1,945,384) 36,667 173,117 2008 118,327 165,857 (1,559,332) 133,661 543,012 2009 258,249 353,309 (1,107,474) 290,983 1,109,684 2010 458,931 617,365 (655,616) 508,631 1,873,133 2011 706,048 943,699 (203,757) 786,606 2,833,360 2012 953,165 1,270,033 248,101 1,064,581 3,793,586 2013 1,200,282 1,596,367 699,959 1,342,557 4,753,812 2014 1,447,399 1,922,700 1,151,817 1,620,532 5,714,039 2015 1,694,516 2,249,034 1,603,675 1,898,507 6,674,265 2016 1,941,633 2,575,368 2,055,534 2,176,483 7,634,492 2017 2,188,750 2,901,702 2,507,392 2,454,458 8,594,718 2018 2,435,867 3,228,036 2,959,250 2,732,433 9,554,944 2019 2,682,984 3,554,370 3,411,108 3,010,408 10,515,171 2020 2,930,101 3,880,704 3,862,966 3,288,384 11,475,397 2021 3,177,218 4,207,037 4,314,824 3,566,359 12,435,624 2022 3,424,335 4,533,371 4,766,683 3,844,334 13,395,850 City of Eagan, MN April 23, 2004 Page 10 Please do not hesitate to call if you have any questions. Cc: David MacGillivray AGENDA CITY OF EAGAN REGULAR MEETING OF THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY EAGAN MUNICIPAL CENTER MAY 18, 2004 A. CALL TO ORDER B. ADOPT AGENDA C. APPROVE MINUTES D. OLD BUSINESS E. NEW BUSINESS 1. Public Hearing for the Consideration of the Amended and Restated Development Agreement between the City and Grand Oaks LLC for the Redevelopment of Property for the Grand Oaks V Office Park and to Consider the Sale of Property to Grand Oaks LLC for that Purpose F. OTHER BUSINESS G. ADJOURNMENT 076 Agenda Information Memo Eagan Economic Development Authority Meeting May 18, 2004 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 adopt a resolution approving the minutes of the May 4, 2004 EDA meeting as presented or modified. ATTACHMENTS: • Enclosed on page is a copy of the minutes of the May 4, 2004 EDA meeting. • Enclosed on pages is a copy of the resolution approving the minutes of the May 4, 2004 EDA meeting. 37 7 MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE EAGAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Eagan, Minnesota May 4, 2004 A meeting of the Eagan Economic Development Authority was held on Tuesday, May 4, 2004 at the Eagan Municipal Center. Present were President Geagan and Commissioners Fields, Tilley, Carlson and Maguire. Also present were Executive Director Tom Hedges, City Planner Mike Ridley, Director of Public Works Tom Colbert, Community Development Director Jon Hohenstein, City Attorney Mike Dougherty, Administrative Secretary / Deputy Clerk Mira McGarvey. ADOPT AGENDA Commissioner Maguire moved, Commissioner Tilley seconded a motion to approve the agenda as presented. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 APPROVE MINUTES Commissioner Carlson moved, Commissioner Tilley seconded a motion to adopt a resolution approving the minutes of the March 1, 2004 EDA meeting as presented. Aye: 4 Nay: 0 NEW BUSINESS PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE CONSIDERATION OF THE AMENDED AND RESTATED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND GRAND OAKS LLC FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT OF PROPERTY FOR THE GRAND OAKS V OFFICE PARK AND TO CONSIDER THE SALE OF PROPERTY TO GRAND OAKS LLC FOR THAT PURPOSE Commissioner Maguire moved, Commissioner Tilley seconded a motion to continue a public hearing for the consideration of the amended and restated development agreement between the City and Grand Oaks LLC for the redevelopment of property for the Grand Oaks V Office Park and to consider the sale of property to Grand Oaks LLC for that purpose. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 RESOLUTION APPROVING BUSINESS RELOCATION AGREEMENT FOR MINNESOTA WATERPROOFING TO FACILITATE THE REDEVELOPMENT OF PROPERTY IN NORTHEAST EAGAN REDEVELOPMENT TIF DISTRICT #2 -4. Community Development Director Hohenstein made a brief presentation. Councilmember Tilley moved, Councilmember Fields seconded a motion to approve a Resolution Approving Business Relocation Agreement for Minnesota Waterproofing to Facilitate the Redevelopment of Property in Northeast Eagan Redevelopment TIF District #2 -4. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Fields moved, Commissioner Tilley seconded a motion to adjourn the meeting at 8:05 p.m. Aye: 5 Nay: 0 Date Executive Director e7t BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners of the Eagan Economic Development Authority to approve the minutes of the May 4, 2004 regular meeting of the Eagan Economic Development Authority. Motion by: Second by: Those in Favor: Those Against: EAGAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY RESOLUTION APPROVING THE MINUTES OF THE MAY 4, 2004 REGULAR MEETING CERTIFICATION I, Jon Hohenstein, Secretary /Deputy Executive Director of the Economic Development Authority of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted by the Authority in a regular meeting thereof assembled this 18 day of May, 2004. Jon Hohenstein, Secretary /Deputy Executive Director 3 79 Agenda Information Memo May 18, 2004 Eagan Economic Development Authority Meeting E. NEW BUSINESS 1. RESOLUTION APPROVING AMENDED AND RESTATED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND GRAND OAKS LLC FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT OF PROPERTY FOR THE GRAND OAKS V OFFICE PARK AND TO CONSIDER THE SALE OF PROPERTY TO GRAND OAKS LLC FOR THAT PURPOSE ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: To approve or deny: 1) A Resolution Approving The Amended and Restated Development Agreement between the City and Grand Oaks LLC for the Redevelopment of Property for the Grand Oaks V Office Park and 2) A Resolution to Approve the Sale of the Former Imre Property at 2805 and 2809 Dodd Road to Grand Oaks LLC for that Purpose. FACTS: • The City of Eagan and the Eagan Economic Development Authority previously approved a development agreement with Interstate Partners for the acquisition and resale of property located at the intersection of TH 149 and TH 55 for redevelopment purposes. Under that agreement, the City and the EDA agreed to assist with the acquisition of certain properties, including a portion of the property located at 2805 and 2809 Dodd Road and to provide $500,000 in Tax Increment Financing assistance to Interstate to facilitate redevelopment activities. • Subsequently it was determined that the acquisition all of the property at that address would permit the ultimate redevelopment of that entire corner of the intersection and the EDA and City Council previously authorized the purchase of that portion of the property as well. • At this time, the City has acquired the property noted and the developer, acting as Grand Oaks CR LLC has submitted a revised proforma indicating that an additional $1 million dollars in tax increment will permit the redevelopment of the entire site, while providing for a rate of return consistent with like investments. The developer has requested an amendment of the Tax Increment Financing Development Agreement and the sale of the property. • The City's Redevelopment Consultant, Ehler's and Associates, has performed a review of the proforma and has issued an opinion indicating that the sale of the property by the City to Grand Oaks CR LLC and the related redevelopment of the site will generate adequate tax increment to assist the project at a level of $1.5 million and generate a reasonable, but not excessive, rate of return for the development. The financial analysis is based on the assumption that 25% of the �8d Agenda Information Memo May 18, 2004 Eagan Economic Development Authority Meeting New Business FACTS (Continued): TIF proceeds will be retained by the Northeast Eagan TIF #2 -4 fund for administrative costs and future project costs in the district. ATTACHMENTS: • Area map on page • Memo from Ehlers and Associates concerning the updated financial analysis on pages • Resolution approving the amended and restated development agreement on pages • Resolution approving the sale of the property at 2805 and 2809 Dodd Road to Grand Oaks CR LLC on page • Full development agreement and purchase agreement available upon request. 3 8 Mendota Jleig iW Location Map .,.1716.41"• ∎1 -... 4 1°' city of eagan Community Development Department Interstate Partners -Gran Map Prepared using ERSI Arcview 3.1. Parcel base map data provided by Dakota County Office of GIS and la currant as of January 2004. Eagan Boundary Street Centerline n Parcel Area Building Footprint ak 5 Area THIS MAP 13 INTENDED FOR REFERENCE USE ONLY The City of Eagan and Dakota County do not guarantee the accuracy of this information and are not responsible for errors or omissions. 0 w EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC To: Jon Hohenstein Community Development Director, City of Eagan From: • Sid Inman, Ehlers & Associates Date: May 10, 2004 Subject: Grand Oaks Project — But -For Analysis The City has received from the developers of the Grand Oaks Project a request for Tax Increment assistance. The City has asked Ehlers & Associates to review the developer's financials to determine if the level of the assistance requested is needed to make the project financially feasible. The developer provided to Ehlers financial information 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 an Internal Rate of Return Analysis for each of the four components of the project. In addition, we prepared an Internal Rate of Return Analysis for the entire project. Base on the information provided, we have determined that the information provided 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 (s"(7 3060 Centre Pointe Drive Phone: 651 -697 -8507 Fax: 651 - 697 -8555 Roseville, MN 55113 -1105 sid @ehlers- inc.com EAGAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY RESOLUTION APPROVING AMENDED AND RESTATED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT RELATING TO TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 2 -4 BETWEEN THE EAGAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, THE CITY OF EAGAN AND GRAND OAKS CR LLC BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners of the Eagan Economic Development Authority to adopt a Resolution Approving The Amended and Restated Development Agreement Relating to Tax Increment Financing District No. 2 -4 Between the Eagan Economic Development Authority, the City of Eagan and Grand Oaks CR LLC for the Redevelopment of property for Grand Oaks V Office Park. Motion by: Second by: Those in Favor: Those Against: CERTIFICATION I, Jon Hohenstein, Secretary /Deputy Executive Director of the Economic Development Authority of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted by the Authority in a regular meeting thereof assembled this 18 day of May, 2004. Jon Hohenstein, Secretary /Deputy Executive Director RESOLUTION APPROVING SALE OF CITY OWNED PROPERTY TO GRAND OAKS CR LLC FOR REDEVELOPMENT IN THE NORTHEAST EAGAN REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2805 AND 2809 DODD ROAD BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners of the Eagan Economic Development Authority to approve the sale of real estate at 2805 and 2809 Dodd Road in the Northeast Eagan Redevelopment Area Located in TIF District No. 2 -4 to Grand Oaks CR LLC for redevelopment purposes. Motion by: Second by: Those in Favor: Those Against: EAGAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY CERTIFICATION I, Jon Hohenstein, Secretary /Deputy Executive Director of the Economic Development Authority of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted by the Authority in a regular meeting thereof assembled this 18th day of May, 2004. Jon Hohenstein, Secretary /Deputy Executive Director Agenda Information Memo Eagan Economic Development Authority Meeting May 18, 2004 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 Commission meeting. Agenda Information Memo May 18, 2004 Eagan City Council Meeting OTHER BUSINESS A. RESOLUTION APPROVING AMENDED AND RESTATED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND GRAND OAKS LLC FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT OF PROPERTY FOR THE GRAND OAKS V OFFICE PARK AND TO CONSIDER THE SALE OF PROPERTY TO GRAND OAKS LLC FOR THAT PURPOSE ACTION TO BE CONSIDERED: (This item will be acted on simultaneously with the EDA action for the same agreements.) To approve or deny: 1) A Resolution Approving The Amended and Restated Development Agreement between the City and Grand Oaks LLC for the Redevelopment of Property for the Grand Oaks V Office Park and 2) A Resolution to Approve the Sale of the Former Imre Property at 2805 and 2809 Dodd Road to Grand Oaks LLC for that Purpose. FACTS: • The City of Eagan and the Eagan Economic Development Authority previously approved a development agreement with Interstate Partners for the acquisition and resale of property located at the intersection of TH 149 and TH 55 for redevelopment purposes. Under that agreement, the City and the EDA agreed to assist with the acquisition of certain properties, including a portion of the property located at 2805 and 2809 Dodd Road and to provide $500,000 in Tax Increment Financing assistance to Interstate to facilitate redevelopment activities. • Subsequently it was determined that the acquisition all of the property at that address would permit the ultimate redevelopment of that entire corner of the intersection and the EDA and City Council previously authorized the purchase of that portion of the property as well. • At this time, the City has acquired the property noted and the developer, acting as Grand Oaks CR LLC has submitted a revised proforma indicating that an additional $1 million dollars in tax increment will permit the redevelopment of the entire site, while providing for a rate of return consistent with like investments. The developer has requested an amendment of the Tax Increment Financing Development Agreement and the sale of the property. • The City's Redevelopment Consultant, Ehler's and Associates, has performed a review of the proforma and has issued an opinion indicating that the sale of the property by the City to Grand Oaks CR LLC and the related redevelopment of the site will generate adequate tax increment to assist the project at a level of $1.5 BP Agenda Information Memo May 18, 2004 Eagan City Council Meeting FACTS (Continued): million and generate a reasonable, but not excessive, rate of return for the development. The financial analysis is based on the assumption that 25% of the TIF proceeds will be retained by the Northeast Eagan TIF #2 -4 fund for administrative costs and future project costs in the district. ATTACHMENTS: • Resolution approving the amended and restated development agreement on pages • Resolution approving the sale of the property at 2805 and 2809 Dodd Road to Grand Oaks CR LLC on page • Other background information enclosed with EDA business item. CITY OF EAGAN RESOLUTION APPROVING AMENDED AND RESTATED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT RELATING TO TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 2 -4 BETWEEN THE EAGAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, THE CITY OF EAGAN AND GRAND OAKS CR LLC BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners of the Eagan Economic Development Authority to adopt a Resolution Approving The Amended and Restated Development Agreement Relating to Tax Increment Financing District No. 2 -4 Between the Eagan Economic Development Authority, the City of Eagan and Grand Oaks CR LLC for the Redevelopment of property for Grand Oaks V Office Park. Motion by: Second by: Those in Favor: Those Against: CERTIFICATION I, Maria Petersen, City Clerk of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted by the Authority in a regular meeting thereof assembled this 18 day of May, 2004. X 50 Maria Petersen, City Clerk CITY OF EAGAN RESOLUTION APPROVING SALE OF CITY OWNED PROPERTY TO GRAND OAKS CR LLC FOR REDEVELOPMENT IN THE NORTHEAST EAGAN REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2805 AND 2809 DODD ROAD BE IT RESOLVED by the Eagan City Council to approve the sale of real estate at 2805 and 2809 Dodd Road in the Northeast Eagan Redevelopment Area Located in TIF District No. 2 -4 to Grand Oaks CR LLC for redevelopment purposes. Motion by: Second by: Those in Favor: Those Against: CERTIFICATION I, Maria Petersen, City Clerk of the City of Eagan, Dakota County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted by the Authority in a regular meeting thereof assembled this 18 day of May, 2004. Maria Petersen, City Clerk