Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
City Council - 08/01/2000
AGENDA EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP/FORUM TUESDAY,AUGUST 1,2000 5:00- 6:55 PM, CITY CENTER HERITAGE ROOM II CITY COUNCIL: Mayor Jean Harris, Councilmembers Sherry Butcher,Ronald Case,Ross Thorfinnson, Jr., and Nancy Tyra-Lukens CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Chris Enger,Parks &Recreation Services Director Bob Lambert,Public Safety Director Jim Clark,Public Works Services Director Eugene Dietz,Asst. City Engineer Rod Rue, Community Development and Financial Services Director Don Uram,Management Services Director Natalie Swaggert, City Attorney Roger Pauly and Recorder Lorene McWaters I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER—MAYOR JEAN HARRIS II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA III. CITY FINANCING,PHILOSOPHY&DIRECTION FOR TRANSPORTATION IV. OTHER BUSINESS V. COUNCIL FORUM VI. ADJOURNMENT AGENDA EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY,AUGUST 1,2000 7:00 PM, CITY CENTER Council Chamber 8080 Mitchell Road CITY COUNCIL: Mayor Jean Harris, Councilmembers Sherry Butcher, Ronald Case, Ross Thorfinnson, Jr., and Nancy Tyra-Lukens CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Chris Enger, Parks & Recreation Services Director Bob Lambert, Public Safety Director Jim Clark, Public Works Services Director Eugene Dietz, Community Development and Financial Services Director Don Uram, Management Services Director Natalie Swaggert, City Attorney Roger Pauly and Council Recorder Peggy Rasmussen I. ROLL CALL/CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS IV. MINUTES A. CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP HELD JULY 18,2000 B. CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD JULY 18,2000 V. CONSENT CALENDAR A. CLERK'S LICENSE LIST B. HEARTLAND ADDITION by Christopher and Kelly Kaeding, and Dariusz and Zofia Padniewski. 2°a Reading for Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 1.88 acres. Location: 13801 St. Andrew Drive. (Ordinance for Zoning District Change) C. ADOPT RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF SUNNYBROOK D. APPROVE THE RELEASE OF LAND FROM SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT FOR UTILITIES FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF SETTLERS RIDGE E. APPROVE INFORMAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH SEH,INC.,FOR DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION SERVICES ASSOCIATED WITH THE LANDSCAPING PLAN FOR THE CSAH 1 (PIONEER TRAIL) PROJECT CITY COUNCIL AGENDA AUGUST 1,2000 Page 2 F. APPROVE AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR WELL PUMPHOUSE NO. 14 G. FIRST AMENDMENTS TO DEVELOPER AGREEMENTS by Hustad Land Company for Bluff Country Village East Commercial and Bluff Country Village West Commercial. II. AUTHORIZE EXECUTION OF TRUNKED RADIO USE AGREEMENT WITH SOUTHWEST METRO TRANSIT COMMISSION I. EXTEND PROJECT CLOSING DATE—LINCOLN PARC APARTMENTS VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS A. WALGREENS/BANK PROJECT by Semper Development, LTD. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 3.36 acres to the overall Gonyea PUD,Planned Unit Development District Review within the Community Commercial Zoning District on 3.36 acres, Site Plan Review on 3.36 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 3.36 acres into 2 lots. Location: Northeast Corner of Co. Rd. 4 and Hwy. 5. (Resolution for PUD Concept Amendment, Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Amendment, and Resolution for Preliminary Plat) B. IDLEVIEW OFFICE PARK by 78th Street Properties, LLC. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 1.21 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers in the Office Zoning District on 1.21 acres, and Site Plan Review on 1.21 acres. Location: North of Eden Road on Lake Idlewild. (Resolution for PUD Concept Review, Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Amendment) C. GRACE CHURCH by Grace Church. Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential and Public Open Space to Church on 10.3 • acres,Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 63 acres,Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 63 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural to Public on 63 acres, Site Plan Review on 63 acres,Preliminary Plat of 63 acres into one lot and road right of way, and EAW Review on 63 acres. Location: South of Pioneer Trail,East of Eden Prairie Road,West of Spring Road. (Resolution for Guide Plan Change,Resolution for PUD Concept Review, Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Change, and Resolution for Preliminary Plat) VII. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS VII. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS IX. PETITIONS,REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS CITY COUNCIL AGENDA AUGUST 1,2000 Page 3 X. REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS & COMMISSIONS A. HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION XI. APPOINTMENTS XII. REPORTS OF OFFICERS A. REPORTS OF COUNCILMEMBERS B. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER 1. Report on Request for Proposals for Professional Real Estate Services for Market Feasibility and Marketing of the Smith/Douglas/More House C. REPORT OF PARKS AND RECREATION SERVICES DIRECTOR D. REPORT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND FINANCIAL SERVICES DIRECTOR E. REPORT OF PUBLIC WORKS SERVICES DIRECTOR F. REPORT OF PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES DIRECTOR G. REPORT OF MANAGEMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR H. REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY XIII. OTHER BUSINESS A. COUNCIL FORUM INVITATION XIV. ADJOURNMENT UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP/FORUM TUESDAY,JULY 18,2000 5:00-6:55 PM, CITY CENTER HERITAGE ROOM III CITY COUNCIL: Mayor Jean Harris, Councilmembers Sherry Butcher,Ronald Case,Ross Thorfinnson, Jr., and Nancy Tyra-Lukens CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Chris Enger, Parks & Recreation Services Director Bob Lambert, Public Safety Director Jim Clark, Public Works Services Director Eugene Dietz, City Engineer Al Gray, Community Development and Financial Services Director Don Uram, Management Services Director Natalie Swaggert, and Recorder Lorene McWaters I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER—MAYOR JEAN HARRIS Mayor Harris called the meeting to order at 5:25 p.m. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA III. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT POLICY Public Works Services Director Gene Dietz reviewed the City's Special Assessment Policy,which was adopted in 1989 and revised this year. Dietz also reviewed legal and policy issues,referring to the current Highview/Lakeland Terrace and Cedar Forest projects for examples. Dietz explained that Eden Prairie's special assessment policy requires each property owner to pay for the road and utility systems adjacent to his/her parcel of land as well as to share in the overall cost of the trunk utility system and collector/arterial street system. The past City Council had believed this to be the most equitable method of financing the City infrastructure. With the help of a professional private appraiser, a cap of$19,600 per lot for 2000 was reached. Dietz highlighted and explained several specific policy statements. • The final test for a special assessment is that the benefit equals or exceeds the amount of the assessment. If a property owner provides a written objection to the special assessment before or at the hearing,they have the option of filing an appeal within 30 days of the hearing. If COUNCIL WORKSHOP MINUTES July 18,2000 Page 2 necessary, a trial at District Court will determine the matter. Dietz noted that he has seen the objection process result in a District Court trial only a handful of times. • Each petition from benefited property owners must be reviewed to determine if it is valid. A valid petition is one that has been signed by at least 35 percent of adjacent benefiting property owners, otherwise there must be 4/5ths approval by the Council. However,Dietz noted that the Council has asked staff to attempt to attain 50 percent support by property owners to avoid particularly contentious special assessment hearings. Dietz noted that there are about 500 septic systems still in use in Eden Prairie. The Inspections Department is currently conducting a survey to pinpoint exactly how many systems exist and how to get all residents connected to City utilities. Dietz noted that,with the exception of Willow Creek Road, future assessments should not be as expensive as the Highview/Lakeland Terrace project. He noted that the assessment policy developed in 1989 is designed: • Not to force property owners off of their properties • For new development to pay for the full costs associated with streets and utilities • The method of distributing costs in an assessment district must be consistent by class of property. Dietz noted that it is not legally permissible to treat a property owner with a financial hardship differently than the other property owners. Questions Councilmember Sherry Butcher asked who is notified of proposed special assessments and how they are notified. Dietz said notices are sent via regular mail(not registered or certified)to property owners of record with Hennepin County. Notices are also published in the local newspaper. The City's policy is to send copies of the feasibility study to property owners and to hold neighborhood meetings to inform property owners of plans, hear concerns, and gain consensus. Councilmember Nancy Tyra-Lukens asked how the special assessment figure is determined,particularly in relation to the requirement that the assessment be equal to or less than the increased value to the property. Dietz said assessment figures are based on professional appraisals on average properties and on data gathered during past special assessment projects. The City hired a private professional appraiser to help determine the Crestwood Terrace benefit. COUNCIL WORKSHOP MINUTES July 18,2000 Page 3 Councilmember Ron Case asked if a property owner can actually determine whether or not their property has gained the assessed value by viewing a post-project property tax statement. Dietz said that the increase in value is not necessarily apparent during the first few years after the project is completed since the City Assessor uses sales trends and does specific calculations on a home only every four years. Dietz pointed out that there must be a distinction made between the value shown on a property tax statement and the actual market value of a parcel. A question was raised about Policy 4,which states, "Assessment term for 100%petition projects shall be 5 years." Dietz explained properties covered under this policy are usually new development. A question was raised about how an assessment is handled on a single lot that can support more than one unit according to the City's guide plan. Dietz said that Policy 28 addresses this issue, and that the City can recoup the assessment if the lot is later developed into more than one unit. Strategic Issues • Speed of Projects Dietz noted that the City has the ability to accommodate those in need(as in the case of failing septic systems in the Highview neighborhood that are causing major inconveniences to some residents as well as potential lake pollution) and speed up the assessment process. However, this may result in not all property owners being"on board"with proposed plans when the public hearing is held. Councilmember Case asked if the remaining septic systems in Eden Prairie are mostly widely spaced single residences with septic systems or entire neighborhoods/areas where septic systems are in use. Dietz said staff will know more about this when the Inspections survey is completed later this year. Mayor Harris asked if the remaining special assessment projects are likely to be council-driven rather than petition-driven. Dietz said he anticipates most projects will be council-driven. • Assessment Hearing Prior to Award of Contract Dietz explained that staff is proposing a new policy of holding the special assessment public hearing the same evening the contract is scheduled to be awarded. Dietz said he has heard of legal firms trying to solicit clients before a public hearing,telling them they can get their assessments reduced. By awarding the contract the same 3 COUNCIL WORKSHOP MINUTES July 18,2000 Page 4 evening as the final assessment hearing,the Council is able to see how many objections are raised and then decide whether or not to award the contract. • Standard Design vs. Specialty Design vs. Cost Dietz said the standard design for utility projects is to open cut and not install concrete driveways. In projects such as Lakeland Terrace,where residents objected to open cutting due to possible destruction of mature trees, special designs are implemented. However, special designs can be more costly. Dietz explained that after hearing residents' concerns at the initial Special Assessment Public Hearing the Council delayed action. City Engineer Al Gray then sent a survey to Lakeland Terrace residents asking whether they would prefer a gravity or a low-pressure system. Gray also held another neighborhood meeting, during which general agreement was reached on a low-pressure system that will avoid disturbing landscaping. Dietz said that in the future, staff will likely be doing more design work as part of the feasibility study on hard-to-build special assessment projects (particularly ones that involve woods or lakefronts)before public hearings are held. Mayor Harris asked how staff plans to address anticipated challenges of the Willow Road utility project. Dietz said that the Willow Road project is budgeted for in the CIP,but that fmal cost will be determined by how much special design is required. Current Projects—Cedar Forest'and Highview Assessments Mayor Harris noted that the assessment for the Highland area is $19,600,in contrast to $19,060 for Lakeland Terrace. Harris asked how these slightly different figures were calculated. Dietz said that while the actual cost of the Highland project(which includes streets and utilities)is just over$33,000,residents are responsible only for paying the $19,600 assessment cap. On the other hand, Lakeland Terrace is scheduled only for utilities,the total cost of which is$19,060 per lot(just under the assessment cap). Harris asked if it was common for a neighborhood to come back to the City and ask for streets in a case such as Highview/Lakeland. Dietz replied that it is unlikely that Lakeland Terrace would now request streets since all property owners would have to agree to grant rights- of-way. • Charlson Area Special Assessment Dietz said that the planned improvements for the Charlson Area project are necessary to develop the property and that there is no question as to the benefits. Dietz explained that MAC plans to acquire an additional 157 acres in the special assessment area and that the City's special assessment against this property will come to$3.8 million. However, LI COUNCIL WORKSHOP MINUTES July 18,2000 Page 5 MAC has indicated that they object to the assessment since they have filed for condemnation of these acres. Dietz reported that the property owner,Lynn Charlson,has agreed to the assessment levy and that although MAC has applied for condemnation,they have not yet taken possession of the property. Dietz encouraged the Council to approve the project, since MAC will still have the right to appeal the decision if they so choose. The staff's stand,on advice from the City Attorney's, is that MAC does not have an interest in the project since they haven't yet taken possession of the land. Dietz further noted that development of CSAH 4 as part of this special assessment is necessary for the Grace Church project to go forward. III. OTHER BUSINESS V. COUNCIL FORUM VII. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Harris adjourned the meeting at 6:55 p.m. J v ,B UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY,JULY 18,2000 7:00 PM,CITY CENTER Council Chamber 8080 Mitchell Road CITY COUNCIL: Mayor Jean Harris, Councilmembers Sherry Butcher, Ronald Case, Ross Thorfinnson, Jr., and Nancy Tyra-Lukens CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Chris Enger, Parks & Recreation Services Director Bob Lambert, Public Safety Director Jim Clark, Public Works Services Director Eugene Dietz, Community Development and Financial Services Director Don Uram, Management Services Director Natalie Swaggert, City Attorney Roger Pauly and Council Recorder Peggy Rasmussen I. ROLL CALL/CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER Mayor Harris called the meeting to order at 7:06 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE M. NATIONAL NIGHT OUT Police Chief Jim Clark announced Tuesday, August 1, is National Night Out, which is a crime-prevention program intended to heighten crime awareness, increase the partnership between police and the community through organized neighborhood watch groups. Case thanked the police, firefighters and Parks and Recreation Depaitiiient, which put on a three-day Safety Camp in July of each year to teach water and fire safety to third-grade children. IV. RECOGNITION OF 4TH OF JULY EVENT SPONSORS Eden Prairie businesses helped sponsor the 4th of July Celebration. Tria Maim, Arts and Special Events Coordinator with the Parks and Recreation Department, gave a summary of the event, and Mayor Harris presented certificates and plaques to representatives of the following businesses: BFI Waste Systems donated two dumpsters and 100 garbage cans Sports World USA donated T-shirts,valued at$1,200 Suburban Chevrolet donated$1,500 for a Petting Zoo and Pony Ride Anchor Printing donated$2,100 in printing items Twin City Coop Federal Credit Union donated$2,000 for daytime entertainment Eden Prairie Center donated$5,000,location and staff Norwest Bank donated$5,000 for the Fireworks Display CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JULY 18,2000 Page 2 V. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS Tyra-Lukens added five items,Butcher added one item, and Thorfinnson added one item, under XIV. A. Reports of Councilmembers. MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, seconded by Thorfinnson, to approve the agenda as published and amended. Motion carried 5-0. VI. MINUTES A. SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL/SCHOOL BOARD MEETING HELD APRIL 20,2000 Case made a correction on page 3, the last sentence in the last paragraph, which should read "... he has needed to teach differently to the entire class for the sake of accommodating the religious needs of one student." Harris made a correction on page 3, paragraph 4 "wiser to focus on providing language skills for older adolescent,non-English speaking ..." MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher, to approve the minutes of the Special City Council/School Board meeting held April 20, 2000. Motion carried 5-0. B. CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP HELD JUNE 20,2000 Butcher made a correction on page 4, paragraph 7, which should read ". . . funding for some programs might be available through Local Collaborative Time Study(LCTS) funds and the Eden Prairie Foundation." MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Case, to approve the minutes of the City Council Workshop held June 20, 2000. Motion carried 4-0, with Thorfinnson abstaining due to his absence. C. CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD JUNE 20,2000 Tyra-Lukens made a correction on page 11, item 2. The second sentence should read ". . . Eden Prairie Foundation and LCTS." The sixth sentence should read "The group received funding for three issues." MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, seconded by Case, to approve the minutes of the City Council Meeting held June 20, 2000. Motion carried 4-0, with Thorfinnson abstaining due to his absence. VII. CONSENT CALENDAR A. CLERK'S LICENSE LIST CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JULY 18,2000 Page 3 B. WELTER'S TRAILHEAD by Ray and Carole Welter Jr. 2nd Reading for Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 5.22 acres and Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5. Location: 9630 Crestwood Terrace. (Ordinance No. 19-2000-PUD-12-2000 for PUD District Review and Zoning District Change) C. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2000-111 APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF EDEN WOODS SENIOR CAMPUS ADDITION D. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2000-112 APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF SETTLERS RIDGE 6T1I ADDITION E. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2000-113 APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF OAKPARKE ESTATES 2ND ADDITION F. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2000-114 APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF WINGATE HOTEL ADDITION G. AUTHORIZE APPROVAL OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR WELLHEAD PROTECTION PLAN H. APPROVE AGREEMENT WITH HENNEPIN COUNTY FOR CONSTRUCTION OF BICYCLE TRAIL ON CSAH 4 I. AWARD CONTRACT FOR STANDBY NATURAL GAS GENERATORS, I.C. 00-5509 J. AWARD CONTRACT FOR LINCOLN LANE AND FOREST HILLS ROAD STREET AND STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS (Resolution No. 2000-115) K. SET PUBLIC HEARING FOR SEPTEMBER 5, 2000, RELATING TO CABLE TV FRANCHISE APPLICATIONS L. AUTHORIZE ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMIT FOR PARKING LOT AT BIRCHWOOD LABORATORIES,INC. M. AUTHORIZE ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMIT FOR EDEN PRAIRIE UNITED METHODIST CHURCH N. AWARD CONTRACT FOR NEW RADIO EQUIPMENT SHELTER AND EMERGENCY POWER GENERATION EQUIPMENT FOR NEW TOWER SITE O. AUTHORIZE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH TKDA FOR RENOVATION AND REPAIR OF WATER UTILITY VEHICLE STORAGE BUILDING crrY COUNCIL M1 UTES JULY 18,2000 Page 4 P. APPROVE TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAL AGREEMENT WITH MNDOT FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLE PRE-EMPTION ON TWELVE EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNALS (Resolution No. 2000-116) Case inquired about item M. There are steep slopes away from the parking lot, and he wondered, with this additional imperious surface, whether all the rainwater is captured from the parking lot. Dietz replied the existing parking lot was "grandfathered" in, but the drainage from this tier of parking goes along the total length of the existing parking lot to the NURP pond, which is sized to handle the water from the 60 additional parking spaces. MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Thorfinnson,to approve items A-P on the Consent Calendar. Motion carried 5-0. VIII. . PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS A. HIGHVIEW DRIVE/LAKELAND TERRACE AREA STREET AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS (Continued from June 20, 2000) (Resolution No. 2000-117) Dietz said on June 20, 2000, Council ordered all the improvements for this project, with the exception of sanitary sewer for the neighborhood adjacent to Lakeland Terrace. He and Al Gray met with property owners on July 17, 2000. Gray said at the meeting with property owners on July 17, the basic concern was about the type and design of the sewer system and method of installation with respect to the impact on trees. Alternative methods were discussed at the meeting and the City and property owners reached a consensus to use a pressure sewer system, and a 3-inch-diameter force main, on Lakeland Terrace. In critical areas it can be installed with horizontal drilling at a price that's competitive with the 8" gravity sanitary sewer system. The result would be that individual property owners would utilize a grinder pump to connect to the system. Mayor Harris asked if anyone wished to address the Council on this project. Charlie Title, 9585 Lakeland Terrace, thanked the Council and City Staff for addressing neighborhood concerns and said everybody feels good about the project. MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Thorfinnson, to close the public hearing, and adopt Resolution No. 2000-117 ordering the improvements and preparation of plans and specifications for the Lakeland Terrace Area sanitary sewer. Discussion followed. Case inquired about the cut through the private driveway on Lot 4 on Highview, and if the City would rebuild the driveway to the standard it was originally. Gray replied the City is asking for an easement on Lot 4, and expected that the property owner would ask to replace the driveway to the standard it was originally built. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JULY 18,2000 Page 5 However, with an 8"water main and horizontal boring technology, Gray did not believe the driveway would be disturbed, so a decision on which way to do this will be made in final design. They will work with the property owner on this also. Case said between Lots 13 and 15 there is a large cluster of trees. He asked, with the horizontal boring technique and smaller pipe, if it is necessary to go between these lots. Gray replied there are two utilities to deal with. The sanitary sewer needs to come down between Lots 13 and 15 to meet the sanitary sewer on Highview Drive, and a few trees would be disturbed. For the storm sewer they could use an alternate route,but as long as they need to open cut through the trees for the sanitary sewer, and have to disturb some trees to do that,they could put the storm sewer along the same route, without disturbing any more trees. They will be evaluating other installation methods, however. If another property owner would consider use of a pump, it would eliminate the need to put the sanitary sewer between the property lines because it could just pump back up toward Highview Drive. This will be determined in final design. They will be working with a couple of property owners on this decision. The plans will be coming back before the Council for final approval. Motion carried 5-0. B. SHADY OAK TECHNOLOGY BUILDING by Mount Properties. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 5.52 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 5.52 acres,Zoning District Change from I-5 to I-2 on 5.52 acres, and Site Plan Review on 5.52 acres. Location: 6875 Shady Oak Road. (Resolution No. 2000-118 for PUD Concept Review and Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Change) Enger said official notice of this public hearing was published July 6, 2000 in the Eden Prairie News and sent to 15 property owners. Steve Michaels, Mount Properties, explained the project is for a 26,024-square- foot industrial building located at 9875 Shady Oak Road. An existing 39,900- square-foot building is located on the property. The 1978 approved plan shows a future building expansion to approximately 72,000 square feet. Michaels showed drawings of other buildings Mount Properties has constructed. Setbacks for the new building meet city code. The exterior will be 75 percent brick and glass. City Staff has reviewed the project and the architects have revised their plans accordingly. Uram said the Community Planning Board voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the project to the City Council at its June 26, 2000 meeting. Mount Properties requested a waiver for the percentage of office use from 50 percent to 75 percent. The waiver may have merit because the traffic generated for the proposed building is less than the expansion of the existing building. The Travel Demand Management plan will further reduce peak hour traffic. In addition, the proposed building meets architectural requirements of the office district. 5 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JULY 18,2000 Page 6 MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Thorfinnson, to close the public hearing and adopt Resolution No. 2000-118 for PUD Concept Review on 5.52 acres; and approve 1st Reading of the Ordinance for PUD District Review with waivers and Zoning District Change from I-5 to I-2 on 5.52 acres; and direct Staff to prepare a Developer's Agreement incorporating Staff and Board recommendations. Motion carried 5-0. C. SUMMERHILL SENIOR COOPERATIVE by Realife, Inc. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 3.09 acres of the Liberty Place PUD, Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 3.09 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural to RM-2.5 on 3.09 acres, and Site Plan Review on 3.09 acres Location: Valley View Road and Smetana Lane. (Resolution No. 2000-119 for PUD Concept Amendment and Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Change) Enger said official notice of this public hearing was published July 6, 2000 in the Eden Prairie News and sent to 99 property owners. Bill Griffith, representing Realife, Inc., said this four-story, senior condominium building will be located at Valley View Road and Smetana Lane, and will be similar to the adjacent project, Realife Valley View Cooperative. However, the proposed building will have 48 units that are larger than the previous development, which has 94 units. There will be 63 underground parking spaces for residents of the 48 units. There will be 17 surface parking spaces provided, and 17 proof-of-parking spaces. Shoreland setbacks will be maintained. A five- foot wide sidewalk will connect to Realife Cooperative to the west and the public trail to the east, providing access to the proposed City Park and trail system on Lake Smetana. Liberty Property will dedicate 33 acres to the City for public open space. Butcher said she was pleased with this sister project to Realife Cooperative. Her concern was about emergency vehicles having sufficient access and the ability to turn around, considering the way the parking spaces are angled. Enger replied the emergency vehicle access and turn-around space is similar to what would be provided in a cul-de-sac. A fire truck would probably not turn around,but would back out of the area. • Uram said three waivers were requested for building height, lot size, and percent of impervious surface. The Community Planning Board voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the project to the City Council at its June 12,2000 meeting. Mayor Harris asked if anyone wished to address the Council on this project. Nancy Arieta, 10785 Valley View Road, lives in the Realife Valley View Cooperative. She expressed concerns about the new project. One was about sufficient parking. Some people owning condominiums in her building have two or three cars and so the parking lot is full most of the time. She pointed out that more parking spaces were recommended at the Planning Board's initial meeting CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JULY 18,2000 Page 7 on this project. Another concern was that trees not be removed-mnecessarily, as she enjoys looking at them. A third concern was about emergency vehicles being able to get into the area from Valley View Road. MOTION: Thorfinnson moved, seconded by Butcher,to close the public hearing and adopt Resolution No. 2000-119 for PUD Concept Review on 3.09 acres; and approve 1st Reading of the Ordinance for PUD district Review with waivers and Zoning District Change from Rural to RM-2.5 on 3.09 acres; and direct Staff to prepare a Developer's Agreement incorporating Staff and Board recommendations. Discussion followed. Case said he was on the Senior Issues Task Force, and this type of project is exactly what the task force discussed at their meetings. He asked who would pay for putting in the 17 proof-of-parking spaces. Thorfinnson asked what is the ratio of parking to units at the existing building and the proposed building. Dick Hansen, architect for the project, replied that at Summerhill there will be 63 underground parking stalls and 34 parking spaces above ground, including the 17 proof-of-parking spaces, for a total of 97 spaces. That would be a ratio of 2:1. He said their experience has been that there is more activity in the parking lot during the first year of operation, with people moving in and having visitors, etc. He would hesitate to use the green space set aside for the proof-of-parking spots. Hansen said the condominium owners own the building and can vote to use the green space for additional parking if they find it is needed. At Realife Cooperative, there are 94 apartments and 94 underground parking stalls. Above ground there are about 40 stalls, or a ratio of 1-1/2:1. • Thorfinnson said the Council only needs to determine if there is adequate parking without using the green space. The land will be prepared for additional parking space, and money has been set aside to do it, if needed. Mayor Harris said she is in favor of trying to keep the green space and then let residents decide if they want to pave it over. Butcher agreed with her. Tyra-Lukens asked if the units in Summerhill would be bigger than those in Realife. Hansen said they would all be two-bedroom units, with larger-sized rooms than Realife. Tyra-Lukens said that might mean more people living there, having more cars. Nancy Arieta was allowed to speak again. She said at the Planning Commission Meeting it was decided to tell the developers they would have to consider having more parking, because there was that question raised when the first building was built. The parking lot becomes full on a regular basis. The building is open to people 55 and over, and that is an active group of people. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JULY 18,2000 Page 8 Tyra-Lukens pointed out that the developer doesn't break ground until all units are sold, so by then the owners will know how much parking space they need and can make the decision. Motion carried 5-0. D. US WEST ADDITION by US West Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 1.09 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers within the I-2 Zoning District on 1.09 acres, and Site Plan Review on 1.09 acres. Location: 7825 Fuller Road. (Resolution No. 2000-120 for PUD Concept Review and Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Amendment) Enger said official notice of this public hearing was published July 6, 2000 in the Eden Prairie News and sent to 11 property owners. Tom Olesak, an architect with Setter, Leach & Lindstrom, representing U.S. West, said this project is for a 3,850 square-foot addition to the south side of the existing one-story building. The addition is necessary because of the amount of equipment they need to provide. The materials selected will match the materials on the existing building. Uram said the Community Planning Board voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the project to the City Council at its June 12,2000 meeting. Mayor Harris asked if anyone wished to address the Council on the project. No one did. MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Thorfinnson,to close the public hearing and adopt Resolution No. 2000-120 for PUD Concept Review on 1.09 acres; and approve 1st Reading of the Ordinance for PUD District Review with waivers and Zoning District Amendment within the I-2 Zoning District on 1.09 acres; and approve early grading and utility permit; and direct Staff to prepare a Developer's Agreement incorporating Staff and Board recommendations. Motion carried 5-0. E. HEARTLAND ADDITION by Christopher and Kelly Kaeding, and Dariusz and Zofia Padniewski. Request for Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 1.88 acres. Location: 13801 St. Andrew Drive. (Ordinance for Zoning District Change) Enger said official notice of this public hearing was published July 6, 2000 in the Eden Prairie News and sent to 36 property owners. Chris Kaeding said his company is requesting approval to rezone the property to divide into two single-family lots. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JULY 18,2000 Page 9 Uram said this is a straightforward subdivision. The existing house will be removed. The Community Planning Board voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the project to the City Council at its June 12,2000 meeting. Mayor Harris asked if anyone wished to address the Council about this project. No one did. MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, seconded by Butcher, to close the public hearing and approve lst Reading of the Ordinance for Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 1.88 acres; and direct Staff to prepare a Developer's Agreement incorporating Staff and Board recommendations and Council conditions. Motion carried 5-0. F. WALGREENS/BANK PROJECT by Semper Development, LTD. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 3.36 acres to the overall Gonyea PUD,Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers within the Community Commercial Zoning District on 3.36 acres, Site Plan Review on 3.36 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 3.36 acres into 2 lots. Location: Northeast Corner of Co. Rd. 4 and Hwy. 5. (Resolution for PUD Concept Amendment and Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Amendment, and Resolution for Preliminary Plat) Enger said the developer is requesting a continuance to the August 1, 2000 City Council meeting. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Thorfinnson, to continue the public hearing to the August 1,2000, City Council meeting. Motion carried 5-0! G. VACATION 00-05 — VACATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR SMETANA LANE (Resolution No.2000-121) Enger said official notice of this public hearing was published June 29, 2000 in the Eden Prairie News and sent to 2 property owners. Liberty Property has requested vacation of the existing right-of-way for Smetana Lane to eliminate possible underlying description conflicts. Replacement right-of-way, following the proposed revised roadway realignment, will be dedicated on the plat of Realife Valley View Cooperative of Eden Prairie Addition. A Quit Claim Deed from the City to Liberty Property Limited Partnership is also proposed to ensure the complete transfer of the City's property rights in the vacated right-of-way. Mayor Harris asked if anyone wished to address the Council on this subject. No one did. MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, seconded by Butcher, to close the public hearing; adopt Resolution No. 2000-121 vacating the right-of-way for Smetana Lane as described in the resolution; and authorize the Mayor and City Manager to sign the Quit Claim Deed conveying the City's title rights in the vacated right-of- way to Liberty Property Limited Partnership. Motion carried 5-0. 9 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES DULY 18,2000 Page 10 H. VACATION 00-06 — VACATION OF DRAINAGE AM) UTILITY EASEMENTS OVER LOT 2, BLOCK 1, FLAGSHIP ADDITION (Resolution No.2000-122) Enger said official notice of this public hearing was published June 29, 2000 in the Eden Prairie News and sent to 3 property owners. The property owner has requested this vacation to remove underlying drainage and utility easements, enabling the combination and platting with an adjacent parcel. Replacement easements following the new property lines have been dedicated in the plat of Flagship 2nd Addition and approved on June 20,2000. Mayor Harris asked if anyone wished to address the Council on this subject. No one did. MOTION: Thorfinnson moved, seconded by Tyra-Lukens, to close the public hearing and adopt Resolution No. 2000-122 vacating the drainage and utility easements as described in the resolution. Motion carried 5-0. I. VACATION 00-07 — VACATION OF UTILITY EASEMENTS OVER LOTS 2 AND 3,BLOCK 2,SETTLERS RIDGE (Resolution No. 2000-123) Enger said official notice of this public hearing was published June 29, 2000 in the Eden Prairie News and sent to 3 property owners. The property owner has requested this vacation to remove underlying drainage and utility easements from the property to enable replatting of the lots. Replacement easements will be dedicated on the new plat. Mayor Harris asked if anyone wished to address the Council on this matter. No one did. MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Thorfinnson, to close the public hearing; and adopt Resolution No. 2000-123 vacating the drainage and utility easements as described in the resolution. Motion carried 5-0. J. ORDER IMPROVEMENTS AND PREPARE PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR CHARLSON AREA IMPROVEMENTS (Resolution No.2000-124) Enger said official notice of this public hearing was published July 6 and July 13, 2000 in the Eden Prairie News and sent to 9 property owners. In accordance with Guide Plan designations adopted in 1998 in consultation with MAC, the Metropolitan Council and property owners, this project will provide public infrastructure improvements to support the development of approximately 450 acres of land. Al Gray explained the property owners have received copies of the feasibility study for these improvements. There are approximately six segments of the /0 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JULY 18,2000 Page 11 project, including sanitary sewer, watermains and road improvements. The total cost estimate is$9,175,000. The first segment is for a new industrial road, Charlson Road, between Spring Road(CSAH 4) and Flying Cloud Drive (T.H. 212), and a new intersection at the proposed Charlson Road and T.H. 212, and another at Spring Road. These improvements are expected to cost $3,230,000, based on a per-acreage estimate, with an area assessment rate of$12,616 per acre. The second segment is the improvement of Eden Prairie Road from Riley Creek to the newly aligned intersection with Spring Road. Spring Road is proposed to be realigned along the southwest and west boundary of the Grace Church property. The estimated cost is $2,675,600 with an estimated assessment rate of $5,916 per acre. The third segment is for watermains that would bring water service to benefit all the properties along Charlson Road, Spring Road, and Eden Prairie Road. The estimated cost is $1,420,000,with an assessment rate of$3,102 per acre. The fourth segment is for a sanitary sewer collection system. It would consist of • approximately 12,500 feet of gravity sanitary sewer in Charlson Road, Spring Road and Eden Prairie Road, following existing and proposed road alignments, and terminating at the intersections of Spring Road and Eden Prairie Road at Riley Creek. It is a gravity system. The total cost is estimated at $920,000, with an assessment rate of$2,010 per acre. The fifth segment is for a sanitary sewer pumping system with forcemain systems. It is estimated to cost$810,000,with an assessment rate of$1,770 per acre. The sixth segment of the system is part of the lateral sanitary sewer that connects between Riley Creek Ridge easterly to the system that would be in Eden Prairie Road. It replaces the temporary lift station in Riley Creek Ridge resulting from the Hustad development. It is in conformance with the Developer's Agreement the City had with the Hustad development. The estimated cost is $121,500, with an assessment rate of$2,110 per acre. Dietz asked Gray if the trunk utility assessments were included in the above amounts. Gray replied the preliminary trunk assessments were included, based upon the current assessment rate for 2000. Mayor Harris asked if anyone wished to address the Council on this subject. Bridget Rief, as a representative of the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC), referenced a letter to the City Clerk from MAC, which owns or has ownership interest in 10 parcels identified in the Feasibility Study and a portion of three additional parcels. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JULY 18,2000 Page 12 The City's Preliminary Assessment Roll indicates assessments against MAC property of approximately$5,084,191. MAC objects to the improvements if they result in an assessment against its property because most of the property will not be developed, and MAC will not tie into the utility improvements or benefit from them. The improvements will solely benefit parcels not owned by MAC. If the City decides to pursue these improvements,the cost should be borne by those who will benefit. Gray said Council also received a letter from Grace Church in support of the project as outlined in the Feasibility Study. MOTION: Thorfinnson moved, seconded by Butcher, to close the public hearing; adopt Resolution No. 2000-124 ordering the improvements and preparation of plans and specifications for Charlson Area Improvements. Motion carried 5-0. K. CHARLSON AREA FINAL ASSESSMENT HEARING (Resolution No. 2000-125) Enger said official notice of this public hearing was published July 6, 2000 in the Eden Prairie News and sent to 1 property owner. Gray said this public hearing was being held at the request of the property owner, Lynn Charlson. The public hearing and levy of special assessments are all in accordance with discussions and the special assessment agreement between the City and Lynn Charlson. The assessments shown are as estimated in the Feasibility Study. The first portion of the assessments to be levied are for street and utility projects in the amount of$6,885,849, assessed to seven parcels owned by Mr. Charlson. The second portion is for trunk assessments. Mayor Harris asked if anyone wished to address the Council. Bridget Rief, as a representative of the Metropolitan Airports Commission, said to note for the public record that MAC objects to the assessments. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Thorfinnson, to close the public hearing; adopt Resolution No. 2000-125 approving the Special Assessments presented regarding utility and street improvements in the Charlson Area, I.C. 98-5470 and I.C. 99-5484 for parcels owned by Lynn Charlson. Motion carried 5-0. IX. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, seconded by Case, to approve the Payment of Claims as submitted. Motion was approved on a roll call vote, with Butcher, Case, Thorfinnson,Tyra-Lukens and Harris voting"aye." l � CITY COUNCIL MI UTES JULY 18,2000 Page 13 X. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS XI. PETITIONS,REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS A. REVIEW BERGELAND VARIANCE REQUEST 2000-07 Enger said on June 8, 2000 the Board of Adjustments and Appeals heard Mr. Bergeland's request for shoreland setback variances, approval to alter the non- conforming house structure, permission to allow repair, remodeling and improvements to the existing non-conforming house and gazebo, and an appeal of the Building Official's Order for removal or relocation of the non-conforming gazebo. The Board denied the variance requests and upheld the Building Official's Order. David Hellmuth, attorney for Mr. Bergeland, said he participated in the previous hearing before the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. In September, 1999, Mr. Bergeland purchased this property (Lot 2, Block 1, Bryant Lake Heights), intending to live there and to fix up the property. The condition of the property is deteriorating and a proposal to repair the house and gazebo was submitted to the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. After the Board turned down this proposal, he submitted an alternative proposal to Mr. Rosow,the City Attorney. The original proposal is still being appealed, however. Mr. Hellmuth believed a minimum of repairs should be allowed. Mr. Bergeland plans to put new siding on the house, a new roof and new windows. He plans to enclose the flat roof, which would be adding onto the property, but that is the only addition. Mr. Hellmuth discussed the denial of the request with Mr. Rosow, who said an alternative, proposal could be considered. Regarding the gazebo, prior to Mr. Bergeland submitting the variance application, he had discussions with Mr. Rosow and understood he could make some basic repairs to the gazebo. He did not get a permit from the City, and a City Staff member came out and determined what was done was more than maintenance and repairs. Nathan Bergeland said he moved into the house in March of this year. He has a business in Eden Prairie with 20 employees. His intention is to be a long-term resident of the City. He understood when he purchased the property that he would be able to remodel the house and gazebo. He was not told these structures were non-conforming when he made the purchase. In order to get rid of the flat roof,he has proposed removing the porch and building a two-story addition in its place; but this would not enlarge the plat. He expressed willingness to work with the City on whatever conditions or requirements are made to his proposal. The house is in an upscale neighborhood and the neighbors would also like the house to have a new look. The improvements would benefit the City by increasing the tax base. David Hellmuth said he questions a portion of the Eden Prairie Code pertaining to non-conforming structures. He believed the new roof would come under "basic repair or maintenance", as it is 25 years old. The alternative proposal was 13 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JULY 18,2000 Page 14 prepared to highlight what he believed to be permissible under the code. This allows room for compromise. The cedar siding and windows need to be replaced because of water damage. The code prohibits enlargement or alteration of non- conforming structures,but Hellmuth did not think that was applicable with regard to the work being proposed for this house. The main proposal has a small addition to the property but the alternative proposal does not. Mayor Harris asked Pauly if it is appropriate to consider the alternative proposal as well as the proposal made to the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. Pauly said it is appropriate to consider both. Thorfinnson said Council should deal with the proposals in two stages. Tyra- Lukens said denial by the Board was based on the original proposal, and Council needs to separate the two. Mayor Harris asked Bergeland, with reference to the Purchase Agreement, if he understood there was an opportunity to improve,remodel or enhance the property. Bergeland replied he did, and was to get the original blueprints of the plan. Mayor Harris said the Council approved the plat on condition the house would be torn down. She asked Dietz if the road to this house was the one referenced in the Developer's Agreement. Dietz replied he believed that agreement referenced a common driveway and a brand new driveway was contemplated. Jean Johnson,Zoning Administrator,presented the following information. Nathan D. Bergeland ("Bergeland") is the owner of Lot 2, Block 1, Bryant Lake Heights (7012 Willow Creek Road, Eden Prairie)the"Property."There is situated on the Property a house and a gazebo. The Property is situated on a point on Bryant Lake and includes shoreland on both sides of the tip of the point. In the spring of 2000 Bergeland commenced remodeling of the gazebo without a building permit. The work was stopped by order of the City's building official on May 7, 2000. On May 18, 2000, the City's building official advised Bergeland that the gazebo is a non-conforming structure; that pursuant to City Code, a non- conforming structure may not be enlarged, altered or reconstructed except for routine maintenance and repairs and that the work of the gazebo constituted alteration and reconstruction of the gazebo in violation of the City Code. Bergeland was further advised that it would be impossible to return the gazebo to its original condition and therefore, Bergeland was ordered to remove the gazebo from the Property or as an alternative, to move it to a location in conformance with the set-back requirements of the City Code. It was also noted that no building permit had been obtained from the City for the work performed on the gazebo. The City's official records evidence that Lot 2 was granted six variances by the City Council on July 6, 1999, specifically the following: CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JULY 18,2000 Page 15 Code Requirement Variances 5 acre without sewer 1.18 acres 300-foot lot width at building line 170 feet 100-foot setback from OHW 75 feet 90-foot street frontage; 55 feet on cul-de-sac 0 feet Frontage on public street 0 feet Alteration or structure withing 50 foot shore impact zone Grading The variances granted by the City Council on July 6, 1999 were not used within one year and therefore expired on July 6, 2000 pursuant to City Code Section 11.76, subd. 3. On March 7, 2000 Bergeland entered into an Easement Agreement with James W. Perkins, Raynelle Perkins and Pearl A. Freeburg whereby Burgeland was granted a perpetual easement for driveway purposes over the Freeburg parcel, a perpetual easement for sanitary sewer maintenance and use over the Freeburg parcel and Berglund granted to Freeburg a sanitary sewer maintenance and use easement over the Berglund parcel. The City's official records evidence that on August 3, 1999 the City entered into that certain Developer Agreement between the City of Eden Prairie and James Perkins and Raynelle Perkins ("Developer Agreement") relative to the development of Lots 1, 2 and 3, Bryant Lake Heights, Hennepin County. The Easement Agreement was required by the Developer Agreement. Bergeland purchased Lot 2, Block 1, Bryant Lake Heights on September 29, 1999 from James and Raynelle Perkins pursuant to a Purchase Agreement dated August 23, 1999. The Purchase Agreement states in lines 181 through 185 that: "Seller certifies that the City, County and State agencies have approved a 75' set back on 1999 plans that have been filed and recorded to allow the potential building of a new house on this existing lot." Pauly said reference has been made to the Purchase Agreement and Developer's Agreement. The Purchase Agreement was made on August 23, 1999 and the Developer's Agreement for Perkins Subdivision, between Perkins and the City, was made on August 3, 1999. Pauly requested that the Purchase Agreement and Developer's Agreement be made part of the record. Mayor Harris said the two issues need to be separated. First is the decision of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals and the Council needs to decide if it is going to uphold that decision. Tyra-Lukens said because the original proposal included an addition to the house, she would deny the appeal and support the decision of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. 15 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JULY 18,2000 Page 16 MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Case, to affirm the denial action of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals based upon the Findings contained in the Board of Adjustments and appeals motion made on June 8, 2000 regarding the variances. Discussion followed. Pauly said Staff has prepared some additional Findings that incorporate, but are more extensive than,the Findings of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. The draft makes mention of the alternative plan as well, and would require some editing. Pauly suggested these be revised and provided for review by the Council. Mayor Harris called a recess to permit editing of the above-referenced Findings. Council recessed at 9:17 p.m. Mayor Harris reconvened the meeting at 8:35 p.m. Pauly suggested that because of the alternative proposal being made, Council should just vote on the motion without reference to Findings. Then Council can take up the request for approval of the alternative proposal and can vote on that, and afterwards discuss the Findings regarding these improvements. Butcher and Case withdrew their motion. MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Case, to affirm the denial action of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals made on June 8, 2000 regarding the variances; and affirm the action of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals regarding upholding the Building Official's Order regarding removal/relocation of the gazebo. Motion carried 5-0. Mayor Harris said Council should now consider the alternative proposal in terms of the maintenance and repair work proposed. Case said it seems that this is more than routine maintenance and repairs according to the City Code, and should not allow anything beyond that. Tyra-Lukens said concerning replacement of the siding and windows, routine maintenance would be replacement of a few pieces of siding and replacement of a few windows, not all the siding and windows. The roof-replacement issue is different because the life of a roof is 25 years and this roof is that old, similar to what is already there. Changing the roof line is another matter,however. Mayor Harris said she felt when the owner starts removing beams, replacing windows and siding, etc. that is beyond routine maintenance. She had read the Purchase Agreement that states routine maintenance is no longer sufficient for this house. Johnson read the language in the Purchase Agreement stated "the seller certifies that City, County and State agencies have approved a 75-foot setback on 99 plans CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JULY 18,2000 Page 17 that have been filed and recorded to allow the potential building of a new house on this existing lot." Mayor Harris said because there is a Developer's Agreement covering this, she did not want to retreat from that. Butcher agreed with that also. She believed replacing a roof would be beyond routine maintenance. David Hellmuth said siding and windows, in addition to roofs, have a useful life, and their replacement should be considered routine maintenance and repair. He asked if Council would require his client to live in a home that needs a new roof and new siding. Mr. Bergeland had invited Councilmembers to come and look at his house. Mayor Harris said she came out with the Building Official and looked at it. Thorfmnson said Councilmembers have a good knowledge of this house after a year of discussing the property. He has been out to see it. Case said he believed all of the Councilmembers have been out there at one time or another. MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Case, to deny the alternative proposed by Mr. Nathan Bergeland to make changes to his existing house. Motion carried 5-0. Mayor Harris said Council sympathizes with the situation in which Mr. Bergeland finds himself. However,the City has rules and regulations that it must follow. Pauly called Council's attention to the Findings that were placed on their desks during the recess. They are the Findings Staff suggested be adopted by the Council in connection with the two motions, with some slight modification. Item 8 should read, "The setback variance granted by the City Council on July 6, 1999, was not used within one year and therefore expired on July 6, 2000, pursuant to City Code, Section 11.73, Subdivision 3." To the order on the last page should be added, "It is also ordered that Mr.Bergeland's alternative proposal is denied." Hellmuth voiced his objection to the Findings. He called the City that day and asked that City reports be faxed and none were provided to him until that night. He would have addressed these Findings if he had had them. Enger replied that he had faxed Staff reports. Hellmuth said he received a report from the Building Official, but did not receive these Findings. He had asked for Staff reports and anything else relevant to that evening's meeting. Pauly said it is customary for Findings to be adopted upon actions being taken by the Council. It is not always possible to anticipate what those actions would be and so it is customary not to distribute Findings in advance. Nevertheless, it is usual to have Findings drafted, in anticipation of actions being taken. He suggested Council consider adopting these Findings. l-4- CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JULY 18,2000 Page 18 MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher, to adopt these Findings. Motion carried 5-0. XII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS & COMMISSIONS A. COMMUNITY PROGRAM BOARD 1. Management and Use of Historic Properties Swaggert reported that on January 18, 2000, the City Council directed the City Staff to work with the Community Program Board and Heritage Preservation Commission to develop recommendations for the future use of the Smith-Douglas-More House, the Cummins House and Riley Farm. The Analysis of the Properties was to take into account their historic significance, potential adaptive reuse, operations, maintenance, programming, all costs, and financial sustainability over time. The City Staff, with input from the Heritage Preservation Commission, developed several optional uses for each of the historic sites and presented these recommendations to the Community Program Board. The Board met on July 11 to review the Adaptive Reuse Proposal prepared by the Historic Preservation Commission. The Board members supported the general recommendation of the proposal for the three properties. Lambert gave background information on how these three sites were acquired. The Cummins House was acquired with a larger portion of land using a federal Lock-On Grant in the late 1970s. As part of the grant, no mention was made of the historic property, as it was purchased for park purposes. After the purchase, it was determined to preserve the house and grounds. The Riley-Jacques Farm was also purchased with a Lock-On Grant in the 1980s. The City determined to preserve the house, barn, granary and another storage building as part of a historic homestead site. The Smith House was purchased in 1981 for $140,000, using Cash Park Fees to preserve the property. The City gave the Mores life estate so they could remain in the house with no property taxes or repair costs. The City looked after the property and invested money to replace the roof and furnace. Gertz explained that the term"adaptive reuse"is a widely used restoration planning process. The proposal in the report is the same process that would be used by the state or federal government for finding new uses for a historic property. The goal is to adapt the property to for the use but still retain its historic uses. The Glen Lake Camp and Consolidated School are both being used this way. Jan Mosman, Chair of the Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC), said these three historic houses are of similar age and architecture. It has been a challenge as well as an opportunity to find uses for these properties. The 1 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JULY 18,2000 Page 19 HPC based its decisions on physical and legal limitations, the City's needs,the cost, and preservation of history. The HPC's recommendations are summarized in the report, as follows: • Cummins House — remain in City ownership, restoration to be completed;uses would be recreational, educational, and cultural. • Riley Farm - to remain in City ownership as a Community Heritage Park and be used for recreation and education programs. • Smith House - remain in City ownership but use for commercial purposes on a small scale, which would still allow for some public access. Leasing would take the burden of rehabilitation from the City. Mayor Harris thanked everyone who has been involved in this work. Baker said she would like to commend the City's commitment to protecting and preserving the City's resources. The HPC is well known around the State and she expressed appreciation for the work that has been done by the HPC. Also very well regarded is John Gertz, the Staff person on the HPC, whose job is to foster and monitor preservation activities in the City. She thought the presentation for preservation of the three houses is a very reasonable approach. "Mothballing" historic structures is not a very productive way to preserve them. The report shows very reasonable uses for the properties and she supports them. She thought the recommendation for the Smith-Douglas-More House was very reasonable in terms of having an adaptive-reuse suggestion. Case said the report was very well done. He complimented John Gertz for his work and Jan Mosman for her drawings of the properties. With regard to leasing or selling the Smith-Douglas-More House, he said the one historic house people know about is the More House and he found it difficult to think of the City relinquishing ownership control of it. The HPC recommended the leasing option. He knew the City couldn't afford to pay for redundant programming. However, the City has open parkland where uses are minimal, so he didn't have a problem with redundant ownership of the More House, particularly if the cost of repair were removed from the City. He doesn't want to sell it but would look for public/private partnership of the house. He believed that would present an opportunity for the public to access it. Using leasing restrictions,there are many ways the City could lease this house out and still retain control. Tyra-Lukens said she believed people do recognize that house from the outside more than other historic properties the City has. On the other hand she didn't know how strong a desire people have to enter into the house. She leaned toward the idea of exploring the lease option and public/private partnership prior to sale. Thorfinnson said it is a little premature to eliminate any options until they have proposals in hand and know what they will be able to do. They will icr CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JULY 18,2000 Page 20 have to see what comes forward before making a choice. Butcher said this site is designated a local Heritage Preservation Site and the City can retain a lot of control over what this house can look like even if it is sold. There is adaptive reuse that would work well. The building can remain with the same look outside but have the interior used in a way that it can generate money. Butcher said because we have the other historic houses she believed the Council needs to be aware of the kind of competing element that could happen; i.e.,how many activities will the City want to have taking place at the three sites. That may be a deterrent to participation by the public. Case said that for him it is so much more than just preserving the shell of the building. The City may want to re-take the property some day. If the lease option runs into a dead end, the Council may want to look at another choice. Past City Councils have set these properties aside for future generations to enjoy. Lambert said he didn't think there were a lot of options to sell the other two properties because they were purchased with federal grant money. They were bought for park purposes, not historic purposes. The More House is the only one that can be leased or sold. Mayor Harris said the More House is the most visible to the public. It is the only one that lends itself to the option of leasing or selling. The Council is only talking about obtaining information through Requests for Proposals (RFPs). Then the Council has the opportunity to review this again. The City would still have a lot of control. Butcher said she was pleased with the practicality of the multi-year budget and funding plan for the historic properties. Gertz said the HPC is recommending that the budget not extend over a long period of time. It would be practical to get the houses rehabilitated and into use quickly. One of the intents of the recommendation for the multi-year budget and funding plan was to develop a shorter timetable for the projects. MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Thorfinnson, to thank the Heritage Preservation Commission and staff for their work and accept the June 20, 2000, Adaptive Reuse Proposal for City historical properties; to direct staff to develop an RFP for professional real estate services to determine the market feasibility for lease or sale of the Smith-Douglas- More House for adaptive reuse and to market the property for maximum return; direct staff to develop a multi-year budget and funding plan for the Cummins House and Riley Farm within the parameters of the City's budget and CIP; direct staff to develop a program plan for the Cummins CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JULY 18,2000 Page 21 House and Riley Farm for review by the Parks and Recreation Citizen Advisory Commission and Community Program Board. Discussion followed. Tyra-Lukens asked what was the intended meaning of "market property for maximum return"? Enger replied the intended meaning is maximum return within appropriate adaptive reuse. Case said he would vote against this motion. He didn't agree with the option of selling the More House. In his opinion, it is the same as looking at selling parkland. He agreed with other parts of the motion. The motion doesn't include public accessibility and right of first refusal. He thought Council ought to look at the leasing option fully and then look at other options. Motion carried 4-1,with Case voting"nay." XIII. APPOINTMENTS XIV. REPORTS OF OFFICERS A. REPORTS OF COUNCILMEMBERS 1. Councilmember Tyra-Lukens' Inquiry about Accidents at Intersection of Dell Road and Pioneer Trail Tyra-Lukens said there have been a number of accidents at the intersection of Dell Road and Pioneer Trail. She wondered what the timetable is for a semiphore at this intersection. Dietz replied his department was made aware of the accidents and has added another stop sign and notice of stop sign as a minimum measure. The signal is expected to be in place within the next 60 or 90 days. 2. Councilmember Tyra-Lukens' Report about Personnel Changes at Southwest Metro Tyra-Lukens reported that Jodi Ruehle has left Southwest Metro after a year of employment. Jean Wickland also is leaving to go back to the construction industry. 3. CouncilmemberTyra-Lukens' Commendation for Police Department Staff Tyra-Lukens commended Mark Vandenberg and Gary Therkelson of the Police Department staff, who have worked closely with the Southwest Metro Transit staff on conversion to the new radio system Southwest Metro is now using. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JULY 18,2000 Page 22 4. Councilmember Tyra-Lukens'Inquiry about Deanovich Apartments Tyra-Lukens referenced the minutes of the last Council meeting, when a report was requested on the Deanovich Apartments. She asked if staff had a report ready. Enger replied he now has that information and will include it in Council's information packet prior to the next Council meeting. 5. Councilmember Tyra-Luken's Inquiry About Donation of Apple Trees for Cummins-Grill Property Tyra-Lukens referenced the minutes of the last Council meeting,regarding the offer of apple trees from Eden Apple Orchard, to be planted on the Cummins-Grill property. She noted that issue hadn't been resolved yet. Lambert responded that because the Cummins-Grill house is on the National Register, the City has to have the approval of the Minnesota Historical Society to plant trees on the property. John Gertz checked with the Historical Society and found out that there were no dwarf trees developed in the early 1900s, so only apple trees that were available at that time could be planted. It would be inappropriate to plant dwarf trees, which was the type grown in the Eden Apple Orchard. 6. Councilmember Butcher's Inquiry About Sight Lines Along Pioneer Trail at Settlers Drive Butcher said she was asked to cut the ribbon for the opening of the Settlers Ridge housing development on June 24. A number of residents told her of their concerns about the poor sight lines along Pioneer Trail as one turns south on Settlement Drive. Butcher wondered what potential solutions the City might have so she can get back to them. Dietz replied he received a call about this and has asked the Hennepin County Transportation Department to revisit the sight distances. Modifications were approved to add a median, which changed the sight distances at Settlement Drive. His staff is working with Hennepin County to find solutions. 7. Councilmember Thorfinnson's Report on Traffic Management Conference Thorfinnson said he went to the Western Regional Traffic Management Association Conference in Reno, Nevada, primarily to learn more about traffic management associations and bring back information for the Golden Triangle. He and others on the Golden Triangle Demonstration Project Committee, brought back quite a bit of information and learned much that was useful. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JULY 18,2000 Page 23 The survey of employees in the Golden Triangle area should be completed by the end of October. In addition, Irene Wright, Executive Director of the Golden Triangle TMA, has been talking to a number of employers, developers and property management companies in the Golden Triangle. Many of them have made commitments to join the Traffic Management Association, and$30,000 in dues have been paid. They are very interested in finding solutions. B. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER 1. Council Workshop Schedule Enger said a Workshop on the City's philosophy for the Southwest Metro Transit Commission, and funding in general for the transportation program, as requested by Council, would be held on August 1, and the Budget Workshop on August 17. Enger suggested moving the Technology Workshop to September 18. C. REPORT OF PARKS AND RECREATION SERVICES DIRECTOR D. REPORT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND FINANCIAL SERVICES DIRECTOR E. REPORT OF PUBLIC WORKS SERVICES DIRECTOR 1. Authorize Preparation of Purchase Agreement for Multi-use Storage Facility Site Dietz reported that BFI is planning to sell 17 acres of land they own adjacent to TH 212, east of Flying Cloud Airport. Since 1990, the City has identified a need for an outside storage facility site for Parks and Public Works to support on-going maintenance activities in the City. The site could be screened and would be remote from residential areas in the community. Dietz asked Council for authorization to negotiate a purchase agreement and prepare a financing plan in accordance with the CIP budgeting process. Butcher inquired if the land Dietz is talking abut extends as far as Pioneer Trail. Dietz replied no, it does not. If it is purchased, he planned to build a berm around the property,using the City's maintenance staff. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Thorfinnson, to authorize staff to negotiate a purchase agreement with BFI for approximately 17 acres for utilization of a multi-use storage facility site. Motion carried 5-0. D3 CITY COUNCIL NIINQTES JULY 18,2000 Page 24 F. REPORT OF PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES DIRECTOR G. REPORT OF MANAGEMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR H. REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY XV. OTHER BUSINESS A. COUNCIL FORUM INVITATION Mayor Harris said Council Forum is held the first and third Tuesdays of the month from 6:30 —6:55 p.m. in Heritage Room II. This will be scheduled time following City Council Workshops and immediately preceding regular City Council Meetings. It is important, if you wish to visit with the City Council and Service Area Directors at this time, that you notify the City Manager's office by noon of the meeting date with your request. XVI. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Thorfinnson moved to adjourn the meeting. Mayor Harris adjourned the meeting at 10:40 p.m. Li CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: August 1,2000 SECTION: Consent Calendar SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Community Development Clerk's License Application List ITEM NO.. &Financial Services/ V.A. Gretchen Laven These licenses have been approved by the department heads responsible for the licensed activity. Commercial Lawn Fertilizer Applicators Green Stuff Inc August 1,2000 - 1 - CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 08/01/00 SECTION: Consent Calendar SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Community Development Donald R.Uram Heartland Addition V. 13 Scott A. Kipp Requested Action Move to: • Approve 2nd Reading of the Ordinance for Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 1.88 acres; and • Approve the Developer's Agreement for Heartland Addition by Christopher and Kelly Kaeding and Dariusz and Zofia Padniewski. Synopsis This is a rezoning for two single-family lots located at 13801 St. Andrew Drive. Attachments 1. Ordinance for Zoning District Change 2. Developer's Agreement 1 HEARTLAND ADDITION CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO.2000-- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND IN EACH DISTRICT, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99 WHICH,AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE,MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1. That the land which is the subject of this Ordinance (hereinafter, the "land")is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof. Section 2. That action was duly initiated proposing that the land be removed from the Rural District and be placed in the R1-13.5 District. Section 3. The proposal is hereby adopted and the land shall be, and hereby is removed from the Rural District and shall be included hereafter in the R1-13.5 District, and the legal descriptions of land in each District referred to in City Code Section 11.03, Subdivision 1, Subparagraph B, shall be, and are amended accordingly. Section 4. City Code Chapter 1, entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 11.99, "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety,by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. Section 5. The land shall be subject to the terms and conditions of that certain Developer's Agreement dated as of August 1, 2000, entered into between Christopher and Kelly Kaeding and Dariusz and Zofia Padniewski, and the City of Eden Prairie, and which Agreement are hereby made a part hereof. Section 6. This Ordinance shall become effective from and after its passage and publication. FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 18th day of July, 2000, and finally read and adopted and ordered published in summary form as attached hereto at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the 1st day of August, 2000. ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk Jean L.Harris,Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on 2 Exhibit A Heartland Addition Legal Description That part of Lots 27 and 28,AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NO. 225, according to the recorded plat thereof,Hennepin County,Minnesota that lies northerly of Baker Road. 3 HEARTLAND ADDITION CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 2000-- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND IN EACH DISTRICT, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99, WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Summary: This ordinance allows rezoning of land located at 13801 St. Andrew Drive, from Rural to R1-13.5 Zoning District. Exhibit A, included with this Ordinance, gives the full legal description of this property. Effective Date: This Ordinance shall take effect upon publication. ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk Jean L. Harris,Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the (A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from City Clerk.) • Exhibit A Heartland Addition Legal Description That part of Lots 27 and 28, AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NO. 225, according to the recorded plat thereof,Hennepin County,Minnesota that lies northerly of Baker Road. S • DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT HEARTLAND ADDITION THIS AGREEMENT is entered into as of August 1, 2000, by Christopher M. Kaeding, Kelly A.Kaeding,Dariusz Padniewski, and Zofia Padniewski,hereinafter referred to as "Developer," and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation,hereinafter referred to as "City": WITNESSETH: WHEREAS,Developer has applied to City for Zoning District Change from Rural to Ri- 13.5 on 1.88 acres, legally described on Exhibit A(the "Property"); NOW,THEREFORE,in consideration of the City adopting, Ordinance No. for Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5,Developer shall to construct, develop and maintain the Property as follows: 1. PLANS: Developer shall develop the Property in conformance with the materials revised and dated July 7, 2000, reviewed and approved by the City Council on July 18, 2000, and attached hereto as Exhibit B, subject to such changes and modifications as provided herein. 2. EXHIBIT C: Developer agrees to the terms,covenants, agreements, and conditions set forth in Exhibit C. 3. ACCESS: Developer acknowledges that access to the Property shall be from St. Andrew Drive. Developer further acknowledges that no access shall be permitted to the Property from Baker Road(County Road 60). 4. DEMOLITION OF EXISTING HOUSE: Prior to issuance by City of any permit for grading or building on the Property,Developer shall submit to the Chief Building Official and to obtain the Chief Building Official's written approval of plans for demolition and removal of the existing house on the Property, as depicted in Exhibit B. Prior to such demolition or removal, Developer shall provide to the City a deposit in the amount of$ 1,000.00 to guarantee that Developer completes implementation of the approved plan. Prior to issuance of any permit for grading or building on the Property, Developer shall complete implementation of the demolition plan in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C. The city shall return to Developer the $ 1,000.00 deposit at such time as the Chief Building Official has verified in writing that the Developer has completed implementation of the approved plan. 5. DEVELOPER'S RESPONSIBILITY FOR ITS CONTRACTORS: Developer shall release,defend and indemnify City,its elected and appointed officials, employees and agents 6 from and against any and all claims, demands,lawsuits, complaints, loss, costs (including attorneys' fees), damages and injunctions relating to any acts, failures to act, errors, omissions of Developer or Developer's consultants,contractors,subcontractors, suppliers and agents. Developer shall not be released from its responsibilities to release, defend and indemnify because of any inspection,review or approval by City. 6. DEVELOPER'S RESPONSIBILITY FOR CODE VIOLATIONS: In the event of a violation of City Code relating to use of the Land construction thereon or failure to fulfill an obligation imposed upon the Developer pursuant to this Agreement, City need not issue a building or occupancy permit for construction or occupancy on the Land while such a violation is continuing,unless waived by City. The existence of a violation of City Code or the failure to perform or fulfill an obligation required by this Agreement shall be determined solely and conclusively by the City Manager of the City or a designee. 7. REMOVAL/SEALING OF EXISTING WELL AND SEPTIC SYSTEMS: Prior to issuance by City of any permit for grading or building on the Property, Developer shall submit to the Chief Building Official and to obtain the Chief Building Official's written approval of plans for demolition and removal of existing septic systems and wells on the Property, and restoration of the Property. Prior to such demolition or removal, Developer shall provide to the City a deposit in the amount of$ 1,000.00 to guarantee that Developer completes implementation of the approved plan. The city shall return to Developer the $ 1,000.00 deposit at such time as the Chief Building Official has verified in writing that the Developer has completed implementation of the approved plan. 8. RETAINING WALLS: Prior to issuance by the City of any permit for grading or construction on the Property, Developer shall submit to the Chief Building Official, and obtain the Chief Building Official's written approval of detailed plans for the retaining walls identified on the grading plan in Exhibit B. These plans shall include details with respect to the height,type of materials, and method of construction to be used for the retaining walls. Developer shall complete implementation of the approved retaining wall plan in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C, attached hereto, prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property. 9. TREE LOSS TREE REPLACEMENT: There are 695 diameter inches of significant trees on the Property. Tree loss related to development on the Property is calculated at 94 diameter inches. Tree replacement required is 17 caliper inches. Prior to the issuance of any grading permit for the Property,Developer shall submit to the City Forester and receive the City Forester's written approval of a tree replacement plan for 17 caliper inches. This approved plan shall include replacement trees of a 3-inch diameter minimum size for a shade tree and a 7-foot minimum height for conifer trees. The approved plan shall also provide that, should actual tree loss exceed that calculated herein,Developer shall provide tree replacement on a caliper inch per caliper inch basis for such excess loss. Prior to building permit issuance,the Developer shall submit to the City Planner and receive the City Planner's written approval of a final tree replacement plan for the Property. The approved tree replacement plan shall be consistent with the quantity,type, and size of plant materials shown on the tree replacement plan in Exhibit B. Developer shall furnish to the City Planner and receive the City Planner's approval of a tree replacement bond equal to 150%of the cost of said improvements as required by City Code. Prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property, Developer shall complete implementation of the approved tree replacement plan in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: August 1, 2000 SECTION: Consent Calendar SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Public Works Final Plat Approval of Sunnybrook Engineering Services 17 C Randy Slick Requested Action Move to: Adopt the resolution approving the final plat of Sunnybrook • Synopsis This proposal, located north of Sunnybrook Road and west of Wilderness Cove, consists of 6.51 acres to be divided into fifteen single family lots and right-of-way dedication for street purposes. Background Information The preliminary plat was approved by the City Council February 15, 2000. Second Reading of the Rezoning Ordinance and final approval of the Developer's Agreement was completed on March 21, 2000. Approval of the final plat is subject to the following conditions: • Receipt of engineering fee in the amount of$675.00 • Receipt of street lighting fee in the amount of$2,283.30 • Receipt of street sign fee in the amount of$803.45 • Satisfaction of bonding requirements for the installation of public improvements • Execution of Special Assessment Agreement for trunk utility improvements • The requirements as set forth in the Developer's Agreement • Provide a list of areas (to the nearest square foot) of all lots, outlots and road right-of- ways certified by surveyor • Prior to release of final plat, Developer shall submit a conservation easement for the protection of existing wetlands and wetland buffer strip on the property • Prior to release of final plat, Developer shall convey access easements for sidewalk and trails • Prior to release of final plat, a permit fee of 5% of construction value shall be paid to the City by the Developer Attachments Drawing of final plat 1 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA • RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF SUNNYBROOK • WHEREAS,the plat of Sunnybrook has been submitted in a manner required for platting land under the Eden Prairie Ordinance Code and under Chapter 462 of the Minnesota Statutes and all proceedings have been duly had thereunder, and WHEREAS, said plat is in all respects consistent with the City plan and the regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and ordinances of the City of Eden Prairie. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED BY THE EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL: A. Plat approval request for Sunnybrook is approved upon compliance with the recommendation of the City Engineer's report on this plat dated August 1, 2000. B. That the City Clerk is hereby directed to supply a certified copy of this resolution to the owners and subdividers of the above named plat. C. That the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute the certificate of approval on behalf of the City Council upon compliance with the foregoing provisions. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on August 1, 2000. Jean L. Harris,Mayor ATTEST: SEAL • Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk n -I \ : \ \ .."\ • \ \ .••• \ , I \ , \ \ ...,....... \ I \ x \ ...., s ...•• \ . \ \/.•••• \ g§ I\ . • •^ Mg \ \ ••P '^-) \ \\ • 7-- ',.<- \. ,'\ \ \ \ •5 ,( ) - - I)v/-- •-N-•c-.•._ -MNOt*0's-6.20--W- 1--300--.0-0 \ \ \ ' r )--7 r- .5 . .'• \ . , ' '' 0.• ... 1 f ) ;0, a; . ‘ , \ \ \ \' '' I ' -- -N ''•'\ III ,I ... NI 6; X 0 I .." 1 s 1 g§ " ' •WI . \ ZS. 01 Urg.', ', . ,••• 1 I-` ' •,,b,,, W2IITI 81 I gi \........."... ' ),, ' 1 Nil . 'I ..Itka •1 R1 1 'di I .1 1 \ ,, • I 2' \\, .,F. • I .0•038:20-w .7.1 ' Cr: I FA I I I i, I • \./ ., 13 En 1 ril I I . .; IT P> ,.._•a Nov52tew z . ;.Y. I 1,§i...-- N0•07'22-Ny 1 317.31 --"Ut--•-. 21,.,3- t '42! I .:::-.4%.21,5' E.---5.271-°--- 1-'17'r-7 r-,..-u-a---1 r"-- :--z:*E--:::-/. P i•----7:e -175-1 R 1 0 •••• zt., .( .71 I !:,•,s•.;,VEil I. E; 1!1 8I: I:,1%--••7(-*1"21: 1 4,S4 10,„"4 .•.i4r150.g..;. ti(;L 8 . _ijIi1 4PI • . c• I iR C. 1 •-J____!..2,9brss- 11; 1 , I I (.4 I I SE,I. , .4 i„,.,., > g li.2",:foi Ncroilrw , • t ..r.crs,s•ji. i L____ __.: L_ ____,_,,, ...:,..0.1, rsi g /t••76,L'uro-l-I--.1c.iie .., -93.00- . 04.19 i . . t t 870.7.51226:WcN 4131220gr38° (3..‘-23917;33'31°P--. NOT:17•22•41 199.15..• 1D43 ' :.:t N :; il'.l''.;::LT c(n pr_r_.1,240.1....st-°° ',".20,4.2..01:: 1.1 g COLD STREAM g4.3. LANEel'A niiri •:'.1: 1 7/.4. / 4.• R`419A,A-0 4 4.4- c...) 0.14.M Z __•ft,:74,,.--6g,...;- .°°-tillit"-- egrer 'w 17.4 ...-r.s '- / 44.e ••••AY LF '1 >I P -• ; -..*2.1".:. Pst I .._1.-79.54- ,. .-- 1 r - R. r;:i...,..... 4 ..4..,,P44 ---'44.;..1:::e..... I IS'z CI) . r;;i 11 I 4 93n I I' -... r.„..v, •4.422•47•034 Itzto 104 q . .....",...] , ,...: „,:s, 1 10 zi , „ rt . . F.,'„I ',', . , . ....„. z ---:..v7 1 ' A kirizial-s-k1 L , :gg, r.... ' li I I r) g \\S ''' 0) I i-. I 4.':§.)* / , 'rwlq,•, I ,...4.,0 oi ,z, 4, 1,) . ..., , 8 Z ii: 1 f.,_ s4 / ''r.• ronzi.--7.1,„ ! r., ;:. 1 tti-: ,T3F. I „..-------... ['HT tssA4J, . : 55 1 1•,,''' > 3 1 i I . 0,;:,,e N-Thi,75-I a k ; 1 ,I,t.4 NF.,,,, I I- e‘n, . • 1 ; 03 ..: 1 - ... ,..\ , ., „, . ,, :::: , --•----Z.ORA1NACE AND UNLITT' ,EASEMENT t•-•::: --.• I 3,34 , 107.11 1b 90.00 I 1i. 90.00 '44.t,I----- -1,.--- 1.- -- .....--, (I) ,.. \t 354.38 ..---.. S0'07.22-E- , 647.79 ' 1 '•••---EAST LINE OF TRACT A 0(-) I .... 1 % I ...., ,,..) _i I ....". I 1 I 1.ggp, riLig I 1 . 0 0 r....,- 1.-to A v igi9 I g 1 g ' '0*E g/24g I q c 311- '711; & L_1_ 1 1 U 2 A s __„tem,....,-z ;i1! 1 Ft--r- i a § Ig.E ' 'atfl I ,I u) „,,,:-.)-j ; or. n.;.1,- F.,. F= - -0. i 0 g ,', 11-s, . , 00-, • 5 CD pp hl i 2 g ZZ- 0 1 05 • 00 •N) F g-E; 1.3 i F m r .9 m 1 --I 3 CF) V I I CITY COUNCIL AGENDA - DATE: August 1, 2000 SECTION: SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Engineering Services Release of Land from Special Assessments Jim Richardson Agreement for Utilities for the Development of Settlers Ridge � D Requested Action Move to: Approve the Release of land from the Special Assessment Agreement for placing of utilities to benefit the development of Settlers Ridge and Settlers Ridge 2nd Additions. Synopsis Staff recommends that the City Council approve the Release of Land from Special Assessment Agreement and authorize the Mayor and City Manager to sign the release.- Background Information In November of 1998, the City entered into a Special Assessment Agreement with Settlers Ridge Limited Partnership regarding the levying of special assessments for placing of sanitary sewer and watermain for the benefit and development of the Settlers Ridge Additions. The completion of all improvements has been accomplished and the costs assessed to all the property in the plat of Settlers Ridge and Settlers Ridge 2nd Additions. Therefore, it is appropriate and timely to release the agreement. Attachments Release of Land • RELEASE OF LAND This Release of Land is executed by the City of Eden Prairie, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("City"),and is dated as of August 1,2000. FACTS 1. A certain Agreement Regarding Special Assessments ("Agreement") dated November. 5, 1998,was executed by and between the City, and Settlers Ridge Limited Partnership which Agreement was filed as Document No. 7159492 with the Hennepin County Recorder on August 6, 1999. 2. The special assessments contemplated by the Agreement have been levied and the time for appeal has expired. To evidence the fact that the special assessments have been levied and the time for appeal has expired,the City is executing this Release of Land. • The property affected by this release is Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Lots 1 through 3 Block 2, Lot 1 Block 3,Lots 1 through 13 Block 4,Lots 1 through 25 Block 5,Lots 1 through 6 Block 6, Lots 1 through 17 Block 7, Settlers Ridge and Lots 1 through 9 Block 1, Settlers Ridge 2' Addition. THEREFORE, the City of Eden Prairie, a Minnesota municipal corporation, hereby releases the Property described above from all obligations and conditions set forth in the Agreement Regarding Special Assessments dated November 5, 1998 filed with the Registrar of Titles as Document No. 7159492 on August 6, 1999. This Release of Land shall not release or discharge the Property from the lien of any special assessments levied by the City pursuant to the Agreement. • • IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the City of Eden Prairie has executed the foregoing instrument. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE A Municipal Corporation BY: BY: Jean L.Harris Christopher M.Enger Its Mayor Its City Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss HENNEPIN COUNTY ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2000, by Jean L. Harris and Christopher M. Enger, the Mayor and City Manager of the City of Eden Prairie,a municipal corporation under the laws of the State of Minnesota, on behalf of said corporation. Notary Public THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie,MN 55344 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: August 1, 2000 SECTION: Consent Calendar SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: LC. 94-5369 ITEM NO.: Engineering Service Approve Informal Professional Services Rodney.W. Rue Agreement with SEH,Inc.for Design and I Construction Services Associated with the V G Landscaping Plan for the CSAH 1 (Pioneer Trail)Project. • Requested Action • Move to: Approve informal professional services agreement with SEH, Inc. for design and construction services associated with the landscaping plan for the CSAH 1 (Pioneer Trail) project from Hennepin Town Road to TH 212 (Flying Cloud Drive)and authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute said agreement. Synopsis • As per our Construction Cooperative Agreement with Hennepin County, the City is responsible for the design and construction engineering services associated with the landscaping plan (which is a separate project) for the CSAH 1 project. Hennepin County will be responsible for the construction costs of the landscape project(estimated at$400,000). We requested proposals from three landscaping consultants for the project. Upon review of these proposals and consultant interviews with the corridor resident group (six property owners along the corridor), SEH, Inc. was selected as the landscaping consultant by the corridor resident group. • We hereby recommend approval of this informal professional services agreement with SEH, Inc. for the amount of$62,202.00. Attachments Informal Professional Services Agreement with SEH,Inc. 3535 Vadnais Center Drive,200 SEH Center,St.Paul, MN 55110-5108 651.490.2000 651.490.2150 FAX architecture • engineering • environmental • transportation July 21, 2000 RE: City of Eden Prairie Pioneer Trail, CSAH 1 Landscape Design and Construction Services Professional Services Agreement SEH No. A-EDENP0002.00 Mr.Rodney W. Rue,P.E. Assistant City Engineer City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie,MN 55344-4485 Dear Rod: The Landscape Architecture Team at SEH is so pleased to have been selected to provide the design and construction services for the Pioneer Trail, CSAH 1 landscaping project. We look forward to working with you and with the neighborhood Design Review Committee (DRC). A detailed proposal and cost estimate was provided prior to our selection. A summary of the scope of services that will be provided and the cost estimate for those services is provided below and this letter is intended to serve as the informal Professional Services Agreement between the City of Eden Prairie and SEH, Inc. The proposal will serve as the detailed description of the scope of services that will be provided. Scope of Services The scope of services that will be provided for this project include the following: A. Project Management: This task includes project coordination through construction and the kick-off meeting with the City and the DRC. B. Public Involvement: This task includes meetings with the DRC and neighborhood meetings. The DRC committee will work with SEH to develop concepts and then the design for the corridor landscape. The DRC will approve each stage of the plan as it develops. Neighborhood meetings will be held to take input from all the neighbors and then to explain the final design to individual property owners. C. Inventory and Review of County Tree Inventory: This task includes a site visit, developing a base map for the project, reviewing and understanding the County construction plans and policies,reviewing City policies, understanding the context of the natural environment in the corridor, a review of the County Tree Removal Plan, and a graphic presentation of the material and information gathered above. Short Elliott Hendrickson inc. • Offices located throughout the Upper Midwest Equal Opportunity Employer We help you plan,design,and achieve. oZ Mr.Rodney W.Rue,P.E. July 21, 2000 Page 2 D. Concept Development: This task includes development of goals and objectives for the project. A design palette, including a list of plant materials, will be developed and utilized throughout the process. Preliminary sketches for critical areas along the corridor, like entries or backyards, will be developed and will be used as typical solutions along the roadway. The DRC will approve the design palette and the sketches. E. Prepare Landscape Concepts: This task includes developing two landscape concepts for typical sections along the corridor. The concepts will illustrate plant massings and locations and suggest plant types based on the design palette. Preliminary cost opinions will also be developed. F. Preliminary Landscape Plan: This task includes developing one plan for the corridor. This plan will identify specific plants and locations. A cost estimate will be prepared. The preliminary landscape plan will be presented to the neighborhood for their input. G. Final Landscape Plan: This task includes the preparation of the final landscape plan and cost estimate. The plan will be divided into individual plans that can be presented to property owners at a series of small meetings. Each property owner will be shown their individual lot and the proposed plan. Each property owner will be asked to sign a right of entry form at these meetings so that planting on private property can occur. Property owners that do not attend will be contacted. H. Preparation of Construction Documents and Bidding: This task includes the preparation of a landscape construction plan and specification. The plan will be prepared based on State-Aid Standards. SEH will assist in pre-bid activities and attend the bid opening. A bid tabulation and recommendation for award will be provided. I. Construction Administration: This task includes a total of 78 hours of construction observation. This will include approving the staked location of plant materials, attendance at the pre-construction conference, part time field observing at critical points in construction and processing payment requests. Estimated Fee It is anticipated that this work can be completed for a total of $62,202.00. The services will be provided on an hourly rate with a not-to-exceed price of $62,202.00. No additional work will be completed without prior, written authorization from the City. Schedule It is anticipated that the majority of the planning work will be completed in 2000 and that construction plans will be completed by March of 2001. Landscape construction is dependent on the County completing the roadwork and it is not likely that planting will occur prior to fall 2001. Mr.Rodney W.Rue,P.E. July 21,2000 Page 3 Attached to this agreement are general conditions that were provided by the City and a detailed break down the cost estimate that was provided in the proposal. Two copies of this agreement are attached for your review. Please sign one copy and return it to our offices as a notice to proceed. Sincerely, Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. Laurie McRostie Landscape Architect sah Attachments \\spfiles l\corpdoc\wp\projects\e fledenp\0002\letragree.721.doc Approved this day of , 2000 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE By: • Mayor, City of Eden Prairie By: City Manager, City of Eden Prairie • CSAH 1,Pioneer Trail, Landscaping Proposal,Eden Prairie,Minnesota TASKS Project Senior Graduate Technician Clerical TOTALS Manner LA LA 1.0 Project Management ®Kick-off Meetin-with Ci and County Staff 4 4 4 12 Pro•ect Coordination-Throoeh Construction Phase _Subtotal Hours: 2.0 Inventory Phase ®Coon end Ci Ordinance Review __ 6 4 10 ®Review Conn CSAH 1 Reconstruction Plans ®Site Visit-Document Ve etation T• s and Visual Analysis EN Ga•hicat! Describe Invents. and Anal sis --=11111:1�i—SI —Subtotal Hours: i v 11111 4 Concept De%elopment/Preliminary Sketches ME a veto.Plant and Struc. Des[_.Pale. 1 4 16 30 51 MEM Devclo•Preli Sketch Con •" ©l=r1 1.1=23=M1—=MEI _Subtotal Hours: ------ b�.s�R�.:F�' ��.,.,...i a•. .3t,s'Y( `='Y..!• ....s�=,.-K .s�._e.._;y 6 Prepare Landscape Concepts Pre•are Two Coact.ts for Corridor 8 30 40 78 ISE Pre•are Prelirnina Cost 0.iaioas — I .1 .1 9 • _Subtotal Hours: 1111.1=311111111162==011=111701113 �T.� ' �.a 3�'k} at. .I`i'i€is 3:...,.�5 �' , .it fR.. �Vi4w•1 x � 4L 8 Preliminary Landscape Plan EMI• •ere Prelimina Lacdsca• Plan 6 24 24 54 131111Pretimina Cost()Won —IIMEINIIIIIMIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIMM111111111111 —Subtotal Hours: AFT ..r.�. Final Landscape Plan ®Pre,are Final Landsca• Plan 2 6 16®— 56 ®Pre•arc Final Cost 0•inion -��--� a Subtotal Hours: ©MIIIICIMMICI©1111•111:1111111111111M 01.111111.11111111111111111111111111111.1M11.1111111.1111 iC gar ;.may' w: fir' r" ! €£4�.#'r_.t:6�,.3a'�.°'...I.-dt�-.due,. �L�a�`.t- •4 ,....�^..`�w46�,..�&..- 3t,a.s, �r".. �.�:��-..�a- C.f.'..-.�,.,�:..�t�re. - Obtainln_Remainin_Ri_•t-of-En Si:natures 111111.111_1MM —MIME 24 14 Construction Documents Mil Pre•een Construction 1 vudwa• Plan 2 8 16 24 50 �Pre o 'o re.•• :id Tabulefion 81111111.11M11111.11111.11Milln Pre•see S•cificatioos and Project Manual 11.1.13M11111111®-111111111111131M11111110 —Subtotal Hours: 1111111111WIMMIIIIIIIIIEIIIIIME11111111111E® -----_ IS Bidding Phase Assist in Pre-Bid Activities,Attend Bid••oia_ 2 6--- 8 Pre•are Addenda(If Necess ) 4 ®Pre•are Bid Tabulation and Recommendation for Award —_111111111111111113-- 1 1.1 Subtotal flours: 11.1111111E111.1311111111113MIKIMINICIIIIMICI 16 Construction Administration -Attend Pre-construction Meeetin 4 6 10 En Construction Obeservatioo ��---� _Subtotal Hours: ®MIEn 0 011111111111=1111111 ..,TOTAL BASEPItO.1ECT HOURS-. - ::pi:tt:,. :... . 5;3E.: 1 i *`' AVERAGE HOURLY RATES 25.03 25.03 1850 20.03 18.53 #VALUE! LABOR COST HOURS X RATES) 2,077 5507 4.625 6,209 927 #VALUE! _OVERHEAD :OR COST X 1.69) 3,656 9,692 8,140 MEM 1,632 #VALUE! -LABOR AND OVERHEAD SUBTOTAL 5,733 15,199 12,765 17,137 2,559 53,393 • -PROFIT(15%) 860 2,280 1,915® 384 8,009 TOTAL L BOR.OVERHEAD.PROFIT:: b,593`. .17..179;- 13.iiS0. 19,708 2.V43 61,402 EXPENSES ravel,Photography,Printing) TOTAL PORJECT COST 62,2O2 5 GENERAL CONDITIONS SECTION 1: PROJECT INFORMATION 1.1 City will provide to Consultant all known information regarding 3.2 Disposal of contaminated or hazardous waste samples is the existing and proposed conditions of the site or which affects the work to responsibility of City. After said 30 days,City will be responsible to select be performed by Consultant. Such information shall include,but not be and arrange for lawful disposal procedures that include removal of samples limited to site plans, surveys, known hazardous waste or conditions, from Consultant's custody and transporting them to a disposal site. City may previous laboratory analysis results,written reports,soil boring logs and request, or if City does not arrange for disposal, Consultant may deliver applicable regulatory site response(Project Information), samples to City,freight collect,or arrange for lawful disposal and bill City at cost plus 15%. 1.2 City will immediately transmit to Consultant any additions, updates,or revisions to the Project Information as it becomes available SECTION 4: FEE PAYMENT to City,its subcontractors or consultants. • • 4.1 Consultant will submit invoices to City monthly, and a final invoice 1.3 City will provide an on-site representative to Consultant within 24 upon completion of work. Invoices will show charges based on the current hours upon request,to aid, define, supervise, or coordinate work or Consultant Fee Schedule or other documents as attached. Project Information as requested by Consultant. 4.2 The balance stated on the invoice shall be deemed correct unless City 1.4 Consultant will not be liable for any decision, conclusion, notifies Consultant, in writing, of the particular item that is alleged to be recommendations, judgement or advice based on any inaccurate incorrect within ten(10)days from the invoice date. Consultant will review information furnished by City,or other subcontractors or consultants the alleged incorrect item within ten(10)days and either submit a corrected engaged by City. invoice or a statement indicating the original amount is correct. SECTION 2: SITE LOCATION, ACCESS, PERMITS, 4.3 Payment is due upon receipt of invoice(or corrected invoice)and is past APPROVALS AND UTILITIES due thirty-five(35)days from invoice date. On past due accounts,City will pay a finance charge of 1.5% per month on the unpaid balance, or the 2.1 City will indicate to Consultant the property lines of the site and maximum allowed by law,whichever is less,until invoice is fully paid. assume responsibility for accuracy of markers. 4.4 If City fails to pay Consultant within sixty(60)days following invoice 2.2 City will provide for right-of-way for Consultant personnel and date,Consultant may deem the default a breach of its agreement,terminate the equipment necessary to perform the work. agreement,and be relieved of any and all duties under the agreement. City however,will not be relieved of Fee Payment responsibilities by the default 2.3 City will be solely responsible for applying for and obtaining or termination of the agreement. permits and approvals necessary for Consultant to perform the work. Consultant will assist City in applying for and obtaining such permits 4.5 City will be solely responsible for applying for and obtaining any and approvals as needed. It is understood that City authorizes applicable compensation fund reimbursements from various state and federal Consultant to act as agent for City for City's responsibilities under this programs. Consultant may assist City in applying for or meeting notification section including signing certain forms on City's behalf such as Right-of- requirements,however. Consultant makes no representations or guarantees Way forms, as to what fund reimbursement City may receive. Consultant shall not be liable for any reductions from reimbursement programs made for any reason 2.4 While Consultant will take reasonable precautions to minimize any by state or federal agencies, except as may be caused by Consultant's damage to property,it is understood by City that in the normal course negligence. of the work some damage may occur. The correction of any damage is the responsibility of City or, at City's direction;the damage may be 4.6 City may withhold from any final payment due the Consultant such corrected by Consultant and billed to City at cost plus 15%. amounts as are incurred or expended by the City on account of the termination Notwithstanding the above, Consultant agrees to be responsible for of the Contract. damage caused by Consultant's negligence. SECTIC`l 5: OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS 2.5 City agrees to render reasonable assistance requested by Consultant to enable performance of work without delay or interference,and upon 5.1 Consultant will deliver to City certain reports as instruments of the request of Consultant,to provide a suitable workplace. professional work or services performed pursuant to this Agreement. All reports are intended solely for City,and Consultant will not be liable for any 2.6 City will be responsible for locating and identifying all interpretations made by others. subterranean structures and utilities. Consultant will take reasonable precautions to avoid damage or injury to subterranean structures and 5.2 City agrees that all reports and other work furnished to City,or City's utilities identified and located by City and/or representatives of Utility agents or representatives, which are not paid for, will be returned to Companies. Consultant upon demand and will not be used by City for any purpose. SECTION 3: SAMPLES 5.3 Unless otherwise agreed,Consultant will retain all pertinent records or reports concerning work and services performed for a period of at least two 3.1 Consultant may retain at its facility selected soil,water,or material (2)years after report is submitted. During that time the records will be made samples for a maximum of 30 days after completion of the work and available to City during Consultant's normal business hours. City may obtain submission of Consultant's report, which samples shall remain the reproducible copies of all software, manuals, maps, drawings, logs and property of City. Unless otherwise directed by the City,Consultant may reports at cost,plus 15%,for data and materials not being provided as part dispose of any samples after 30 days. of the scope of work for the project. 5.4 City may use the Consultant report in its entirety and may make 7.4 Consultant will not be responsible or liable for the interpretation of its copies of the entire report available to others. However,City shall not data or report by others. make disclosure to others of any portions or excerpts of a report constituting less than the entire report,or to mislead others by omitting SECTION 8: GENERAL INDEMNIFICATION certain aspects contained in the report. 8.1 Consultant will indemnify and hold City harmless from and against 5.5 Consultant will consider Project Information as confidential and demands,damages,and expenses caused by Consultant's negligent acts and will not disclose to third parties information that it acquires,uncovers, omissions,and breach of contract and those acts,omissions,and breaches of or generates in the course of performing the work,except as and to the persons for whom Consultant is legally responsible. City will indemnify and extent Consultant may,in its sole discretion,deem itself required by law hold Consultant harmless from and against demands,damages,and expenses to disclose. caused by City's negligent acts and omissions, and breach of contract and those acts, omissions, and breaches of persons for whom City is legally SECTION 6: DISPUTES responsible. 6.1 City will pay all reasonable litigation or collection expenses SECTION 9: INSURANCE including attorney fees that Consultant incurs in collecting any delinquent amount City owes under this agreement. 9.1 Consultant shall procure and maintain insurance for protection from claims against it under workers compensation acts in statutory amounts and 6.2 If City institutes a suit against Consultant, which is dismissed, public liability/property damage of not less than$1,000,000 per claim and dropped,or for which judgement is rendered for Consultant,City will $3,000,000 in aggregate. pay Consultant for all costs of defense,including attorney fees,expert witness fees and court costs. 9.2 Consultant shall procure and maintain professional liability insurance for protection from claims arising out of professional services caused by any 6.3 If Consultant institutes a suit against City, which is dismissed, negligent act,error or omission for which Consultant is legally liable. dropped,or for which judgement is rendered for City,Consultant will pay City for all coats of defense,including attorney fees,expert witness 9.3 Certificate of insurance will be provided to City upon request. fees and court costs. SECTION 10: TERMINATION 6.4 At the option of the party asserting the same,all claims,disputes and other matters in question(hereinafter"claim")between the parties 10.1 The agreement between.Consultant and City may be terminated by to this Agreement;arising out of or relating to this Agreement or the either party upon thirty(30)days written notice. breach thereof whereby the party or parties asserting the same claims entitlement to damages or payment of less than$25,000.00 in aggregate 10.2 If the agreement is terminated prior to completion of the project, may be decided by arbitration in accordance with the Construction Consultant will receive an equitable adjustment of compensation. Industry Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association then existing unless the parties mutually agree otherwise. In the event any SECTION 11: ASSIGNMENT person shall commence an action in any court for any claim arising out of or relating to this Agreement or the breach thereof or the Project or 11.1 Neither party may assign duties,rights or interests in the performance construction thereof or any contract for such construction, the party of the work without obtaining the prior written consent of the other party, making a claim in arbitration may dismiss such proceedings(unless the which consent will not be unreasonably withheld. hearing on the claim has commenced)and elect to assert its claim in such action if such party could have done so but for the provisions of SECTION 12: DELAYS this Paragraph. 12.1 If Consultant is delayed in performance due to any cause beyond its SECTION 7: STANDARD OF CARE reasonable control, including but not limited to strikes, riots, fires, acts of God,governmental actions,actions of a third party,or actions or inactions of 7.1 Because no sampling program can prove the non-existence or non- City,the time for performance shall be extended by a period of time lost by presence of contaminated conditions or materials throughout the"entire" reason of the delay. Consultant will be entitled to payment for its reasonable site or facility, Consultant cannot warrant, represent, guarantee, or additional charges,if any,due to the delay. certify the non-existence or non-pm:once;or the extent of existence or presence,of contaminated conditions or materials,and City's obligation SECTION 13: EXTRA WORK under this agreement will not be contingent upon Consultant's delivery of any warranties,representations,guarantees,or certifications. 13.1 Extra work,additional compensation for same,and extension of time for completion shall be covered by written amendment to this agreement prior 7.2 Consultant's opinions,conclusions,recommendations,and report to proceeding with any extra work or related expenditures. will be prepared in accordance with the proposal,scope of work,and Limitations of Environmental Assessments and no warranties, SECTION 14: WITHHOLDING TAXES representations,guarantees,or certifications will be made. Except that Consultant warrants that hardware and software will perform as 14.1 No final payment shall be made to the Consultant until Consultant has represented in proposal and other parts of this agreement. provided satisfactory evidence to the City that Consultant and each of its • Subcontractors has complied with the provisions of Minn. Stat. 290.92 7.3 Although data obtained from discrete sample locations will be used relating to withholding taxes upon wages. A certificate by the Commissioner to infer conditions between sample locations no guarantee may be given of Revenue shall satisfy this requirement. that the inferred conditions exist because soil,surface and groundwater quality conditions between sample locations may vary significantly,and SECTION 15: AUDIT because conditions at the time of sample collection may also.vary significantly with respect to soil,surfacewater and groundwater quality 15.1 The books, records, documents and accounting procedures and at any other given time and for other reasons beyond Consultant's practices of the Consultant or other parties relevant to this Agreement are control. subject to examination by the City and either the Legislative Auditor or the State Auditor as appropriate. SECTION 16: PAYMENT TO SUBCONTRACTORS 16.1 The Consultant shall pay any Subcontractor within ten(10)days of the Consultant's receipt of payment from the City for undisputed services provided by the Subcontractor. The Consultant shall pay interest of one and one-half percent(VA%)per month or any part of a • month to a Subcontractor on any undisputed amount not paid on time to the Subcontractor. The minimum monthly interest penalty payment for an unpaid balance of$100.00 or more is S10.00. for an unpaid balance of less than S100.00,the Consultant shall pay the actual amount due to the Subcontractor. SECTION17: DATA PRACTICES ACT COMPLIANCE 17.1 The Consultant shall at all times abide by Minn.Stat. 13.01 et seq.,the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act,to the extent the same is applicable to data and documents in the possession of the Consultant. SECTION 18: ENTIRE AGREEMENT 18.1 This Agreement contains the entire understanding between the City and Consultant and supersedes any prior written or oral agreements between them respecting the written subject matter. There are no representations, agreements, arrangements or understandings, oral or written between City and Consultant relating to the subject matter of this Agreement which are not fully expressed herein. 18.2 The agreement between Consultant and City may be modified • only by a written amendment executed by both City and Consultant. 18.3 This agreement is governed by the laws of the State of Minnesota. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: August 1,2000 SECTION: Consent Calendar SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: 99-5500 ITEM NO.: Public Works Services Award Contract for Well Pumphouse No. 14 V r-Eugene A.Dietz , Requested Action Move to: Award contract for Well Pumphouse No. 14 to Terranova, L.L.C. in the amount of$244,900.00. Synopsis City Council awarded the contract to construct the well (the hole/casing) earlier this year and it is nearly complete at 415 feet deep. This contract will construct the pumphouse, mechanical equipment and well collector line along Lone Oak Drive to Mitchell Road to complete the project. Background Information Well No. 14 will bring our total well field to 13 (the designation for Well No. 1 was retired with the abandonment of the well for TH 212). In order to adequately supply our projected needs for the community, we would anticipate the need for 15 or 16 wells at full development. This summer, it has been typical that the water plant has been operating at a rate of 20 million gallons per day (MGD). Thirteen wells will provide roughly 23 to 24 MGD, up from approximately 21 or 22 MGD with our current 12 wells. Staff anticipates constructing a 151 well in 2001. Well No. 14 will have architecture that resembles the Wingate Hotel, since it is essentially on the same site and follows our policy of matching adjacent architectural features. This project is part of our water system master plan, is contained in the Utility CIP and below the engineer's estimate for the project. Staff therefore recommends that Council award the contract to Terranova,L.L.C. Attachments Letter/Bid tabulation from TKDA f TKDA • TNLTZ,KING, ,ANDERSON AND ASSOCIATESES,,INCORPORATED ENGINEERS•ARCHITECTS•PLANNERS 1500 PIPER JAFFRAY PLAZA • 444 CEDAR STREET SAINT PAUL,MINNESOTA 55101-2140 PHONE 651/292-4400 FAX:651/292-0083 ,90 1gn July 25, 2000 Excellence Mr. Eugene A. Dietz Director of Public Works City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie,Minnesota 55344-2230 Re: Tabulation of Bids • Well Pumphouse No. 14 Improvement Contract No. 99-5500 City of Eden Prairie,Minnesota TKDA Commission No. 11922-03 Dear Mr. Dietz: Enclosed for yourinforniation is the Tabulation of Bids°received for the.above referenced project. Four rims submitted bids onJuly 20, 2000. The bidders,along with their bids, are listed below: Bidder Total Bid Terranova LLC $244,900 Infinity Builders Corp. $260,900 Magney Construction Inc. $268,445 Rice Lake Contracting Corp. $258,400 • • The City has the right to award this contract to the lowest responsible bidder. TKDA staff has checked the bid and references submitted by the low bidder and have found them to be responsible and also that their Bid Proposal as submitted meets the requirements of the project plans and specifications. While the general contractor,Terranova LLC,is a firm which has limited experience in municipal projects,-and is-a firm which we'have not worked with,their listed subcontractors for this project include contractors which have considerable experience with this type of construction. • An Equal Opportunity Employer a_ Mr.Eugene A.Dietz July 25,2000 Page 2 The Engineer's Estimate for this project was $262,000, and the low bidder submitted a bid of $244,900. It is our recommendation that the City award a contract to the lowest responsible bidder,Terranova LLC,in the amount of$244,900. This contract amount is based upon the unit costs as listed in their Bid Proposal. Their Bid Proposal should be included as part of the contract documents. Sincerely, Y'12-444z- Verne E. acobsen,P.E. VEJ/eac Enclosure 3 CD I it al U o 00000000 0 0 0 Z - O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . F- o ouiooc000 o uS u9 Z J Z O 0 V u)o00 LO 0. O a' a 'C OO COOOOCON. 'I O Q U 0 0 .7 N T N N r r _ r. N CO • =F-Q N N N _ Q CA N E9 69-69 E9 E9 E9 ER 69.E9 M H H 0 0 0 0,-0 0 0 0 0 EO Qz - 0 O Or-000oopO Cc I,,,w 0 0 NI- 0 N 0 W 0 U V O O O N zlr r) Zn O. cm N N r . Q0I- ¢ N _ _1 C.)W M E9 E9 E9 E9 E9 E9 ER.E9 E9 Q Z F- S 0 0000000 0 0 0 ¢¢ 0 0 a. o 00000000 q o q C'J�j u) S I- o 00000000 o 0 0 Z O w J Z O o u)u)O N 1-N.0 W 0 N ONO co_r-I.0.. 0 0 0 • Y0 NOD m NCA r Nr N CC) N N :Q Z O C3 wl..�a N N N OQ W -I E9 E9 E9 E9 CO E9 E9 E9 E9 41 E9 E9 0 m O O O O O O O O O o! OOOO CO OOO F'w 0 0100000 to 00 R. CO CO LLDa U N C CV V N Z N E9 E9 E9 E9 E9 E9 E9 E9 E9 0 00000000 0 0 0 O 00000000 0 0 O O 00000000 O 0 0 0 00000000 O 0 0 I- ui 00000uioo ui ui 0 n: o 0000000$ 0 0 0 JZ O UC)0 r'V'CO N. CO Cr) CO , C. CC in ou)oo0o0 in 0 O Q� O CO 0(DCIO COU)N C7 0 CO CCA{ O O) ONIs-o v-u)CO Co O) d' er J~O t} rr V N. T CC0O et V 4N,) NN N r M C0'�) N 1) QO Q N r N N Z N r N NU) Z > o m Z0 69. Eft E9 E9 E9 69.ER 69.ER E9 E9 E9 0 E9 E9 E9 69.69 E9 E9 E9 E9 E9 E9 E9 0 0 00004000 Ya 0 00000000 g W ui Cdd'o C7uiN6 J o OCgNGrOOG M • U. O WI-- co CC)<t V nN 0 Cr) 0 0) 0 0r0 Z F-Z V 0 CO Coo o CO) W rn R. 0 N Co F- 0 g Q V ,- _U u) N N C) �"' O' N ft N m J E9 E9 E9 69.ER E9 ER. E9 E9 E9 ER E9 E9 E9 E9 E9 E9 E M m ~ rn 0)LL LL Q CO Q LL U) W 0)U.LL 4 m LL C Q J JJJ -I W JJ J JJJiwuJ W JJ ~ q O O O O O O O O O o o o O O O 0 0 )-u0)CCir0rC') rU) I,-0TC') Za)CO r CO C7 CO T CO . Q n • a z� a 0 ' Z:E a 0 =do o Zz , FQ- en a) o zzx • c c°)_) V QOm CL I- cm cam_) V Q0m a. FO- 'a E �6. w �j W O Z .at- E curia` W CC?w O- Z 0 p a aE Z Fw-U¢ m 0 0- o.E z Q0< m J V M▪ oy 3 E W owW WU ~o Z N 0E W owW w0 o z 0 z W J Z .V.I a0 ctJ > Cr) =1p a O 0 c.1QCJ > ->-'-I =10 a U Q S = c) y m = o S Q Z I))F- r 0 = o N IL 0)=Q Z W F- r U I-- c)co in O2 EM N >.w 25z •0 o 2 2 E� N gLw 25z 0 c0 coo w Da cm3 z w0Q wwp W OTC IL 15 m z w0Q WWI WZ CC rZ CO c m> - �a�N¢Nid M W - ca > Q m° --rn~Q�cc = a) Z N m w m O� �zoi�3o3wo O al W m m13 2zc=n �o3wo o a) Z� o z 3 5.ro c °COW=)ZZiOaQ a F. O.R1? Wr-w='ZzI-roaCC CL z Ocw ur npC r' N CC o c 03 Q�n�.UCC o0V 2) 2 m cv x Qrr a- CCEL.ODU M 2 m OOa Z 0cc L 0 3JQ W�o zS0 J o. W Q m `o ��W}az== J W Q d z W W c m Q ¢ W Z Z W Q 0 C $ 0 j-1-3 W?.3 W a 0 U O OT1' NU 3 3 I- LL,,--in 2,-0) I-rr .3► 3S 0 cc?w 0) z LLr N r2 rLt]�L2F-rr ZJw 2 O Z Wo ,NC')�f U)CO Is.COr N CO N O F. CO CO 0 I j I 0 0� WC F_Z U3U 0 r0 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 08/01/00 SECTION: Consent Agenda SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: Community Development ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Donald R. Uram Bluff Country Village East Commercial Michael Franzen Bluff Country Village West Commercial 171 6- Requested Action Move to: • • Approve the First Amendment to Developer's Agreement for Bluff Country Village East Commercial • Approve the First Amendment to Developer's Agreement for Bluff Country Village West Commercial Synopsis The approved agreements required all road improvements to Hennepin Town Line Road and Pioneer Trail to be completed by August 31, 2000. The developer would like to phase the improvements. Phase one would be a south bound left turn into Walgreens to be completed by October 31, 2000. The remaining road improvements must be completed prior to occupancy permit for any commercial development on the West Side of Hennepin Town Line Road. The staff supports the proposed phasing plan for road improvements. Attachments 1. First Amendment to Developer's Agreement for Bluff Country Village East Commercial 2. First Amendment to Developer's Agreement for Bluff Country Village West Commercial I FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT FOR BLUFF COUNTRY VILLAGE COMMERCIAL EAST THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT,made and entered into as of August 1, 2000, by HUSTAD LAND COMPANY, a Minnesota corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Developer," and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation,hereinafter referred to as "City"; WHEREAS,the parties desire to amend the Developer's Agreement between Hustad Land Company and the City of Eden Prairie for Bluff Country Village Commercial East,dated December 7, 1999 (hereinafter the "Developer's Agreement). NOW THEREFORE,the Developer's Agreement is amended by adding new paragraph 3a as follows: 1. The improvements to Hennepin Town Road as described in Paragraph 3—STREET AND UTILITY PLANS may be reduced to the construction of a median opening to accommodate southbound left turns only. For this reduced median opening, modifications to the intersection of Hennepin Town Line Road and CSAH 1 are not required. The date for completion of median improvements is revised to October 31, 2000. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties to this Agreement have caused these presents to be executed as of the day and year aforesaid. HUSTAD LAND COMPANY CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE its Vice President Jean L. Harris,Mayor Christopher M.Enger, City Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ,2000, by Jean L. Harris and Christopher M. Enger, respectively the Mayor and the City Manager of the City of Eden Prairie, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of said corporation. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ,2000,by ,the vice president, of Hustad Land Company, a Minnesota corporation, on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public 3 FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT FOR BLUFF COUNTRY VILLAGE COMMERCIAL WEST THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT,made and entered into as of August 1, 2000, by HUSTAD LAND COMPANY, a Minnesota corporation, hereinafter referred to as "Developer," and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation,hereinafter referred to as "City"; WHEREAS,the parties desire to amend the Developer's Agreement between Hustad Land Company and the City of Eden Prairie for Bluff Country Village West Commercial, dated October 19, 1999 (hereinafter the "Developer's Agreement). NOW THEREFORE,the Developer's Agreement is amended as follows: 1. Paragraph 3 is amended in its entirety as follows: STREET AND UTILITY PLANS: Developer agrees than the utility plan, drainage plan and improvements to Hennepin Town Line Road contained in Exhibit B is conceptual.Prior to issuance by the City of any permit for the construction of streets and utilities for the Property,Developer shall submit to the City Engineer, and obtain the City Engineer's written approval of plans for streets,public sanitary sewer,water and storm sewer. Improvements to Hennepin Town Line Road and its intersection with CSAH 1 shall be designed for the current posted speed limit in accordance with MnDOT geometric design standards. The design shall include the north-bound lane shift through the intersection required to accommodate the new left turn lane in Hennepin Town Line Road and shall include all modifications including medians, paving striping, signing and signal modifications. Revisions with the CSAH 1 intersection shall be submitted to Hennepin County for review and approval. Improvements shall be completed prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property. Plans for public infrastructures shall be of a plan view and profile on 24 x 36 plan sheets consistent with City standards. Developer shall pay a permit fee of five percent of construction value to City. The design engineer shall provide daily inspection, certify completion in conformance to approved plans and specifications and provide record drawings. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties to this Agreement have caused these presents to be executed as of the day and year aforesaid. HUSTAD LAND COMPANY CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE its Vice President Jean L. Harris,Mayor Christopher M. Enger, City Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ,2000, by Jean L. Harris and Christopher M. Enger, respectively the Mayor and the City Manager of the City of Eden Prairie, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of said corporation. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 2000,by ,the vice president of Hustad Land Company., a Minnesota Corporation, on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public • CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: I SECTION: Consent Calendar August 1, 2000 SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Public Safety/Police Trunked Radio Network Use Agreement Requested Action Move to: Authorize the execution of an agreement with Southwest Metro Transit Commission to permit use of the City's trunked radio network. Synopsis Southwest Metro Transit is unable to continue to use a commercial radio system since that radio system is being abandoned. The trunked radio network the City owns and operates for public safety and local government operations has excess capacity. Background The City's radio network currently serves all City departments and divisions as well as the School District. Southwest Metro Transit is eligible to use a government network due to the nature of their public services. Southwest Metro is unable to construct a radio system since there are no frequencies available in the metropolitan area. Two-way radio communications is essential for the safe and efficient operation of the transit system. There is an inherent public safety benefit derived from reliable two-way radio communications in this application. Southwest Metro Transit is responsible for the purchase of all subscriber equipment and will pay a maintenance fee to the City of$5 per month per radio. Any infrastructure improvements for the primary benefit of Southwest Metro Transit will be paid by Southwest Metro. Attachments • • Agreement 1 TRUNKED RADIO NETWORK USE AGREEMENT This AGREEMENT is made and entered into on this . . day of 2000, by and between the City of Eden Prairie, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("City") and Southwest Metro Transit Commission, a joint powers entity("SMTC"). WHEREAS,the City owns and operates a trunked radio network(hereinafter"Network") for its public safety and local government operations; WHEREAS,the City has capacity to allow additional users,with similar purposes,to use the Network; WHEREAS, SMTC desires to use the Network for similar purposes, and City desires to allow SMTC to use the Network for those purposes. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants contained herein the parties agree as follows: 1. TERM AND TERMINATION. 1.1 Term. This Agreement shall commence on the day of execution and continue for a term of five(5)years. 1.2 Renewal. This Agreement shall renew for one additional five (5) years term unless either party gives written notice of its intent not to renew this Agreement ninety(90) days before the expiration date. 1.3 Termination. This agreement may be terminated by either party upon one hundred and eighty (180) days written notice to the other party. In the event of an emergency, natural disaster, or other similar event or occurrence, City may terminate or suspend this agreement without notice. • 2. USE OF NETWORK. 2.1 Permitted Uses. SMTC may use the Network solely for official purposes related to the conduct of SMTC business. 2.2 Authorized Users. Use of the Network shall be limited to SMTC, its employees, agents, and other individuals designated as authorized users by SMTC in writing to the City prior to the non-employee or non-agent user's use of the Network. Upon written request from City, SMTC shall provide to the City a list of SMTC employees and agents and the assignments and route manifests for each such employee or agent. 2.3 Restrictions on Use. Use of the Network by SMTC shall comply with Part 90 of the Federal Communication Commission ("FCC") rules, and all other applicable Trunked Radio Network Use Agreement laws, ordinances,or regulations,whether Federal, State or Local. 2.4 Not Private. All communications on the Network are not private, and may be monitored and recorded by the City, the Federal Communications Commission, news media organizations and members of the general public. 2.5 Misuse. If there is any misuse of the Network or equipment by SMTC, the City may, in its sole discretion, disable or otherwise render inoperative, the offending radio(s) or equipment. City shall notify the Executive Director of SMTC of any such disabling. Reactivation of the radio or equipment shall not occur until City, in its sole discretion is satisfied that the misuse will not reoccur. 3. FEE. • 3.1 Fee. SMTC shall pay to City $5.00 per month per radio used on the Network by • SMTC. This fee shall cover SMTC's use of the Network and radio maintenance as described in section 6.1 of this Agreement. City may change this fee upon thirty(30) days written notice to SMTC. City shall not change this fee more than once in any twelve(12)month period without the written consent of SMTC. 3.2 Toll Calls. The cost of all toll calls originating from SMTC radios will be billed to SMTC and are the sole responsibility of SMTC. 3.3 Expenses. SMTC shall pay all expenses and costs related to its use of the Network, including but not limited to cost of licensing under section 4.2 of this Agreement, cost for new equipment under section 5.2 of this Agreement, cost for equipment maintenance under section 6.2 of this Agreement, and cost of Network improvements under section 7.2 of this Agreement. 4. LICENSING. 4.1 License Required. SMTC shall license all radios used in the City network with • the FCC on the City Network license(s). 4.2 Cost of Licensing. All costs and expenses related to licensing actions required to provide SMTC radio communications capabilities shall be the responsibility of SMTC. 5. EQUIPMENT. • 5.1 Inventory. Prior to SMTC's use of the Network, SMTC shall provide the City with a list of all radios and equipment used on the Network which includes, the serial number, model number, brand, and the location of the radio or equipment. ("Authorized List"). Only equipment on the Authorized list may be used on the Network. City's use of the Authorized List shall be limited to licensing and P. Trunked Radio Network Use Agreement Network management purposes. • 5.2 Equipment Purchasing. SMTC shall coordinate the purchase of new radios and equipment with the City, including but not limited to, providing a copy of all purchase orders to the City at the time the purchase order is issued and delivering all equipment purchased to City for inventory and programming. The purchase of radios and equipment for SMTC's use shall be at the sole cost and expense of SMTC. 6. MAINTENANCE. 6.1 Radio Maintenance. City shall repair and maintain all radios, including radios owned by SMTC, used on the Network, in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications and FCC rules. All maintenance shall be performed by trained and certified technicians. 6.2 Equipment Maintenance. SMTC shall maintain and repair all equipment, other than radios and the Network, used by SMTC on the Network in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications and FCC rules. All maintenance shall be performed by trained and certified technicians. 6.3 Network Maintenance. City shall maintain and repair the Network and the Network infrastructure in accordance with manufacturer's specifications and FCC rules. All maintenance shall be performed by trained and certified technicians. 7. NETWORK IMPROVEMENTS. 7.1 Cooperation. SMTC shall cooperate and work with City to effectively complete Network improvements or expansions. 7.2 Cost of Improvements. The cost of Network improvements or expansions shall be the responsibility of the City, unless the City,in its sole discretion, determines that the Network improvement or expansion is for the sole or primary benefit of SMTC. If the improvement or expansion is for the sole or primary benefit of SMTC then SMTC shall be responsible for all of the costs of the improvement or expansion. • 7.3 Notice of Improvements. The City shall provide at least sixty (60) days notice of improvements or expansions that the City has determined will be for the sole or primary benefit of SMTC. If the City fails to give the required notice the cost of the improvement or expansion shall be the responsibility of the City, regardless of the sole or primary beneficiary, unless SMTC agrees in writing to be responsible for the cost of the improvement or expansion. PP. 1.] Trunked Radio Network Use Agreement 8. LOSS. THEFT. OR MISUSE OF RADIOS. SMTC shall report the loss, theft, or known misuse of Network radio equipment to the City upon discovery. 9. OTHER COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES. 9.1 PSAP Monitoring. The City 911 Public Safety Answering Point (PSAP) shall monitor designated talk groups or channels for receipt of distress or other urgent communications from SMTC personnel. 9.2 PSAP Services. SMTC may also use PASP personnel to assist and coordinate non-distress and non-urgent communications with the City, City departments, and City personnel. Such assistance and coordination may not be available at all times as the assistance and coordination may be limited by other PSAP responsibilities and PSAP staffing 9.3 No Representations. The City makes no representation of, or commitment to the monitoring of talk groups or channels used by SMTC. 10. LIABILITY. SMTC and City acknowledge that each party will be responsible for its own acts and the results thereof, to the extent authorized by the law, and shall not be responsible for the acts of the other party and the results thereof. The City's and SMTC's liability shall be limited as set forth in Minnesota Statutes; Chapter 466. • 11. NOTICES. Any notice required or permitted to be given by any party upon the other is given in accordance with this Agreement if it is directed to said party by delivering it personally, or if mailed in a sealed wrapper by United States registered or certified mail, return receipt.requested, postage prepaid, or if deposited cost paid with a nationally recognized,reputable overnight courier, or by facsimile,properly addressed as follows: If to City: City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie,MN 55344-2230 Fax No. 952-974-6203 Attn: Gary Therkelsen If to SMTC: Southwest Metro Transit Commission 13500 Technology Drive Eden Prairie,MN 55344 Fax No. 952-974-7997 Attn:Len Simich Pd4 Trunked Radio Network Use Agreement Notices shall be deemed effective on the earlier of the date of receipt or the date of deposit as aforesaid,provided, however, that if notice is given by deposit, that the time for response to any notice by the other party shall commence to run one business day after any such deposit. Any party may change its address for the service of notice by giving written notice of such change to the other party, in any manner above specified, 10 days prior to the effective date of such change. 12. ASSIGNMENT. This agreement may not be delegated or assigned by either party without the written consent of the other party. 13. FORCE MAJEURE. Neither party shall be held responsible if the fulfillment of any terms or provisions of this agreement are delayed or prevented by revolutions or other disorders, wars, acts of enemies, strikes, fires, floods, acts of God, without limiting the foregoing, by any other cause not within the control of the party whose performance is interfered with, and which by the exercise of reasonable diligence, the party is unable to prevent,whether of the class of causes herein before enumerated or not. 14. GOVERNING LAW. This agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Minnesota. 15. WHOLE AGREEMENT. This agreement constitutes the fmal and complete agreement of the parties. Any subsequent modifications to this agreement must be in writing, signed by both parties. , . • P gh � CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: August 1, SECTION: Consent 2000 SERVICE AREA: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO. Community Development& Extend Project Closing Date- Lincoln Parc Financial Services: Apartments Don Uram &David Lindahl Requested Action: Move to: Authorize the execution of the 2nd Amendment to the Contract for Deed sale of Lot 4 Block 1 Eden Prairie Marketcenter to Hartford Financial Services, extending the closing date from July 28,2000 to September 8, 2000. Synopsis: • The City closed the sale of Lot 4 Block 1 Eden Prairie Marketcenter to Hartford Financial Services through a Contract for Deed December 28, 1999. The terms of the sale were as follows: Total Price - $1,683,158.40 Down Payment Paid to City - $ 170,000.00 Interest payments (9.5%)to City until closing at which time the total balance owed on the Contract for Deed will be paid to the City. On April 18, 2000 the City Council granted an extension of the closing from April 28 to July 28,2000 in consideration of an additional payment of$50,000 toward the purchase of the property. Hartford is requesting another extension to provide HUD more time to approve their overall project financing. In consideration of a payment of$25,000 to the City toward the payoff of the Contract for Deed, the City Council could consider extending the closing date until September 8,2000. The following is a summary of all the Purchase Agreement and Contract for Deed amendments granted to date. All the extensions were requested by Hartford Financial to provide more time to secure project financing: Date Action Consideration January 19, 1999 Original purchase agreement executed- sale of land $1,683,160 August 24, 1999 First amendment executed- extended closing $ 15,000 September 21, 1999 Second amendment executed-extended closing $ 10,000 December 7, 1999 Third amendment executed- extended closing $ 15,000 December 21, 1999 Fourth amendment executed- Contract for Deed land sale $ 170,000 April May 22, 2000 First amendment to Contract for Deed(CD) $ 50,000 August 1, 2000 Sixth amendment to CD (pending CC approval) $ 25,000 Total cash received by the City $ 285,000 Attachments: Second Amendment to Contract for Deed Letter from HUD SECOND AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT FOR DEED THIS AGREEMENT is made as of August 1, 2000 between City of Eden Prairie, a municipal corporation("Seller")and Hartford Financial Services,LLC("Purchaser"). RECITALS WHEREAS Seller and Purchaser have entered into that certain agreement entitled Contract for Deed,made as of the 281 day of December, 1999 (hereinafter"Contract for Deed"), as amended by that certain First Amendment to Contract For Deed,made as of the 18th day of April, 1999 (hereinafter the"First Amendment") for the real property legally described as Lot 4, Block 1,Eden Prairie Market Center(hereinafter,the"Property"or"Real Property"). All initially-capitalized terms which are not defined in this Second Amendment shall have the meanings given them in the Contract for Deed and the First Amendment. WHEREAS Seller and Purchaser desire to amend the Contract for Deed as amended by the First Amendment pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. NOW,THEREFORE,in consideration of the foregoing and other good and valuable consideration,the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged,the parties agree as follows: 1. Paragraph 4. is amended adding a requirement for an additional principal payment and changing the due date of the outstanding principal balance and as follows: Purchaser shall pay on or before August 1,2000 an additional principal payment of$25,000.00. The remaining principal balance of$1,463,133.40 shall be payable in full on September 8,2000 with interest at the rate of 9 and 1/2 percent per annum. Interest on the outstanding principal balance shall accrue from the date hereof and shall be payable on September 1, 2000, and the remaining accrued interest shall be paid on September 8,2000 along with the outstanding principal balance. 2. • Except as amended hereby the Contract for Deed as amended by the First Amendment shall remain in full force and effect. IN AGREEMENT, Seller and Purchaser have executed this Second Amendment to Contract for Deed as of the date first written above. SELLER: BUYER: CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HARTFORD FINANCIAL SERVICES, LLC By By Its Jean L. Harris,Mayor By Christopher M. Enger, City Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on the day of 2000,by Jean Harris the Mayor and Christopher Enger,the City Manager,respectively, of the City of Eden Prairie, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on the day of 2000,by the and ,the , of Hartford Financial Services, LLC, on behalf of the company. Notary Public ep'llartford\second amended contract for deed.072500 • NICHOLSNICHOLSFINANCIAL SERVICES 'COMPANY July 26,2000 - _ Mayor Jean Harris CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie,MN 55344-2230 • Dear Mayor.Harris: , - _ - - • The purpose of this Ietter is to provide to you and the City of Eden Prairie the status,of the.'. • . processing of the Firm Commitment by the U.S.-Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)for the Lincoln Parc development. Nichols Financial Services Company is the HUD approved Mortgagee of record for this project. . _As such,it is our role to underwrite and deliver to'HUD a Firm Commitment application for mortgage insurance:. In turn,HUD processes.the loan application and issues a commitment to • insure the construction and permanent financing of this development. As required,our firm has ' . delivered to HUD all documents required to process the loan.application. Generally,these exhibits include the following: .. Architectural Plans - •• Civil Engineering.Plans , .,. - - Structural Plans -. - - - - - - • « . Construction Specifications , +• Construction Cost Itemization • • • Landscape Plans • • • .•• Non Refundable Financing Fees in the amount of$83,505.00 ', ., Appraisals • City Approval Documentation •. "Miscellaneous:Documents Per the attached correspondence from HUD,we expect to receive the Firm Commitment by no • later than August 30,2000,which will enable the developer and owner to close on the land and • start construction by September 15,2000.. If you have any questions regarding:further status of the processing,please contact me directly at • 952/.895-5200 erel Ti ‘y ' : \ _ „ . - othy: i oIs - President . ' 9521 895-5200 • Encl. • Multifamily Lender•Real Estate Financial Services . • 350 West Burnsville-Parkway Suite 500•Burnsville,MN 55337•Phone (952)-895 5200•FAX(952) 895-1.159 • i Q':,�ytviroFy U.S.Department of mousing and Urban Development '� ��j�(j�1 _ Minnesota State Office a '�"II�� 220 Second Street South o. I`,'IIII �o Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401-2195 9a,HOE„E•.°` http://www.hud.gov/local/minfminhome.html r,/0/ Mr. Timothy F. Nichols JUL 2 4 2000 CO (-000 Nichols Financial Services Company 350 West Burnsville Parkway Suite 500 Burnsville, MN 55337 Dear Mr. Nichols: Subject: LINCOLN PARC APARTMENTS Eden Prairie, MN Project Number 092-35604 Dear Mr. Nichols: We are writing this letter at your request to update you and the development team on the status of the Firm Commitment processing of the above-referenced application.. The project has been assigned a project number of 092-35604 and the Multifamily staff is diligently working on all aspects of the underwriting review. Our office understands that an early September closing is critical to this proposal. Our office will be prepared to issue a Firm Commitment, which will enable you to proceed to Initial Endorsement by early September of 2000 - pursuant to the bond delivery date requirements . If you have any questions regarding this, please contact Tim Gruenes, Public Trust Specialist, at 370-3051, -xt. 2252. Very since - rs, Id Goldman, Director Minneapolis Multifamily Hub CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 08/01/00 SECTION: Public Hearings SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Community Development Donald R.Uram Walgreens/Bank Redevelopment 4 Michael D. Franzen Requested Action Move to: • Continue the Public Hearing to the August 15, 2000, City Council meeting. Synopsis The project is for a 15,120 sq. ft. Walgreens and a 3,500 sq. ft. bank located at the northeast corner of County Road 4 and Highway 5. The Community Planning Board voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the project to the City Council at the June 12, 2000,meeting. The Developer is requesting a continuance to the August 15, 2000 City Council meeting. Background This project is located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Wagner Way and County Road 4. The project involves removing the existing building and constructing a 15,120 sq. ft. Walgreens and a 3,500 sq. ft. bank. The project requires waivers for offsite parking, lot size, and side yard setback. Approximately 9,200 square feet of a 17.3-acre wetland will be filled. The mitigation site is at the southwest corner of Venture Lane and Highway 5. A conservation easement is shown on the plans over the wetland,wetland mitigation, and wetland buffers. The plan meets the required 15- foot wetland buffer and the required 15-foot structure setback. Attachments 1. Letter requesting continuance. 07/23,00 14:37 F 1 612 332 2428 SEM 'ER DEVELOPMENT LTD. SEMPER DEVELOPMENT, LTD. D. 600 Foshay Tower! Phone: (612) 3 821 Marquette Avenue Fax (612; Minneapolis,Minn sota 55402 July 25,2000 Michael D.Franzen City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie,MN! 55344-4485 RE: Walgreens Project at Highways 5 and 4 Dear Mike: We are requesting a continuance to the August 15th City Council Meeting for our project at Hwy 5 ,ur get back to you math any further information from Walgreens as soon as we have it. John H.Kohler JHKJIt CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 08/01/00 SECTION: Public Hearings SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Community Development Donald R.Uram Idleview Office Park Mike Franzen Requested Action Move to: • Close the Public Hearing; and • Adopt the Resolution for PUD Concept Review on 1.21 acres; and • Approve 1st Reading of the Ordinance for PUD District Review with waivers and Zoning District Amendment within the Office Zoning District on 1.21 acres; and • Direct Staff to prepare a Developer's Agreement incorporating Staff and Board recommendations and Council conditions. Synopsis This project is a three story, 13,200 square foot office building located between Eden Road and Lake Idlewild,west of Dairy Queen. This site is guided and zoned Office. In 1986 the City Council approved a 14,000 square foot, two-story office building at a 30-foot setback from Lake Idlewild. The Community Planning Board first reviewed this project at the June 26, 2000 meeting. The Board recommended a two-week continuance for architectural changes, a TDM plan, and screening of parking. At the July 10,2000 meeting,the board voted 7-0 to recommend approval of the project,with shoreland and height waivers,to the City Council subject to a plan change for a 35-foot front yard setback to building and a 73-foot shoreland setback. The plans in the packet show a 35-foot front yard setback and a 73-foot shoreland setback. The TDM plan is consistent with TDM plans approved for small office buildings. Background The project requires the following waivers: • Shoreland structure setback from 200 feet to 73 feet. • Shore impact zone encroachment from 100 feet to 15 feet. • Shoreland impervious surface from 35%- 65% • Front yard parking setback structure setback from 35 feet to 17.5 feet. The City has approved waivers for all existing buildings on the lake.Applying the 200-foot setback would have precluded any of the land from developing, since there is limited land area between the existing roads and the lake. Attachments 1. Resolution for POD Concept Review 2. Community Planning Board Minutes dated June 26,2000 and July 10,2000 3. Staff Report dated June 23,2000 and July 7,2000 o . IDLEVIEW OFFICE PARK CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE H II NNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT OF IDLEVIEW OFFICE PARK FOR 78TH STREET PROPERTIES WHEREAS,the City of Eden Prairie has by virtue of City Code provided for the Planned Unit Development (PUD) Concept of certain areas located within the City; and WHEREAS, the Community Planning Board did conduct a public hearing on Idleview Office Park PUD Concept by 78th Street Properties and considered their request for approval for development(and waivers) and recommended approval of the requests to the City Council; and WHEREAS,the City Council did consider the request on August 1, 2000. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, as follows: 1. Idleview Office Park, being in Hennepin County, Minnesota, legally described as outlined in Exhibit A, is attached hereto and made a part hereof. 2. That the City Council does grant PUD Concept approval as outlined in the plans dated July 21, 2000. 3. That the PUD Concept meets the recommendations of the Community Planning Board dated July 10, 2000. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 1st day of August, 2000. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk 3 Exhibit A Idleview Office Park Legal Description: Lot 1,Block 1, Lake Idlewild Addition I STAFF REPORT TO: Community Planning Board FROM: Michael Franzen, City Planner DATE: July 7, 2000 SUBJECT: Idleview Office Park APPLICANT: Landform Engineering OWNER: 78th Street Properties, L.L.C. LOCATION: Eden Road and Glen lane REQUEST: 1. Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 1.21 acres. 2. Planned Unit Development District Review on 1.21 acres with waivers within the Office Zoning District. 3. Site Plan Review on 1.21 acres 5 L : ti :S j- ,, Q i r.„41, ss 4t _aac --y .c. r• - . cl •► 4" .•}'` tYg61 ' a, 'JT — —t �� i:•:n, ooT`.— Qrr., n i .J�a 2=' — '� - �•• I Asot ur'1r.7• . '� 1I,J. I _ , 1.14J '� ,Z JO•Sr-T 'a"'' xc to uzart 1 •1<t4 : rsart MT �s h o• ` � ....3 stf is•rt:72.ir )+f'71•iR x/ ,•a''�•+t•p. •t.,—- 1.) 1 1.i t ; 8 sot=wi�q M dC!®L l�S©e�'Soi*sic=te, r.•�,r 3. &.• z, �' • � • NTSl1 1 t 4....124) ; \�x I rc ,nrrr LaKE A. aRu• 1 1 QDLE WOLtD ,;5, I u.s .r os .....urlF • 'r-Y ry '0 „Y Ur r '4r ;AERIAL PHOTO 19891 a urv..t a•at 'r YR :1 1291��0 <• VO• FI 1J rr v for �. r'<Of '!io r i• �11 1• r 73 • 9 ar t 121 o • . ,6 1 r Ems • • j, er.' `+ .. . 2 ".?.r~� TJ ?• �9 t A w -a ; = j ��� ,*`' 8 LOAM ItAlit ; 4o O • 1 ,� W O D�7 F. AD Dee r *`' '_ - - - 114) -- e t I. +ems, (" uYu•x uruvt 122> 143, 1 = neu.os MSC! ! '*if• 1j5, S rj, ,n,n (� o �, 1 F Ietii 1443 ADO4e fit f/Mp 'r w 181- . Z 0 EDC UV 1 LDRAOWOE Ca 't �" CLOUOr 're` t4° Q G �y 0,, GGG �� 4 8F#' .A.," + .;',', 49 . -----.= . e a l.t..r $ 'o.r1 • ,' � t .S?JT'TrSa r'-.�, 1J 10.11 �p �, °' • . �f tf .42$•��� • X " 9� =CZ , g 7• / MOMT�QYt111 9 e •� . J Ur r• ADO*138f .4d '•wn •zts:' • d. o 1111 1,,,, •r- • •i ,7. . ' t . O /l. l I• 1 • rur.r,..ct a L>s ' 4 t.n l� ;P •'��.�4' D • /� ' nup s �R 1. S NO F449 5','s br,::-.1::., lT���'� i • /'''� /,�' •yqy• IS/ M • , .1.;,' LSos— • 125r.»s. �,'. �/ •, .• ���/\\J� M ��'������('''--- -((II)/ !//=_1 �•'� i'00 _ �.Y , fY r • 1•2q, ,a.1 ? ,, Z; VI • E 4.�. IE�.V — S. •: •••+,6) I 001 �$ (24) .0 ,0 T it,,, 5° psi, 05°1 �f wY Q • Y. r .j yti .'i • Orgy / moo ` �1%�' ' .t ��_e �U" ,}5, g •'•��U�.I�C ' 17`W' E ur a . r.s • '•G'l ff 2 ®®� y i..cr t ar a (y .. 11 t9,' ,5, f A 2 ' I �� 0.7 KV �' COY [1CJL +, ew J . p 10A1C NORTlf ' .1. ,'v' ' ' el� U • � • • ' ei‘ I "` _3 P�MINIM 6 .E..„ RES Staff Report—Idleview Office Park July 7,2000 BACKGROUND This is a continued item from the June 26,2000 Community Planning Board meeting. PLAN REVISIONS 1. The site plan shows the required 66 parking spaces. 2. The building elevations have a sloped metal panel roof, increased window sizes, and additional window details. 3. The landscape plan shows conifer trees instead of shade trees along the west property to help screen parking. 4. The Travel Demand Management Plan is consistent with plans approved for similar size office buildings. The staff believes that the plan revisions are consistent with the direction from the Community Planning Board given at the June 26, 2000 meeting. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the following: • Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 1.21acres. • Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers within the Office Zoning District on 1.21 acres. • Site Plan Review on 1.21 acres. This approval is based on plans dated June 16, 2000 and July 7, 2000, and subject to the recommendations of this Staff Report, and the following: 1. Prior to grading permit issuance, the proponent shall install erosion control and tree protection fencing at the grading limits of the property for review and approval by the City Engineer and City Forester. The proponent shall submit stormwater runoff and utility plans for review by the watershed district and the City Engineer. 2. Prior to Building permit issuance,the proponent shall: A. Meet with the Fire Marshal to go over fire code requirements. B. Submit samples of exterior building materials for review. C. Submit a landscaping and tree replacement bond for review. D. Pay the required cash park fee. E. Staff Report—Idleview Office Park _ July 7,2000 3. The following waivers from the City code are granted as part of the Planned Unit Development District review in the Office Zoning District: • Shoreland structure setback from 200 feet to 90 feet. • Shore impact zone encroachment from 100 feet to 15 feet. • Shoreland impervious surface from 35%- 65%. • Front yard structure setback from 35 feet to 17.5 feet. • Building height from 30 feet to 44 feet. • Parking setback from 35 feet to 17.5 feet. STAFF REPORT TO: Community Planning Board FROM: Michael Franzen, City Planner DATE: June 23, 2000 SUBJECT: Idleview Office Park APPLICANT: Landform Engineering OWNER: 78th Street Properties, L.L.C. LOCATION: Eden Road and Glen lane REQUEST: 1. Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 1.21 acres. 2. Planned Unit Development District Review on 1.21 acres with waivers within the Office Zoning District. 3. Site Plan Review on 1.21 acres Staff Report—Idleview Office Park June 23,2000 BACKGROUND This site is guided and zoned Office. In 1986 the City Council approved a 14,000 square foot,two- story office building at a 30-foot setback from Lake Idlewild. SITE PLAN The building is 13,260 square feet. The building base area ratio is .08. The City Code allows up to a .30 base area ratio. The floor area ratio is .23. The City Code allows up to a.50 floor area ratio. The required parking is 66 spaces. The plan meets the required parking. • PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT WAIVERS The project requires the following waivers: • Shoreland structure setback from 200 feet to 90 feet. • Shore impact zone encroachment from 100 feet to 15 feet. • Shoreland impervious surface from 35%- 65% • Front yard structure setback from 35 feet to 17.5 feet. • Building height from 30 feet to 44 feet. • Parking setback from 35 feet to 17.5 feet. In 1979 the City approved the Lake Idlewild PUD for land on the north and east sides of the lake. The approved setbacks were between 30—50 feet from the lake. The shoreland ordinance was adopted in 1982. Lake Idlewild was classified by the DNR as recreational development water with a 200-foot setback. The City has approved waivers for all existing buildings on the lake. Applying the 200-foot setback would have precluded any of the land from developing, since there is limited land area between the existing roads and the lake. The waivers should be granted for the following reasons: 1. The waivers are consistent with other projects on the lake. 2. The building is located 90 feet from the lake as compared to 30 feet with the approved plan. 3. Encroachment in the shore impact zone is needed to allow the construction of a stormwater treatment pond and a trail. 4. Compliance with City code requirements would preclude the site from developing. Staff Report—Idleview Office Park June 23,2000 WAIVERS FOR EXISTING AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS Home- Dairy Fuddruckers Baptist 1986 2000 Code Requirement: stead Queen Office Plan Plan Village 200 ft. Shoreland 50 feet 45 feet 65 feet 75 feet 30 ft 90 ft. Setback 35 ft. Front yard Meets meets meets code meets 30 ft. 17.5 ft. Setback code code code 35 ft.Parking 10 feet meets 10 feet meets 17.5 17.5 ft. Setback code code ft 100 ft. Shoreland Na Na na na na 15 ft. Impact 30 ft.Building Meets meets meets code meets meets 44 ft. Height code code code code 35% Impervious 55% 60% 60% na na 65% Surface ARCHITECTURE The building meets the 75% face brick and glass requirement LANDSCAPE PLAN The caliper inch requirement is 47 inches. The plan meets this requirement. There are 94 inches of significant trees on site. Tree loss is 74 inches. The required tree replacement is 86 inches. The plan meets this requirement. • DRAINAGE The plan provides the required stormwater treatment pond. SUMMARY Compliance with the city code requirements would preclude the property from developing. The granting of the waivers will allow the property to develop consistent with existing buildings along the lake. Staff Report—Idleview Office Park June 23,2000 STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the following: • Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 1.21acres. • Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers within the Office Zoning District on 1.21 acres. • Site Plan Review on 1.21 acres. This approval is based on plans dated June 16, 2000 and subject to the recommendations of this Staff Report, and the following: 1. Prior to grading permit issuance, the proponent shall install erosion control and tree protection fencing at the grading limits of the property for review and approval by the City Engineer and City Forester. The proponent shall submit stormwater runoff and utility plans for review by the watershed district and the City Engineer. 2. Prior to Building permit issuance,the proponent shall: A. Meet with the Fire Marshal to go over fire code requirements. B. Submit samples of exterior building materials for review. C. Submit a landscaping and tree replacement bond for review. 3. The following waivers from the City code are granted as part of the Planned Unit Development District review in the Office Zoning District: • Shoreland structure setback from 200 feet to 90 feet. • Shore impact zone encroachment from 100 feet to 15 feet. • Shoreland impervious surface from 35%- 65%. • Front yard structure setback from 35 feet to 17.5 feet. • Building height from 30 feet to 44 feet. • Parking setback from 35 feet to 17.5 feet. COMMUNITY PLANNING BOARD MINUTES June 26,2000 Page 6 V. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. IDLEVIEW OFFICE PARK by 78th Street Properties,LLC.Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Reiew on 1.21 acres,Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers in the Office Zoning District on 1.21 acres, and Site Plan Review on 1.21 acres. Location:North of Eden Road on Lake Idlewild. Corneille opened the public hearing at 8:56 p.m. Franzen said this piece of property was zoned for office in a 1986 plan and approved for a 2-story office building with a 30 foot setback from the lake. All existing structures have been granted waivers of the shoreline ordinance. If the city applied the ordinance there would be no room for building on the property. Darren Lazon of Landform Engineering representing the 78th street property said the situation was similar to Fuddruckers with the setback from street. It is a straightforward application and the waivers proposed are in line with other parcels;this continues the trail system and retaining wall. Franzen said granting the waiver will allow property to develop consistent with the existing buildings. Stoelting asked about the square footage. Franzen said it is 13,260 square feet. Stoelting asked about the height. Franzen said it was 44 feet. Clinton said the requirement 66 spaces was not met; there are only 59 spaces in the plan. Lazon said 64 stalls and 2 handicap stalls were on the original plan submitted to staff. The building is somewhat smaller and the parking may be less. Clinton asked when they would start construction. Lazon said upon approval and permitting. The space is proposed as interim parking use for overflow for Champps. Clinton asked what guarantees it would not be a permanent arrangement. Lazon said they intend to build a structure. )3 COMMUNITY PLANNING BOARD MINUTES June 26,2000 Page 7 Brooks asked about the change in setback requirements to 17.5 feet from the street and the approved plan. Franzen said since the building was taller it should be located further from the lake.A reduced front yard setback is appropriate since this is a commercial area. This would not be appropriate if residential were across the street. Brooks asked what would the building size need to be reduced to in order to meet the 35 foot setback and 90 foot shoreline setback. Lazon said that would make parking in front of the building. They could put the building back to 35 feet,but the setback to the lake would be less. Brooks asked about shrinking the building size Lazon said that is why went to three stories it is as small as it can get. Stoelting said Champps has always had a problem with parking. How will customers safely access and walk across. Lazon said there would be a pedestrian crosswalk or valet service. Koenig asked about the location of the NURP pond by the lake;how many feet closer to the lake and how much tree line will be left there. Lazon said the majority would remain. The existing treeline separating the pond from the lake would remain. Koenig said so if one is looking from across the lake the tree line is uninterrupted. Lazon said the vegetation will remain. Stock said there were concerns about setbacks and why it went from 200 to 90 feet. Franzen said it was a question of balance environmental rules and rights of property owners. If our ordinance precludes development either us or the DNR would have to purchase the property. The 90 foot setback is a compromise to allow some development while at the same time providing a water quality pond and a trail. The existing developments along the lake are developed less intense than the code allows. Clinton requested an architectural view of the building. Lazon showed the south or front with rock based block, accent,brick and glass in thecenter. 114 COMMUNITY PLANNING BOARD MINUTES June 26,2000 Page 8 Clinton said the building as presently designed was unattractive. Clinton suggested a gable in the center. Lazon said the surrounding buildings are flat. • Franzen said there are sloped roofs on some of the buildings. Koenig asked about utilization of the NURP pond. • Gray said the pond serves the site. Koenig asked about when adjacent property were developed what would happen. Gray said those properties would have to have their own NURP pond. Koenig asked about cash park fees,whether they were already paid or if it was too small a parcel Fox said it may fall in the preserve; the original preserve PUD was close to Eden Prairie center. Stock said the elevation needed to be addressed and suggested more glass in lieu of the punch windows Foote said for large office projects traffic demand management was done. Traffic in this area seems to get worse daily and this will add to it. He asked whether the board could impose this as a condition. Franzen said the city required a TDM plan for the Lariat 3 office building of a similar size. A TDM plan is required for this project. Corneille said they are asking for a lot of waivers. In order to support the waivers, architecture must change to be more compatible with the area and include more detail. Franzen stated rather than have these changes made before building permits, the board should review plan changes before sending the project to the City Council. Stoelting said that was good guidance, he would welcome another look at the final design. Bob Kolman,resident, said he owned a lot to the west of the property. The lot extended to the center of what is now the lake. He has lakeshore property in the middle of market center. It appears it maybe a parking lot for a long time. The property owner said he still had a house there and there was not much attention to V COMMUNITY PLANNING BOARD MINUTES June 26,2000 Page 9 a barrier between the parking lot and house.He asked for continued consideration of the long term effects of this plan. Foote asked whether the property was for sale now. Property owner said he had a contract but the buyer backed out and it was still for sale. Property owner said he was trying to market properties together. There were two under consideration,his and neighbors. It is a reasonable plot to build a nice building. Corneille asked about the transition issue. Franzen said they would look at the end use of the office, and will further consider the transition issue.Normal setbacks to parking would be required. Franzen asked the Board to continue the project to the July 10th meeting. Staff would review architectural compatibility and will look for features to make the building more compatible. MOTION by Stoelting, second by Clinton to continue the item until July 10, 2000. Motion carried, 6-0. COMMUNITY PLANNING BOARD MINUTES DULY 10,2000 Page 3 III. PUBLIC BEARINGS A. IDLEVIEW OFFICE PARK: by 78th Street Properties, LLC.Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 1.21 acres,Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers in the Office Zoning District on 1.21 acres, and Site Plan Review on 1.21 acres. Location: North of Eden Road on Lake Idlewilde. Franzen said the board directed the staff and developer to make the changes required to accommodate 66 parking spaces; the elevations were revised to add the sloped metal roof and a larger windows, also conifer instead of shade trees were added and a travel demand management plan was created. • Vicky Vandal from Landform Engineering and 78th Street Properties presented the revised plans. HTG Architects reviewed the changes to the architecture. They said the smaller windows are now larger; and they added a sloped metal roof and curved entry. They proposed a limestone base edge around the bottom and passed around samples of the building material. Clinton asked about the construction schedule and asked for clarification on whether the developer had plans for grading the parking lot and beginning construction after securing a tenant. Vandal said the developer would put in the retaining wall and rough grade and seed. Stock asked about the smaller windows next to the main glass window on the building alterations. She said it doesn't match the plans. Bruce said the elevation shows the lower end having two windows followed by singles going up; and that was correct. Stock asked how much larger the windows were than previously. Bruce said these are oversized at 8-10 inches above the floor. They are nearly floor to ceiling windows. Nelson asked about the setback on the south elevation. Vandal said that from the road it is 17.5 feet. COMMUNITY PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 10,2000 Page 4 Franzen said the setback from the lake is 90 feet. Staff and the developer looked at ways to move further from lake. There was an opportunity to move the building closer to the street so that there was a greater setback from the lake. There is no housing across the street; this is appropriate in an urban setting where it would not be appropriate in a residential area. The trade-off is less individual impact on the lake. Stock asked about the letter regarding foot traffic and how that was addressed. Gray said there were concerns about foot traffic crossing the street. If that is a problem it could be addressed with installation of cross-walk striping. Throughout this area there has not been a need for it but if it is necessary in the future it can be addressed. Foote asked whether Champps would use the property for overflow parking. Franzen said the developer presented to the staff that the building and parking will be constructed simultaneously and that the owner may consider a shared parking arrangement with Champps during the evening hours. Foote said if this happens staff should review whether a crosswalk and striping should be added to the plans. Franzen reviewed the staff recommendation for approval. An item D was added indicating the developer will pay the appropriate cash park fee. Foote inquired whether there was any means of enforcing the transportation management plan. Franzen said since this is new, staff was looking at the possibility of a travel demand ordinance with financial incentives for compliance and punitive damages for noncompliance. Right now the city is requiring a letter of credit from the developer to implement the program. Staff can do spot checks and talk with building owners. Foote said he hoped the city would follow up to the check progress. Clinton inquired whether there was a site distance problem with Eden Road. Gray said based on the speed limit there should not be a problem. I r; COMMUNITY PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 10,2000 Page 5 Nelson expressed concern that the building was too close to the road, even the landscaping is going to have a visual impact and, consequently,will not be supporting it. Foote asked about the height of some of the other buildings. Franzen said Homestead Village is 45 feet. This building is 44 feet. Others are 20-24 feet in height. Foote asked how close Homestead was to the lake. Franzen said 50 feet at its closest point. Brooks inquired about the setbacks proposed for this building. Franzen said 90 feet from the high water mark; the ordinance is 200. Brooks asked about the surrounding properties' setbacks. Franzen said they varied from 30-50 feet depending on the project. Brooks suggested it might lessen the impact to the site if the third floor was eliminated and a larger two story be proposed. Franzen said the building could expand east-west without moving closer to the lake. Koenig asked whether this would make it the same distance from the lake. Franzen said it would be the same distance if it were expanded east-west. Koenig asked how this would affect the landscaping. Franzen said it would affect landscaping around the foundation but not the perimeter of the parking lot. Clinton asked whether space for parking would be lost. Franzen said no. Brooks asked whether the developer has looked at two-story vs three- story. Vidal said the owner wants the three story; it is better economically. A two story may be possible but is not desired by the owner. COMMUNITY PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 10,2000 Page 6 Stock said the windows look disproportionate; two all the way up would look better. Bruce said there was a bathroom on one side and a stair going up the other way. It would be difficult. There is an elevator mechanical room stair on either side. Arrangements of windows are difficult in these areas. Two windows would be hard but the developer would be willing to try to fit it in. Stock said the rest of the building should match the first floor. Foote said he shared Nelson's concerns about the 17.5 front yard setback, but if the developer went to a two-story the setback would remain the same. Franzen said they could eliminate some parking on the north side and put it on the east side of the building. This would allow the building to be shifted farther from the road,but closer to the lake. Foote said the lake setback would be 73 instead of 90 and it would meet 35 setback in front. He said it was not really within the board's area to tell the developer how many stories to build,but he was concerned with the road setback. Franzen said it was the staff recommendation to get the maximum setback from the lake with the building as they could. Koenig said 17.5 vs 25 is not much of a difference. Brooks said it was relative to the visual impact. Nelson said 17.5 foot setback is very close. With a three story really close to the street it seems bigger. She said she would rather see parking around the building than have it close to the road because of the visual impact. It may detract from the whole area. Franzen said if the board is comfortable with the three story building; the setback from the road can be increased to meet code. The net result is a building 23 feet leave as is the lake than any of the current structures. Clinton said if the board is comfortable with the staff recommendation to shift the building farther back, they should allow the developer and staff to modify the plan prior to City Council review. COMMUNITY PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 10,2000 Page 7 Franzen said the building can meet a 35 foot front yard setback and a 73 foot setback from the lake. MOTION by Clinton second by Foote to close the public hearing. Motion carried,7-0. MOTION by Clinton second by Foote to recommend to the Council for approval of Idleview Office Park by 78th Street Properties, LLC for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 1.21 acres,Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers in the Office Zoning District on 1.21 acres, and Site Plan Review on 1.21 acres, additem D that the developer pay the Cash Park Fee, and instruct staff and developer to revise the plans to change the front yard setback to 35 feet and the setback from the lake at 73 feet. Motion carried, 7-0. I CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 08/01/00 SECTION: Public Hearings SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Community Development Donald R.Uram Grace Church ,C, Scott A.Kipp Requested Action Move to: • Close the Public Hearing; and • Adopt the Resolution for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential and Public Open Space to Church on 10.3 acres; and • Adopt the Resolution for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 63 acres; and • Approve 1st Reading of the Ordinance for Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers and Zoning District Change from Rural to Public Zoning District on 63 acres; and • Adopt the Resolution for Preliminary Plat on 63 acres; and • Direct Staff to prepare a Developer's Agreement incorporating Staff and Board recommendations and Council conditions; and • Direct Staff to issue an early land alteration permit to Grace Church to proceed with grading at their own risk. Synopsis This project is for a 600,000 square foot church complex located south of Pioneer Trail, east of Eden Prairie Road and west of Spring Road. Phase I will be approximately 300,000 square feet, and consist of a 4,500 seat worship area, religious education space, and 2,000 on grade parking stalls. Full development includes an additional 300,000 square feet for fellowship, education, and family center uses, and a 1,000 space parking deck. This project was first introduced at a public informational meeting with the Community Planning Board on March 27, 2000. The Community Planning Board voted 6-1 to recommend approval of the project to the City Council at its July 10, 2000 meeting (Nelson voting no). The recommendation included supporting waivers for building and spire height, and temporary stucco wall, but not waivers for proposed architectural precast stone, or signs. Background The north 10.3 acres of the site require a guide plan change from Low Density Residential and Public Open Space to Church. City Council Meeting—August 1,2000 Grace Church Page 2 This change may have merit for the following reasons: • The single-family house at the northwest corner has been acquired by the Church and will be demolished. This will eliminate an existing access to Pioneer Trail. • Creates a consistent land use south of Pioneer Trail and east of Eden Prairie Road. • The City does not need the property for park use. Berming, trees, and large setbacks to parking and the building will provide transition to the adjoining arterial roadways and neighboring land uses. PUD Waivers The City has identified the following waivers from the City code: Building Height Based on City code, the tallest portion of the building is 59 feet. The maximum building height permitted in the public zoning district is 30 feet. Wooddale Church is 75 feet tall, and Pax Christi Church is 45 feet tall. The large setbacks from property lines, distance to existing single-family homes,berming and trees help mitigate height. Tower/Spire Height Maximum tower height permitted in the public zoning district is 25 feet above the permitted building height, or 55 feet. Grace Church proposes a 133-foot tower. The Wooddale Church spire is 125 feet above the building for a total of 200 feet. St. Andrew Church was approved for a 150-foot spire. The FAA has determined this height is not a hazard to air navigation and will not require lighting for aviation safety. The large setbacks from property lines, distance to existing single-family homes,berming and trees help mitigate height. Exterior Building Material City code requires 75%of the exterior building elevation to be face brick, glass, and/or natural stone. The church is proposing 43% face brick and glass and 23% architectural precast stone panel for Phase 1. At full development,the building will be 50%face brick and glass and 26% architectural precast stone panel. Staff does not support the architectural precast stone proposed by the church as comparable in grade and quality to natural stone. The elevations have been revised to show facebrick, or architectural precast stone to be approved by City staff as comparable in grade and quality to natural stone. A temporary stucco wall is proposed in Phase 1 for a portion of the west building elevation, which reduces the percentage of required exterior building materials to 66%. This wall will be removed when the next phase of construction takes place resulting in code compliance. Staff supports this waiver. Christ Lutheran Church was granted a waiver for 63%required exterior materials to work with their expansion phasing. Signs Staff does not support the waiver for signs and the plans have been revised to meet City code. City Council Meeting—August 1,2000 Grace Church Page 3 Traffic Study A traffic study was prepared as part of the EAW and indicates the following: • County Road 1/Eden Prairie Road intersection will adequately accommodate the traffic generated by the proposed project. • County Road 1/Spring Road intersection will adequately accommodate the traffic generated by the proposed project in 2003. • Turn lanes added to the northbound approach of Spring Road at County Road 1 are necessary to adequately accommodate the traffic generated by the proposed project in 2010. Timing for the construction of the church needs to coincide with the County Road 4 realignment. The road improvement needs to be completed before the church opens. A building permit will not be issued for the church until one of the following events occurs: • Grace Church, MAC, and Lynn Charlson have signed a special assessment agreement regarding participation in cost sharing of the road realignment and utility project. • The road realignment and utility project has been approved and awarded by the City Council. Airport Compatibility The proposed church is outside of all runway protection zones, safety zones, and approach surfaces for the airport. A small portion of the building is in a provisional use area requiring noise attenuation. The church will meet the requirements of the Metropolitan Council's Land Use Compatibility Guidelines for Aircraft Noise. Archaeological Survey An archaeological survey was conducted for the property,which indicates that no significant archaeological features were found of the property. The State Historic Preservation Office will review the final report and make a determination regarding the site's potential eligibility. Environmental Assessment.Worksheet(EAW) The EAW for Grace Church has identified the areas of potential significant environmental impact, and includes the Response to Comments, Findings of Fact, and Record of Decision indicating that an EIS is not required for the project. Attachments 1. Resolution for Guide Plan Change 2. Resolution for PUD Concept Review 3. Resolution for Preliminary Plat 4. Community Planning Board Minutes dated July 10,2000 5. Staff Report dated July 7,2000 6. Correspondence 7. Letter Requesting Early Land Alteration Permit 3 GRACE CHURCH CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2000- A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE MUNICIPAL PLAN WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has prepared and adopted the Comprehensive Municipal Plan("Plan"); and WHEREAS, the Plan has been submitted to the Metropolitan Council for review and comment; and • WHEREAS,the proposal of Grace Church, by Grace Church for a 600,000 square foot church complex requires the amendment of the Plan; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, hereby adopts the amendment of the Plan subject to Metropolitan Council approval as follows: 10.3 acres from Low Density Residential and Public Open Space to Church, located south of Pioneer Trail, east of Eden Prairie Road, and west of Spring Road. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 1st day of August, 2000. Jean L. Harris,Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk L GRACE CHURCH CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE H t+,NNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2000- A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT OF GRACE CHURCH FOR GRACE CHURCH WHEREAS,the City of Eden Prairie has by virtue of City Code provided for the Planned Unit Development(PUD) Concept of certain areas located within the City; and WHEREAS, the Community Planning Board did conduct a public hearing on Grace Church PUD Concept by Grace Church and considered their request for approval for development (and waivers) and recommended approval of the requests to the City Council; and WHEREAS,the City Council did consider the request on August 1,2000. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, as follows: 1. Grace Church,being in Hennepin County,Minnesota, legally described as outlined in Exhibit A, is attached hereto and made a part hereof. 2. That the City Council does grant PUD Concept approval as outlined in the plans dated July 21, 2000. 3. That the PUD Concept meets the recommendations of the Community Planning Board dated July 10, 2000. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 1st day of August, 2000. Jean L.Harris,Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A.Porta, City Clerk Exhibit A Grace Church Legal Description: That part of the following described property lying northeasterly of the following described Line A and its northwesterly and southeasterly extensions The Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 21, Township 116, Range 22 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, except the South 653.4 feet of the East 1000 feet thereof. Also the North One—half of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 28, Township 116 North. Range 22 West of the 5th Principal Meridian. LINE A: Commencing at the southwest corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of said Section 21; thence North 1 degree 38 minutes 21 seconds West along the west line of said Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter a distance of 305,00 feet to the point of beginning of said Line A; thence South 26 degrees 24 minutes 49 seconds East a distance of 296.95 feet; thence South 50 degrees 00 minutes 48 seconds East a distance of 1067,81 feet to the south line of the North One—half of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of said Section 28 and said Line A there terminating. The South 653.4 feet of the East 1000 feet of the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 21. Township 116 North, Range 22 West of the 5th Principal Meridian. That part of the Northwest 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 21, Township 116 North, Range 22 West of the Fifth Principal Meridian, described as follows: Commencing at a point on the center line of County Road No. 1 formerly known as Shakopee Road, which point is 771.85 feet due East of West line of Northwest 1/4 of Southwest 1/4; thence South .parallel to said West line 335 feet to South line of Northwest 1/4 of Southwest 1/4; thence West along South line 771.85 feet to Southwest corner thereof, thence North along West line to the center line of said road; thence Southeasterly along said center line to point of beginning and there terminating, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota. That part of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 21, Township 116, Range 22, lying South of Center line of Shakopee Road and East of the West 771.85 feet thereof. GRACE CHURCH CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2000- RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF GRACE CHURCH FOR GRACE CHURCH BE IT RESOLVED,by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of the Grace Church for Grace Church dated July 21,2000, and consisting • of 63 acres into one lot, a copy of which is on file at the City Hall, is found to be in conformance with the provisions of the Eden Prairie Zoning and Platting ordinances, and amendments thereto, and is herein approved. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the 1st day of August, 2000. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk 7- COMMUNITY PLANNING BOARD 1\IINUTES JULY 10,2000 Page 8 B. GRACE CHURCH by Grace Church.Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential and Public Open Space to Church on 10.3 acres,Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 63 acres,Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 63 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural to Public on 63 acres, Site Plan Review on 63 acres,Preliminary Plat of 63 acres into one lot and road right of way, and EAW Review on 63 acres. Location: South of Pioneer trail,East of Eden Prairie Road, West of Spring Road. Scott Kipp said the developer held an informal neighborhood meeting on March 9, 2000, and a public information meeting before the Community Planning Board on March 24, 2000. There were issues raised regarding land use, landscaping,transition, and FAA height criteria. The developer worked with staff and provided a detailed traffic study,met FAA height requirements including runway protection zone,berms, landscaping and setbacks and relocated the parking deck farthest from residents and completed an EAW. Bob Sofelt, 10508 Bluff Road, Eden Prairie said BRW was contracted to do the EAW and an archeological study. He provided a brief history of the church,which was currently located at 53rd and France. There are 3500 people attending seven services; growth provided the demand for a new facility. The church purchased the property three years ago and has spent the past two years on design and function. John Justus, Architect with HGA, explained the master plan of 600,000 square feet. The plan was broken down into six buildings. Phase I would provide a large facility in the center. Phase II would include children's ministries. To the west of the chapel there would be a food court, and fellowship and banquet hall. The parking is on the flattest part of the site, to the north and east of the plateau. Terrain is multilevel and there is a walkout and garden level. There is a parking ramp at the furthest point from residential along Spring. On the southwest part of the site there is a NURP pond. There is berming and landscaping around the entire area. There is site access from two entrances; one along Eden Prairie Road/County Road 4,the second off Spring Road. There is a third access at the south end of the parking ramp along Spring Road; this would serve cars going toward the river valley.No access is proposed along Pioneer Trail. Justus reviewed the architecture. He said they were looking for a blend with residential architecture. The slope roofed tops identify the other buildings as separate from the main structure. The bays and curved roof help break up the scale. There is a tower cross element that is 133 feet tall; it meets FAA regulations and there is no need for a hazard light. The COMMUNITY PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 10,2000 Page 9 tower is part of the master plan and not in Phase I. Its height is consistent with religious institutions in Eden Prairie. The facility has a metal roof and precast bands followed by brick. There is a rock face block base on the walkout level. Justus said there would be 1,800-2,000 parking stalls. Signage for the church will be revised to meet code. Foote asked about lighting of the cross tower and whether it would be similar to Wooddale's. Justus said that they haven't discussed this. He said it was unlikely the tower would be illuminated. Clinton inquired about the noise reduction required as part of the Met Council's guidelines for aircraft noise. Justus said the church commissioned a study and collected data on what type of decibel level and noise would take place. They have not processed the data but have engaged an acoustical consultant. He said they will meet the requirement. Nelson asked about the cross on the worship center and whether it would be illuminated. Justus said there is one just above the chapel and it would not be illuminated. Nelson asked whether sports fields would be a part of phase I. Justus said no. Gary Fishbet of HGA said the landscaping meets code requirements, and that five foot berms will be provided around the site to screen the parking. Foote said the staff report says 100% tree removal primarily in future phases.He said he wasn't sure why all the trees would have to go if only half were in the building area; such as the trees between the NURP pond and building. Fishbet said they might fall outside of the building but are within the grading limits. COMMUNITY PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 10,2000 Page 10 Gray said from a drainage perspective,they need to ensure storm drainage from the parking lot to the pond. This will be graded so the overflow does not come into the building. The pond was designed for the 100 year storm. Foote asked whether staff looked at trees and whether they were healthy. Fox said there was a mixture of large cottonwoods, box elders, elms, and ash. Foote asked about significant trees such as oaks. Fox said there were only six oaks on the site. Sofelt said they had a letter in the packet from their consultant stating that due to the age of trees they may not survive construction. Stock asked about the use of stucco and whether it was just for the area that is being expanded on. Justus said Phase I shows 13% stucco. Some is permanent such as that located at the base of the worship space. In the master plan the percentage is 4%. Stock questioned whether the facility would also be used as a school. Sofelt said there is no formal K-12 education on the site. There would be Christian education for all ages. The rooms when called out as education are for Christian education. Kipp said the proposal is consistent with the comprehensive plan; there are large setbacks with berms and a landscaping transition with road improvements to accommodate the traffic. Church construction will be timed with realignment of County Road 4. Staff supports height and temporary stucco waivers but not the waivers for architectural precast stone and signage. The board should consider whether the 10.3 acre guide plan change was compatible with the area,the traffic study, and whether the waivers are reasonable. Nelson asked when is 212 going to be finished into Eden Prairie Road. Gray said 212 out to Eden Prairie Road is under contract and scheduled to be completed next summer. Nelson asked approximately what percentage of attendees actually live in Eden Prairie. /C COMMUNITY PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 10,2000 Page 11 Sofelt said about 1/3 live west of 494;this includes Minnetonka and Plymouth. The rest live elsewhere. The traffic study shows where the people are coming from. Nelson asked whether the traffic study also was done for weekdays. Gray said yes. Sofelt said the church's day care is quite small; there are less than 100 students He was unsure whether this would move to Eden Prairie. There is Christian education for Junior and Senior High and approximately 700 kids attending on Wednesday evenings. Gray said the study looked at a.m. and p.m.rush hours. Koenig asked about the memorandum from the Flying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission. Kipp said it provided a discussion on the closeness of the site in relation to Flying Cound Airport and its proposed expansion.Because of its closeness to the airport they think is not the best use for the property. Clinton asked about the staff report and staff's reasoning for not supporting architectural precast stone panels. Franzen said prior to 1987 the city did not allow any aggregate panels. Since then,the Wilson Learning Building,the 10400 building, and Southwest Crossings have used precast aggregate panels. The issue is that the precast panel needs to be comparable in grade and quality to natural stone, and based on the information provided to staff at this time,we do not believe the proposed precast is comparable in grade and quality. We are willing to continue to discuss the precast and work with the church to find a precast that is comparable in grade and quality. Another option would be to eliminate it or use it as part of the 25% category. Sofelt said they were willing to work with staff to select materials staff was comfortable with. If more details or a different aggregate is needed, that could be resolved. Kipp said the project meets the Met Council's Land Use Compatibility Guidelines for Aircraft Noise.But because the church is near the airport, the church should educate its members regarding aircraft noise. Clinton said he was concerned with the noise level at Flying Cloud. LI COMMUNITY PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 10,2000 Page 12 Kipp said the increase in air traffic is close to the runway and safety zone. This use is of concern with airport operation because of noise during service. The church should educate its members on this. Stock asked about the traffic study and how it related to the rest of the week;most specifically the use of sports fields. Gray said there is some traffic for ballfields but the impact is low. There is more impact on the weekends with the road capacity. It is difficult to exit the ballfields over there. He mentioned an additional signal by Staring Lake Parkway. Those improvements will make it easier to get in and out. Stock asked about the impact on property value of housing on the other side. Franzen said the assessor considers existing and proposed uses of surrounding property including the airport,Pioneer Trail, and CSAH 4 when determining market value. Stock said this would be four times larger than Wooddale and expressed concerns over lighting. Franzen said 20 foot downcast lighting is proposed which is policy for development near residential uses. There are larger berms and perimeter screening. The plan will meet the one-half foot candle requirement. What has been a practice for Wooddale and office developments is reduce lighting at night. Foote inquired about the traffic study on page 5,table 1, with the church in 2003; he asked about cars arriving early,but not leaving until 1:00 p.m. Gray said it reflects the largest exit hour as 12-1 p.m. The analysis shows a peak of 1,375 cars leaving. Many of the worshipers stay over for religious education. Foote asked what level of service does that generate. Gray said level B and C. There is the possibility of intersection improvements at Spring Road and County Road 1. This could work into design improvements for Pioneer Trail. Foote asked about improvements to County Road 4. 1� COMMUNITY PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 10,2000 Page 13 Gray said County Road 4 would be realigned by the time the church opens and before the Pioneer Trail improvements. Foote asked what if traffic reaches the max before 2010? Gray said there would be some congestion;the worst would be weekdays. Pioneer Trail and Eden Prairie Road is worse today than it will be when Pioneer Trail is expanded in 2004/2005. Koenig inquired about the proponent's alternative to parking deck. Sofelt said initially the deck was on the north side of the property. It has been located to the far southeast portion of the property. Clinton asked about the parking opportunity and the nearby office development. Sofelt said they have had discussions about the property directly to the east about leasing but have not entered into discussions with the future office development. Koenig asked whether the parking deck had to be approved now. Kipp said the board is reviewing the entire project now, including the deck. With the parking deck in the southeast portion of the site,there is very little view of the deck from Pioneer Trail. Koenig asked how high would it be for the residential views. Justus said it was 15 feet above grade on the north end and 900 feet from Pioneer Trail. Justus said it is an open deck one level on grade with a retaining wall around it. It is a level and 1/2 or two levels on the north end. Spring Road will have berming and planting and a retaining wall. Kipp said Pioneer Trail is at an elevation of 891 or 892; the berm is proposed at 901; the top level of the deck is 904 so it is three feet taller than the berm height and 900 feet away from Pioneer Trail; it will blend in. Stoelting inquired about the entrance and exit for the parking ramp structure. 13 COMMUNITY PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 10,2000 Page 14 Justus said it was a schematic design. They reviewed the concept of the parking ramp with a consultant. There were two entrances and exits at south end in and out off Spring Road;the lanes are parallel to the parking • and perpendicular to Spring Road; cars can enter the next level up from the north entrance. Stoelting said there was in and out traffic in the southeast corner and two entrances into the parking ramp. He asked how traffic flows in and out. Kipp said it would help traffic flow so cars entering the site can turn into the parking deck at either entrance. Koenig inquired about the noise generated from the church services and music. Kipp said this has not been a problem in the past. Justus said he had never heard of noise generated from a church impacting the outside of a building. This worship center is surrounded by occupied space; the rooms around are a good buffer . Stock asked about the size of the building footprint for ADC. Franzen said it was 1.2 million square feet for all four floors. He was unsure of the exact building footprint. Stock said here it is listing the footprint as 326,000 sf. Franzen the church is not one square building,but rather a series of buildings,which helps break up the scale. It is setback far from all roads; this will help. Stoelting asked for public comment. Bob Shulte of 9072 Palmetto Drive directly north of Grace Church site said it affects about 14 residents and 26 children. They support a church as far as land use. They are concerned about its size related to traffic before Pioneer is modified and the construction period. He asked about the construction traffic on weekdays. With the stoplight at Mitchell and Eden Prairie Road,traffic can't make the left turn onto Palmetto and traffic typically goes around on the bike path to get by. He would like to see some operational thoughts about traffic during the construction period. He requested a berm and trees high enough so residents do not see parking lot traffic.Residents would ask that the lights be shut off after midnight. lLi COMMUNITY PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 10,2000 Page 15 John Hanson of Hilltop Road west of Eden Prairie Road asked about the northwest corner and whether it would remain residential. Kipp said the church has acquired the property. Foote asked whether the lights could be turned off at midniht. Sofelt said they could be as long as it was not a problem with the police. Nelson said they are rezoning 10 acres of residential to church; taxable to nontaxable. Kipp said only one acre is residential,nine acres is public open space. Nelson asked whether there was other property that can be turned into taxable land. Uram said this project would be taking 63 acres off the tax rolls. When the land was purchased three years ago it was reflected in financial projections even though it was tax exempt. It does not impact the city on an overall basis long term. Nelson said so taxes won't go up for other residents. Uram said this is an issue of balance. The city had anticipated half of the square footage for ADC. The city picked up 600,000 square feet of office/ industrial for that site. Gray said staff can work with the developer during construction and look at the materials/suppliers aggregate and concrete coming from the south so construction traffic won't be on Pioneer Trail. Foote asked about the dirt removal. Gray said it was balanced. They can designate routes to mitigate potential construction traffic. The problem is peak hours. Stoelting asked about Highway 212 and any impact in constructibility of 212 and building County Road 4. Gray said the legislature allocated 270 million for the metro area congestion; this will accelerate metro area projects. A result could be the extension of 212 through Eden Prairie earlier. 15 COMMUNITY PLANNING BOARD MINUTES DULY 10,2000 Page 16 MOTION by Clinton, second by Foote to recommend to the City Council approval of the Grace Church request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential and Public Open Space to Church on 10.3 acres,Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 63 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 63 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural to Public on 63 acres, Site Plan Review on 63 acres,Preliminary Plat of 63 acres into one lot and road right of way, and EAW Review on 63 acres,based on plans dated June 23, 2000 and subject to the recommendations of the Staff Report dated July 7, 2000. Motion carried 6-1. • hi; STAFF REPORT TO: Community Planning Board FROM: Scott A. Kipp, Senior Planner DATE: July 7,2000 SUBJECT: Grace Church APPLICANT/ FEE OWNER: Grace Church LOCATION: South of Pioneer Trail,East of Eden Prairie Road,west of Spring Road REQUEST: 1. Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential and Public Open Space to Church on 10.3 acres. 2. Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 63 acres. 3. Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 63 acres. 4. Zoning District Change from Rural to Public on 63 acres. 5. Site Plan Review on 63 acres. 6. Preliminary Plat of 63 acres into one lot and road right of way. 7. EAW Review on 63 acres. (7 el " •%!".- ' . — A. .1 .,.... 1;0 .......*.r-*;:'. ' "-. :.." ...."' • .g.. • •• ... . ..... ....... .... .. .,3,03.,,-. .. • . _ • :•a "r• 1,0. .• �.,'- , 'ice: .• 1 �, _ 17T - Wir 4144: Y Qs' S.. rY /i 4114 . O •Q'3 �Y i - I na 13�" tN P R •p\ 'Ib •171. • N �•v= •; .b 1 1 j '• 9 1, • ua : y •` '� ; - 'n �' \: y••• .=•'" ki_..r.x......• • • O 1Z4 , .�I y Ifs, , ' •7t' 4. I w 0,!!F - II 1L�i i % �[.nu.t _ .,L . •. J ':a " • . , . a MITCHELL _ RO 1 ......... eil _ SUTTON OR . . CORRAL'°----=A- ,! ...1 .. 1 ^ „� ,`u i1n •, a .. . _ w i' «� ...rmr r w Cov[rw+rC rto `!--y:,� 1. 4? x w . .;', •; + v...!'i. `{a•:lt�= !ti� rd..„00 +ba 1...'1 1.2171391a�11Y.ji' a� i o ry= S t 1 ,• • liai • 12l, a • >ti; 4 4. s! •!u s,a �•aaa•14y,� a r/OAYT7�" r- fI: a0 •.••'..: n. ^,•.a;YTTOR PARR•�•'•i.• .�— . .„ &HOLM 1>,� '4'hMMh��MM�{{ ay ..i.i. ,•':j ,Sl1 -; � .ilC, a i�' 1)AI �A�....TI•r11..at•I gAMI 1�n't ' wT. + J ua ta, t a11 1a :L .r ! 11 1UY '•' 17, • A• I7>1 Q t Hs rP Er. 1]71 1 i li •L • Si.�` ••n e 4 ��IIMI� li4 t ■ f a ••. • "'""" digali . ••• sir. ..... J , :.A`a :::::1::.1:1,...:iW. - RIPE 11 . . t. 1201 •`5.5. .. .." 1 !P.. iris i3.•_...;11.tul'isE - ,. . ..,,,,.. „I-0. • . IV 0 +.......r...s.,._.„4,. ''.1=. liti gli ICKF/•LTS .;,' .' .1.4., • . '411 '...414... . ; ' .:: VI RtIA-D.D.:•‘. ' t...?•4,c'" .:: 1; M • 'Pi 4 t • <K/44 E. HIL TOP RO ••, I a'r I ,27 . •S . !• .NIA �2,1 IIU 1171 .IMI IM ,!• .,,1 •1<1 „1 •41 ,= CO�V KG l • • 9 Y 1% a l. • ny ,, �.I 1211 111, „1, •Ib 2yAy7D •t, 1711 i - 121 o V • �I .LEY RO Z • ' • IIu ` no. F IY, . / . • ' • • • • ii• I • I • • I • • i I • • . m 54°"\i iir �FF • i la Y z 1 •`.*" I Staff Report—Grace Church July 7,2000 Page 2 BACKGROUND This project was first reviewed at a public informational meeting with the Community Planning Board on March 27,2000. At that meeting a concept plan was presented and issues regarding land use,traffic, compatibility with the airport,transition,landscaping,parking, and environmental review were discussed. The Board directed staff and the developer to proceed with development plans for detailed review. DEVELOPMENT REQUEST Grace Church is proposing construction of a 600,000 square foot church campus. Phase I will be approximately 300,000 square feet, and consist of a 4,500 seat worship area, religious education space, and 2,000 on grade parking stalls. Full development includes an additional 300,000 square feet for fellowship, education, and family center uses, and a 1,000 space parking deck. The property will be platted into one lot and road right of way. GUIDE PLAN CHANGE The majority of the property was guided Church as part of the Charlson guide plan change approved in 1998. Approximately 10 acres on the south side of the site is guided for Church and Public Open Space to address acquisition by the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) of the runway protection zone and safety zones for the Flying Cloud Airport. Should the MAC acquire this area in fee title or easement, the Public Open Space designation would apply. It is the MAC's intent to acquire this area. The north 10.3 acres of the site, which was not part of the original Charlson property, requires a guide plan change from Low Density Residential and Public Open Space to Church. This change may have merit for the following reasons: • The single-family house at the northwest corner has been acquired by the Church and will be demolished. This will eliminate an existing access to Pioneer Trail. • Creates a consistent land use south of Pioneer Trail and east of Eden Prairie Road. • The City does not need the property for park use. • Berming, trees, and large setbacks to parking and the building will provide transition to the adjoining arterial roadways and neighboring land uses. SITE PLAN The site plan shows the construction of 600,000 square feet of building on 63 acres at a.12 base area ratio and a .22 floor area ratio. City code does not limit the size of building coverage in the public zoning district. The building is setback 86 feet(320 feet phase 1) from Eden Prairie Road, 550 feet from Pioneer Trail, and 450 feet(560 feet phase 1)from Spring Road. City Code requires s 50-foot setback from 110 Staff Report—Grace Church July 7,2000 Page 3 public roads. The plan meets code. Parking is setback 86 feet from Eden Prairie Road, 62 feet from Pioneer Trail, and 50 feet from Spring Road. The future parking deck will be 60 feet from Spring Road. City Code requires a 50- foot setback for parking along one frontage, and 25 feet along the remaining frontages. The plan meets code. City Code requires one parking stall for every three seats in the main worship area. Based on the proposed 4,500 seats, a total of 1,500 parking spaces are necessary. Religious education will take place concurrent with church services so additional parking is proposed. The plan shows 2,000 on grade parking spaces, and a parking deck for 1,000 additional spaces. The plan meets code. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT WAIVERS The City has identified the following waivers from the City code: Building Height The maximum building height permitted in the public zoning district is 30 feet. Based on City code, the tallest portion of the building is 59 feet. Wooddale Church is 75 feet tall,and Pax Christi Church is 45 feet tall. The large setbacks from property lines, distance to existing single-family homes, berming and trees help mitigate height. Tower/Spire Height Grace Church is proposing a freestanding religious tower near the main entrance to the building. Maximum tower height permitted in the public zoning district is 25 feet above the permitted building height, or 55 feet. Grace Church proposes a 133-foot tower. The Wooddale Church spire is 125 feet above the building for a total of 200 feet. St. Andrew Church was approved for a 150-foot spire. The FAA has determined this height is not a hazard to air navigation and will not require lighting for aviation safety. The large setbacks from property lines, distance to existing single-family homes,berming and trees help mitigate height. Exterior Building Material City code requires 75% of the exterior building elevation to be face brick, glass, and/or natural stone. The church is proposing 43% face brick and glass and 23% architectural precast stone panel for Phase 1. At full development,the building will be 50%face brick and glass and 26% architectural precast stone panel. Staff does not support the panel the church proposes as comparable in grade and quality to natural stone. The elevations should be revised to meet the City code for 75% face brick, glass, and/or natural stone, or provide an architectural precast stone panel comparable in grade and quality to natural stone. A temporary stucco wall is proposed in Phase 1 for a portion of the west building elevation, Staff Report—Grace Church July 7,2000 Page 4 which reduces the percentage of required exterior building materials to 66%. This wall will be removed when the next phase of construction takes place resulting in code compliance. Staff supports this waiver. Christ Lutheran Church was granted a waiver for 63%required exterior materials to work with their expansion phasing. Signs City code permits one, 80 square foot monument sign per road frontage. The site has three road frontages allowing three monument signs. The plan shows five monument signs,two of which exceed the maximum square footage allowed. Staff does not support the waiver for the number and size of signs proposed. The sign plan should be revised to meet City code. • CONSISTENCY WITH CITY TRANSPORTATION PLAN The project is consistent with the City's Transportation Plan. The realignment of the County Road 4/1 intersection at Mitchell Road,westerly to the intersection with the north leg of County Road 4 is part of the 1997 Transportation Plan and the 1982 Comprehensive Plan. The City is currently reviewing a Feasibility Study for the realignment and utility project. Timing for the construction of the church needs to coincide with the construction of the road realignment. The road improvement needs to be completed before the church opens. A building permit will not be issued for the church until one of the following events occurs: • Grace Church,MAC, and Lynn Charlson have signed a special assessment agreement regarding participation in cost sharing of the road realignment and utility project. • The road realignment and utility project has been approved and awarded by the City Council. TRAFFIC A traffic study was prepared as part of the EAW. The study was based on existing and future traffic for the affected roads and the following assumptions: • Grace Church will complete Phase I by 2003 and full development by 2010. • County Road 4 realignment will be completed before completion of Phase I. • County Road 1 will not be upgraded by 2003. • County Road 1 will be upgraded before full development(County indicates 2004/2005). The traffic study,based on the above assumptions,indicates the following: • County Road 1/Eden Prairie Road intersection will adequately accommodate the traffic generated by the proposed project. • County Road 1/Spring Road intersection will adequately accommodate the traffic generated by Staff Report—Grace Church July 7,2000 Page 5 the proposed project in 2003. • Turn lanes added to the northbound approach of Spring Road at County Road 1 are necessary to adequately accommodate the traffic generated by the proposed project in 2010. COMPATIBILITY WITH FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT The proposed structure is outside of all runway protection zones, safety zones, and approach surfaces for the airport. The church is consistent with the Metropolitan Council's Land Use Compatibility Guidelines for Aircraft Noise for the existing airport. Applying the Guidelines to the expanded airport alternative proposed by MAC, a small portion of the building will be within the provisional use area,requiring noise attenuation to achieve an interior noise level of 45 dBA. Grace Church proposes to design the church to meet this requirement. GRADING AND DRAINAGE The site is relatively flat to the north and east with sloping topography to the south and west. Much of the property has been farmed over the years. All site drainage,including additional storm water from a relocated County Road 4,will be directed to a NURP pond proposed in the west central portion of the site. UTILITIES City sewer and water will be extended to the property as part of the County Road 4 realignment and utility project currently being reviewed by the City. ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY An archaeological survey was conducted for the property. The detailed report will be available prior to City Council review. The summary report indicates based on the preliminary data,no significant archaeological features were found of the property. The State Historic Preservation Office will review the final report and make a determination regarding the site's potential eligibility. ARCHITECTURE Building height and the percentage of required building materials to meet City code is discussed under the PUD Waivers section. The future parking structure will need to meet the 75%face brick, and/or natural stone requirement. �c�a� Staff Report—Grace Church July 7,2000 Page 6 All rooftop mechanical equipment will be placed within the roof recesses for screening to meet City code. LANDSCAPING A total of 2,299 diameter of significant trees are on the property. Tree loss is 2,299 diameter inches. The significant trees are generally located on the flat portions of the property where development is to occur, and within future County Road 1 right of way. Tree replacement is 3,058 caliper inches. Tree replacement is included in the landscaping plan. A total of 1,875 caliper inches of landscaping are required for this project based on the size of the total building. Together with the 3,058 caliper inches of tree replacement, a total of 4,933 caliper inches of landscaping are required. The plan meets City code. Phase I will provide 3,917 caliper inches, and include all required tree replacement. Berms are shown around the property to provide the transition and buffering from the adjacent land uses. All loading areas will be physically screening by berms and landscaping during phase I, and enclosed at full development. LIGHTING Since the site is adjacent to residential areas, all parking lot lighting will be 20-foot pole downcast cut off lighting fixtures. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET (EAW) An EAW is required for this project because the size of the church exceeds 300,000 square feet. The purpose of the EAW is to screen projects that may have the potential for significant environmental effects. The EAW process uses a standardized list of questions in worksheet format to disclose necessary information to screen the project for significant environmental effects. The EAW is distributed to local, state, and federal agencies to identify environmental protection measures that should be incorporated into the proposed project. After reviewing comments from outside agencies and the public, the City Council determines whether the impacts warrant further investigation and analysis, or an Environmental Impact Statement(EIS). The EAW for Grace Church has identified the areas of potential significant environmental impact, and includes the Response to Comments,Findings of Fact, and Record of Decision indicating that an EIS is not required for the project. Staff believes the primary impact of this project/ traffic. is The traffic is mitigated by road 7 Staff Report—Grace Church July 7,2000 Page 7 improvements identified in the traffic study. SUMMARY • The use of this site for a church is consistent with the guide plan and is compatible with the surrounding area for the following reasons: • Large setbacks, berms and landscaping help create a visual transition to existing residential neighborhoods. • The road improvements identified in the traffic study can accommodate the traffic generated by the church. After presentation by the proponent and listening to comments from the neighborhood,the Board should discuss the following questions: 1. Is the 10.3-acre guide plan change from low density residential and public open space to church compatible with existing and future land uses? 2. Does the proposed plan provide the transition required by City Code? 3. Are the proposed road improvements adequate enough to accommodate traffic generated by the church? 4. Are the waivers reasonable and do they result in a better plan for the City than if the waivers are not granted? STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends approval of the following: • Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential and Public Open Space to Church on 10.3 acres. • Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 63 acres. • Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 63 acres. • Zoning District Change from Rural to Public on 63 acres. • Site Plan Review on 63 acres. • Preliminary Plat of 63 acres into one lot and road right of way. • EAW Review on 63 acres. This approval is based on plans dated June 23, 2000, the Staff Report dated July 7, 2000, and the following conditions: 1. Prior to City Council review,the proponent shall: Staff Report—Grace Church July 7,2000 Page 8 A. Revise the building elevations to meet the City code for percentage of face brick, glass, and/or natural stone. B. Revise the sign plan to meet City code. C. Revise the parking deck plan to depict required percentage of face brick, and/or natural stone. 2. Prior to grading permit issuance,the proponent shall: A. Submit detailed storm water runoff,utility, and erosion control plans for review and approval by the City Engineer and Watershed District. B. Notify the City and Watershed District 48 hours in advance of grading. C. Install erosion control on the property. 3. Prior to building permit issuance,the proponent shall: A. Review the building plans with the Fire Marshal. B. Submit a landscaping bond in accordance with City Code. C. Provide building material samples and colors for review by the City Planner. D. Pay the cash park fee. 4. The following waivers have been granted through the PUD District Review for the Property: A. Building height of 59 feet. Code maximum is 30 feet. B. Tower/Spire height of 133 feet. Code maximum is 55 feet. C. Use of a temporary stucco wall on a portion of the west building elevation for Phase I as shown in the plans. Code requires 75%face brick, glass, and/or natural stone. MERRIMON HIPPS,JR. CAROL T.HIPPS 15512 ALMOND LANE EDEN PRAIRIE,MN 55347 July 8 , 2000 City of Eden Prairie Community Planning Board 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Dear Planning Board Chairman: Since we will not be in attendance at the meeting on July 10, 2000 , we would like to enter our deep concern about the issue of traffic density that this project will present to our residential area. When we built our home in 1991 , and paid $5000 for the com- pletion of Mitchell Road, we were ASSURED by the Eden Prairie City Planners that Mitchell Road would remain a residential road . This proposed Grace Church project threatens that promisetIIII Please see that appropriate measures are developed to assure traffic flow in and out of Grace Church so that the primary road usage will be on Pioneer Trail and Eden Prairie Road, which are main arteries designed for that heavy usage. Thank you. Sincerely, 06L-,) Carol T. Hipps �6 Grace Church - . !A There i tea e friends become j amity July 26,2000 City Of Eden Prairie Community Development Department 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie,MN 55344-2230 Attention: Scott A.Kipp RE:GRACE CHURCH EDEN PRAIRIE EARLY GRADING PERMIT Dear Mr. Kipp: On behalf of Grace Church,we are requesting City Council approval of our application for an early grading permit for the above referenced project.It is our understanding that if granted the permit Grace Church assumes all risk associated with starting the project before issuance of a City of Eden Prairie building permit. We wish to thank you for considering our request. If you have any questions or require additional information,please contact the undersigned Sincerely, Douglas Keefer Business Administrator Grace Church of Minnesota Inc. Cc: Dale L.Hall,Bossardt Corporation Rick Nelson,Development Team Bob Sofelt, Mount Properties __ -14 o'= 'Fe-.cS.td. 7 . , ('nn"•nti n�;111i1 enPJ W,4ic•9 nnn7 47• inr CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Payment of Claims August 1,2000 SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Community Development and Payment of Claims Financial Services/Don Uram Requested Action Move to: Approve the Payment of Claims as submitted(roll call vote) Synopsis Checks 89185-89507 Wire Transfers 360-368 Background Information Attachments COUNCIL CHECK SUMMARY 26-0U1,-2000 (09:28) DIVISION TOTAL LEGAL COUNSEL $35,422.83 CUSTOMER SERVICE $7,714.65 BENEFITS $2,676.90 TECHNOLOGY $3,171.27 HUMAN RESOURCES $700.57 COMMUNICATIONS $41.03 CITY CLERK $102.02 HUMAN SERV $12,750.00 RISK MANAGEMENT $2,355.96 WIRELESS COMMUNICATION $8,299.48 ENGINEERING $10,543.77 INSPECTIONS $91.94 FACILITIES $28,388.15 POLICE $13,817.31 FIRE $164,955.56 ANIMAL CONTROL $191.00 STREETS/TRAFFIC $17,331.19 PARK MAINTENANCE $6,149.63 PARKS CAPITAL $5,076.37 FLEET SERVICES $28,479.69 ORGANIZED ATHLETICS $2,003.00 • COMMUNITY DEV -$32.75 COMMUNITY CENTER $14,310.26 HISTORICAL $6.85 YOUTH RECREATION $1,789.89 SPECIAL EVENTS $3,209.67 ADULT RECREATION $1,157.12 RECREATION ADMIN $29.91 ADAPTIVE REC $195.09 OAK POINT POOL $120.00 ARTS $1,045.33 PARK FACILITIES $530.00 PUBLIC IMPROV PROJ $48,029.48 EMPLOYEE PAYROLL DEDUCTIONS -$853.01 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM $16,488.64 SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS $40,505.44 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR STORE $35,278.20 PRAIRIEVIEW LIQUOR STORE $39,479.86 DEN ROAD LIQUOR STORE $79,807.23 TRUST FUNDS $10,584.48 WATER DEPT $62,712.33 , SEWER DEPT $26,286.18 STORM DRAINAGE $37,140.16 AGENCY FUNDS $9,486.56 $777,569.24* COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER - 26-JUL-2000 (09 CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM 89185 $27.00 ANDERSON, CINDY ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP 89186 $175.00 AREA DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS IN SERVICE TRAINING 89187 $400.44 ARROWWOOD RADISSON RESORT TRAVEL IN SERVICE TRAINING 89188 $190.68 ASPEN WASTE SYSTEMS INC. WASTE DISPOSAL EPCC MAINTENANCE 89189 $51.00 BELLEFEUILLE, JOY SR CITIZENS/ADULT PROG FEES ADULT PROGRAM 89190 $35.00 BELONGIE, ROBIN ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP 89191 $561.20 BENSHOOF & ASSOCIATES INC DEPOSITS ESCROW 89192 $70.00 BRUENING, CHARLOTTE SR CITIZENS/ADULT PROG FEES ADULT PROGRAM 89193 $7,409.36 BRW INC DEPOSITS ESCROW 89194 $350.21 CONNEY SAFETY PRODUCTS SAFETY SUPPLIES ` EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 89195 $41.21 DELEGARD TOOL CO CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT ' EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 89196 $162,500.00 EDEN PRAIRIE FIREFIGHTER'S REL PENSION PLANS FIRE 89197 $35.00 ERICKSON, JOSEPHINE SR CITIZENS/ADULT PROG FEES ADULT PROGRAM 89198 $319.95 FEDEX POSTAGE GENERAL 89199 $30.00 FOLEY, BARB ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG SPECIAL EVENTS/TRIPS 89200 $3,569.78 GARTNER REFRIGERATION & MFG IN REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES ICE ARENA 89201 $201.29 GLENWOOD INGLEWOOD OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL FITNESS CENTER 89202 $96.00 GOODENOUGH, JUDITH ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR.PROG PRESCHOOL PLAYGROUND 89203 $111.92 IKON OFFICE SOLUTIONS* RENTALS FIRE 89204 $199.16 IOS CAPITAL RENTALS FIRE 89205 $92.00 JASKULKE, PENNY ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG PRESCHOOL PLAYGROUND 89206 $340.00 LAWRIE, JEANNE ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG OUTDOOR CTR PROGRAM 89207 $120.00 LEE, JU-HYE ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROS SPECIAL EVENTS/TRIPS 89208 $91.18 MENARDS REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES WATER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE 89209 $134.64 MEYER, GARY TRAVEL FIRE 89210 $20.46 MINNCOMM PAGING COMMUNICATIONS WATER UTILITY-GENERAL 89211 $400.00 MINNESOTA GFOA CONFERENCE IN SERVICE TRAINING 89212 $822.00 MINNESOTA ORCHESTRAL ASSOCIATI SPECIAL EVENTS FEES ADULT PROGRAM 89213 $17.00 MINNESOTA RECREATION AND PARK CONFERENCE IN SERVICE TRAINING 89214 $80.00 MPCA LICENSES & TAXES SEWER UTILITY-GENERAL 89215 $19.50 NEWTON, RANDY MILEAGE AND PARKING ENGINEERING DEPT 89216 $22.10 HELLING, LAURIE MILEAGE AND PARKING RECREATION ADMIN 89217 $9.30 OLSON, DAVID MILEAGE AND PARKING ENGINEERING DEPT 89218 $191.58 PETTY CASH OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL PARK MAINTENANCE 89219 $14.00 POHLEN, JODY ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG AFTERNOON PLAYGROUND 89220 $50.00 PONCIN, ANDREW ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP 89221 $152.10 RUE, RODNEY MILEAGE AND PARKING ENGINEERING DEPT 89222 $30.00 SHERWOOD, MARY ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG SPECIAL EVENTS/TRIPS 89223 $35.00 SPENCE, BERNICE SR CITIZENS/ADULT PROG FEES ADULT PROGRAM 89224 $46.25 TAYLOR, SEAN OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 89225 $170.00 THORSON, SHERI ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG OUTDOOR CTR PROGRAM 89226 $2,334.75 TIMBERWALL LANDSCAPING INC LANDSCAPE MTLS & AG SUPPL DEV RICHARD T ANDERSON CONSERV 89227 $72.79 WASTE MANAGEMENT-SAVAGE MN WASTE DISPOSAL EPCC MAINTENANCE 89228 $1,170.00 WESTWOOD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DESIGN & CONST TRAILS 89229 $126.98 ASAP OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL TASTE ON PRAIRIE • 89230 $8.85 AT&T TELEPHONE PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 89231 $385.67 CONNEY SAFETY PRODUCTS REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT PLANT 89232 $100.00 MAKI, CARI ANNE REFUNDS ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION 89233 $20.46 MINNCOMM PAGING COMMUNICATIONS SEWER UTILITY-GENERAL 89234 $1,448.67 MINNEGASCO GAS FIRE STATION #5 89237 $456.00 MINNESOTA BUREAU OF CRIMINAL A PHYSICAL & PSYCO EXAM HUMAN RESOURCES 89238 $4,868.65 QUALITY WINE & SPIRTS CO MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 89239 $100.00 STANLEY, STUART REFUNDS ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION 89240 $26.28 STAR TRIBUNE MISC NON-TAXABLE PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 89241 $10,584.48 STUART MANAGEMENT COMPANY INTEREST SUBSIDY EDENVALE TIF DISTRICT COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER - 26-JUL-2000 (09 CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR . DESCRIPTION PROGRAM 89242 $121.14 ACE ICE COMPANY MISC TAXABLE PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 89243 $147.79 AMERIPRIDE LINEN & APPAREL SER OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 89244 $1,590.00 DAHLHEIMER DISTRIBUTING COMPAN BEER 6/12 PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 89245 $14,884.28 DAY DISTRIBUTING BEER 6/12 PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 89247 $2,904.43 EAGLE WINE COMPANY WINE IMPORTED PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 89248 $13,398.13 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE COMPANY BEER 6/12 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 89249 $1,265.00 GRAPE BEGINNINGS WINE DOMESTIC PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 89250 $9,102.74 GRIGGS COOPER & CO BEER 6/12 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 89253 $45,638.22 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 89256 $2,157.23 LAKE REGION VENDING TOBACCO PRODUCTS LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 89257 $15,882.06 MARK VII BEER 6/12 LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 89258 $1,232.70 MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING COM MISC TAXABLE LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS ' 89259 $559.85 NORTH STAR ICE MISC TAXABLE LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 89260 $2,067.75 PAUSTIS & SONS COMPANY WINE IMPORTED LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 89261 $7,072.79 PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRITS INC WINE DOMESTIC PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 89263 $474.45 PINNACLE DISTRIBUTING MISC TAXABLE PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 89264 $1,579.67 PRIOR WINE COMPANY WINE IMPORTED LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 89265 $16,448.70 THORPE DISTRIBUTING BEER 6/12 PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 89266 $373.00 WINE COMPANY, THE WINE DOMESTIC PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 89267 $3,497.20 WINE MERCHANTS INC WINE DOMESTIC PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 89268 $2,331.31 WORLD CLASS WINES INC WINE IMPORTED PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 89269 $1,078.08 BEST WESTERN RICHMOND INN SCHOOLS POLICE 89270 $330.00 IAATI 2000 SCHOOLS POLICE 89271 $436.05 INGRAHAM & ASSOC IMPROVEMENTS TO LAND DEV RICHARD T ANDERSON CONSERV 89272 $10.00 COMPUTER CHEQUE OF MINNESOTA I OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 89273 $10.18 JANSEN, TANYA MISCELLANEOUS GENERAL BUILDING FACILITIES 89274 $3,962.66 KMC TELECOM TELEPHONE GENERAL 89275 $1,920.00 MINNESOTA TACTICAL OFFICERS AS SCHOOLS POLICE 89276 $160.00 NATIONAL RECREATION AND PARK A DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS IN SERVICE TRAINING 89277 $1,231.57 US POSTMASTER - HOPKINS POSTAGE WATER ACCOUNTING 89278 $1,958.04 ARCH PAGING COMMUNICATIONS WIRELESS COMMUNICATION 89279 $192.19 CARLSON, DANIEL TRAVEL POLICE 89280 $23.45 CITY HILL FELLOWSHIP LEGAL SERVICE LEGAL COUSEL 89281 $75.00 EDEN PRAIRIE CHAMBER OF CONNER MISCELLANEOUS IN SERVICE TRAINING 89282 $112.01 GEIS, ROB OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL SUMMER SAFETY CAMP 89283 $29.05 MANN, TRIA POSTAGE SUMMER THEATRE 89284 $120.75 MENARDS CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT POLICE 89285 $60.00 MINNESOTA TWINS SPECIAL EVENTS FEES SPORTS/SPECIAL CAMPS 89286 $70.00 MRPA CONFERENCE IN SERVICE TRAINING 89287 $32.00 PRECISION SHOOTING DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS POLICE 89288 $104.00 RUE, RODNEY DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS IN SERVICE TRAINING 89289 $31.40 STRAND, KAREN REC EQUIP & SUPPLIES PRESCHOOL PLAYGROUND 89290 $75.00 TOM THUMB'INC. FALSE ALARM FEES FD 10 ORG 89291 $248.98 UNLIMITED SUPPLIES INC CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 89292 $3,921.43 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS COMMUNICATIONS POLICE 89293 $1,203.57 AIRTOUCH CELLULAR, BELLEVUE TELEPHONE GENERAL 89294 $2,969.03 VERNCO MAINTENANCE INC CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT WATER UTILITY-GENERAL 89295 $125.14 WESTACOTT, JOEL OTHER EQUIPMENT PARKS & REC MONTH 89296 $19.95 WINE ENTHUSIAST - DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 89297 $18.40 ZIELKE, DIANE ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG FALL SKILL DEVELOP 89298 $65.00 A-AARONS CASH OVER/SHORT FD 10 ORG 89299 $11.99 AABC TOTAL COMFORT CASH OVER/SHORT FD 10 ORG 89300 $120.00 AARP 55 ALIVE MATURE DRIVING SPECIAL EVENTS FEES SENIOR CENTER PROGRAM 89301 $82.00 AMELL, KAREN ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG DAY CAMP 89302 $32.00 BAKER, JACI LESSONS/CLASSES POOL LESSONS COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER 26-JUL-2000 (09 CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR . DESCRIPTION PROGRAM 89303 $15.00 SALON, JULIE ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG PRESCHOOL PLAYGROUND 89304 $47.50 BARLI, ROBERT OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL SUMMER SAFETY CAMP 89305 $40.00 BARTELME, LINDA LESSONS/CLASSES POOL LESSONS 89306 $15.00 BOOMS, MS. ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG PRESCHOOL PLAYGROUND 89307 $92.00 BORRELL, GREG ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP 89308 $31,804.00 C & M FORD SALES INC. AUTOS STORM DRAINAGE 89309 $45.00 CHARLES, KENNETH ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG SUMMER SKILL DEVELOP 89310 $383.83 CORDES, JEFFREY MILEAGE AND PARKING TREE DISEASE 89311 $151.04 DELEGARD TOOL CO SMALL TOOLS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 89312 $74.55 ECOLAB INC CONTRACTED BLDG MAINT WATER TREATMENT PLANT 89313 .$40.00 EHRICH, CAMILLE LESSONS/CLASSES OAK POINT LESSONS 89314 $37.00 FOLEY, BARB ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG SPECIAL EVENTS/TRIPS 89315 $37.00 FRANCO, NATALIE ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG SPECIAL EVENTS/TRIPS 89316 $100.00 GEIS, ROB TRAVEL POLICE 89317 $13.00 GERTEN, DENISE LESSONS/CLASSES POOL LESSONS 89318 $50.00 HOWE, RICHARD LESSONS/CLASSES POOL LESSONS 89319 $64.00 HYSJULIEN, TRACEY LESSONS/CLASSES POOL LESSONS 89320 $285.00 LEE, JU-HYE ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG DAY CAMP 89321 $80.00 LOVING, HEIDI LESSONS/CLASSES OAK POINT LESSONS 89322 $1.00 LUNDE, SHELLEY LESSONS/CLASSES POOL LESSONS 89323 $15.00 MELTER, MARK ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG PRESCHOOL PLAYGROUND 89324 $74.28 MENARDS SMALL TOOLS WATER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE 89325 $1,060.74 METRO SALES INCORPORATED* RENTALS GENERAL 89326 $686.90 PARK NICOLLET HEALTHSOURCE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES IN SERVICE TRAINING 89327 $164.45 PETTY CASH-POLICE DEPT MISCELLANEOUS POLICE 89328 $874.08 QUALITY WINE & SPIRTS CO WINE IMPORTED PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 89329 $100.00 RASMUSSEN, ANNE TRAVEL POLICE 89330 $140.01 RIGID HITCH INCORPORATED . EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 89331 $20.00 SALEM, ANNEVA ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROG OUTDOOR CTR PROGRAM 89332 $3,700.00 SPECTRUM POOL PRODUCTS OTHER EQUIPMENT CC CAPITAL OUTLAY _ 89333 $6,503.53 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS TELEPHONE EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE. 89334 $100.00 VOSBEEK, PETER TRAVEL POLICE 89335 $37.00 WAGNER, STEVE ADULT/YOUTH/OUTDOOR CTR PROD SPECIAL EVENTS/TRIPS 89336 $192.40 YEAGER, KELLY MILEAGE AND PARKING TREE DISEASE 89337 $3,182.37 QUALITY WINE & SPIRTS CO MERCHANDISE FOR RESALE PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 89338 $17.80 AT&T TELEPHONE GENERAL 89339 $27.96 AT&T TELEPHONE WATER UTILITY-GENERAL 89340 $240.00 BCA/TRAINING & DEVELOPMENT SCHOOLS POLICE 89341 $465.21 CONNEY SAFETY PRODUCTS SAFETY SUPPLIES RISK MANAGEMENT 89342 $635.00 CONVERGENT COMMUNICATIONS INC. TELEPHONE GENERAL 89343 $91.65 CRACAUER, CLIFF MILEAGE AND PARKING EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 89344 $41.03 EXPRESS MESSENGER SYSTEMS INC POSTAGE COMMUNITY SERVICES . 89345 $120.00 GALLAGHER, GRETCHEN OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES ACCESSIBILITY 89346 $117.14 HANLON, STEVE OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL FIRE 89347 $35,116.58 LANG PAULY GREGERSON AND ROSOW LEGAL SERVICE CRIMINAL PROSECUTION 89348 $115.00 NFPA DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS FIRE 89349 $452.00 NILSSON, BETH INSTRUCTOR SERVICE ICE ARENA 89350 $11,055.07 NORTHERN STATES POWER CO ELECTRIC STORMWATER LIFTSTATION 89351 $347.16 OFFICE MAX OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 89352 $179.13 PETTY CASH RECORDING DOCUMENT FEE ENGINEERING DEPT 89353 $2,781.52 QUALITY WINE & SPIRTS CO WINE IMPORTED LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 89354 $18.56 SCHMIDT, MIKE TRAVEL IN SERVICE TRAINING 89355 $60.00 SENSIBLE LAND USE COALITION MISCELLANEOUS IN SERVICE TRAINING 89356 $36.30 TIMBERWALL LANDSCAPING INC OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL PARK MAINTENANCE 89357 $102.33 WEEDMAN, NICOLE MILEAGE AND PARKING PROGRAM SUPERVISOR 5 COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER 26-JUL-2000 (09 t'BF;CK NO CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM 89358 $2.31 WILKENING, SID ACCTS REC-CUSTOMER WATER DEPT 89359 $117.30 A TO Z RENTAL CENTER RENTALS WATER TREATMENT PLANT 89360 $35.56 AAA LAMBERTS LANDSCAPE PRODUCT LANDSCAPE MILS & AG SUPPL WATER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE 89361 $87.00 ACME TYPEWRITER INC. CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT POLICE 89362 $547.75 AMERICAN WATER WORKS ASSOCIATI TRAINING SUPPLIES WATER UTILITY-GENERAL 89363 $21.67 APPARENTLY GRAPHIC LTD. OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL FIRE 89364 $2,060.18 APRES EQUIPMENT RENTAL JULY 4TH CELEBRATION 89365 $85.60 AUDIOQUIP INC EQUIPMENT RENTAL STARING LAKE CONCERT 89366 $3,998.00 BARR ENGINEERING COMPANY IMPROVEMENTS TO LAND BAC TREE PLANTING PROJECT 89367 $520.00 BARTOS PRODUCTS NEW CAR EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 89368 $58.56 BATTERY STORE INC, THE VIDEO SUPPLIES POLICE 89369 $353.80 BAUER BUILT TIRE AND BATTERY CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 89370 $212.96 BEST IMPRESSIONS OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL POOL SPECIAL EVENTS 89371 $153.15 BRO-TEX INC OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 89372 $65.63 CARLSON TRACTOR AND EQUIPMENT EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 89373 $1,331.25 CARLSON'S TREE SERVICE OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TREE REMOVAL 89374 $148.11 CATCO CLUTCH & TRANSMISSION SE EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 89375 $1,899.96 CEMSTONE ASPHALT OVERLAY STREET MAINTENANCE 89376 $2,425.00 CENTRAIRE INC BUILDING CAPITAL OUTLAY-PARK 89377 $454.81 CHANHASSEN BUMPER TO BUMPER EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 89378 $19,532.00 CM CONSTRUCTION COMPANY INC. BUILDING RILEY LAKE PARK SHELTER (GRANT 89379 $205.65 COMPRESS AIR & EQUIPMENT CO CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT FIRE 89380 $209.81 CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS INC OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL TRAFFIC SIGNS 89381 $24,632.41 CONVERGENT COMMUNICATIONS INC. OTHER EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE BUILDING 89382 $148.93 COPY EQUIPMENT INC OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL PARK MAINTENANCE 89383 $42.27 CORPORATE EXPRESS OFFICE SUPPLIES GENERAL 89384 $23.30 CROWN MARKING INC OFFICE SUPPLIES GENERAL 89385 $1,032.99 CUB FOODS EDEN PRAIRIE MISCELLANEOUS POLICE 89386 $8,074.24 CUTLER-MAGNER COMPANY CHEMICALS WATER TREATMENT PLANT 89387 $615.88 CY'S UNIFORMS CLOTHING & UNIFORMS POLICE 89388 $306.72 D.J.'S MUNICIPAL SUPPLY CO SAFETY SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 89389 $6,663.80 DAFFINSON ASPHALT OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES STREET MAINTENANCE 89390 $53.25 DALE GREEN COMPANY, THE LANDSCAPE MTLS & AG SUPPL STREET MAINTENANCE 89391 $159.34 DANKO EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT CO CLOTHING & UNIFORMS FIRE 89392 $228.31 DRISKILLS NEW MARKET OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL POLICE 89393 $1,140.82 EF JOHNSON CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT WIRELESS COMMUNICATION 89394 $8,625.00 EPISCOPAL COMMUNITY SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES HOUSING, TRANS, & SOC SVC 89395 $1,704.00 ESS BROTHERS & SONS INC* REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES STORM DRAINAGE 89396 $50.00 FAHAYS STABLES EQUIPMENT RENTAL JULY 4TH CELEBRATION 89397 $216.77 FERRELLGAS MOTOR FUELS ICE ARENA 89398 $398.99 FIBRCOM-MN COMMUNICATIONS WIRELESS COMMUNICATION 89399 $70.00 FINLEY BROS INC OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL PARK MAINTENANCE 89400 $239.00 FISK, APRIL OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES VOLLEYBALL 89401 $155.46 FLYING CLOUD ANIMAL HOSPITAL CANINE SUPPLIES POLICE 89402 $2,651.37 FOLLANSBEE DOCK SYSTEMS OTHER EQUIPMENT CAPITAL OUTLAY-PARK 89403 $244.02 FORESTRY SUPPLIERS INC. OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL TREE DISEASE 89404 $34.99 G & K SERVICES DIRECT PURCHASE CLOTHING & UNIFORMS GENERAL BUILDING FACILITIES 89405 $255.56 G & K SERVICES-MPLS INDUSTRIAL CLEANING SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT PLANT 89406 $4,665.06 GARTNER REFRIGERATION& MFG IN OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES ICE ARENA , 89407 $1,217.65 GENUINE PARTS COMPANY REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES SEWER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE 89409 $349.26 GRAFIX SHOPPE CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 89410 $31.95 GREENMAN TECHNOLOGIES OF MN IN CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 89411 $465.44 GROVE NURSERY CENTER LANDSCAPE MTLS & AG SUPPL PARK MAINTENANCE 89412 $215.69 HANCE COMPANIES EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 89413 $178.49 HARMON AUTOGLASS CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 6 COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER - 26-JUL-2000 (09 CK NO CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM 89414 $16,797.44 HARTLAND FUEL PRODUCTS LLC MOTOR FUELS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 89415 $360.00 HAWKINS WATER TREATMENT GROUP CHEMICALS WATER TREATMENT PLANT 89416 $82.50 HEAVENLY HAM EMPLOYEE AWARD HUMAN RESOURCES 89417 $123.01 HEDBERG AGGREGATES LANDSCAPE MTLS & AG SUPPL PARK MAINTENANCE 89418 $317.57 HELLERS CARBONIC WEST CHEMICALS WATER TREATMENT PLANT 89419 $278.75 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 89420 $788.00 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER - AC PRINTING POLICE 89421 $0.24 HIRSHFIELDS PAINT MANUFACTURIN OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL PARK MAINTENANCE 89422 $6,300.00 HONEYWELL INC CONTRACTED EQUIP REPAIR WATER TREATMENT PLANT 89423 $739.68 HYDROLOGIC REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES PARK MAINTENANCE 89424 $217.00 ICE SKATING INSTITUTE OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL ICE ARENA 89425 $480.00 EDEN PRAIRIE SCHOOL DISTRICT N CONFERENCE IN SERVICE TRAINING 89426 $3,304.44 INGRAHAM & ASSOC IMPROVEMENTS TO LAND RILEY LAKE PARK SHELTER (GRANT 89427 $568.00 INNOVATIVE GRAPHICS CLOTHING & UNIFORMS POOL LESSONS 89428 $55.00 INNOVATIVE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY IN LANDSCAPE MTLS & AG SUPPL WATER TREATMENT PLANT 89429 $140.67 J&W INSTRUMENTS INC. EQUIPMENT PARTS WATER TREATMENT PLANT 89430 $43.93 JANEX INC . CLEANING SUPPLIES EPCC MAINTENANCE 89431 $191.00 KEN ANDERSEN TRUCKING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES • ANIMAL WARDEN PROJECT 89432 • $144.55 KRAEMERS HARDWARE INC SMALL TOOLS SEWER SYSTEM,MAINTENANCE 89433 $336.36 LAKELAND FORD TRUCK SALES EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE• 89434 $96.50 LAND'S END CORPORATE SALES CLOTHING & UNIFORMS POLICE 89435 $5,296.14 LEONARD J KOEHNEN & ASSOC OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES IS-EXTERNAL NETWORK INFRASTRUC 89436 $448.00 LESCO INC LANDSCAPE MTLS & AG SUPPL STREET MAINTENANCE 89437 $6.85 LINHOFF PHOTO & DIGITAL IMAGIN PRINTING HERITAGE PRESERVATION • 89438 $2,590.00 LIQUID ENGINEERING CORPORATION CONTRACTED BLDG MAINT WATER TREATMENT PLANT 89439 $908.94 LUBRICATION TECHNOLOGIES INC MOTOR FUELS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 89440 $2,061.42 M R SIGN SIGNS TRAFFIC SIGNS 89441 $24,708.00 MAGNUS INC. OTHER EQUIPMENT SEWER UTILITY-GENERAL 89442 $53.00 MARKS CERTICARE AMOCO CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 89443 $185.00 MATTS AUTO SERVICE INC CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 89444 $36.27 MCGLYNN BAKERIES MISCELLANEOUS POLICE 89445 $657.98 MENARDS REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES WATER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE 89447 $313.11 METRO PRINTING INC OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL POLICE 89448 $67.42 METROPOLITAN FORD EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 89449 $4,251.55 . MIDWEST ASPHALT CORPORATION WASTE BLACKTOP/CONCRETE STREET MAINTENANCE 89450 $1,789.41 MINN BLUE DIGITAL OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL ENGINEERING DEPT 89451 $26.92 MINNESOTA CONWAY CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT FIRE 89452 $134.51 MINNESOTA TROPHIES & GIFTS OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL POLICE 89453 $3,389.49 MINNESOTA VIKINGS MISCELLANEOUS GENERAL BUILDING FACILITIES 89454 $776.33 MTI DISTRIBUTING CO EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 89455 $749.23 MUNICILITE EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 89456 $983.70 NATIONAL BUSINESS FURNITURE FURNITURE & FIXTURES WATER TREATMENT PLANT 89457 $507.00 NEUMANN, NEAL OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES SOFTBALL 89458 $227.05 NORTHSTAR REPO PRODUCTS INC OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL ENGINEERING DEPT 89459 $159.21 OFFICE DEPOT PROFESSIONAL SERVICES POLICE 89460 $49.45 OHLIN SALES VIDEO SUPPLIES POLICE 89461 $833.94 OLSEN CHAIN & CABLE CO INC REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES STORM DRAINAGE 89462 $2,209.45 PARK NICOLLET CLINIC PROFESSIONAL SERVICES RISK MANAGEMENT 89463 $1,699.46 PRAIRIE ELECTRIC COMPANY CONTRACTED EQUIP REPAIR WATER WELL #12 89464 $161.67 PRAIRIE LAWN AND GARDEN OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL PARK MAINTENANCE 89465 $1,776.91 PRECISION PAVEMENT MARKING CONTRACTED STRIPING TRAFFIC SIGNS 89466 $32.97 RADIO SHACK VIDEO SUPPLIES POLICE 89467 $462.25 RAK INDUSTRIES OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL TRAFFIC SIGNALS 89468 $1,159.50 RAY, LEE OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES SOFTBALL 89469 $56.81 RIGID HITCH INCORPORATED EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER 26-JUL-2000 (09 CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION - PROGRAM 89470 $4,211.59 RMR SERVICES INC OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES WATER METER READING 89471 $101.46 ROADRUNNER TRANSPORTATION INC CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 89472 $55.00 RUFF-CUT SA ON LAND TREE DISEASE 89473 $70.00 RUSSICA TRANSLATIONS INC. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES POLICE 89474 $6,129.65 S/K WELL & PUMP INSPECTIONS CONTRACTED EQUIP REPAIR WATER TREATMENT PLANT 89475 $55.00 SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC. DUES & SUBSCRIPTIONS WATER UTILITY-GENERAL 89476 $629.65 SNAP-ON TOOLS SMALL TOOLS WATER METER REPAIR 89477 $9,860.00 SNELL MECHANICAL INC BUILDING COMMUNITY CENTER IMPROVEMENTS 89478 $29.38 SPIEGLE, SARAH OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES TEEN WORK PROGRAM 89479 $8,113.85 SRF CONSULTING GROUP INC DESIGN & CONST GOLDEN TRIANGE STUDY 89480 $2,125.00 STOREFRONT/YOUTH ACTION INC PROFESSIONAL SERVICES HOUSING, TRANS, & SOC SVC 89481 $40,365.07 STREICHERS POLICE EQUIPMENT FEDERAL FORFEITURE-DRUGS 89482 .$1,999.52 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET GEO EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 89483 $69.94 SUBURBAN PROPANE MOTOR FUELS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 89484 $125.00 SWEDLUNDS WASTE DISPOSAL OUTDOOR CENTER-STARING LAKE 89485 $5,462.75 SYSTECH SERVICES COMPUTERS POLICE 89486 $102.02 TARGET OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL ELECTION 89487 $2,000.00 TEENS ALONE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES HOUSING, TRANS, & SOC SVC 89488 $198.28 TIERNEY BROS INC OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL PARK MAINTENANCE 89489 $18,315.55 TKDA DESIGN & CONST EDEN CROSSING ROADS 89490 $857.49 TURF SUPPLY COMPANY LANDSCAPE MTLS & AG SUPPL PARK MAINTENANCE . 89491 $120.00 TWIN CITY OXYGEN CO LUBRICANTS & ADDITIVES EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 89492 $722.48 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED CLOTHING & UNIFORMS POLICE 89493 $53.90 UNLIMITED SUPPLIES INC CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 89494 $34.94 US CAVALRY CLOTHING & UNIFORMS POLICE 89495 $13,404.09 VERNCO MAINTENANCE INC CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT WATER UTILITY-GENERAL 89496 $1,804.32 VESSCO INC EQUIPMENT PARTS WATER TREATMENT PLANT 89497 $197.03 VIKING INDUSTRIAL CENTER OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL PARK MAINTENANCE 89498 $52.72 W W GRAINGER OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 89499 $129.63 WAHLS ENTERPRISES REPAIR & MAINT SUPPLIES PARK MAINTENANCE 89500 $625.00 WEST SUBURBAN MEDIATION CENTER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES LEGAL COUSEL 89501 $162.50 WESTWOOD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES DESIGN & CONST TRAILS 89502 $147.81 WHEELER LUMBER OPERATIONS OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL PARK MAINTENANCE 89503 $354.26 WICHTERMAN'S LTD CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 89504 $249.84 WOLF CAMERA INC PHOTO SUPPLIES POLICE 89505 $461.00 YALE INCORPORATED CONTRACTED BLDG MAINT WATER TREATMENT PLANT 89506 $1,778.05 ZIEGLER INC EQUIPMENT RENTAL JULY 4TH CELEBRATION 89507 $97.50 ZOELLNER, MARK OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES SOFTBALL $777,569.24* 16 COUNCIL CHECK SUMMARY 26-JUL-2000 (09:28) • DIVISION TOTAL DEBT SERVICE PAYMENTS $320,487.40 EMPLOYEE PAYROLL DEDUCTIONS $396,256.29 $716,743.69* • • 9 COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER 26-JUL-2000 (09 CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM 360 $155,706.22 NORWEST BANKS MINNESOTA N A FEDERAL TAXES W/H FD 10 ORG 361 $72,240.92 NORWEST BANKS MINNESOTA N A EMPLOYEES SS & MEDICARE FD 10 ORG 362 $72,240.92 NORWEST BANKS MINNESOTA N A EMPLOYERS SS & MEDICARE FD 10 ORG 363 $55,746.69 MINNESOTA DEPT OF REVENUE STATE TAXES WITHHELD FD 10 ORG 364 $27,770.08 ORCHARD TRUST CO AS TRUSTEE/CU DEFERRED COMP FD 10 ORG 365 $12,551.46 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-457 DEFERRED COMP FD 10 ORG 367 $285,049.90 FIRST TRUST NATL ASSOC INTEREST CITY CENTER DEBT FD 368 $35,437.50 NORWEST BANK MN N.A. INTEREST B & I PAYMENTS $716,743.69* - • • /O CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 08/01/00 SECTION: Reports of Officers SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Chris Enger, City Manager Request for Proposal for Professional Real Estate Mir E Services for Lease or Sale of the Smith Douglas More House Requested Action Move to: Approve the Request for Proposal for professional real estate services to determine the market feasibility of lease or sale for adaptive reuse of Smith Douglas More House and to market the property for maximum return on the City's investment within the framework of adaptive reuse, and direct staff to solicit proposals and return to the City Council with recommendation of a preferred Real Estate Professional. Synopsis On July 18,the City Council directed the staff to draft an RFP for a real estate professional to: 1. Determine the market feasibility of lease or sale of the Smith Douglas More House for adaptive reuse; and 2. Market the property for maximum return on the City's investment through lease or sale within the framework of adaptive reuse The City purchased the property with Cash Park Fees in 1981 for$140,000 and Life Estate. With a 6% cost of money, capital improvements,payment of taxes and maintenance, the City has a cost of over$500,000 in the property. The RFP presented may be adopted as is or with changes directed by the City Council. Staff will then proceed to solicit the proposals and make a recommendation to the City Council on selection of a qualified professional. Attachments RFP I Request for Professional Services City of Eden Prairie Development of Market Feasibility Plan for Lease or Sale of the Historic Smith/Douglas/More House for Adaptive Reuse Proposal Due August 18, 2000 City of Eden Prairie Community Development Department 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie,MN 55344-4435 SECTION I—General Information A. BACKGROUND The Smith house was built in 1877 and is presently owned by the City of Eden Prairie. This house is historically significant and is a designated Heritage Preservation Site. On September 16, 1997 the Smith house was placed on the City Register of Heritage Preservation Sites. The registration was based on its historical association with Sheldon Smith and the home's architectural style and construction. The home's unique masonry cavity wall construction is considered rare in Minnesota and, thus, makes the house eligible for nomination for the National Register of Historic Places. The City's goal is to rehabilitate the Smith house for adaptive reuse for a commercial purpose. This may be accomplished through either a lease or sale to a private owner contingent upon retaining the historic qualities of the structure. Examples of commercial uses that would be acceptable,but not limited to, are: coffee shop, tearoom, bookstore, or antique store. The City would prefer a use that would allow the public access to the historic homes' interior. The building's main level is remarkably well preserved and worthy of the public's appreciation. Space on the main level is limited to 1,404 square feet. The property was purchased in 1981 for $140,000 and life estate given to the owner. Since then, the City has paid the annual taxes,made capital improvements and has funded annual maintenance and operational costs. Based on this information, the City has invested more than$500,000 in the property. B. OBJECTIVES The purpose of the Request for Professional Services is: 1. Develop a Market Feasibility Report for the lease or sale of the historic Smith/Douglas/More House for maximum return on the City's investment and • restoration of the exterior of the house within the parameters of adaptive reuse. 2. Market the property for lease or sale for maximum return within the framework of of adaptive reuse. C. ISSUING OFFICE The RFP is issued by the City of Eden Prairie, Community Development Services Area. All correspondence regarding the RFP must be addressed to: City of Eden Prairie, Community Development Services Area, 8080 Mitchell Road,Eden Prairie,MN 55344. D. CONTRACT ADMINISTRATOR Following signing of the contract, all communications concerning the contract must be directed to John Gertz, 8080 Mitchell Road,Eden Prairie,MN 55344. P1 3 E. INCURRING COSTS The City of Eden Prairie is not liable for any cost incurred by the perspective firms prior to signing the contract. F. PROPOSAL To be considered, each firm must submit a complete response to this RFP following the requirements outline in Section II and using a format provided in Section III. The proposal must be signed in ink by an official authorized to bind the submitter to its provisions. The proposal must include a statement as to the period during which the proposal remains valid. This period must be at least sixty(60) days from the due date for the proposal. G. ACCEPTANCE OF THE PROPOSAL CONTRACT The contents of this proposal will become contractual obligations if the contract is awarded. Failure of the selected consultant to accept these obligations may result in cancellation of the award. H. SELECTION CRITERIA 1. Qualifications 2. Fee Proposal 3. Interview SEALED PROPOSAL RECEIPT Proposals must arrive at Community Development Services on or before 4:30 p.m., Friday,August 18,2000. J. DISCLOSURE All information in the submitter's proposal, except the analysis, is subject to disclosure under the provisions of Minnesota Statute, Chapter 13 "Minnesota Government Data Practices Act." K. RIGHT TO REJECT PROPOSALS • The City reserves the right to reject any or all Proposals or to accept the Proposal deemed in the best interest of the City. In determination of award, the qualifications of the proposed submitter, the conformity with the specifications of services to be supplied, and delivery terms will be considered. Pag/2 SECTION II—SCOPE OF WORK A. SITE VISITS Potential contractors are encouraged to visit the site prior to submitting this proposal. Anyone requiring access into the house must contact Stuart Fox, City of Eden Prairie, at 949-8445. B. PREPARATION OF MARKET PLAN AND REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL The report to the City Council will provide the following: 1. Description of the process the real estate agent will follow to determine the market for the best lease. A. Goal of the lease will be to restore the exterior of the historic home and to provide an income stream to the City that would cover future costs such as taxes and provide return on the investment made to date. B. The quality of the restoration must be acceptable to standards established by the City Building Inspector and Historic Preservation Specialist, and subject to review by the Heritage Preservation Commission. C. Develop timeline and steps to market this property to determine best lease arrangement available prior to determining if the property should be sold. 2. Description of the process to market the property for sale. A. Goal of the sale will be to restore the exterior of the historic home and to provide sufficient revenue to cover the investment made to date. B. The quality of the restoration must be acceptable to standards established by the City Building Inspector and Historic Preservation Specialist, and subject to review by the Heritage Preservation Commission. C. Develop timeline and steps that would be taken to market this property to meet these goals. SECTION HI—PROPOSED TIME TABLE • A. Proposals submittal deadline—Friday, August 18,-2000, at 4:30 p.m. B. Council decision on consultant—September 5,2000 C. Consultant receives detailed project input from City staff and commences review of site and market analysis—September 6,2000. P D. Consultant submits market analysis and marketing plan report to the City Council — October 3,2000. E. Consultant begins marketing the site for lease or sale, depending on Council direction— October 4,2000. SECTION IV—INFORMATION REQUESTED FROM ALL PROPOSAL SUBMITTERS A. PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS 1. State the full name and address of the individual or individuals who will perform the work hereunder. 2. Manpower — include the number of professional personnel by skill and qualifications that will be employed in the work. Indicate which of the individuals you consider key to the successful completion of the study or project. Identify individuals by name and title who will do the work on this project. Resumes or qualifications are required for proposed project personnel. 3. State history of the firm in terms of length, existence, etc. 4. Describe your firm's experience with marketing commercial properties, historical properties, or projects with similar requirements to the one proposed. 5. Three professional references. C. QUOTATION State your firm's not to exceed fee for this project, as follows: 1. Fee to develop marketing plan and report to the City Council: 2. Fee for actual lease or sale of the property. A. Leasing property B. Sale of Property D. AUTHORIZED NEGOTIATOR Include the name and phone number of the individual in your organization authorized to negotiate the proposed contract with the City of Eden Prairie. E. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND COMMENTS Include any other information that is believed to be pertinent and not specifically asked for elsewhere in the RFP. Page F. DEADLINE FOR SUBMITTAL OF PROPOSAL Three copies of the proposal must be received at the following address on or before 4:30 p.m. Central Standard Time,August 18, 2000. City of Eden Prairie Attention Don Uram Director of Community Development 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie,MN 55344 Phone(949)849-8488 • P ge'� tr51- allerX! DS1�cu�j Uo The reason I am here as chair of the Heritage Preservation Commission is to have the best possible communication with City Council: to give a succinct wrap-up of our issues,give any updates,answer questions, and get comments. I'd like to come 3-4 times a year, December being the next. This time the format includes 6 topics, and I will leave copies of the notes. 1. The HPC requests that we be able to meet at the Cummins-Grill House for some of our monthly meetings each year. We have done so 3 times in the last 2 years approximately and had an extra Saturday morning HPC work day there. The building is _ publicly owned,ADA accessible,the meetings can and were given public notice well ahead of time,there is heat,light,and now an indoor restroom. There were guests at 2 meetings(unusual)and we feel meeting here is productive for when we are dealing with house, garden,fence and event issues. 2. The Old Houses topic from July's meeting. I feel the need to clarify our intent on the Smith Douglas Moore Homestead: if the HPC was recommending their highest and best use for the 3 houses,we would have kept all, fixed-up and maintained all,used all. There wasn't a lack of interest, a lack of potential uses,a problem of feasibility, a problem of structural integrity. There was really only the pressure of finances all around. We came down to the responsible level of recommending lease of the More house,but the HPC never intended sale to be even a thought until the leasing option is completely considered. (a) Along this vein,the HPC would like to be involved to whatever extent you will allow us to be in helping find a lessee,in setting parameters for that contract, and in developing a way,be it annual tours, a picnicing area,or signage and a rest stop off the two nearby trails for the interested public on this 1.7 acres. • (b) John Gertz and the HPC have started looking at other communities lease arrangements to aid in putting Eden Prairie's together. A lot of fascinating uses are coming out,which we can document if the Council would be interested in seeing this list. (c) Public Support. The Historical Society Board has written letters I've been told to the City Council. It would be interesting to hear the Council's reaction on how you feel the public can best show interest on issues such as this. Letters to Council,letters to the editor,phone calls to Council, presence at meetings,or signing petitions 3. CLG Grants The interpretive signs for historic sites have layout and artwork almost completed. This along with the limited text will be going into production soon and there will be some very easy to look at,creative signs up this fall. Si Overlook Site-The grant money to complete National Historic Registration nomination has been received and that process will be finished by early fall. Eden Center—The third grant applied for and received is being used for reroofing the gdormitory and the old dining hall later this fall. Apple Trees left at Arlene Marshall's Orchard Site The HPC had been offered old apple trees 1 %years ago by Arlene Marshall. We immediately accepted these for the Cummins-Grill property. The old variety issue didn't come up until much later. Current information on this is: Lee Johnson of US Homes Corporation has saved 100 trees. He is planning right now to try to have 50 near the Pioneer Trail edge of this development and move 50 more to the conservation zone on his south end. Securing a tree spade is a problem he is grappling with which has not been solved yet. John Gertz has dug through diaries and found some of the old varieties which could be used at the Cummins-Grill House for a small orchard. The apples would need to be sprayed/� and could be used for education and actually making pies for demonstrations. S4 �/♦ ones at the Cummins-Phipps-Grill Homestead The formal old garden east of the house has over 400 plants in 10 rows, which were planted starting in 1904 by Harriet Phipps. About 11 years ago according to Eden Prairie Garden Club minutes and letters to the City,this peony bed was tackled and improved; it was then turned over to the City for maintenance. Park and Rec had a lot of other things to do,the gardens were not given much attention, and four years later the plants were barely alive. The current garden club group then took this on as their main volunteer service project. The City sent in wood chips and straw when requested, grubbed-out weed trees and shrubs along one side, and delivered an old hand mower for use on cutting grass between the rows. The club is small and 90%of members are not retired,but they put in about 420 man-hours over 3 seasons after work in heat, drought,mosquitoes, flies, gnats, snakes,thistles and nettles and all by hand,raised these back up from one little finger-sized shoot in some cases and a small handful of blooms in 1998,to great,healthy plans with hundreds of lush blooms in June 2000. This shows how important simple but continuing care is. When the mower proved too pathetic for words, the workers started bringing their own weed whips and mowers everytime,plus hand tools, and cleaned up after themselves. The amount of work needed on a regular basis was getting to be a strain. When they were told this spring that they couldn't have a key anymore to the shed and house and were to be charged$25 per hour to hold meetings there or at the Outdoor Center and be let in and out by a City staff person,that was the last straw, and they have now informed the City through their minutes that they will no longer work on the peonies at all. A They are giving the City the notes on extensive,multi-source research done on peony maintenance and their best recommendations. They are leaving it in a condition where it can now be maintained partly with larger equipment a few times each year rather than weekly. It has proven in the past to be too much for Eden Prairie Facilities to properly watch over these heirloom flowers and put them as top priority at the correct times each year so I feel that the City needs to hire a professional company to handle this garden. I don't know who else to suggest besides myself to obtain estimates for this, so I will if directed. The garden club president said that they will meet once with the chosen garden pro. The maintenance notes are being completed for the files. The Garden Club was originally planning to co-sponsor with the City a spring event at the house when the peonies would be blooming next year, and I am hoping that the City will consider organizing a simple tea and tour to take advantage of the spectacular display. My final recommendation on this is that there be some type of public commendation from the City for the huge amount of TLC given by a core group of about 12 garden clubbers in bringing back these amazingly tough old beauties.