Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 02/20/2001 AGENDA EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY,FEBRUARY 20,2001 7:00 PM, CITY CENTER Council Chamber 8080 Mitchell Road CITY COUNCIL: Mayor Jean Harris, Councilmembers Sherry Butcher, Ronald Case, Jan Mosman, 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 Ric Rosow and Council Recorder Peggy Rasmussen I. ROLL CALL/CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. PRESENTATION TO MAYOR JEAN HARRIS OF CHARLES DEBONO COMMUNITY VOLUNTEER AWARD IV. COUNCIL FORUM INVITATION V. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS VI. MINUTES A. COUNCIL WORKSHOP HELD TUESDAY,FEBRUARY 6,2000 B. CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY,FEBRUARY 6,2001 C. SPECIAL MEETING ON FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT HELD SATURDAY,FEBRUARY 10,2001 VII. CONSENT CALENDAR A. CLERK'S LICENSE LIST B. AZTEC TOWN OFFICE PARK by DaVem, Inc. 2nd Reading for Planned Unit Development District Review on 4.46 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural to Office on 4.46 acres, and Site Plan Review on 4.46 acres. Location: Aztec Drive. (Ordinance for Zoning District Change and Resolution for Site Plan Review) C. ADOPT RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPLICATION TO MNDOT FOR LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENT FUNDS CITY COUNCIL AGENDA February 20,2001 Page 2 D. ADOPT RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR STATE NATURAL AND SCENIC AREA GRANT FOR BIRCH ISLAND WOODS E. ADOPT RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF THE 2001 RESIDENTIAL RECYCLING FUNDING POLICY GRANT F. ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT FOR THE 2001 MUNICIPAL WASTE ABATEMENT INCENTIVE FUND GRANT PROGRAM G. ADOPT RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF TWO AGREEMENTS FOR THE 2001 MUNICIPAL WASTE ABATEMENT INCENTIVE FUND GRANT PROGRAM H. ADOPT RESOLUTION REJECTING BIDS FOR REROOFING AT EDEN WOOD CAMP AND ORDER CONTRACTING PURSUANT TO MINNESOTA STATUTES SECTION 471.345 I. ADOPT RESOLUTION DECLARING `ABANDONED PROPERTY" VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS /MEETINGS IX. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS X. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS A. FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CITY CODE CHAPTER 2,RELATING TO BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS XI. PETITIONS,REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS A. SOUTHWEST BUSWAY STUDY PRESENTATION B. VALLEY VIEW CORPORATE CENTER XII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS & COMMISSIONS XIII. APPOINTMENTS A. APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS XIV. REPORTS OF OFFICERS A. REPORTS OF COUNCILMEMBERS B. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER CITY COUNCIL AGENDA February 20,2001 Page 3 C. REPORT OF PARKS AND RECREATION SERVICES DIRECTOR 1. Contract for Consultant to the Purgatory Creek Recreation Area Task Force 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 XV. OTHER BUSINESS XVI. ADJOURNMENT AGENDA EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP/FORUM TUESDAY,FEBRUARY 20,2001 5:00 - 6:55 PM, CITY CENTER HERITAGE ROOM H CITY COUNCIL: Mayor Jean Harris, Councilmembers Sherry Butcher,Ron Case, Jan Mosman, 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 Ric Rosow and Recorder Lorene McWaters I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER—MAYOR JEAN HARRIS H. APPROVAL OF AGENDA III. BOARD AND COMMISSION CHAIR AND CO-CHAIR DISCUSSION IV. GUIDELINES FOR COUNCIL NEIGHBORHOOD MEETINGS V. OTHER TOPICS VI. COUNCIL FORUM VII. ADJOURNMENT IT A UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP/FORUM TUESDAY,JANUARY 2,2001 5:00-6:55 PM, CITY CENTER HERITAGE ROOMS I &H CITY COUNCIL: Mayor Jean Harris, Councilmembers Sherry Butcher,Ronald Case, Jan Mosman, and Nancy Tyra-Lukens CITY COUNCIL STAFF: City Manager Chris Enger,Parks &Recreation Services Director Bob Lambert,Public Works Services Director Eugene Dietz,Public Safety Services Director Jim Clark, Community Development and Financial Services Director Don Uram, Director of Management Services Natalie Swaggert, IT Coordinator Mike Hutter,IT Manager,Lisa Wu, City Attorney Ric Rosow, and Recorder Lorene McWaters VISITORS: Lyle Wray,Executive Director of the Citizens League; Lisa Sisinni, Eden Prairie Chamber of Commerce President; Scott Thiss, Eden Prairie Chamber of Commerce Past Chair;Bill Horn,Eden Prairie Chamber of Commerce; Joe Stoebner, Eden Prairie Chamber of Commerce Chair Elect; Joe Smith,Flying Cloud Airport Commission; Jeff Strate,Friends of Birch Island Woods; Geri Westermann, Friends of Birch Island Woods I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER—MAYOR JEAN HARRIS Mayor Harris called the meeting to order at 5:07 p.m. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA III. E-GOVERNMENT Lyle Wray, Executive Director of the Citizen's League, gave a PowerPoint presentation entitled"eGovernment: From in Line to Online." Wray reviewed ways in which eGovernment is used to enhance access to and delivery of government services to benefit citizens,businesses and employees. Topics included communications between governmental organizations, government and business, and government and citizens. Wray stressed that any eGovernment initiative can only be as good as its underlying IT systems. Wray mentioned a current Sloan Foundation project that involves a web-based citizen complaint system. This program is being tested by several Twin Cities communities. City Manager Chris Enger noted that while the City has had a web site for several years, it is mainly a Phase I(informational) site. In order to implement a Phase II(interactive) site, staff needs direction and support from the Council. Councilmember Case suggested reviving a telecommunications (or technology) committee to address these issues with membership consisting of one or two Councilmembers and Service Area Directors. Mayor Harris said rather than having a single Councilmember be involved with largely a staff technology committee,that the entire Council needs to be involved in the policy decision making process. 1 COUNCIL WORKSHOP AU UTES February 6, 2001 Page 2 Case said the City currently has the opportunity to partner with the School District in laying the groundwork for a joint portal through which residents could access both City and School information and services. V. OTHER A. COUNCIL E-MAIL Enger said he had talked with some other communities about how their Councils handle e-mail. Enger said some Councils have agreed that their Mayor responds to e-mail communications that are sent to all Councihnembers. Enger also clarified the differences between government data,public information, and private communications based on information provided by City Attorney Ric Rosow. Rosow indicated that correspondence from an individual to one or more Councihnembers is considered private data;however it is also government data and must be retained according to the rules set forth in the Minnesota Data Practices Act. It was decided that staff will not have access to e-mail and will not open,print or file Council e-mail unless specifically asked to do so. Groupwise retains an archival copy of all e-mails, so it was decided this would be the official means of record retention. Enger asked how the Council wishes to handle correspondence that comes in through the All Council mailbox. Councihember Case said there should be a minimum response level, something to let individuals know their mail has been received and read. Councilmember Tyra-Lukens said she thinks it makes sense for Mayor Harris to take the initiative on responding to All-Council e-mails. It was agreed that Mayor Harris will be the official responder to All-Council e-mails. As in the past, the Mayor will forward correspondence best addressed by staff on to the appropriate individual and all Councihuembers will receive copies of responses. VI. COUNCIL FORUM A. EDEN PRAIRIE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE Chamber member Bill Horn said the Chamber wished to address the Council regarding the proposed Flying Cloud Airport expansion. He noted the Chamber has taken an official position in favor of the expansion. He and other members of the Chamber were concerned because they had been informed that the Council would hear only from opponents of the expansion at the February 10 public meeting. Also commenting on the Chamber's pro-expansion stance were Scott Thiss, Lisa Sisinni, and Joe Stoebner. They expressed the following concerns: • The Council would be getting a skewed perception on the airport issue if only anti-expansion views are presented at the February 10 meeting • A lawsuit by the City to attempt to stop airport expansion would send an anti- business message • The cost of such a lawsuit would fall mainly on businesses 0 COUNCIL WORKSHOP MINUTES February 6,2001 Page 3 • Flying Cloud Airport is a community resource that needs to be improved • It is unwise to "pick a fight"with another government agency • An expanded airport would enhance a competitive business environment and help lure businesses to Eden Prairie Bill Horn advised the Council to look for a win-win situation, and to work toward a negotiated settlement. Lisa Sisinni said she thought it would be beneficial for the Council to hear all new information(including pro-expansion) on the airport issue to ensure an informed decision making process. Councilmember Case said he disagreed and that the Council had "been there and done that." He said the Council represents all of Eden Praire, while the Chamber represents only pieces of the community. Mayor Harris pointed out that the Council would be looking at all alternatives to oppose expansion, not just litigation. Councilmember Butcher asked the Chamber to remember that the February 10 meeting is not the only way to get information to the Council and urged them to use e-mail and other means of communication to get convey their opinions. Joe Smith, member of the Flying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission, raised a concern that as an invited organization, the Commission would be allowed only to present anti-expansion views. He noted that there are members of the Commission who are pro-expansion. Rosow indicated that this matter would be addressed during the Council Meeting. B. FRIENDS OF BIRCH ISLAND WOODS—JEFF STRATE Mayor Harris invited the Friends of Birch Island Woods to speak during the regular Council Meeting since there was no time left in the Workshop. VIII. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Harris adjourned the meeting at 6:58 p.m. rr-g UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PR AMM CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY,FEBRUARY 6,2001 7:00 PM, CITY CENTER Council Chamber 8080 Mitchell Road CITY COUNCIL: Mayor Jean Harris, Councilmembers Sherry Butcher, Ronald Case, Jan Mosman, 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 Planner Michael Franzen, City Attorney Ric Rosow and Council Recorder Peggy Rasmussen I. ROLL CALL/CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER Mayor Harris called the meeting to order at 7:07 p.m. She introduced Student Representative Kathleen Luther who is learning more about City government. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. COUNCIL FORUM INVITATION 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. IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS Case added an item about the City Manager review process, under XIII.A. Reports of Councilmembers. Tyra-Lukens requested to move up Item 3. on Birch Island Woods, under XIII.C. Report of Parks and Recreation Services Director, to immediately follow VI. Consent Calendar. Rosow added a closed session to discuss pending litigation. MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Case, to approve the agenda as published and amended. Motion carried 5-0. V. MINUTES A. CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY,JANUARY 16,2001 Mayor Harris made a change on page 13, the third paragraph under X.A. The second sentence should read, 'Mayor Harris said that the City Code requires ten acres on non-sewered or City-water-supplied areas, and she has reservations about sub-dividing these eight lots further. She requested Bob Lambert to expand on I CrrY COUNCIL All UTES February 6,2001 Page 2 existing protection of the Bluffs by current City and Met Council positions on movement of the MUSA line." Butcher made a correction on page 18, in the last paragraph, which should read, ". . . to have a TIF district that is non-qualified because the City is subsidizing some of the housing. . ." MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, seconded by Butcher, to approve the minutes of the City Council Meeting held Tuesday, January 16, 2001, as published and amended. Motion carried 5-0. VI. CONSENT CALENDAR A. CLERK'S LICENSE LIST B. ENTREVAUX by Pemtom Land Company. 2nd Reading for Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 30.45 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 30.45 acres. Location: Pioneer Trail and Bennett Place. (Ordinance No. 4-2001-PUD-1-2001 for Zoning District Change) C. BLUFFS EAST 17TH by Hustad Land Company. 2nd Reading for Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 5.78 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural to RM-6.5 on 5.78 acres, and Site Plan Review on 5.78 acres. Location: South of Pioneer Trail at Franlo Road. (Ordinance No. 5-2001-PUD- 2-2001 for Zoning District Change and Resolution No. 2001-28 for Site Plan Review) D. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2001-29 APPROVING THE FINAL PLAT OF ENTREVAUX E. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2001-30 APPROVING THE FINAL PLAT OF IVERS ADDITION F. APPROVE SERVICE AGREEMENT WITH HONEYWELL FOR MAINTENANCE OF CONTROL SYSTEMS AT THE WATER TREATMENT PLANT G. APPROVE PROPOSAL FOR THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION OF THE PRAIRIE CENTER DRIVE/PRAIRIE LAKES DRIVE TRAFFIC SIGNAL WITH WESTWOOD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES,INC.,I.C. 95-5372 H. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 6-2001 AMENDING CITY CODE SECTION 2.22 RELATING TO BOARDS, COMMISSIONS, CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMISSIONS AND TASK FORCES I. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2001-31 SETTING PUBLIC HEARING ON MARCH 20, 2001, TO CONSIDER ESTABLISHING A TAX INCREMENT (TM DISTRICT FOR ROLLING HILLS SENIOR HOUSING a CITY COUNCIL MUNUTES February 6,2001 Page 3 J. RECOMMEND REAPPOINTMENT OF EDWARD SCHLAMPP TO LOWER NIINNESOTA RIVER WATERSHED DISTRICT MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, seconded by Case, to approve Items A-J on the Consent Calendar. Mayor Harris referenced Item G. and asked Dietz what are the actual City costs on that traffic signal. Dietz replied the cost for construction of the signal is anticipated to be $175,000, plus the cost of design, which is estimated to be about $23,600. Of that amount, the 1994 Hartford Place PUD will supply $71,000, so the City's cost is about $127,000. The source of funding is from TIF funds. Motion carried 5-0. XIII. REPORTS OF OFFICERS A. REPORT OF PARKS AND RECREATION SERVICES DIRECTOR 3. Birch Island Woods Ap rn aisal Jeff Strate, representing Friends of Birch Island Woods, was asked to give Council a report. He said that the group is making progress in establishing reasons for a no-cost conveyance of the property to the City. They have found another precedent in Minnetonka for the County doing this, and they have looked at other conveyances in the County. So far it is encouraging and they are confident that when the group has a chance to talk to the Board of Commissioners they will receive a good hearing. Last week the Legislative Committee from Minnetonka, headed by Ellingson, worked with Tom Workman on a new Bill, H.F. 529, that would require Hennepin County to convey or sell the property to Eden Prairie at an undisclosed price. They also secured endorsement from other state legislators, including Ed Oliver. Commissioner Johnson is aware of this Bill. Strate said he would e-mail the language of this Bill to the Councilmembers. Gerri Westermann referenced the joint appraisal that was conducted by the City and County. The value placed on the property was disappointing. There is a potential "Brown Field" that was not taken into account in the appraisal. She encouraged the Council to authorize an environmental assessment of the property. Enger said the County agreed to provide a Phase I Environmental audit and will split the cost of that with the City. With regard to a Phase H or III, Enger said he didn't know who would bear the cost of that, although it is usually the seller. 13 CITY COUNCIL NI[N=S February 6,2001 Page 4 VH. PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS A. VACATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY OF PART OF VALLEY VIEW ROAD IN SECTION 11, T116, RANGE 22, VACATION 00-03 (Resolution No. 2001-32) Enger said official notice of this public hearing was published in the January 19, 2001, Eden Prairie News. Hennepin County Transportation Department has requested the City conduct the public hearing process to vacate excess right-of- way south of Valley View Road adjacent to the Land Rover Dealership. Upon vacation, the excess right-of-way will become part of the Land Rover site. Mayor Harris asked if anyone wished to address the Council. No one did. MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, seconded by Mosman, to adopt Resolution No. 2001-32 vacating the right-of-way of part of Valley View Road in Section 11, T 116,Range 22 as described in the resolution. Motion carried 5-0. B. SUNNYBROOK PLACE by Baton Corporation. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 7.71 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 7.71 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural to RM- 6.5 Zoning District on 7.71 acres, Site Plan Review on 7.71 acres, and Preliminary Plat on 7.71 acres into 17 lots. Location: Sunnybrook Road. (Resolution for PUD Concept Review, Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Change, and Resolution for Preliminary Plat) Enger said official notice of this public hearing was published in the January 25, 2001, Eden Prairie News and sent to 27 property owners. This is a 16-unit, single-level townhome development, with two- and three-unit buildings. The project is located at 12650 Sunnybrook Road. Randy Zejdlik of Baton Corporation presented the plan. The site is zoned rural, and they are requesting a change to RM-6.5 for a low-density multifamily development. There would be 2.2 units per acre. The 16 units would have 1,460 square feet of living space on the main level. The lower level would have 1,200 square feet to be finished by the owner if desired. They are one-level rambler walkout/lookout townhomes. Prices will be approximately $220,000 and up. Options can push the price over $300,000. The construction process would be to build a two-unit model home and sell from it. The company anticipates they would be owner-occupied. They are adding to the conservation easement, so there would be no future development in that area. Franzen said the developer has a project that is consistent with the Comprehensive Guide Plan. The Council is being asked to transfer density in order to have units built at the southern end of the property. Wetland mitigation will be done on the site. The amount of wetland fill is six percent of the property. The Community Planning Board voted 4-2 to recommend approval to the Council. Those who voted against it said it was because of the density and proximity of some units to 9 CITY COUNCIL,MR'q=S February 6,2001 Page 5 Highway 212. Some residents who spoke to the Planning Board at the public hearing also mentioned these concerns. Mayor Harris asked if anyone wished to address the Council on this project. Libby Hargrove, 12640 Sunnybrook Road, said her property is adjacent to the development. She believed the density of the townhomes should be less. Along the north side of the property there is only 25 feet between the back of the townhomes and the wetland area. To provide more distance, she recommended filling some of the wetland. The units are set back only 10 feet from the lot lines along each side, or a total of 20 feet between units; and those that have porches are even closer. She said her main concern, however, is the four units that would be built close to Highway 212. Unit 16 appears to be about 85 feet from the edge of the highway, and between units 16 and 13 the average distance would be about 95 feet. The developer said it would be easy to move those units to the north end of the property. She didn't believe anyone would be able to park safely on Sunnybrook Road, where the entrance to the development is located. There would be limited parking for guests. She liked the single-floor plan; but that increases the amount of acreage needed. She suggested units 1, 2 and 3 be made into two-unit buildings so they can fit better in that location and would not need a variance. She would like to have a privacy fence installed to protect her property, especially along the north and east sides. Mrs. Hargrove showed pictures she took of the wetland. In the north of the property there is a natural drainage area. Laura Bluml, 10540 West Riverside Drive, said she walks through this area quite often. She believed it would be a mistake to put houses on the west side near the highway. Regarding the density transfer question, she thought the City might not want to do that; 20 feet apart is better than 10 feet apart. She would like to see access to Highway 212 into the site. She would also like to have sidewalks to enable people to walk to the downtown area. MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, seconded by Case, to close the public hearing. Motion carried 5-0. Franzen said the developer has worked on an alternative plan and asked him to talk about that. Zejdlik showed an alternative plan. It showed the area that needed to be filled and mitigated and they were able to change that for this alternative plan. He took the units from the clustered area, left the ones by TH 212 and moved some units to the north area. That would allow him to build 17 units instead of 16. Regarding City staff s concern about the density and the wetland, he tried to alleviate mitigation and some of the density concerns. The wetland fill would be reduced by adjusting this to a two-unit building, making the NURP pond more oblong in shape and pushing the units up toward the property line. This would mean a 50 percent reduction in wetland fill. However, it would require greater site- development cost by reducing the number of units. If this alternative were adopted, and he had to reduce the number of units, he requested that the City 5 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES February 6,2001 Page 6 compromise or reduce his obligation to pay the cost of extending the sewer line from the cul de sac to the north end of the property. It doesn't benefit this property at all. Mayor Harris asked if unit 14 is closer to Highway 212 than unit 16. Franzen replied there is some additional space between the building and the wetland, so it could be moved to the east and still meet the front yard setback requirements. Mosman said she looked at the units near Highway 212. She suggested taking one of the three-unit buildings and moving it closer to the road, turn it to gain about 120 feet, which would save some trees. The trees would help buffer the sound from the highway. Zejdlik said he was told the three-unit building wouldn't fit there without a lot of wetland fill. Mosman wondered if there could be a trade-off between wetland fill and losing the trees. Case said he would like to have a philosophical discussion regarding density transfer. The City has used it to save wooded areas and bluff land or creek land that could have been developed. But on this site it doesn't appear the City would be saving land that could have been developed because the wetland area could not be developed. There is just one piece of dry land that can be developed. Suddenly they are moving density off wetland, that he wouldn't have approved filling, onto a little piece of dry land. It doesn't feel that density transfer fits in this case. He asked if they could refuse to do a density transfer; this is a little four- or five-acre piece of land rather than 7.1 acres. Enger said perhaps they should consider what the City has done in the past. Franzen said the wetland on this property is 2.4 acres, leaving 5.10 acres above the wetland. They would be transferring density off the northwest corner of the property. If they just use the high and dry area to calculate the density, that would be three units per acre, so it would be necessary to transfer partial density off the wetland in order to justify the plan as submitted. The alternative plan would be two units less, and may be close to the guide plan if they are looking at the net density above the wetland. The City has done density transfer in the past off lakes when the City has had that portion dedicated to the City and it is adjacent to park property, and for other reasons such as saving trees. Enger asked Franzen if it is true that density transfer, however it has been granted by the Council, is dependent upon development of the site plan. Franzen replied yes, it is whether the Council is comfortable with the setbacks, open space, etc. because that would become the valid reasons for considering the change. It isn't just gaining open space; Council has to be happy with the net result. Rosow said he believed that there are constitutional issues regarding the wetland mitigation process,which is the taking of property. Just because the property has a wetland on it doesn't mean the property owner doesn't have the right to develop CITY COUNCIL MENUTES February 6,2001 Page 7 it. That is why there is reasonable regulation about wetland replacement. If an owner is going to fill wetland it needs to be replaced 2:1. Rosow suggested Council frame its discussion, not around whether it is a certain number-of-unit property or whether there are really four acres that can be developed versus seven, but whether it meets all the code requirements of the setbacks, etc. Franzen showed an alternate plan which he said was based on comments heard at the Community Planning Board. This is a 13-unit proposal. The east side of the property has more units. It was suggested that the units in the three-unit building on the southeast corner be staggered. This would meet the intent of the ordinance for wetland fill. Tyra-Lukens asked if it would remove the need for the setback variance. Franzen said he believed the one along Highway 212 would meet the 30-foot setback requirement from the highway right-of-way. The wetland buffer strips would be meeting the requirement for a 10-foot setback and 15-foot buffer. There are certain criteria in the code, such as the percentage of the site left as wetland and the percentage left undisturbed. The code takes into consideration wetland quality. He discussed this with Leslie Stovring and Gene Dietz, and they agreed with him that it was low-quality wetland. Tyra-Lukens said she was much more comfortable with the plan presented by Franzen. It reduced the need for variance requests. There is a great deal of land placed into a conservation easement on the north end of the property. However, there is the request by the developer to consider with regard to reducing the cost to him of extending utilities to the north end of the property in exchange for a reduction in the number of units, and the whole question of assessments for Sunnybrook Road. Dietz said when assessments were calculated for this property, it was assumed four units could be built on this site without the need for utility extensions and street extensions. To provide utilities for this project, there will be a public sewer built as part of this project, and the developer is incurring the cost. The City requires developers to extend utilities through their property at their cost. That has been the City's practice and is in the City's policies. The water main will be looped through this property to go to the north. Case inquired, when it is necessary for utilities to cross property to reach a new development, wouldn't that be the new developer's responsibility? Dietz replied the assumption is if all developers bring utilities through their property, then the next piece of property can connect, etc. That is the City's policy. Butcher said she walked the land with Mrs. Hargrove and felt the transition isn't very good from single-family homes to this density of townhomes. She believed that was the concern of the two people on the Community Planning Board who voted against the plan. When a transfer of density is done and the developer is asking for this kind of density, clearly other things have to benefit the City for the CITY COUNCIL NEW= February 6,2001 Page 8 Council to go ahead and do it. Butcher said she was not comfortable with the units close to the road because it is a big safety issue. She would rather see those units really reduced or not there at all. If the City were going to go with the plan with higher density, she recommended the higher density should be put in the core units, but perhaps still remove one unit from the core. She believed the area was much better suited to a different scenario because the transition is not good. Getting any more than a few single-family homes would be a benefit for the developer. Mosman asked Dietz, since the wetland is low-quality, could the cluster units be put up in one highland area, and could the developer pay a fee instead of having the NURP pond? Leslie Stovring told her that the highland area is more desirable to save than filling some of the wetland, because an integral part of having wetland is to have highland for the benefit of animals, such as deer. Mosman asked if this wetland could be extended so animals can cross Sunnybrook Road and have a continuation of green space. Dietz replied the City has allowed the developer pay a fee in lieu of a NURP pond, but it has been on a site where there have been just a few units or a commercial site not large enough to support building any type of NURP pond. The City has taken cash in lieu of that. The City has NURP pond standards to treat all water before it leaves the site. The question would be do they choose to make the wetland quality worse? Perhaps they could create a pond within a wetland. Mosman asked about Tyra-Lukens suggestion to put units from the west end to where the NURP pond is, and could there be some dredging on the site. Dietz replied that might be a possibility, because they would have to cross the wetland anyway with sanitary sewer and water. However, if there is some reduction in the number of units and they are put elsewhere on the site, it would be preferable to put the NURP pond on the site. Case said he understood that the amount of water coming off impervious surfaces from the front part of the homes and the road must be very small compared with what comes down from Highway 212. Perhaps they could let the drainage go into the low-grade wetland, function without a NURP pond, and take money in lieu of the NURP pond. Dietz replied he didn't know what the legal ramifications would be if they did that. Although they have sometimes taken cash in lieu of a NURP pond, he would prefer to build a pond elsewhere on the property. Franzen said it would be necessary to check that out with the watershed district. Case said he was wondering if they built the NURP pond in place of the mitigation pond,would there be any loss of wetland. Dietz replied that when you mitigate wetlands you have to mitigate type for type. The City's rules are to replace on a ratio of 1:1. If you went due north of unit 8 CrrY COUNCIL MINUTES February 6,2001 Page 9 and created a NURP pond there, it may require more wetland mitigation, but it could be done. There are some possibilities here that haven't been explored. Part of the area where the wetland is located could be used as a building site. He said he would look at the grading plan. Zejdlik said he would have no problem with putting a NURP pond into the wetland and mitigating it, and he could move the units as requested. Dietz said in addition to mitigating the pond to wetland, there would probably be more mitigation required. On the other hand, there is property on site where mitigation could be performed. Mayor Harris said she heard concern expressed about the developer's plan as it was presented and a preference for the plan presented by staff, a request to see where those houses proposed for the western side of the project might be moved to the east side, and to move the NURP pond. It might be preferable to continue this process, have staff look at alternatives, and then bring the project back to the Council on a date certain. Rosow asked Franzen when the 120-day requirement expires. Franzen said it expires April 11. Enger said Council has closed the public hearing. Council would need to reopen it if they are going to continue the public hearing. They will be looking at a significantly different plan. Mayor Harris said she believed they should reopen the public hearing. Case said he did not want the proponent to go away confused about what the Council wants. How many units would Councilmembers be comfortable with? They should make it clear. Mayor Harris said it was the density that was a problem. One of the plans got the number down to 13 units. Tyra-Lukens said there are too many units on the plan as presented. She would not be uncomfortable with twinhomes on the site. Butcher said she had a problem with location of the units; one is 85 feet from the road. She would like to see them moved down to that core group and area up there left as a buffer between this core group and the buffer. She was comfortable with twinhomes. There is a lot of land here that can't be developed and that it in a conservation easement is meaningful. All of those things together make her feel comfortable with the core group. Mayor Harris said she was comfortable with the twinhomes, but wanted the proponent to address the issue of the density and different placing of the NURP pond. CITY COUNCIL AI MUTES February 6,2001 Page 10 Case said, regarding the wetland issue, he believed they should stick with the NURP pond and have it placed by staff in an area where wetland can be mitigated. Dietz said he had an idea to present at this time. What if the cul de sac remained as it is,with units 12, 11, 10, 9 and 8 on it? Drop one of the units from 3, 2 and 1, and put another two-unit building next to it where the pond is shown. This would require more wetland to be filled. Immediately west of the units where the pond is now, they would create a pond within the wetland area and then do all the mitigation within the wetland between units 14, 15 and 16. It seems there would be more wetland impact, but they could mitigate on-site, and if they put a conservation easement over it there would be more conserved wetland than there is today. Franzen said he concurred with that idea. Zejdlik said on the boundary of the property along Highway 212 there is a buffer of trees so he would like to explore where is the best place to put the pond. Quite a bit of land can be gained without destroying a lot of trees. Dietz said he believed the pond needs to be near Sunnybrook Road because the basins collecting water are near Sunnybrook. Case said he was not sure that it is best to smooth out the wetland buffer behind units 10, 9 and 8. He liked keeping the buffer irregular. Butcher said there is a very short back yard between the units and the neighbors behind them, and she would not want future residents to encroach on the wetland. MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, seconded by Butcher, to reopen the public hearing. Motion carried 5-0. MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, seconded by Butcher, to continue the public hearing for 30 days to a date certain. Motion carried 5-0. VIII. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, seconded by Butcher, to approve the Payment of Claims. Motion was approved on a roll call vote, with Butcher, Case, Mosman, Tyra-Lukens and Harris voting"aye." IX. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS X. PETITIONS,REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS A. TAX INCREMENT FINANCING (TIF) ANALYSIS — HARTFORD COMMONS,ROTTLUND HOMES Uram said the City has been working with the proponent on a revised plan for the past couple of weeks. CITY COUNCIL AENUTES February 6,2001 Page 11 Tim Whitten, Executive Vice President for Rottlund Homes, said he was representing David Bernard Builders & Developers, a division of Rottlund Homes. He said they had a different site plan and have revised their TIF request as a result of Council direction at the January 16, Council meeting. Ryan Companies agreed to lower the purchase price of the property by $500,000. Rottlund looked at the development cost per unit. The amount of infrastructure needed for the construction of a home is much more than goes into commercial infrastructure. They wondered what would happen when they took the commercial portion out and replaced that with townhomes. In doing this they found a project that could create the scenario they were working toward. As a result, they proposed to substitute 26 townhouse units for the 30,000 square feet of commercial/retail space. There would be 82 affordable housing units, 19 of them for people with an income of less than $68,000, plus 90 moderately priced homes. Their current request was for $3,854,447 in TIF over a 15-year term, to support a Note of $1,500,000, which would require a City contribution of $192,723, or approximately $13,000 a year. This project would generate over $1 million in City fees. Case wondered if Rottlund still can't build 82 affordable homes and 90 moderately priced homes without some government subsidy. Whitten replied that was correct. They had to stretch to reach $2.5 million, and when they went from $2.5 to $1.5 million they added more layers on top of this. No matter what scenario they look at, they can't do it by themselves. They would be building townhomes on commercial property and really building the affordable units on their own. Uram said staff and Rottlund Homes have spent a lot of time on this project. Staff wanted to eliminate use of TIF and also to make the project market feasible for Rottlund. There are several scenarios. Scenario 1 is a request for $3,854,447 in TIF over a 15-year term to support a Note of $1,500,000, requiring a City contribution of$192,723. Scenario 2 is based on a program started back in the late 1980s, where the City would provide a subsidy up to 25 percent of the estimated market value. The TIF subsidy would be approximately $1.2 million. The third scenario would be just to develop a TIF district around 82 units classified as affordable. That would provide a TIF subsidy of $175,000. The final scenario was not to provide any TIF. Reasons for that could include use of TIF as a non-qualified housing district,which the City has not done in the past. Tyra-Lukens asked what is the total TIF subsidy figure under Scenario 1. Uram replied $3.8 million. Tyra-Lukens asked what is the difference between a total TIF subsidy and a TIF Note. Uram replied what is being proposed from a financial standpoint is they would take the estimated TIF collected over 15 years and then discount that back to today and how much that would support. The $1.5 million would be discounted at nine-and-a-half percent interest. Whitten asked for feedback from the Council so his company could decide whether to go forward or not. ll CITY COUNCIL AIEIUTES February 6,2001 Page 12 Mayor Harris said this was not a public hearing, but if there were someone in the audience who wished to speak they could do so. Don Klingel, 10940 Kiawah Drive, said he is a member of the Westwood Townhouse Association near the proposed development. He believed Scenario 2 was a good plan and would be good for the surrounding community. It addresses traffic reduction, which he calculated would be approximately 344 cars making two trips per day. That is a lot less than a commercial development would generate. It would also be good for Eden Prairie to help meet its affordable housing goals. Eden Prairie is one of the unique communities in the nation regarding technology. This plan would also be good for public officials. The Mayor's Housing Task Force was charged to determine what must change to meet the City's housing goals. At the January 16 meeting, he understood there were concerns about changing TIF policies. However, the Housing Task Force is asking for change. The Council could show other communities it takes affordable housing to heart. Butcher said there isn't enough affordable housing in the area and some people don't have good places to live. The question is whether this is the best possible way for Eden Prairie to create affordable housing. This is the most expensive land in Eden Prairie, so is this the best place to put affordable housing in terms of the cost, because the City would be subsidizing the cost of the land. If it were possible to put more density on that land it might make the cost-benefit ratio better. She was worried the City might get requests from other developers if the City were to set that precedent. She was also aware of the concern expressed by other City residents, because of the commercial portion being removed in these scenarios, that the kind of synergy brought about by having the Eden Prairie Center close by would be lost. Butcher was also worried about the townhomes being purchased at $134,000 by persons at the low income level, and after living there a year or so could sell them at the market rate, so they would no longer be affordable. Mosman asked if they hadn't previously addressed having some control over the market to keep them affordable. Uram replied staff discussed this with Rottlund Companies. One thing staff is concerned about is the amount of administrative time that would have to go into monitoring this over the years. Mayor Harris said she understood Whitten to say that Scenario 2 was not acceptable. Whitten said he couldn't give the Council an answer as to whether the company would accept Scenario 2. However, if that is something the Council would support, the company would look at it and give it their best shot. They needed to know what the Council would support so they can move forward or move onto other projects. Case said he liked this project. If the City doesn't put affordable housing in this location,he wondered where they would put it. However, the land value is high, and he didn't believe the City could force affordable housing onto the most 11 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES February 6,2001 Page 13 valuable land in the City. Perhaps it could be placed within the Golden Triangle area. If this project were free of public subsidy, he could accept it, but he couldn't support it otherwise. Tyra-Lukens said she felt the same way. She was troubled by the loss of the retail portion of the project, which was attractive to her. Therefore, she was reluctant to go ahead with it. Mayor Harris said she had trouble with the City subsidizing market-rate housing and putting residential housing onto commercially priced land. The fact remained, even if the Council agreed that night to go forward, they would expect this project to go through the normal review process, as every project does. It would have to pass rigorous staff and citizen review. No project comes out at the end the way it went in, and Council might not be able to support the project at the end. Council would make a decision based on the recommendations that came forward from those groups. Tyra-Lukens said she was saddened by the loss of affordable housing that this project would bring. She hoped there would be money available to do this in the future from the state to provide the subsidies required. Mosman said she would have voted to spend money on this project because there is no state money or other funding available. She would have voted to support one of the scenarios. MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, seconded by Butcher, to decline use of Tax Increment Financing for the Rottlund proposal. Motion carried 4-1, with Mosman voting nay. XI. REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS & COMMISSIONS XII. APPOINTMENTS A. APPOINTMENTS TO THE 212 HIGHWAY CORRIDOR COMMITTEE Dietz said TH 212 has been designated by MnDOT as an interregional corridor from I-494 to the South Dakota border. MnDOT is establishing a coordinated committee structure to develop a Corridor Management Plan for TH 212. The requested action is to designate a member of the Council to serve at the policy level and a staff member to serve at the technical advisory level. At the Policy Advisory Committee level, he expected the plan to be done by the fall of 2001. There would be approximately three meetings, and the committee is expected to invite legislators to a meeting during the current Legislative Session. Mayor Harris said, in the interests of continuity, because Councihnember Mosman is serving on the I-494 Corridor Commission, she would be the logical one to appoint to the advisory committee, and she has agreed to serve. The technical support would come from Mr. Dietz. 13 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES February 6,2001 Page 14 MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, seconded by Butcher, to appoint Councibnember Mosman to the Policy Advisory Committee (PAC) and the Director of Public Works Services to the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) for the TH 212 Corridor Management Plan. Motion carried 5-0. XIV. REPORTS OF OFFICERS A. REPORTS OF COUNCILMEMBERS 1. Report on I-494 Corridor Commission—Councilmember Mosman Mosman reported that she attended a meeting of the commission three weeks ago. Former Councilmember Ross Thorfinnson was hired as an expert legislative consultant. He will be putting in between 8 to 10 hours a week and will be going to Washington and the state capitol, as needed, where he has a great number of contacts. Mosman will be going to Washington, D.C. for two days of organized meetings with legislators on March 13 and 14. Mayor Harris will also be attending and then staying afterward for the Congress of Cities. The reason for these meetings is that Minnesota is far behind with federal funding for highways compared with other major cities. The I-494 Corridor Commission is trying to help MnDOT obtain the funds needed to accomplish the planned expansion of I-494 before the Crosstown is closed down for reconstruction. The strategy on these two projects is to show solidarity with all of the involved cities. They suggest that cities aid in studying intersections, bridges, land acquisition and planning to help push the process along on the I-494 corridor. Mosman was able to tell them that at the January 16 meeting, the City Council approved the hiring of a consultant to study options for access at I-494 and Prairie Center Drive. Representatives from the I-494 Corridor Commission are planning to visit each City Council sometime during the coming year to present their work. 2. Ci , Manager's Evaluation Process—Councilmember Case Case is a member of the committee doing the City Manager's evaluation this year. Mayor Harris is the other member. He said they have not had a committee meeting yet. However, he understood that some of the evaluation forms have already been sent out and he believed the process should be put on hold until they have a chance to meet. Case asked if each of the five Councilmembers received an evaluation form. Enger said they were sent to the Councilmembers he worked for last year, which included Ross Thorfinnson. Case objected to this, saying iy CrrY COUNCIL AE[NUTES February 6,2001 Page 15 it is the current City Council which is responsible for setting the bonus for last year's performance and the pay raise this year, and it is accountable to the public for these decisions. Mayor Harris said the evaluation should be the Council from last year, since Thorfinnson's tenure ended December 31. He helped define the goals for last year. Councilmember Mosman didn't have the advantage of working with the City Manager last year. However, she could be part of the conversation about the City Manager's work, along with the recipients of the evaluation forms. Mosman would be responsible for defining the goals for this year. Mosman said she has been working with Enger over the last 5 to 10 years as a member of commissions, and since her election in November she has met with him a number of times. Tyra-Lukens suggested letting Mosman vote, based on the results of the other councilmembers' evaluations. The information gathered could be considered by her and then she can vote. Enger said the City Manager is responsible for meeting the goals that were set a year ago, and perhaps the evaluation work needs to be done at the end of the year instead of into a new year. Mayor Harris said she would recommend doing the evaluation at the end of the year. That would mean the evaluation would be completed by those who were the policy makers and who worked with the City Manager that year. Voting on the information gathered would be done in the new year. She said Councilmember Mosman could vote based on the figures the other councilmembers have on their evaluations. Case did not like setting a precedent for a time when there may be mostly new members on the Council. Enger said if there should only be two remaining members on the Council after an election,there would be a lack of knowledge as to what work was done, and that would skew the figures. Using councilmembers the City Manager worked with the previous year would follow the process adopted by the Council. Enger said it was his understanding that the evaluation committee may only change the following year's process, if they decide to do so. He apologized if there was any miscommunication with Councilmember Case regarding the process. Enger said the time frame for sending out and receiving back the evaluation forms is a problem. That is why he has already sent them to members in the community. He expanded the City staff list beyond department heads this year. Community members were asked to return the forms to Mike Barone. 15 CITY COUNCIL AlEq TES February 6,2001 Page 16 Mayor Hams asked that Mike Barone give the evaluation forms to her to hold onto,prior to evaluation by the committee. B. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER 1. February 10 Special Meeting on Flying Cloud Airport Enger said further questions had arisen regarding the format of the meeting on February 10. Invitations to the individuals and groups the Council requested to present information have been sent out, and they have been asked to respond so Council would know who is coming. A response was received from the Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District they will be in attendance but do not choose to make a presentation. The draft agenda was reviewed. Enger said he understood three hours would be allocated for both the presentations and closed session. He assumed the Council would want an hour for the closed session, leaving two hours for the public meeting portion, with time allotted at the end of the presentations for persons to speak. His suggestion was to give 25 minutes to the Flying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission, 20 minutes to Zero Expansion, 5 minutes for each of the staff members, 10 minutes for former State Representative Barb Haake, 10 minutes for each of the watershed districts and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Refuge, leaving 25 minutes for public comment at the end. He asked if that was the way the Council wanted to allocate the time. If so, how does the Council want the moderator to handle this? City Attorney Rosow will be giving instructions to the Administrative Law Judge as to how to conduct the meeting. Enger asked for Council's answers to such questions as whether the Council would allow questions of the presenters from the audience, and would the Council ask questions of the presenters. Enger said he has asked the staff who are speaking to give the information in written form to the Council. Mosman had asked Enger if the meeting could be held in the Heritage Rooms. Enger said the Council asked to have the meeting televised, and Council Chambers is a better place to do that. A City resident asked if the meeting could be announced on the reader board; however, Council agreed with Enger that this would make the meeting more like a rally and open to different opinions about the airport expansion. Mayor Harris asked councilmembers to address the agenda first. Mosman said the people who have been invited are probably working hard on their presentations, and she would prefer to give twice as much time and subtract time from the number of persons who can speak at the end. 16 CITY COUNCIL NH UTES February 6,2001 Page 17 Butcher said she is concerned that City staff is only having 5 minutes. Those watching on television would benefit from having more information from the staff. Mayor Harris said she does a lot of public speaking and 25 minutes is a long time. She never speaks more than 15 minutes. Having that amount of time makes the speaker focus on the most important things he or she wants to say. Tyra-Lukens wondered if there would be a number of questions Council may want to ask of the presenters in that 25 minutes. Council agreed to allow 5 minutes out of the 25 for the Council to ask questions of the presenters, to give Zero Expansion 25 minutes, and to give Scott Kipp and Don Uram 10 minutes each. There will be 10 minutes left for public comment. Enger said didn't know if all of these other groups have responded as to whether or not they have accepted the invitation. At Mosman's request, Enger will ask the Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District if they would be available for questions. Case said he didn't expect everyone who speaks would be as much against expansion as the Council is. He is looking for people to speak to the merits of various legal alternatives. However, someone in favor of expansion could speak to the failings of going ahead with a lawsuit for certain reasons. That would help the Council to gather information on all alternatives and steer it toward another avenue. He didn't want people saying expansion is a great idea and good for the community, however. The Council has taken a stand on that. However, the Chamber of Commerce was asking if they can speak and address the merits of various alternatives, and he would be in favor of that. Enger said he was confused by that statement. He received requests from both the Chamber of Commerce and the Metropolitan Airports Commission to be allowed time for presentations. He informed them they would be allowed to speak during the general portion of the meeting for 2- 3 minutes, provided they give information on how to stop the airport expansion. He thought this reflected what the Council said at the last Council meeting, when the February 10 meeting was changed from a public hearing to a special meeting. He said the Council has been quite clear that it wanted to hear opinions that would explore the City's options to oppose expansion of the airport. Rosow said he has given instructions to the Administrative Law Judge that the Council has directed it would listen only to information that would explore non-expansion of the airport. Case explained if someone were to stand up and say they believe it is not good to proceed with a lawsuit against the airport, and they would 17 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES February 6,2001 Page 18 recommend the City pursue certain other alternatives, he wouldn't object to hearing the reasons why. Rosow said he understands that people are to address options to oppose the expansion. If someone wants to talk about why the expansion should proceed, that person would be told to sit down by the Administrative Law Judge. Enger said "addressing options" isn't really correct because that means "I'd like to talk about the option of not opposing the airport and here is my opinion on it." Council wants suggestions and information and ideas on different ways to oppose the airport, legal and otherwise. Rosow said he would suggest the Administrative Law Judge sit where Mayor Harris usually sits and the councilmembers sit on one side and staff resources on the other side. He asked if the Council would like a verbatim transcript of the session or rely on the tape. Mayor Harris said they would like a transcript. Enger said that would serve as the minutes of the meeting. Regular minutes would be more of a short summary, and would be the ones Council would actually review. Rosow asked if the Council wanted him to attend a meeting of the Flying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission on February 7. He asked what if that group could not decide to present what the Council wants to hear. Baker expressed concern that what they are asking of this commission is nothing less than what divides them. The whole group doesn't agree to opposing the expansion of the airport. The Council formulated that group, and to ask one person represent the whole group is inappropriate when they don't all agree. Tyra-Lukens asked if the presentation should be from both the commissioners appointed by the council and those appointed by MAC and the airport commission as well. Butcher thought it should be from both groups. She said what we are asking them to do may split them up, and they may not be able to operate in the same capacity as they have been doing in working as a team and negotiating through difficult issues. It may change the whole makeup of the group. Mayor Harris said one question that was raised is where there is an individual that may not agree with the presentation, can that person speak as an individual as opposed to a member of the group? Rosow responded he believed they could speak as individuals. The Council is choosing to hear the majority report and not the minority report. He assumed the majority would be opposed to expansion because Council appoints six members and MAC appoints one. Mosman said she didn't know many people on the Eden Prairie Chamber of Commerce;but of those she has talked to more than half are opposed to the airport expansion, so they do not provide a unified front either. She !IV Cr rY COUNCIL AEUNT TES February 6,2001 Page 19 believed the Council could ask the Flying Cloud Airport Commission to give the majority opinion. Case said the value of the input and feedback to the Council of the citizen representatives on the commission who are opposed to the expansion historically has been a failed experience. Council needs the input of those in that group who are opposed to expansion. If they want to speak as individual commissioners and not speak for the whole group, that would be fine. It was set up to be a contentious group because it is a flawed setup. Butcher said if the Council does that it needs to be careful about whose voice is speaking for the commission. She would be comfortable having just having one of members speak, but not on behalf of the whole commission. Rosow said he would suggest the City Manager revise the invitation to the group that it is not the commission being invited to speak but the City- appointed commissioners who care to address the topic. They can decide among themselves how to divide up the time. Council agreed that the invitation to the Flying Cloud Airport Commission should be revised to reflect that position. Mayor Harris said she believed Rosow should be at the meeting of the commission on February 7 because he has heard that conversation and could answer questions about it. Council agreed questions to the presenters from the audience would not be allowed, only from the Council. Enger asked who is going to decide what to do about presenters going over their time. Rosow said he could ask the Administrative Law Judge that when the time is up, if there is a member of the Council who wants to hear more the member can say so and ask if the others agree. If so, the presenter would be given more time. C. REPORT OF PARKS AND RECREATION SERVICES DIRECTOR 1. Request from Eden Prairie Schools Regarding Forest Hills School Park Playground Lambert said City staff has been working with the School District staff in the evaluation of the Forest Hills School Park site to accommodate the renovation of the playground. The plan for renovation of the playground relies solely on the ability to remove a hill that was developed with excess fill from the original park development. This must be removed in order to accommodate playground expansion and to meet ADA requirements. The cost to remove the hill could be in excess of$100,000; however, the City CITY COUNCIL.MINUTES February 6,2001 Page 20 is sometimes able to find contractors who may be in need of clean fill and are willing to remove the fill at no cost. Lambert was not asking for approval of the request at this time. The City has no money budgeted over the next five-year period for playgrounds at Forest Hills School Park; however, there will be discussions regarding the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) scheduled for a workshop on May 1, 2001. He would have some idea then on the cost, and Council can decide whether it can afford to assist in redevelopment of this playground. MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, seconded by Case, to authorize City staff to assist the School District in seeking contractors that may be interested in fill available at Forest Hills School Park; also to authorize staff to evaluate the feasibility of providing some funding support for this project during review of the Capital Improvement program later this year. Motion carried 5-0. 2. Anderson Lakes Park Reserve Plan Lambert said the City transferred ownership of the Anderson Lakes Park Reserve to Hennepin Parks. At that time they agreed it would be developed according to the City's plan. A few years ago, Hennepin Parks decided not to move the nature center from its present location. However, they will be developing nature trails in the park. Lambert asked if Council concurred with the following process for reviewing the proposal from Hennepin Parks for development of the park reserve. 1. Review the proposed park plan and phasing plan with the Parks and Recreation Citizens Advisory Commission. The Commission is to provide input to the City staff and comments relating to recreation needs. 2. Review a proposed park plan and phasing plan with the Community Program Board to obtain input and a recommendation to the Council relating to program needs, environmental sensitivity, and staff concerns. 3. Notify the neighborhood of a public meeting at the Planning Board and obtain input from the neighborhood and a recommendation from the Planning Board to the City Council. 4. Review and approval by the City Council. Case asked if the City transferred ownership through a no-cost conveyance. Lambert said the City got back from Hennepin Parks all of the City money it had in the park,which was less than$500,000. Tyra-Lukens said she was concerned that the only neighborhood involvement would be in step 3. She asked if the park is directly across from any residences. Lambert replied yes, it is across from the Anderson Lakes Parkway and is residential. o CrrY COUNCIL.MINUTES February 6,2001 Page 21 Tyra-Lukens asked about parking. Lambert said the original park plan had an access road at Amsden Way, and the parking lot was up where the nature center was originally going to be. The parking lot would not be seen from the road. In Hennepin Parks the parking lots are always screened from the road. However, the access road is now placed at the intersection of TH 169 and Anderson Lakes Parkway, and it might make more sense to have the access road at Franlo Road to avoid congestion further down. Lambert supposed there would be controversy about access at Franlo. This is a land-use issue and will be coming before the Planning Board. As far as how the City can program use of the park, that is a discussion that would be coming before the Parks Commission and the Program Board. MOTION: Tyra-Lukens moved, seconded by Case, to approve the process for reviewing the proposed Anderson Lakes Park Reserve development plan as proposed by City staff. Motion carried 5-0. 3. Birch Island Woods Appraisal Lambert said the appraisal was not as good as the City had hoped for, but they did agree with the County that they would jointly select an appraiser and accept the appraised price. The 31 acres south of Indian Chief Road was valued at$650,000. The parcel north of Birch Island Woods, which is guided industrial,totals a little over four acres, of which approximately 2.9 acres is considered usable and is valued at$385,000. Staff is recommending the City Council limit the matching grant applications for Birch Island Woods to the 31 acres south of Indian Chief Road. MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Mosman, to authorize staff to limit grant applications for Birch Island Woods to the 31 acres south of Indian Chief Road. Motion carried 5-0. 4. Appointment of Task Force for Developing Program and Design for Purgatory Creek Recreation Area Entry Lambert referenced the January 16 Council meeting when the Council moved to create a Purgatory Recreation Area Task Force, and adopted the Mission and Charter Statement. The Council agreed to appoint members to the Task Force at the February 6 meeting. The Council also authorized developing a Request for Proposal for consultant services for developing the program and design of the Purgatory Recreation Area. An RFP has been forwarded to two consulting firms that have extensive experience with similar types of projects. Mayor Harris said she would like to recommend the following names to the Council. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES February 6,2001 Page 22 • Council representative—Jan Mosman. 0 Community Planning Board—Sue Stock and Vicki Koenig • Program Board—Harry Moran and Therese Benkowski • Parks and Recreation Citizen Advisory Commission—Sue Dickman Case recommended Pat Richards as one of the Citizens-at-Large. Butcher recommended Terry Randolph as a second Citizen-at-Large. MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Case, to appoint the individuals discussed to the Task Force for Developing Program and Design for Purgatory Creek Recreation Area Entry. Motion carried 5-0. D. REPORT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND FINANCIAL SERVICES DIRECTOR 1. Draft Comprehensive Guide Plan Update Enger said staff was asking the City Council to approve distribution of the prepared draft document of the Comprehensive Guide Plan Update to the Metropolitan Council. The Plan needs to be submitted to the Metropolitan Council for an informal review to determine if it is complete. The Plan must also be distributed to adjacent jurisdictions and school districts for a required six-month review period. The staff suggests the draft Plan also be submitted to the Community Planning Board for an advisory recommendation. The Plan would then be reviewed by the City Council. Lambert said a more detailed Guide Plan will follow this draft document. MOTION: Mosman moved, seconded by Butcher, to direct staff to distribute draft copies of the Plan to the Metropolitan Council to review for completeness (an informal review); to adjacent jurisdictions and school districts for the required review and comment period; and the Community Planning Board for an advisory recommendation. Motion carried 5-0. E. REPORT OF PUBLIC WORKS SERVICES DIRECTOR 1. Review Development and Infrastructure Issues on Eden Prairie Road, South of RilefCreek Dietz showed the sketch of the area under discussion, which he said has become ripe for development. He said a developer has been working with the City staff regarding the redevelopment of the Cedar Hills Golf Course for a housing project. The developer is going to be coming to the Planning Board to describe his housing development project. Neighborhood meetings are being planned by the developer. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES February 6,2001 Page 23 The area of concern to the City is south of Riley Creek and between Spring Road and Dell Road north of TH 212. The development is moving toward density transfers. Regarding the development of Eden Prairie Road going down to TH 212, Eden Prairie Road will be built down to Riley Creek, and Spring Road will be reconstructed. There are steep grades going down Eden Prairie Road south of the creek. A lot of grading will be needed. Reconstruction of the road will be an issue and will be expensive. The choice Council will need to make is whether to extend City services to the bluff lots. It is possible to maintain them on well and septic systems. Owners may expect additional utilities developed. The City has property adjacent to the creek but there is not good access for utilities. Drainage issues will need to be addressed. It will be necessary to maintain the wooded area. There is an extremely steep segment of road in the last 45 feet. The City could close it and make a cul de sac. Another possibility would be to put in a median and have right in and right out only. Another possibility is to regrade the slope. They could realign Eden Prairie Road over to Spring Road and just put a cul de sac down near the steep slope. Dietz said Eden Prairie Road is very dangerous near the creek and there are frequent accidents, so something has to be done about it. Between Eden Prairie Road and Spring Road there is probably 120 feet of grade change and a lot of trees. Regarding MAC's acquisition of parcels along Eden Prairie Road, only one parcel has been acquired south of Riley Creek. Dietz said he didn't know if there are any others. MAC believes that takes them out of special assessments,but the City doesn't agree with that. Dietz said so far the City has not done any real work on this project. There are probably around 400 acres involved in the development. When the steep slopes are taken out, it is reduced to 250 acres. He would estimate that the cost of building Eden Prairie Road from TH 212 to the creek, and utilities within that corridor, probably will be as much as $2 million. This could result in a cost of$8,000 to $10,000 per acre. The timing is such that the developer is ready to begin, so the City staff will have to work its way through. Dietz said if the City doesn't make the right choice about how to serve the area, it won't work. That is why it is necessary to find out what the neighborhood wants to do. Special assessments are spread over a period of time, with interest, which gets to be expensive. The City needs to find out how many want the utilities and how many don't. Looking at the area involved, it is entirely possible to say five lots in the neighborhood will always have a well and septic. The City does not have to extend utilities, so would not have to do special assessments. Dietz said he expected this will be as tough a project as any the City has had. He wanted the Councilmembers to know about it before they start c)3 CITY COUNCIL.M]W=S February 6,2001 Page 24 getting phone calls. This area has always been zoned as two-and-a-half units per acre. Enger said this is going to be a politically charged situation. Council has seen other special assessment projects that are very small compared to this one. The City has tried more citizen involvement. Staff wants to know Council's preferences regarding outreach and if Council wants to be involved in that. For example they could meet in a sector as a Council. Rather than have the staff wade into a political process with neighborhood meetings,Enger wanted to know the Councilmembers' opinions. Dietz said one possibility would be to establish a task force of neighbors. However, the task force probably won't get everyone to agree. Enger asked if Council would like to discuss this at a future meeting, and if they would like staff to provide some suggestions for a skeleton of a process Council could build on. Councilmembers agreed to this and Enger said he would bring it to the next Council meeting. Dietz said he believed the developer has already talked to some of the neighbors and is ready to begin neighborhood meetings. Case said at the first meeting in January, Councilmembers discussed their goals for the year. He and another Councilmember talked about dedicating a staff person who would be a liaison for the Council with community projects that are controversial. This project may be one of those. Case said he also talked about having workshops in neighborhoods and inviting people to walk the area with the Councilmembers. This project is a good opportunity to try some of these ideas. Dietz said in the meantime staff would not go to neighborhood meetings the developer may hold. F. REPORT OF PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES DIRECTOR G. REPORT OF MANAGEMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR H. REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY XIV. OTHER BUSINESS XV. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Mosman, to adjourn to a closed session. The meeting adjourned at 10:40 p.m. a� YL-C- UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAMIE CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING—FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT SATURDAY, FEBRUARY, 10, 2001 9:00 A.M., CITY CENTER Council Chamber 8080 Mitchell Road CITY COUNCIL: Mayor Jean Harris, Councilmembers Sherry Butcher,Ronald Case, Jan Mosman and Nancy Tyra-Lukens CITY STAFF: City Manager Chris Enger;Don Uram,Director of Community Development; Scott Kipp, Senior Planner;Ric Rosow, City Attorney and Council Recorder Carol Pelzel MODERATOR: Judge Allen Klein I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER Mayor Jean Harris called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA MOTION: Case moved, Tyra-Lukens seconded,to approve the agenda as published. Motion carried unanimously. III. OPENING REMARKS Judge Klein introduced himself explaining that he is an administrative law judge and will serve as moderator. He further explained that this is a special meeting open to the public to which specific groups are invited to make presentations to the Council with respect to the City's options to oppose the expansion of the Flying Cloud Airport. IV. PRESENTATIONS A. FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT ADVISORY COMMISSION Tom Heffelfinger, Chairperson of the Flying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission, appeared before the Council to provide them with an update from the Commission. He explained that the Commission does not take a position on the fundamental issue before the Council today. The Advisory Commission has not in the past taken nor does it now take any official position in favor of or opposed to the possible expansion of Flying Cloud Airport. The Commission recommends that an attempt to negotiate a compromise in the interest of the citizens and in the interest of the Metropolitan 1 CITY COUNCIL AI MUTES February 10,2001 Page 2 Airports Commission(MAC),pilots and operators of the airport. The Advisory Commission continues to believe that the process to seek a compromise should continue. Settlement opportunities have not yet been explored but should be. Heffelfinger said the Commission urges the City Council to direct the Airports Commission to continue to pursue all reasonable settlement options. They also urge the City Council to request MAC to continue participation in the Commission and to attempt to seek settlement in this area. Case asked Heffelfinger in the Commission's opinion,what components would comprise a successful compromise or reasonable settlement option. Heffelfinger responded that the Commission has just begun to look at what other options are available other than Ordinance 51 to serve as a framework for a compromise. There has been discussion of voluntary curfews similar to those in existence at the Twin Cities International airport. They have not yet discussed the adequacy of voluntary curfews and there are other options that have not yet been endorsed. The Commission is in the process of scheduling another special meeting for early next month to begin the process in exploring those options.Heffelfinger said they do believe there are things that need to be discussed before they can say there are no options available. Mosman said she would like to see the Commission continue working on these options and to continue working with MAC. She said she would also like to see the FAA involved in these meetings. Heffelfinger pointed out that the FAA is not a member of the Commission. The City Council may make an official request that they participate,however, it is questionable whether or not they would comply with that request. The FAA is an important player in this whole process. B. CITY STAFF 1. Scott Kipp, City Planner Kipp explained that he also serves as the staff liaison to the Flying Clouds Advisory Commission and explained his responsibilities in these capacities. Kipp presented a brief chronological listing of issues regarding Flying Cloud Airport to provide a better focus on the issues to the expansion of the airport. He explained that the City has consistently been opposed to the expansion of the airport and made their reasons very clear. Kipp presented the various reasons for opposition to the expansion of the airport. 2. Don Uram,Director of Community Development and Financial Services Uram presented to the City Council the financial analysis of the airport expansion. He explained that approximately$124 million would be lost in revenue from building permits,property taxes, assessments and future utility bills should this airport expansion occur. Uram pointed out that the Airports Commission has acquired 220 acres with 60 acres yet to be acquired.Uram CITY COUNCIL AIINUTES February 10,2001 Page 3 reviewed with the Council the assumptions that were used in arriving at the estimated lost revenue. Butcher asked if the majority of the land recently acquired by MAC would still have been acquired even if the airport were not expanded. She asked if this land had been acquired for the runway protection zone.Uram said it was his understanding that the land would not have been acquired if the airport were not expanded.MAC shifted the land acquisition from airport expansion alternative to no-build alternative to give a better-cost benefit analysis. It is staff s position that all 280 acres purchased is based on the expanded airport. C. ZERO EXPANSION Bill Clark explained that they are not against the existing airport. They are requesting that the airport no longer be expanded and that they rely heavily on Ordinance 51. Ordinance 51 was an agreement for the City to drop a lawsuit and MAC agreed to defend that Ordinance. It has now been decided by MAC to drop Ordinance 51. Clark said they are asking that the City continue Ordinance 51 and that MAC continue to honor that Ordinance. Gary Demee said he feels the draft Environmental Impact Statement(EIS)is unobjective, defective and incomplete. He feels the facts the Metropolitan Council and MAC built their report on is faulty information. Demee said he feels there is no way they can enforce voluntary restrictions and there is no way to know if the pilots will agree to the restrictions. Demee said he recommends that the City Council debate the EIS and research legal and political ways to cover actual costs and lost opportunities for growth associated with the airport expansion. He also recommended that they research legal and political ways to halt the expansion of Flying Cloud Airport. Kim Vohs stated that communities that do not favor airport expansion need to develop strategies so that local communities have control over future expansion of these reliever airports. Filing a lawsuit is not the only strategy. There is a need to create a task force to coordinate the various strategies. Vohs suggested that the task force consist of two Eden Prairie Councilmembers, Eden Prairie citizens, and City staff,regional groups who work on airport issues,US Fish and Wildlife representatives and legal counsel. This task force could coordinate research and implement activities. Vohs said the task force must develop recommendations within 45 days. She would also like to see legislative strategies explored. Legislation could limit MAC's authority and create new airports in areas where people want them. They could also work with other groups that are opposed to the expansion and develop other solutions.Vohs said they need to build a coalition that is needed to stop expansion of the airport or develop legislation. This task force could coordinate all of the efforts designed to stop the airport expansion. 3 CrrY COUNCIL MEWTES February 10,2001 Page 4 Sara Strzok explained that she is a representative from Residents Opposed to Airport Racket(ROAR) and urged the Council to explore ways to work with other Minnesota groups and governmental bodies to address serious transportation issues in the area. Strzok asked the Council to go with the task force recommendation and receive input from local and government agencies to adopt a way to address serious transportation issues that face many areas in the metropolitan area. Aviation problems are not only in Eden Prairie but throughout the metro area. Strzok explained that regionally the City needs to ensure that necessary growth happens through a plan and not piecemeal. D. BARBARA HAAKE,FORMER STATE REPRESENTATIVE Barbara Haake explained that she was the author of House File 849 regulating airport size. In 1980 a law was passed stating that minor airports have runways 2,500 feet to 4,000 feet. In the mid 1980's Met Council changed the law to state that a minor airport has runways from 2,500 feet to 5,000 feet. Mounds View decided to fight this change and spent approximately$300,000 to $400,000 in legal fees. The bill did pass in May and allowed 5,000-foot runways for minor airports. The bill also included that this law could not be changed without legislative approval. Haake reviewed with the Council the various issues they were faced with in trying to restrict expansion of the airport located in Mounds View. E. U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Rich Schultz presented general information regarding the fish and wildlife refuge and how they dealt with MAC on the Minneapolis airport expansion. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Refuge should be concerned about vital public service but they cannot prohibit them. The airport is considered a vital public service. With the Minneapolis expansion,they did not feel they had the latitude to stop the project. In response to a question from Mosman, Schultz explained that they have done noise studies with regard to airport noise but could not make a firm conclusion that the noise from this expansion would affect wildlife. They do have concerns with the impact of the overflights on an eagles nest and with water quality. It is not a good idea to direct flights over a national wildlife refuge. Schultz pointed out that wildlife hazards to aircraft are created when airports are built near wildlife refuges. They did present their concerns to the FAA and MAC's attention. They are concerned that some time in the future MAC will say that they cannot manage the refuge for its intended purpose because of it being a hazard to the aircraft. F. LOWER MINNESOTA WATERSHED DISTRICT Kevin Bigalke,District Administrator for the Lower Minnesota Watershed District, explained that he is not here to take a position on whether or not Flying Cloud Airport should or should not be expanded. He explained that he would like to discuss some concerns they have for not only the existing conditions at Flying Cloud but potential conditions should an expansion take place. The concerns they have are with protecting the river and the resources in not only water quality but wildlife resources "I CITY COUNCIL MINUTES February 10,2001 Page 5 that occur in the lower Minnesota River.Bigalke further explained that they have several major concerns with the proposed expansion. The first of which is for the sanitary sewer system. This system will need to be upgraded and brought into compliance with the Minnesota Pollution Control Agencies standards.Bigalke said they would recommend that should Flying Cloud Airport be expanded,they be required to connect into the existing City sanitary sewer system. Their second concern is with the storm water management system. With the proposed expansion, there would be a significant increase in the impervious surface that will increase the amount of runoff into the Minnesota River. These runoff rates will need to be controlled. Bigalke said they are also concerned with the deicing operations and use of deicing products that would be necessary for larger aircraft. These products do pose a hazard to the Minnesota River and with the expansion,Flying Cloud will need to have a plan for deicing management. Bigalke said they are also concerned with the public water supply. The expansion calls for an increased water supply,which is currently served by individual wells and they would recommend that they connect with the City's public water supply. Mosman said she has three questions that could be addressed at a later time. She asked if Flying Cloud Airport has currently been handling their water runoff without any problems and if there is contamination to the Minnesota River from gas, oil or deicing materials who will be responsible if there are implications. Mosman explained that other developments are required to have ponds to handle runoff. She asked if the ponds are adequate to handle runoff from the airport or if it would be necessary to have on-site holding ponds. MOTION: Butcher moved, Case seconded,to extend the public comment period to 11:30 a.m. Motion carried unanimously. V. PUBLIC COMMENT Terra Kohl said she is speaking on behalf of her family and the wait and see option has not been successful. It is now time to consider their own options as homeowners. The noise from the existing airport does not allow them to keep their windows open during the summer months. Kohl asked that the Council weigh their options and take immediate action to stop the expansion. Floyd Hagen appeared before the Council to comment on the EIS. He feels the noise levels are not adequately addressed in the EIS. He would like to see the footprints extend not to 60 but to 55 possibly even 50. This would be a meaningful analysis as to how many homes and businesses will be affected by this noise in Eden Prairie.Hagen pointed out that they have a landlocked airport and he suggested that MAC look at obtaining 7,500 acres of land south of the Minnesota River presently owned by the University of Minnesota. This land has never been developed and is not in a residential area. This land is available and is presently tax- free. It could be developed over time and is less than ten miles from the main terminal. CITY COUNCIL AIINUTES February 10,2001 Page 6 Vicky Pellar-Price expressed her appreciation to the Council for having this public comment meeting. She is opposed to the expansion and thanked the Council for listening to their comments. Tim Anderson explained that he is a resident of Eden Prairie and works for the Airports Commission.He stated that it is important that they have a debate on both sides of the issue. The Airport's Commission does have a commitment and responsibilities to the communities their reliever airports'surround. It is also their responsibility to foster aviation and achieve services in the region. Laura Neuman said she is a resident of Eden Prairie and feels this is a very important issue. MAC has extreme powers. She asked that the Council not be afraid of litigation. It is the threat of litigation that gives the City of Eden Prairie power.Neuman said hopefully there is some creative thinking for ways to mitigate problems if the expansion occurs. Neuman explained that as a resident her main concern is the noise impact and she feels voluntary agreements will not mitigate noise. There must be some type of accountability. Neuman suggested that MAC provide a salaried person to have 24-hour surveillance at the airport to track infractions of the voluntary agreement. Tom Heffelfinger explained that he is a resident of Eden Prairie and recommended that the City Council retain qualified lawyers in litigation to evaluate the situation and all of the options and to present to the City Council options and recommendations including litigation if necessary. Heffelfinger said he feels one of the things that must be considered is how to implicate MAC and the FAA in this. The Council does not need to make a decision today as to whether or not the City should file a lawsuit.Heffelfinger suggested that the Council today authorize obtaining legal advice from which they can then make an informed decision as to whether or not litigation is necessary. The City has built around Flying Cloud Airport and relied on the fundamental character of that airport which was created by Ordinance 51. Heffelfinger said he feels the proposed expansion will change the fundamental character of the airport. The Council has no choice but to protect the fundamental character of life around this airport. Ordinance 51 is at the heart of the relationship between the City and MAC and the FAA has said that MAC must remove Ordinance 51 immediately or they will loose the grant money. MAC appears to be willing to forego their obligation to defend Ordinance 51. They must address the legal question of whether or not MAC should be allowed to abandon Ordinance 51. There is a conflict as to whether or not comments made by the FAA have any legality at all.Heffelfinger presented various legal issues as to why the City Council must defend Ordinance 51. Kevin Adams expressed his appreciation to Councilmember Mosman for suggesting that this public meeting be held. Adams said his concern as a citizen is that MAC has already purchased the necessary land for the expansion and now the City must move quickly to stop this expansion.His biggest concern is not knowing where the City Council stands on this issue and how far they are willing to go. Adams indicated that this is the fourth meeting he has attended on this issue and he has not seen a unified front.He strongly opposes the airport expansion and is in favor of litigation and feels the Council should pursue that and if they C� CITY COUNCIL NIINUTES February 10,2001 Page 7 can't stop the expansion,they do everything possible to disallow any further expansion beyond what they are currently proposing. Bob Stassen said he is sympathetic with the people who suffer from noise from reliever airports. A report was recently released that says the Minneapolis-St. Paul airport is the major deliverer of the metro economy. Stassen said he suggests that the Council look at how the other reliever airports have dealt with airport expansion.He believes it is the community's responsibility to support community airports to better the local economy. It is important that the Council keep an open mind on the big picture of these public issues. Dan MacDonald pointed out that the runway expansion does not increase the capacity of the airport. It does support a faster and larger aircraft. MacDonald says he feels noise is an issue. He questioned how they can regulate noise and not participate in discrimination issues. MacDonald said he hopes the City can avoid a lawsuit and suggested that they look at other alternatives. They ultimately need to address the noise issue. Ramesh Sajaparayde explained that he is opposed to the expansion of the airport. He said he feels that no matter what rules are put in place, they are consistently violated. He asked that the Council use the option of noise sanctions. Bren Kanuth said she has a concern with the noise and would like to be in her yard without hearing the airplane noise. She feels expanding the runway will not guarantee quieter aircraft. They do not need more flights and she would support spending her tax dollars to fight the proposed expansion. Paul Silvander said he feels the highways contribute more pollution than airports do. With regard to property values,his property has increased four times in value and he lives close to the airport. He asked why the people who don't want to live by the airport moved there in the first place. Scott Mace requested that all information on this issue be posted on the City's Web site. In response to the question of what the City should do to oppose the expansion of Flying Cloud, Mace said the short answer is to do everything. The Council does not need to file a lawsuit today but they do need to get some experts hired. They need to obtain legal consultants, airport consultants and people who are experts with the EIS. The cost of this expansion greatly outweighs the benefit. Ed Schlampp expressed concern with the existing safety zones. VI. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher,to adjourn the public meeting and to convene in closed session. The motion carried unanimously. The meeting was adjourned at 12 noon. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Consent Calendar February 20,2001 SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Community Development Clerk's License Application List &Financial Services/ Gretchen Laven These licenses have been approved by the department heads responsible for the licensed activity. Raffle Organization: Kent Hrbek Celebrity Tournament for A.L.S. Place: Bearpath Golf& Country Club Date: June 11, 2001 - 1 - CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 02/20/01 SECTION: Consent Agenda SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Community Development n' Donald R.Uram Aztec Town Office Park V Krista R. Flemming Requested Action Move to: • Approve 2nd Reading of the Ordinance for PUD District Review with waivers on 4.46 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural to Office on 4.46 acres; and • Adopt the Resolution for Site Plan Review on 4.46 acres; and • Approve the Developer's Agreement for Aztec Town Office Park Synopsis This project includes 22 office units in 2 and 3 unit structures, located on Aztec Drive. Attachments 1. Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning Change 2. Resolution for Site Plan Review 3. Developer's Agreement AZTEC TOWN OFFICE PARK CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 7-2001-PUD-3-2001 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 Zoning District and be placed in the Planned Unit Development Office Zoning District 7- 2001-PUD-3-2001 (hereinafter "PUD-3-200 1-Office"). Section 3. The land shall be subject to the terms and conditions of that certain Developer's Agreement dated as of February 20, 2001, entered into between DaVern, Inc., and the City of Eden Prairie, (hereinafter "Developer's Agreement"). The Developer's Agreement contains the terms and conditions of PUD-3-2001-Office, and are hereby made a part hereof. Section 4. The City Council hereby makes the following findings: A. PUD-3-200 1-Office is not in conflict with the goals of the Comprehensive Guide Plan of the City. B. PUD-3-2001-Office is designed in such a manner to form a desirable and unified environment within its own boundaries. C. The exceptions to the standard requirements of Chapters 11 and 12 of the City Code that are contained in PUD-3-200 1-Office are justified by the design of the development described therein. D. PUD-3-200 1-Office is of sufficient size, composition, and arrangement that its construction, marketing, and operation are feasible as a complete unit without dependence upon any subsequent unit. Section 5. The proposal is hereby adopted and the land shall be, and hereby is removed from the Rural Zoning District, and placed in the Office Zoning District and shall be included hereafter in the Planned Unit Development PUD-3-200 1-Office 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 6. City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 11.99 entitled "Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. Section 7. 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 16th day of January, 2001, 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 20th day of February, 2001. ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk Jean L. Harris, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on 4 ENIRBIT A Aztec Town Office Park Legal Description: Planned Unit Development Property Description: Outlot A,Anderson Lake Commercial Center, 3rd Addition,Hennepin County,Minnesota Site Plan and Zoning ProppEty Description: The south 597.85 feet of Outlot A, ANDERSON LAKES COMMERCIAL CENTER 3RD ADDITION,Hennepin County,Minnesota. Legal Description after Final Plat: Lots 1-22,Block 1, Aztec Town Office Park Outlot A, Aztec Town Office Park 14 AZTEC TOWN OFFICE PARK CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 7-2001-PUD-3-2001 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 Aztec Drive, from the Rural Zoning District to the Office 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 (A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from City Clerk.) AZTEC TOWN OFFICE PARK CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO.2001- A RESOLUTION GRANTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR AZTEC TOWN OFFICE PARK BY DAVERN,INC. WHEREAS,DaVern, Inc., has applied for Site Plan approval of Aztec Town Office Park on 4.46 acres for construction of a 22 townhome-style office units to be zoned in the Office Zoning District on 4.46 acres by an Ordinance approved by the City Council on February 20, 2001, and WHEREAS, the Community Planning Board reviewed said application at a public hearing at its January 8, 2001 meeting and recommended approval of said site plans; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed said application at a public hearing at its January 16, 2001, meeting. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, that site plan approval be granted to DaVern, Inc., for the construction of 22 townhome-style office units, based on plans dated January 5, 2001, between DaVern, Inc., and the City of Eden Prairie. ADOPTED by the City Council February 20, 2001. Jean L. Harris,Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT AZTEC TOWN OFFICE BUILDING THIS AGREEMENT is entered into as of February 20,2001,DaVern H,Inc., a Minnesota Corporation, 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 a Guide Plan Change from Neighborhood Commercial to Office on 6.48 acres; Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 6.48 acres; a Planned Unit Development District Review on 4.68 acres; a Rezoning from Rural to Office on 4.68 acres; a Site Plan Review on 4.68 acres; and a Preliminary Plat of 6.48 acres into 21 lots and an outlot legally described on Exhibit A(the "Property"); NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the City adopting Resolution No. 2001-19 for Guide Plan Change,Resolution No. 2001-20 for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment, Ordinance No. for Planned Unit Development District Review and Zoning District change from Rural to Office,Resolution No. for Site Plan Review, and Resolution No. 2001-21 for Preliminary Plat, Developer shall to construct, develop and maintain the Property as follows: Standard Conditions: 1. PLANS: Developer shall develop the Property in conformance with the materials revised and stamp dated January 5,2001,reviewed and approved by the City Council on January 16, 2001 (hereinafter the "Plans"), and identified on Exhibit B attached hereto, 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. CROSS ACCESS, PARKING, UTILITIES USE AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT: Prior to release of the final plat for any portion of the property,the owners shall provide a signed cross access, parking and utilities use and maintenance agreement over proposed Lots 1 -22,Block 1,Aztec Town Office Park. This Agreement shall address joint vehicle access and maintenance in parking areas and driveways and use and maintenance of sanitary sewer,water, storm sewer and ponding areas. All of these facilities shall be privately owned and maintained by the Developer or Owner. Prior to release of the first building permit for the Property, Developer shall submit to the City Engineer proof that the Agreement has been recorded in the Hennepin County Recorder's office/Registrars of Titles' Office. 4. 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. 5. DEVELOPER'S RESPONSIBILITY FOR ITS CONTRACTORS: Developer shall release, defend and indemnify City,its elected and appointed officials,employees and agents 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. EXTERIOR MATERIALS: Prior to building permit issuance, Developer shall submit to the City Planner, and receive the City Planner's written approval of a plan depicting exterior materials and colors to be used on the buildings on the Property. Prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property, Developer shall complete implementation of the approved exterior materials and colors plan in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C, attached hereto. 7. FUTURE DEVELOPMENT: Developer acknowledges that the City has approved development plans only for proposed Lots 1-22,Block 1,Aztec Town Office Park Addition, as depicted on the Plans. Prior to any development or construction on proposed Outlot A, Aztec Town Office Park, as depicted on the Plans, Developer shall be required to submit detailed development plans, and all other submittals required by the Eden Prairie City Code, and obtain approval of those plans and submittals by the Community Planning Board and City Council. 8. GRADING,DRAINAGE,AND EROSION CONTROL PLANS: A. FINAL GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN: Developer agrees that the grading and drainage plan contained in the Plans is conceptual. Prior to the release of a land alteration permit for the Property, Developer shall submit and obtain the City Engineer's written approval of a final grading and drainage plan for the Property. The final grading and drainage plan shall include all wetland,wetland buffer strips, wetland buffer monument locations,water quality ponds, storm water detention areas and other items required by the application for and release of a land alteration permit. All design calculations for storm water quality and quantity together with a drainage U area map shall be submitted with the final grading and drainage plan. Prior to release of the grading bond, Developer shall certify to the City that the water quality pond conforms to the final grading plan. Developer shall employ the design professional who prepared the final grading plan. The design professional shall monitor construction for conformance to the approved final grading plan and City erosion control policy. The design professional shall provide a final report to the City certifying completion of the grading in conformance the approved final grading plan and City erosion control policy. B. EROSION CONTROL PLAN: Prior to issuance of a land alteration permit, Developer shall submit to the City Engineer and obtain City Engineer's written approval of an erosion control plan for the Property. The erosion control plan shall include all boundary erosion control features,temporary stockpile locations and turf restoration procedures: All site grading operations shall conform to the City's Erosion Control Policy labeled Exhibit D, attached hereto and made a part hereof. Prior to release of the grading bond, Developer shall complete implementation of the approved plan. Developer shall remove any sediment that accumulates in the existing and/or proposed sedimentation pond during construction. Developer shall provide preconstruction and post construction surveys for evaluation by City,upon request by the City. 9. IRRIGATION PLAN:Prior to building permit issuance,Developer shall submit to the City Planner and receive the City Planner's written approval of a plan for irrigation of the landscaped areas on the Property. The irrigation plan shall be designed so that water is not directed on or over public trails and sidewalks. Developer shall complete implementation of the approved irrigation plan in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property. 10. LANDSCAPE PLAN: Prior to building permit issuance,the Developer shall submit to the City Planner and receive the City Planner's written approval of a final landscape plan for the Property. The approved landscape plan shall be consistent with the quantity,type, and size of plant materials shown on the landscape plan identified on the Plans. Developer shall furnish to the City Planner and receive the City Planner's approval of a landscape 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 landscape plan for the perimeter plantings and the unit requesting the occupancy permit in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C.. 11. MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT SCREENING: Developer shall submit to the City 9 Planner, and receive the City Planner's written approval of a plan for screening of mechanical equipment on the Property. For purposes of this paragraph, "mechanical equipment" includes gas meters, electrical conduit, water meters, and standard heating, ventilating, and air-conditioning units. Security to guarantee construction of said screening shall be included with that provided for landscaping on the Property,in accordance with City Code requirements. Developer shall complete implementation of the approved plan prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property. If, after completion of construction of the mechanical equipment screening, it is determined by the City Planner,in his or her sole discretion,that the constructed screening does not meet the Code requirements to screen mechanical equipment from public streets and differing, adjacent land uses,then the City Planner shall notify Developer and Developer shall take corrective action to reconstruct the mechanical equipment screening in order to cure the deficiencies identified by the City Planner. Developer agrees that the City will not release the security provided until Developer completes all such corrective measures. 12. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS: Developer agrees that the Property will be operated in a manner meeting all applicable noise, vibration, dust and dirt, smoke, odor and glare laws and regulations. Developer further agrees that the facility upon the Property shall be operated so noise, vibration, dust and dirt, smoke, odor and glare do not go beyond the Property boundary lines. 13. RETAINING WALLS: Prior to issuance by the City of any building permit for 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 on the grading plan identified on the Plans. 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. 14. SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION: Prior to issuance by City of any building permit on the Property, Developer shall submit to the Parks and Recreation Services Director and obtain the Director's written approval of detailed plans for sidewalks and trails to be constructed on the Property. Developer shall convey access easements for such sidewalks and trails in such locations as determined by the Parks and Recreation Services Director. Sidewalks and trails shall be constructed in the following locations: A. A five-foot wide concrete sidewalk to be located along Aztec Drive with connection from the project to the Aztec Drive as depicted on the Plans. Developer shall complete implementation of the approved plans in accordance with the 1Q terms of Exhibit C prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property. 15. SIGNS: Developer agrees that for each sign which requires a permit by Eden Prairie City Code, Section 11.70, Developer shall file with the City Planner and receive the City Planner's written approval of an application for a sign permit. The application shall include a complete description of the sign and a sketch showing the size, location, the manner of construction, and other such information as necessary to inform the City of the kind, size, material construction, and location of any such sign, consistent with the sign plan shown on the Plans and in accordance with the requirements of City Code, Section 11.70, Subdivision 5a. 16. SITE LIGHTING: Prior to building permit issuance, Developer shall submit to the City Planner and receive the City Planner's written approval of a plan for site lighting on the Property. All pole lighting shall consist of downcast shoebox fixtures not to exceed 20 feet in height. Developer shall complete implementation of the approved lighting plan prior to issuance of an occupancy permit for the applicable unit for the Property. 17. TRASH ENCLOSURE: Developer has submitted to the City Planner, and obtained the City Planner's written approval of a plan for the design and construction of the outside trash enclosure for the Property. This trash enclosure shall be constructed with face brick to match the building and include gates that completely screen the interior of the enclosure. Developer shall complete implementation of the trash enclosure plan prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property. 18. TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT PLAN: Developer shall develop and implement a Travel Demand Management Plan(TDM)at the site to help reduce traffic congestion. The TDM Plan, at a minimum, will be consistent with the suggested plan outline and budget, which is attached as Exhibit E. Prior to issuance of a building permit on the Property, Developer will provide to the City a Letter of Credit in the amount equal to the estimated cost of implementing the first two years of the TDM Plan. The Letter of Credit will be released to the Developer on a"draw-down" basis during the later of the first two years of building occupancy or first two years of TDM Plan implementation, in the following manner: a) The Developer shall periodically submit to the City receipts of expenses associated with executing the TDM Plan. The City shall have 15 business days to review the receipts. If within this 15 day period the City does not provide the Developer with written notice that it objects to all or any portion of the expenses which the Developer has submitted as TDM implementation expenses then in such event Developer may also exchange for the then existing Letter of Credit, a new or amended Letter of Credit in an amount equal to the previous total, less the total receipts submitted. I � CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: February 20,2001 SECTION: Consent Calendar SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Engineering Services Resolution Authorizing Application to MnDOT Jim Richardson for Landscape Improvement Funds . Requested Action Move to: Adopt resolution authorizing application to MnDOT for landscape improvement funds. Synopsis MnDOT has constructed additional berm between Bryant LakeDrive and TH 212 north of their maintenance facility. The berm provides screening to residents on Crowne Oak Road from TH 212. MnDOT will provide funding for landscape materials to be added to the berm in pattnership with the City. The City will purchase and water the materials. MnDOT will reimburse the City for its material costs. Background Information This project is the second phase of a neighborhood improvement project to add berming and landscaping to the area between Bryant Lake Drive and TH 212. CITY OF EDEN P12ARHE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. APPROVAL OF CITY PARTICIPATION IN MN/DOT COMMUNITY ROADSIDE LANDSCAPING PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM WHEREAS, a portion of TH 212 right-of-way in Eden Prairie has been identified as a candidate for landscape improvements. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED BY THE Eden Prairie City Council that the City of Eden Prairie act as sponsoring unit for the landscape improvement project identified as TH 212 Right-of-Way Adjacent Bryant Lake Drive to be conducted during the period of August, 2001 through June, 2002. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Stuart Fox, Manager of Parks and Natural Resources, is authorized to apply to the Minnesota Department of Transportation for funding of this project on behalf of the City of Eden Prairie. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on February 20, 2001. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: February 20, 2001 SECTION: Consent Calendar SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Resolution Authorizing ITEM NO: Parks and Recreation Application for State Natural and Scenic Area Robert A. Lambert Director Grant for Birch Island Woods B4- ,-D , Requested Action Move to: Adopt Resolution authorizing application for a State Natural and Scenic Area Grant for the expansion of Birch Island Park. Synopsis The DNR grant application for a State Natural and Scenic Area Grant requires a resolution from the City Council with the specific language included in the attached resolution. Background The grant application is for 50% of the $650,000 appraised amount for the 31 acres southwest of Indian Chief Road. The City's match will initially come from cash park fees. The park fund would eventually be reimbursed from revenue from the sale of property located south of the Flagship Athletic Club. BL:mdd CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,IVIINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO.2001- A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING APPLICATION FOR A STATE NATURAL AND SCENIC AREA GRANT BIRCH ISLAND PARK EXPANSION WHEREAS,the City of Eden Prairie act as legal sponsor for the project contained in the Natural and Scenic Area Grant Program,Application to be submitted on March 31,2001,and that the Director of Parks and Recreation Services is hearby authorized to apply to the Department of Natural Resources for funding of this project on behalf of the City of Eden Prairie. WHEREAS,the City of Eden Prairie has the legal authority to apply for financial assistance, and the institutional,managerial, and financial capability to ensure adequate construction, operation, maintenance and replacement of the proposed project for its design life. WHEREAS,the City of Eden Prairie has not incurred any costs, and has not entered into any written agreements to purchase this property. WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has not violated any Federal, State,or Local laws pertaining to fraud,bribery, graft,kickbacks,collusion, conflict of interest or other unlawful or corrupt practice. WHEREAS,upon approval of its application by the state,the City of Eden Prairie may enter into an agreement with the State of Minnesota for the above-referenced project,and that the City of Eden Prairie certifies that it will comply with all applicable laws and regulations as stated in the grant agreement. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that the Director of Parks and Recreation Services is hereby authorized to execute such agreements as are necessary to implement the project on behalf of the City of Eden Prairie. ADOPTED by the City Council on February 20,2001. Jean L. Harris, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen Porta, City Clerk CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Date: Section: February 20, 2001 Service Area: Item Description: Item No.: Public Works Resolution authorizing submittal of Leslie Stovring the 2001 Residential Recycling , Funding Policy Grant Requested Action Move to: Adopt a Resolution authorizing submittal of the 2001 Residential Recycling Funding Policy Grant. Synopsis The City of Eden Prairie submits a Residential Recycling Grant Application for to Hennepin County on an annual basis. The recycling grant is for distribution to residents who have the ability to recycle on an individual basis. Multi-family complexes with communal recycling bins are not eligible for the grant. A portion of the recycling grant is also used to fund community recycling efforts and promotional or educational activities, such as the annual Community Cleanup in June. The remainder of these funds are distributed to residents with individual service as a recycling rebate on their utility bills. The funding is expected to be approximately $155,000. Hennepin County has requested a current Resolution in order to process the 2001 Recycling Grant. The County will be sending a Residential Recycling Funding Agreement for signature by the Mayor and City Manager after the Application is approved. Attachments Proposed Resolution. 1 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF AN APPLICATION FOR THE 2001 HENNEPIN COUNTY MUNICIPAL SOURCE-SEPARATED RESIDENTIAL RECYCLING GRANT PROGRAM WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statute 115A.551, each county must develop and implement or require political subdivisions within the county to develop and implement programs, practices, or methods designed to meet its recycling goal; WHEREAS, Hennepin County Ordinance 13 requires each city to implement a recycling program to enable the County to meet its recycling goals; WHEREAS, the County has adopted a Hennepin County Residential Recycling Funding Policy for Source-Separated Recyclables to distribute funds to cities for the development and implementation of waste reduction and recycling programs from January 1,2000 through December 31, 2004; WHEREAS,to be eligible to receive these County funds,cities must meet the conditions set forth in the "funding policy"; and Now, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council authorizes the submittal of the 2001 Municipal Recycling Grant Application for the Hennepin County Residential Recycling Programs; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that as a condition to receive funds under the Hennepin County Residential Recycling Funding Policy the City agrees to implement recycling programs as committed to by its submission of the 2001 Hennepin County Municipal Residential Recycling Grant Application. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council February 20,2001. Jean L. Harris,Mayor SEAL ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Consent Calendar February 20,2001 SERVICE ITEM DESCRIPTION: AREA/DIVISION: Resolution authorizing execution of an Agreement ITEM NO.: Public Works for the 2001 Municipal Waste Abatement Leslie Stovring Incentive Fund Grant Program . Requested Action Move to: Adopt a Resolution authorizing execution of an Agreement for the 2001 Municipal Waste Abatement Incentive Fund Grant Program. Synopsis The City of Minnetonka has submitted a Municipal Waste Abatement Incentive Fund Grant Application for an"Integrated Waste Reduction, Recycling and Resource Management Tool Kit" to Hennepin County. The City of Eden Prairie is listed as a partner on this application, along with nine other Cities. Matching funds will be required but are limited to the Environmental Coordinator's in-kind time,or an amount of approximately$1,900. Hennepin County has delivered an Agreement for the grant application that needs to be signed by the Mayor and City Manager of each City. A Resolution is also required authorizing adoption of the Agreement. The City Attorney has reviewed the Agreement. Background A grant application for the educational Tool Kit was presented to the Minnetonka City Council in December 2000. The City of Minnetonka has agreed to act as the fiscal agent for the grant and will submit the final report to Hennepin County. The Recycling Coordinators from Minnetonka, Hopkins, Brooklyn Park, Hennepin Recycling Group (Brooklyn Center, New Hope and Crystal), Plymouth,Bloomington, and Wayzata will participate in the planning and goals setting process and assist in developing the educational materials. They will then receive training in the use of the materials. The grant request is for $53,500 with a match of$17,900. The total project cost is $71,400. The matching amount will be split between the Cities, local teachers and the Science Museum with a resulting total of about$1,900 per City. This project will provide an integrated tool kit for Hennepin County recycling coordinators to present waste reduction,recycling and resource management messages to their communities. The City's "Big Foot" educational video, the Grant Application for which was approved in November 2000 by the City Council,will be included in the Tool Kit if approved. Other materials in the Tool Kit will be learning activities,prepared presentations,resource lists and books and games focusing on recycling and waste reduction. The kits will be distributed to area recycling coordinators. A second set of kits, mobile "Trunks", will also be developed. These will include more in-depth activities and would go to the Cities participating in this grant. Attachments • Proposed Resolution • Municipal Waste Abatement Incentive Fund Grant Application Municipal Waste Abatement Incentive Fund Grant Applications February 20,2001 Page 2 of 2 Attachments • Proposed Resolution • Municipal Waste Abatement Incentive Fund Grant Application CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. Resolution authorizing execution of an Agreement for the 2001 Municipal Waste Abatement Incentive Fund Grant Program for development of an Integrated Waster Reduction,Recycling and Resource Management Took Kit WHEREAS, the City has agreed to participate with the Cities of Minnetonka, Plymouth, Brooklyn Center,New Hope, Crystal,Brooklyn Park,Bloomington,Hopkins and Wayzata in development of an Integrated Waster Reduction,Recycling and Resource Management Took Kit; WHEREAS, Hennepin County Ordinance 13 requires each city to implement a recycling program, including public education, to enable the County to meet its recycling goals; WHEREAS,the County has established a Municipal Waste Abatement Incentive Fund to help meet these recycling goals; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council authorizes the execution of the 2000 Municipal Waste Abatement Incentive Fund Grant Agreement; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that as a condition to receive funds under the Hennepin County Municipal Waste Abatement Incentive Program the City agrees to implement recycling programs as committed to by its participation in the 2000 Waste Abatement Incentive Fund Grant Application. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council February 20, 2001. Jean L.Harris, Mayor SEAL ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk EXMYr A Municipal Waste Abatement Incentive Fund Grant Application Form—2000 Application Due—5:00 pm,Friday,December 1,2000 Mail Signed Copy to: Dan Ruiz Hennepin County Dept. of Environmental Services 417 N. 5t' St., Suite 200 Minneapolis,MN 55401-1309 E-mail Copy (if possible to: dan.ruiz@co.hennepin.mn.us Applicant Information: Municipality:�City of Minnetonka for the cities of Plymouth,Hopkins,Eden Prairie,Brooklyn Park, Brooklyn Center, New Hope, Crystal, Minnetonka, Bloomington and Wayzata. (other Hennepin County cities may also wish to participate and/or benefit from this project Contact Person: Dean Elstad Title: Recycling Coordinator Address: 14600 Minnetonka Blvd. City, State,Zip JMinnetonka,MN 55345 Phone: 952-939-8217 Fax: 952-939-8217 E-Mail: delstad_,ci.minnetonka.mn.us Grant Request: $53,500 Matching Funds: $17,900 Total Project Cost: $71,400 Authorizing Signature: The signature of a person who has the authority to enter into a contract with Hennepin County on behalf of the municipality(Mayor, City Manager/Administrator/Clerk). Name(Typed or Printed): John Gunyou, Signature: Title: City Mana er Project Title: Integrated Recycling and Resource Management"Tool Kit" Project Description: This project will provide an integrated tool kit for Hennepin County recycling coordinators to present the waste reduction,recycling and resource management message in their communities; with an emphasis on adolescent and adult audiences. The final product will be two-fold: q EXH03IT A 1. Thirty identical durable resource packets with learning activities,prepared presentations, originals for duplicating,background information,resource lists,books and games. These items would be used for school and community presentations. The packets would be distributed to thirty recycling coordinators for their ongoing use for public education. The recycling coordinator can tailor the items to his/her needs. Several learning activities in these packets would be linked to more in-depth activities contained in the trunks described in#2 (below). 2. Five educational trunks that provide further"hands-on"learning. These would be developed for the participating cities, and would be evaluated for usefulness throughout Hennepin County. These trunks would be designed for use in either a classroom, assembly or event settings. Materials for the"tool kits"would contain as high a post consumer recycled content as possible. This project would be directed by the recycling coordinators from Minnetonka,Brooklyn Park, HRG,Plymouth,Bloomington, and Eden Prairie in consultation with teachers from at least two school districts. Research and product design and construction would be provided by the Science Museum of Minnesota. The team will work to insure that these packets and trunks are easy to understand and use, clearly demonstrate the important role of waste reduction,recycling, composting and resource conservation and enhance school curricula. These learning tools would be ready for distribution and use when the 2001-02 school year begins in September, 2001. Training,promotion and an evaluation tool will also be components of the project. Project Budget: Budget Item Responsible Party Grant In-kind and amount Matching amount Project development& Recycling Coordinators & $3,600 oversight teachers Research& design Science Museum staff& $25,000 $3,600 recycling coordinators Materials for 30 resource Science Museum staff(time $10,000 packets which could include: included in item above) books,tapes, originals for duplication, computer software Graphics &copying for Recycling Coordinators $2,700 packets Materials for 5 learning trunks Science Museum staff $18,500 $1,500 Training,marketing and Recycling Coordinators & $6,500 evaluation teachers EXMIT A Total 1 $53,5001 $17,900 K� CITY COUNCIL AGENDA Date: Section: February 20,2001 Service Area: Item Description: Item No.: Public Works Resolution authorizing execution of Leslie Stovring two Agreements for 2001 Municipal Waste Abatement Fund Grant Program Requested Action Move to: Adopt Resolution authorizing execution of two Agreements for the 2001 Municipal Waste Abatement Incentive Fund Grant Program. Synopsis The City of Eden Prairie submitted two Municipal Waste Abatement Incentive Fund Grant Applications to Hennepin County in 2000. The two grant applications were presented to the City Council in November 2000. One was aimed at improved multi-family recycling in Eden Prairie and the second was for production of an educational video on recycling. The County requires that the Mayor and City Manager sign a"Municipal Waste Abatement Incentive Fund Agreement"for each grant application. They are also requiring a City Resolution authorizing adoption of the Agreements. The City Attorney has reviewed the Agreements. Attachments Proposed Resolution. 1 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, HENNEPIN COUNTY9 MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF TWO AGREEMENTS FOR THE 2001 MUNICAL WASTE ABATEMENT INCENTIVE FUND GRANT PROGRAM WHEREAS,the City has submitted two Applications for the Municipal Waste Abatement Incentive Fund Grant Program, one for the`Eden Prairie Multi-Family Recycling Information&Education Initiative" and one for the"Big Foot Educational Video Project"; WHEREAS, Hennepin County Ordinance 13 requires each city to implement a recycling program, including public education,to enable the County to meet its recycling goals; WHEREAS,the County has established a Municipal Waste Abatement Incentive Fund to help meet these recycling goals; Now, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council authorizes the execution of the 2000 Municipal Waste Abatement Incentive Fund Grant Agreements; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,that as a condition to receive funds under the Hennepin County Municipal Waste Abatement Incentive Program the City agrees to implement recycling programs as committed to by its submission of the 2000 Waste Abatement Incentive Fund Grant Application Forms. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council February 20,2001. Jean L. Harris,Mayor SEAL ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 02/20/01 SECTION: Consent Calendar SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Community Development Adopt Resolution rejecting bids for reroofing at Donald R.Uram Eden Wood Camp and order contracting pursuant TR John Gertz to Minnesota Statutes Section 471.345 Requested Action Move to: Adopt resolution rejecting all bids for re-roofing dormitory and dining hall buildings at Eden Wood Camp, and order contracting for this project pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 471.345 which authorized soliciting sealed bids or, if the amount of the contract does not exceed $50,000,by direct negotiation. Synopsis Two bids were received on February 8, 2001, one from Rayco Construction, Inc., in the amount of$54,500.00 and the other from Sela Roofing, in the amount of$77,300.00. Rayco Construction did not submit a bid bond at the time (10:00 a.m.) of the bid opening, delivering it late at 1:45 p.m. They claimed the bonding office they use had closed early the day before due to a snow storm. Sela Roofing proposed doing the re-roofing for$77,300.00 dollars, which exceeds our budget by $16,800.00. Based on the above information staff recommends rejection of both bids. Background Information: Staff was directed to apply for Minnesota Historical Society grant funds to be used for re-roofing the dormitory and dining hall buildings. The City was awarded a $30,500.00 matching grant, which Friendship Ventures, the camp leasee, agrees to reimburse to the City. Re-roofing should be completed by May 1, 2001. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,NIINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION REJECTING BIDS AND ORDERING RE-BIDDING WHEREAS,pursuant to an advertisement for bids for the Re-roofing of the Dormitory and Dining Hall buildings at Eden Wood Camp,two bids were received, opened and tabulated according to law. WHEREAS,the City Staff recommends rejection of all bids since the low bidder failed to submit a bid bond at the time the bids were opened and the other remaining bid exceeded the City's budget for this improvement; NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That all bids received are hereby rejected. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that City staff is directed to proceed with contracting for this project pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 471.345. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 20th day of February,2001. Jean L.Harris,Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A.Porta, City Clerk CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Consent Calendar February 20,2001 SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Public Safety Services Gary J.Therkelsen Resolution Declaring"Abandoned Property" , Requested Action Move to: Adopt resolution declaring the property listed on Exhibits A and B as "abandoned property." Synopsis Public Safety Services has accumulated a quantity of bicycles and miscellaneous items that remain unclaimed. City Code Section 2.86 Subd. 2, Disposal of Unclaimed Property, requires adoption of a resolution by City Council to declare unclaimed property that has been in the possession of the City for over 90 days as "abandoned property." Background Information The property itemized on Exhibits A and B has lawfully come into the possession of the City's Police Department in the course of municipal operations, remains unclaimed by the owners, and has been in the possession of the Police Department for at least 90 days. In accordance with City Code Section 2.86 Subdivision 2 D., the Police Department would like to dispose of the property itemized on Exhibit A by private sale through Project for Pride in Living, Inc. (PPL), (phone number 612/789-3322, 850 15th Ave. NE, Minneapolis, MN) a nonprofit organization that has a significant mission of community service. In addition, in accordance with City Code 2.86 Subdivision C, the Police Department would like to convert the property itemized on Exhibit B for City use. Attachments ■ Resolution-Declaration of Abandoned Property. ■ Exhibit A - List of unclaimed property.to be declared "abandoned property" for disposal by Project for Pride in Living. ■ Exhibit B - List of unclaimed property to be declared "abandoned property" for retention by the City for City use. ■ Agreement between City of Eden Prairie and Project for Pride in Living,Inc. I CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,NIINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. DECLARATION OF ABANDONED PROPERTY WHEREAS, City Code 2.86 Subd. 2 requires adoption of a resolution by City Council to declare the property itemized on Exhibits A and B as "abandoned property;" and WHEREAS,the property has lawfully come into the possession of the City in the course of municipal operations; and WHEREAS,the property remains unclaimed by the owners; and WHEREAS,the property has been in the possession of the City for over 90 days. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED.that the City of Eden Prairie declares the property itemized on Exhibits A and B as "abandoned property." ADOPTED by the City Council on February 20, 2001. Jean L. Harris,Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk a Exhibit A - Project for Pride in Living ClassExtension Description Make Model SerialNumber Boxes of goltballs,phon Box of cables and parts Box of misc.property Pool Cue Case Excalibur Belt Tan weight lifting belt Bicycle(B) White,book rack,St.Pa Sears Freespirit Bicycle(B) Mountain Giant CW6V8957 Bicycle(B) Green, BMX Bicycle(B) Dirt Bike,w/Blue GT Se Dyno VFR Bicycle(B) Blue Boys 18 speed Fre Free Spirit Octane Bicycle(B) 15 spd., Murray WindRiver MOS1298219 Bicycle(B) Royal blue Boston USA Touring 8093486914 Bicycle(B) Dirt bike,Purple Dyno VFR Bicycle(B) Mountain,Trianglar Bag, Wheelar Proline Bicycle(B) Black,Older Style bike Tyler Bicycle(B) Maroon, 12 Spd. Marquis C8054487944 Bicycle(B) Chrome,BMX Diamondback SPyder Bicycle(B) Mens,Lock,Water Bottl Murray Extreme 9992X92051198 Bicycle(B) 10 spd.Purple,blk seat Montana True Temper Bicycle(B) Seafoam Green Specialized RockHopper S3K01Z29 Bicycle(B) 26",Green in color,wat Diamondback Crestview IA7G11272 Bicycle(B) Mountain,Royal Blue Dyno P400 90206485 Bicycle(B) Black,mountain,water Schwinn High plains S3026858 Bicycle(B) Cross Country,Wht. Fr Magna NorthernRidge Bicycle(B) Chrome Mountain Vertical XL2 99TD741068 Bicycle(B) Chrome 20" 1988-90 Li Schwin Theasher 3329329 Bicycle(B) Red,10 spd.old rusted Huffy Thursday,February I5,200I Page I of 4 Exhibit A - Project for Pride in Living ClassExtension Description Make Model SerialNurnber Bicycle(B) Black 10spd,old,rusted Murray Bicycle(B) Gray with Purple writting Magna Fugitive Bicycle(B) Blue,26",21 speed Specialized ExpeditionSport PV920413 Bicycle(B) Red/Rust Frame,hand b Schwin Bicycle(B) painted Saphire Blue,N ACLOB0688Q Bicycle(B) 10 Spd.,Red Raleigh Pursuit 4LL3521 Bicycle(B) Trick bike,Swamp Gree GT Performer Bicycle(B) 10 spd.womans FreeSpirit Sunbird 322472740 Bicycle(B) Chrome Frame,hard se GT Dyno YC97L00532 Bicycle(B) Lavender,Banana Seat, AMF Bicycle(B) Lime Green color,boys BMX Bicycle(B) Mountain,Tan frame wit Schwin Sierra P9JH22150 Bicycle(B) Rust in color,Water Bott Giant Rincon GU705531 Bicycle(B) Trick Bike,White frame, Mongoose Bicycle(B) Dirtbike,red, hand break Cignal Topgun HF0907990 Bicycle(B) Chrome Bicycle Robinson BMX 4130 YC97070238 Bicycle(B) Black 10 Spd.,Mens Rallye Coyote Pass RMC60200194 Bicycle(B) Pink/Purple,girls Roadmaster Ultra Terrain RMC23396397 Bicycle(B) Green Mt.Bike Fuji F9075350 Bicycle(B) Orange Mountain Bike Huffy Mountain Blaster 2460400944514H24C8 Bicycle(B) Silver BMX,Boys GT KH1389 Bicycle(B) Silver childs bike GT YC97072115 Bicycle(B) GT Airwalk Bicycle GT Airwalk C97109022 Bicycle(B) Black&Yellow GT Verti GT Vertigo YC98L09907 Bicycle(B) Silver Vertigo Trick Bike GT Vertigo YC95021420 Bicycle(B) T-Rex Panther,red,boy T Rex Panther T8C01541 Bicycle(B) Blk/Green Frame, 10 sp Magna Northern Ridge Bicycle(B) Boys/Specialized/Dk Blu Hard Rock Tl:rcrsdav,February IS,2001 Page 2 of 4 Exhibit A - Project for Pride in Living ClassExtension Description Make Model SerialNumber Bicycle(B) Blue,All Terrain Huffy Scout Briefcase(P) Black Nylan Brief Case Cassette Tapes Tapes/Black Case CD Player(R) Discman,.purple Sony Cellular Phone(0) US West Port Phone w/Case Motorola GVY Cellular Phone(0) Black Nokia Cellular Phone(0) 1 cell phone,Digital,Audiovox Airtouch CDM4000 13811863837 Cellular Phone(0) Cell Phone Sony M920 344691 Compact Disc(Y) 35 CD's in Blk.Logic Case Compact Disc(Y) 5 CD's&Case Compact Disc(Y) 4 cd's,black case Compact Disc(Y) CD-Holla Holla Compact Disc(Y) (2)CD's in Laminated Plastic Compact Disc(Y) (35)CD's Decorations Box of misc Xmas decoration Equipment/Measuring D 1 Jack, 1 Wrench Film (5)Packs of Polaroid Film Flashlight (X) charger&flashlight and drill Portercable 869 058043 Hat Blue Hat-Mailed Postcard to Jacket(D) red/White/Blue Jacket Jacket(D) Black&White Jacket XL Perry Ellis Americ Laminator IBico 01767 Laminator Laminator IBICO HL9 01799 Pager(R) green pager Pagemart Paper Cutter Paper Cutter Fiskars Phone Card (3)Phone Cards Office Depot Precious Metals(Y) 14K gold bracelet Radio Portable Radio Motorola SPort 7 Thursday,February 15,2001 Page 3 of 4 - i Exhibit A - Project for Pride in Living ClassExtension Description Make Model SerialNumber Radio(R) BH024 Motorola HUD3326A Radio(R) BH059 Sprint Refrigerator(H) Cooler Superior Products Beverage Air Remote Control (R) (3)Remote Controls Roller blades roller blades,size 13 Roller Blades 1 pair of roller blades,BI Triforce Rug . Rug sample 16"x 24"m Screwdriver(X) Screwdriver Kleintools Shoes (D) Boots-Black,Size 8 Timberland Shoes (D) Lugz black,size 7 1/2 Lugz Stereo Equip-Other(R) Car CD Player Clarion DRX5575 0004831 Subwoofer (R) car stereo subwoofer Kenwood 70511309 Telephone(0) Green Portable phone Television(R) 5inch,color portable TV' Spectra Television(R) TV Bells Howel Showmate 4 60201095 Tennis Shoes (1)Pair of Tennis Shoes Nike Tools-Other (X) Grey Case, DDM initials Portercable 866 077540 Tools-Other (X) Green Case with tools Tool Smart Tlurrsday,February 15,200I Page 4 of 4 E:xh i•blt A FEB 15 2001 MISCELLANEOUS PROPERTY FOR AUCTION/PPL 1. (3)Dog Leashes (Blue,Pink&Black) 2. (1)Elgin Mens Watch 3. Gold Lighter 4. (5)Miscellaneous Power Supply Sources 5. (1) Green PE Outfitters Jacket 6. (1)Yellow &Blue Helly Hansen Jacket 7. (1) Gray Tackle Box 8. (1) Texas Instrument 503 Calculator 9. (1)Black Purse w/Beads sewn on it 10. (1)Black"Tao Natural Foods" Sweatshirt 11. (1)White(w/flowers) Casserole Dish 12. (1) Green Jansport Backpack 13. (1)AT&T Globalyst 200 Laptop Computer#TRC973437 14. (1)Kani XXL Blue &White Shirt 15. (1)Realistic Musical Powerhorn 16. (1)Philips Intercom Box VSS2901/00; Serial#62001113 17. (4)Books 18. (1)Picture Frame 19. (1) Green Plastic Hanging File Folder Case 20. (1) Currency Collectors Edition 21. (3)Pagers 22. (3)Leatherman Pocket Tools 23. (1) Timex Watch 24. (1)Ericsson Omni Point Cell Phone,Model CH388, Ser#UA200B8E7M 25. (1)Ericsson Aerial Cell Phone, Model CH388, Ser#UA2009J1BA 26. (1)Motorola g520 Aerial Cell Phone,Model 92058PWXJA, Ser 9A72GYUT342 27. (1)Ericsson Cell Phone, Model#DF388, Ser#UA2009J3FN 28. (1)Hewlett Packard Colorado 5GB Tape Drive for PC's, Ser#MX00118178 29. (1) 3Com Cellular Modem 56K PC Card,Model#3CXM556, Ser#109917R8260J 30. (1) 3Com Voice Fax Modem Pro,Model 5606 31. (1)Plant Growing Light 32. (1)Blue Jansport Backpack 33. (1)Black Bag 34. (1)Pair of Sunclassics Sunglasses 35. (1)Black Cigarette Case 36. (1)Motorola StarTac Cell Phone 37. (1) Qualcomm QCP-1920 Cell Phone, Ser#V9835481470 38. (1)Tire Gauge 39. (1) Sentry#2110 Fire Safe 40. (1)MacIntosh Power Book 9170 Laptop Computer(#CK2080WH703)w/books, power supply, etc. 41. (8)Miscellaneous Pagers Exhibit B - Convert for City Use ClassExtension Description Make Model Serial# Amplifier(R) Yamaha Stereo Amplifie Yamaha A700 CD Changer (R) Yamaha CD Changer,M Yamaha CDC605 Cones 4 Orange cones Drugs(Y) Mushroom,MJ, Jar of Duct Tape Duct Tape Gun-Revolver/Pistol ( 38 Special Smith&Wesson CCH2993 Knife(H) 2 knives Remote Control (R) (2)Remotes Speaker(s) (R) (2)Sony Speakers Sony Television(R) 27"TV Phillips Magnavox Television(R) Samsung 19"TV Samsung Tools-Other (X) large red tool box with m Blue Point KRW48A Tools-Other (X) 2 crowbars, 3 wedges,1 VCR Equipment(R) Sony DA Pro 4 VCR Equipment(R) Mitsubishi VCR Mitsubishi Thursday,February 15,2001 Page 1 of 1 AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE AND PROJECT FOR PRIDE IN LIVING, INC. This Agreement is made by and between Project for Pride in Living, Inc. ("PPL") and the City of Eden Prairie (the "City") as follows: 1. PPL will pick up salable abandoned property (the "property") from the City Police Department. PPL agrees to accept all property that is in reasonable condition for resale. 2. The City will tag and identify each property with a unique number, and provide an inventory specifying each property. 3. PPL will maintain the inventory received from the City, determine the sale prices of each property and use its best efforts to sell the property. 4. Sales proceeds will be divided 30/70 between the City and PPL (70% will be retained by PPL and 30% will be remitted to the City). 5. Sales proceeds checks will be issued to the City on a monthly basis. 6. This contract shall continue for a term of six months after which it shall continue indefinitely until terminated by either parry by written notice to the other. 7. Upon termination all amounts due to City shall be paid to City within 20 days after termination and all unsold property shall be returned to City. PROJECT FOR P IN LIVING, INC. CI F EDEN PR.AIRI 5 By B Its Manager ayor r By Its City Manag 0 Dated: i / Dated: 7 rfr\ep\police\ppl.agr i CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Payment of Claims February 20,2001 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 95193-95250 (from the IFAS system) Checks 97253-97554 (from the JD Edwards system) Wire Transfers 1011-1015, 1018 & 1019 (from the JD Edwards system) Background Information Attachments City of Eden Prairie Council Check Summary . 2/20/2001 Division Amount General Fund 199,501 101 Legislative 2,602 110 City Clerk 834 111 General 9,618 112 Human Resources 260 113 Communication Services 41,981 114 Benefits&Training 2,024 115 Risk Management 56,977 116 Facilities 12,130 - 131 Finance 3,400 133 Community Development 201 134 Heritage Preservation 697 136 Wireless Communication 830 150 Park Administration 303 151 Park Maintenance 5,473 153 Athletic Programs 5,306 154 Community Center 26,348 156 Youth Programs 1,155 157 Special Events 1,156 158 Senior Center 391 159 Recreation Administration 32 160 Adaptive Recreation 357 161 Oak Point Pool 5 162 Arts 354 163 Park Facilities 40 180 Police 18,160 183 Civil Defense 20 184 Fire 8,811 185 Animal Control 47 200 Engineering 1,243 201 Street Maintenance 14,371 203 Fleet Services 32,692 117 City Center 4,059 303 Cemetary Operation 375 405 Park Bonds 1992A 1993A 318,670 407 Utility Bonds Arbitrage 2,256,015 410 Improvement Bonds Pre 1990 87,508 410 Improvement Bonds Pre 1990 491,039 412 Improvement Bonds 1991 B 296,736 414 Improvement Bonds 1993E 144,425 415 Open Space Debt 1994 1-13,864 502 Park Development 1,124 509 CIP Fund 85,433 601 Prairie Village Liquor 32,627 602 Den Road Liquor 37,887 603 Prairie View Liquor 23,575 701 Water Fund 92,283 702 Sewer Fund 1,177 703 Storm Drainage Fund 286 Total JD Edwards 4,434,402 1 Total Previous System 268,756 Grand Total 4,703,158 COUNCIL CHECK SUMMARY 13-FEB-2001 (18:11) DIVISION TOTAL ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ LEGISLATIVE $271.40 LEGAL COUNSEL $5,625.00 CUSTOMER SERVICE $3,219.52 BENEFITS $501.94 TECHNOLOGY $333.42 HUMAN RESOURCES $189.50 HUMAN SERV $5,250.00 RISK MANAGEMENT $1,294.29 ENGINEERING $133.00 INSPECTIONS $1,858.38 FACILITIES $7,529.71 POLICE $3,686.20 FIRE $4,780.37 ANIMAL CONTROL $310.00 STREETS/TRAFFIC $332.51 PARK MAINTENANCE $4,757.01 FLEET SERVICES $1,089.81 ORGANIZED ATHLETICS $1,151.00 COMMUNITY CENTER $857.29 YOUTH RECREATION $202.42 ADAPTIVE REC $16.96 ARTS $1,009.38 PUBLIC IMPROV PROD $196,741.74 DEBT SERVICE PAYMENTS $250.00 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM $2,458.45 PRAIRIE VILLAGE $1,754.52 PRAIRIEVIEW $127.58 DEN ROAD $211.65 WATER DEPT $6,594.58 SEWER DEPT $2,179.53 \ STORM DRAINAGE $13,723.38 AGENCY FUNDS $315.50 $268,756.04* City of Eden Prairie Council Check Register 2/20/2001 Check# Amount Vendor Account Description Business Unit 1011 882,803 US BANK Principal Refunding Bonds 1995E 1012 727,450 FIRSTAR TRUST COMPANY Principal Utility Bonds Arbitrage 1013 148,896 WELLS FARGO MINNESOTA N A Federal Taxes Withheld General Fund 1014 27,621 MINNESOTA DEPT OF REVENUE State Taxes Withheld General Fund 1015 13,385 ORCHARD TRUST CO AS TRUSTEE/CU Deferred Compensation General Fund 1018 2,098,004 WELLS FARGO BANK MINNESOTA NA Principal Utility Bonds Arbitrage 1019 7,002 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-457 Deferred Compensation General Fund 97253 95 CAMPOS LORI Operating Supplies After School Programs 97254 225 CARDARELLE DAWN Other Contracted Services Accessibility 97255 189 GARTNER REFRIGERATION&MFG IN Repair&Maint.Supplies Ice Arena 97256 70 IKI Instructor Service Senior Center Program 97257 98 KEATING MARY Tuition Reimbursement/School In Service Training 97258 111 KRESS CARLA Mileage&Parking Adaptive Recreation 97259 137 LOOSEN MICHAEL Adult Resident Community Center Admin 97260 590 MRPA Dues&Subscriptions In Service Training 97261 419 NTH COMMUNICATIONS Capital Under$2000 Ice Arena 97262 176 PETTY CASH Office Supplies Recreation Administration 97263 3,914 ROUSE SUSAN Clothing&Uniforms Ice Show 97264 13 STAR TRIBUNE Misc Non-Taxable Prairie View Liquor Store 97265 27 TORNOE JACKIE Program Fee Senior Center Program 97266 105 WASTE MANAGEMENT-SAVAGE MN Waste Disposal- Den Road Liquor Store 97267 48 WEEDMAN NICOLE Mileage&Parking Youth Programs Administration 97268 70 WRIGHT IRENE Mileage&Parking Golden Triange Study 97269 69 AMERICAN PUBLIC WORKS ASSN Operating Supplies Engineering 97270 4 AT&T Telephone Prairie View Liquor Store 97271 242 BUDGETEL INN Tuition Reimbursement/School Fire 97272 260 CONVERGENT COMMUNICATIONS SRVC Telephone General 97273 220 D'AMICO AND SONS Miscellaneous General Facilities 97274 100 DEVRIES DIANE Refunds Environmental Education 97275 9 HALL ANN Program Fee Senior Center Program 97276 657 J A PRICE AGENCY INC Insurance Risk Management 97277 2,278 JOHNSON STEWART Insurance Risk Management 97278 100 LORIO PATRICK Refunds Environmental Education 97279 53 MANN TRIA Mileage&Parking Arts 97280 165 MINNESOTA ASPHALT PAVEMENT ASS Conference Expense In Service Training 97281 72 MUELLER CYNTHIA Mileage&Parking Aquatics&Fitness Admin 97282 191 PROTECTION ONE Other Contracted Services Prairie View Liquor Store 97283 70 SOUTH CENTRAL TECHNICAL COLLEG Tuition Reimbursement/School Fire 97284 23 STAR TRIBUNE Misc Non-Taxable Prairie View Liquor Store 97285 150 STAVROULAKIS CAROL Office Supplies General 97286 290 ALL SAINTS BRANDS DISTRIBUTING Beer Den Road Liquor Store 97287 68 AMERIPRIDE LINEN&APPAREL SER Repair&Maint.Supplies Den Road Liquor Store 97288 1,287 BELLBOY CORPORATION Liquor Prairie View Liquor Store 97289 4,747 DAY DISTRIBUTING Beer Prairie Village Liquor Store 97290 2,342 EAGLE WINE COMPANY Wine Imported Prairie View Liquor Store 97291 9,466 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE COMPANY Beer Den Road Liquor Store 97292 4,075 GRIGGS COOPER&CO Liquor Den Road Liquor Store 97294 18,167 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO Liquor Den Road Liquor Store 97295 1,640 LAKE REGION VENDING Tobacco Products Den Road Liquor Store 97296 3,969 MARK VI Beer Den Road Liquor Store 97297 228 MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING COM Misc Taxable Prairie View Liquor Store 97298 69 PEPSI COLA COMPANY Misc Taxable Prairie View Liquor Store 97299 3,463 PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRITS INC Wine Domestic ' Den Road Liquor Store 97300 258 PINNACLE DISTRIBUTING Misc Non-Taxable Prairie View Liquor Store 97301 3,463 PRIOR WINE COMPANY Wine Domestic Den Road Liquor Store 97303 10,258 QUALITY WINE&SPIRTS CO Wine Domestic Den Road Liquor Store 97304 5,877 THORPE DISTRIBUTING Beer Den Road Liquor Store 97305 490 ACT Conference Expense Golden Triange Study y City of Eden Prairie Council Check Register 2/20/2001 Check# Amount Vendor Account Description Business Unit 97306 20 AMEM Dues&Subscriptions Civil Defense 97307 25 ANDERSON LONNIE LEE Operating Supplies Arts Festival 97308 140 ASCAP Licenses&Taxes Ice Arena 97309 16 BOUDREAUX BURT Lessons&Classes Ice Arena 97310 15 BROCK WHITE CO Conference Expense In Service Training 97311 102 CAMPOS LORI Operating Supplies After School Programs 97312 96 CARLSON BOB Operating Supplies Prairie View Liquor Store 97313 52 COUGHLAN ALEXA Lessons&Classes Ice Arena 97314 133 CRACAUER CLIFF Mileage&Parking Fleet Services 97315 330 DAVIES/NORTHERN WATERWORKS Conference Expense In Service Training 97316 451 DELEGARD TOOL CO Equipment Parts Fleet Services 97317 600 FAHEY HARNESS Other Contracted Services Arts Festival 97318 83 FEDEX Postage General 97319 44 FREY LYNDELL Office Supplies Community Center Admin 97320 40 GEIB AUDREY Instructor Service Outdoor Center 97321 36 GRAVES MARIAN Program Fee Senior Center Program 97322 697 JOHN'S ANTIQUES Capital Under$2000 Heritage Preservation 97323 27 KRAEMERS HARDWARE INC Repair&Maint.Supplies General Facilities 97324 15 LACOMBE SANDY Lessons&Classes Ice Arena 97325 345 LAW ENFORCEMENT OPPORTUNITIES Tuition Reimbursement/School Police 97326 240 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES Conference Expense In Service Training 97327 225 MILE Tuition Reimbursement/School Police 97328 535 MINNEGASCO Gas Douglas More House 97329 100 MSSA Dues&Subscriptions In Service Training 97330 13 NILSSON BETH Operating Supplies Ice Arena 97331 25 OPERATING ENGINEERS TRAINING P Conference Expense In Service Training 97332 176 PETTY CASH-POLICE DEPT Miscellaneous Police 97333 41 PRODOEHL JERRY Employee Award Human Resources 97334 2,657 QWEST Telephone General 97335 3,000 RESERVE ACCOUNT Postage General 97336 75 SCHLOSSMACHER JIM Travel Expense In Service Training 97337 350 SILVER CREEK SLED DOGS Other Contracted Services Winter Wonderland 97338 89 SMITH AMY Travel Expense Police 97339 360 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA Conference Expense In Service Training 97340 25 USPCA REGION 18-2000 TRIALS Tuition Reimbursement/School Police 97341 5 VUOLO SUANNE Lessons&Classes Oak Point Lessons 97342 171 WASTE MANAGEMENT-SAVAGE MN Waste Disposal Prairie Village Liquor Store 97343 107 WEEDMAN NICOLE Operating Supplies Special Events&Trips 97344 66 WROBLEWSKI MIKE Program Fee Senior Center Program 97345 1,202 XCEL ENERGY Electric Water Treatment Plant 97346 12 AMERICAN EXPRESS PUBLISHING Misc Non-Taxable Prairie View Liquor Store 97347 20 AT&T Telephone Water Treatment Plant 97348 111 BAGELMAN'S NEW YORK BAKERSY Miscellaneous General Facilities 97349 110 BUDGETEL INN Tuition Reimbursement/School Fire 97350 41 CUMMINGS KIM Printing Fire 97351 586 DISH NETWORK Cable TV Ice Arena 97352 63 EXPRESS MESSENGER SYSTEMS INC Postage General 97356 2,042 GENUINE PARTS COMPANY Small Tools Fire 97357 10 HENNEPIN COUNTY FIRE CHIEF ASS Dues&Subscriptions Fire 97358 386 HONIGS Recreation Supplies Softball 97359 219 HRFOCUS Dues&Subscriptions Human Resources 97360 199 IOS CAPITAL Operating Supplies Fire 97361 210 L&S HOSPITALITY AND DIRECTOR Advertising ' Prairie View Liquor Store 97362 128 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE Repair&Maint.Supplies Maintenance 97363 2,597 MINN CHILD SUPPORT PAYMENT CTR Garnishment Withheld General Fund 97364 15 MN DEPT.OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY Licenses&Taxes Water Treatment Plant 97365 50 MN DEPT.OF REVENUE Licenses&Taxes Fleet Services 97366 23 MPCA Licenses&Taxes Sewer Utility-General City of Eden Prairie Council Check Register 212012001 Check# Amount Vendor Account Description Business Unit 97367 2,575 NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES Dues&Subscriptions City Council 97368 80 QWEST Telephone Water Utility-General 97369 210 SOUTH CENTRAL TECHNICAL COLLEG Tuition Reimbursement/School Fire 97370 4 STAR TRIBUNE Misc Non-Taxable Den Road Liquor Store 97371 400 STATE FIRE MARSHAL DIVISION Conference Expense Fire 97372 250 US HOSPITALITY Advertising Prairie View Liquor Store 97373 131 BOGREN ANN Tuition Reimbursement/School Police 97374 27 CITIZENS LEAGUE Dues&Subscriptions City Council 97375 12,983 DNR Licenses&Taxes Water Utility-General 97376 234 GE CAPITAL Other Rentals General 97377 6,705 HONEYWELL INC. Building Repair&Maint. Water Treatment Plant 97378 20 KETTELL PAULA Program Fee Special Events&Trips 97379 38 LEMON LEONA Program Fee Adult Program 97380 17 NESBITT RALPH Program Fee Senior Center Program 97381 10,035 NILSSON BETH Instructor Service Ice Arena 97383 1,467 QWEST Telephone Prairie View Liquor Store 97384 30 STRANDBERG JANET Lessons&Classes Fitness Classes 97385 34 USULOGLU CANAN Lessons&Classes Pool Lessons 97386 120 WEEDMAN NICOLE Operating Supplies Special Events&.Trips 97387 56 A TO Z RENTAL CENTER Operating Supplies Street Maintenance 97388 242 ABM EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLY COMPA Operating Supplies Traffic Signs 97389 1,046 ACT ELECTRONICS INC Operating Supplies Traffic Signals 97390 1,262 ADT SECURITY SYSTEMS INC Equipment Repair&Maint Maintenance 97391 60 ALAN SHILEPSKY CONSULTING INC Other Contracted Services Fleet Services 97392 4,592 ALFAX WHOLESALE FURNITURE INC. Machinery&Equipment Water Treatment Plant 97393 860 ALTERNATIVE BUSINESS FURNITURE Other Assets Furniture 97394 50 ANCHOR PAPER COMPANY Office Supplies General 97395 29,309 ANCHOR PRINTING COMPANY Printing Communication Services 97396 98 ARMOR SECURITY INC. Repair&Maint.Supplies Maintenance 97397 795 ASPEN CARPET CLEANING Other Contracted Services Prairie View Liquor Store 97398 923 ASPEN EQUIPMENT CO. Equipment Parts Fleet Services 97399 318 ASSOCIATION OF TRAINING OFFICE Tuition Reimbursement/School Police 97400 73 AUTO ELECTRIC SPECIALISTS Equipment Repair&Maint Fleet Services 97401 633 AZTECH EMBROIDERY SERVICES Clothing&Uniforms Community Center Admin 97402 720 BACHMANS CREDIT DEPT Other Contracted Services General Facilities 97403 154 BAN-KOE SYSTEMS INC Office Supplies Community Center Admin 97404 708 BAUER BUILT TIRE AND BATTERY Equipment Parts Fleet Services 97405 618 BECKER ARENA PRODUCTS INC Repair&Maint.Supplies Ice Arena 97406 887 BIFFS INC Waste Disposal Park Maintenance 97407 216 BLOOMINGTON SECURITY SOLUTIONS Equipment Repair&Maint City Center Operations 97408 198 BLR INC Training Supplies Water Utility-General 97409 34 BROADWAY AWARDS Awards Raquetball 97410 51 BURTON EQUIPMENT INC Operating Supplies General Facilities 97411 847 C&H DISTRIBUTORS INC. Capital Under$2000 Water Treatment Plant 97412 85,241 CAPITOL COMMUNICATIONS Other Assets Capital Impr./Maint.Fund 97413 9,824 CARGILL SALT Salt Snow&Ice Control 97414 247 CARLSON TRACTOR AND EQUIPMENT Equipment Parts Fleet Services 97415 711 CHANHASSEN BUMPER TO BUMPER Equipment Parts Fleet Services 97416 6,582 CONTROL STUFF INC. Machinery&Equipment Water Treatment Plant 97417 189 CONVERGENT COMMUNICATIONS SRVC Telephone General 97418 358 COPY EQUIPMENT INC Operating Supplies Engineering 97419 2,239 CORPORATE EXPRESS Capital Under$2000 Water Utility-General 97420 461 CRYSTEEL TRUCK EQUIPMENT INC Equipment Parts ' Fleet Services 97421 4,884 CUTLER-MAGNER COMPANY Chemicals Water Treatment Plant 97422 977 DALCO Cleaning Supplies General Facilities 97423 16,158 DAYTON'S COMMERCIAL INTERIORS Leasehold Improvements Prairie Village Liquor Store 97424 552 DECORATIVE DESIGNS INC Other Rentals City Center Operations 97425 150 DEM CON LANDFILL INC Waste Disposal Street Maintenance 6 City of Eden Prairie Council Check Register 2/20/2001 Check# Amount Vendor Account Description Business Unit 97426 375 DIETHELM GARY Other Contracted Services Pleasant Hill Cemetary 97427 140 DIRECT SAFETY CO Safety Supplies Water Treatment Plant 97428 6,023 DOWNTOWN COLLISION Equipment Repair&Maint Fleet Services 97429 151 DRISKILLS NEW MARKET Merchandise for Resale Concessions 97430 445 DYNA SYSTEMS Repair&Maint.Supplies Water Treatment Plant 97431 214 EARL F ANDERSEN INC Signs Traffic Signs 97432 318 ECOLAB INC Other Contracted Services Public Works/Parks 97433 672 ELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY INC Operating Supplies Fire 97434 954 EMED COMPANY INC Safety Supplies Water Treatment Plant 97435 486 ESS BROTHERS&SONS INC' Repair&Maint.Supplies Sewer System Maintenance 97436 3,363 FACILITY SYSTEMS INC Capital Under$2000 Furniture 97437 1,013 FASTENAL COMPANY Equipment Parts Fleet Services 97438 650 FERRELLGAS Motor Fuels Ice Arena 97439 399 FIBRCOM-MN Utilities Wireless Communication 97440 1,306 FILTRATION SYSTEMS Building Repair&Maint. Water Treatment Plant 97441 32 FIRE INSTRUCTORS ASSOCIATION 0 Tuition Reimbursement/School Fire 97442 70 FRANKLIN COVEY CO. Office Supplies General 97443 515 G&K SERVICES DIRECT PURCHASE Clothing&Uniforms General Facilities 97444 925 HAMILTON MICHAEL Other Contracted Services Broomball 97445 8,981 HARTLAND FUEL PRODUCTS LLC Motor Fuels Fleet Services 97446 224 HAWK LABELING SYSTEMS Office Supplies Park Maintenance 97447 2,926 HAWKINS WATER TREATMENT GROUP Chemicals Water Treatment Plant 97448 875 HELICOPTER FLIGHT INC Other Contracted Services Deer Consultant 97449 364 HENDERSON JOSH Other Contracted Services Basketball 97450 196 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER Operating Supplies Community Development 97451 780 HOLMES JOHN CARTER Other Contracted Services Basketball 97452 616 HOLMES TOM Other Contracted Services Volleyball 97453 59 HUDSON MAP COMPANY Operating Supplies Water Utility-General 97454 681 ICE SKATING INSTITUTE Operating Supplies Ice Arena 97455 103 INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DIST NO.27 Transportation Preschool Events 97456 253 INDUSTRIAL PLASTICS INC Repair&Maint.Supplies Water Treatment Plant 97457 1,427 INGRAHAM&ASSOC Other Contracted Services Park Acquisition&Development 97458 550 J J KELLER&ASSOCIATES INC Training Supplies Water Utility-General 97459 2,700 JANEX INC Cleaning Supplies Maintenance 97460 172 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO Liquor Prairie View Liquor Store 97461 3,400 KERN DEWENTER VIERE LTD. Audit&Financial Finance 97462 900 KNUDTSON STEVE Other Contracted Services Broomball 97463 123 KRAEMERS HARDWARE INC Repair&Maint.Supplies Water Treatment Plant 97464 3,721 KUSTOM SIGNALS INC Capital Under$2000 Police 97465 805 LAB SAFETY SUPPLY INC Capital Under$2000 Water Treatment Plant 97466 96 LAKE COUNTRY DOOR Building Repair&Maint. Water Treatment Plant 97467 145 LAKELAND FORD TRUCK SALES Equipment Parts Fleet Services 97468 2,652 LAMETTRYS COLLISION Equipment Repair&Maint Fleet Services 97469 51,883 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES INS Insurance Risk Management 97470 47 LEROY JOB TRUCKING Other Contracted Services Animal Control 97471 3,608 LOVEGREEN INDUSTRIAL SERVICES Other Contracted Services Water Plant Grand Opening 97472 128 MIA ASSOCIATES Cleaning Supplies Water Treatment Plant 97473 850 MACQUEEN EQUIPMENT INC Equipment Parts Fleet Services 97474 7 MAIL BOXES ETC Postage Water Utility-General 97475 37 MARKS CERTICARE AMOCO Equipment Repair&Maint Fleet Services 97476 85 MAXIMUM SOLUTIONS INC Operating Supplies Ice Arena 97477 181 MCGONIGLE COMMCT INC. Telephone General 97478 382 MENARDS Building Repair&Maint. ' Water Treatment Plant 97479 173 METRO FIRE Small Tools Fire 97480 873 METRO SALES INCORPORATED* Other Rentals General 97481 155 METROPOLITAN FORD Equipment Parts Fleet Services 97482 1,218 MIDWEST ASPHALT CORPORATION Patching Asphalt Water System Maintenance 97483 431 MIDWEST TELETRON INC. Equipment Repair&Maint Wireless Communication City of Eden Prairie Council Check Register 2/20/2001 Check# Amount Vendor Account Description Business Unit 97484 154 MIKE'S SHOE REPAIR INC Protective Clothing Fire 97485 2,159 MINNESOTA SAFETY COUNCIL Other Contracted Services Risk Management 97486 367 MINNESOTA VIKINGS FOOD SERVICE Miscellaneous General Facilities 97487 509 MINNESOTA WANNER COMPANY Operating Supplies Street Maintenance 97488 286 MONTGOMERY WATSON Design&Engineering Storm Drainage Projects 97489 1,863 MUNICILITE Capital Under$2000 Fleet Services 97490 381 NATIONAL BUSINESS FURNITURE Operating Supplies Community Center Admin 97491 875 NEUMANN NEAL Other Contracted Services Broomball 97492 257 NORTHSTAR REPRO PRODUCTS INC Operating Supplies Engineering 97493 1,325 NORTHWEST BUSINESS SYSTEMS Telephone General 97494 306 NORTHWEST RESPIRATORY SERVICE Safety Supplies Fire 97495 167 OHLIN SALES Operating Supplies Police 97496 40 OLSEN COMPANIES Repair&Maint.Supplies Water System Maintenance 97497. 4,506 PARROTT CONTRACTING INC Other Contracted Services Water System Maintenance 97498 252 PERKINS Other Contracted Services Park Maintenance 97499 45 PETSMART Canine Supplies Police 97500 1,115 PRAIRIE ELECTRIC COMPANY Repair&Maint.Supplies Ice Arena 97501 73 PRAIRIE EQUIPMENT COMPANY Equipment Repair&Maint Fleet Services 97502 32 PRAIRIE LAWN AND GARDEN Operating Supplies Street Maintenance 97503 290 PRECISION BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC Other Contracted Services Water Utility-General 97504 126 PRIORITY COURIER EXPERTS Equipment Repair&Maint Fleet Services 97505 181 QUALITY FLOW SYSTEMS INC Repair&Maint.Supplies Sewer Liftstation 97506 1,985 R E FRITZ INC Operating Supplies Fire 97507 460 RAY LEE Other Contracted Services Basketball 97508 92 RC IDENTIFICATIONS INC. Office Supplies Community Center Admin 97509 95 REAL JUSTICE Tuition Reimbursement/School Police 97510 1,380 RED WING SHOE STORE Clothing&Uniforms Sewer Utility-General 97511 150 RES WELL DRILLING CO. Other Contracted Services Outdoor Center 97512 132 RIGID HITCH INCORPORATED Operating Supplies Park Maintenance 97513 32,695 RMR SERVICES INC Equipment Parts Water Meter Repair 97514 60 RUSSfCA TRANSLATIONS INC. Other Contracted Services Police 97515 623 SAVOIE SUPPLY CO INC Cleaning Supplies Water Treatment Plant 97516 5,705 SCHAD TRACY SIGNS Leasehold Improvements Den Road Liquor Store 97517 1,680 SE-ME INC Video&Photo Supplies Police 97518 21 SHERWIN WILLIAMS CO Operating Supplies Traffic Signs 97519 140 SHRED-IT Waste Disposal City Center Operations 97520 1,405 SIGNATURE CONCEPTS INC. Clothing&Uniforms Fire 97521 400 SL-SERCO Other Contracted Services Water Treatment Plant 97522 408 SNAP-ON TOOLS Small Tools Fleet Services 97523 250 SOUNDS GREAT Other Contracted Services Special Events&Trips 97524 131 SOUTHWEST LOCK&KEY Repair&Maint.Supplies Maintenance 97525 2,173 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISHING- Advertising Communication Services 97526 8,347 SPECTRACOM Other Assets Police 97527 350 SPORTS WORLD USA INC Operating Supplies Ice Arena 97528 155 SPS COMPANIES Repair&Maint.Supplies Park Maintenance 97529 2,174 STANDARD SPRING Equipment Parts Fleet Services 97530 177 STANLEY STEEMER CARPET AND UPH Cleaning Supplies Maintenance 97531 135 STATE CHEMICAL MFG.CO.THE Operating Supplies Fire 97532 638 STREICHERS Clothing&Uniforms Police 97533 316 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET GEO Equipment Parts Fleet Services 97534 550 SUCCESSORIES INC. Training Supplies Water Treatment Plant 97535 125 SWEDLUNDS Waste Disposal Park Maintenance 97536 539 TIERNEY BROS INC Equipment Parts ' Fleet Services 97537 137 TOLL GAS AND WELDING SUPPLY Operating Supplies Water System Maintenance 97538 6,588 TRANS ALARM INC Other Assets Fire Station#1 97539 246 TWIN CITY OXYGEN CO Lubricants&Additives Fleet Services 97540 3,302 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED Capital Under$2000 Police 97541 1,160 UNIQUE SPECIALITY BAGS Safety Supplies Fire City of Eden Prairie Council Check Register 2/20/2001 Check# Amount Vendor Account Description Business Unit 97542 180 UNITED RADIO INC. Equipment Repair&Maint Fleet Services 97543 448 UNLIMITED SUPPLIES INC Equipment Parts Fleet Services 97544 20 US CAVALRY Clothing&Uniforms Police 97545 40 US OFFICE PRODUCTS Office Supplies Fire 97546 436 VOSS LIGHTING Repair&Maint.Supplies Maintenance 97547 1,375 W W GRAINGER Safety Supplies Fleet Services 97548 1,772 WATSON CO INC THE Merchandise for Resale Concessions 97549 45 WHEELER HARDWARE COMPANY Building Repair&Maint. Park Maintenance 97550 12,120 WIRTHLIN WORLDWIDE Other Contracted Services Communication Services 97551 1,991 WM MUELLER AND SONS INC Sand Snow&Ice Control 97552 36 WOLF CAMERA INC Video&Photo Supplies Police 97553 107 WORM SANDY Operating Supplies Park Maintenance 97554 251 ZEP MANUFACTURING CO Equipment Parts Fleet Services 4,434,402 Total JD Edwards 268,756 Total Previous System 4,703,158 Grand Total ti - COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER 13-FEB-2001 (18 CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 95193 $272.76 ACT ELECTRONICS INC OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL TRAFFIC SIGNALS 95194 $115,311.00 BACONS ELECTRIC COMPANY IMPROVEMENT CONTRACTS GENERATORS-WELL 2,9,11,13 95195 $310.00 BLOOMINGTON, CITY OF KENNEL SERVICE ANIMAL WARDEN PROJECT 95196 $875.83 ELAN FINANCIAL SERVICES TRAVEL COUNCIL 95197 $241.98 FEDEX POSTAGE GENERAL 95198 $250.00 FIRSTAR TRUST COMPANY PAYING AGENT UTILITY DEBT FUND 95199 $838.86 GUNNAR ELECTRIC CO INC BLDG REPAIR & MAINT PARK MAINTENANCE 95200 $333.42 HENNEPIN COUNTY I/T DEPT OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES INFORMATION SYSTEM 95201 $1,294.29 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES INS INSURANCE RISK MANAGEMENT 95202 $59.75 MENARDS BUILDING MATERIALS STREET MAINTENANCE 95203 $1,697.50 MICHAEL J WILKUS ARCHITECTS IN LEASEHOLD IMPROVEMENTS LIQUOR STORE PVM 95204 $18,563.00 TERRANOVA LLC IMPROVEMENT CONTRACTS WELL 14 95205 $1,140.62 TIMBERWALL LANDSCAPING INC BUILDING MATERIALS DEV RICHARD T ANDERSON CONSERV 95206 $8.00 DAY DISTRIBUTING BEER 6/12 PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 95207 $3,021.56 G & K SERVICES DIRECT PURCHASE CLOTHING & UNIFORMS SEWER UTILITY-GENERAL 95208 $498.86 G & K SERVICES-MPLS INDUSTRIAL CLEANING SUPPLIES WATER TREATMENT PLANT 95209 $2,971.74 KMC TELECOM TELEPHONE GENERAL 95210 $90.00 M SHMKEN COMMUNICATIONS INC MISC TAXABLE LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 95211 $204.96 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS TELEPHONE POLICE 95212 $1,253.11 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS TELEPHONE PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR #1 95213 $158.73 BRACE, PATTY LICENSES & TAXES HUMAN RESOURCES 95214 $80.00 CERCHIA, JERRY OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES ART & MUSIC 95215 $133.00 HENNEPIN COUNTY PUBLIC RECORDS RECORDING DOCUMENT FEE ENGINEERING DEPT 95216 $1,055.64 HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFI BOARD OF PRISONERS SVC POLICE 95217 $78.55 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO WINE IMPORTED PRAIRE VIEW LIQUOR #3 95218 $1,015.30 LAKELAND FORD TRUCK SALES EQUIPMENT PARTS EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 95219 $9.48 PAPER WAREHOUSE EMPLOYEE AWARD HUMAN RESOURCES 95220 $5.80 PETTY CASH-POLICE DEPT POSTAGE GENERAL 95221 $72.63 PINNACLE DISTRIBUTING OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL LIQUOR STORE CUB FOODS 95222 $1.48 US WEST,COMMUNICATIONS TELEPHONE POLICE 95223 $770.00 RATEIKE, MARILYN JANE OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES ART & MUSIC 95224 $234.30 STEVE LUCAS PHOTOGRAPHY OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL IN SERVICE TRAINING 95225 $198.40 CONSTRUCTION BULLETIN LEGAL NOTICES PUBLISHING WATER TREATMENT PLANT 95226 $2,568.35 BURTON EQUIPMENT INC FURNITURE & FIXTURES FURNITURE ACCOUNT 95227 $2,375.00 CENTRAIRE INC CONTRACTED BLDG REPAIRS POLICE STATION 95228 $64.35 CLAREYS INC MISC FIRE EQUIPMENT FIRE 95229 $5,625.00 CORNERSTONE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES LEGAL COUSEL 95230 $47,102.50 DELANO ERICKSON ARCHITECTS OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES NESBITT / PRESERVE PARK K16 95231 $16.96 DRISKILLS NEW MARKET OPERATING SUPPLIES-GENERAL LEISURE TIME 95232 $2,458.45 HANSEN THORP PELLINEN OLSON DESIGN & CONST TRAILS 95233 $2,598.50 HARRIS-BILLINGS COMPANY CONTRACTED BLDG REPAIRS FACILITIES - COMMUNITY CENTER 95234 $886.60 HELLERS CARBONIC WEST CHEMICALS WATER TREATMENT PLANT 95235 $100.00 HENDERSON, JOSH OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES BASKETBALL 95236 $601.00 HOLMES, JOHN CARTER OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES VOLLEYBALL 95237 $361.80 EDEN PRAIRIE SCHOOL DISTRICT N BLDG RENTAL ART & MUSIC 95238 $3,125.00 EDEN PRAIRIE SCHOOL DISTRICT N PROFESSIONAL SERVICES HOUSING, TRANS, & SOC SVC 95239 $100.00 KNUDTSON, STEVE OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES BROOMBALL 95240 $629.61 METRO FIRE CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINTi FIRE 95241 $350.00 NEUMANN, NEAL OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES BROOMBALL 95242 $4,742.41 PARROTT CONTRACTING INC OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES WATER SYSTEM MAINTENANCE 95243 $3,570.00 SPORTS WORLD USA INC CLOTHING & UNIFORMS INSPECTION-ADMIN 95244 $13,723.38 STS CONSULTANTS LTD DESIGN & CONST BEARPATH BOG MONITORING 95245 $20.55 SUBURBAN PROPANE LUBRICANTS & ADDITIVES EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 95246 $2,125.00 STOREFRONT/YOUTH ACTION INC PROFESSIONAL SERVICES HOUSING, TRANS, & SOC SVC 95247 $6,489.41 TKDA DESIGN & CONST WELL 14 /6 COUNCIL CHECK REGISTER 13-FEB-2001 (18 CHECK NO CHECK AMOUNT VENDOR DESCRIPTION PROGRAM ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 95248 $3,850.00 TREES INC OTHER CONTRACTED SERVICES REFORESTATION 95249 $8,135.21 TWIN CITIES & WESTERN RAILROAD IMPROVEMENT CONTRACTS VALLEY VIEW RD CROSSING IMPROV 95250 $4,086.41 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED CONTRACTED REPAIR & MAINT FIRE $268,756.04* '1 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: February 20,2001 SECTION: Ordinances and Resolutions SERVICE AREA: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Management Services 1"reading of an Ordinance amending City Code Chapter 2,relating to Boards & Commissions 4 , Requested Action Move to: Approve the Pt reading of an Ordinance amending City Code Chapter 2,relating to Boards and Commissions. Synopsis The staff and City Attorney have modified the Ordinance to reflect current City Council direction regarding membership and appointment to the Flying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission. Background Strikeout Version: Subd. 3. Membership. The Commission shall consist of seven (7) members. One (1) member shall represent the Metropolitan Airports Commission and shall be appointed by the Chairman of the Metropolitan Airports Commission. Six (6) members shall be appointed by the Council who shall serve at the pleasure of the Council. Net less +,,.,,, +Two (2) members appointed by the Council shall represent the interests of the Flying Cloud Airport Bbusinesses , neither of whom need to be residents of Eden Prairie not withstanding Section 2.22 Subd. 3 of the City Code, 4 least ^re "` of t.,,,^F shall be a ,-esi of Edo„ P",;,;o and four (4) members appointed by the Council shall represent the community's interest, all of whom shall be residents of Eden Prairie. Attachment Ordinance 1 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,NIINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE,MINNESOTA AMENDING CITY CODE SECTIONS 2.27; AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 2.99,WHICH AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE,MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1. City Code Section 2.27, Subdivision 3 entitled "Members" is amended in its entirety as follows: Subd. 3. Membership. The Commission shall consist of seven(7)members. One (1) member shall represent the Metropolitan Airports Commission and shall be appointed by the Chairman of the Metropolitan Airports Commission. Six(6)members shall be appointed by the Council who shall serve at the pleasure of the Council. Two (2)members appointed by the Council shall represent the interests of the Flying Cloud Airport businesses, neither of whom need to be residents of Eden Prairie not withstanding Section 2.22 Subd. 3 of the City Code, and four(4)members appointed by the Council shall represent the community's interest, all of whom shall be residents of Eden Prairie. Section 2. City Code Chapter 1 entitled "General Provisions and Definitions Applicable to the Entire City Code Including Penalty for Violation" and Section 2.99 entitled"Violation a Misdemeanor" are hereby adopted in their entirety,by reference, as though repeated verbatim herein. Section 3. 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 20th day of February,2001, and finally read and adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the day of ,2001. Kathleen Porta, City Clerk Jean L. Harris,Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of 52001. { CITY COUNCIL AGENDA SECTION: Petitions and Requests DATE: February 20, ?nn1 SERVICE AREA: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO. Community Development Southwest Busway Study Presentation—Metro &Financial Services: Transit Staff Don Uram . David Lindahl Requested Action: Discuss how Eden Prairie residents could participate in the process. Synopsis: Metro transit staff will present their plans to conduct a feasibility study for a dedicated busway between Minneapolis and Eden Prairie. Background: Last year the state legislature allocated$2.1 million to the Metropolitan Council to determine the feasibility and benefits of developing a dedicated bus service between Minneapolis and Eden Prairie. The service would possibly use the old Chicago Northwestern rail corridor now owned by Hennepin County and currently used as a pedestrian and bike trail. Metro Transit has been selected to oversee a feasibility study to: Review previous studies and related data. Identification of busway alignments. • Screening of alternative alignments. • Conduct public involvement. • Prepare conceptual designs and cost estimates. Selection of preferred alignments. • Identification of potential environmental impacts. Determine current and potential ridership. Attachments: i MetroTransit January 9,2001 Dave Lindahl HRA Manager 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie,MN 55344 Dear Mr.Lindahl: You and your staff are invited to attend an information meeting regarding the upcoming �Sbt thr%e t=B,, SJffidY. The meeting is scheduled for January 22, 2001, from 8:30 AM to 10:00 AM at the Hopkins City Hall(1010 First Street). The Southwest Corridor, defined as extending from CSAH 4 to downtown Minneapolis, was purchased by the Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority(HCRRA)in the early 1990s in order to preserve it for a future transit use. In 1999, Hennepin County and Metro Transit conducted the 29th Street and Southwest Corridors Busway Feasibility Study and determined it is feasible to construct and operate an exclusive busway in the Southwest Corridor. The Southwest Corridor was also identified in the Metropolitan Council's Transit 2020 Plan as a potential busway prior to 2010. In 2000, the state legislature allocated $6.3 million for further busway studies in the region. On October 25 the Metropolitan Council decided to utilize the $6.3 million to conduct busway studies for the Southwest, Northwest, and Riverview Corridors. This informational meeting on January 22 is the first step in the Southwest Busway Study process. Again, you are cordially invited to attend an informational meeting regarding the Southwest Busway Study. Sincerely, U Arthur T.Leahy General Manager GO/bah A service of the Metropolitan Council 560 Sixth Avenue North Minneapolis,Minnesota 55411-4398 (612)349-7400 Transit Info 373-3333 TTY 341-0140 http://www.metrotransitorg An Equal Opportunity Employer Southwest Busway Study Informational Meeting Agenda January 22,2001, 8:30 a.m.to 10:00 a.m. Hopkins City Hall 1. Welcome and Introduction Diaz/Elected Officials -Funding 2, Background Diaz/Kozlak -Transit 2020 Kozlak -Southwest Feasibility Study Walker -Trolly Study Walker. -MN/DOT Busway Study Henkel or O'Keefe 3.. Southwest Busway Study Orlich -Scope -Timeline -Community Involvement 4. Community Response/Issues Diaz and Others Alignments/Distance -Issues -Public Involvement 5. Wrap-up and Next Steps Diaz/Metro Transit Staff 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION The 29th Street and Southwest Corridors extend from 5th Avenue in Hopkins to Hiawatha Avenue in Minneapolis. In the early 1990s, the Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority(HCRRA) purchased these corridors,preserving them for a future transit use. This busway feasibility study was initiated in May 1999 as a joint effort of Hennepin County and Metro Transit to determine the feasibility, defined in terms of ridership forecasts and cost assumptions, of constructing and operating a limited-stop,rapid transit busway within these corridors and to determine if this was a practical first step toward light-rail transit(LRT). Study components included market assessment, ridership forecasts, cost estimates and analysis of issues relating to transit service provision. The determination of feasibility is based solely on the estimates of ridership and costs for a rapid-transit service. STUDY ASSUMPTIONS Key study assumptions were that busway infrastructure elements such as transit stations,park-and-ride lots, fare collection systems and communications would be compatible with LRT and capable of re-use with conversion to LRT. Another assumption was that the bicycle/pedestrian trails constructed within the corridor would remain with conversion to a busway. For purposes of this study, a busway was defined as a two-lane roadway, separated from other traffic, operating with hybrid, diesel-electric, low-floor buses and a proof-of-payment fare collection system. STUDY CONCLUSIONS Based on ridership forecasts and cost estimates, an exclusive limited-stop busway in the 29th Street and Southwest Corridors is "technically"feasible. As such,the busway option should be included with other transit alternatives (e.g., LRT,Electric Trolley)in any future studies of these corridors. Furthermore,based on capital costs, constructing a busway will not preclude conversion to LRT in the future. SUMMARY OF KEY STUDY FINDINGS Market Assessment • Based on responses from the focus"group participants,telephone survey respondents, and on-board bus survey respondents, a market for busway service in the 29th Street and Southwest Corridors does exist. '=�. t EXECUTIVE SUMMARY • Connections to other regional systems such as the proposed Hiawatha LRT and downtown Minneapolis were viewed as critical to the corridor's success as a transit service. • A modest preference for LRT over busway service was expressed; however, a busway was viewed as a positive precursor to LRT given LRT's long-term implementation prospects in this corridor. • Current transit riders in the corridor are highly transit-dependent with 51 percent not owning an automobile and 36 percent riding the bus 10 or more times per week. 2020 Ridership Forecasts • A substantial number of riders would be attracted to rapid transit service provided in the 29th Street and Southwest Corridors 4 3 •r:'RG t7.YL4tK>4:Ntl.•Ya ._. . .. . •�``�y-`yL , !s A:MI•nst Y�.. ,� � l♦w <<drliN W. Lake Hopkins Route 1: West Lake to Hiawatha: • 7,300 daily busway riders • 7,700 daily LRT riders Route 2: Hopkins to Hiawatha • 11,500 daily busway riders • 12,100 daily LRT riders Route 3: Hopkins to downtown Minneapolis: • 16,000 daily busway riders • 16,500 daily LRT riders ExECmm SUMMARY Cost Estimates • Busway construction costs and operations and maintenance (O&A4) costs are , within a reasonable range. Based on regionally acceptable criteria, a busway will be operationally cost-effective. BUSWAY COSTS(2005 DOLLARS) LRT COSTS (2005 DOLLARS) • ":•i�E:. f I. .ii�tn;�i; � (ru,i j;�•U'rtW 1 t. ..� �fS�E' E. 4 • NF F „ � I: �T4,01�;71.; �'ti;d�l�k�sE{iif7C..;,•i gt�j t.: -0T •-Q Construction $59M $104M $84-95M Construction $122M $234M $244-289M AnnualO/M $2.OM $4.9M $91M AnnualO/M $2.3M $4.9M $8.4M Issues Analysis • Sufficient space exists in both the 29th Street and Southwest Corridors to accommodate both transit(Busway or LRT) and a bicycle/pedestrian trail, assuming the use of fencing,retaining walls and bridge modifications. • Unresolved issues include issues relating to transit service (rapid transit or collector service using trolleys or other vehicle types), existing freight rail service,physical design(transit stations,transitway treatments,retaining walls, bridge work, and landscaping), and the environment. These issues will be explored in greater detail if future transit planning is initiated in the 29th Street and Southwest Corridors. �c7 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NEXT STEPS _ This study is only the first step in the 29th Street and Southwest Corridors transit planning process. As illustrated in the graphic on the next page, the next step is a process of agency and public review to select one of three transitway candidate corridors for further study. Future studies will focus on identifying the type of transit service(LRT,busway, trolley, etc.) offered on the chosen corridor and how it may be designed. Public and agency, involvement is critical to determining which corridor and which transit alternative is-selected. Aprocess for public involvement has been initiated and will be ongoing as the project development process continues. Future steps in planning for transit will involve the identification of environmental and other impacts directly resulting from project implementation as well as a discussion of how the transit service will be designed and operated. 29th and SW Busway Feasibility < Study Public/Agency , Review& Environmental , Transit Selection Analysis B�tall 2020 Process 3 YES= Odsi�rt Plan ; ? (1 to 2 (3 candidate i corridors) corridors) ; I .. NO 'pt';••• Mn/Ul7r Y ° ` Busway F Study• •( a rdf�od:':00 > 8 moS 6-10:mos 16 mos•2 yrs :3'yrs L� iv -� - Ft 77 �; • ■S 7 �. �• E Ar P r t C-4 _ r 4.*46A cf� �V lotyr 4 y,.i +� ■ kr..r i w..■ r low z •k` - ,"' ,�• gat' P �, i--,EWFU irrt, rr: ■� Sri d Ore y j°�t liar Gi .JP�i 1!!yR �!'.� �- - ' w �'� 1 Fd■ fu. rP � .- e f�M3 L ■i - ■ �?r p ! M�'�� �1 M rain i�Y �l,,sii�� '�9 ¢�`� h Sr 3 - �'• "E t - � �■.e'Ir � � Y ..rrr pry, ?.T! F .N�••�`� ' E Gf;p i �_e1r� rgry ter, y r � �` ■.Y� i�i ia. :�.,• S- �• •3""?•4 �'�4. : t � - niT p xp � 9 � ■ ��r+e 5 !� �e � E ,-yam" ` � ��`+5 Y f �� C �j�` a ir. � i•.ji.r s" Y r..`' C iv,. ��' 1�.. -Y '�..�, �_.`{,.:�¢ h c�' Y +:ri pi ;iD ! +fit V j I � i i�.�a 'f"+• � r }} �.rxr>:..wr....'Lm a,.:^.....-ra irx:sv.w■use..{ � 1 `" $t •t � 6_l�7 �! i'r.�, •^t.." r..i5 ""'-' i C E� i,.t�n„�. 4#IM €e r- a�,.r Rf` � °•+r �. li■� �i� _ �!1 -ia.4 ! j ; _ '� F ' - .� ,�:ere L � '�"-�� � � �A�" f. ■ A.x�a - C yi'rt •r+�.. h.ai� M■..ie � r 1 4—•. - r • .t ittA VP • �►" •�►' l 3 1&yq 6 n� i 4` •J, I►r I 4 �Jl C� C� �74 O O O CD � �CD �' O CD 0 �- �• O CD CD CD CD 0 CAD p CD O O O /D CD CD n CD �n CO a ~ ' CID n • CD lot 0 CD CDCD CD CD ,__, . CD n > CD CD > N Cf4 ,�, rn CD CD CD CD �• CD CD CD CD f ( cr CD rCD CD CD o O n CD CD 0 �- c CD C�• CD • Cam' • C1�? �- o � o o � c� CD - l� s 0 CD CD CD CD cn CD m O o � � 0 CDCD CD o y lot b C o � N CD CD O � can CD 13 C) t7 � 0m -nfn � _m n� O o z 0 c Q° =3 mt7 _n j `3 m o �' = CD CA Cry v m �' v r � CL - �2. Fn � � CD 0 =3 V) 0 C0 V1 m co m co � o 1 O N N O O W .A O N N O CD N CLn ' W �P H� C N N O O W W � N N O W •OA .A N N O O W cn / I CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 02/20/01 SECTION: Petitions and Requests -SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Community Development Donald R. Uram Valley View Corporate Center � Michael D. Franzen Requested Action • Move to accept the request of CSM Equities for an extension of the review period to September 30, 2001. Synopsis The developer is considering a plan revision for a smaller building. The attached site plan and building elevations show a one-story 75,000 square foot building similar to the building to the west. If the City Council finds the concept plan acceptable then the above motion should be passed to extend the comment period. The developer is required to appear before the Community Planning Board and City Council for public hearings on the new plan. Attachments 1. Letter from CSM Equities for extension of the review period. 2. Memo from Randy Newton, Traffic Engineer dated February 13, 2001 U I � \ 1 1 ` 1 1 1 � D � \ n \ a w 3� Z F I� i a 3 S i f S j 1 s i Y S S i S 'I I: I I F 4 i r MEMORANDUM TO: City Council FROM: Randy Newton, Traffic Engineer THROUGH: Chris Enger, City Manager Eugene A. Dietz,Director of Public Works Al Gray, City Engineer DATE: February 13, 2001 SUBJECT: Valley View Corporate Center-Topview Road Driveway Safety Impacts Introduction This memorandum is intended to review the safety of Topview Road and to determine the impacts of the proposed driveway from the Valley View Corporate Center to Topview Road. The following section provides a short summary of this memorandum and includes the staff recommendations regarding the access to the Valley View Corporate Center. The remainder of this memorandum provides all of the supporting background information. Summary and Recommendations This memorandum includes a lot of information regarding the safety impact to both Valley View Road and Topview Road of the proposed driveway from the Valley View Corporate Center. The information shows that there is a trade-off in safety between Valley View Road and Topview Road depending on the presence of the driveway, summarized by the following: The right out movement from the Valley View Corporate Center to Topview Road provides a significant positive operational and safety impact on Valley View Road in return for a minor negative impact on Topview Road. This is accomplished by providing vehicles with a significantly safer and more convenient access to eastbound Valley View Road than the existing full access driveway to the west of the property. y Valley View Corporate Center-Topview Road Driveway February 13,2001 Page 2 of 12 • The left in movement from Topview Road to the Valley View Corporate Center also provides a positive operational and safety impact to Valley View Road however there is a more even trade-off with the safety on Topview Road. The left in also provides a positive value to the Topview neighborhood by reducing the potential for U-turns in the neighborhood. Also, as described in a previous memorandum dated January Bch (attached) the driveway to Topview Road eliminates the potential for an additional signal installation on Valley View Road by addressing the operational concerns at the full access driveway to the west of the property. In summary the overall benefits of providing a full access driveway outweigh the minor safety impacts to Topview Road and as a result it is recommended that a full access driveway from the Valley View Corporate Center to Topview Road be provided. A complete list of the recommendations identified in this report follows: 1) Approve full access from Valley View Corporate Center to Topview Road 2) Monitor the safety of the driveway and if a safety problem persists prohibit left turn movements as necessary. 3) Provide additional southbound lane between the proposed driveway and the Valley View Road /Topview Road/Plaza Drive intersection. (see attached figure) 4) Increase the turning radii and widen the receiving lane on Topview Road at the Valley View Road/Topview Road/Plaza drive intersection to accommodate a full size school bus without encroachment into the opposite lanes of traffic. (see attached figure) 5) Add Topview Road to the Priority A schedule for plowing and sanding. 6) Monitor the pedestrian demand on Topview Road and consider the sidewalk for possible reprioritization of snow removal. 7) Clear trees from a small portion of the southeast corner of the Topview Road/ Roberts Drive intersection to improve the sight distance to/from the south. CAWINDOWSUENO WCC-Safety.doc Valley View Corporate Center-Topview Road Driveway February 13,2001 Page 3 of 12 Background Information At the January 16th, 2001 City Council meeting, city staff was directed to review the safety of Topview Road and to determine the impacts the proposed driveway from the Valley View Corporate Center site will have on the safety of Topview Road. In evaluating the safety impacts of the proposed driveway to Topview Road it also important to consider the impacts the driveway will have on the safety of Valley View Road. Other points that need to be considered are the viable access it provides the property and how it helps maintain the integrity of Valley View Road. In an internal staff memorandum, dated January 8th, 2001 (attached), the benefits of these two points are documented. They are also summarized below: • A driveway from the Valley View Corporate Center site to Topview Road provides vehicles with a significantly safer and more convenient access to eastbound Valley View Road than the existing full access driveway to the west of the property. • By providing access to the existing traffic signal at Topview Road the driveway addresses the operational concerns at the full access driveway to the west of the property and eliminates the potential for an additional signal installation on Valley View Road. The purpose of this memorandum is to document the safety aspects of the proposed driveway. The key aspects of the review include: • Valley View Road Safety Impacts • Existing Safety Issues on Topview Road • Topview Road Safety Impacts • Additional Considerations • Conclusions Each aspect is described in detail in the following sections. Valley View Road Safety Impacts In order to effectively evaluate the safety impacts of the proposed driveway from the Valley View Corporate Center to Topview Road it is important to review its impact on both Topview Road and Valley View Road. This is important in the case of the Valley View Corporate Center because the lack of access to Topview Road would require vehicles to access Valley View Road directly. This is a safety concern for the following reasons: C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\WCC-Safety.doc Valley View Corporate Center-Topview Road Driveway February 13,2001 Page 4 of 12 • Valley View Road is a higher speed facility. (45 mph speed limit compared to 30 mph speed limit). This means that accidents that occur on Valley View Road are likely to have a higher severity (i.e. personal injury accident versus property damage accident)than accidents that occur on Topview Road. • Valley View Road carries higher volumes (5 times) than Topview Road. This results in a higher exposure (higher potential for conflict) for vehicles accessing Valley View Road than accessing Topview Road. These concerns are valid for all movements to and from Valley View Road. However, the movements with the highest number of conflict points (left out and left in) are of a greater concern from a safety standpoint than the movements with the least number of conflict points (right in and right out). An additional concern with the left out movement is that the high traffic existing volumes on Valley View Road make it difficult to make a left turn onto Valley View during the peak travel periods from an unsignalized intersection(i.e. the full access driveway). With the expected continued increase in traffic volumes on Valley View Road this will only become more difficult and will result in longer delays. This will also increase the potential for vehicular accidents because the high delays are expected to increase driver impatience,which will result in drivers selecting smaller gaps in the vehicle stream. Existing Safety Concerns on Topview Road The Valley View Corporate Center project has fueled a lot of concern about the safety of Topview Road and the impact of the proposed driveway to Topview Road. Prior to analyzing the impacts of the proposed driveway it is necessary to detail the existing conditions and safety of Topview Road. • Accident History - The past 4 %Z years of accident data (January 1996 to June 2000) for Topview Road was reviewed and the following crash totals were calculated: - 1 accident at the Roberts Drive/Topview Road Intersection - 0 accidents on Topview between Roberts Drive and Valley View Road - 20 accidents at the Valley View Road / Topview Road / Plaza Drive intersection. This constitutes a crash rate of 0.6 crashes /million entering vehicles which is below average for this type of intersection. A further review of the data determined that of all the accidents at the Valley View Road / Topview Road / Plaza Drive intersection none of the accidents were a result of vehicles skidding or sliding down the hill on Topview Road. While it is important to understand that accident history is not the sole indicator C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\WCC-Safety.doc Valley View Corporate Center-Topview Road Driveway February 13,2001 Page 5 of 12 of a safety problem, the accident records are strong factual evidence that suggest there is not a safety problem on Topview Road. • Roadway Grade - The existing grade on Topview Road is 8.75%. This is slightly higher than the standard maximum grade used on City streets of 8% and is a result of the significant grade difference between Roberts Drive and Valley View Road that must be accommodated in a short distance. On a day to day basis, when the pavement is dry, there is no particular problem with a roadway grade in this range. However, on the periodic days when snowy or icy conditions prevail, steeper grade roads make it difficult to stop on the downhill grade and difficult to traverse the uphill grade. The lack of accidents on Topview Road indicates that drivers are aware of the problems associated with the steeper grades and adjust there driving accordingly. At this time Topview Road is not on the Priority A schedule for plowing and sanding, however due to steep grade and to the importance of the road to the road system(Minor Collector) it will be added to the Priority A Schedule. • Sidewalk Location - Contrary to statements made at the public hearing for the Valley View Corporate Center a sidewalk does exist on the east side of Topview Road. The confusion regarding its existence may be a result of its low priority standing for snow removal and the fact that it is currently covered by snow. To this time, city staff has not received demand for additional service for this particular sidewalk. However, due to the concerns expressed about Topview Road city staff will monitor the pedestrian demand and consider this sidewalk for possible reprioritization. • Roadway Geometry- The main geometrical features of Topview Road besides the previously discussed roadway grade are its 28 foot width and the sharp curve that is just south of Roberts Drive. These features were reviewed to determine their adequacy for the traffic conditions of Topview Road. The following is the key findings of the review: - A full size bus is not capable of the navigating the curve on the north end of Topview Road or entering Topview Road at the Valley View Road / Topview Road / Plaza Drive intersection without encroaching on the opposite lane of traffic. C.\WINDOWS\TEMP\WCC-Safety.doc Valley View Corporate Center-Topview Road Driveway February 13,2001 Page 6 of 12 - Smaller vehicles such as a single unit (UPS) trucks and passenger cars can navigate the curve on the north end of Topview and enter Topview Road at the Valley View Road / Topview Road / Plaza Drive intersection without encroaching on the opposite lane of traffic. - No full size Southwest Metro Transit buses use Topview Road. - Approximately 8 (4 northbound and 4 nouhbound) different buses serving the Eden Prairie school district use Topview Road on a daily basis. - 5 comparable roadways in Eden Prairie with the same functional classification (minor collector) and similar traffic volumes have pavement widths of 32 feet. These finding indicate that although the curve on Topview Road can accommodate a bus or similar sized vehicle, these vehicles may come into conflict with opposing traffic while traversing the curve. While this is not an ideal situation, the number of vehicles using Topview Road that create this conflict is minimal. Also the low volumes and low speed on Topview Road enable this conflict to be managed by drivers with minimal delay and confusion. However, the problem at the intersection is more serious because, due to the traffic signal, vehicle queues on Topview Road are expected and conflicts are more likely. Also, a vehicle unable to complete a turn onto Topview Road may block or impede traffic on Valley View Road. This indicates that the receiving lane / curb radii on Topview Road should be widened to accommodate a bus without encroachment into other lanes. The fact that comparable roadways to Topview Road typically have roadway widths of 32 feet indicates that 32 feet may be a more appropriate width for the roadway than the existing 28 feet. The additional width would reduce the potential for conflict with larger vehicles and would also increase the margin or error for skidding or sliding vehicles. However it is important to note that the existing width effectively accommodates the current traffic conditions on Topview Road and widening the road would require funds that could be better spent in other areas. As a result it is recommended that when Topview Road is eventually rebuilt it be considered for a 32 foot pavement width. Topview Road Safety Impacts Adding an access point to any roadway will increase the number of conflict points on that roadway and will result in an increased potential for vehicular accidents. The proposed driveway from the Valley View Corporate Center to Topview Road is no different in this regard as it adds the following 4 movements to Topview Road: • Right In- Souhbound Topview Road entering driveway CAWINDOWS\TEMP\WCC-Safety.doc Valley View Corporate Center-Topview Road Driveway February 13,2001 Page 7 of 12 • Right Out- Existing driveway to southbound Topview Road • Left In- Northbound Topview Road entering driveway • Left Out- Existing driveway to northbound Topview Road The purpose of this section is to document how these additional movements effect the safety of Topview Road. A summary of the impacts in reference to various conditions on Topview Road is as follows: • Sight Distance - The available sight distance to and from a driveway is a key aspect in the safety of the driveway. In order to determine the adequacy of the available sight distance for the proposed driveway from the Valley View Corporate Center to Topview Road the sight distance criteria and field conditions were reviewed and the following was determined: - The Stopping Sight Distance (SSD), which can be considered the minimum intersection sight distance, for 30 mph is 200 feet on a flat grade. - The SSD for 30 mph is increased to 230 feet for a steep downgrade. - The SSD for 20 mph is 125 feet for all grades. - The available sight distance from the proposed driveway to / from the north is to a point just south of the Topview Road / Roberts Drive intersection(approximately 220 feet). - The available sight distance from the proposed driveway to / from the south is beyond the Valley View Road intersection (approximately 150 feet)but for the basis of this review is considered to be 150 feet. This information indicates that for 30 mph conditions, which is the speed limit on Topview Road, the approximate SSD is provided to the north but not to south. While the minimal sight distance to the south is of concern, it is important to note that the stop control at the Topview Road / Roberts Drive intersection and the traffic signal at the Valley View Road / Topview Road / Plaza Drive intersection require vehicles to enter Topview Road at a stopped or near stop condition. This diminishes the speed vehicles will be traveling when they first see the proposed driveway and as a result a 20 mph SSD may be a more realistic distance to use. Using the 20 mph SSD of 125 feet adequate sight distance is provided to the south for the proposed driveway. Also, it is important to note that a field review of Topview Road indicated that the removal of a small portion of the trees in the southeast corner of the Topview Road / Roberts Drive would improve the sight distance from the driveway to / from the north. While not necessary, the removal of the trees is recommended because the improved sight distance will give drivers an improved view of Topview Road and an increased time to react to unusual conditions. CAWINDOWSUENO WCC-Safety.doc l� Valley View Corporate Center-Topview Road Driveway February 13,2001 Page 8 of 12 • Volume- The Valley View Corporate Center is anticipated to generate 1500 daily vehicle trips. It is expected that half of these trips would access the site via Topview Road and the proposed driveway. This would add 750 daily trips to Topview Road,which constitutes approximately a 20% increase to the existing traffic. The increase in traffic is not anticipated to create any operational (capacity) deficiencies as both the Topview Road/proposed driveway and the Valley View Road /Topview Road/Plaza Drive intersections are expected to operate with minimal vehicle delay. It is also important to note that the site generated traffic will have an opposite peak directional flow than the existing Topview Road traffic. For example existing traffic is predominately south in the AM and north in the PM compared to the site traffic which is north in the AM and south in the PM. • Roadway Grade - All movements at the proposed driveway have the potential to make southbound vehicles on Topview Road slow or stop. The high roadway grade on Topview Road may make this difficult in snowy or icy conditions. This is most likely to occur with the left in and left out movements because the slippery road conditions will cause these movements to take longer to complete. While this is an item of concern the available sight distance combined with the relatively low volume of vehicles on Topview and the slower speeds required of these conditions suggest that all movements from the driveway can be completed safely in snowy or icy conditions. • Vehicle Queues - Although it is not anticipated to be a problem when the Valley View Corporate Center first opens, it is expected that as volume grow that vehicle queues on the north approach of the Valley View Road / Topview Road / Plaza Drive intersection will exceed the distance to the proposed driveway. This is a potential future problem with the right out movement as vehicles will have to enter a standing queue. It is also a problem with the left in and left out movement as vehicles will have to cross a standing queue and may be blocked from making the desired movement. This is an undesirable situation from both a traffic operations and safety standpoint. • Roadway Geometry - As stated previously the roadway width of Topview Road is slightly less than typical for similar roadways. As a result larger vehicles are required to encroach on the opposite lane of traffic, at both the curve on the north side of Topview and at the Valley View Road intersection, in order to traverse Topview Road. The proposed driveway from the Valley View Corporate Center accentuates the problem at the Valley View Road intersection because it adds to the volumes on the north approach of the intersection and as a result will make conflicts more likely. For this reason it is recommended that CAWINDOWSUENOMCC-Safety.doc f� Valley View Corporate Center-Topview Road Driveway February 13, 2001 Page 9 of 12 the receiving lane / curb radii on Topview Road be widened to accommodate a bus without encroachment into southbound lane. The proposed driveway from the Valley View Corporate Center does not accentuate the problem around the curve on the north side of Topview for the following reasons: - In the peak travel periods, the site generate traffic will be primarily passenger vehicle and will not add to the number of larger vehicles using Topview Road. - The majority of the traffic using the proposed driveway will access it from Valley View Road and as a result will not add to volume of traffic using the curve on the north side of Topview. Additional Considerations The following are some additional points that require consideration: • Access Alternatives - As stated previously the addition of any access point to any road has the potential to negatively impact the safety of the road. One way to decrease the safety impact of an access point is to minimize the type of access (i.e. right in/right out access has fewer impacts than a full access). This is true for the driveway from the Valley View Corporate Center to Topview Road. In this case, there are four potential access scenario for the driveway listed as follows, in order of the greatest safety impact to Topview Road to the least safety impact: - Full Access - Right In/Right Out Access - Right Out Access - No Access Another option is to provide a full access driveway and to monitor its safety. If over time there proves to be a safety problem signs can then be installed to restrict some of the movements. What this shows is that there are alternatives for dealing with the access to Topview Road. However, as discussed in detail throughout this memorandum and in the January 8th memorandum there are additional positive impacts to both Valley View Road and to site access that need to be considered for each level of access provided. • Access Management- Access Management is a planning and design strategy to control access and to ensure that the roadway network operates efficiently and safely. One of the typical applications of access management is to minimize or C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\WCC-Safety.doc Valley View Corporate Center-Topview Road Driveway February 13,2001 Page 10 of 12 remove access on the major street in favor of placing the access on the side street. This is done even if it means relaxing design standards on the side street in favor of protecting the design standards and criteria on the major street (higher volume and higher speed). • Valley View Road Right Turn Lane - The traffic study for this project did recommend a right turn lane on the east approach of the Valley View Road / Topview Road / Plaza Drive intersection for future consideration. The primary benefit of the right turn lane is that by separating the turning vehicles from the through vehicles on Valley View Road it will improve the safety of the intersection. Also the right turn lane will improve intersection operations, although it is not required for the intersection to operate at an acceptable level. Because the right turn lane will provide operational and safety benefits to the intersection it is a project the city may consider at a future date. However, the right turn lane does not effect the impact of the proposed driveway to Topview Road and as a result is not recommended at this time. Conclusions The preceding sections include a lot of information regarding the safety impact to both Valley View Road and Topview Road of the proposed driveway from the Valley View Corporate Center. In essence this document shows that there is a trade-off in safety between Valley View Road and Topview Road depending on the presence of this driveway. Also as documented in the January 8th memorandum there are significant operational impacts on Valley View that must be considered as well in evaluating the overall impact of the driveway. The following is summary of the positives and negatives of providing each of the movements to and from Topview Road: • Right Out - Significant positive operational impact to Valley View Road. (Removes potential for additional signal and addresses operational problems at full access driveway to the west.) - Significant positive safety impact to Valley View Road. (Eliminates need to make unprotected left turn onto Valley View Road.) - Minor negative safety impact to Topview Road. (Potential conflict with southbound vehicles on Topview Road and with entering standing queue.) CAWINDOW S\TEMP\V VCC-Safety.doc 13 Valley View Corporate Center-Topview Road Driveway February 13,2001 Page 11 of 12 • Right In - Significant positive operational and safety impact to Valley View Road. (Eliminates vehicles from Valley View Road.) - Minor negative safety impact to Topview Road. (Potential conflict with southbound vehicles on Topview Road.) - Due to the small projected volumes the overall impact of this movement is minimal. • Left In - Moderate positive safety impact to Valley View Road (Provides eastbound vehicles with protected left turn movement across Valley View Road and decreases potential for U-turns on Valley View Road.) - Moderate negative safety impact to Topview Road. (Potential conflicts with northbound and southbound vehicles on Topview that are increased in snowy or icy conditions, may have to cross standing queue, and short site distance to the south.) - Minor positive operational impact to Valley View Road. (Provides more equitable split of left turning vehicles on Valley View Road between full access driveway to west and Valley View Road/Topview intersection.) - Improves site access for eastbound vehicles on Valley View Road. - Reduces potential for vehicles making U-turns in Topview neighborhood. • Left Out - Significant positive operational and safety impact to Valley View Road. (Eliminates vehicles from Valley View Road.) - Moderate negative safety impact to Topview Road. (Potential conflicts with northbound and southbound vehicles on Topview that are increased in snowy or icy conditions, may have to cross standing queue, and short site distance to the south.) - Due to the small projected volumes the overall impact of this movement is minimal. This summary shows that the overall benefits of providing a full access driveway outweigh the minor safety impacts to Topview Road and as a result it is recommended that a full access driveway from the Valley View Corporate Center to Topview Road be provided. A complete list of the recommendations is as follows: 1) Approve full access from Valley View Corporate Center to Topview Road 2) Monitor the safety of the driveway and if a safety problem persists prohibit left turn movements as necessary. CAWiNDOWS\TEMP\WCC-Safety.doc 1y Valley View Corporate Center-Topview Road Driveway February 13,2001 Page 12 of 12 3) Provide additional southbound lane between the proposed driveway and the Valley View Road /Topview Road/Plaza Drive intersection. (see attached figure) 4) Increase the turning radii and widen the receiving lane on Topview Road at the Valley View Road/Topview Road/Plaza drive intersection to accommodate a full size school bus without encroachment into the opposite lanes of traffic. (see attached figure) 5) Add Topview Road_to the Priority A schedule for plowing and sanding. 6) Monitor,the pedestrian demand on Topview Road and consider the sidewalk for possible reprioritization of snow removal. 7) Clear trees from a small portion of the southeast corner of the Topview Road/ Roberts Drive intersection to improve the sight distance to/from the south. Attachments Valley View Corporate Center-Topview Road Driveway Memorandum, Dated 1/8/01 C:\WINDOWS\TEMP\WCC-Safety.doc �5 S - . tt 1 Il ►" II I . it s II 16 15:39 PATI 6516037675 CSM CORP R1002 f CSM Corporation 2575 University Ave.W.,a#150•St_Paul,MN 55114-1024 • (651)646-1717 - Fax(651)646-2404 February 15, 2001 Mr. Mike Franzen Planning Director City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie,MN 55344 Re: Valley View Business Center Dear Mike: CSM Equities, L.L_C. requests an extension of the comment period for the above referenced project to September 30, 2001. Sincerely, David Carland Vice President CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: February 20,2001 SECTION: APPOINTMENTS SERVICE AREA: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: MANAGEMENT APPOINTMENTS TO BOARDS & .. SERVICES COMMISSIONS Requested Action Move to: Appoint to the Community Planning Board Fred Seymour—Term to expire 3/31/2004 and Paul Sodt(pending his resignation from the Parks and Recreation Citizen Advisory Commission effective 3/31/2001)—Term to expire 3/31/2004 Move to: Appoint to the Board of Appeals &Adjustments Ismail Ismail and Greg Olson—Terms to expire 3/31/2004 Move to: Appoint to the Heritage Preservation Commission Betsy Adams—Term to expire 3/31/2004 Move to: Appoint to the Community Program Board Harry Moran(Human Rights and Diversity Citizen Advisory Commission Chair) and Kim Teaver(Parks and Recreation Citizen Advisory Commission Chair)—Terms to expire 3/31/2002 Therese Benkowski and Jeffrey Gerst—Terms to expire 3/31/2004 Move to: Appoint to the Human Rights and Diversity Citizen Advisory Commission Balu Iyer and Jodi Malmquist—Terms to expire 3/31/2002 Holly Clynch and Harry Moran—Terms to expire 3/31/2004 Move to: Appoint to the Parks &Recreation Citizen Advisory Commission John Murray—Term to expire 3/31/2002 Rob Barrett and Philip Wright—Terms to expire 3/31/2003 David Larson and Trish Swanson—Terms to expire 3/31/2004 Move to: Appoint to the Flying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission Gary Demee and Jeff Larsen(Residents-at-Large)—Terms to expire 3/31/2004 and Mitch Anderson-Flying Cloud Airport businesses representative (pending Council approval of amendment to City Code Section 2.27 relating to membership and appointment to the Flying Cloud Airport Advisory Commission) —Term to expire 3/31/2004 Synopsis Community Planning Board Randy Foote has served two three (3)-year terms on the Planning Commission and one one (1)-year term on the Community Planning Board. Appointment requires unanimous approval of the full Council when a candidate has served two full terms. It will be possible to take action on this at the March 6, 2001 Council meeting if all Councilmembers are present. Background The City Council held Board and Commission interviews on Tuesday, February 13, 2001. Thirty-three (33) candidates applied for consideration; eleven of which are seeking reappointment. Twenty-one (21) candidates have been designated for appointment on February 20, 2001. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: February 20, 2001 SECTION: Reports of Director Parks and Recreation Services SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Authorize Mayor and ITEM NO: Parks and Recreation City Manager to Enter Into a Contract for Robert A. Lambert Director Consultant to the Purgatory Creek Recreation Area �. Task Force Requested Action h Move to: Authorize the Mayor and City Manager to enter into a contract for planning and designing services for the Purgatory Creek Recreation Area as per the proposal submitted by SRF Consulting Group Incorporated. Synopsis The Purgatory Creek Recreation Area Task Force unanimously voted to recommend the City Council authorize the Mayor and City Manager to enter into a contract with SRF Consulting Group Incorporated after interviewing SRF and URS — BRW Incorporated. SRF provided a proposal to complete concept design as per the Request for Proposal for an amount not to exceed $40,410. Any work directed beyond concept design would require an addendum to this contract or a new contract. Funding for this work will come from the Tax Increment Finance funds allocated for the Purgatory Creek Recreation Area Project. BL:mdd