Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 04/16/2002APPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, APRIL 16, 2002 7:00 PM, CITY CENTER Council Chamber 8080 Mitchell Road CITY COUNCIL: Mayor Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Councilmembers Sherry Butcher, Ron Case, David Luse, and Jan Mosman CITY STAFF: City Manager Carl Jullie, Parks & Recreation Services Director Bob Lambert, Public Works Services Director Eugene Dietz, Community Development and Financial Services Director Don Uram, City Planner Michael Franzen, City Attorney Ric Rosow and Council Recorder Jan Nelson Curielli I. ROLL CALL / CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER Mayor Tyra-Lukens called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. All members were present. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. COUNCIL FORUM INVITATION Mayor Tyra-Lukens said the Council Forum has been modified as follows. Council Forum will be held the first and third Tuesday of the month from 6:30 – 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber. Please note that this portion of the meeting is off-camera. The Council Forum will consist of two parts: scheduled and unscheduled appearances. 6:30 to 6:50 p.m. is reserved for scheduled participants. If you wish to schedule time to visit with the City Council and Service Area Directors, please notify the City Manager’s office (at 952- 949-8412) by noon of the meeting date with your request. The last 10 minutes of the Forum, from 6:50 to 7:00 p.m. is set aside for impromptu, unscheduled appearances by individuals or organizations that wish to speak the Council. IV. CHAMPION OF HEALTH PRESENTATION BLUE CROSS/BLUE SHIELD Muriel Scott and Janelle Waldoch, representing the Champion of Health program, said former Mayor Jean Harris was nominated and selected as this year’s winner of the Blue Cross/Blue Shield Champion of Health award. Ms Waldoch said Dr. Harris was selected for the award because of her life-long efforts to control tobacco use at the local, state and national levels. They presented a video of Dr. Harris promoting a smoke-free environment and reviewing the health issues caused by the effects of second-hand smoke. Cindy Schultz, representing the American Cancer Society, presented the award to Dr. Harris’ husband, Leslie Ellis, and her daughter, Cindy Ellis. V. ARBOR DAY PROCLAMATION Mayor Tyra-Lukens read a proclamation proclaiming May 4, 2002, as Arbor Day in the City of Eden Prairie. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 16, 2002 Page 2 Tyra-Lukens reminded residents that April 20 is the Parks Commission clean up day when community groups help with cleaning up the parks. Mayor Tyra-Lukens then read a proclamation proclaiming Wednesday, May 1, 2002, as Carl Jullie Day in recognition of Mr. Jullie’s service as City Manager for the last eight months. VI. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS Councilmember Luse said he would have a comment prior to the review of Item IX.A. Jullie added Item IX.D. Resolution Relating to Residential Group Home Facilities Owned and operated by Fraser, a MN Nonprofit Corporation, and the Issuance of Revenue Bonds. MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Case, to approve the Agenda as published and amended. Motion carried 5-0. VII. MINUTES VIII. CONSENT CALENDAR Regarding Item G, Jullie said the description of the precinct boundaries are illustrated by the attached map. The resolution relates to the written description as illustrated by the attached map. The written description would prevail in case of a discrepancy. Regarding Item J, Jullie said there is a revised amendment to the assessment agreement that has two changes. The first change is that the year of collection of the assessment has been moved back one year, so we will start to collect the levy in 2004 rather than 2003. The second change is an added provision for an escrow deposit at the City to avoid any problems before the actual levies begin. Rosow noted there is a revised resolution attached to the revised assessment agreement. A. CLERK’S LICENSE LIST B. PRAIRIE CENTER DRIVE MEDICAL BUILDING Grootwassink Real Estate. Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 6.62 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 6.62 acres, Zoning District Amendment within the Office District on 3.7 acres, Zoning District Change from I-2 and Rural to Office on 2.92 acres, Site Plan Review on 6.62 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 6.62 acres into two lots. Location: 800 Prairie Center Drive. (Ordinance No. 8-2002-PUD-5-2002 for PUD District Review and Zoning District Change from Rural and I-2 Park to Office, Resolution No. 2002-71 for Site Plan Review, Developer Agreement) CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 16, 2002 Page 3 C. MITCHELL CROSSING by Mitchell/5, Inc. Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 3.45 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 3.45 acres, Zoning District Amendment within the Community Commercial Zoning District on 3.45 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 3.45 acres into one lot, two outlots and road right-of-way. Location: Southeast corner of Mitchell Road and Martin Drive. (Ordinance No. 9-2002-PUD-6-2002 for PUD District Review and Zoning District Amendment in the Community Commercial Zoning District) D. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2002-72 APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF MITCHELL CROSSING E. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2002-73 APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR CHARLSON AREA IMPROVEMENTS – PHASE II, I.C. 02-5564 F. APPROVE SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 10-2002 AMENDING CITY CODE SECTION 4.40 SUBDIVISION 2, RELATING TO ON-SALE WINE LICENSES G. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2002-74 ESTABLISHING PRECINCT BOUNDARIES H. AWARD CONTRACT FOR PAINTING OF RINK II CEILING AT THE COMMUNITY CENTER I. AWARD CONTRACT FOR DEMOLITION OF THE POLICE BUILDING J. FIRST AMENDMENT TO ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT WITH LYNN L. CHARLSON AND RESOLUTION NO. 2002-75 AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 2000-125 K. AWARD CONTRACT FOR DEVELOPMENT OF CRESTWOOD PARK MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher, to approve Items A-K of the Consent Calendar. Motion carried 5-0. IX. PUBLIC HEARINGS / MEETINGS Councilmember Luse read the following statement: “I am pleased to report that the sale of a parcel of land that was in process when I was appointed to the Council has now been finalized. I had abstained from voting on issues about how this parcel of land would be used, but now that I have no further financial interest in the land I will no longer encumber the Council with abstentions. We’re back at full strength. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 16, 2002 Page 4 I had originally hoped to develop an office building on this piece of land, near Best Buy in the area of Highways 169 and 62. But the office market became overbuilt, so my company, EPCC, sold the parcel to Dominium Acquisition, which is planning a residential development. My company completed the original purchase agreement with Dominium in October, and we closed on the sale earlier this month consistent with the original agreement. When I was being considered for appointment to this Council, I stated that I would not engage in development activities in the city during my tenure. I will continue to honor that commitment. My votes on this parcel of land and any other developments will be based on my view of what is best for the citizens of our community.” Tyra-Lukens noted that Item A is a joint hearing with the Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) and the City Council. Tyra-Lukens called to order the meeting of the HRA at 7:35 p.m. She then opened the joint Council/HRA Public Hearing for Item A A. TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT NO. 18 AND TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN FOR HEIGHTS AT VALLEY VIEW PROJECT Jullie said official notice of this public hearing was published in the April 4, 2002, Eden Prairie News. He noted Items A, B and C are related to the same project. He said proponent and the developer would begin with an explanation of the project details. Next we will review the financing packages for Items A and C, and then we will open the hearing to the public. Paul Sween, Dominium Development & Acquisition, LLC, addressed the proposal. He said the project was approved by the Community Planning Board at the March 25 meeting on an 8-0 vote. Brian Gruben reviewed the site plan, noting there were a number of scenic easements on the property. He said some additional easements were added after working with the neighbors. Franzen had no comments to add to Mr. Sween’s review of the Community Planning Board’s action. Uram said housing revenue bonds are proposed under Item IX. C. on the Council agenda. The developer has asked for Multifamily Housing Revenue Bonds not to exceed $26,500,000. B. THE HEIGHTS AT VALLEY VIEW by Eden Prairie Leased Housing Associates I, LLP. Guide Plan Change from Office/Industrial to High Density Residential on 10.26 acres, Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 10.26 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 16, 2002 Page 5 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 10.26 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural to RM-2.5 on 10.26 acres, Site Plan Review on 10.26 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 10.26 acres into 1 lot. Location: Flying Cloud Drive and Valley View Road. (Resolution No. 2002-77 for Guide Plan Change, Resolution No. 2002-78 for PUD Concept Amendment, Resolution No. 2002-79 for Preliminary Plat) Tyra-Lukens opened the Public Hearing. Nancy Arieta, 10785 Valley View Road, #207, said she had sent a three-page letter to the Council expressing her concerns about the project. She was concerned that affordable housing units are not put in single-family areas. She thought developers don’t put enough money into a project and then quickly move on, and that isn’t putting stakes into the community. Arieta said the trees that replace the current trees are not the same quality. She thought the builder would just destroy the land and move on. She wanted them to leave the character of the area, but the project appears to be too big. She also thought there will be the same amount of traffic in the second plan as there was in the first plan. She said this would have a negative impact on the senior buildings because of decreased safety for the seniors and possible vandalism. Tyra-Lukens asked about the number of one and two-bedroom units. Sween said of the total of 186 units, 67 will be one-bedroom units and 97 will be two bedrooms. Tyra-Lukens asked if the affordable units would be identical to the rental units. Sween said 53 of the affordable units will be one bedroom and 10 will be two bedrooms. Jeff Strate, 5021 Summerhill Drive, said he liked the development very much. He was particularly happy that the Parks Commission recommended not encroaching on the conservation easement. He said the Enblom family has an easement on their property and there is a corridor along Nine-Mile Creek. He thought the developer has done a good job listening to the Parks Commission. Strate did have concerns about the development being totally dependent on the use of cars when we are trying to encourage multi-modes of transportation. He thought part of the transportation problem in the Golden Triangle area includes no pedestrian and bicycle trails. He thought the project should provide for future trail connectivity to the rest of the area. Strate asked if there is some way to have the developer work with Staff to build sidewalks through the development and possibly provide for a future bridge over Valley View Road. Since the City’s conservation easement on the land permits a trail way, he thought there should be an opportunity to build a bike/pedestrian way through the area. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 16, 2002 Page 6 Mosman agreed with the idea of making an accessible walkway system and asked how we could go about that. Luse thought we could look at using the park dedication fee with the project. Lambert said there is a cash park fee requirement, and we could use that money for developing recreation opportunities or trails to get to recreation opportunities to serve this development. Case agreed we need to provide these opportunities. He noted the grades are horrible, and there are trees where we would need trails. He thought we should refer this back to Staff to work on getting trails in the property. Butcher thought we need to put the transportation issue on as another Staff item. Charlotte Enblom, 10610 Valley View Road, said her family came to a meeting where they learned that a large apartment building was being built close to their property. She said they have worked with the development people and City Staff. There are three existing homes in the Golden Triangle area, one of which is hers. She thought the footprint for the apartment building should be considerably smaller. David Enblom, 10610 Valley View Road, was concerned about Mr. Luse’s prior involvement with the property. He said the conservation easement to the right of the building was created to alleviate the destruction when the Wilson Learning Center and other buildings were built. He thought a dozen oak trees could be saved if the northern extension of the building were reduced. Tyra-Lukens asked about the issue of the conservation easement. David Enblom said his point was that we should have an additional easement created since the current one was made many years ago. Luse said he was very sensitive to Mr. Enblom’s feelings and he has carefully and thoughtfully struggled with how to best represent the interests of the City of Eden Prairie. He said he was absolutely confident in participating in any role here tonight. Dan Enblom, formerly of 10610 Valley View Road, said this property is on one of the tallest points in Eden Prairie and has magnificent trees. He thought we should shrink the footprint to save some of the trees, and he didn’t think the tree replacement plan was quite right. Luse acknowledged the Enblom family for their leadership in putting their five- acre homestead into a land trust so that it cannot be touched in the future. C. PROPOSED ISSUANCE OF MULTIFAMILY HOUSING REVENUE BONDS IN AN AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $26,500,000 FOR THE HEIGHTS AT VALLEY VIEW PROJECT (Continued from March 7, 2002) CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 16, 2002 Page 7 1. Resolution No. 2002-80 Adopting a Financing Program for the Issuance of Bonds for the Acquisition and Construction of a Multifamily Housing Development 2. Resolution No. 2002-81 Providing for the Issuance and Sale of Multifamily Housing Revenue Bonds to Provide Funds for a Multifamily Housing Project on Behalf of Eden Prairie Leased Housing Associates I, Limited Partnership MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher, to close the Council Public Hearing on Tax Increment Financing District No. 18 and Tax Increment Financing Plan for Heights at Valley View project, to adopt Resolution No. 2002- 76 creating Tax Increment Financing District No. 18 and approving the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the Height at Valley View Project. Motion carried 5-0. MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Mosman, to close the Council Public Hearing on the Heights at Valley View, to adopt Resolution 2002-77 for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Office/Industrial to High Density Residential on 10.26 acres, to adopt Resolution No. 2002-78 for PUD Concept Amendment on 10.26 acres, to adopt Resolution No. 2002-79 for Preliminary Plat, to approve 1st Reading of the Ordinance for PUD District Review on 10.26 acres and Rezoning from Rural to RM-2.5 on 10.26 acres, and to direct Staff to prepare a Developer’s Agreement incorporating Board and Staff recommendations and Council conditions, including the Council direction to Staff to address the issues of trail ways and transportation in the area. Motion carried 5-0. MOTION: Mosman moved, seconded by Butcher to close the Council Public Hearing on the proposed issuance of multifamily housing revenue bonds for the Heights at Valley View Project; to adopt Resolution No. 2002-80 for a financing program for the issuance of bonds for the acquisition and construction of a multifamily housing development; to adopt Resolution No. 2002-81 providing for the issuance and sale of multifamily housing revenue bonds to provide funds for a multifamily housing project on behalf of Eden Prairie Leased Housing Associates I, Limited Partnership. Motion carried 5-0. D. RESOLUTION NO. 2002-82 RELATING TO RESIDENTIAL GROUP HOME FACILITIES OWNED AND OPERATED BY FRASER, A MN NONPROFIT CORPORATION, AND THE ISSUANCE OF REVENUE BONDS Uram said the Council adopted a resolution on March 19 concerning this issue. He said this would allow $475,000 for use in homes in Eden Prairie. Tyra-Lukens asked why the City of Blaine is involved. Uram said Fraser Homes was looking for a community that could issue bonds that would qualify for bank qualification, so Blaine was selected. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 16, 2002 Page 8 MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Luse, to adopt Resolution No. 2002-82 relating to Residential Group Home Facilities owned and operated by Fraser, a Minnesota Nonprofit Corporation, and the Issuance of Revenue Bonds to finance the costs thereof under Minnesota Statues, Chapter 464c, as amended, and Minnesota Statues, Sections 469.152-469.165, as amended, pursuant to a Joint Powers agreement; granting Preliminary approval thereto; establishing compliance with certain reimbursement regulations under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended; granting approval for entering into a Joint Powers Agreement; and taking certain other actions with respect thereto. Motion carried 5-0. X. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher, to approve the Payment of Claims. The motion was approved on a roll call vote, with Butcher, Case, Luse, Mosman, and Tyra-Lukens voting “aye.” XI. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS XII. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS A. PRESENTATION BY “CLEAN AIR ON THE PRAIRIE” REGARDING SECOND-HAND SMOKE FROM TOBACCO USE Jullie said we received a request for a spot on the April 16 Council Agenda for a presentation by an Eden Prairie group called “Clean Air on the Prairie.” Leslie Ellis, 10860 Forestview Circle, said some of the background for this presentation was given in the Champion of Health presentation (Item IV). He said he has long had concerns about the harmful effects of secondhand smoke on the health of our citizens. He and his daughter are committed to continuing Jean Harris’ fight to protect citizens from the effects of secondhand smoke. He said they have found a partnership in this effort with the American Cancer Society. They have circulated a petition about this issue and have obtained the signatures of 1400 Eden Prairie residents. Cindy Ellis, 635 Prairie Center Drive, asked that a task force be formed to investigate the issue of a smoke-free work environment and smoke-free public places. Cindy Schulz, 9211 Homeward Hills Road, said she volunteered for the American Cancer Society. She would support a City policy that would protect those who live and work here. She believes secondhand smoke is a deadly disease. Becky Hedlo said she works at the Eden Prairie School District. She said the School Board has passed a resolution approving making the City into a smoke- free community. She was concerned about the issue of modeling behavior for CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 16, 2002 Page 9 young people and about the effect of secondhand smoke on children with asthma. Jim Gunther, 9082 Victoria Drive, said there is an epidemic of second hand smoke. He thought this was an opportunity for the Council and Eden Prairie to set a precedent in this area. Stacy Pearson, 13222 Bush Lane, said she worked at a local restaurant that allowed smoking and she had many colds and coughs. She said her health has improved since she quite working at the restaurant. Kathy Meyer, 9427 Clubhouse Road, said she has owned the TLC café and catering business in Eden Prairie for 12 years. She believes a smoke free workplace policy is necessary to keep her employees’ and patrons’ health. She said her business is now going smoke free and her clientele have been very pleased with the decision. She said this as an opportunity for the City to set an example for the rest of the metropolitan area. Pete Dunnell, 12200 Middleset Road, said he is a pediatrician who wanted to take a leadership position to make Eden Prairie a safer place to live and work. MOTION: Mosman moved, seconded by Butcher, to direct Staff to put together a charter statement and structure for a Task Force to study the issue of a smoke-free ordinance and report back to the Council at a workshop session. Butcher said out of deference to Jean Harris and her hard work and the concern of many of our residents, she believed it would be prudent to have a task force to work on this issue and gather the information for further discussion at a workshop. Case said there is a financial component that makes this issue somewhat complicated. The bottom line is that people are getting ill or dying because of second hand smoke. He believed we, as a society, must respond, and it is a question not of “if,” but “how” and “when.” Luse thanked Mr. Ellis for his outstanding service as Eden Prairie’s “First Man” and for the entire family’s commitment to the community. He thought this is a political issue, and he was very concerned about Eden Prairie getting involved in this issue at this time. Luse said he supports a ban on smoking in public places in Eden Prairie, and he believes that the great majority of our residents also support such a ban. To him, there is no middle ground. However, he thought it is best that we not start exploring this ban until the Attorney General clarifies the rules of engagement on this contentious issue, which he understood is to happen in May. Therefore, he said he would vote against forming the task force at this time because it is just a little too early. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 16, 2002 Page 10 Luse said while he would like to see us demonstrate leadership on this public health issue, he doesn’t want our city to become an island or a battleground. After a difficult year in city government, he didn’t think we need the divisiveness that could come as we become targets of political campaign forces on both sides of this issue. Luse said the Attorney General would be issuing guidelines on how anti-smoking organizations that receive state money can interact with city and state officials. These guidelines will help set the rules of engagement so we can have fair and constructive debate. Luse also believes this is an issue that is best addressed at the statewide level. But because the political will doesn’t exist to take this on statewide in Minnesota, he was concerned that the political maneuvering over this issue city by city will be very divisive and distract us from other issues of equal importance. He thought we should start considering this important issue with the Attorney General’s guidelines in place after May 17th. Mosman said she could understand Councilmember Luse’s concerns but she has been doing some research on this issue. She said she understands that the MPAT issue is a separate issue from us looking at a smoking ordinance, and we are not going to be using any MPAT money to put together a task force. We are representing our citizens, so she did not feel that we would need to wait. She noted there were 200-some local ordinances passed in California before the state passed the ordinance. Tyra-Lukens didn’t see this as an MPAT related issue, but rather as a public health issue. She was very supportive of this but thought there are issues that need to be looked at, such as how best to draft an ordinance that would address some of the concerns or the business community. Luse said he believes we have to look out for the majority and his concern is the political ramifications. He was approached by MPAT and lobbied to support the issue. He said he was asking for just 30 days before we allow the political maneuvering to begin. Butcher said she wanted to clarify that this is a task force to collect and gather information that will come to the Council where we can discuss this issue. Luse said he understood the concept but, in the process, perception is reality. He was concerned that, if we start the process, the sound bite will be that Eden Prairie has passed the smoke-free ordinance. Rosow asked if the intention was that staff draft a charter statement and structure for the Council to approve the task force and then make appointments to the task force. He suggested indicating a time frame for when the charter should be brought back. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 16, 2002 Page 11 Jullie suggested the May 21 City Council meeting. That gives three or four weeks to gather information, start drafting a charter statement that would address the purpose and goals and the staff support needed, and put together some timelines and the number of meetings. He thought we could follow the guidelines for other task forces. We have a workshop date open on the evening of May 21 that could be used for discussion of a charter statement. VOTE ON THE MOTION: Motion carried 4-0-1, with Councilmember Luse opposed. B. PETERSON/BRIGGS REQUEST REGARDING MOVING THE FELTMANN HOUSE Jullie said at the March 19 meeting the Council gave Staff direction to follow up on a number of items. He referred to the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service’s response to questions posed by the City in a letter to the USF&WS. The Council also took action to suspend work on the proposed parking lot and access to the Richard T. Anderson Conservation Area. He also referred to a copy of the notice to the Briggs family suspending the termination of their lease. Rick Schultz, Manager of the Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge, reviewed his letter of April 8 responding to the questions posed in Mr. Lambert’s letter of March 21, 2002. He said he tried to explain why they believe a relocation of the home would complicate their management of the area as well as their future plans. He hoped the home could be relocated to another location. Schultz said the only remaining units left to be purchased in the Refuge are within the Upgrala Unit. He said they only acquire land from willing sellers, and they pay the market value, based on an appropriate process to determine that value. He noted they offered Mr. Peterson a fair market value purchase of the land in November 1979 and again in April 1988; however, in both cases the Petersons refused to sell. He said it is his agency’s highest priority to obtain appropriations from the U.S. Congress to purchase land in this area. Tyra-Lukens thanked Mr. Schultz for his presentation. She noted that we all recognize the value of the Refuge. She asked how long the Upgrala area has been the highest priority for purchase. Schultz said the Upgrala area is about 2000 acres so they have not had appropriations to purchase all of it at once. Case asked how many acres in total there are left to buy. Schultz responded there are about 2000 acres. Case then asked if Mr. Schultz would estimate as to the fair market value of that area. Schultz said 284 acres in Chaska sold for $1,000,000 a year ago. He said $5 million would not buy the entire area. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 16, 2002 Page 12 Case asked if Mr. Schultz considered an offer forthcoming for a purchase on the Peterson property. Schultz said there is not yet an offer, and it all depends on what the other landowners do. Mosman asked if it is desirable to buy the whole thing as one, or do you buy it in sections. Schultz responded that there are two major landowners. Depending on how the landowners respond, they could buy either of them. He said they are hoping to obtain an appropriation for $5 million in 2003. Sever Peterson said there are two issues here. He said his family needs a home on their farm, and there is a home on the Feltmann farm. Regarding the issue raised by Mr. Schultz of burning the hills, he said private citizens burned every year when there were more houses in the area. He said he supports the Refuge and looks forward to discussing a comprehensive plan. Butcher said she realized the house has great meaning for Mr. Peterson. When he came before the Council at the earlier meeting, there were a couple of different places where the house could be placed, and she asked him to review the alternatives. Peterson said he was open to other alternatives, but they are also within the boundaries of the Refuge Schultz asked about an alternative site north of Hwy 212. Luse thought there were traffic issues with that site. Peterson said the north side of the highway would not have access. Butcher said her understanding was that the house was the real key. Case said there are two issues—the house, but also whether it can go into the disputed area in the Refuge. He asked if the Petersons could place a new house at this site on a 10-acre plot. Lambert responded that, as he understood the ordinances, they could; however, it is zoned rural, so they would have to combine some land. Case said he was frustrated that we seem to be merging the two issues together. He thought it would be inappropriate to block the moving of a house if they could build a new house. Luse said he didn’t think the City should look at any temporary housing because we have seen that become difficult to deal with. He thought the issue is you can build a house so why not preserve this particular home. He thought it didn’t serve the greater good to have some pending sale that is going to ultimately be completed. He thought it is unfair to the family and to all of the residents of this City that could get caught in this sort of quagmire. Mosman said she received a phone call expressing concern about the increased value of the land if a house goes on the property and asking if this is a ploy to increase the value when it is purchased. She thought you can understand the CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 16, 2002 Page 13 concern that if you put the house on the property and then in two or three years the money comes in to buy the property, the estimated value would be up because of the home. She asked if there is anything we can do to protect the public from that. Peterson thought anyone concerned about property values was out of line. He thought his property values should follow the market just like anyone else’s. He said this has been a hardship for his family. He said if it were that important a point and the house would be perceived as an amenity that was adding value, he would try to mitigate that. Case said he was slightly confused as to why we are even discussing this. He thought we would be in agreement over the concept of saving a home rather than putting it in a landfill. He was confused because we could stop them from moving this house, yet they could build a new one on the property Butcher said she thought we have new information now. There is a concern that we want to do something for the public good, but it may take some time to acquire all the land for the Refuge. She asked if we could put some clause in to state that Mr. Peterson would sell only to the Wildlife Refuge in the future. Rosow said, based on the last discussion, we drafted the proposal to purchase the house, then if it is relocated to a piece of property and subsequently purchased by another governmental agency, the value cannot be more than the price paid in the first place. Peterson said his desire would be that this house be put back on the tax rolls. He was more concerned about the wording because there will be costs to put the house where they want to put it. He would be concerned that he would have a certain number of dollars invested in the house, but he would be denied being compensated for those dollars. He would be open to dealing with dollars spent to purchase the house, moving costs and other expenses. Luse thought this has come forward because Eden Prairie has done what it should have done. He thought the most pressing issue here is that there were promises made by other governmental agencies about some potential transaction that might happen. He thought it is for the better good of Eden Prairie that we don’t have that type of hammer over the Peterson family, and that we don’t allow it to happen to others. He didn’t think we should get into trying to determine what the values and costs are. Tyra-Lukens was not sure any of the suggested motions are correct because she thought it comes down to just approving the sale of the house. Case said he agreed with her. Regarding the issue of paying twice for the house, he thought the argument was flawed because if the Petersons can build a new house on this site and we destroy the Feltmann house, then the City paid for the CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 16, 2002 Page 14 Feltmann house and the governmental entity will some day pay for the new house. If the house were moved, it would be cheaper than building a new house and then it gets bought again, but it seems a cheap argument to say we are paying for it twice. We would like to put this house on the market on a sealed bid process, and, if the Peterson family acquires the house, they would have the right to put the house on that site. They would have to come back for the appropriate permit to move the house. Case said he would also like to have staff work with the Peterson family to find another location for the house because of the possibility that Fish & Wildlife could acquire the land in the near future. Butcher said Option 2 was to delay the development of the Richard T. Anderson area, and she would like to not delay but rather get this done as soon as possible in order to get the park developed. Lambert said one of the issues raised dealt with burning. He said there are 700 homes to the north of this property and smoke does rise. He said Mr. Schultz made the point that, as the area to the north develops, we will have to wait until we have winds from the north. In that case the smoke will go to the south towards any house that might be on the Peterson property. MOTION: Luse moved, seconded by Case, to approve the request to move the house to the Riverview Road site, subject to the proponent successfully acquiring the house through the sealed bid public sale process and without requiring any site variances. Case asked Rosow about the question of including resale language. Rosow said he thought it was accurate to assume they can put a new house on the property, and that is a matter that is not immediately before the Council. He was concerned as he thought about the motion that the Council is not the one to initially grant the approval to move the house. He said it would be helpful to have direction on the value of the house not being a factor in the bids. If the Petersons were the successful bidders on the house, they would go through the application process just as anyone would. Case asked if we need to direct staff to prepare the house for a sealed bid process. Rosow said staff has started to prepare the plans, and they could bring the specs back for approval or could just take it out to bid. Luse withdrew the motion with the consent of Case. Tyra-Lukens noted the Council believes in the value of the Wildlife Refuge, but she also believes that Mr. Peterson has a legal right to build on the property. C. PRESENTATION BY HENNEPIN COUNTY REGARDING LRT FEASIBILITY STUDY CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 16, 2002 Page 15 Katie Walker, representing Hennepin County Transit Department, and Richard Knowle, representing URS, reviewed the proposed study of potential rail-transit alternatives along the old Chicago-Northwestern rail right of way now owned by Hennepin County. Knowle said this would be a public involvement process with citizen participation. They plan to publish four newsletters during the process and send them to the residents along the corridor. There will be community meetings, two of which will be held in Eden Prairie. They will hold Council workshops at cities along the corridor. They have a website, a hotline and an email address. There will be a Technical Advisory Committee with representatives from all of the cities and governmental agencies involved. They expect to return next December or January to present the results of the study to the Council. Tyra-Lukens asked if the HCRRA is a planning organization. Walker said it is a separate subdivision that is charged with doing rail transit planning and working with other agencies. It also acquires property for future transportation use. Tyra-Lukens asked if part of the study is going to be to suggest who will operate such a corridor. Walker said the study probably would not get into such details. Tyra-Lukens questioned whether 2000 newsletters would be enough. She said our experience has been that you can’t mail only to people directly along the corridor and she would strongly recommend that they broaden the area they go to. XIII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS & COMMISSIONS XIV. APPOINTMENTS XV. REPORTS OF OFFICERS A. REPORTS OF COUNCILMEMBERS B. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER C. REPORT OF PARKS AND RECREATION SERVICES DIRECTOR 1. School District/City Joint Powers Agreement for Operation of Oak Point Pool Lambert said City Staff and School District Staff have been working together for six months to revise the Joint Powers Agreement between the City and the School District that relates to the Oak Point pool. The reason they were revising the agreement was to resolve problems the City has faced each year trying to guess how much the operational costs would be. They decided it makes the most sense to charge at the same rate that we CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 16, 2002 Page 16 charge them to use the Community Center pool. He said the City School Facility Advisory Committee approved the proposal and is requesting that the Council approve it this evening. MOTION: Mosman moved, seconded by Butcher, to revise the Joint Powers Agreement Between Independent School District 271 and the City of Eden Prairie by providing a notice of termination of the Agreement dated October 29, 1995, as per terms of the Agreement and request the School District agree to the revised Joint Powers Agreement for Oak Point pool in which the School District and City agree to charge the same rate for City and School pools. Motion carried 5-0. D. REPORT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND FINANCIAL SERVICES DIRECTOR E. REPORT OF PUBLIC WORKS SERVICES DIRECTOR 1. Contract For Charlson Area Improvements Dietz clarified that this is Phase 1 of the improvements, not Phase 2. He said the contract is for the construction of a lift station to serve the Grace Church property. He said Staff and SRF Consulting Group are recommending award of the contract to F.F. Jedlicki, Inc. in the amount of $385,564.35. Dietz said Phase 2 of the improvements would be awarded next month and Phase 3 in June. MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Case, to adopt Resolution No. 2002-83 awarding contract for I.C. 02-5563, Charlson Area Improvements – Phase I to F.F. Jedlicki, Inc. in the amount of $385,564.35. Motion carried 5-0. F. REPORT OF PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES DIRECTOR G. REPORT OF MANAGEMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR H. REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY XVI. OTHER BUSINESS Luse expressed his thanks to Mr. Jullie for coming back to serve as City Manager. Case said in this position we occasionally get to do something that feels right, and it felt right to bring Mr. Jullie back to serve. Jullie thanked the Councilmembers for all their support during his eight-month tenure. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES April 16, 2002 Page 17 XVII. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Luse moved, seconded by Case, to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried 5- 0. Mayor Tyra-Lukens adjourned the meeting at 10:15 p.m.