April 28, 2005 District Court Judge Patrice Sutherland ruled in favor of the Rahn Family Limited Partnership and Wensmann Realty, Inc. stating that the City of Eagan must either amend the zoning to allow for the housing development or begin eminent domain proceedings to take the 40-year old public golf course within 30 days.
May 3, 2005 The Eagan City Council met in a closed door (closed to the public) hearing to decide the fate of this precious parcel of land. Information from that meeting is not available to the general public.
The Carriage Hills Coalition's goal is to stop any changes in the City's Comprehensive Guide Plan, and the rezoning of the property in order to keep the precious green space available for the public to enjoy for generations to come.
Click on the following pdf link to view the proposed Settlement Plan for
Carriage Hills:
The Carriage Hills Coalition is a non-profit, grassroots community organization that has joined together to preserve open space. Our current focus has been saving the Carriage Hills Golf Course AGAIN. The coalition has no affiliation with the golf course's management or ownership. We are only trying to save one of the last beautiful open areas in Eagan from becoming lost forever due to residential development.
November 29, 2005 The City Council unanimously agreed to settle
the dispute with Wensmann Realty allowing the developer to build the exact same number of units (480) on the property along with a small 9 hole golf course on 30 acres (15 less open acres than the original plan) which includes unusable drainage ponds.
December 27, 2005 Eagan Planning Commission heard the issue again. This time because of fear of loosing control over the planning of the development, the Commission voted 4-3 in favor of changing the Comprehensive Guide Plan and the area's designation from Park to Special Area allowing development of the golf course.
January 17, 2006 Eagan City Council voted unanimously to deny the settlement plan that would have allowed Carriage Hills to be developed. Sending the case back to The State Of Minnesota Court of Appeals.
May 23, 2006 Chief Judge Toussaint announces The State Of Minnesota Court of Appeals ruled IN FAVOR of the City of Eagan reversing Judge Sutherland's decision!
A city’s comprehensive plan designation conflicts with a zoning ordinance designation when the comprehensive plan prohibits a property use that is specifically permitted under the zoning ordinance.
Under the Metropolitan Land Planning Act, Minn. Stat. § 473.858, subd. 1 (2004), a city does not have a clear duty to amend a comprehensive plan designation that conflicts with a zoning ordinance designation when there are alternative ways to reconcile the conflict.
Plaintiff’s mandamus action is not appropriate to challenge a city’s exercise of legislative discretion in denying a proposed amendment to the city’s comprehensive plan.
A city has a rational basis to deny a proposed amendment to its comprehensive plan with respect to property currently used as a golf course when the city has a legitimate interest in reaffirming a historical comprehensive plan designation and in protecting open and recreational space.
Because the amendment of a city’s comprehensive plan is a discretionary act and the city had a rational basis to deny a proposed amendment to the comprehensive plan, the district court erred in issuing a peremptory writ of mandamus directing the city to approve an application for a comprehensive plan amendment.
Reversed and remanded. Justice Paul H. Anderson.
Concurring/Dissenting, Justice G. Barry Anderson, Chief Justice Kathleen A. Blatz and
August 2, 2004 the Eagan City Council UNANIMIOUSLY agreed to DENY a proposed change in the city's Comprehensive Guide Plan allowing Carriage Hills Golf Course to be developed.
November 2005 Rahn Family Limited Partnership and Wensmann Realty, Inc. took the decision of the City to District Court.
Click on the following pdf link to view Judge Sutherland's ruling:
After the Minnesota Supreme Court agreed in that the City has the right to decide what to do with the property as long as the owner is fairly compensated, the same court sent the issue back to the lower courts to decide the final fate of Carriage Hills.
Since then there has been nothing publicly said on the issue until now. The Eagan City Council has decided to negotiate rather then stick with their past commitment of defending the open space through the court system until they lose. The City Council says legal fees on both sides are large and could grow much larger. If the City lost in court, Wensmann could only build the initial proposal which this sounds like it is close or worse. Eagan is part of a larger community legal fund that several cities contribute so to cover legal situations just like this one. Isn't to the City's advantage to force the private parties who bring legal action to pay legal fees? Doesn't the City continue to gain negotiation leverage the longer this process continues? Does this mean if the people decide not to pay $10 million, that the City Council is approving the same proposal that would happen if they lost anyway? Effectively, the same proposal the people faught not to have. The same proposal the previous City Council (made up of mostly the same people) unanimously voted against January 17, 2006?
The Settlement:
120 acres of premium location and open space all for the low price of $10.25 million.
Or:
30 acres of open space retained throughout the development with various buffers established between nearby neighborhoods; (If I remember right, this 30 acres was made up mostly of drainage ponds that would have needed to be there anyway.)
If developed there would be no north/south street connections to either the Greensboro or Wescott Hills neighborhoods, but rather an east/west connection between Wescott Woodlands and Duckwood Drive.
There would be a mixture of housing types from single family homes to row homes and senior housing on the remaining 90 acres.
Between 450 and 480 units in all are proposed. (Didn't the council just pass legislation limiting the number of homes that can be built on the other Eagan courses? Was addressed in the negotiations?)
I believe the property is worth $10 million in the long run for the people of Eagan. Thanks to the City Council, that's now the price to save the open space. Nearly the same council on November 29, 2005 unanimously agreed to settle the dispute with Wensmann Realty allowing the developer to build the exact same number of units (480) on the property along with a small 9 hole golf course which 10-15 acres of less Open Space than the original plan.
Friends of Eagan Open Space Coalition / Carriage Hills Coalition are meeting, Saturday morning, May 17th, at 9:00 a.m. at Starks in Eagan at the intersection of Highways 19 & 55) to help draft language for City Referendum and create strategy going forward.
Dear Friends of Carriage Hills Coalition and Eagan's Open Space,
Members our groups have proposed a meeting to determine whether we can establish some sort of consensus regarding the Carriage Hills settlement proposal put forth by the City. The chief motivation for doing so is the belief that we have more strength as a coalition group than we do individually.
Recall that the collective values we signed on at our kick-off meeting, now over three years ago, included:
Ensuring a balance between the greater good of the community and its individuals, especially pertaining to the environment;
Encouraging the recognition that preserving Eagan's green space is vital to the health, beauty and success of our community;
Fostering opportunities to interact and enjoy the benefits Eagan's natural amenities and environmental resources.
