HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 04/09/2002 AGENDA
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP/FORUM
TUESDAY,APRIL 9,2002 CITY CENTER
5:00- 6:25 PM,HERITAGE ROOM II
6:30—7:00 PM, COUNCIL CHAMBER
CITY COUNCIL:
Mayor Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Councilmembers Sherry Butcher,Ron Case,David Luse and
Jan Mosman
CITY STAFF:
City Manager Carl Jullie,Public Safety Director Jim Clark,Public Works Services Director
Eugene Dietz, Director of Parks and Recreation Services Bob Lambert, Community Development
and Financial Services Director Don Uram, City Attorney Ric Rosow, and Recorder Lorene
McWaters
Heritage Room II
I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER
II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
IV. SERVICE AREA DIRECTOR ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND GOALS
V. COUNCILMEMBER DISCUSSION OF 2002 GOALS
VI. OTHER TOPICS
Council Chamber
VII. OPEN FORUM (Scheduled participants, 6:30-6:50 p.m.)
VIII. OPEN PODIUM(Unscheduled participants, 6:50-7:00 p.m.)
IX. ADJOURNMENT
PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES
2001 ACCOMPLISHMENTS 1 lb( kpott
POLICE
• Support Division: Constructed new radio tower at Public Works Facility
with seamless transfer from old tower. Upgraded to microwave link to •
dispatch center.
• Support Division: Partner with City Information Technology Division to
acquire and install Digital Fingerprint System, Digital Booking Photo ,
. Upgrade, and Automated PawnShop System.
• Support Division: Completed interface with MNJO (provides electronic •
transfer of data to member agencies)
• Support Division: Agreement to participate in JNET (provides electronic
transfer of juvenile data to member agencies and Hennepin County). •
• Investigative Division: Convicted murder suspect, Pyotr Shmelev, for the •
murder of his wife.
• Investigative Division: Began planning for future computer forensic
needs.
• Investigative Division/ Community Oriented Policing: Continued
successful prevention programs— Citizens Academy, Safety Camp,
National Night Out, &Neighborhood Watch.
• Investigative Division/ Community Oriented Policing: Moved Licensing
Clerk from Community Development to Community Oriented Policing in
effort to link licensing with education and enforcement. •
• Investigative Division/ Community Oriented Policing: Implemented
"positive reward" program for liquor and alcohol compliance. Continued
educational effort with a major seminar for liquor licensees. •
• Investigative Division/ Community Oriented Policing: Officer assigned
to E. P. Center and Major Center area.
• Investigative Division/Training: Joint Powers Agreement signed with
Edina, Bloomington and MAC to build Public Safety Training Center for
firearms, defensive tactics, firefighting, and related training.
• Investigative Division I Training: Met or exceeded all mandated training>
for police officers. Prepared to train officers in PIT (pursuit
intervention). First group of officers trained in February of 2002.
Fire Department
• Replaced all self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) with OSHA
compliant equipment that includes personal alert devices that sound
r/ alarm when firefighter is not moving or trapped.
• Completed specifications and bid process for new ladder truck replacing
20 +year old apparatus.
• Conducted tests on all ladders, hose, and pumps, complying with (and
exceeding) OSHA and NFPA regulations.
• Recruited (and appointed) five new firefighters to replace retiring
firefighters. Department is currently at 70 members, 5 below our
authorized number. Recruiting effort is now underway for 2002 class.
• Fire Prevention efforts reached every school in Eden Prairie, teaching
children about fire safety. Continue to be involved in Safety Camp and
various block parties and other prevention opportunities.
• Continue to maintain high standards for training where we meet or
exceed mandates. Evidence of the level of training is a very low injury
rate for firefighters and the public while responding to over 1400 calls
per year.
Inspections
• Implemented the new CITRIX inspection program from Logis.
• Issued a record number of permits in 2001 (8098).
• Collected record revenue from permit fees in 2001.
• Issued Certificate of Occupancies for ADC and the remodeling of the
Eden Prairie Center. These two projects are the two largest projects in
Eden Prairie history and were under construction simultaneously. .
• Investigative Division I Training: Participated in several recruiting
opportunities at State Colleges and LEO conference. Partnered with
Management Services to coordinate hiring process (ongoing throughout
the year).
• Patrol Division: Reorganize to add additional "traffic officer" in 2002.
Two officers are now (2002) assigned to traffic related issues. Moved
school bus stop arm violations to this unit for follow-up.
• Patrol Division: Sgt. Tracy Luke graduated from F.B.I. National
Academy.
Public Safety Support
• Managed Terrorism Incident Response plan.
• Implement bio-terrorism response procedures.
• Hired replacement for Community Relations Coordinator and expanded •
duties.
• Contracted for volunteer coordinator (response to Presidents call for
volunteer service and our hope to maximize the use of volunteers in our
area).
• Coordinated (with the Fire Department) a recruiting task force made up
of business and community leaders. The primary mission of the task
force was to examine new ways to work with the business community
and recruit more daytime firefighters.
• Realized a small decrease in the false alarm number reported to the police
department. This is the first drop in the number of false alarms in the last
3 years. Began work with the School District in an effort to reduce the
number of alarms at school facilities.
• Secured contract with Qwest to construct cell tower with attached
outdoor warning siren in Hidden Ponds Park. Qwest will assume all
costs associated with the project including the cost of a new siren. The
siren in the immediate area (Duck Lake Trail @ Dell Road) will be
relocated to another area of the city.
AGENDA
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY,APRIL 9, 2002 7:00 PM, CITY CENTER
Council Chamber
8080 Mitchell Road
CITY COUNCIL: Mayor Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Councilmembers Sherry Butcher,Ron Case,
David Luse and Jan Mosman
CITY STAFF: City Manager Carl Jullie,Parks&Recreation Services Director Bob Lambert,
Public Works Services Director Eugene Dietz, Community Development and Financial Services
Director Don Uram, City Planner Michael Franzen, City Attorney Ric Rosow and Council Recorder
Jan Nelson Curielli
I. ROLL CALL/CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
III. COUNCIL FORUM INVITATION
IV. PROCLAMATION OF CHILD ABUSE PREVENTION MONTH
V. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS
VI. MINUTES
A. SPECIAL MEETING HELD MARCH 18,2002
B. COUNCIL WORKSHOP HELD MARCH 19, 2002
C. CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD MARCH 19,2002
VII. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. CLERK'S LICENSE LIST
B. BRYANT LAKE BUSINESS CENTER THIRD ADDITION by Glenborough
Realty Trust,Inc. Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 2.37 acres,
Planned Unit Development District Review on 0.6 acres,Zoning District Change
from Regional Commercial to Office on 0.6 acres, Site Plan Review on 0.6 acres,
and Preliminary Plat of 2.37 acres into one lot. Location: 7555 Market Place
Drive. (Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Change,
Resolution for Site Plan Review.)
C. UNITEDHEALTH GROUP PUD by UnitedHealth Group. Guide Plan Change
from Office to High Density Residential on 19 acres, Office to Regional
Commercial on 4.2 acres, Office to Neighborhood Commercial on 4.5 acres,
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
April 9,2002
Page 2
Medium Density Residential to Quasi-Public on 10 acres, and from Medium
Density Residential to Office on 5 acres,Planned Unit Development Concept
Review on 72 acres, and Alternative Urban Area wide Review(AUAR)on 72
acres. Location: South of Highway 62,east of Shady Oak Road,north of City
West Parkway. (Resolution adopting the Alternative Urban Areawide Review
(AUAR))
D. APPROVE JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
EDEN PRAIRIE AND THE BUREAU OF CRIMINAL APPREHENSION-
PREDATORY OFFENDER REGISTRATION SYSTEM
E. ADOPT RESOLUTION DESIGNATING PERSONS AUTHORIZED TO
PUBLICLY OPEN BIDS FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS
F. AWARD CONTRACT FOR PARK BASEBALL BUILDING
G. AWARD CONTRACT FOR PARK BUILDING AT CRESTWOOD PARK
H. AWARD CONTRACT FOR 2002 STREET STRIPING,I.C. 02-5560
I. AWARD CONTRACT FOR 2002 STREET CRACKSEALING,I.C. 02-5561
J. ADOPT RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS
FOR BRYANT LAKE DRIVE TRAIL,I.C. 00-5514
K. ADOPT RESOLUTION APPROVING TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAL
AGREEMENT WITH MNDOT FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLE PRE-
EMPTION ON EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNALS,I.C. 01-5541
L. ADOPT RESOLUTION APPROVING TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAL
AGREEMENT WITH MNDOT FOR A SIGNAL AT THE I-494 NORTH
RAMP AND PRAIRIE CENTER DRIVE INTERSECTION,I.C.I.C. 01-5550
M. APPROVE DRAINAGE EASEMENT TO MNDOT FOR I-494 THIRD LANE
IMPROVEMENTS,I.C. 02-5553
N. APPROVE AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE OF WISCONSIN-RADIO
FREQUENCY SHORT SPACING
VM. PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS
A. MARVIN HEIGHTS by Peter Anderson and Virginia Marvin. Planned Unit
Development Concept Amendment on 3.11 acres,Planned Unit Development
District Review with waivers on 3.11 acres,Zoning District Change from RM-6.5
to R1-13.5 on 3.11 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 3.11 acres into 1 lot. Location:
West of Preserve Boulevard and South of Anderson Lakes Parkway. (Resolution
for PUD Concept Amendment,Resolution for Preliminary Plat.)
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
April 9,2002
Page 3
IX. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS
X. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS
A. FIRST READING OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CITY CODE
SECTION 4.40 SUBDIVISION 2,RELATING TO ON-SALE WINE
LICENSES
XL PETITIONS,REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
A. REVIEW OF BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS DECISION ON
VARIANCE 2002-02,BERGELAND,7012 WILLOW CREEK ROAD
XII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS & COMMISSIONS
XIII. APPOINTMENTS
XIV. REPORTS OF OFFICERS
A. REPORTS OF COUNCILMEMBERS
1. City Manager Contract
B. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER
C. REPORT OF PARKS AND RECREATION SERVICES DIRECTOR
D. REPORT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND FINANCIAL
SERVICES DIRECTOR
1. Singletree Lane Land Sale
E. REPORT OF PUBLIC WORKS SERVICES DIRECTOR
1. Renewal of Midwest Asphalt's Land Alteration Permit and Addendum
A,Covering Operating Conditions
F. REPORT OF PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES DIRECTOR
G. REPORT OF MANAGEMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR
H. REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY
XV. OTHER BUSINESS
XVI. ADJOURNMENT
! V ,
PROCLAMATION
National Child Abuse Prevention Month
April 2002
WHEREAS, the month of April is declared National Child Abuse Prevention Month;
and
WHEREAS, each year there are more than 800,000 confirmed incidents of maltreatment
of children in our country; and
WHEREAS, each year there are approximately 25,000 calls to Child Protective Services
in Hennepin County;and
WHEREAS, children between the ages of zero and ten represent the greatest number of
victims of child maltreatment;and
WHEREAS,prevention is the best method for protecting our precious children, as well
as increased awareness about child abuse and the resources available to families.
NOW,THEREFORE I,Nancy Tyra-Lukens,Mayor of the City of Eden Prairie,do
hereby proclaim April 2002 as
Child Abuse Prevention Month in the City of Eden Prairie
And urge all individuals in Eden Prairie to become aware of the dynamics of child abuse,
the effects on families and our community, and when appropriate,seek help from
Cornerstone, a local agency that serves children who have been victimized by domestic
violence. I further encourage residents to support Cornerstone's programming, and to
become involved in the efforts to end abuse.
Dated this 9th day of April,2002.
Nancy Tyra-Lukens,Mayor
City of Eden Prairie
L.11 �L`J
G1 A-.
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING
CITY MANAGER CANDIDATE INTERVIEWS
MONDAY,MARCH 18, 2002 6:30 PM, CITY CENTER
Council Chambers
8080 Mitchell Road
CITY COUNCIL: Mayor Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Councilmembers Sherry Butcher,Ron Case,
David Luse, and Jan Mosman
CITY STAFF: City Manager Carl Jullie, City Attorney Ric Rosow and Recorder Carol Pelzel
I. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER
Mayor Tyra-Lukens called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m.
II. OVERVIEW OF SEARCH RESULTS
Harry Brull,Personnel Decisions International,reviewed with the Council appropriate
questions to ask the three finalists. City Attorney Rosow reminded the Council that this
meeting was advertised as City Manager candidate interviews and that formal action on
this item should be taken at the March 19 Council meeting. The Council discussed the
negotiation process once an offer is made. Mayor Tyra-Lukens asked if the Council is
comfortable with she and Councilmember Mosman continuing through the negotiation
process.
III. INTERVIEWS
Council interviewed the three finalists for the City Manager position:
• Michael McGuire, former city manager of Maplewood, current consultant and
interim City Manager of Grand Rapids
• Steve Mielke, City Manager of Hopkins
• Scott Neal, City Administrator for Northfield
IV. WRAP-UP DISCUSSION
The Council discussed the process for determining the most qualified candidate.
Councilmember Luse said he would like to include the city department heads in this
process. Councilmember Case said he deeply respects the opinion of staff but feels that at
this point it is in the Council's hands.Following discussion,the Council agreed that
Mielke and Neal were the top two candidates. The Council agreed to consider the two
candidates over night and to make a formal motion at the Tuesday,March 19,meeting.
V. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 9:25 p.m.
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP/FORUM
TUESDAY,MARCH 19,2002 CITY CENTER
5:30- 6:25 PM,HERITAGE ROOM II
6:30—7:00 PM, COUNCIL CHAMBER
CITY COUNCIL:
Mayor Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Councilmembers Sherry Butchery Ron Case, David Luse, and Jan
Mosman
CITY STAFF:
City Manager Carl Jullie, Public Safety Director Jim Clark,Public Works Services Director
Eugene Dietz,Director of Parks and Recreation Services Bob Lambert, Community Development
and Financial Services Director Don Uram, and Recorder Lorene McWaters
Heritage Room II
I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER
Mayor Tyra-Lukens called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m.
II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
III. SERVICE AREA DIRECTOR OVERVIEW OF 2001 ACCOMPLISHMENTS
Community Development and Financial Services Director Don Uram reviewed
accomplishments for 2001 and goals for 2002 for the following areas:Assessing,
Community Development,Economic Development,Housing, Transportation and Social
Services,Historic Preservation,Finance, Information Technology, and Liquor
Operations. The goals and accomplishments were also covered in detail in a
Memorandum distributed to the Council, so Uram highlighted items of particular interest
to the Council:
• Eden Prairie's assessing tax base for Pay 2003 is expected to exceed$6 billion
• Staff will finalize the updated Guide Plan,with the assistance of the Council and legal
staff
• The City will attempt to secure funding from Hennepin County for the HOPE
program
• Work will go forward on renovation and conversion of the More House to a coffee
and bakery shop
• The City's bond rating was upgraded from Aa2 to Aa1 in 2001, and staff will
continue to work toward further upgrade of the rating
• The new City website will be in place by the end of the year
CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MINUTES
March 19,2002
Page 2
• Staff will continue to partner with local restaurants to hold wine tasting events and
will explore other means of increasing profits,particularly through sales of high
margin wines.
Uram noted that last year Mayor Harris' had explored the idea of a Sister City program
that would pair Eden Prairie up with a city in China. Uram asked if the Council wishes to
pursue the Sister City idea. Butcher wanted to know what would need to be done next.
Uram said the City would need to join the International Sister City Program. He noted
that for a Sister City Program to be successful, support of civic organizations,the school
district, and the business community would be critical.Mayor Tyra-Lukens asked about
the costs that would be associated with such a program. Uram said he would contact
cities of similar size with Sister City programs and report back to the Council.
Parks and Recreation Services Director Bob Lambert also referred to a memo to the
Council detailing goals and accomplishments. Highlights included:
• A Citizen Taskforce will be formed to address short-and long-term athletics needs in
the City.
• Development of the Purgatory Creek Recreation Area will continue with construction
of a trail around the marsh.
• Staff will work on securing a site for a neighborhood park to serve the Cedar Forest
area.
• Staff will consider requesting permission from MAC to expand the Flying Cloud
Ballfields to Spring Road.
• Development of Smetana Lake Park will be completed.
• An enclosed archery range will be built in Staring Lake Park. and work on regarding
of the sliding hill will begin.
Lambert also reported that he had been contacted by a citizen interested in building a 9-
golf course with an expanded teaching area to provide Eden Prairie youth and adults with
an affordable means of learning the game. Lambert will explore the proposal and report
back to the Council on any decisions. Lambert said the second phase of the skate park at
Round Lake is scheduled for construction in 2003. Staff is also looking at placing
smaller skate parks in some of the neighborhood parks throughout the City.
Councilmembers agreed that, since only ten minutes remained for discussion of this
topic,the workshop would be continued on April 9. The topic originally scheduled for
the April 9 workshop,the new City website,will be rescheduled.
IV. COUNCILMEMBER DISCUSSION OF 2002 GOALS
V. OTHER TOPICS
r
CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MINUTES
March 19,2002
Page 2
Council Chamber
VI. OPEN FORUM (Scheduled participants,6:30-6:50 p.m.)
A. LAURA BLUML—CONCERNS ABOUT MCES SEWER LINE
Laura Bluml, 10540 West Riverview Road,her husband Kevin,and several
neighbors appeared before the Council to present issues they have with MCES
property located near theirs. Bluml said an odor control biofilter that was
installed on a siphon headbox to control odors emanating from manholes has been
emitting increasingly foul odors over the past year. She said that she had even
summoned a police officer come to her residence to document the situation.
Bluml said that when the headbox was installed in 1987,residents were told that it
would not be visible from their houses,which is not the case. She said MCES
also submitted a relandscaping plan to the City for approval at the time the
structure was built,but that plan was never implemented. According to Bluml,
the site has become a"de facto"park over the past year or so. According to
Bluml,there is only one no trespassing sign posted on the property. Bluml said
she has called the County numerous times regarding these issues. In November,
she was told that the staff she had been contacting was no longer allowed to talk
to her and she was given a hotline number to call if she had complaints. She said
the County has not responded to her repeated complaints.
Public Works Services Director Gene Dietz said he had sent a letter to MCES on
March 11 regarding Bluml's complaints,but he had not yet received a reply.
Councilmember Case asked if MCES could be asked to appear before the Council
to address the concerns. Councilmember Luse said talking with the media about
issues can be helpful when dealing with non-elected intergovernmental agencies
that seem nonresponsive.
B. KEN BRIGGS AND SEVER PETERSON
Ken Briggs introduced himself as the renter of a home located on City parkland at
18700 Flying Cloud Drive. The home is slated for demolition to allow for further
development of the park. Briggs introduced long-time resident Sever Peterson.
Peterson said he is requesting permission to move the home,which was
constructed about 80 years ago and is in good condition,to his Eden Prairie
farmland property. Peterson said that he has held off on improvements to his land
for years because he was informed in 1978 by the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service
that they planned to acquire his land for use as a wildlife refuge. Peterson said he
is tired of waiting for action from the Wildlife Service,and would like to be able
to help Briggs out by moving the house onto his property. Councilmember Case
suggested addressing this request during the regular meeting, since there was little
time left to discuss the issue during the forum portion of the meeting. Council
agreed.
CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP MINUTES
March 19,2002
Page 2
VII. OPEN PODIUM(Unscheduled participants, 6:50-7:00 p.m.)
No one asked to speak during Open Podium.
VI. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Tyra-Lukens adjourned the Workshop/Forum at 6:59 p.m.
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL
TUESDAY,MARCH 19,2002 7:00 PM,CITY CENTER
Council Chamber
8080 Mitchell Road
CITY COUNCIL: Mayor Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Councilmembers Sherry Butcher, Ron Case,
David Luse, and Jan Mosman
CITY STAFF: City Manager Carl Jullie, Parks & Recreation Services Director Bob Lambert,
Public Works Services Director Eugene Dietz, Community Development and Financial Services
Director Don Uram, City Planner Michael Franzen, City Attorney Ric Rosow and Council Recorder
Jan Nelson Curielli
I. ROLL CALL/CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER
Mayor Tyra-Lukens called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.All members were present.
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
III. COUNCIL FORUM INVITATION
Mayor Tyra-Lukens said the Council Forum has been modified as follows. Council Forum
will be held the first and third Tuesday of the month from 6:30—7:00 p.m. in the Council
Chamber. Please note that this portion of the meeting is off-camera. The Council Forum
will consist of two parts: scheduled and unscheduled appearances. 6:30 to 6:50 p.m. is
reserved for scheduled participants. If you wish to schedule time to visit with the City
Council and Service Area Directors,please notify the City Manager's office(at 952-949-
8412)by noon of the meeting date with your request. The last 10 minutes of the Forum,
from 6:50 to 7:00 p.m. is set aside for impromptu,unscheduled appearances by individuals
or organizations who wish to speak the Council.
IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS
Under Item X. PETITIONS,REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS, Case added
PETERSON/BRIGGS REQUEST REGARDING MOVING THE ALTMANN
HOUSE and asked that it be placed as Item X.A.before the other two petitions.
MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher,to approve the Agenda as published and
amended.Motion carried 5-0.
V. MINUTES
A. CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD MARCH 7,2002
MOTION:Mosman moved,seconded by Butcher,to approve as published the
Minutes of the City Council Meeting held March 7,2002.Motion carried 5-0.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
March 19,2002
Page 2
VI. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. CLERK'S LICENSE LIST
B. BP AMOCO by BP Products North America,Inc. 2nd Reading for Planned Unit
Development District Review with waivers on 2.45 acres,Zoning District Change
from Neighborhood Commercial to Community Commercial on 1.4 acres,Zoning
District Amendment with the Community Commercial Zoning District on 1.05
acres, and Site Plan Review on 2.45 acres. Location: Southeast corner of Highway
212 and Anderson Lakes Parkway. (Ordinance No.5-2002-PUD-3-2002 for PUD
District Review,Zoning District Change and Zoning District Amendment, and
Resolution No.2002-54 for Site Plan Review)
C. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO.2002-55 APPROVING FINAL PLAT OF
ANDERSON LAKES COMMERCIAL CENTER 411H ADDITION
D. AWARD CONTRACT FOR 2002 STREET SWEEPING TO ASTECH
CORPORATION,I.C. 02-5558
E. APPROVE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH SEH,INC.
FOR DESIGN SERVICES FOR CRESTWOOD TERRACE
IMPROVEMENTS,I.C.98-5474
F. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO.2002-56 APPROVING PLANS AND
SPECIFICATIONS FOR CHARLSON AREA IMPROVEMENTS,PHASE I,
I.C.02-5563
G. APPROVE SERVICE AGREEMENT WITH HONEYWELL FOR
UPGRADE OF FILTER CONTROL SYSTEM AT THE WATER
TREATMENT PLANT
H. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2002-57 CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING
ON THE PROPOSED ISSUANCE OF REVENUE NOTES BY THE CITY
OF BLAINE
MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher,to approve Items A-H of the
Consent Calendar.Motion carried 5-0.
VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS
A. COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN UPDATE (Resolution No.2002-58)
Jullie said this item was continued from the February 5 City Council meeting.He
said official notice of this public hearing was published in the January 24,2002,
Eden Prairie News and was sent to 29 property owners.The Council is required to
hold a public hearing for adoption of the Guide Plan Update.The Resolution does
not include approval of the Aviation Chapter.The Aviation Chapter approval will
CITY COUNCIL.MINUTES
March 19,2002
Page 3
occur after the City and the Metropolitan Airports Commission finish negotiations
and finalize an agreement.He said the Community Planning Board finished its
review of the Guide Plan Update on November 13,2001.The Board did not
recommend any land use changes,but did recommend minor changes to proposed
policies.
Case asked if there are 1,700 acres of land left to develop in the City.Franzen said
37%of the 1700 acres is not developable,but that portion would probably be used
for density transfer.
Case said he thought the figures presented in the memorandum did not add up
correctly.Franzen said he would double-check the figures.
There were no comments from the audience.
MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Luse,to close the Public Hearing, except
continue the Public Hearing on the Aviation Chapter to May 21,2002; and to adopt
Resolution No. 2002-58 for Comprehensive Guide Plan Update.Motion carried 5-0.
B. PRAIRIE CENTER DRIVE MEDICAL BUILDING by Grootwassink Real
Estate Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 6.62 acres,Planned
Unit Development District Review with waivers on 6.62 acres,Zoning District
Amendment within the Office District on 3.7 acres,Zoning District Change from I-
2 and Rural to Office on 2.92 acres, Site Plan Review on 6.62 acres,Preliminary
Plat of 6.62 acres into two lots. Location: 800 Prairie Center Drive. (Resolution
NO.2002-59 for PUD Concept Amendment, Ordinance for PUD District
Review and Zoning District Change,and Resolution NO. 2002-60 for
Preliminary Plat)
Jullie said the project is for a new 28,400 square foot medical office building and a
14,800 square foot expansion to the existing Fairview Clinic located at 800 Prairie
Center Drive.He said proponent would present an overview of the proposal. He said
the Community Planning Board voted 7-0-1 (Stoelting abstained)to recommend
approval of the project to the City Council at the February 25,2002 meeting.
Todd Mohagen,Mohagen Architects, addressed the proposal.He said it would be a
two-story office building.They worked with staff on the drainage and the parking
slope problems.
There were no comments from the audience.
MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Case, to close the Public Hearing; to
adopt the Resolution No. 2002-59 for PUD Concept Amendment on 6.62 acres; to
approve ls`Reading of the Ordinance for PUD District Review, Zoning District
Amendment within the Office Zoning District on 3.7 acres, and Zoning District
Change from 1-2 and Rural to Office on 2.92 acres; to adopt Resolution No. 2002-
60 for Preliminary Plat on 6.62 acres into 2 lots; and to direct Staff to prepare a
�3
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
March 19,2002
Page 4
Developer's Agreement incorporating Staff and Board recommendations and
Council conditions. Motion carried 5-0.
C. MITCHELL CROSSING by Mitchell/5,Inc. Planned Unit Development
Concept Amendment on 3.45 acres,Planned Unit Development District Review
with waivers on 3.45 acres,Zoning District Amendment within the Community
Commercial Zoning District on 3.45 acres,Preliminary Plat of 3.45 acres into one
lot,two outlots and road right-of-way. Location: Southeast corner of Mitchell
Road and Martin Drive. (Resolution No.2002-61 for PUD Concept Amendment,
Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Amendment, and
Resolution No.2002-62 for Preliminary Plat)
Jullie said this is a simple platting procedure to meet Amoco's lease option to
acquire its portion of the 3.45-acre site at the southeast corner of Mitchell Road
and Martin Drive. He said the Community Planning Board voted 8-0 to
recommend approval of the project to the City Council at the February 25, 2002
meeting.
There were no comments from the audience.
MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Luse, to close the Public Hearing; to adopt
Resolution No. 2002-61 for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on
3.45 acres; to approve 1S`Reading of the Ordinance for Planned Unit
Development District Review with waivers within the Community Commercial
Zoning District on 3.45 acres; to adopt Resolution No. 2002-62 for Preliminary
Plat on 3.45 acres into one lot, two outlots and road right-of-way; and to direct
Staff to prepare a Developer's Agreement incorporating Staff and Board
recommendations and Council conditions. Motion carried 5-0.
VIII. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS
MOTION: Luse moved, seconded by Case,to approve the Payment of Claims. The
motion was approved on a roll call vote,with Butcher,Case,Luse,Mosman, and
Tyra-Lukens "aye."
IX. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS
X. PETITIONS,REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
A. PETERSON/BRIGGS REQUEST REGARDING MOVING THE ALTMANN
HOUSE
Sever Peterson said he would like to address some of the issues presented in the
memorandum from Bob Lambert. He said the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
proposes to acquire the site for a future refuge. The site they are proposing to
acquire would be on the south side of Riverview Road, which would not include
1
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
March 19,2002
Page 5
the Altmann home site. He noted it has been a hardship for them to wait 34 years
for the acquisition.
Peterson said the property to which he proposed moving the house would be to the
east and would be on 3.14 acres. If it were necessary or desired by staff, he would
add the acreage necessary to make a five-acre parcel so that it would qualify as a
building site in Eden Prairie.
Peterson said they have had borings done, and he thinks there could be a septic
system and well put in. Regarding the last item in the memorandum, he said he
thought the Council should not sell the house if it is being moved.
Peterson said Mrs. Briggs' daughter Molly might want to live in the house. He
thought it makes a lot of sense to recycle homes, and we would be keeping it in
Eden Prairie and on the farm of which it has always been a part.
Butcher said she had the pleasure of getting to see the interior of the house, and it
is a wonderful structure. She said she could not imagine we would not want to
reuse it if we can. She said she would definitely support reusing the house and
moving it. She asked what the process would be for reusing it.
Lambert replied there would be a couple of steps. We would need a house-moving
permit reviewed by the Board of Appeals and Adjustments. There would also have
to be a site plan review. He noted there is a requirement for ten acres in a rural
area, as well as issues regarding water, sewer and setbacks.
Lambert said he wanted to make sure the Council was aware that the U.S. Fish&
Wildlife Service plan was approved by the City Council. He said those plans
include acquiring the property south of Hwy 212, and the Council might want to
hear from the Fish&Wildlife Service to see what their intention is.
Butcher asked why the Fish &Wildlife Service couldn't purchase the site with the
house on it. Lambert replied they would purchase the property the same way the
City does, for open space. He thought the correct action would be for the City to
go to the Fish&Wildlife Service and ask for a revision of the boundaries and then
take this property as an exception.
Butcher said there would be tax capture on the house once it is moved, so we could
capture some funds back.
Case asked if the Peterson's wanted to build on either site and came before the City
with a 10-acre plot, could they build a new house on either of the sites. Lambert
said they could, assuming they would have a minimum of ten acres.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
March 19,2002
Page 6
Case said if they were to build a house, it doesn't matter if it is new or if they
move this house. The situation of paying for it twice would occur in a new
residence. He could understand the point of view of a family having to keep the
property for 34 years and wanting to somehow gift the City with a preservation of
an historic property.
Lambert said Fish &Wildlife is probably going to buy this, and then they are
going to remove the house. He said if the Council is concerned about saving the
house, we should decide where it should go.
Case said while walking the site he noticed there is a lot of land above the flood
plain south of Grass Lake. He thought if the Fish&Wildlife Service were to
acquire everything except where Riverview Road branches off, they would still
have a massive amount of land.
Lambert noted there is a little piece of bluff land that has native prairie grasses that
is hundreds of years older than the house. He said we want to preserve the area of
native grasses. He thought we would hear from Fish&Wildlife that they would
like to preserve that portion of the bluff as part of their area.
Butcher said, while this is a valuable house in Eden Prairie, the house has been
altered, so she was not sure it qualifies as an historic house. She felt it has a lot of
value, and has been very well kept up even thought it was altered.
Case said he would probably not have chosen to buy this, but he thought it is
1880's in the foundation structure and then redone in the 1920's. It is one of the
best-preserved 1920's houses in the City. This would be an opportunity to keep
another piece of our history going. He talked to Sever about going north of 212
instead of south. He said he wanted to slow down the demolition to give us time to
work it out.
Mosman thought we have someone offering to move a classic house, and it would
be paying taxes again. To her the only question was if the Fish&Wildlife Service
purchases it, can it be moved again.
Peterson said he didn't know if that were possible, but he wanted to go on record
that he would put up $5,000 in an escrow account that, if and when the U.S. Fish
&Wildlife Service would acquire the property from him, could be used to move it
again. He would like to do that this fall. There has been no discussion by Fish&
Wildlife and they have no money. He said, contrary to Mr. Lambert's comment
about the native prairie grasses, this particular site is not native prairie grasses and
has been cropped by his family for years.
Tyra-Lukens said there seems to be a lot of concern to delay the demolition of the
house so we can check out how to preserve it.
6
CTTY COUNCIL MINUTES
March 19,2002
Page 7
Lambert said we could put this on hold. He said staff proceeded only because of
commitments made to the Council about access to the conservation area.
Rosow said he did not have a chance to review the memo but the Council could put
it as a motion or rely on staff. He said this is a house that the City owns, so the
Council can't sell it to Mr. Peterson. It would have to be put up for bid.
Case thought there are two issues. We want to try to allow the Peterson's to save
this house. The second issue is where does it go. The two issues are tied together,
but he was not feeling ready for any motion except to not destroy the house.
Tyra-Lukens said we need to contact Fish&Wildlife and find out what their plans
are. If it is simply that they don't have money but want the site, then that might
mean a different approach. We need to protect the City in making the decision.
Butcher thought the risk would have to be Mr. Peterson's.
Case said he had some comfort level that the area of land that was farmed is
different from the area around it. If the Peterson farm were to stay there with a
house and Fish & Wildlife buys around it, then there are some bigger issues.
Luse said we are in control and Mr. Lambert will slow down the process to
develop the park. That is equally as important to the people who have lived in the
house. This is also an emotional issue for those who have toured the house. The
issue in his mind is that we need to have direction on who is going to the U.S. Fish
&Wildlife because that is where the problem is. We have a responsibility to all
55,000 constituents and to other governmental agencies that money is not wasted.
MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher, to direct staff to delay any plans to
destroy the Peterson house, to engage in discussion with U.S. Fish &Wildlife
Service regarding their plans to purchase the property and the potential relocation
of the house, and to report back to the City Council by the 2nd meeting in April.
Mosman said the wording of a letter to a governmental agency makes a difference
in its reception. We want to make sure all the benefits we have discussed are listed.
We have all talked about the advantages of keeping the house.
Case said we want to preserve the home and are looking at alternatives.
Luse thought the renters are under a time-sensitive situation here and are required
to move out by June 1. He would like to have something as an amendment or
understanding that they can go on until September 1 or some other date.
Peterson said the Briggs' and he would like to be moving long before September 1.
He thanked the Council for considering their request.
7
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
March 19,2002
Page 8
Luse thought we should get the process done as soon as we can but another issue is
giving good value to citizens. All of us know what it is like to be under a time
crunch.
Tyra-Lukens thought there will be some time of putting the house up for sale and
that wouldn't happen until we have resolved the issues with Fish&Wildlife.
Rosow asked if we have given notice to vacate the home by June 1. Lambert said
we have, but we could rescind it and give another 60-days notice at a later date.
Case asked if we could proceed by Council direction for the sale of the house and,
if Peterson were to acquire it, then the second part of this is where it would be put.
Lambert responded we could initiate the sale and we could choose to allow the
buyer to back out. We could make the terms of the sale to allow for that option.
VOTE ON THE MOTION: Motion carried 5-0.
MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Luse, to direct staff to proceed with plans to
sell the Altmann house.
AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION: Luse moved, seconded by Case, to proceed
with the sale by means of a sealed bid process, not a public auction. Motion
carried 5-0.
VOTE ON THE MOTION AS AMENDED: Motion carried 5-0.
B. UPDATE ON MET COUNCIL FARMILY AFFORDABLE HOUSING
PROGRAM
Jullie said David Lindahl would give the update.
Lindahl said the Metropolitan Council has purchased 15 townhouse and
condominium units in Eden Prairie through their Family Affordable Housing
Program(FAHP).He said they have done a pretty good job of scattering them
around the City. Staff is pursuing funding through Hennepin County to provide
services to some of the families that will move into the units.
Tyra-Lukens thanked Lindahl for his report.
C. GOLDEN TRIANGLE AREA(GTA)CITY WEST LAND
USE/TRANSIT STUDY
Lindahl said Mark Koegler,president of Hoisington-Koegler Group of Minneapolis
was present and would give an overview of the study to determine if a wider mix of
land uses can help reduce traffic and enhance transit use in the Golden Triangle and
City West areas.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
March 19,2002
Page 9
Mark Koegler said he found this to be a fascinating project that they will be able to
copy and duplicate in other areas.
Koegler outlined the area to be studied,noting they are in the first step of
organi7ing the project and collecting background information. They are just
beginning the market analysis work on the project.He said staff has been great to
work with.
He said there are several major study tasks. In the second major task they will look
at identifying potential redevelopment sites which will include identifying some
criteria and looking at such things as tax implications,vacancies and turnover.The
third major task will be to identify potential land uses and create development
scenarios.
Koegler said the remaining three tasks will include evaluating the tax benefits of the
land use scenarios, forecasting travel demand and recommending land use and
implementation scenarios and presenting the report findings and recommendations.
He noted it will be a 10-12 month process and they will share information and get
feed back as they go.
Tyra-Lukens thought this all looks wonderful and appears to be very thorough.
Butcher said she was very excited to see this.
Koegler said this is something of a groundbreaking project. He said they have
worked on this with a variety of plans,but not on this scope.
Butcher thought this has the potential to solve a very serious problem.
M. REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS&COMMISSIONS
XII. APPOINTMENTS
XIII. REPORTS OF OFFICERS
A. REPORTS OF COUNCILMEMBERS
1. City Manager Selection
Tyra-Lukens reviewed the process used to replace the City Manager,noting
that Mr. Jullie agreed to come back to serve as the interim City Manager.
She said at that time Mayor Harris appointed a subcommittee to find
someone to help with the search and selection process.PDI was selected to
work with the subcommittee to develop a profile of what we were looking
for in a City Manager.PDI helped to conduct interviews with the City
Council,staff,and members of the community regarding what
qualifications the City Manager needed.
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
March 19,2002
Page 10
Tyra-Lukens said we got over 70 applications for the position,from which
PDI narrowed the list to 15. The list of 15 was again narrowed down to
seven, and those seven came back for interviews. One of the seven dropped
out and six returned to interviews with the Council,the Service Area
Directors and Mr. Jullie, and a subcommittee of staff. The list was then
narrowed to three people, each of whom would be a fine City Manager. She
said the Council interviewed the three candidates and asked some additional
questions last night in a public meeting.
Luse said this was an outstanding group of individuals, and it was very
difficult to decide among the three finalists.
MOTION: Luse moved, seconded by Case,to offer the position of Eden
Prairie City Manager to Scott Neal and to direct staff,with appropriate
assistance from PDI,to negotiate an employment agreement for City
Council approval at the April 9,2002 Council meeting.
Tyra-Lukens noted she thought it would be the same subcommittee to
negotiate an employment agreement,not staff.
AMENDMENT TO THE MOTION: Luse moved, seconded by Case,to
change"direct staff'to"direct the committee."Motion carried 5-0.
Case said he was not sure whether last night's meeting was televised. He
noted the Council had a two-hour discussion time at the meeting.At that
time,the Council expressed some leanings and came close to agreement,
but Councilmembers have not covered this among themselves prior to this
evening.
VOTE ON THE MOTION AS AMENDED: Motion carried 5-0.
Case suggested Mayor Tyra-Lukens review some background information
about Mr.Neal.
Tyra-Lukens said Mr.Neal has been City Manager of Northfield,
Minnesota for almost six years. She noted he is highly qualified and has
successfully moved to ever-larger cities during his career. She thought there
are a lot of similarities between Northfield and Eden Prairie that will be
helpful in his work here.
Case noted Mr.Neal came very highly qualified by everyone they
contacted.He said all three candidates were very excellent,but Mr.Neal
was superior.
Tyra-Lukens noted the Council will miss Mr.Julie,and the Council
appreciates his coming back to help out.
/o
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
March 19,2002
Page 11
B. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER
C. REPORT OF PARKS AND RECREATION SERVICES DIRECTOR
1. Miller Spring Renovation
Lambert said the Council was asked to approve this project several years ago,
but staff delayed implementing it anticipating we would extend water and
sewer down past the site.He said,with the development decisions made
recently,we have decided we will not be sending sewer and water down past
the site for some time. Staff went to the Watershed District the first
Wednesday of this month and asked them if they would like to continue with
the partnership on this project.
Lambert suggested that we go ahead and bid the project and see how much it
will cost. Staff would come back to review the cost estimates in a couple of
months.
MOTION: Mosman moved, seconded by Butcher, to approve authorization
to proceed with a joint project with the Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek
Watershed District in the renovation of Miller Spring.
Luse thought this kind of project really gives us a sense of community and it
appears that it would be dollars well spent.
Mosman said there has been a great amount of interest from residents that we
do something with this and she thought this would be noticed.
VOTE ON THE MOTION: Motion carried 5-0.
2. Athletic Program Task Force
Lambert said one of the important parts of updating the Parks and Open
Spaces Plan is to update Chapter 3 of the plan making recommendations on
what athletic facilities will be needed in the next 20 years. He said the
Council has authorized SRF Consulting Services to assist staff in updating
the plan. Staff is recommending that an Athletic Program Task Force be
formed that would be responsible for reviewing census data,population
projections and participation trends to develop recommendations on facilities
for adult and youth athletic programs. He said they would plan to come back
to the Council with recommendations in a couple of months.
Case thought such a task force would be a good means of pulling in the
residents to help.He noted that this has been on his goal list for a couple of
years.He asked if the statistical data would include the school district data.
Lambert replied it would.
1/
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
March 19,2002
Page 12
Mosman agreed that having resident involvement has been wonderful. She
believes objectivity is helpful, and she thought there should be one or two
members who would have an overview attitude rather than representing a
specific sport. She said she had given Mr. Jullie a letter from Kay Donahue
who would be a generalist with no ties to a specific sport.
Tyra-Lukens asked if there is one association for basketball that represents
both boys and girls. Lambert replied that the Basketball Association is pretty
much taken care of with the new facilities in the schools,but everyone will
be sent an invitation to send a representative from their association.
Luse thought we are being quite visionary in the way we look at things.He
thought this bodes well for Eden Prairie.
MOTION: Luse moved, seconded by Case,to approve authorization to
proceed with a joint project with the Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed
District in the renovation of Miller Spring.Motion carried 5-0.
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
XIV. OTHER BUSINESS
XV. ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher, to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried 5-
0. Mayor Tyra-Lukens adjourned the meeting at 8:20 p.m.
I�.-r
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE:
SECTION: Consent Calendar April 9,2002
SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.:
Police/C.O.P.Unit
Gretchen Laven Clerk's License Application List VII.A.
These licenses have been approved by the department heads responsible for the licensed activity.
New Liquor License
Civitali Restaurant Corporation
Dba: Punch Neapolitan Pizza
Private Kennel
Natalia Ranhoff-Dogs
- 1 -
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
• DATE: 04/09/02
SECTION: Consent Agenda
SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.:
Community Development
Donald R.Uram Bryant Lake Business Center Third Addition
Scott A.Kipp
Requested Action
Move to:
• Approve 2"a Reading of the Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Change
from Regional Commercial to Office on 0.6 acres; and
• Adopt the Resolution for Site Plan Review; and
• Approve the Developer's Agreement for Bryant Lake Business Center Third Addition.
Synopsis
This project is for a 34-stall parking lot addition located at 7555 Market Place Drive.
Attachments •
1. Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Change
2. Resolution for Site Plan Review
3. Developer's Agreement for Bryant Lake Business Center Third Addition
I
BRYANT LAKE BUSINESS CENTER THIRD ADDITION
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 2002-
A RESOLUTION GRANTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL
FOR BRYANT LAKE BUSINESS CENTER THIRD ADDITION
BY GLENBOROUGH FUND IX,LLC
WHEREAS, by Glenborough Fund IX, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, has
applied for Site Plan approval of the Bryant Lake Business Center Third Addition on 0.6 acres
for construction of a 34-stall parking lot addition to be zoned in the Office Zoning District on 0.6
acres by an Ordinance approved by the City Council on April 9, 2002; and
WHEREAS, the Community Planning Board reviewed said application at a public
hearing at its February 11,2002 meeting and recommended approval of said site plans; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed said application at a public hearing at its
March 7,2002 meeting.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE,that site plan approval be granted to Glenborough Realty
Trust, Inc., for the construction of a 34-stall parking lot addition, based on plans dated February
25, 2002,between by Glenborough Fund IX, LLC, and the City of Eden Prairie.
ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 9th day of April, 2002.
Nancy Tyra-Lukens,Mayor
ATTEST:
Kathleen A.Porta, City Clerk
BRYANT LAKE BUSINESS CENTER THIRD ADDITION
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE,
HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO.7-2002-PUD-4-2002
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
Regional Commercial Zoning District and be placed in the Planned Unit Development Office
Zoning District 7-2002-PUD-4-2002(hereinafter"PUD-4-2002-Office").
Section 3. The land shall be subject to the terms and conditions of that certain
Developer's Agreement dated as of April 9, 2002, entered into between Glenborough Fund IX,
LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, and the City of Eden Prairie, (hereinafter
"Developer's Agreement"). The Developer's Agreement contains the terms and conditions of
PUD-4-2002-Office, and are hereby made a part hereof.
Section 4. The City Council hereby makes the following findings:
A. PUD-4-2002-Office is not in conflict with the goals of the Comprehensive Guide
Plan of the City.
B. PUD-4-2002-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-4-2002-Office are justified by the design of the
development described herein.
D. PUD-4-2002-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.
3
Section 5. The proposal is hereby adopted and the land shall be, and hereby is
removed from the Regional Commercial Zoning District, and placed in the Office Zoning
District and shall be included hereafter in the Planned Unit Development PUD-4 2002-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
7th day of March, 2002, 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 9th day of April,
2002.
ATTEST:
Kathleen A.Porta, City Clerk Nancy Tyra-Lukens,Mayor
PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on
•
r1
EDIT A
Bryant Lake Business Center Third Addition
Legal Description:
Lot 1,Block 1,BRYANT LAKE OFFICE TECH CENTER,according to the recorded plat
thereof,Hennepin County,Minnesota.
AND
Part of Outlot B,BRYANT LAKE CENTER, according to the recorded plat thereof,Hennepin
County,Minnesota.
BRYANT LAKE BUSINESS CENTER THIRD ADDITION
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA
SUMMARY OF
ORDINANCE NO.7-2002-PUD-4-2002
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 7555 Market Place
Drive from the Regional Commercial 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 Nancy Tyra-Lukens,Mayor
PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on -.
(A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from City Clerk.)
EDIT A
Bryant Lake Business Center Third Addition
Legal Description:
Lot 1,Block 1,BRYANT LAKE OFFICE TECH CENTER, according to the recorded plat
thereof,Hennepin County,Minnesota.
AND
Part of Outlot B,BRYANT LAKE CENTER, according to the recorded plat thereof,Hennepin
County,Minnesota.
7
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
DATE: 04/09/02
SECTION: Consent Agenda
SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.:
Community Development
Donald R.Uram UnitedHealth Group
-
Scott A.Kipp V . C
Requested Action
Move to:
• Adopt the Resolution for Alternative Urban Areawide Review(AUAR); and
• Approve the Developer's Agreement for UnitedHealth Group
Synopsis
This project is for a mixed-use PUD Concept plan consisting of 1,131,700-sq. ft. of office, 331
apartment units, a 125-room hotel/restaurant, and 25,000 square feet of retail. The property will
need to be rezoned prior to any development, which will require a return to the Community
Planning Board and City Council with detailed development plans for approval.
Background Information
The City Council approved the Guide Plan Change and PUD Concept Plan for UnitedHealth
Group and conducted a public hearing on the Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) and
mitigation plan on January 15, 2002.
Attachments
1. Resolution adopting the Alternative Urban Areawide Review(AUAR)
2. Developer's Agreement for UnitedHealth Group
UNITEDHEALTH GROUP
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO.2002-
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE ALTERNATIVE URBAN AREAWIDE REVIEW
(AUAR)DOCUMENT AND MITIGATION PLAN FOR UNITEDHEALTH GROUP
WHEREAS,the City Council of Eden Prairie did hold a hearing on January 15, 2002 to
consider the UnitedHealth Group PUD; and
WHEREAS,said development is located on 72 acres of land located south of Highway 62,
east of Shady Oak Road, and north of City West Parkway; and
WHEREAS,the Eden Prairie Community Planning Board did hold a public hearing on the
UnitedHealth Group PUD on November 26,2001,and did recommend that the City Council approve
the UnitedHealth Group PUD and AUAR document and mitigation plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of Eden Prairie reviewed the UnitedHealth Group AUAR
document and mitigation plan January 15,2002.
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Eden Prairie,Minnesota,
that the UnitedHealth Group AUAR and mitigation plan is accurate, complete and mitigation
measures or procedures are adequate to prevent significant environmental impacts within the area
when actual development occurs.
ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 9th day of April, 2002.
Nancy Tyra-Lukens,Mayor
ATTEST:
Kathleen Porta, City Clerk
DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT
UNITEDHEALTH GROUP PUD
THIS AGREEMENT is entered into as of April 9,2002,by United Healthcare Services,
Inc.,a Minnesota corporation,its successors and assigns,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 Guide Plan Change from Office to High
Density Residential on 19 acres, Office to Regional Commercial on 4.2 acres, Office to
Neighborhood Commercial on 4.5 acres,Medium Density Residential to Quasi-Public on 10 acres,
and Medium Density Residential to Office on 5 acres,Planned Unit Development Concept Review
on 72 acres, and Alternative Urban Areawide Review (AUAR) on 72 acres, legally described on
Exhibit A(the"Property");
NOW,THEREFORE,in consideration of the City adopting Resolution No. 2002-19 for
Guide Plan Change,Resolution No. 2002-20 for Planned Unit Development Concept Review,and
Resolution No. for AUAR,Developer agrees to construct, develop and maintain the
Property as follows:
1. PLANS: Development of the Property shall be in conformance with the materials revised
and stamp dated January 4,2002,reviewed and approved by the City Council on January 15,
2002, (hereinafter the "Plans") and identified on Exhibit B, subject to such changes and
modifications as provided herein.
The plans depict the development of 1,131,700 square feet of office, 331 apartment units,
125 room hotel with restaurant, and 25,000 square feet of general retail.
The plans will require the following waivers through the Planned Unit Development at the
time of rezoning for the Property:
Office Site
a) Floor Area Ratio of 0.99. Code maximum is 0.50.
b) Building height greater than 30 feet. Six, eight, and ten story buildings are
anticipated.
c) Structure setback from wetland buffer of 35%. Code maximum is 10%.
Residential Site
a) 0-foot internal setback to parking. Code requires a 10-foot setback. Shared parking
is anticipated.
Neighborhood Commercial Site
a) Floor Area Ratio of 0.51. Code maximum is 0.40. Housing is proposed above the
retail uses.
b) 0-foot internal setback to parking. Code requires a 10-foot setback. Shared parking
is anticipated.
c) Building height greater than 30 feet. Housing is proposed above the retail uses.
2. EXHIBIT C: Developer agrees to the terms,covenants,agreements,and conditions set forth
in Exhibit C.
3. CONSERVATION EASEMENT AND WETLAND PLAN REQUIREMENTS FOR
PROTECTION OF WETLANDS ON THE PROPERTY: Prior to release of the final
plat for any portion of the Property, Developer shall submit•a Conservation Easement
(Exhibit D)and Wetland Plan for the entire Property for review and written approval by the
Environmental Coordinator, for the area delineated on the Plans.
Prior to release of the final plat,for each phase of the development of the Property,Desveloper
shall also furnish to the Environmental Coordinator and receive the Environmental
Coordinator's approval of a plan in conformance to the overall wetland plan,a Wetland Plan
performance bond, cash escrow, or letter of credit with a corporation approved by the City
Manager or other guarantee acceptable to the City Manager equal to 150% of the cost, as
estimated by the City Manager, of completing said Wetland Plan requirements.
Prior to release of any building permit for the Property,Developer shall submit evidence to
the Environmental Coordinator that the approved Conservation Easement has been filed in
the Hennepin County Recorder's/Registrar of Titles' Office for the phase of the Property then
being developed. The parties recognize that certain elements of the approved wetland plan
may be dependent on mitigation or requirements beyond the boundaries of any particular
phase of development. It is understood and agreed that all aspects of meeting the overall
wetland plan design will be implemented by phase,but will include all wetlands impacted
by that phase,including conservation easements for mitigation outside of the phasing limits.
4. CONSERVATION EASEMENT FOR THE PROTECTION OF EXISTING TREES
ON THE PROPERTY: Prior to release of the final plat for any portion of the Property,
Developer shall submit a Conservation Easement(Exhibit E)for review and written approval
by the Director of Parks and Recreation Services, for the area delineated on the Plans.
Prior to issuance of any permit for grading, development or construction on the Property,
Developer shall submit evidence to the Director of Parks and Recreation Services,that the
approved Conservation Easement has been filed in the Hennepin County Recorder's/Registrar
of Titles'Office.
cif
Prior to issuance of the first building permit for the Property,Developer shall permanently
demarcate the location of the boundary of the conservation easement on each lot property
line or corner with permanent four-foot tall posts. A 2 %2 by 6 inch sign or decal reading
"Scenic/Conservation Easement Boundary,City of Eden Prairie",will be affixed to the top
of the post.
5. FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY: Developer acknowledges that the
City has approved the Guide Plan Change and Planned Unit Development Concept only for
the Property, as depicted in the Plans. Prior to any development or construction on the
Property, as depicted in 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.
6. GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLANS: Developer agrees that the grading and drainage
plan contained in Exhibit B is conceptual. Developer shall be required to submit detailed
grading and drainage plans and obtain approval of those plans by the Community Planning
Board and City Council as part of the platting/site plan approval process for each phase of
the proposed development. The grading and drainage plan shall include all wetlands,
wetland buffer strips, wetland buffer monument locations, conservation easements, water
quality ponds and storm water detention areas for the entire area impacted by that phase of
the development only.
7. OFF-SITE TRAFFIC AND ROAD IMPROVEMENTS: Concurrent with the
development of the Property the Developer will be responsible for the costs of the off-site
infrastructure improvements identified in this Agreement and as documented in the traffic
study (Appendix A of the Final Alternative Urban Areawide Review dated 11-06-01,
identified in Exhibit B hereto)as confirmed to be required for the phase of the Property then
being developed by an update to the traffic study at the time of site planning:
1) Shady Oak Road/West 62nd Street Intersection Improvements including:
- Additional left turn lane(dual left)on the Shady Oak Road north approach.
- Right turn lane on the Shady Oak Road south approach.
- Minimum three(3)westbound lanes (two (2)left turn lanes and one(1)right turn
lane) and two (2) eastbound lanes on east approach of West 62nd Street.
- Traffic signal improvement.
2) Shady Oak Road/City West Parkway(north)Intersection Improvements including:
- Left and right turn lanes on both the north and south approaches of Shady Oak Road.
- Traffic signal improvement.
3) Interim Upgr.ding of Shady Oak Road to a 4-lane section between the north and south
intersections with City West Parkway. This interim upgrading contemplated shall not
exceed$200,000 cost to the Developer. The City will request that Hennepin County
include in its Capital Improvements Program the upgrading of Shady Oak Road as
identified above. If Hennepin County includes this work in its Capital Improvements
Program, this could reduce the project scope for this upgrading to a more nominal
interim project,which would be paid for at the Developer's expense.
4) Shady Oak Road/City West Parkway(south)Intersection Improvements including:
- Left and right turn lanes on both the east and west approaches of Shady Oak Road.
- Additional left turn lane(dual left) on the City West Parkway north approach.
- Reassignment of lanes on the City West Parkway south approach.
- Traffic signal improvement.
5) HOV Bypass/Slip Ramp - Shady Oak Road South Ramp to Eastbound TH 62. The
City will request that the State of Minnesota through the Minnesota Department of
Transportation enter into a cooperative funding agreement with the City and Developer
for the HOV Bypass/Slip Ramp identified above. As a result of such an agreement,
Developer's cost share shall not exceed one-third of the cost to construct the
improvements.
6) Shady Oak/TH 212 Interchange Short Term Improvements including:
- Add free right on west approach Shady Oak/TH 212 West Ramp Intersection.
- Additional left turn lane (dual left) on north approach Shady Oak/ TH 212 West
Ramp Intersection.
- Additional left turn lane (dual left) on south approach Shady Oak/ TH 212 East
Ramp Intersection.
- Traffic signal improvements
In no event shall Developer be responsible to pay for or construct any improvements to
TH 62 or the bridge over Shady Oak Road or the Shady Oak bridge over TH 212.
Transportation infrastructure improvements may be phased to support the phased
development of the Property. At the time of submission to the City of specific plans for the
first phase of development of the Property and prior to any development or construction on
the Property, Developer shall submit to the City and other agencies as required by law, a
Phasing Plan for the development of the entire Property(hereinafter the"Phasing Plan")and
obtain approval of the Phasing Plan from the City Council, County and State as appropriate.
Prior to any development or construction on the Property, as depicted in 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 City
Council.
4
8. ON-SITE TRAFFIC AND ROAD IMPROVEMENTS: Concurrent with the development
of the Property the Developer will be responsible for the reconstruction of West 62nd Street
and the construction of the internal public roadway connecting West 62nd Street and City
West Parkway. In connection therewith,the City shall petition MNDOT to turn back West
62nd Street to the City. Following reconstruction, City shall convey title to the east portion
(the private streets)of the reconstructed roadway to the Developer, east of the intersection
with the new internal public roadway. Costs, fees and services associated with this
reconveyance/turn back process shall be the responsibility of Developer.
Prior to any development or construction on the Property,as depicted in 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.
9. RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION: Concurrent with the development of the Property the
Developer shall dedicate those portions of the Property needed for the right-of-way required
to accommodate the road improvements on Shady Oak Road, West 62nd Street and the
internal connector roadway.
10. STREET AND UTILITY PLANS: Developer agrees that the street and utility plan
contained in Exhibit B is conceptual. Developer shall be required to submit detailed street
and utility plans and obtain approval by the Community Planning Board and City Council.
Detailed plans shall include streets, sanitary sewer,water and storm sewer.Developer shall
evaluate the capacity of sanitary sewer and watermain connections to the Property. If
additional capacity is required within the local(Eden Prairie)sanitary sewer and watermain
system Developer shall be responsible for the costs thereto.
11. TAX INCREMENT FINANCING: City will undertake, subject to holding a public
hearing, to create a Development District and Tax Increment Financing District which
includes the Property within its boundaries. The City and Developer will enter into an
agreement that will provide for the use of a portion of the tax increments generated to defray
allowable costs under the Statute incurred by the Developer in return for the Developer
providing a minimum of 20%affordable housing units associated with the multiple family
portion of the Property and constructing regional road improvements.
12. TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT PLAN: Concurrent with any application for
development of the Office portion of the Property,Developer agrees to develop and submit
to the City Engineer for review and written approval, a Travel Demand Management Plan
(TDM) for the Property to help reduce traffic congestion. The TDM Plan, at a minimum,
will be consistent with the plan outline and Unitedllealth Group's October 22, 2001
commitment letter, attached as Exhibit F.
Prior to any building permit issuance for the Office portion of 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.
13. TRUNK UTILITY ASSESSMENTS: Developer acknowledges that the Property will be
subject to trunk utility assessments at prevailing rates at the time of development.
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE:
03/21/02
SECTION: Consent
SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION:
Public Safety/Police Joint Powers Agreement-Predatory Offender ITEM NO.:
Support Operations Division Registration
Gary J. Therkelsen
Requested Action:
Move To: Approve Joint Powers Agreement between the City of Eden Prairie and the Bureau of
Criminal Apprehension.
Synopsis:
The Joint Powers Agreement is required to permit police department access to the Bureau of Criminal
Apprehension's Predatory Offender Registration System.
Background:
In 2001, the Legislature created the funding and authority for the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension to
automate the predatory offender registration system. As of July 1, 2001, this was in excess of 11,000
records. The manual nature of the system prevented timely law enforcement inquiries and limited the
effectiveness of the registration system as a public safety initiative.
The automated system will provide for immediate, full time access to the data which will assist in
identifying registered predatory offenders residing in our City and enforcing the registration
requirements.
Due to the nature of the data,management control of the systems and data contained or communicated is
required by state and federal laws. The agreement defines our responsibilites required for access to the
system and data.
The Ctiy Attorney has reviewd the agreement for form and legality and advises that it may be forwarded
to the City Council for execution by the Mayor and City Manager.
Attachments:
Joint Powers Agreement
Letter-3/20/02 City Attorney's Office
LANG,PAULY, GREGERSON&ROSOW,LTD.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1600 PARK BUILDING
650 THIRD AVENUE SOUTH
MINNEAPOLIS,MINNESOTA 55402-4337
TELEPHONE: (612)338-0755
FAX: (612)349-6718
ROGER A.PAULY EDEN PRAIRIE OFFICE
DAVID IL GREGERSON* SUITE 370
RICHARD F.ROSOW+ 250 PRAIRIE CENTER DRIVE
MARK J.JOHNSON EDEN TELEPHONE:PRAIRIE,M 55344
JOSEPH A.NILAN* 7355 M.INZ FAX:(612)829-0713
JAMES W.DELAPLAIN
CRAIGHTON T.BOATES REPLY TO MINNEAPOLIS OFFICE
CHRISTINE A.LONGE
ROBERT I.LANG,OF COUNSEL
*Also admitted in Wisconsin
+Certified as a Real Property Specialist
by the Minnesota State Bar Association
March 20,2002
Mr. Gary Therkelsen
Eden Prairie Police Department
8080 Mitchell Road
•
Eden Prairie,Minnesota 55344
RE: Joint Powers Agreement
Dear Gary:
We have received and reviewed the Joint Powers Agreement between Eden Prairie and the
Bureau of Criminal Apprehension related to the Predatory Offender Registration Unit. The
Agreement is acceptable in its current form and maybe forwarded to the City Council for execution
by the Mayor and City Manager.
If you have any additional questions,please give us a call at your convenience.
Very truly yours,
LANG, PAULY, GREGERSON&ROSOW, LTD.
By
Craighton T. Boates
CTB/smt
ep\police\therkelsen.032002
2
STATE OF MINNESOTA
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY
MINNESOTA PREDATORY OFFENDER REGISTRATION DATABASE
• ACCESS AGREEMENT#
According to Minnesota Statute 471.59.,Subd. 10,the State of Minnesota,acting through its Commissioner of
Public Safety,Bureau of Criminal Apprehension,Predatory Offender Registration Unit, (DPS)and City of Eden
Prairie,Police Department,a Minnesota Criminal Justice Agency as defined in Minnesota Statute,Chapter
299C.46,Subdivision 2,(Agency)enter into this Joint Powers Agreement on December 15,2001.
This agreement details the obligations and requirements of the Agency that is connected to the State's Criminal
Justice Data Communications Network(CJDN)and that will have access to the Minnesota Predatory Offender
Registration Database(POR)or may acquire POR information through a third party who has direct access to
POR through the CJDN.
The DPS is the organization set forth by Minnesota Statute as being responsible for the administration and
operation of the State's POR Database.
I) AGREEMENTS REGARDING INFORMATION
With respect to POR information and related information as maintained and/or provided by DPS,it is agreed that:
A) DPS will furnish to Agency,via a web interface,such information as is available from the POR
Database. Agency will not furnish any information from the POR Database to a non-criminal justice
entity.
B) DPS reserves the right to suspend furnishing POR information to Agency when any rule,policy,or
procedure has been,or appears to have been,violated. DPS may reinstate the furnishing of POR
information upon receipt of satisfactory assurances that such violation did not occur or has been
corrected.
C) Agency will output reports and other hard copy products containing POR information only to printers
within the Agency. Only Authorized Employees will transport,handle,and store POR output
documents. The Agency is responsible for the correct and legal dissemination and use of all data and-
records it receives.
D) DPS will log all transactions of the POR Database. DPS will maintain these logs for at least one year
from the date of the transaction.
E) An individual's right to review and challenge his/her own record is an integral part of the system.
Agency will require appropriate identification,including fingerprinting,of the individual before any
POR information is disseminated to the individual. The originating agency may verify that fingerprints
associated with the record on file are those of the individual to verify that he/she is who he/she purports
to be.
II) PERSONNEL
A) Agency agrees to conduct criminal history checks on all Agency employees who will have access to
POR information. An Agency employee who is not cleared will not have access to the POR
information. Only Authorized Employees will have access to POR information.
Pam 1 of 5
B) Under its authority and supervision,Agency will screen all personnel who have access to any of the
interconnect equipment. This screening will also apply to all maintenance personnel,contract technical
personnel,and other individuals having unescorted access to any of the interconnected equipment.
C) Agency may promulgate policies and procedures directed toward protection,security,and dissemination
of the data.
•
D) In the event of an emergency related to an individuals health or well being,an Authorized Employee
must accompany those persons answering the emergency call if the event is located in an area where
security of the CJDN and its associated data system could be compromised.
E) An Authorized Employee must escort casual visitors or those on tour of the Agency in areas where the
equipment is located and is responsible for their presence at all times.
F) Agency agrees to initiate,at the request of the DPS,disciplinary action,up to and including termination
of personnel having access to POR systems,where such persons violate the provisions of this agreement
or other security requirements established for the collection,storage,or dissemination of POR
information. Agency will assist in the criminal prosecution of such individuals when Federal or State
laws have been violated.
G) DPS will provide system training to personnel assigned by Agency receiving POR information.Training
may be in the form of a formal class,computer based training,or self-study guide.
H) DPS will provide documentation and/or manuals on the correct use of the POR Database for users.
Agency will disseminate the documentation or manuals to all of its employees who utilize the POR
Database. Agency will maintain this documentation and/or these manuals in a secure manner.
III) DATA/INFORMATION
A) DPS and Agency will determine the accesses Agency will be allowed. Agency may request additional
accesses. Agency agrees that the decision of DPS as to what information will be made available to
Agency is final.
B) Agency must verify data and information that Agency receives from the POR Database with the
originating agency before acting upon it.
C) Agency must abide by the Minnesota Data Practices Act and applicable Federal Statutes in its access,
use,storage,and dissemination of all data and information entered into or received from the POR
Database.
IV) COSTS:
A) Network communication line costs fall under the CJDN Access Agreement.
B) All maintenance costs for Agency owned equipment is the responsibility of Agency.
V) ADDITIONAL TERMS
A) Agency must provide adequate physical security to protect against any unauthorized personnel gaining
access to the computer equipment or to any of the stored data for all electronic equipment that is
interconnected to the CJDN. This includes equipment provided by the DPS and Agency and equipment
acquired from any other source.Failure by Agency to provide adequate security will warrant the
removal of the equipment from accessing the POR Database and the CJDN network.
Paee2of5
B) Agency must keep all rooms containing interconnected equipment locked from exterior entry at all
times.
C) Agency agrees to regard tampering with,or attempting to compromise security as serious offenses
resulting in Agency taking disciplinary action against individuals involved in such offenses.
D) Agency will have no"dial-in"lines into the Agency's Multiple Access Computer unless that access
conforms to DPS Security Policy as outlined in the CJDN Access Agreement.
E) Either DPS or Agency may propose changes to this agreement. The modifications will not become
effective until DPS and Agency fully execute an addendum or amendment to this agreement.
F) This agreement will become effective on December 14,2001,or upon the date that the final required
signature is obtained by DPS,pursuant to Minn.Stat.§ 16C.05,Subdivision 2,whichever occurs later,
and shall remain in effect until December 15,2006,or until all obligations set forth in this agreement
have been satisfactorily fulfilled or the agreement has been canceled,whichever happens first.
G) Either DPS or Agency may,upon 90 days written notice,terminate this agreement. •
H) Agency is responsible for the cost of all facilities,devices,or equipment set forth in this agreement
which contribute to the security and safety of the CJIS System within the Agency.
I) The Agency agrees that designated DPS employees will have the authority to audit,monitor,and
inspect all procedures and facilities established pursuant to this agreement. This will include DPS's
right to attempt to breach Agency's security as it relates to the provisions of this agreement.
J) Agency shall indemnify,save,and hold DPS,its representatives,and its employees harmless from any
and all claims or causes of action,including all attorneys'fees incurred by DPS,arising from the
performance of this agreement by Agency or Agency's employees,agents,or subcontractors. This
clause shall not be construed to bar any legal remedies Agency may have for DPS failure to fulfill its
obligations pursuant to this agreement.Agency's liability shall be governed by the provisions of the
Municipal Tort Claims Act,Minnesota Statutes§§466.01-466.15 and other applicable law.
K) DPS and Agency will abide by all present and future rules,policies,and procedures adopted by DPS or
the NLETS Board of Directors,or as approved by the FBI-NCIC Policy Board and adopted by FBI-
NCIC. DPS will propose no changes in the rules,policies,and procedures adopted by it without notice
to all agencies and provision of a 30 day period in which an agency can submit written comments to
DPS.
L) If Agency provides POR information access and/or services to another agency,it must have a written
agreement with that agency. Agency must provide a copy of the agreement and any amendments to
DPS. This does not prohibit Agency from providing information,on a one-time basis per case,to
another Law Enforcement Agency that is conducting an investigation in Agency's jurisdiction.
M) The books,records,documents and accounting procedures and practices of Agency and its
employees,agents or subcontractors relevant to this agreement shall be made available and subject to
examination by DPS,including the contracting Agency/Division,Legislative Auditor,and State
Auditor for a minimum period of six years from the end of this agreement.
VI) MANAGEMENT CONTROL
If Agency does not own and/or operate its own equipment,it must have a Management Control Agreement
with the entity providing the service which,at a minimum,must include the following:
Pane3of_5
A) The ability of Agency to set and enforce priorities for the system usage,which includes the CJDN
functions having the highest priority on the system.
B) Agency will have the right to screen for employment in areas where the equipment is located or the
system is maintained and reject all persons who do not meet the security screening requirements.
C) The entity providing service to Agency will agree to and abide by all the requirements of the POR
Database Access Agreement and all of its amendments and successors.
VII) DEFINITIONS
A) Authorized Employee. An employee who has been granted clearance by Agency thereby allowing
access to POR information. Agency,in granting the clearance,must have done a criminal history check
on the employee.
B) Criminal Justice Agency. This will have the same meaning as contained in Minnesota Statutes,Chapter
299C.46,Subdivision 2,or subsequent State law or regulations which may supersede Minnesota
Statutes,Chapter 299C.46,Subdivision 2.
C) POR information. The digital images and corresponding data elements transmitted to the POR
database.
D) Criminal Justice Data Communication Network. The network,including the equipment,circuits,
facilities,procedures,agreements,and organizations thereof,for the collection,processing,preservation,
or dissemination of criminal justice information,and may include related systems that directly contribute
to the criminal justice information system.
E) Authorized Access Device. A device in a user agency which,by virtue of a signed contract with
Department of Public Safety,is allowed access to the criminal justice information systems.
F) Casual Visitors. Persons who have irregular access to the Data Center.
G) Computer Center. The specific location(s)of all computers and associated equipment including
terminals and printers,upon which criminal justice information is processed.
H) Data Center. The total physical space(s),inclusive of the computer center,where criminal justice
information systems are developed,maintained,or operated.
I) Management Control. The authority to set and enforce standards for the selection and termination of
personnel,and for policy governing the operation of computers,telecommunications devices,and
circuits used to process criminal justice information insofar as the equipment is used to process,store,or
transmit the information. Management control includes the supervision of the systems design,
programming,and operating procedures for the development,modification,maintenance,and
processing of computerized criminal justice information either as a function by itself or with other non-
criminal justice applications.
J) Multiple Access Computer. An electronic device that has multiple input and/or output units such as
terminals and printers,or is attached to or part of a network that has multiple devices or computers on it.
This does not include stand alone micro computers.
IC) NCIC(National Crime Information Center). A division of the Federal Bureau of Investigation of the
U.S.Department of Justice which maintains a nationwide computerized information system established
as a service to all criminal justice agencies-local,state,and federal. NCIC's main purpose is to assist
the criminal justice organizations in performing their duties by providing a computerized filing system
of accurate and timely documented information,readily available to each criminal justice organization.
Pane 4 of 5
L) NLETS(National Law Enforcement Telecommunications System). NLETS is an incorporated,non-
profit organization whose purpose is to provide a nationwide criminal justice data communications
system.
M) Permanent Visitors. Persons having regular access to the Data Center but who are not Authorized
Employees.This term shall include contract and vendor personnel who have access to the Data Center.
VIII) ACKNOWLEDGMENT
As the individual responsible for Agency,I hereby acknowledge the responsibilities and duties set forth in this
agreement as well as in those documents incorporated by reference. I acknowledge that these responsibilities and
duties were developed and implemented to ensure the reliability,confidentiality,accuracy,timeliness,and
completeness of POR information. I further acknowledge that failure of this Agency to comply with these duties
and responsibilities will subject this Agency to various sanctions,including the termination of access to POR
information.
1. AGENCY 2. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY
AGENCY certifies that the appropriate person(s) have (with delegated authority)
executed this agreement on behalf of the AGENCY as
required by applicable articles, bylaws, resolutions, or
ordinances.
By: By:
Title: Title:
Date: Date
By:
Title:
Date
4.ATTORNEY GENERAL 3. DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION
Approved to sign on behalf of the attorney general as to
form and execution:
By: By:
Date: Date:
Page 5 of 5
7
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE:
SECTION: Consent Calendar April 9,2002
SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.:
City Clerk, Resolution Designating Persons Authorized to
Kathleen Porta Publicly Open Bids for Public Improvements
Requested Action:
Adopt the resolution designating persons authorized to publicly open bids for public
improvements.
Synopsis:
This resolution designates which officials or agents of the City are authorized under Minnesota
Statute 429.041, Subd. 1,to publicly open bids for any public improvement for which the
Council has authorized advertisement for bids.
Attachment:
Resolution
I
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO.2002-
RESOLUTION DESIGNATING PERSONS AUTHORIZED
TO PUBLICLY OPEN BIDS FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS
BE IT RESOLVED,by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie,Minnesota:
1. That as authorized by Minnesota Statute 429.041, Subd. 1, any two or more of the
following designated officials or agents of the City may publicly open bids for anypublic
improvement.for which this Council has authorized advertisement for bids:
Mayor
Councilmembers
City Manager or his or her designee
City Clerk or his or her designee
Finance Director or his or her designee
Director of Parks and Recreational Services or his or her designee
Director of Public Works or his or her designee
Director of Public Safety Services or his or her designee
City Attorney or assistant City Attorney
2. This authority shall remain in effect until rescinded or modified by further action of the
Council, and shall be effective as to the individual elected or appointed to the position
named.
ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 9th day of April 2002.
Nancy Tyra-Lukens,Mayor
ATTEST:
Kathleen A.Porta, City Clerk
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE:April 9,2002
SECTION: Consent Calendar
SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: Award Bid for Park ITEM NO:
Parks and Recreation Baseball Building Contract
Through:Robert A Lambert,
Director Parks&Recreationvst,
Services
Stuart A.Fox,Manager Parks.
and Natural Resources `6T"
Requested Action
Motion: Move to award the bid to Ebert Construction for$290,000 for construction of the
baseball building at Miller Park Field No. 1.
Synopsis
Staff has been working with Delano Erickson Architects to develop plans and specifications for a
building at Miller Park Baseball Field No. 1. This project has received the review of the City
Council and staff was authorized to advertise for bids for this project. The project was
advertised in the Eden Prairie News and Construction Bulletin, and bids were opened on March
22, 2002. The City received bids from 11 construction firms for this building. A summary of
the bids is attached. The consultant's estimate for this building was $360;000.
Staff recommends awarding the building contract to Ebert Construction as per their bid of
$290,000.
The construction project will be paid out of funds from cash park fees that have been designated
for this park building project and contributions from the Eden Prairie Baseball Association. The
City's portion of the cost is 60% and the Baseball Association will pay 40% of the total.
Attachment: Letter from Delano Erickson Architects
Bid Tabulation Summary from the March 22, 2002 Bid Opening.
SAF:mdd
l 03/26/2002 10:01 6125455433 ERICKSON PAGE 01
le
Ir
DELANO ERICKSON ARCHITECTS
7415 WAYZATA BOULEVARD
MINNEAPOUS,MN 55426.
March 26,2002
Mr.Robert Lambert A(at 9
Director
Department of Parks&Recreation •
City of Eden Prairie
8080 Mitchell Road
Eden Prairie,Minnesota 55344 •
•
Re: Crestwood and Miller Park Buildings .
Commission No. 0109
•
Dear Bob: .
•
•
Bids were received on the above projects on March 22, 2002 from 11 of the 18 general contractors we
had issued plans to. Bids ranged from$228,000 to$309,200 on Crestwood,-for which we had estimated
$246,000+ 10%contingency=$271,000. Bids ranged from$290,000 to$398,600 on Miller,for which
we had estimated$327,000+ 10%contingency=$360,000.
•
The low bids are well below our estimates and budget and,therefore, we do not recommend accepting
any of the seven alternates.
We have check the qualifications of the low bidders and,therefore,recommend award of contract to:
Southridge Construction
for Crestwood and a sum of$228,000 . '
Ebert Construction
for Miller and a sum of$290,000
Please call me with any questions.
. Sincerely,
' DELANO ERICKSON ARCHITECTS
Del Eric son,AIA
DE/tIt .
N((NIINiN1 INININININUNI MINI ;Ni
!? m Olato,c)i ;01plCtOlC101 ( OtOt ;OI
E § it-ILnIIR ini ,inlznfu?'ulittalt- I 1>.n to1 �.c�'
C) C)) C) Q)I C)1 O) I to i q0 I to I CA t C){
CD I) O O CS) O ICTOI0101010; IOIOI IO
: )
Lis m - I I I 1 ' ' I I I I CLc L Y_ 0 I I 11 I I I
U m L O Ci C1 CI CI Ci C C CI CI i CI C 1 Ca
m Q o U m OI 0 0 0 0 0 Oi 0 0 O O I OI
W = C4 � mmml mmmllomml Imm
oY � r I ' I 1 I i ! I
>" L co
U Lb r r r r T. r r r r r r r TT
0 CD O O O O O O O O O O O O O •
as -a Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z - -
o ¢ 1
i- O C) C) O O O O O O O O O co,
O O O O O CQCCCC O O O
03 CO - 0 0 N O O O O O O O O O O
V- O 0 N O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O co)_
• -0 r co CO O co co I- O r C) co O co
Q N ti LO d 00 - 4c*) ti O Ij) u5 C)) d-
0 0 0 0 O O co) O co) O O O co
m >, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O
LC) -C 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O 0 0 O
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O LC) 0
CO CO O co N CA co) 0 CO O O r N
< I- t` ti N I` CO I� 0o C'0 d- Cn O .o5 c .
-
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O
m m O O O O CCCCCC O O O
cy .. O O O O O 6 06 0 O O O O
C O O CO O CO 0 0 0 0 0 O O O
'•"' 76 d; CO N r r r O O LC) CO O LC) ti
< 0_ 00 O ti 1- N ti C70 CS) 1` y) CO N. Co
r
O O O O O O O O O O O 0
Q U O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0 •
C O LC) O LC) O O O O O O LC) O •
' "-' •iii Z N. d• N- 1` N O co LU • O LC) LU .
Q a- LC) C) -47 c) d' d' t Cv) N LCj Cr) d'
C co 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0
O O O O O O O O O O O O
CI) , C ¢ O LOC) O N 0 0 0 0 0 O co O
O Z r Ln LU LC) CO LU O ti CO O N ti
< m N r r r N- a N N v- LO N - d-
CO
1-
-a .% O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0
O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O
m N U C; r r¢ O O O O O O O O O
O C) CA C) 0 0 0 0 0 O O O
•.-' Z CO O O 0 0 0 0 C•7 O LOU) N
Q 2 LO N- 1- 1- I- CO ti ti ti CO ti N '
I-
L 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O
m CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O CO
r - O N O ci 0 0 0 O 0 0 O O O
O CO co co 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O
"-' O O co CO N CO CO �t d' 1- LC) O O 0
to LC) d d t LCj Ln LO CO CO LO 1` N
U a O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O 0
O. 0 0 O O O O O O O O O
.O C O CA O O O O O O O 0 0 O
m -O z Cop N coO co0 O O O coO O co) 0 co)
COD Q CO O O CO CA r CO N N O O mot'
O m U co U) IC) COO L j its L10 LO I.C) CO In CO
0
N O O O CZ) O O CD O O 0
03 O O O O O O O O O O O
N .O L 0 0 0 0 O O O O 0 0 O
C t mw CO CO N d0' Or O 1 LLU O 0 LU
p i COD 2 C C) N 'd' d' CO . 00 O O '
._ CO CO 6) LC) CO CA CO . r O CA CO O) 'cY'
="2 - [o CO CO Cf) N CO CO - CO N CO N ' CO
m .
Y O Q -O 0 0 0 O • O O O O O O
p O 0 0 0 O O O O O O O
0-C‘I '-• .a O O O O O O O O O O O
IL Ea 3 co) CO O O 0 0 0 O O C.
N - O - co O) CS) N O CO O) O O LC)
-- Q CO L. cco o00 LU O N .1- L oi LU N U) U)
pp 0 N N N C) N N N N N N
CO
O U)I C co C C .. - .: U' C > r.., ..: .... t6 I O
t0 O C I O C O O CO CD CI) CI CD O -- U) iO Cn CD >i CD
0 0 CO U 0 E 0 0 0 � 0'1 D 0 0 0 0 coc01>
L U U U U U L
p O v w rot L N 0 Cn m n CD y_ CO m
u) 0, a)12 al C C c C U t0 ,_
� � O O c0 C a L -a
U m m t01 U O �i J Z El CD WI
Y) O m1 =I —,--,1
1 U�I1I2;2 �1 -' •I 3
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: April 9,2002
SECTION: Consent Calendar
SERVICE ARFA/DIVISION: 1'I'EM DESCRIPTION: Award Bid for Park ITEM NO:
Parks and Recreation Building at Crestwood Park
Through:Robert A.Lambert,
Director Parks&Recreation :'jam 6----
Services _�J—
Stuart A.Fox, Manager Park
and Natural Resources
Requested Action
Motion: Move to award the bid to Southridge Construction for $228,000 for construction
of the Crestwood Park shelter building.
Synopsis
Staff has been working with Delano Erickson Architects to develop plans and specifications for a
new park building at Crestwood Neighborhood Park. This project has received the review of the
City Council and staff was authorized to advertise for bids for this park building. The project
was advertised in the Eden Prairie News and Construction Bulletin, and bids were opened on
March 22, 2002. The City received bids from 11 construction firms for this building. A
summary of the bids is attached. The consultant's estimate for this building was $271,000.
Staff recommends awarding the building contract to Southridge Construction as per their bid of
$228,000.
This park project will be paid out of funds from cash park fees that have been designated for this
park project.
Attachment: Letter from Delano Erickson Architects
Bid Tabulation Form from the March 22, 2002 Bid Opening
SAF:mdd •
�a 03/28/2002 10:01 612E455433 ERICKSON PAGE 01
7 ■
m/
DELANO ERICKSON ARCHITECTS
__ sIGf
7415 WAYZATA BOULEVARD
MINNEAPOLIS,MN 55426.
March 26,2002 .
Mr.Robert Lambert ' .Ape , 9 1AI—01 '
Director
Department of Parks &Recreation •
City of Eden Prairie
8080 Mitchell Road
Eden Prairie,Minnesota 55344
Re: Crestwood and Miller Park Buildings •
Commission No. 0109 •
Dear Bob:
Bids were received on the above projects on March 22,2002 from 11 of the 18 general contractors we
had issued plans to. Bids ranged from$228,000 to$309,200 on Crestwood,for whichwe had estimated
$246,000+ 10%contingency=$271,000. Bids ranged from$290,000 to$398,600 on Miller,for which
we had estimated$327,000+ 10% contingency=$360,000.
The low bids are well below our estimates and budget and,therefore, we do not recommend accepting.
any of the seven alternates.
.r
We have check the qualifications of the low bidders and, therefore,recommend award of contract to:
•
Southridge Construction
for Crestwood and a sum of$228,000 •
•
Ebert Construction
for Miller and a sum of$290,000
•
Please call me with any questions.
Sincerely,
•
DELANO ERICKSON ARCHLLECTS ' -
Del Eric on,AIA
DE/tlt
NINININI ININININININI ,NINI NI
SZ O CI`OIC;C C aLC;O CICI 1 IOOIO C
E L)iLo.�.LU in ooiLU!LU L�ITI I 1Lo1LLOO LLU
U II a)Iof, 0)1 rnirn{Ia)IC) C) C)I 1 Io a) Irn
0▪ ,., o O.a)l o l o t° o}o co c); , i o co l o l
. O
iLQ m .r p1 i i ' I
I i I I ( f I I
o m s O ci a 73I I'a1- -01� 'a.�1 I-i- -O
a) Q o U co 0 0 OI j o O O O O O I O O 0
wa 0C) 1 Immmlmmm ,Ilm m
Oy I I 1
• o to I -
U W T T' T T T T r T T -T T T T
0 CD O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 d 66 6
t6 � ZZZZ ZZZZZZ ZZ Z
1.5 Q
0
=- 0000. 000aoo Oo o .
O O o o O O O O O o O O O O
•
O U- O O N O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O
-+-' -O T LO CO O Cr) CO N- O T a) LC) O LO
Q N ti LC) d c0 d•• rf• M I: co- tC) Lo O d
cocoa O O O O o 0 O co O
m >, co co o 0 co O O O O O 0 co O
co - 0 0 0 0 O O O O O. O O O O
_ Q- O O o 0 O O O O o 0 C. LO O
2 co co 0 co N a) O o co O o T N
Q I- ti N N ti a0 N O a0 d' a0 00 CO a)
•
0 0 0 0 O 0000, 0 0 0 O
m 2 O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O
d +-• O O O O O O O O O O O O O
G O O (C O M o 0 0 0 o co O co
• •� d; co N T T T O co co co O to h
Q 0., a0 O IS N N I` a0 a) N- M CO N- 00
O o co. co O O co O O O O O
Q U 0 0 0 ` O O O O o 0 0 o O •
.1• +-. Q O O d• O O o 0 0 0 6 O O
C O Lo a) Lo O O C. o C. O Lo O
Z N d� N d I- N O Lo co o co co
Q ci.. Lo M d' C') d' d d co- N' Lo (h
coo cocoa 0 O CD
O C O O O O O O O C) O
CO 0 Q 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O
O O O co O f- O O co coo O co O
-+� a) Z T LC) Lo LC) O Lo O I- CO C. N N.
-a < m N T T T N N N T Ln N -1
t6
I-
-o y; O o co co O O O O O O O co
Q O O O co 0 0 0 co 0 co O O
m N Q O T T O O O O O O OO OU▪ ZOaO) O) O 880M0 O oO Lo Lo N
Q N Lo N- L- I` N LU I` I` ti O ti N
F. •
f- O O o o O O O O o co o O O
m a) co 0 co 0 co 0 0 0 0 0 o co O
2 0 CCOO O O O O O O O ci O O O O
'''' a) o O CO N CO CO. ":t N- Lo O O O
Q Lo Lr - - d co- to Lo O (O Ili ti N
U O o O co O O co O O O O O
O O CD CDO O o 0 o 0 0 co O
O a) O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O
m O Z M N M 000 D O O ODD O O O O
O (O o 0 a0 C) T a N N 0 o 4alO co 'd' Lo CO I` ' Lo Lo �t N- LO N.'"NO m 0 co O Lo CO LO LC) LC) LC) Lo CO LC) O
O
N co co co coo O o 0 0 o O O
0 0 co 0 O O O O O O o
N .O L- 0 0 6 O 6 O 0 0 0 0 6
O L m N COO 000 N '1 OT O co co O co LC)
i y 2 oO N r' 4 d- ' 00 a0 O .O 'i
-• o N a) LC) co a) -O T O 0) CO a) '
m 2 co LU CO ("0N M CO M N . CO N CO •
Y LO o 0 0 O O O O O co O
• 6 Q c) O O O O O O O O O O •
a
a o o a) O O O O O - 00 O
LE OO O a, O
•L - Lo a) a) N 0
0)
0Lo
QNmcL 0 0
(6 co CO LC) O N d• LLO
op 0 N N N CO N N N N CO
N N N .
-CO
CO
Cl)
.0 oi C C .:I....: .; 0 ...: C >+ . -�: (B 0
CO O C C..) O O En 0) LA C CO 0 = U) to U) to > 0
-p s- O CO O :C. C C C C Q = C C' C C O
C
O ,a) 0 _
UO LC2 U U U U C U U U U L
UL Zr) oov-0 a) = a) m 0
03 Da (B
U m LT] o a) U LOL ca i o Z c 0
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE:
April 9,2002
SECTION: Consent Calendar
SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION:I.C. 02-5560 ITEM NO.:
Engineering Services Award Contract for 2002 Street Striping
Mary Krause ff .
Eugene A.Dietz •
Requested Action
Move to: Award contract for 2002 Street Striping to United Rentals Highway
Technology in the amount of$41,262.50 and authorize the Mayor and City
Manager to execute the document.
Synopsis
Sealed bids were received Thursday, March 21, 2002 for the 2002 Street Striping. Four bids
were received as follows:
United Rentals Highway Technology $41,262.50
Pavement Marking Service $43,116.25
AAA Striping Service Company $52,380.00
Traffic Marking Service $71,042.50
Background Information
Street striping is an annual street maintenance project. The budget for 2002 is $60,000.00 under
budget#1714-6337. Staff recommends award to United Rentals Highway Technology.
! -
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE:
April 9,2002
SECTION: Consent Calendar
SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: LC. 02-5561 ITEM NO.:
Engineering Services Award Contract for 2002 Street Cracksealing
Mary Krause
Eugene A.Dietz
Requested Action
Move to: Award contract for 2002 Street Cracksealing to Precision Sealcoat, Inc. in the
amount of$53,060.00 and authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute
the document.
Synopsis
Sealed bids were received Thursday, March 21, 2002 for the 2002 Street Cracksealing. Six bids
were received as follows:
Precision Sealcoating,Inc. $53,060.00
Daffinson Pavement $55,720.00 •
Allied Blacktop $77,000.00
ASTECH $79,730.00
Superior Asphalt Maintenance $84,700.00
Bergman Companies $86,800.00
Background Information
•
Street cracksealing is an annual street maintenance project in preparation for sealcoating. The
funding for this project is through budget #1707-6351, Contracted Services and Sealcoating
budget#1707-6336. Staff recommends award to Precision Sealcoating, Inc.
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE:
April 9,2002
SECTION: Consent Calendar
SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: LC.00-5514 ITEM NO.:
Engineering Services Approve Plans and Specifications and Order
Randy Newton Advertisement for Bids for Bryant Lake'Drive J �'
Trail �/
•
Requested Action
Move to:Adopt resolution approving plans and specifications and ordering advertisement
for bids for I.C. 00-5514,Bryant Lake Drive Trail.
Synopsis
With the assistance of SEH,Inc. the Engineering Division has prepared plans and specifications
for a trail along the west side of Bryant Lake Drive and the south side of Shady Oak Road
between the TH 212 off-ramp and Rowland Road.
Background
The Bryant Lake Drive trail is included in the City's Park and Open Space Plan and is one of the
priority trail projects in the community. The Parks and Recreation Department has secured a
grant for approximately$50,000 from the Department of Natural Resources(DNR).
Previous Council action (February 5, 2002) approved a Professional Services agreement with
SEH, Inc. for design of the Bryant Lake Trail as part of the TH 212 / Valley View Road
Interchange Area Improvements. In order to meet the DNR deadline for it's grant funding the
trail segment has split from the larger project and will be constructed as a seperate project.
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY,NIINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS
AND ORDERING ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS.
WHEREAS,the City Engineer through SEH, Inc., has prepared plans and specifications for the
following improvements to wit:
I.C. 00-5514 Bryant Lake Drive Trail
and has presented such plans and specifications to the Council for approval.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
EDEN PRAIRIE:
1. Such plans and specifications, a copy of which is on file for public inspection in the
City Engineer's office, are hereby approved.
2. The City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted in the official paper and in the
Construction Bulletin an advertisement for bids upon the making of such
improvement under such approved plans and specifications. The advertisement shall
be published for 3 weeks, shall specify the work to be done, shall state that bids shall
be received until 10:00 a.m. on May 9, 2002, at City Hall after which time they will
be publicly opened by the City Clerk and Engineer,will then be tabulated, and will be
considered by the Council at 7:00 p.m., Tuesday, May 21, 2002, at the Eden Prairie
City Hall, Eden Prairie. No bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the
clerk and accompanied by a cash deposit, cashier's check, bid bond or certified check
payable to the City for 5% (percent)of the amount of such bid.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on April 9,2002.
Nancy Tyra-Lukens,Mayor
ATTEST: SEAL
Kathleen A.Porta, City Clerk
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE:
April 9,2002
SECTION: Consent Calendar
SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: I.C. 01-5541 ITEM NO.:
Public Works Approve Traffic Control Signal Agreement
Engineering Services with MnDOT for Emergency Vehicle Pre-
Rodney W.Rue Emption on Existing Traffic Signals
Requested Action •
•
Move to: Adopt resolution approving Traffic Control Signal Agreement No. 83001M
with MnDOT for the installation of Emergency Vehicle Pre-Emption (EVP)
• equipment on existing MnDOT-controlled intersections within Eden Prairie.
Synopsis
This agreement defines MnDOT's and the City's maintenance obligations associated with the
EVP equipment to be installed on existing MnDOT-controlled intersections. This agreement is
associated with the EVP contract that was awarded by the City in December 2001.
Background
This project completes our commitment to have all signals within Eden Prairie equipped with
EVP systems. The current project should be completed and operational by early summer this
year.
Attachments •
Traffic Control Signal Agreement No.83001M
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO.
APPROVE TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAL AGREEMENT
WITH MnDOT FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLE PRE-EMPTION(EVP)
EQUIPMENT ON MnDOT-CONTROLLED TRAFFIC SIGNALS
I.C. 01-5541
WHEREAS,the City of Eden Prairie has prepared and approved plans and specifications for the
installation of emergency vehicle pre-emption equipment on various traffic signals throughout
Eden Prairie; and
WHEREAS, MnDOT has prepared a traffic control signal agreement that identifies the
maintenance obligations for the MnDOT-controlled traffic signals for this project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council that Traffic
Control Signal Agreement No. 83001M for City Project No. 01-5541 is hereby approved, and the
Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute said agreement on behalf of the City
of Eden Prairie.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on April 9,2002.
Nancy Tyra-Lukens,Mayor
ATTEST: SEAL
Kathleen Porta, City Clerk
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE:
April 9,2002
SECTION: Consent Calendar
SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: I.C. 01-5550 ITEM NO.:
Engineering Services Approve Traffic Control Signal Agreement
Rodney W.Rue with MnDOT for a Signal at the I-494 North
Eugene A.Dietz Ramp and Prairie Center Drive Intersection
Requested Action
Move to: Adopt resolution approving Traffic Control Signal Agreement No. 83027R
with MnDOT for a signal at the intersection of the I-494 north ramp and
Prairie Center Drive.
•
Synopsis
This signal agreement defines the financial, operational and maintenance responsibilities for each
agency. Our share of the cost for this project is estimated at $117,263. Our share is proposed to
be financed by the Construction Fund.
MnDOT is proposing the expansion of I-494 to provide a third land in each direction. Some of
the preliminary work will occur this summer, including the installation of this traffic signal at the
intersection of the I-494 north ramp and Prairie Center Drive.
Background Information
This intersection is on MnDOT's signal priority list. We had requested that this signal be
installed with the I-494 third lane project and constructed as early in the project schedule as
possible. The project also includes constructing double left turn lanes on the I-494 north off-
ramp, as well as some minor improvements on Prairie Center Drive to accommodate the double
left turns. There is also a segment of signal interconnect (between West 78th Street and Viking
Drive)being installed with their project.
Attachments
Traffic Control Signal Agreement No. 83027R
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY,IVIINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO.
APPROVE TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAL AGREEMENT WITH MnDOT
FOR SIGNALS AT THE INTERSECTION OF •
PRAIRIE CENTER DRIVE AND I-494 NORTH RAMP
I.C. 01-5550
WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) has prepared construction
plans for intersection and signal improvements at the intersection of Prairie Center Drive and I-494
North Ramp;
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has approved the preliminary layout for I-494 from TH 212
to 0.5 miles west of East Bush Lake Road, which included the above referenced intersection and
signal improvements;
WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie desires to have this signal interconnected with the
interconnect system along Prairie Center Drive and I-494 North Ramp; and
WHEREAS,MnDOT has prepared a traffic control signal agreement that identifies the operational
and financial obligations for the traffic signal at Prairie Center Drive and I-494 North Ramp
intersection.
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council that Traffic Control
Signal Agreement No. 83027R for City Project No. 01-5550 is hereby approved,and the Mayor and
City Manager are hereby authorized to execute said agreement on behalf of the City of Eden Prairie.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on April 9,2002.
Nancy Tyra-Lukens,Mayor
ATTEST: SEAL
Kathleen A.Porta,City Clerk
•
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE:
April 9,2002
SECTION: Consent Calendar
SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: 02-5553 ITEM NO.:
Engineering Services Drainage Easement to MnDOT for I-494 Third
Alan D. Gray Lane Improvements /v!
Eugene A.Dietz
Requested Action
Move to: Approve Drainage Easement to MnDOT over a portion of Outlot C, Golden
Strip
Synopsis
As part of the addition of the third lanes to I-494 between TH 212 and Th 100, MnDOT will
construct a new segment of storm sewer discharging to the existing City ponds north of Viking
Drive. MnDOT requires a drainage easement over a portion of Outlot C, Golden Strip for the
construction and maintenance of this storm sewer.
•
Background Information
The Council has previously authorized a "Permit To Construct" to MnDOT for pond
improvements to accommodate 1-494 drainage. This easement is required for the storm sewer
connecting to the pond. Outlot C is owned by the City and used for storm water facilities.
Consistent with past practices,no compensation is requested of MnDOT for the easement.
Attachments •
Drainage Easement
1
DRAINAGE EASEMENT
C.S.2785 (494=394)907
Parcel 223C
Date: County of Hennepin
For and in consideration of the sum of zero dollars and zero cents
Dollars($0.00), City of Eden Prairie,
a municipal corporation under the laws of the state of Minnesota, Grantor, hereby conveys and
quitclaims to the State of Minnesota, Grantee, its successors and assigns, a drainage easement in
perpetuity for the construction and maintenance of a drainage system, on the following described
premises in Hennepin County,Minnesota:
An easement in perpetuity for drainage purposes over and across Tract 1 described below:
Tract 1. That part of Outlot C, Golden Strip, according to the plat thereof on file and of
record in the office of the County Recorder in and for Hennepin County,
Minnesota, described as follows: Commencing at the north quarter corner of
Section 13, Township 116 North, Range 22 West; thence run southerly along the
north and south quarter line of said Section 13 on an assumed azimuth of 179
degrees 52 minutes 52 seconds for 863.61 feet to the northerly line of Viking Drive
as now located and established; thence on an azimuth of 269 degrees 00 minutes 57
seconds along the north line of said Viking Drive for 339.38 feet to the point of
beginning of Tract 1 to be described; thence continue on an azimuth of 269 degrees
00 minutes 57 seconds along the northerly line of said Viking Drive for 56.71 feet
to a point on the southwesterly line of said Outlot C; thence on an azimuth of 313
degrees 52 minutes 18 seconds along the southwesterly lone of said Outlot C for
80.00 feet; thence on an azimuth of 43 degrees 52 minutes 18 seconds for 40.00
feet; thence on an azimuth of 133 degrees 52 minutes 18 seconds for 120.20 feet to
the point of beginning.
Grantor shall have the right of ingress to and egress from the hereinbefore described
property for the purpose of maintaining and repairing said drainage conduit.
Grantee shall restore all grasses, shrubs and natural growth disturbed by initial
construction or subsequent maintenance activities to a condition as near as possible to that existing
prior to initial construction or subsequent maintenance.
The said Grantor does hereby release the State of Minnesota from any claims for
damages to the fair market value of the above-described area covered by the drainage easement
and for its use, or any claims for damages to the fair market value of the remaining property of
Grantor caused by the use of the drainage easement, including grading of area for highway
purposes. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Grantor does not release any claims it may have as a
result of the negligence of the Grantee, its agents or contractors, in conducting any of the above
activities.
2)
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
By
Nancy Tyra-Lukens,Mayor
And
Carl J. Jullie, City Manager
STATE OF M NNESOTA )
)ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN)
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
, 2002, by Nancy Tyra-Lukens and Carl J. Jullie, the Mayor and City
Manager of the City of Eden Prairie, a municipal corporation under the laws of the state of
Minnesota,on behalf of the municipal corporation..
Notary Public
My commission expires:
This instrument was drafted by the
State of Minnesota,Department of .
Transpiration,Legal and
Real Estate Conveyance Unit,
St.Paul,Minnesota 55155
R56875-01W.wpd
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE:
SECTION: Consent 03/26/02
SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.:
Public Safety/Police
Support Operations Division Agreement-State of Wisconsin Radio Frequency
Gary J. Therkelsen Short Spacing
Requested Action:
Move To: Approve Agreement between the City of Eden Prairie and the State of Wisconsin
Synopsis:
This agreeement will permit the State of Wisconsin to license a radio frequency that they would
otherwise be ineligible due to it's close proximity to Eden Prairie
Background:
The State of Wisconsin is attempting to license a radio frequency(811.4875 /857.4875)that we operate
on for use by their corrections department at New Richmond, a physical location that is closer than
normally permitted by the FCC. Normally, the reuse of this type of radio frequency is not permitted
within 88 kilometers. Since we are already licensed on this frequency,Wisconsin would need a waiver
to "short space"their system to ours. Their desire to use the specific frequency is driven by their desire
to develop an existing system in use throughout the state of Wisconsin. The use of another frequency
for the New Richmond site will complicate system design and user operation.
The request by Wisconsin has been studied by our radio engineering firm, Leonard Keohnen&
Associates who has advised that we may cooperate with Wisconsin's request providing certain technical
and legal measures are taken to protect our communications system as it exists today and permit our
ability to adapt it in the future.
The City Attorney has prepared an agreement that addresses the concerns of the City.
Attachment:
Agreement
AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made and executed the day of ,2002,by
and between the City of Eden Prairie, ("City"), and the State of Wisconsin, ("State").
WHEREAS,the City is licensed by the Federal Communication Commission("FCC")to
operate a radio frequency in and around the City of Eden Prairie,Minnesota and operates a radio
network on said frequency; and
WHEREAS,the State desires to operate a radio network on the same frequency in and
around the City of New Richmond,Wisconsin; and
WHEREAS,the frequency upon which the State desires to operate would normally not
be allowed by the FCC because the operating area is too close to the City network operating on
the same frequency; and
WHEREAS,the State has requested that the City consent to the State's use of the same
frequency; and
WHEREAS,the City has determined that it will allow the State to use the same radio
frequency.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises and covenants contained herein
City and State, agree as follows:
i. City shall not object to the use of the City's radio frequency by the State in the
City of New Richmond, Wisconsin.
2. State shall design and construct the radio system in New Richmond,Wisconsin
with an antenna system that provides a minimum of 25db front to back ratio and with the notch
centered on the City of Eden Prairie,Minnesota.
3. State shall make available for inspection and copying all plans,drawings, or other
documents related to the radio network at the request of the City or the City's engineers.
4. State acknowledges that the current City radio network provides service at least as
far as Baldwin,Wisconsin along the Interstate 94 corridor. State shall incorporate this fact in the
design and construction of its radio network.
5. State acknowledges that the City network may interfere with the State's use of its
radio network. State shall not object to any such interference caused by the current or future
operation of the City radio network. State further waives any claim,of any sort, against the City
for such interference.
6. State shall not object to,block,impede,or in any way interfere with any design
changes in the City radio network or the licensing of such changes. Potential changes to the City
network include,but are not limited to,relocation and or addition of thinking transmitters within
an eight mile radius of the current transmitter site which may or may not use the frequency that
will be used by City and State.
7. State agrees to save, indemnify, and hold the City harmless from any and all loss,
claim, or expense,including attorney fees, arising out of or in any way related to this Agreement
or the State's use of the frequency in question,including without limitation,personal injury,
bodily injury and property damage
8. State shall at all times abide by the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act,
Minn. Stat. § 13.01, et seq.,to the extent that the Act is applicable to data and documents in the
hands of the State.
9. The books,records, documents, and accounting procedures and practices of the
State or other parties relevant to this Agreement are subject to examination by the City and either
the Minnesota Legislative Auditor or the Minnesota State Auditor for a period of six years after
the effective date of this Agreement.
10. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts each of which shall be
considered an original.
11. This Agreement constitutes the final and complete agreement of the parties and
shall supersede and replace any prior oral or written agreements between City and State. Any
subsequent modification must be in writing signed by both parties.
12. This Agreement shall be governed and construed under the laws of the State of
Minnesota. Any disputes in any way related to this Agreement or the State's use of the frequency
in question shall be venued in the Minnesota State Courts located in Hennepin County,
Minnesota unless the subject matter of any dispute may only be heard in a federal court, in which
case the action shall be venued in the United States District Court located in Minneapolis,
Minnesota.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties to this Agreement have hereunto set their hands
as of the date set forth above.
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE STATE OF WISCONSIN
By By
Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Its Mayor
By By
Carl Jullie, City Manager
3
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE:
SECTION: Public Hearings 4/9/02
SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.:
Community Development
Donald R.Uram Marvin Heights /J-
Danette M.Moore
Requested Action
Move to:
• Close the Public Hearing; and
• Adopt the Resolution for PUD Concept Amendment on 3.11 acres; and
• Approve 1st Reading of the Ordinance for PUD District Review, and Zoning District
Change from RM-6.5 to R1-13.5 on 3.11 acres; and
• Adopt the Resolution for Preliminary Plat on 3.11 acres into 1 lot; and
• Direct Staff to prepare a Developer's Agreement incorporating Staff and Board
recommendations and Council conditions.
•
Synopsis
The project is for one-single family lot located south of Anderson Lakes Parkway and west of
Preserve Boulevard.
Community Planning Board Recommendation
The Community Planning Board voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the project to the City
Council at the March 11, 2002 meeting.
Background Information
The site is zoned RM-6.5 and would reasonably allow for the construction of four twin homes.
The proponent is proposing to construct one-single family two-story structure.
The site is 81%wetland, classified as low quality, Type 3. The City Code allows for a 25 foot
wetland buffer and structure setback. In the interest of reducing impacts to the wetland and tree
removal,the following waivers are required through the Planned Unit Development:
1. Front yard setback of 25 feet. Code requires a minimum front yard setback of 30 feet.
2. Wetland buffer setback of 4 feet. Code requires a minimum wetland buffer setback of 10
feet.
3. Wetland structure setback of 0 feet. Code requires a minimum wetland structure setback
of 15 feet.
City Council Agenda April 9,2002
Public Hearings-Marvin Heights
Page 2 of 2
Reasons to consider the waivers include:
• To preserve the existing tree masses located on the site
• To avoid wetland fill.
• To allow for the reasonable use of the property.
Attachments
1. Resolution for PUD Concept Amendment
2. Resolution for Preliminary Plat
3. Staff Report dated March 11,2002
4. Community Planning Board minutes dated March 11,2002
2
MARVIN HEIGHTS
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 2002-
A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
CONCEPT AMENDMENT OF MARVIN HEIGHTS FOR PETER ANDERSON AND
VIRGINIA MARVIN
WHEREAS,the City of Eden Prairie has by virtue of City Code provided for the Planned
Unit Development(PUD) Concept of certain areas located within the City; and
WHEREAS, the Community Planning Board did conduct a public hearing on The Marvin
Heights PUD Concept by Peter Anderson and Virginia Marvin and considered their request for
approval for development (and waivers) and recommended approval of the requests to the City
Council; and
WHEREAS,the City Council did consider the request on April 9, 2002.
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Eden Prairie,Minnesota,
as follows:
1. Marvin Heights,being in Hennepin County,Minnesota,legally described as outlined
in Exhibit A, is attached hereto and made a part hereof.
2. That the City Council does grant PUD Concept approval as outlined in the plans
dated February 21, 2002.
3. That the PUD Concept meets the recommendations of the Community Planning
Board dated March 11, 2002.
ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 9th day of April,2002.
Nancy Tyra-Lukens,Mayor
ATTEST:
Kathleen A.Porta, City Clerk
Exhibit A
Marvin Heights
Legal Description:
Outlot B, Lake Heights Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota.
7
MARVIN HEIGHTS
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY,NIINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 2002-
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT
OF MARVIN HEIGHTS FOR PETER ANDERSON AND VIRGINIA MARVIN
BE IT RESOLVED,by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows:
That the preliminary plat of the Marvin Heights Subdivision for Peter Anderson and Virginia Marvin
dated February 21,2002 and consisting of 3.11 acres into 1 lot,a copy of which is on file at the City
Hall, is found to be in conformance with the provisions of the Eden Prairie Zoning and Platting
Ordinances, and amendments thereto, and is herein approved.
ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on the 9th day of April,2002.
Nancy Tyra-Lukens,Mayor
ATTEST:
Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk
5
MI'I' A--
STAFF REPORT
TO: Community Planning Board
FROM: Danette M. Moore,Planner
THROUGH: Michael D.Franzen, City Planner
DATE: March 11,2002
SUBJECT: Marvin Heights
APPLICANT: Peter Anderson and Ginny Marvin
OWNER: Lake Heights Ventures
LOCATION: Southwest of Anderson Lakes Parkway and Preserve Boulevard
REQUEST: 1. Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 3.11 acres
2. Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 3.11 acres
3. Zoning District Change from Multiple Family Residential(RM-6.5)to
Single Family Residential(R1-13.5) on 3.11 acres
4. Preliminary Plat of 3.11 acres into 1 lot
f„0
Staff Rep ort—Marvin Heights
March 11,2002
BACKGROUND
The Comprehensive Guide Plan shows this site as Low Density Residential for up to 2.5 units per acre.
The property is currently zoned Multiple Family Residential(RM-6.5). Surrounding land uses consist of
single-family residential to the west and south, multiple-family residential to the east, and Eden Lake
Elementary School to the north. The surrounding zoning is R1-13.5 to the west and south,RM-6.5 to the
east, and rural to the north.
PRELIMINARY PLAT
The site is currently described as Outlot B of Lake Heights Addition. The lot size and dimensions meet
City Code requirements. The proposed structure is a two-story walk out.
To avoid wetland filling,mitigation, and additional tree removal,the plan proposes a 25 foot front yard
setback. City Code requires a 30 foot front yard setback. The plan meets City Code side and rear yard
setback requirements.
The site is 81%wetland. The wetland is classified as a low quality,Type 3 wetland. The City Code allows
for a 10 foot wetland buffer setback and a structure setback of 15 feet. A waiver will be necessary to allow
for a 4 foot buffer setback from the wetland and a 0 foot structure setback.
GRADING AND DRAINAGE
Two significant trees (30 inches) located near the proposed garage will be lost due to construction. A
conservation easement is proposed to protect the remaining trees on site.
UTILITIES
City sewer and water is available to the site.
•
PUD WAIVERS
The following waivers are required through the Planned Unit Development:
1. Front yard setback of 25 feet. Code requires a minimum front yard setback of 30 feet.
2. Wetland buffer setback of 4 feet. Code requires a minimum wetland buffer setback of 10 feet.
3. Wetland structure setback of 0 feet. Code requires a minimum structure setback of 15 feet.
2
I
Staff Report—Marvin Heights
March 11,2002
Reasons to consider the waivers include:
• To preserve the existing tree masses located on the site
• To avoid wetland fill.
• To allow for the reasonable use of the property.
DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES
There are two uses of the site:
• Four twin homes. The current zoning of RM-6.5 would reasonably allow for the construction
of four twin homes. There would be 10%wetland fill and mitigation,consistent with past City
approvals for wetland fill. In addition, tree removal would be more extensive.
• Single family homes that meet setback requirements. This would require wetland fill,
mitigation, and additional tree removal.
CONCLUSION
The Community Planning Board should discuss the following questions:
1. Should the land remain zoned Multiple Family Residential or rezoned Single Family Residential?
2. Which alternative fits in better with the neighborhood?
3. Which alternative causes the least impact on the trees and wetland?
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of the following:
1. Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 3.11 acres
2. Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 3.11 acres
3. Zoning District Change from Multiple Family Residential(RM-6.5)to Single Family Residential
(R1-13.5) on 3.11 acres
4. Preliminary Plat of 3.11 acres into 1 lot
3
Staff Report—Marvin Heights
March 11,2002
This would be based on plans dated February 21,2002,this staff report, and the following conditions:
1. Prior to grading permit issuance,the proponent shall:
A. Submit detailed storm water runoff,utility and erosion control plans for review by the City
Engineer and Watershed District.
B. Install erosion control at the grading limits of the property for review and approval by the
City Engineer.
2. Prior to building permit issuance,the proponent shall:
A. Submit a tree replacement bond for review.
B. Submit detailed building plans to the Inspections Department and Fire Marshal for their
review and approval.
3. Concurrent with final plat release and prior to any development on the property, the proponent
shall:
A. Record at Hennepin County,a conservation easement over the wetland area as shown on the
preliminary plat.
4. The following waivers have been granted through the PUD for this project:
A. Front yard setback of 25 feet. Code requires a minimum front yard setback of 30 feet.
B. Wetland buffer setback of 4 feet. Code requires a minimum wetland buffer setback of 10
feet.
C. Wetland structure setback of 0 feet. Code requires a minimum wetland setback of 15 feet.
4
APPROVED MINUTES OF T1
EDEN PRAIRIE COMMUNITY PLANNING BOARD
MONDAY,MARCH 11,2002 7:00 P.M., CITY CENTER
Council Chambers
8080 Mitchell Road
BOARD MEMBERS: Ken Brooks,Frantz Corneille,Randy Foote, Vicki Koenig,
Kathy Nelson,Fred Seymour,Paul Sodt, Susan Stock,Ray
Stoelting
STAFF MEMBERS: Alan Gray, City Engineer
Scott Kipp, Senior Planner
Danette Moore,Planner
I. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE—ROLL CALL
Chair Corneille called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Present: Chair Corneille,
Commissioners Brooks, Foote,Koenig, Stoelting, Stock, Stoelting. Absent:Nelson,
Seymour, Sodt.
II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Motion by Brooks, second by Stoelting to approve the agenda. Motion carried, 6-0.
III. MINUTES
A. Minutes of the Monday February 11, 2002 Community Planning Board Meeting
Motion by Brooks, second by Stoelting to approve the minutes of the Monday,February
11, 2002 Community Planning Board Meeting. Motion carried,3-0-2, abstentions
Foote and Koenig.
IV. PUBLIC MEETINGS
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. MARVIN HEIGHTS by Peter Anderson and Ginny Marvin.Request for:
Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 3.11 acres, Planned Unit
Development District Review with waivers on 3.11 acres,Zoning District Change
from RM-6.5 to R1-13.5 on 3.11 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 3.11 acres into 1
lot. Location: West of Preserve Boulevard and South of Anderson Lakes Parkway
The public hearing opened at 7:02 p.m.
! O
Community Planning Board Minutes
March 1,2002
Page 2
Moore stated the property is currently zoned multi-family residential(RM 6.5).
The developer is proposing to rezone the property to single-family residential
(R1-13.5)to construct one single-family home. Staff recommends approval of the
project and proposed waivers based on the recommendations of the Staff Report
dated March 11, 2002.
The developer showed the plans including the location of the significant tree
removal. The home was designed to minimize wetland impact.
Rick Nelson of 8983 Preserve Boulevard stated he was not opposed to a single
family home.He was concerned about the proposed 25-foot front yard setback.
The way Preserve Boulevard curves near this lot it is not a good idea to have a
house right on the street. The Community Planning Board should stick with the
required 30-foot setback. Also,it was not clear how the lower level garage would
be accessed.
The developer stated the intent of the lower garage was only for storage.No
vehicle access is proposed.
Stoelting inquired whether there were other homes on the street with reduced
setbacks or they were all at the required 30-foot setback.
Moore stated she was not aware of any reduced front yard setbacks in this area.
However,the City Council has approved 25-foot front yard setbacks in other
developments to help minimize wetland and tree impacts.
Foote asked whether the city would have any liability if the house were
constructed with a reduced wetland setback.
Kipp stated it is the builder's responsibility for structural engineering of the
house.
Gray said the wetland will connect to the storm sewer that runs into Eden Lake.
The house is two feet above the 100-year flood elevation. The designer and
builder will have to provide soil testing results.
Foote asked whether they could hold the city liable for water problems.
Gray stated no. The structure is shown two feet above the 100-year flood
elevation. The lowest level is a walkout. Mitigation would need to be taken into
account by the builder.
Stoelting inquired about the number of bedrooms and the size of the house.
Community Planning Board Minutes
March 1,2002
Page 3
The developer stated the structure would be between 4 and 5 bedrooms and
approximately 4,200 square feet finished.
Stoelting inquired about its market value.
The developer stated around$600,000.
Koenig inquired about the zero foot structure setback. The house appears to be on
the wetland delineation.
Kipp said the house is proposed four feet from the wetland at one corner of the
house.
Koenig asked whether it would be marked so there will be no encroachment.
Moore stated there would be monuments showing the separation from the yard
and wetland.
Foote noted the way it is zoned right now,it is a good trade off and the neighbors
would appreciate a single-family house versus multi-family structures.
Dan Fisk, 3973 Noble Court, stated their backyard borders the wetland and
proposed development. They are in support of the project. The key is designating
the wetland areas for conservation to be left undeveloped.
Motion by Brooks, second by Stoelting to close the public hearing. Motion
carried, 6-0.
The hearing closed at 7:16 p.m.
Motion by Brooks, second by Stoelting to approve Marvin Heights by Peter
Anderson and Ginny Marvin request for: Planned Unit Development Concept
Amendment on 3.11 acres,Planned Unit Development District Review with
waivers on 3.11 acres, Zoning District Change from RM-6.5 to R1-13.5 on 3.11
acres, and Preliminary Plat of 3.11 acres into 1 lot. Location: West of Preserve
Boulevard and South of Anderson Lakes Parkway based on plans dated February
21,2002, staff report dated March 11, 2002 and conditions therein. Motion
carried, 6-0.
VI. MEMBERS' REPORTS
VII. CONTINUING BUSINESS
VIII. NEW BUSINESS
Community Planning Board Minutes
March 1,2002
Page 4
IX. PLANNERS'REPORTS
Kipp stated the March 25th Community Planning Board meeting will be for The Heights
at Valley View project for construction of an apartment building. The Board will recall
that this item was discussed earlier at an informational meeting to review possible
development scenarios and tree impacts.
X. ADJOURNMENT
Motion by Stoelting,second by Brooks to adjourn.Motion carried, 6-0.
The meeting adjourned at 7:20 p.m.
•
/3
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
DATE:
SECTION: Payment of Claims April 9,2002
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 108472-108933
Wire Transfers 1502-1512
•
Background Information
Attachments
I
City of Eden Prairie
Council Check Summary
4/9/2002
Division Amount
General 405,266
101 Legislative 3,173
102 Legal Counsel 63,148
111 Customer Service 10,720
112 Human Resources 1,448
113 Communication Services 3,375
114 Benefits&Training 12,041
115 Risk Management 1,854
116 Facilities 22,026
117 City Center 7,186
130 Assessing 187
131 Finance 72
133 Community Development 558
135 Information Technology 85,988
136 Wireless Communication 7,595
150 Park Administration 2,693
151 Park Maintenance 11,421
153 Athletic Programs 16,579
154 Community Center 34,111
156 Youth Programs 1,189
157 Special Events 46
158 Senior Center 4,460
159 Recreation Administration 89
160 Adaptive Recreation 438
161 Oak Point Pool 531
162 Arts 2,613
163 Park Facilities 934
180 Police 27,939
181 Telecommunicators 373
183 Civil Defense 63
184 Fire 14,729
185 Animal Control 804
186 Inspections 189
200 Engineering 2,019
201 Street Maintenance 19,008
202 Street Lighting 52,317
203 Fleet Services 16,995
204 Equipment Revolving 51,173
301 CDBG 243
303 Cemetary Operation 7
311 Grant Fund 5,550
312 Recycle Rebate 12,708
314 Liquor Compliance 646
402 2nd Sheet of Ice 1992A 1,064
403 City Center Debt 1,064
406 Water/Sewer Refunding 1978 1,175
418 HRA 2002A Lease Revenue Bonds 8,535
502 Park Development 18,859
503 Utility Improvement 4,087
505 Utility Reserve 2,710
506 Improvment Bonds 1996 105,130
509 CIP Fund 145,198
511 Construction Fund 52,133
601 Prairie Village Liquor 105,367
602 Den Road Liquor 180,815
603 Prairie View Liquor 113,954
701 Water Fund 146,962
702 Sewer Fund 198,814
703 Storm Drainage Fund 2,047
803 Escrow Fund 72,803
806 SAC Agency Fund 236,400
Report Totals 2,301,622
City of Eden Prairie
Council Check Register
4/9/2002
Check# Amount Vendor Account Description Business Unit
1502 265 MINNESOTA DEPT OF REVENUE Motor Fuels Fleet Services
1503 54,046 MINNESOTA DEPT OF REVENUE Sales Tax Payable Den Road Liquor Store
1504 114,236 WELLS FARGO MINNESOTA N A Federal Taxes Withheld General Fund
1505 21,443 MINNESOTA DEPT OF REVENUE State Taxes Withheld General Fund
1506 13,973 ORCHARD TRUST CO AS TRUSTEE/CU Deferred Compensation General Fund
1507 7,955 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-457 Deferred Compensation General Fund
1508 62,423 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT Employers PERA General Fund
1509 14,732 WELLS FARGO MINNESOTA N A Federal Taxes Withheld General Fund
1510 335 WELLS FARGO MINNESOTA N A Employers SS&Medicare General Fund
1511 5,256 MINNESOTA DEPT OF REVENUE State Taxes Withheld General Fund
1512 7,193 US BANK TRUST NATIONAL ASSN Bond Issue Costs HRA 2002A LEASE REVENUE BONDS
108472 80 BCA/FORENSIC SCIENCE LABORATOR Tuition Reimbursement/School Police
108473 180 BCA/TRAINING&DEVELOPMENT Tuition Reimbursement/School Police
108474 312 BOCK,FRED Clothing&Uniforms Police
108475 90 BOSACKER,MIKE Clothing&Uniforms Police
108476 72 BUTCHER,SHERRY Mileage&Parking City Council
108477 98 CONLEY,JOHN Clothing&Uniforms Police
108478 138 COUNTRY INN&SUITES Tuition Reimbursement/School Fire
108479 307 CUMMINGS,KIM Operating Supplies Fire
108480 193 D'AMICO AND SONS Miscellaneous General Facilities
108481 98 EASTBURN,EMILY Canine Supplies Police
108482 87 FEDEX Postage General
108483 105 G&K SERVICES-MPLS INDUSTRIAL Other Rentals Park Maintenance
108484 12,643 HAMLINE UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SC Other Contracted Services Recycle Rebate
108485 453 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER-GE Board of Prisoner Police
108486 179 HOLIDAY INN Tuition Reimbursement/School Fire
108487 304 KAHLER GRAND HOTEL,THE Tuition Reimbursement/School Fire
108488 75 KALKES,JAYNA Employee Award Human Resources
108489 60 KANDIYOHI COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEP Dues&Subscriptions Police
108490 58 KLINE,JAMES Travel Expense Police
108491 72 LARSON,ALLEN R. Travel Expense Police
108492 20 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES Dues&Subscriptions City Council
108493 64 LINDGREN,KRISTI M. Clothing&Uniforms Telecommunicators
108494 164 MATTHEW BENDER&CO INC Training Supplies Police
108495 880 MITCHELL,JULIE Other Contracted Services Police
108496 260 MORRISON COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPT Deposits Escrow
108497 25 NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF TOWN W Dues&Subscriptions Police
108498 125 NATIONAL TACTICAL OFFICERS ASS Dues&Subscriptions Police
108500 5,395 QWEST Telephone Police
108501 13 RICHFIELD,CITY OF Autos Public Safety
108502 58 SAMS,BETH Clothing&Uniforms Police
108503 800 ST.PAUL POLICE DEPT Tuition Reimbursement/School Police
108504 22,932 SUPERIOR FORD Autos Public Safety
108505 3,536 US POSTMASTER-HOPKINS Postage Community Brochure
108506 40 USPCA REGION 12 Dues&Subscriptions Police
108507 2,658 ARCH PAGING Pager&Cell Phone Wireless Communication
108508 1,420 ASPEN WASTE SYSTEMS INC. Waste Disposal Maintenance
108509 30 BACHMANS CREDIT DEPT Operating Supplies Senior Center Administration
108510 149 BAGELMAN'S NEW YORK BAKERY Miscellaneous General Facilities
108511 72 BCA CJIS ID UNIT Other Contracted Services Finance
108512 35 BUESGENS,KEITH Lessons&Classes Ice Arena
108513 3 DISALVO,STEVE Lessons&Classes Pool Lessons
108514 91 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC Other Contracted Services Water Treatment Plant
108515 433 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER Licenses&Taxes Pool Maintenance
108516 232,848 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Due to Other Governments SAC Agency Fund
108517 111 MINN ST ADMIN ITG TELECOM SERV Software Maintenance Information Technology
108518 56 MINNCOMM PAGING Pager&Cell Phone Sewer System Maintenance
108519 5,911 MINNEGASCO Gas Fire Station#1
108520 8,544 MINNESOTA STATE TREASURER Building Surcharge General Fund
108521 1,071 MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP Electric Street Lighting
108522 90 PAIN ENTERPRISES INC. Chemicals Pool Maintenance
108523 30 PRADHAN,BIOPIN Lessons&Classes Oak Point Lessons
108524 20 QUICKSILVER EXPRESS COURIER Postage General
108525 1,565 RODGERS&HAMMERSTEIN THEATRE Operating Supplies Arts
108526 117 SBSI INC Other Contracted Services Fire Station#3
108527 112 STAR TRIBUNE Dues&Subscriptions Police
108528 75 STEWART-HESTER,RENEE Other Contracted Services Recreation Administration
108529 8 TRANS UNION CORPORATION Other Contracted Services Police
108530 1,178 US POSTMASTER-HOPKINS Postage Water Accounting
108531 660 VERIZON DIRECTORIES CORP Advertising Community Center Admin
108532 621 VERIZON WIRELESS BELLEVUE Pager&Cell Phone Police
3
City of Eden Prairie
Council Check Register
4/9/2002
Check# Amount Vendor Account Description Business Unit
108533 224 WILDER,LOIS Instructor Service Senior Center Administration
108534 200 WYNNFIELD WOMEN'S ASSN Riley Lake Shelter Park Facilities
108535 69 AMERIPRIDE LINEN&APPAREL SER Repair&Maint Supplies Den Road Liquor Store
108536 1,255 BELLBOY CORPORATION Wine Imported Den Road Liquor Store
108537 132 COMMANDEUR LLC Wine Imported Den Road Liquor Store
108538 4,425 DAY DISTRIBUTING Beer Den Road Liquor Store
108539 2,024 EAGLE WINE COMPANY Wine Imported Den Road Liquor Store
108540 19,788 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE COMPANY Misc Non-Taxable Den Road Liquor Store
108541 192 EXTREME BEVERAGE Misc Taxable Den Road Liquor Store
108542 410 GETTMAN COMPANY Misc Taxable Den Road Liquor Store
108543 4,358 GRAPE BEGINNINGS Wine Domestic Den Road Liquor Store
108544 8,217 GRIGGS COOPER&CO Liquor Prairie View Liquor Store
108545 361 HOHENSTEINS INC Beer Prairie Village Liquor Store
108546 18,202 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO Wine Domestic Prairie View Liquor Store
108547 1,634 LAKE REGION VENDING Tobacco Products Den Road Liquor Store
108548 6,186 MARK VII Beer Den Road Liquor Store
108549 520 MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING COM Misc Taxable Den Road Liquor Store
108550 92 NORTH STAR ICE Misc Non-Taxable Den Road Liquor Store
108551 3,224 PAUSTIS&SONS COMPANY Wine Imported Prairie View Liquor Store
108552 772 PEPSI COLA COMPANY Merchandise for Resale Concessions
108553 6,630 PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRITS INC Wine Domestic Prairie Village Liquor Store
108554 538 PINNACLE DISTRIBUTING Misc Non-Taxable Prairie View Liquor Store
108555 2,274 PRIOR WINE COMPANY Wine Domestic Den Road Liquor Store
108556 9,143 QUALITY WINE&SPIRITS CO Liquor Den Road Liquor Store
108557 15,139 THORPE DISTRIBUTING Beer Den Road Liquor Store
108558 25 TRI COUNTY BEVERAGE&SUPPLY Beer Den Road Liquor Store
108559 601 WINE COMPANY,THE Wine Domestic Den Road Liquor Store
108560 193 WINE MERCHANTS INC Wine Domestic Den Road Liquor Store
108561 1,300 WORLD CLASS WINES INC Wine Domestic Den Road Liquor Store
108562 170 AARP 55 ALIVE MATURE DRIVING Other Contracted Services Senior Center Program
108563 15,018 AKIN GUMP STRAUSS HAUER&FELD Legal Counsel Airport Airport
108564 46 BOLD,PAULINE Instructor Service Outdoor Center
108565 50 BRACE,LANCE Travel Expense Police
108566 17 FIKES HYGIENE SERVICES Operating Supplies Prairie View Liquor Store
108567 290 HENNEPIN COUNTY I/T DEPT Software Maintenance Information Technology
108568 187 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER-TAXP Printing Assessing
108569 5 HERZAN,CHRISTIE Program Fee Outdoor Center
108570 5 INTERNATIONAL CHECK SERVICES I Other Contracted Services Prairie Village Liquor Store
108571 1,509 INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATI Union Dues Withheld General Fund
108572 16 KLEVE HTG&AC Cash Over/Short General Fund
108573 50 KLINE,JAMES Travel Expense Police
108574 20 LEHRER,MICHAEL Youth Resident Community Center Admin
108575 38 M SHANKEN COMMUNICATIONS INC Misc Non-Taxable Prairie View Liquor Store
108576 75 MAINERICH,WALTER Program Fee Outdoor Center
108577 40 MCFERRIN,TANYA Instructor Service Outdoor Center
108578 142,959 MEDICA CHOICE Medical Bills Prepaid General Fund
108579 67 MENARDS Operating Supplies Police
108580 3,910 METRO CLASSIC HOMES WAC-Water Utility Reserve Fund
108581 100 MILLER,LOUISE Instructor Service Outdoor Center
108582 399 MILLS FLEET FARM Operating Supplies Park Maintenance
108583 1,453 MINN CHILD SUPPORT PAYMENT CTR Garnishment Withheld General Fund
108584 225 MINN NCPERS GROUP LIFE INSURAN Life Insurance Employees General Fund
108585 150 MPSA Conference Expense In Service Training
108586 1,328 NILSSON,BETH Instructor Service Ice Arena
108587 240 SENSIBLE LAND USE COALITION Miscellaneous In Service Training
108588 40 TRAPP,SUZANNE Instructor Service Outdoor Center
108589 99 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA Conference Expense In Service Training
108590 60 XCEL ENERGY Electric Traffic Signals
108591 2,775 ADTECH COMMUNICATIONS GROUP Other Contracted Services Grant Fund
108592 4,523 BENSHOOF&ASSOCIATES INC Deposits Escrow
108593 284 CUMMINGS,KIM Operating Supplies Fire
108594 1,175 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER-TAXP Other Contracted Services Water&Sewer Refund Bond 1979
108595 243 KINGSTON,JEREMY Other Contracted Services 2000 Rehab
108596 245 MEDICINE LAKE TOURS Special Event Fees Adult Program
108597 21,751 MINNESOTA DEPT OF HEALTH Miscellaneous Water Utility-General
108598 180 MINNESOTA TIMBERWOLVES Operating Supplies Leisure Time
108599 130 NATIONAL RECREATION AND PARKA Dues&Subscriptions In Service Training
108600 1,854 PARK NICOLLET CLINIC Other Contracted Services Risk Management
108601 7,295 PRAIRIE PARTNERS SIX LLP Building Rental Prairie Village Liquor Store
108602 5,109 PRUDENTIAL INS CO OF AMERICA C Life Insurance Employees General Fund
108603 18,912 RELIANT ENERGY RETAIL INC. Gas Maintenance
9
City of Eden Prairie
Council Check Register
4/9/2002
Check# Amount Vendor Account Description Business Unit
108604 2,988 RELIASTAR LIFE INSURANCE CO Disability Ins Employers General Fund
108605 19,425 RESIDENCE INN EDEN PRAIRIE AR Utility Sewer Fund
108606 160 SOCIETY FOR HUMAN RESOURCE MNG Dues&Subscriptions In Service Training
108607 689 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISHING- Printing Communication Services
108608 35 TCALMC Conference Expense In Service Training
108609 43 THOMPSON,RICK J. Travel Expense Fire
108610 2,491 US POSTMASTER-HOPKINS Postage Communication Services
108611 70 WRIGHT,IRENE Miscellaneous Golden Triange Study
108612 984 XCEL ENERGY .Electric Water Treatment Plant
108613 47 ANDERSON LAKES ANIMAL HOSPITAL Other Contracted Services Animal Control
108614 135 BARLI,ROBERT Clothing&Uniforms Police
108615 179 BOGREN,ANN Canine Supplies Police
108616 460 CONLEY,JOYCE Travel Expense Police
108617 49,301 LANG PAULY GREGERSON AND ROSOW . Legal Legal Council
108618 50 MINNESOTA CHAPTER IAAI-J SCHAD Dues&Subscriptions Police
108619 35 MSANI Tuition Reimbursement/School Police
108620 1,450 OLSON,CLOUGH&LEBLANC LTD Other Contracted Services Golden Triange Study
108621 92,570 OLSON,ROSS AND SANDRA Right of Way&Easement Improvement Projects 1996
108622 292 PETTY CASH Conference Expense In Service Training
108623 3,178 QWEST DEX Advertising Prairie View Liquor Store
108624 905 RADCO Capital Under$2,000 Fleet Services
108625 60 SCHLOSSMACHER,JIM Clothing&Uniforms Police
108626 40 TRAPP,SUZANNE Instructor Service Outdoor Center
108627 1,278 ALL SAINTS BRANDS DISTRIBUTING Beer Den Road Liquor Store
108628 201 AMERIPRIDE LINEN&APPAREL SER Repair&Maint.Supplies Prairie Village Liquor Store
108629 507 BELLBOY CORPORATION Liquor Den Road Liquor Store
108630 12,029. DAY DISTRIBUTING Beer Prairie View Liquor Store
108631 3,792 EAGLE WINE COMPANY Wine Domestic Prairie Village Liquor Store
108632 10,066 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE COMPANY Beer Prairie View Liquor Store
108633 160 EXTREME BEVERAGE Misc Taxable Prairie View Liquor Store
108634 620 GRAPE BEGINNINGS Wine Imported Prairie View Liquor Store
108635 12,392 GRIGGS COOPER&CO Liquor Den Road Liquor Store
108637 23,204 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO Liquor Den Road Liquor Store
108638 1,768 LAKE REGION VENDING Tobacco Products Den Road Liquor Store
108639 4,874 MARK VII Beer Den Road Liquor Store
108640 561 MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING COM Misc Taxable Prairie View Liquor Store
108641 41 NORTH STAR ICE Misc Non-Taxable Den Road Liquor Store
108642 58 PAUSTIS&SONS COMPANY Wine Imported Prairie View Liquor Store
108643 667 PEPSI COLA COMPANY Merchandise for Resale Concessions
108644 15,131 PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRITS INC Wine Domestic Prairie Village Liquor Store
108645 846 PINNACLE DISTRIBUTING Operating Supplies Den Road Liquor Store
108646 2,209 PRIOR WINE COMPANY Wine Domestic Prairie Village Liquor Store
108647 15,075 QUALITY WINE&SPIRITS CO Wine Domestic Prairie Village Liquor Store
108648 16,270 THORPE DISTRIBUTING Beer Den Road Liquor Store
108649 1,582 WINE COMPANY,THE Wine Domestic Den Road Liquor Store
108650 2,841 WINE MERCHANTS INC Wine Domestic Prairie View Liquor Store
108651 1,519 WORLD CLASS WINES INC Wine Domestic Prairie View Liquor Store
108652 150 ALTMAN,MARY Other Contracted Services Parks Administration
108653 59,950 DOMINIUM DEV.&ACQUISITION LL Deposits Escrow
108654 197 GE CAPITAL Other Rentals General
108655 80 GEIS,ROB Clothing&Uniforms Police
108656 100 GUSTAD,MARK Clothing&Uniforms Police
108657 333 HOME DEPOT/GECF Operating Supplies Park Maintenance
108658 9,254 MASSMUTUAL LIFE INSURANCE CO. Building Rental Prairie View Liquor Store
108659 225 MILE Tuition Reimbursement/School Police
108660 783 PITNEY BOWES INC Other Rentals General
108661 1,540 Qwest COMMUNICATIONS Pager&Cell Phone Police
108662 59 ROGERS,MICHAEL Operating Supplies Street Maintenance
108663 215 SPECIALIZED TRAINING SERVICES Tuition Reimbursement/School Police
108664 53 STROHKIRCH,NICOLE Mileage&Parking Adaptive Recreation
108665 97,571 XCEL ENERGY Electric Street Lighting
108666 1,500 CARLSON,PAUL Tuition Reimbursement/School In Service Training
108667 229 D'AMICO AND SONS Miscellaneous General Facilities
108668 190 DEGREE,BETH Mileage&Parking Oak Point Operations
108669 42 EDEN PRAIRIE CHAMBER OF COMMER Miscellaneous In Service Training
108670 32 HENNEPIN COUNTY Waste Disposal Park Maintenance
108671 10 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER Waste Disposal Park Maintenance
108672 180 KING,MARION Instructor Service Senior Center Program
108673 70 KLOECKNER,LINDA Other Contracted Services Community CenterAdmin
108674 60 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES Conference Expense In Service Training
108675 175,652 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ENVIRONME Waste Disposal Sewer Utility-General
5
City of Eden Prairie
Council Check Register
4/9/2002
Check# Amount Vendor Account Description Business Unit
108676 62 PUNTON,JASON Tuition Reimbursement/School Water Utility-General
108677 33 QUICKSILVER EXPRESS COURIER Postage General
108678 30 SHAMROCK TOURS Special Event Fees Adult Program
108679 2,200 SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY Dues&Subscriptions City Council
108680 46 TAYLOR,SCOTT Travel Expense Fire
108681 735 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA Conference Expense In Service Training
108682 2,044 XCEL ENERGY Principal Traffic Signals
108683 69 PIZZA HUT Special Event Fees Special Events&Trips
108684 120 SHOREVIEW COMMUNITY CENTER Special Event Fees Special Events&Trips
108685 78 ANDERSON,ERIC F. Mileage&Parking Arts
108686 40 BOLD,PAULINE Instructor Service Outdoor Center
108687 920 BORG,STEVE Tuition Reimbursement/School In Service Training
108688 275 CAMP SNOOPY Special Event Fees Special Events&Trips
108689 144 CHUCK-E-CHEESE Special Event Fees Special Events&Trips
108690 5 COTTRILL,STACY Program Fee Outdoor Center
108691 35 CULLIGAN WATER Operating Supplies Fire
108692 252 DEAN,MITCH Travel Expense Prairie Village Liquor Store
108693 81 DEGREE,BETH Travel Expense In Service Training
108694 215 GE CAPITAL Other Rentals General
108695 19,283 GROSSMAN CHEVROLET COMPANY INC Autos Public Safety
108696 169 HARMON AUTOGLASS Equipment Repair&Maint .Fleet Services
108697 2,067 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO Liquor Prairie Village Liquor Store
108698 40 JUHNKE,THOMAS/KATIE Lessons&Classes Pool Lessons
108699 230 KEATING,MARY Mileage&Parking Community Development
108700 94 KRESS,CARLA Mileage&Parking Adaptive Recreation
108701 2,571 METRO SALES INCORPORATED* Other Rentals General
108702 236 MUSIC PERFORMERS TRUST FUND Other Contracted Services Staring Lake Concert
108703 129 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS Pager&Cell Phone Wireless Communication
108704 237 PETTY CASH Office Supplies General
108705 193 PETTY CASH-POLICE DEPT Postage General
108706 98 PROTECTION ONE Other Contracted Services Cummins Grill
108707 65 RECYCLING ASSOCIATION OF MINNE Dues&Subscriptions Recycle Rebate
108708 5 REITZ,LISA Program Fee Outdoor Center
108709 113 SAFARI ISLAND Special Event Fees Special Events&Trips
108710 213 SCIENCE MUSEUM OF MINNESOTA Special Event Fees Special Events&Trips
108711 256 WEEDMAN,NICOLE Capital Under$2,000 Youth Programs Administration
108712 105 WRIGHT,IRENE Mileage&Parking Golden Triange Study
108713 39 ACE ICE COMPANY Misc Non-Taxable Prairie View Liquor Store
108714 412 ALL SAINTS BRANDS DISTRIBUTING Beer Den Road Liquor Store
108715 69 AMERIPRIDE LINEN&APPAREL SER Repair&Maint.Supplies Den Road Liquor Store
108716 1,778 BELLBOY CORPORATION Liquor Prairie Village Liquor Store
108717 3,355 DAY DISTRIBUTING Beer Den Road Liquor Store
108718 3,524 EAGLE WINE COMPANY Wine Domestic Prairie Village Liquor Store
108719 6,304 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE COMPANY Beer Prairie View Liquor Store
108720 465 GRAPE BEGINNINGS Wine Domestic Den Road Liquor Store
108721 9,159 GRIGGS COOPER&CO Liquor Prairie Village Liquor Store
108722 180 HOHENSTEINS INC Beer Den Road Liquor Store
108723 20,779 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO Liquor Prairie Village Liquor Store
108724 1,582 LAKE REGION VENDING Tobacco Products Den Road Liquor Store
108725 6,915 MARK VII Beer Den Road Liquor Store
108726 265 MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING COM Misc Taxable Den Road Liquor Store
108727 157 NORTH STAR ICE Misc Non-Taxable Den Road Liquor Store
108728 4,336 PAUSTIS&SONS COMPANY Wine Domestic Den Road Liquor Store
108729 348 PEPSI COLA COMPANY Merchandise for Resale Concessions
108730 8,762 PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRITS INC Wine Domestic Den Road Liquor Store
108731 391 PINNACLE DISTRIBUTING Misc Taxable Prairie Village Liquor Store
108732 1,802 PRIOR WINE COMPANY Wine Domestic Prairie View Liquor Store
108733 9,831 QUALITY WINE&SPIRITS CO Liquor Den Road Liquor Store
108734 8,605 THORPE DISTRIBUTING Beer Den Road Liquor Store
108735 468 WINE COMPANY,THE Wine Domestic Den Road Liquor Store
108736 153 WINE MERCHANTS INC Wine Domestic Den Road Liquor Store
108737 15 DAYS COMMUNICATION INC. Dues&Subscriptions Police
108738 788 ELAN FINANCIAL SERVICES Travel Expense City Council
108739 1,453 MINN CHILD SUPPORT PAYMENT CTR Garnishment Withheld General Fund
108740 1,282 MINNESOTA DEPT OF ECONOMIC SEC Unemployment Compensation Employee Benefits
108741 16 MINNESOTA'S BOOKSTORE Operating Supplies Liquor Compliance
108742 748 MITCHELL,JULIE Other Contracted Services Police
108743 300 MN CHIEFS OF POLICE ED FOUNDAT Conference Expense Police
108744 59 MOSMAN,JAN Travel Expense City Council
108745 3,017 PURCHASE POWER Postage General
108746 300 TCALMC Dues&Subscriptions In Service Training
City of Eden Prairie
Council'Check Register
4/9/2002
Check# Amount Vendor Account Description Business Unit
108747 40 TELEPHONE ANSWERING CENTER INC Other Contracted Services Water Treatment Plant
108748 40 UNITED STATES POLICE CANINE AS Dues&Subscriptions Police
108749 1,225 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA Conference Expense Prairie View Liquor Store
108750 2,017 URSBRW Deposits Escrow
108751 2,128 US BANK TRUST NATIONAL ASSN Paying Agent City Center Debt Fund
108752 350 WELLS FARGO HOME MORTGAGE INC Right of Way&Easement Improvement Projects 1996
108753 55 WHITE,NICOLE Mileage&Parking Therapeutic Recreation
108754 22 A TO Z RENTAL CENTER Equipment Repair&Maint Park Maintenance
108755 131 ABRASIVE TECHNOLOGIES INC Equipment Parts Fleet Services
108756 2,775 ADTECH COMMUNICATIONS GROUP Other Contracted Services Grant Fund
108757 1,446 ALEX AIR APPARATUS INC Equipment Repair&Maint Fire
108758 148 AMERICAN PRESSURE INC Equipment Repair&Maint Fleet Services
108759 480 AMERICAN WATER WORKS ASSOCIATI Training Supplies Water Utility-General
108760 1,469 ANCHOR PAPER COMPANY Office Supplies General
108761 217 ANCOM COMMUNICATIONS INC Equipment Parts Wireless Communication
108762 463 ASPEN EQUIPMENT CO. Equipment Parts Fleet Services
108763 152 ASTLEFORD EQUIPMENT COMPANY IN Equipment Parts Fleet Services
108764 4,330 AUTOMATED ENTRANCE PRODUCTS IN Equipment Repair&Maint City Center Operations
108765 675 BAUER BUILT TIRE AND BATTERY Equipment Parts Fleet Services
108766 2,474 BECKER ARENA PRODUCTS INC Equipment Repair&Maint Ice Arena
108767 240 BERRY COFFEE COMPANY Operating Supplies Fire
108768 85 BITSTREAM UNDERGROUND LLC Other Contracted Services Airport
108769 1,973 BLACK&VEATCH Other Contracted Services Water Treatment Plant
108770 654 BLOOMINGTON SECURITY SOLUTIONS Building Repair&Maint. Water Treatment Plant
108771 640 BLOOMINGTON,CITY OF Kennel Services Animal Control
108772 269 BROWN TRAFFIC PRODUCTS Operating Supplies Traffic Signals
108773 632 BRY-AIR INC Operating Supplies Ice Arena
108774 2,900 BUCK,NATHAN Other Contracted Services Volleyball
108775 1,175 C&C EMBROIDERY Clothing&Uniforms Fire
108776 10,233 CARGILL SALT Salt Snow&Ice Control
108777 50 CARLSON TRACTOR AND EQUIPMENT Equipment Parts Fleet Services
108778 1,072 CDW GOVERNMENT INC. Other Rentals General
108779 2,819 CENTRAIRE INC Equipment Repair&Maint Fire Station#2
108780 382 CHANHASSEN BUMPER TO BUMPER Equipment Parts Fleet Services
108781 900 CLOSED CIRCUIT SPECIALISTS INC Capital Under$2,000 Prairie View Liquor Store
108782 63,104 COMARK GOVT&EDUCATION SALES Computers Capital Impr./Maint.Fund
108783 51 CONCRETE CUTTING&CORING INC Operating Supplies Street Maintenance
108784 541 CONTINENTAL SAFETY EQUIPMENT Safety Supplies Sewer Utility-General
108785 2,913 CORPORATE EXPRESS Office Supplies Police
108786 514 CUB FOODS EDEN PRAIRIE Operating Supplies Fire
108787 2,328 CUSTOM CONVEYOR CORPORATION Equipment Parts Water Treatment Plant
108788 6,668 CUTLER-MAGNER COMPANY Chemicals Water Treatment Plant
108789 1,845 DALCO Cleaning Supplies General Facilities
108790 147 DAVIES WATER EQUIPMENT CO Repair&Maint.Supplies Storm Drainage
108791 854 DECORATIVE DESIGNS INC Building Repair&Maint. City Center Operations
108792 84 DELL MARKETING L.P. Other Hardware Information Technology
108793 480 DILLEY,TODD Other Contracted Services Basketball
108794 852 DIXIE CARBONIC INC Chemicals Water Treatment Plant
108795 338 DOUBLE A TRUCKING OF WACONIA I Other Rentals Street Maintenance
10B796 130 DRISKILLS NEW MARKET Operating Supplies Fire
108797 30 DUO-SAFETY LADDER CORP Repair&Maint.Supplies Fire
108798 858 DYNA SYSTEMS Equipment Parts Water Treatment Plant
108799 1,322 EARL F ANDERSEN INC Signs Traffic Signs
108800 544 ECOLAB INC Other Contracted Services Water Treatment Plant
108801 489 EDINA SW PLUMBING Building Repair&Maint. Fire Station#3
108802 2,094 EF JOHNSON Equipment Repair&Maint Wireless Communication
108803 1,080 ELECTRONIC DESIGN Building Repair&Maint. Water Treatment Plant
108804 883 EMERGENCY APPARATUS MAINTENANC Equipment Repair&Maint Fire
108805 54 ESCHELON TELECOM INC Equipment Repair&Maint Telephone
108806 1,589 FACILITY SYSTEMS INC Capital Under$2,000 Furniture
108807 97 FASTSIGNS Signs Water Treatment Plant
108808 335 FERRELLGAS Motor Fuels Ice Arena
108809 34 FIKES HYGIENE SERVICES Operating Supplies Prairie View Liquor Store
108810 75 FITZCO INC Operating Supplies Police
108811 11,420 FM FRATTALONE EXCAVATING&GRA Improvements to Land Construction Fund
108812 57 FORCE AMERICA Equipment Parts Fleet Services
108813 179 G&K SERVICES DIRECT PURCHASE Clothing&Uniforms Maintenance
108814 110 GARDEN&ASSOC INC Other Contracted Services Police
108815 36 GARELICK STEEL CO INC Operating Supplies Street Maintenance
108816 80 GEBO,ROBERT L Other Contracted Services Volleyball
108817 62 GINA MARIAS INC Operating Supplies Fire
7
City of Eden Prairie
Council Check Register
4/9/2002
Check# Amount Vendor Account Description Business Unit
108818 1,088 GRAFIXSHOPPE Capital Under$2,000 Fleet Services
108819 75 GREENMAN TECHNOLOGIES OF MN IN Tires Fleet Services
108820 375 H M CRAGG CO Equipment Repair&Maint Wireless Communication
108821 19,903 HANSEN THORP PELLINEN OLSON Improvements to Land Park Acquisition&Development
108822 419 HARMON AUTOGLASS Equipment Repair&Maint Fleet Services
108823 5,363 HARTLAND FUEL PRODUCTS LLC Motor Fuels Fleet Services
108824 1,992 HAWKINS WATER TREATMENT GROUP Chemicals Water Treatment Plant
108825 306 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER Operating Supplies Community Development
108826 50 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER Improvement Contracts Capital Impr./Maint.Fund
108827 2,031 HENNEPIN TECHNICAL COLLEGE Tuition Reimbursement/School Fire
108828 400 HOLMES,TOM Other Contracted Services Volleyball
108829 50 IND SCHOOL DIST 272 Operating Supplies Police
108830 622 INDUSTRIAL LIGHTING SUPPLY INC Repair&Maint.Supplies Water Treatment Plant
108831 186 INFRATECH Equipment Repair&Maint Sewer Liftstation
108832 2,800 INGRAHAM&ASSOC Improvements to Land Park Acquisition&Development
108833 18 INNOVATIVE GRAPHICS Clothing&Uniforms Adaptive Recreation
108834 1,329 ITRON INC. Other Contracted Services Water Meter Reading
108835 1,146 ITS A KEEPER Employee Award Human Resources
108836 185 J&H BERGE INC Operating Supplies Water Treatment Plant
108837 2,375 JANEX INC Cleaning Supplies General Facilities
108838 187 JIM HATCH SALES CO Operating Supplies Street Maintenance
108839 27 KRAEMERS HARDWARE INC Small Tools General Facilities
108840 193 KUSTOM SIGNALS INC Equipment Repair&Maint Police
108841 27 LAB SAFETY SUPPLY INC Small Tools Water Treatment Plant
108842 158 LAKE COUNTRY DOOR Building Repair&Maint. Water System Maintenance
108843 681 LAKELAND FORD TRUCK SALES Capital Under$2,000 Fleet Services
108844 882 LAMETTRYS COLLISION Equipment Repair&Maint Fleet Services
108845 8,258 LANDFORM ENGINEERING COMPANY Improvement Contracts Capital Impr./Maint.Fund
108846 309 LANDS END CORPORATE SALES Clothing&Uniforms Telecommunicators
108847 35 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES Operating Supplies City Council
108848 80 LEROY JOB TRUCKING Other Contracted Services Animal Control
108849 88 LOFFLER BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC Other Contracted Services Parks Administration
108850 98,688 LOGIS LOGIS Information Technology
108851 2,253 LON MUSOLF FLOORING COMPANY Building Repair&Maint. Outdoor Center
108852 16,429 LOVEGREEN INDUSTRIAL SERVICES Other Contracted Services Marketcenter Reservoir
108853 1,739 MAXI-PRINT INC Other Contracted Services Liquor Compliance
108854 76 MCGRAW-HILL COMPANIES,THE Training Supplies Water Utility-General
108855 747 MENARDS Building Materials Park Maintenance
108856 2,749 MES INC Protective Clothing Fire
108857 13 METROPOLITAN FORD Equipment Repair&Maint Fleet Services
108858 3,439 MIDWEST PLAYSCAPES Landscape Materials/Supp Richard T.Anderson Cons.Area
108859 37 MINNESOTA CHIEFS OF POLICE ASS Printing Police
108860 8,073 MINNESOTA HIGHWAY SAFETY&RES Tuition Reimbursement/School Police
108861 60 MINNESOTA PLASTICS Equipment Parts Fleet Services
108862 520 MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AG Licenses&Taxes Water Utility-General
108863 479 MINNESOTA TROPHIES&GIFTS Operating Supplies Fire
108864 376 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC Equipment Parts Fleet Services
108865 1,079 MWH AMERICAS INC Design&Engineering Storm Drainage Projects
108866 351 NATIONAL CAMERA EXCHANGE&VID Capital Under$2,000 Police
108867 4,900 NATURAL REFLECTIONS VII LLC Other Contracted Services Water Treatment Plant
108868 180 NEPM Fire Prevention Supplies Fire
108869 21 NORTHERN TOOL&EQUIPMENT CO. Motor Fuels Water Utility-General
108870 377 NORTHSTAR REPRO PRODUCTS INC Operating Supplies Engineering
108871 240 NORTHWEST TECHNICAL COLLEGE Tuition Reimbursement/School Fire
108872 851 OLSEN COMPANIES Repair&Maint.Supplies Water Utility-General
108873 244 OSI BATTERIES INC Operating Supplies Fire
108874 71,550 PEARSON MECHANICAL SERVICES IN Equipment Repair&Maint Capital Impr./Maint.Fund
108875 560 PEPPER OF MINNEAPOLIS Operating Supplies Art&Music
108876 4,195 PERFORMANCE KENNELS INC Canine Supplies Police
108877 108 PETSMART Canine Supplies Police
108878 26 POWER SYSTEMS Equipment Parts Fleet Services
108879 4,905 PRAIRIE ELECTRIC COMPANY Building Repair&Maint Water Treatment Plant
108880 701 PRAIRIE LAWN AND GARDEN Equipment Parts Fleet Services
108881 144 PRINTERS SERVICE INC Repair&Maint Supplies Ice Arena
108882 140 PRIORITY COURIER EXPERTS Equipment Repair&Maint Fleet Services
108883 327 QUALITY FLOW SYSTEMS INC Equipment Repair&Maint Sewer Liftstation
108884 26 RAINBOW FOODS INC. Operating Supplies Senior Center Administration
108885 480 RAY,DAVID M. Other Contracted Services Basketball
108886 644 RAY,LEE Other Contracted Services Basketball
108887 60 REAMER,MARK Other Contracted Services Basketball
108888 249 REGNET Software Information Technology
6
City of Eden Prairie
Council Check Register
4/9/2002
Check# Amount Vendor Account Description Business Unit
108889 572 RITZ CAMERA Operating Supplies Park Maintenance
108890 34,928 RMR SERVICES INC Equipment Parts Water Meter Repair
108891 10,717 RUFFRIDGE JOHNSON EQUIPMENT CO Machinery&Equipment Public Works
108892 2,374 S/K WELL&PUMP INSPECTIONS Equipment Repair&Maint Water Well#3
108893 400 SALONEK,SHARON Other Contracted Services Volleyball
108894 33,566 SHORT ELLIOT HENDRICKSON INC Design&Engineering Construction Fund
108895 37 SIGNSOURCE Operating Supplies Animal Control
108896 112 SOFTWARE HOUSE INTERNATIONAL I Office Supplies Fire
108897 187 SOUTHWEST LOCK&KEY Building Repair&Maint Maintenance
108898 11,124 SPORTS WORLD USA INC Recreation Supplies Softball
108899 5,851 SPRINGSTED INCORPORATED Deposits Escrow
108900 138 SPS COMPANIES Equipment Repair&Maint Water Treatment Plant
108901 18,040 SRF CONSULTING GROUP INC Design&Engineering Improvement Projects 1996
108902 2,167 ST PAUL LINOLEUM AND CARPET CO Building Repair&Maint. Maintenance
108903 281 STATE CHEMICAL MFG.CO.,THE Cleaning Supplies Water Treatment Plant
108904 371 STRAND MANUFACTURING CO INC Building Repair&Maint. Water Treatment Plant
108905 639 STREICHERS Capital Under$2,000 Fleet Services
108906 94 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET GEO Equipment Parts Fleet Services
108907 313 SULLIVANS UTILITY SERVICES INC Building Repair&Maint. Public Works/Parks
108908 178 SURVIVALINK CORP Safety Supplies Fire
108909 125 SWEDLUNDS Waste Disposal Park Maintenance
108910 77 TASK FORCE TIPS INC Repair&Maint.Supplies Fire
108911 1,323 TESSCO Operating Supplies Wireless Communication
108912 1,280 THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR Equipment Repair&Maint Water Treatment Plant
108913 109 TIERNEY BROS INC Operating Supplies Traffic Signs
108914 231 TKDA Other Contracted Services Water Utility-General
108915 69 TOLL GAS AND WELDING SUPPLY Equipment Repair&Maint Park Maintenance
108916 5,763 TRANS ALARM INC Improvement Contracts Utility Improvement Fund
108917 692 TRENCHERSPLUS Other Rentals Street Maintenance
108918 112 TWIN CITY OXYGEN CO Lubricants&Additives Fleet Services
108919 75 TWIN CITY SCALE CO INC Equipment Repair&Maint Street Maintenance
108920 1,717 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED Clothing&Uniforms Fire
108921 759 UNITED RENTALS-HT BRANCH#229 Repair&Maint.Supplies Storm Drainage
108922 780 UNLIMITED SUPPLIES INC Equipment Parts Fleet Services
108923 168 US BANK TRUST Paying Agent HRA 2002A LEASE REVENUE BONDS
108924 167 US CAVALRY Clothing&Uniforms Police
108925 53 US FILTER/WATERPRO Repair&Maint.Supplies Water Meter Repair
108926 119 VESSCO INC Equipment Parts Water Treatment Plant
108927 206 VIKING TROPHIES Employee Award Human Resources
108928 860 VISIONARY SYSTEMS LTD. Office Supplies Fire .
108929 235 VOSS LIGHTING Repair&Maint.Supplies Maintenance
108930 787 W W GRAINGER Small Tools Water Treatment Plant
108931 691 WATSON CO INC,THE Merchandise for Resale Concessions
108932 2,564 WESTWOOD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Design&Engineering Capital Impr./Maint.Fund
108933 218 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE Safety Supplies Community Center Admin
2,301,622 Grand Total
9
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE:
SECTION: Ordinances and Resolutions April 9,2002
SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: First Reading of an ITEM NO.:
Community Development& Ordinance Amending City Code Section 4.40
Financial Services—Don Uram Subdivision 2,Relating To On-Sale Wine Licenses
- -
Requested Action
Adopt: First Reading Of An Ordinance Amending City Code Section 4.40 Subdivision 2,
Relating To On-Sale Wine Licenses, And Adopting By Reference, City Code Chapter 1 And
Section 4.99,Which,Among Other Things, Contain Penalty Provisions.
Synopsis
City Code Section 4.40 subdivision 2 requires that restaurants have a minimum of"seventy-five"
(75) seats in order to be granted an on-sale wine license. To accommodate smaller"bistro" style
restaurants such as Punch Neapolitan Pizza, staff recommends that the number of seats required
be reduced to"fifty"(50). All other requirements remain the same.
Attachments
Ordinance
I
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING
CITY CODE SECTION 4.40 SUBDIVISION 2, RELATING TO ON SALE WINE
LICENSES, AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE, CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND
SECTION 4.99, WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY
PROVISIONS.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE,MINNESOTA,ORDAINS:
Section 1.The City Code is amended by amending Section 4.40 subdivision 2 by deleting
the second line the reference to "seventy-five (75)" and replacing it with "fifty (50) so that
Section 4.40 subdivision 2 shall read in its entirety as follows:
SECTION 4.40 ON-SALE WINE LICENSE REQUIRED
Subd. 2. On-sale wine licenses shall be granted only to restaurants
as defined in this Chapter. Provided,however,for purposes of this
Section, such restaurant shall have appropriate facilities for seating
not less than fifty(50)guests at one time.
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
day of , 2002, and finally read and adopted and ordered published at a
regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the day of ,2002.
Kathleen A.Porta, City Clerk Nancy Tyra-Lukens,Mayor
PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie News on the day of ,2002.
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: April 9,2002
SECTION: Petitions,Requests and Communications
SERVICE AREA/DIVISION:
Police ITEM DESCRIPTION:Review of Board of ITEM NO.:
Jim Clark,Director of Public Adjustments&Appeals Decision on Variance#
Safety Services 2002-02,Bergeland 7012 Willow Creek Road 7n.
Jean Johnson,Zoning Adm.
Requested Action:
Move to affirm the approval action of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals based upon the
Board's motion and the attached Findings, Conclusions, and Order.
Synopsis:
On Feb. 6,2002 the Board of Adjustments and Appeals acted on Mr. Bergeland's request for the
construction of a new house in lieu of remodeling the existing deteriorated home. The existing
home is 37 feet from the lake; the new home is located 55 feet from the lake at the closest point.
The Board granted the request.
On Feb. 19, 2002 the City Council elected to review the Board's decision.
Background Information:
See attached Memo dated March 11,2002.
Attachments:
Var.2002-02 Final Order
Board minutes of Feb. 6 &Jan. 10,2002
Variance 2002-02 Staff Report
Bergeland's submission material dated Jan.20,2002&Dec.21, 2001
History packets: 2001 &2000
March 8, 2002 Memo
Court Order and Memorandum
VARIANCE#2002-02
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
IRIIEE
BOARD OFADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS
FINAL ORDER
RE: Petition of Nathan Bergeland
ADDRESS: 7012 Willow Creek Road
OTHER DESCRIPTION: N/A
VARIANCE REQUEST:
1. Approve a 25 foot variance from a 100 foot setback requirement for construction of a garage 75 fee
. Bryant Lake's Ordinary High Water Level.
2. Approve a 63 foot variance from a 100 foot setback requirement for construction of a new house
from Bryant Lake's Ordinary High Water Level.
The Board of Adjustments and Appeals for the City of Eden Prairie at a special meeting thereof duly
considered the above petition and after hearing and examining all of the evidence presented and the file therein
does hereby find and order as follows:
1. All procedural requirements necessary for the review of said variance have been met. (Yes X No_).
2. There are circumstances unique to the property under consideration, and granting such variances does not
violate the spirit and intent of the City's Zoning and Platting Code.
3. Variance Request#2002-02 is herein Granted as modified below .
4. Conditions to the granting X denial , of said variance are as follows:
See Attachment for Conditions
5. A copy of this order shall be forwarded to the applicant by the City Clerk.
6. This order shall be effective February 6, 2002 ; however,this variance shall lapse and be of no effect
unless the erection or alternatives permitted shall occur within one(1) year of the effective date unless
said period of time is extended pursuant to the appropriate procedures prior to the expiration of one year
from the effective date hereof.
7. All Board of Adjustments and Appeals actions are subject to City Council Review.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS
N/A=Not Applicable BY: x/_,
DATED: February 6,2002
• ATTACHMENT: CONDITIONS FOR VARIANCE 2002-02
That a lake setback of 55 feet for a new house to the lot's southeast shoreline be granted(the house will meet
the required 100 foot lake setback from the lot's southwest shoreline).
Said variance shall be subject to the following conditions:
a) No building permits for the construction of the house be issued until the City and State approves
a septic system for the property.
b) That Final Order 2001-07, item 1 pertaining to the previous request to enlarge the non-
conforming existing house be voided.
The hardships involved with this property are the topography of the north end of the lot, the 2 converging
shorelines and the configuration of the lot.
6_ 7 GPIT '�- --— I ,.\
•
_ ,-
400.
Z ,_:: 210Aft ..„___--- -• A-k_V - f..w4.0,..1.---4--iitqlf-"-'-'
W**(1) , ...\ ,:ies19.6 lAlk- "i'...ttof - ---,N' L
----:- 1010' •:4,141,(4 J. ,A4740,c,P'-' - --r.--11-V,ic,A,-
8 6 CI a R-1 T> \ \ NI, -111A0.4111t. - 41.7.1c.1 - - :11:4V1.41%,-_,-,#,- Ailtil :-..- -,„, ,4, -
PI X rri \.\\ 6,it1.7; :::*.:4,- ..,r.:. ..,j::*?•:30, :tfli*.-i.: 1.....!,..4• . :••t-,•-
x. z ,.,,
-, „...........d...tr,..- .
rI z
= co koi-gH, N
* m .'ter • `�1 ,446�_' /.' /
•
1 tri 1 l'.3 0 4,1\ - vasilississm"; . i r.
1 0 1 > _, ft.. ......., _ c.
. .„
1 i .
z . ......
1 i
� �
0 :iiiiii. . „L..
_,.
th,. . •.. ..
*A)
lik,,8,,
..:„. . •
i5 t _ -
+ \ /
/ kor__:......,zvw-__ .:i.
rr,w:rail. is, " ,
t .•., .. AIL ,----- • 107.000,0
''''
E " ..1.1t.
_ * . �' l�� k*
((\
e/ 55 ' setback
-- _ _:-
•\ \ - 1 U -
\; 100 ' setba l• a 1 ,NjJ 1/411." �- _i � i
'•'.. . -.•-• '.40# ..:4tr-RVi:
'\ _ IStt.i.fiN. *V____Liit.:- / de
,..\ \.., ,,,vz.\. :3'4.,:-..r-,./ /•
V, Air. .: • r•-•,p ",.. ft, / :::.,..,•-•;•.•.:•.;:::::: -
\\ A -..\, -:\ fy .i.- .
..\ ' , v- ... :. ....... .
.-. ... ....... . .. ...
• • • •
. . Ito
.\' \ /
. 7 . .
, . . .
. • . ..
. . .. .
. . . .. .
. -... .... . .. .
' ' ' '
. . .. . .. .\:\
\, , \ . .. . .
.. . ..• •
. . • .. .•
\ \ i 5, ..'-, ' ' 1-1
New House location Var. 2002-02
(/ 2-6-02 Board Adj.&Appeals
i
o
FM e,- ail) ,_.___-- 7-
_ -4.41.*-10,ivi-11,)
AL-----_-4---,..1:----
1.11.7, or lifirr--41r..-
xirri 000 --.... - ----7;141-&.--.7 .• - -14-- ----•,......F.__,prtfy.,::,-0.,,..,
1.04,-*, PP.W."
0--..-1-1-1 --1 • * - ' `16,r0:10.1".,."---- ... ' -444'''-',... 4_4sttit 14.---14, -
IE g-lo PI >1 '-:. \ . N lit':-.11.:1---14w-Iflik -,-:-.4"-..67-1)4- ,...- -V.,'-''*!f,ti.--A.._' 11,,,:' A110..i...-.
rnxiT1 ,.. - ,Alitw-.•.... vitc.iik.. stri-tvokz--+
.'ft 4,
---, .--..-. -- -....„ .1\--., ,,....... , ei±-4,,,,,i.,,,,,,,,,,
z \ ..-, ,, A `' - A.t ' '-:-$4:04:0413fe-tt'---7
ox L' w.olo ,fir! p
,, r
�•�••� m\ro �o�
f \ ` o rl _ i i . z'
� `�_' ( .1171
• / . it
11
11
\\.> / • /• r , J'rf.48. :ie. ::s:. / ' ° .N. w �J i
•
•
,S fires �! ti.:18, *--11111111111111111". r/fit• s-1 ''
1.
/r bC.:: 7/t.-,2
ail, �' • .-- ---
�`\ i9 - 55 ' setback 'r'
\ i
-• \ .. _ ,_„, 4*/ _ l
100 ' setbas} 1.�1v
•
\-.
ter _ t`\o- .r 0,;0 /, //.
, - • 4.3:* 41:1,'.11;.0 ! ..... .. .,
\\ \'4 •••‘). 1 '-• ,i. r
V. // - Ica
A \ .. . • . : . , .
.• • _d
... .. ..... . ...... ..
i ;_. ...... . . . . ., . . gl-
\ \-
1 if-:, ..--'...-- :-
� � •
'''‘\ N.____} '/ S rn
\`� y' New House location Var. 2002-02
2-6-02 Board Adj_&Appeals
MEMORANDUM
0 To: Mayor and City Council
From: Jean Johnson,Zoning Adminsitrator
11.11
Eden Prairie
Date: March 27, 2002
Subject: Review of Board of Adjustments and Appeals Decision on
Variance#2002-02,Bergeland, 7012 Willow Creek Road
RECENT BACKGROUND
2002: Variance#2002-02
Mr. Bergeland applied to the Board of Adjustments and Appeals to construct a new house,
(removing the existing house which Judge Harvey C. Ginsberg's action in 2000 allowed him to
remodel), or to add a new garage at a 75 foot setback from to the lake to the existing house
which is 37 feet from the Bryant Lake. (See background under 2000 for further information on
Judge Ginberg's ruling). Mr. Bergeland's preference was to remove the existing deteriorating
house for health reasons.
The Board reviewed the request on Jan. 10 ,2002. The item was continued to a Feb. 6, 2002
meeting with the Board directing Mr. Bergeland to explore a setback for the new house which
would be greater than the 37 feet requested.
At the Feb. 6, 2002 meeting the Board reviewed plans for new house construction on the lot
with various setback options and acted unanimously on a 55 foot setback. The hardships with
this request were noted as: the topography of the north end of the lot, the two converging
shorelines, and the shape of the lot.
On Feb. 19, 2002 the City Council elected to review the Board's action on Var. 2002-02.
Information supplied to the Board at their Jan. 10 &Feb. 6 meetings is attached for the Council's
review.
Memo-Review of Var.2002-02 p. 2
2001: Variance 2001-07
Bergeland submitted a variance application to the City after Judge Ginberg's ruling.
Mr.Bergeland's application included a garage addition to the existing house(48'from the lake),
a porch addition, deck addition and entry roof(all meeting the 100' requirement), the removal of
a one story portion of the house with replacement with a two story addition(60'from the lake),and
the existing 40' setback for the existing house structure and the 0' setback for the existing
gazebo.
On July 12,2001 the Board granted the variances with the exception of the request for the garage
addition. Conditions of the approval were that no building permits could be issued until an
approved septic system is installed and the approval of the 40' setback for the existing house is
for the present footprint of the house and not for any future additions. (Mr. Bergeland has not
yet acted upon this variance-a new variance#2002-02 was submitted).
Information related to Var. 2001-07 is attached.
2000:Variance 2000-07
Mr. Bergeland submitted a variance application (Var2000-07) requesting approval to remodel
and repair the existing Perkins house on lot 2. The variance also included an appeal of the
Building Officials Order to remove or replace(at a100' setback)the gazebo.
On June 8, 2000 the Board of Adjustments and Appeals denied the variance request. The
Board's action was appealed to the City Council. On July 18, 2000 the City Council affirmed
the Board's denial.
Mr. Bergeland appealed the Council's action to Hennepin District Court.
Judge Ginberg's ruled Mr.Bergeland could remove siding from the house and gazebo and
replace with new siding,the house &gazebo roof and insulation could be replaced,the house and
gazebo windows could be replaced, and Building Officials Order for the removal of the gazebo
was reversed and repairs previously performed were granted.
7
Memo-Review of Var. 2002-02 p.3
•
1999
March 2, 1999 the City approved a revised 3 lot subdivision on the Perkins property. Variances
involved with the platting were submitted to the Board of Adjustments and Appeals.
The Perkin's subdivision variances (Var.99-08)were denied by the Board of Adjustments and •
Appeals on May 13, 1999 The Board's action was appealed to the City Council; and the
Council approved the variances on July 6, 1999.
On August 17, 1999 the City approved the final plat for the 3 lot subdivision,Res.99-136.
On Sept. 29, 1999 Mr. Bergeland purchased lot 2 from the Perkins.
1989
June 20, 1989 the City approved a 3 lot subdivision. Variances involved with the plat were
denied by the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. The Board's action was appealed to the City
Council. The Council granted the variances on August 1, 1989.
History previous to 1989 is available through Community Development files.
approved Minutes
Board of Adjustments &Appeals
WEDNESDAY,FEBRUARY 6,2002 7:00 P.M. CITY CENTER
Heritage Room III
8080 Mitchell Road
BOARD: Cliff Dunham,Chairperson;Louis Giglio,Ismail
Ismail,Michael O'Leary and Greg Olson
STAFF: Jean Johnson,Zoning Administrator
Rick Rosow, City Attorney
Carol Pelzel, Recorder
GUESTS: Nathan Bergeland,7012 Willow Creek Road
Rich Boumeester,21120 Parkfield Ave,
Jordan,MN
Stuart Nolan,7020 Willow Creek Road
Dick Seidenstricker,7221 Willow Creek Road
Dave Crowther, 7011 Willow Creek Road
CALL TO ORDER •
Chairperson Dunham called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m.
ROLL CALL—PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Present: Cliff Dunham,Louis Giglio,Ismail Ismail, Greg Olson and Michael O'Leary
(arrived at 7:10 p.m.)
Absent: No one.
I. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Motion/Second:Ismail/Giglio,to approve the agenda as published.Motion carried,4-0.
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Minutes of January 10,2002
Giglio asked that on Page 4,fourth line of the first paragraph,the"s"be moved up behind the
word Lake and on Page 5,fifth line of the first paragraph the word"ar"be corrected to read car.
Motion/Second: O'Leary/Ismail,to approve the January 10 minutes as corrected.Motion carried,
5-0.
9
III: VARIANCES (Continued from January 10,2002)
Request#2002-02 by Nathan Bergeland of 7012 Willow Creek Road to:
Approve a 25-foot variance from a 100-foot setback requirement for construction of a garage 75-
feet from Bryant Lake's Ordinary High Water Level.
Approve a 63-foot variance from a 100-foot setback requirement for construction of a new house
37-feet from Bryant Lake's Ordinary High Water Level.
Dunham explained that this item had been continued to this meeting to allow the -
applicant time to look at other alternatives to reduce the variance request.
Bergeland pointed out that he currently has the option to remodel the existing house
which is 37 feet from the high water mark. They have looked at ways to construct a •
smaller house on this site but the contour of the property does not allow them to
build a house that would be consistent with the other homes in the neighborhood. -
Bergeland explained that they did look at other options to make this project work.
He did approach the neighbors,the Perkins,regarding acquiring a 50-foot strip of
land adjacent to the northern edge of his property or the entire parcel of land. The
Perkins did not wish to sell any surrounding property. Acquiring additional property
would have given them adequate space to move the house over and be set back 100
feet from the lake. Bergeland said he also asked the Perkins if they would allow him
to build within the 15 feet bordering the setback on the north side of his property.
They indicated that they would be willing to work with him on this matter.
Bergeland said he has since learned that to build closer to the side lot line on the
north is an issue that must be addressed by the City and he would be willing to work
with the City on that.
Bergeland explained that they did look at reducing the size of the house and
essentially cut off the den area.They reduced the width of the house by
approximately 16 feet and the depth of the house was reduced by another two feet.
This resulted in reducing the entire size of the house by approximately 900 square
feet.This could be constructed with a 7-foot setback allowance. If the house were
moved back 100 feet it would be built 20 feet into the hill. This would result in
destroying the hill and its surroundings. They are closer to the lake but only in one
corner. Bergeland said they would prefer to not have to deal with the hill.
In response to a question from Dunham, Bergeland explained that the larger house
was 82 feet wide while the new plan is 68 feet wide.Dunham explained that this
Board would not be able to address a request for a 7-foot side yard setback at this
time since that request has not been advertised.Johnson pointed out that the required
side yard setback is 15 feet. The applicant would have to apply for the requested 7-
foot setback and a public hearing would have to be advertised for such a request.
1 0
Johnson presented the staff report explaining at the meeting in January Bergeland
also had a request for construction of a garage to the existing house.The new garage
would be 75 feet from the lake.The second request and preferred was the
construction of a new house 37 feet from the lake at the closest point.Different
options were discussed at the January meeting and it was felt that revisions to the
plan should be done. It was felt that a plan could be done that would set the house
further from the lake than 37 feet, which was a past approved plan. Johnson pointed
out that the 7-foot side yard setback shown on the plan cannot be acted on tonight
and the house must be shifted to meet the 15-foot setback requirement.The footprint
shown would be approximately 50 feet from the lake at the closest point.Johnson
explained that the staff report from the previous meeting does have recommended
conditions. Staff is recommending that should the request be approved,the septic
plan meet all State and local requirements and that the previous Final Order No.
2001-07 be voided. Johnson indicated that the hardship issues are the shape of the
lot,the topography on the north one-half of the lot, the wooded hill and the two
shorelines.
Dunham presented a schematic sketch of the home at a 100-foot setback from one
shoreline and approximately 50 feet from the other. He noted that he used the
footprint of the earlier house with the three-car garage with a 15-foot side yard
setback. Dunham explained that this plan does result in the house being
approximately 50 feet from the lakeshore on the south and east.
Dunham opened the public hearing.
Stu Nolan,7020 Willow Creek Road, asked that this Board allow the 75-foot setback
for this lot that was approved in 1999 stand. He reminded the Board that a variance
already exists for this property. There was much discussion that took place at that
time and it was decided that the setback should be 75 feet for this lot. Nolan believed
that the driveways for Lots 1 and 2 and a septic system for those lots will grade into
the hill.Nolan said he does not feel a hardship exists. The applicant was aware of the
75-foot setback and he has talked about preserving a hill that will not be preserved
after all construction is completed. Nolan stated that the neighbors feel the setback
from the lake is much more important than preserving the hill. He indicated that they
are also concerned about setting a precedent allowing homes to be built closer to the
lake. Nolan said he feels building closer than 100 feet to the lake is not consistent
with the neighborhood.
O'Leary asked what the status is of Lots 1 and 3.Johnson responded that Lot 3 is
vacant and Lot 1 has a small cottage on it.
Dick Seidenstricker,7221 Willow Creek Road,explained that he realizes the
applicant has modified the size of his house and the placement of it on the lot.
However,it still comes back to preserving the integrity of the neighborhood.
Previous discussions involved whether or not they preserve the lakeshore or the
contour of the lot.The key issue at that point and time was that the shoreline is much
I/
more important to maintain than the contour of the home or land.Seidenstricker
pointed out that with the development of Lot 1 and the septic system,the hill and
contour will be impacted.
Dave Crowther,7011 Willow Creek Road, said he shared the sentiments of the
people that have spoke this evening. He explained that he is just moving into the
neighborhood and is concerned about the lakeshore.
Dunham closed the public hearing.
Olson asked if what the neighbors stated regarding the destruction of the hill is
correct.Johnson responded that the plan as approved does depict driveways that are
along the north&east sides of the hill. The proposed homes would be placed at the
base of the hill. The proposed drain field will result in the removal of trees. If the
proposed Bergeland house is set 100 feet back from the 2 shorelines, there would be
an approximate 20 foot cut into the hill. The City has reviewed the grading and
tree removal over these 3 lots.
Rich Boumeester,contractor for the project, explained that they need enough room
to construct the septic system. Once the hill is cut back it will be necessary to build
tiered retaining walls.The height of retaining walls is also restricted by City
ordinance.The retaining walls would result in additional costs. Again,there is the
issue of the distance from the septic system. Bergeland explained that from an
aesthetics point of view, he would prefer not to build the back of the house into the
hill.
Giglio asked if a Developer's Agreement exists.Johnson responded that it does on
Lots 1 and 3. Ismail said he is trying to reach a comfortable variance request for
everyone. He asked if a 70-foot variance would be helpful.Bergeland responded
the Court action a year ago allows him to remodel the existing home that is 37 feet
from the shoreline. He is proposing to move the house back even further and can
not understand why the neighbors would not be in favor of this rather than leave the
house 37 feet from the lake.
O'Leary said that Bergeland has a very valid point. He is proposing to move the
house back further from the lake than the Court approved location which would
improve the integrity of the lakeshore setback. The applicant does not have to do
this, he can remodel the existing house. Giglio pointed out that if the Board should
approve something new,the lake would be improved because the house would be
moved back.
Dunham pointed out that this lot has several unique characteristics to it and
maintaining most of the hill is one of them.The lakeshore is on two sides of the
property,which makes this lot similar to the hardship that some corner lots possess.
Dunham informed the audience that just because one neighbor is granted a variance
for a setback does not mean the next applicant applying for a variance will be
/z
granted one. Each request is dealt with separately and the unique circumstances are
reviewed.The neighborhood should not be concerned that a particular Board action
is precedent setting.
O'Leary said he believes the plan for a new house further back from the lake than
the 37 foot existing home allowed to be remodeled by the Court,is a better plan and
a greater lakeshore setback.
Motion/Second: Giglio/Ismail, to approve variance request#2002-02 for a 45 foot
variance from a 100-foot setback requirement on the southeast borderline for
construction of a new house 55 feet from Bryant Lake's Ordinary High Water Level
with the house conforming to the 100-foot setback on the southwest borderline with
the following conditions:
a. No building permits for the construction of the house be issued until the City
and State approve a septic system for the property.
b. Void Final Order 2001-07,Item 1,pertaining to the previous request to enlarge
the non-conforming existing house.
The hardship includes the shape of the lot,topography and two lakefronts. Motion
carried,5-0.
/3
Minutes
Board of Adjustments&Appeals
January 10, 2002
B. Request#2002-02 by Nathan Bergeland of 7012 Willow Creek Road to:
1. Approve a 25-foot variance from a 100-foot setback requirement for
construction of a garage 75-feet from Bryant Lake's Ordinary High
Water Level.
2. Approve a 63-foot variance from a 100-foot setback requirement for
construction of a new house 37-feet from Bryant Lake's Ordinary High
• Water Level.
Bergeland presented to the Board an illustration of the house design and explained that
the proposed house is in keeping with the neighborhood.He explained that he would
prefer to tear down the house and build on the current footprint. Although the footprint of
the proposed home is larger,the square footage of the proposed house is similar to
the existing house since the third floor of the house has been eliminated creating a lower
roofline.He is proposing to have the current setback 37 feet from Bryant
1 / 3
Minutes
Board of Adjustments&Appeals
January 10,2002
Lake's Ordinary High Water level to minimize the impact on the hill and trees behind the
house.Bergeland pointed out that this is an odd shaped lot with a huge hill and they are
trying to figure out how to make this proposal work. He explained that if he built off the
existing foundation the entry area and a portion of the garage would not be within the
100-foot setback. Bergeland indicated that his goal is to preserve as much of the property
as possible. They have reviewed various alternatives and have developed two that would
be acceptable. The first is to tear down the house and build on the current footprint and
the second is to remodel the existing structure on the current footprint with a proposed
75-foot setback to accommodate the entry area and a portion of the garage.
Olson inquired about the hill.Johnson responded topography and tree protection are
provided for in City Code.Bergeland pointed out that if they had to build into the hill,
additional trees would have to be removed. Giglio asked if the applicant would be
required to do anything permanent for erosion control.Rich Boumeester, contractor for
the project, explained that they would probably construct a retaining wall on the north
side of the property. If the house is pushed back they would have to try to maintain the
hill. Erosion control will be installed to protect the lake.
Ismail asked if the applicant has discussed the shifting of the house back with the
neighbors.Bergeland responded that he has. He did have a meeting with four or five of
the neighbors.He explained that there is a lot of animosity regarding this property that
existed even before he purchased it.There are certain things the neighbors want to have
happen with this property or with other properties in the area.Bergeland explained that if
he were to move the house back 100 feet they would be faced with problems with the hill.
Dunham explained in response to a comment made in Bergeland's letter to the Board,
that his comments made at a previous meeting are only his comments and not Board
action.
Bergeland explained that an option is for him to remodel the existing structure on the
current footprint with a proposed 75' setback for additional garage space. However,he
would prefer not to do that because of the unkown and what they could run into when
remodeling. Dunham asked if the applicant would be willing to tear down and rebuild.
Bergeland said that is his preference.Giglio asked what the impact would be on the
property should the applicant rebuild.Bergeland said they are aware of road restrictions
from March through May and they would not be able to start construction prior to May.
Giglio asked if any additional trees would have to be removed if the existing
house were torn down.Boumeester said that would depend on what proposal they went
with. Once the driveway is completed,there would be minimal tree removal depending
on which plan they went with.If they push the house back,more trees would have to be
removed.Ismail asked how large the proposed garage would be.Bergeland said
they are proposing a 31/2 car garage.If necessary, they could eliminate the half stall.
Johnson presented the staff report explaining that the Board could choose one of the two
alternatives presented.The first alternative is to rebuild and remodel the existing house
and garage addition with a 75-foot setback.The other alternative presented is for
`5 4
Minutes
Board of Adjustments&Appeals
January 10,2002
new construction on the property with a proposed 37-foot setback from Bryant Lake.
Johnson indicated options exist for this property. The first option would be to reduce the
size of the house and the second would be to shift the house to the west for a minimum
side setback of 15-feet instead of the proposed 24-foot side setback.The applicant could
also change the garage to a double deep garage and build an additional detached garage.
This would eliminate having to build into the hill and additional trees. Staff also
suggested eliminating the deck at the southeast corner and to redesign the corner of the
house to increase the lake setback. Johnson said another option would be to design a
house for the lot meeting, or more closely meeting the 100-foot required shoreland
setback and minimizing cuts into the north hill and tree removal.The house could be
designed to meet the 75-foot setback, similar to the plan approved in 1999.Johnson
explained that should the Board recommend approval of any alternative presented,
conditions outlined in the staff report be attached to that approval. If the Board should
choose to deny the variance, staff recommends findings. The Board may also want staff
to look at other alternatives including a new house design.
Dunham opened the public hearing.
Dick Seidenstricker,7221 Willow Creek Road,expressed concern about maintaining the
integrity of the neighborhood and the Board setting a precedent. Seidenstricker said he is
concerned with the actions that have been taken again and again with regard to this
• property. He explained that the subdivision was approved based on the fact that the house
would be moved back. It was also indicated that all three lots would be developed at the
same time including the removal of the house on Lots 1 and 2. Seidenstricker said they
are now talking about protecting the hill and infringing on the lakeshore. An agreement
was made with the City when the lots were divided with specific requirements as to what
their expectations were. Seidenstricker asked that thee City enforce the agreement for a
75-foot setback before construction is started. Seidenstricker asked that they go back to
the original agreement when the subdivision occurred which insists on a 75-foot setback
to the lake to protect it.
Stuart Nolan, 7020 Willow Creek Road, explained that he is the adjoining property owner
to the north.He explained that he is in favor of remodeling the house or a new home 75
feet from the lake. If a new house were built on this lot,it would be 75-feet
from the lake while the other homes would be 100-feet from the lake. Nolan said he feels
it would be a detriment to the lake to allow a house to be built inside 100-feet.He
feels that building closer to the lake would be more detrimental than building into the hill
or removing trees.
Dunham closed the public hearing.
Giglio asked if the applicant would be in favor of continuing this item for one month to
allow him time to redesign the proposed house.He said he feels they should approve
something that better protects the lake.Giglio said an approximate 75-foot setback would
be reasonable and he would like to see a design with a 75-foot setback prior to approving
t ( 5
Minutes
Board of Adjustments &Appeals
January 10,2002
something they have not seen.Bergeland said they would be incurring additional costs to
redesign this proposal without knowing whether or not the redesign would be acceptable_
Giglio noted that the applicant does have approval from this Board to remodel this house
with a 37-foot setback,however, he wants to build a new house. Ismail said he thinks it
would be a good idea to develop some scenarios using the an approximate 75-foot
setback. Giglio asked what the hardship would be other than the odd shaped lot.
Johnson explained the previous 75-foot setback on this lot was due to the shape of the lot
and the hill. A previous plan approved by the City for a 75-foot setback did have the
house at the base of the hill. Giglio said he would like to see the applicant come back
with alternatives for constructing a house with an approximate 75-foot setback.
Motion/Second: Giglio/Ismail,to continue this item to February 6, at which time the
applicant will come back with some alternative plans with a setback of approximately 75
feet.The motion carried,4-0.
IV: OLD BUSINESS
The Board agreed to meet on February 6, 2002, at 7:00 p.m. to consider Variance
Request#2002-02. The special meeting date was agreeable to board members and the
applicant.
V: NEW BUSINESS
VI: ADJOURNMENT
Motion/Second: Ismail/Olson, to adjourn the meeting at 8:30 p.m.Motion carried,4-0.
•
/ 7
BOARD OF APPEALS
City of Eden Prairie
8080 Mitchell Road
Eden Prairie,MN 55344
STAFF REPORT
Rev. 1-22-02
VARIANCE: 2002-02 MEETING DATE: January 10,2002
CONTINUED TO February 6,2002
APPLICANT: Nathan Bergeland
LOCATION: 7012 Willow Creek Road
REQUEST:
1. Approve a 25 foot variance from a 100 foot setback requirement for construction of a garage
75 feet from Bryant Lake's Ordinary High Water Level.
2. Approve a 63 foot variance from a 100 foot setback requirement for construction of a
new house 37 feet from Bryant Lake's Ordinary High Water Level.,
ZONING DISTRICT: R1-22
AREA CHARACTER: Half acre+lots along Bryant Lake and Willow Creek Road
BACKGROUND: •
1. Background on Variance Request 2001-07
2. Background on Variance Request 2000-07
APPLICANT'S STATED HARDSHIP: See letter dated December 18,2001.
•
OPTIONS:
1. Redesign house to increase setback to lake by one or more of the following:
a. reduce size of house
b. shift house to west minimum side setback of 15 feet instead of the proposed
24 foot side setback
c. eliminate third stall garage
d. eliminate the deck at the southeast corner and redesign corner of house to increase
lake setback(the center and southwest deck would remain)
2. Design a house for the lot meeting,or more closely meeting the 100 foot required
shoreland setback and minimizing cuts into the north hill and tree removal.
3. Design a house according to the 1999 plan which depict a 75 foot setback
ACTION: The Board may wish to choose from one of the following actions:
1. Approve Variance Request#2002-02 if the Board finds the lot shape,2
converging shorelines and topography poses hardships for placement of a house.
2. Approve a modification of the proposed house at setback from the
lake, outside the 878 contour
Actions 1 or 2 should be subject to the following conditions:.
a. No building permits for the construction of the house be issued until the
City and State approve a septic system for the property.
-b. Void Final Order 2001-07, item 1. pertaining to the previous request to
enlarge the non-conforming existing house
3. Continue Variance Request#2002-02, if additional information is needed.
4. Deny Variance Request#2002-02 based upon the following findings:
a. The proposed house at a 37 foot setback to the lake is an extreme variance
from the 100 foot minimum requirement.
b. The conditions of the property do not justify the granting of such a
significant variance.
c. There has been no showing of"Undue Hardship" as defined in the
City Code, Sec. 11.76, Subd 1.
d. The lot can be put to a reasonable use if a house is designed to the lot's
setback requirements.
e. The applicant has not demonstrated unique circumstances to justify a new more
significant variance than the 75' setback approved in 1999 which has expired.
•
/ 7
January 29t,2002
Eden Prairie Board of Adjustments and Appeals
City of Eden Prairie
8080 Mitchell Road
Eden Prairie, MN 55344
Dear Board Members,
Based on our discussion during our last meeting,I have been working with my architect
to come up with alternative plans and renditions to my proposed new home in order to
better comply with the setback requirements. •
Currently my home's footprint is approximately 37' from the high water mark at Bryant
Lake. Due to the configuration of.the property on a point and a steep hill on the back
portion of the property,it makes the placement of a comparable home a hardship. Some
of the alternatives I have explored since our last meeting are as follows:
1). I have approached the Perkins(my neighbors)regarding acquiring a portion(a 50-
foot strip adjacent to the northern edge of my property)or the entire parcel of land. I was
respectfully denied on both accounts.
2). I have asked the Perkins if they would allow me to build within the 15' bordering
setback on the north side of my property. They both replied that they would be willing to
work with me on this matter.
For illustration purposes,I have shown a map of my property with a 7' bordering setback
allowance and created a 60' dashed line indicating the distance to the high water mark.
In order to fit the footprint of the house close to the 60 foot setback, I reduced the width
of the house by—16 feet and the depth by—2 feet(over 940 square feet).
Please consider that the hill will have minimal impact and if you would prefer no impact,
it is necessary to move the home to the west and it would be slightly closer to the lake on
the south side. Alternatively,if it is necessary to move the home within the 15 foot
border setback,the home would be closer to the lake on the south side.
I want to reiterate that it is my intent to work with my neighbors and the City of Eden
Prairie to design a home that is safe and comfortable for my family while in keeping with
the natural setting and the style of the community. Thank you in advance for your
consideration regarding these issues.
ely,
Nathan D.Ber
7012 Willow Creek Road
t .o-,9Z
i
---i
\ / \
/ , / ..
N
i _ in
i l
1
EDP .1.
Ir -11 I I EAT____—\_
cr v o i
D f J3/4.3.. 1 1i ��
J II
t X. o
ID
Tit
6 I.71 n
I 1.70 O j ow
3.
1 ������������
/ .OL-.£L .OL-.91. .0-.i'I. mg-.LZ
.L-.99
1
_. . ..
- ram
i CD _,,v ,_
(.........-11. /3 7-: ir litrfi?..7%-
Nil r ..IFfik,
. - Ma-4441i$4* 44.0 --, ',11,Wir '/41.ul -
Z ' J -! .sir=<
1", - pl. • :
= ao .,, , \ A -i . 1,►r.
i '4 i ' .XI rik: ... '.-irk*-'
ioi = � � �` (...!P'�l
0 •
/ / ,�
\ \ / .-- .>.4i4INiiiiiiii. :iir
\/ 7... .< -
•
A 1 • ---; .._i!..'----_,rie-- )1111P.
\ '.:.•
•
_�i - IPP. -• ice a-x. ji .a \-1
\ '
�\ \ 55' setback
- i — — .
\.\\ 100 ' setbasla ----11# 1.i---711r- - 11171'11°5' ,..--.. - ...-"
•
\- ,10.1.-. --. ,,, z
\ ...lits.40.....:
.z.--Ar N.:::IP?`.-.A, - , ,•V
. /\ - 14WW•\* -Saiir- 1 ..... .:.
\ A -a\ -,'
•
\ \ I 1 .
\ - x
/` New House location Var. 2002-02
A)._ 2-6-02 Board Adj. &Appeals
December 18th, 2001
Eden Prairie Board of Adjustments and Appeals
City of Eden Prairie
8080 Mitchell Road
Eden Prairie,MN 55344
Dear Board Members,
After our last meeting in July,I have embarked on some extensive architectural plans and
the proper layout of the design necessitates two requests to expedite this process. I am
presenting two alternatives as I am anxious to (re)construct my home into a more livable
dwelling.
I also need a little clarification regarding the construction of the property. After last
meeting, Cliff Dunham had commented at the close of the meeting that he"didn't care if
I tore down and rebuilt the house on the same footprint...". My architect and I have been
operating under the"teardown"assumption due to the higher cost of the extensive
remodeling project and the structural integrity of the house. I have currently spent
$38,000 in architectural fees in the design phase. I didn't see Cliff's comment in the
minutes of the July meeting and before I spend more money,I want to have clarification
on my ability to tear down all or portions of my house to accommodate the plans that
have been designed.
Although the footprint of the proposed home is larger,the square footage of the proposed
house is very similar to the existing house since the third floor of the house has been
eliminated creating a lower roofline. The aesthetics and it's ability to blend into the
landscape is much more appealing and in tune with the neighborhood as can be noted in
the computer aided drawings.
The two alternatives are as follows with my preference being Alternative#1:
Alternativel:
Due to the mold in the house and my allergies, I would prefer to tear down the house and
build on the current footprint. I would propose to have the current setback(37feet) of the
existing pad to minimize the impact on the hill and trees behind the house as one
alternative. This would allow the proposed home that is an overlay on the existing
footprint on the plat map,provided as an exhibit,to be rotated to a more westerly
direction further reducing the impact of the hill and trees. When building off the existing
foundation,the entry area and a portion of the garage(approx 75 feet) are not within the
100 foot setback. The current setback(37 feet)would then accommodate this portion of
the structure.
Alternative 2:
Remodeling the existing structure on the current footprint with a proposed 75' setback to
accommodate the entry area and a portion of the garage. The additional garage space
would allow me to store my boat,bobcat and riding lawnmower versus having them
exposed to MN weather. It also results in a more aesthetically pleasing environment for
my family and neighbors.
Septic
It is my intent to have the septic and drain field installed in compliance with the City of
Eden Prairie's specifications concurrent with the construction of this project. The
"proposed common drain field"is indicated on the plat map. Swedlund septic
recommended the holding tanks to be gravity fed on the northwest section of the property
with a lift station to the drain field.
Thank you in advance for your thoughtful consideration regarding these issues.
S' e ly,
Natha . Be el
7012 Willow Creek Road
Eden Prairie,MN 55344
_... ..
.,..
=...- .. _
..1 ..4 . .
-... ,,
. . .._
..v.t ..........
... .,....„........,..,_,7,, .,,,.....;„,....‘„:„...„.......,_. ,-,-
" -':7".""..'z"...-71-4•I'...- ••:::•;-? Ur)
-rE"•*1..— --'."'i.-4."'•f:• ......... •••:.:,_ ..---.,,,,.,
:!• ;-
•,...• .4-..- ' . ' ;aCalog.6'' • , .
'4•-'*-.".:,•Z, i .* . - .- . ' • •• • . 11:1
',.•-•4.--'2,4",.••.•; . . . •-
: r*-:,,.....1-,--- • .-.
.4 -.:'-2-•.•.- %:-. . 1 .
..•--...,•4-:: -,,..-•-•-;.- 41, -
(13
.-......p.. .,,,,,... :_,...„-, ,
-....„-..... ....:., ,_,.,.„ _ ,.... .gi ik
.4-4,-,'-.T.,-,.•'•-,,Et, • '
_ .
.... .
.............,...,:„. .„, •
_____:„._.,......1....
2.„...„._ ...41...;., .._ LE
.....„. ..7,, ..„,...... ....,.. . _ _,
.....•.. ..• ....„.„ ..,,,..., _
. .
...„,. , 0)
„:„.• •
. co
.... .:•.... ... . ,
_ .
.. •„.i?--.1..,,tit .... • _ .
. ,
. ..... .:_ ..-.7.....„. ,
. .
. :.
. • .
_.,
• • ..
„...,. . • .. „
,, ..
.....,..,.....f.„....„ 4 1 .
,• ..:W•:4Z'''f, . "•,.....•* '''..'''.!•'.. ........"P: 1."' t. .'1 ,......_.. - .•
ti: ". V.Z2.17.",5''• ..., 4..'^ • :41'. ' '' .:
..—•'2..".P.4.....-;7 1 : .. '
.,
r •'
. ,
. .......7 ''4.... .
,.4:- •
-:-.ii• • ., V.'• ,
. "•••.• ••:•••1--• •
'•i• ' •:-a.',- .
:•r..`L .4• 1 . . , l• .
.--:.•••74.1F-- •.41 .
A' -
. . • —•-- .g. , .
.., . ,,.. .._ . v t. -.
i 4 ,
4 ,. — , - • - ... i '''s • •
... r,, .. .m, • -44. , .,,,.. ' , * .: . • i l 0... ; ..• II
., \ .-..0.4 :. *1 i'l. ".• • **.
!.11f •1.7.,(16 , • ,, '.-.41k A /-- ' c el Os IC•,•..". 1,
......"‘ .‘•:,.... .Iy - * .• ...... ..; It.• ..:A . .20 %,
i t3114.i4N • • ...
....
-- ig,„:„.....0-.-PZ,p.:.•,;14,.':ve _.
... i-I *••
^:• .„ihr s..7,,, .„,„..,‘,„ ir,.. s V. ... ... • , ...0!til ".•• ; • ' i
s1/4 744''10-. A. 'IV i„...1.;•, .-. , • -. •
..,...
•
.z.,,z, ...Ak.... ..„) . ,• . r. .../1
..,0••.ZIP 1 •r..;...,..,T.r. -.1 ...• . 1 i '• '-' C .
• *... . . - • - •-.
il4- );1
,Ar 4 ..;* •:i.,..,,....el., . $::,), . , .... i ..- ,... . ..... ..._, .... , .... ,
, -,... -.
, :,,,t',.4....1i.;.,•,,lizr,..t.% •' ', i ' .....4 , : r , ' ° it -...,j&,-.0
. .....i. ..,...,-.:..-:--e- ---- ,
-4:.. '':., 0. ." .= ' '''• i 1 .A '->t,, --.••• 1 4‘ , 1..-4•._---•..,,,-7:4:F27.1 •
,',.....„,;••• .4,.-..A . '1‘• '. i -4.1,-..,,,,-,,,,,Z...
-,...7,,I,•"..t.z....- .,-...,-
rAjr•,6.. ., .111.•,,,"'ya .4••••-•-• t•-•",,,, ,,,'''/S.: " •
`'"' .011."." ;f• • '4. ,„ '.. f i .7 • •,.,-7.7.'1.—='1%•"''47! '
er fl 9 ' "''-'•!Pf: . r 1 ,i 'i. • -'. . , . • -•,---- -'''' -..Y-2,,,',. .-5.".,'-`
''•3 %-•:7''' • i -,, . •, , • ' •. .
. •'.. ,As., , " •..••• ' , V''''• ..
...... 011. •40` . ''''' ; '.; . , "
r. 1,:. °'.•-.% 7:
. .
%s- . 1:7 .. A . • .:::::&•c•-"*"4.•,,,,....:,-typ----,-„ss-..E, ..
7 •
7 " i i „.• •I. •, i IN.'. ....,......z, <e•',---. •-----`rt..1.1,
.A.L.:7,2.•...••- •'
, ' ',..c.- % „ k••• . i . . . .
4e• ' , k kl. . . •,t...,-,,,,.-1,.1-.........__ r if
• *' Coir•••......
....,.....
i ... x
1 • •
1 --... - . I
...,,,..:1. ...1 .
• /i.• -.. 4• , ... ....
1 ..r - . ,,. •'' -.
i -.
. t . .j, -- ' It
- •
* 1 f ,-.•-•
3 .-• • .---
A ..f.- •
1 i 4 4 f'". s • .'•
4 ;
i . I
_
- ,
x f- '• 't. t ?v _ 1 .
_ • _ -
- .. •
•
1:••
•
•
•
•
•
•
. .
•
•
\
. .
•
•
•.
3, . .
.•
•
-_ -
t.
8'-6" 16'-11" 4, '12'-8" 11.-8"
w Master = .rl .
`° Bedroom :.] : :.i
imir, liii
29-5C. .A. / f
T
0 13'-1C "
/
Breakfast 11 j
N M� itche
2'-a ," ,r-rxs" 4'-5" 1 ,9'-2"�
I 11
O _ 6'-4"7:7
LjIL
61
r I u I in
co
LI l� 1 1 i •
I ��1cel
�� i Dinning j '1_ �G4,1 r�'r:iiii&J►;
r-1 i II Room
In
Great.- -Roorn -_ors
L J INIfiii _______ , ,,
a all ,� 9('� II;
I+144k
1 ICI 1111111 1,1p 17'-6" 1. 1°'-2" / 18'-10"
an
II 11111111111111
11 D e n ICIIIIIIIIICI
1
r
1
7L1 \ - .
•
! 7'-1J" f • 29'-1X"
NATHAN BERGELAND
I•
1;
i
•
\
La 2
. § • .....:,:,..:1,..21.:..,•,....;:,....1:::::::::.•.•. .. 1.
ISS i r•ii. As•:/•*047 \
)...)1.):::(:).,....0). / " v1\'*-:10 \ ;z:;It.`.41 0 v^'''4 .,
+t '+s: s. '• .i' 70 1��'v •
•
^,?.',.},,d• • .e r, 'J � ' F ,/mac ° •j *.
•
•
.4....• • - .... .44 g . .: . tiiii., ,,(//k. . ...,.
\ `it •`�''` `, ' 7 .I"..t•• .ter . �rl�. "'� •)
.001111111'. 4e41,1 .,...mrirCOL..111 :5414 i .5 de I,. ......
:i1'. /4°1 1 44;4.44411.I
ilP ;I, - .:!? .1::
Or
Ail
IIII,
2,s_.s.,..ii
1111111111fr il 1 8 1
• 'e /00111rLifige I: r�it �ay
o
y,
Alm \,i 1i� r 1 n 1
g /
ffi 1
•
Vifrdake '47.,.0.:•,!..,740,••_,-g-'••••.-4....._. 44),,,, 1111114 111:411.1111111w
clig/ oil
, NB'ia,:..C1-7.1.e.A . " .:144-'4.°41.-4 S-4"14. 1 sly_,.'
A:may. , i< ,P, ��' ik �� tr,:l.'r:
40.1"
ipa. . a.'.‘ 'Vg\ii.:1%.,,,: ' '
i, 74 ...,,
�n
t1 \ _ • -
2001
4 41).; Minnesota Department of Natural Resources.
= W Metro Waters- 1200 Warner Road,St.Paul,MN 55106-6793 -_
�� Telephone: (651)772-7910 Fax: (651)772-7977
oFNA t
July 3,2001
•
Ms.Jean Johnson
City of Eden Prairie
8080 Mitchell Road
Eden Prairie,MN 55344-2229
RE: Nathan Bergeland Variance Application,Bryant Lake(27-67P),City of Eden Prairie,
Hennepin County.
Dear Ms.Johnson:
Thank you for sending the variance application,dated June 21,2001,for the Bergeland Residence
to the DNR for review. The residence is located in the N Y2 of Section 11,Township 116 North,
Range 22 West,Hennepin.County. After reviewing the application,we have the following
comments to offer.
1. The November 7,2000 District Court Finding of Fact was based on the determination that
{ the work requested at that time met the definition of repair and thus would not be considered
an improvement. The court order should not be interpreted or applied to any future
application requests.The fact that the applicant did not seek to enlarge the existing structure
was the basis of the decision. It's evident that current variances requested by the applicant
would be defined as improvements,by extending the existing footprint. The expansion of •
this nonconforming structure does not meet the intent of the City of Eden Prairie's
Shoreland Ordinance-and any future enlargements to this existing structure should be
prohibited.
2. The existing sewer system must meet the required setback for the Ordinary High Water
Level(OHWL)and must receive any required approvals from the Minnesota Pollution
Control Agency and the Minnesota Department of Health.
3. The proposed landscape wall would be constructed within the shore impact zone(50 percent
of the required structure setback):activities including grading are restricted within that zone.
4. All water accessory structures are required to be setback 10 feet from the OHWL.All other
accessory structures and facilities must meet or exceed the structure setback requirements.
DNR Information:651-296-6157 • 1-888-646-6367 • TTY:651 296-5484 • 1-800-657-3929
An Equal Employer .1 0 ayed on RecyCfed ed paper g a
Who Values Dirersity p
ism d 20Y l C'lre+� ..a
i
a
' -;2_,V. -- .
:? Page 2
• Y July 3,2001
Ms.Jean Johnson
City of Eden Prairie
i
s The comments in this letter address DNR Waters jurisdictional matters and concerns. These
comments should not be construed as DNR support of lack thereof for the particular project. On
the basis of the information I have received,I do not see any demonstration of hardship that would
warrant granting the variances. The property can still be used in a reasonable manner. DNR Waters
i recommends denial of these variance requests.
' Thank you for submitting the application to the DNR for review.Please contact me at(651)772-
7.914 should you have any questions about these comments.
Sincerely,
Travis Germundson
• . Area Hydrologist
•
•
•
c: Hennepin Conservation District
Bob Obermeyer,Nine Mile Creek Watershed District
Bryant Lake(27-67P)File
Eden Prairie Shoreland File
7.
3 1
VARIANCE#2001-07
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE ..
BOARD OFADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS
FINAL ORDER •
RE: Petition of Nathan D.Bergeland
ADDRESS: 7012 Willow Creek Road
OTHER DESCRIPTION: N/A
VARIANCE REQUEST: See attachment A
The Board of Adjustments and Appeals for the City of Eden Prairie at a regular meeting thereof duly
considered the above petition and after hearing and examining all of the evidence presented and the file therein
does hereby find and order as follows:
1. All procedural requirements necessary for the review of said variance have been met. (Yes X No ).
2. There are circumstances unique to the property under consideration,and granting such variances does not
violate the spirit and intent of the City's Zoning and Platting Code.
3. Variance Request#2001-07 is herein Granted X ,Denied
4. Conditions to the granting X denial ,of said variance are as follows:
A. Item 2a on Attachment A for a garage addition is not approved.
B. No building permits for the requested variances be granted until an approved septic system has been
installed..
C. That the 40 foot setback for the house be for the existing footprint and not for any future additions.
5. A copy of this order stall be forwarded to the applicant by the City Clerk.
6. This order shall be effective July 12,2001 ;however,this variance shall lapse and be of no effect unless
the erection or alternatives permitted shall occur within one(1)year of the effective date unless said
period of time is extended pursuant to the appropriate procedures prior to the expiration of one year from
the effective date hereof.
7. All Board of Adjustments and Appeals actions are subject to City Council Review.
• BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS
N/A=Not Applicable BY: AgYt44-3t
DATED: 2—AP O
ATTACHMENT FOR VARIANCE#2001-07 _.
Approve the existing 40' setback to the Ordinary High Water Level for the existing
nonconforming house structure(Code requires 100')
1. To enlarge the nonconforming house structure with the following:
a. adding an attached 3rd stall garage having a shoreland setback of 48'
(Code requires a 100' setback).
b. adding a 12'x 20' deck(meets 100' setback)
c. adding a 16'x 20'porch(meets 100' setback)
d. adding an entrance roof and covered walkway on the-north side of the
house(meets the 100' setback)
e. remove a one-story portion of the house and replace it with a two story
addition at a 60' shoreland setback(Code requires 100' setback).
f. Increasing the roof overhang to 3'6"
(City Code,Sec. 11.75 NON-CONFORMING USES,STRUCTURES
AND SIGNS. Subd. 1.Purposes. This Section is intended to limit the
number and extent of non-conforming uses by prohibiting.their
enlargement,their re-establishment after abandonment,and the
alteration of restoration after destruction of the structures they occupy.
Eventually,certain classes of non-conforming structures of nominal
value,and certain non-conforming signs are to be eliminated or altered
to conform. -
Subd.2 Continuation and Maintenance.
A. Except as otherwise provided in this Chapter, a use,lawfully
occupying a structure or a site on the effective date of this Section
or amendments thereto that does not conform with the use
regulations or the site area per dwelling unit regulations for the
district in which the use is located shall be deemed to be a non-
conforming
use and maybe continued except as otherwise
provided in this Section.
B. Non-conforming uses must comply with all regulations for off-
street parking and lowing,screening,landscaping and
performance standards.
C. Routine maintenance and repairs may be performed on a structure
or site the use of which is non-conforming and on a non-
conforming structure.
3. Approve the existing 0' setback to the lake's Ordinary High Water Level for the 4
existing non-conforming gazebo structure.
BOARD OF APPEALS
City of Eden Prairie
. • • 8080 Mitchell Road - -
-
,� ; • .. - Eden Prairie,MN 55344 .,
• STAFF REPORT: ; -. . •
- VARIANCE: 2001-07 MEETING DATE: July 12,2001
APPLICANT: Nathan Bergeland
LOCATION: 7012 Willow Creek Road
REQUEST:
1. Approve the existing 40'setback to the Ordinary High Water Level for the existing.
non-conforming house structure(Code requires 100')
2. To enlarge the nonconforming house structure with the following:
a. adding an attached 3'a stall garage having a shoreland setback of 48'(Code requires a 100'setback).
b. adding a 12'x 20'deck(meets 100'setback)
c. adding a 16'x 20'porch(meets 100'setback)
d. adding an entrance roof and covered walkway on the north side of the house(meets the 100'
setback)
e. remove a one-story portion of the house and replace it with a two story addition at a 60'shoreland
setback(Code requires 100'setback).
f. Increasing the roof overhang to 3'6"
(City Code,Sec. 11.75 NON-CONFORMING USES,STRUCTURES AND SIGNS.Subd. 1.Purposes. This Section
is intended to limit the number and extent of non-conforming uses by prohibiting their enlargement,their re-establishment
after abandonment,and the alteration of restoration after destruction of the structures they occupy. Eventually,certain
classes of non-conforming structures of nominal value,and certain non-conforming signs are to be eliminated or altered to
conform.
Subd.2 Continuation and Maintenance.
A. Except as otherwise provided in this Chapter,a use,lawfully occupying a structure or a site on
the effective date of this Section or amendments thereto that does not conform with the use
regulations or the site area per dwelling unit regulations for the district in which the use is
located shall be deemed to be a non-conforming use and may be continued except as otherwise
• provided in this Section.
B. Non-conforming uses must comply with all regulations for off-street parking and loading,
screening,landscaping and performance standards.
C. Routine maintenance and repairs may be performed on a structure or site the use of which is
non-conforming and on a non-conforming structure.)
3. Approve the existing 0'setbacloto the lake's Ordinary High Water Level for the 4 existing non-
conforming gazebo structure.
ZONING DISTRICT: R1-22
AREA CHARACTER: Half acre+lots along Bryant Lake and Willow Creek Road
Kf Comm.Dev1BOA-Board of AppalslRepoctsl20011BOA Staff Report 2001-07.doc 3 V
'7
BACKGROUND:
• Previous Variance 2000-07, staff report,minutes and final order. - - -• Appeal to City Council, minutes of July 18,2000.
• Court File No. CT00-12426 Findings of Fact, Conclusion of Law and Order
(Court action submitted as history)
Variance 2001-07 is submitted subsequent to, and independent of the previous variance,No. 2000-07.
APPLICANT'S STATED HARDSHIP: See applicant's letter dated June 14,2001
OPTIONS: 1.Remove the non-conforming house structure and construct a new home meeting
the 100' setback.
2.Remodel existing home without enlarging the structure's footprint.
ACTION: The Board may wish to choose from one of the following actions:
1. Approve Variance Request#2001-07 or portions of request, with conditions.
The following conditions are recommended:
1. No building permits for the construction on the house be issued until an
approved septic system has been installed..
2. Condition the 40' shoreland setback for the existing house footprint,not for
any future additions
2. Continue Variance Request#2001-07 if additional information is needed.
3. Deny variance Request#2001-07 based upon the following findings:
a. The enlargements proposed for the house are significant variances to the 100'
required setback.
b. There are no circumstances unique to the property that justify granting the
variances.
c. There has been no showing of"Undue Hardship"as defined in the City Code,
Section 11.76, Subdivision 1.
d. The house can be put to a reasonable use with the interior changes planned by the
owner and based upon the Court Order without enlarging the structure's size and
foot print.
e. The property owner purchased the property with knowledge of its condition.
f. At the time the property owner purchased the property it was a non-conforming
structure under the City Code
g. The variances requested are significant and do not meet the purpose of the •
City Code,which is to prohibit enlargement of nonconforming uses.
h. The variances requested do not adhere to Section 11.50 of the City Code providing
for shoreland regulation,which contains required structure setbacks from the
lake's Ordinary High Water Level.
&Comm.Desr1BOA-Board of AppalsiReports12001\BOA Staff Report 2001-07.doc ss-
Minutes
Board of Adjustments&Appeals
July 12,2001
O'Leary said although what they are adding on to the existing stricture seems to be
quite a lot, the variance overall is minimal. There are similarities toithe previous
variance, but the Gundersons are not going with the deeper size on the three-stall
garage. He was inclined to vote in favor of the variance unless there are more
reasons given to the contrary.
Olson wondered if the other lots in the cul de sac are big enough to support three-
stall garages. He had an idea that they don't have room, and so no one else can
build them because they would be encroaching on the adjacent properties.
Ford said typically when the Board sees a request for a three-car garage,people say
they have the last house on the block with a two-car garage. But this isn't a three-
stall garage neighborhood. A huge change will be made to this house, and it will
have a big visual impact. He agreed that the support of the neighborhood is there,
but be was not sure how much weight to give that. In this particular case, because
the neighborhood does not generally have three-car garages, that was a big factor
for him to consider.
c
Dunham said not all the options have been explored that would avoid going into the
setback. There is 20 feet of buildable property on the north side of the house, so
that would be a direction to build,and then add on a stall to the existing garage.
Giglio said this is a corner lot and he agreed it is a massive change and will change
the character of the house. But he didn't think building a 27-foot two-car garage
would be much different. It is probably just as much of a visual change.
O'Leary said if the neighbors were asked, they would probably wish to have the
addition go toward the street rather than toward their property.
Ford said he was not going to support the variance for the reason he stated; that it .
would allow the applicants to expand their house in a manner not consistent with
the neighborhood.
Motion/Second: Giglio/O'Leary to approve Variance Request 2001-06 to construct
a three-stall garage having a front yard setback of 25 feet, the hardship being the
curve of the street and the shape of the lot. Motion carried 3-2, with Ford and
Dunham voting nay.
C. Request#2001-07 by Nathan D.Bergeland at 7012 Willow Creek Road to:
1. Approve the existing 40' setback to the Ordinary High Water Level for the
existing non-conforming house structure(Code requires 100').
2. To enlarge the non-conforming house structure with the following:
a. adding an attached rl stall garage having a shoreland setback of
48'(Code'requires a 100'setback)
b. adding a 12'x 20'deck(meets 100'setback)
__ c. adding a 16'x 20'porch(meets 100'setback)
K1iCooim.Dev\BOA-Board ofAppeah nates\2001107-12-01.doc 5
Minutes
Board of Adjustments &Appeals
July 12,2001
d. adding an entrance roof and covered walkway on the north side of the
house(meets the 100'setback
e. remove a one-story portion of the house and replace it with a two-story
addition at a 60'shoreland setback(Code requires 100'setback)
f. increasing the roof overhang to 3'6"
(City Code, Sec. 11.75 NON-CONFORMING USES, STRUCTURES AND SIGNS.
Subd. 1. Purposes. This Section is intended to limit the number and extent of non-
conforming uses by prohibiting their enlargement, their re-establishment after
abandonment, and the alteration of restoration after destruction of the structures they
occupy. Eventually, certain classes of non-conforming structures of nominal value, and
certain non-conforming signs,are to be eliminated or altered to conform.
Subd. 2.Continuation and Maintenance.
A. Except as otherwise provided in this Chapter, a use, lawfully occupying a
structure or a site on the effective date of this Section or amendments
thereto that does not conform with the use regulations or the site area per
dwelling unit regulations for the district in which the use is located, shall
be deemed to be a non-conforming use and may be continued except as
otherwise provided in this Section.
B. Non-conforming uses must comply with all regulations for off-street
parking and loading,screening,landscaping and performance standards.
C. Routine maintenance and repairs may be performed on a structure or site
the use of which is non-conforming and on a non-conforming structure.)
3. Approve the existing 0' setback to the lake's Ordinary High Water Level for the
existing non-conforming gazebo structure.
Nathan Bergeland, 7012 Willow Creek Road, explained that he had been before the
Board a year ago to request repair and maintenance of the property. The Board and
then the City Council denied these requests. As a result he had to go to Hennepin
County District Court. The court ruled gave him permission to put in new
windows, new roof and new siding for the house and gazebo. He decided to hire a
professional architect, Charles Stinson, who works in the Twin Cities area. Their
objective is to build a structure that is sound.
Giglio noted there are six different requests under item 2, and asked if they can
approve them individually. Dunham said that could be done.
Stinson said the construction and the architecture of the existing house is not good.
There are no roof overhangs, so there is no protection from the sun or the rain. That
has resulted in serious problems from water damage. They propose increasing the
roof overhang to 3-1/2 feet and enclosing the flat roof.They would like the house to
have more of the character of a lake cottage rather than modern. There has to be a
new driveway put in because the present one goes over other people's property.
They plan to remove a one-story portion of the house and replace it with a two-story
addition. The new front elevation of the house will be more pleasing to look at. •
K1Comm_Dev\BOA-Board of Appeals\k inates12o01107-12-a1.doc 3 / 6
Minutes
Board of Adjustments&Appeals
July 12,2001
They would like to add a stone wall to break down the-scale of the house, add a
porch and deck and create a patio area.
Bergeland questioned the reason the gazebo was included in the list of requests for
approval. Johnson explained that it would allow reconstruction of the gazebo if
damaged by storm,etc.
Bergeland said there are hardships connected with the living conditions in the
house. He needs'to get rid of the flat roof and the mold resulting from the water
damage. He also wants to make sure the house is attractive looking. His neighbors
want him to get to the point where it looks like a nice property, so he has the
support of the neighborhood. He didn't believe what he was asking would be
detrimental to the City;in fact,just the opposite.
Johnson presented her staff report. Mr. Bergeland submitted a variance request to
the Board last year, which included repair and maintenance of this structure. The
Board did not approve the request. The Board believed the maintenance and repairs
required exceeded routine maintenance and repair. The City Council upheld the
Board's decision. Mr. Bergeland appealed the decision to Hennepin County court
and was granted approval as outlined in the Order. This is a unique request,
considering the enlargement of the house and the requested setback of 40 feet from
the shore. There is a deck, garage addition and entryway addition as well to
consider. Options in the staff report have to do with removing the non-conforming
house structure and constructing a new home meeting the 100-foot setback.
Another option would be to remodel the existing home without enlarging the
structure's footprint. The Board has the option of looking at each request and
decide if it wants to act in favor of some and not others. The letter from the DNR
was included for the Board's reference. If the Board approves the applicant's
request, City staff recommends the following conditions: (1) no building permits
for the construction on the house be issued until an approved septic system has been
installed on the property; (2) condition the 40-foot shoreland setback for the
existing house footprint, not for any future additions. If the Board denies the
request,findings have been included for denial.
Ford asked why it is a non-conforming structure now. Johnson replied the setback
now is 40 feet; Code requires 100 feet. The lot size had been non-conforming but
approval was granted in a 1999 plat action. Another non-conforming item is that
the lot does not have frontage on a street. The lot width variance was granted with
the plat approval in 1999.
Giglio asked if Bergeland is living in the house now. He replied that he is.
Giglio asked if the Board always needs to establish a hardship before granting a
request. Johnson replied there is the issue of hardships and unique circumstances.
O'Leary said right now the setback of the house is 40 feet. When the City divided
this lot into three lots,did they approve a 75-foot setback? Johnson said yes.
K'Comm.Dev\BOA-Board of AppalAtEnntes\200B07-12-0I.doc 3 7
Minutes
Board of Adjustments &Appeals
July 12,2001
Olson asked what are the required setbacks from other houses on each side?
Johnson said a 15-foot minimum setback from each side of the house. That is not a
problem in this case.
Dunham opened the public hearing.
Stuart Nolan, 7020 Willow Creek Road, said he lived immediately adjacent to these
properties. The house Nate Bergeland lives in now is in bad shape. Basic
maintenance was not done. Windows have rotted out and siding is damaged, so it
became somewhat of a blight on the neighborhood. He said he spoke for 80 percent
of the people on Willow Creek Road in asking that Nate Bergeland be allowed to
make improvements to the house and turn this situation around.
O'Leary asked Nolan.what his setback is from the lake. Nolan said his house is
high on a hill, so he is probably well over 100 feet back from the lake.
• There being no on else wishing to speak,Dunham closed the public hearing.
Giglio asked for an explanation of the reason for relocating the driveway.
Bergeland said he wanted to have safer ingress and egress to the property. The
driveway comes in now off a building pad. Giglio asked if he would have to
remove a large number of trees. Bergeland said most of the trees have already been
removed that would need to be.
Dunham said certainly this house is a structure that exists and is livable to some
extent. Any improvement to it will be appreciated by the neighborhood. Adding a
porch/deck that are beyond the 100-foot setback is fine, and if he built an addition
to the garage beyond the 100-foot setback,that would be fine.
O'Leary asked if Dunham was opposed to the third stall on the garage that would
have a 48-foot setback to the lake, but conforms to the 15-foot setback on the side?
Dunham said yes.
Ford asked about the setback for the gazebo. Dunham said that was there before, so
he would allow that.
Giglio said last year the Board decided against the gazebo on the basis that a non-
conforming structure should be torn down. However, now the court said the owner
could repair it,but didn't say he could change it. Dunham replied if it is changed so
it looks better,that is a win/win for everybody.
O'Leary said Bergeland purchased the property intending to fix up and improve the
house, and the court said he could. As long as he is not going within 100-foot
setbacks, or adding new areas outside the footprint that had been established, he
supports the request.
Kf Comm.Dev\BOA-Board of Appeals\M'mutes\2001107-12-01.doc ��/ 8
I
Nf mutes
Board of Adjustments &Appeals
July 12,2001
O'Leary asked what is the position of the City regarding City sewer and water? Is
the City going to be putting it in? Johnson replied it is a very difficult atea in which
to do a project, and the City has not received petitions from the residents to request
it. She didn't believe it would be done soon.
Ford asked what improvements were made to the gazebo. Bergeland replied he put
on new siding.
Ford said if the request for a third stall to the garage came-in by itself, the Board
would say it is a huge increase. Given the fact it is a large variance request because
is in addition to the footprint of the non-conforming use. He was not prepared to
support that portion of the request.
Giglio asked if the landscaping toward the lake was natural or a manicured lawn.
Bergeland said it is a'lawn with trees; and the lawn goes all the way to the lake.
Giglio asked if he used fertilizer. Bergeland said he did not.
O'Leary asked where is the septic field on this land. Johnson said a new plan was
approved with a shared drainfield. Giglio asked if the Board could add a condition
to put in a new drainfield. Bergeland interjected he intends to install a private
system. Johnson said staff would need to review the request.
Motion/Second: O'Leary/Giglio to approve Variance Request 2001-07
1. Approve the existing 40-foot setback to the Ordinary High Water Level for the
existing non-conforming house structure
2. Approve requests to enlarge the non-conforming house structure, with the
exception of Item a "adding an attached 31d stall garage having a shoreland
setback of 48'."
3. Approve the existing 0'setback to the lake's Ordinary High Water Level for the
existing non-conforming gazebo structure. -
Conditions:
(1) No building permits for the construction on the house be issued until an
approved septic system has been installed.
(2) Condition the 40' shoreland setback for the existing house footprint, not
for any future additions.
• The motion carried 5-0.
D. Request#2001-08 by Sterling Fence,Inc. at 13480 Pioneer Trail to allow:
• 1. Outside storage of 12 trucks over 3/ton(Code limits outside vehicle parking to
vehicles not exceeding 3Aa ton);
2. Outside storage of fence construction materials (Code requires materials,
supplies,and equipment to be in an enclosed building);
KComm.Dev\BOA-Board of AppealslMmntes12001107-12-01.doc /715 9
2000
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE:July 18,2000
SECTION:
SERVICE AREA/DIVISION:
Police ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.:
Jim Clark,Director of Public Appeal of Board of Adjustments and Appeals
Safety Services Decision on Variance Request 2000-07,&Building
TPan Tnhnsnn Znnina Adm nffirial't ()Tyler fnr remnval/rPlnratinn of aa7Phn
Requested Action
Affirm the denial action of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals based upon the Findings
contained in the Board of Adjustments and Appeals motion made on June 8, 2000 regarding the
variances.
Affirm the action of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals regarding upholding the Building
Official's Order regarding removal/relocation of the gazebo.
Synopsis
On June 8,2000 the Board of Adjustments and Appeals heard Mr.Bergeland's request for
shoreland setback variances, approval to alter the non-conforming house structure,permission •
to allow repair,remodeling and improvements to the existing non-conforming house and gazebo,
and an appeal of the Building Official's Order for removal or relocation of the non-
conforming gazebo. The Board denied the variance requests and upheld the Building Official's
Order.
Background Information
Mr.Bergeland purchased Lot 2 of Bryant Lake Heights from Mr.&Mrs. Perkins.Instead of
removing the non-conforming structures on the lot and constructing a conforming structure,
Mr.Bergeland is requesting repair,remodeling and improvements to the house and gazebo.
The Board reviewed the material submitted by Mr.Bergeland and believed the extent of repairs
and improvements would exceed routine maintenance and repair allowed by code, and such
work would be contrary to the code's intent of limiting non-conforming structures.
Attachments
Memorandum by David Hellmuth,legal counsel for Bergeland,received July 7,2000
June 14th& 8th,&July 6, 2000 letters from David Hellmuth for Bergeland
June 8,2000 Unapproved Minutes of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals
June 8,2000 Staff Report on Variance 2000-07
May 12,2000 Letter from Jean Johnson,Zoning Adm.,to Mr.Bergeland
Mr.Bergeland's Submission Materials
F
j
.ram;{'.� 5 . z..-:BOAR_D`OF APPEALS l-� •_ _
`F•=":`,. :. «Y•` 'fir• • _ i. i;, .'a• _ -,f-
•..Cr4 1::_ -�� i� r:'-" #.�r 1-L"-�_ �/-_:�� w:t n-L f.+,+++Y. :�`? -�r�'`�v74'�:.Ya=�G�".. �'•:
.:-:. - ;3%rt+ # xtt -'"- :`-.�: • %w- '.i .fa-rr<'_-•:42-...P y - a -:3-Y- -
'- ; _ = ***,;:-8 080 tchel Ro ad.c ,.,'` t == ,� . ::
,i.; f
fr.�:^�-i..4r .-::'?-%x '�`=-,,s?,,,- ;' .- ,.y,;,:�'�-, _ — -r` . '� � aN.%`?;sue:; �__::? ••5.-:_
S4 . ,r �,�' •.4.' ,:Nt - '" ...". ; *+! - rain , ;5 a•-..c,�»- ay G`"e.. -am' r-'
Vigt-r•4t�ems,^.{' y' �+?w^ / H S jJ•• 'New , r•t,, { .r- L.' • �. ,,,,wi+T y ?
t,�•�. ,�„ �c� +w •*ggam 'C'•A' • �' , O�"f 0'34. -1;.. 9 .'f,it-f4�F 3�u-t Ew..c._ s^
y-� C ~6.m.g-' '' YY'`�_'' 9 4 1* 1..g .. t�w�.,}ra`+•'z�. "' 7r;%i. w.
.:.,, .. ..1.1- ' t•, _`e4 i'.C.�'5 -0-.i� ,_ �-'_x _ .,. '(ifs i. ..- .,. .r- .�. `'4t4t. t•7M'r'L"?t _tt.!k �. '. -,----; .2.n_iI .Yl' .r4 Cw iG. 'M.
VARIANCE: 2000-07 MEETING DATE: June 8,2000
. APPLICANT: Nathan D.Bergeland -
LOCATION: 7012 Willow Creek Road
REQUEST:
1. Grant the following variances for the existing non conforming house and gazebo:
a. A setback of 40 feet from the Ordinary High Water Mark of Bryant Lake for the house.
b. A setback of 0 feet from the Ordinary High Water Mark of Bryant Lake for the gazebo.
(Code required setback is 1 t)feet for structures).
2. To alter the non conforming house structure by removing a one story portion of the house &a
• constructing in its place a two story addition 60 feet from the Ordinary High Water Mark. (Code
required setback is 160 feet. Code allows only routine maintenance and repairs on
non-conforming uses.) -
3. To permit repair,remodeling and improvements to the existing non-conforming house and gazebo.
The proposed work includes electrical installations,replacement of roofs and insulation,construction
of a two story addition,and new fixtures, doors,windows, cabinets,flooring, stove&venting, gas
fireplace,and siding.
(City Code,Sec.11.75 NON-CONFORMING USES, STRUCTURES AND SIGNS. Subd.l.
Purposes. This Section is intended to limit the number and'extent of non-conforming uses by
prohibiting their enlargement,their re-establishment after abandonment, and the alteration of
restoration after destruction of the structures they occupy. Eventually,certain classes of non
conforming structures of nominal value,and certain non-conforming signs are to be eliminated
or altered to conform.
Subd.2 Continuation and Maintenance.
A. Except as otherwise provided in this Chapter, a use,lawfully occupying a structure or a site on
the effective date of this Section or amendments thereto that does not conform with the use
regulations or the site area per dwelling unit regulations for the district in which the use •
is located shall be deemed to be a non-conforming use and may be continued except as
otherwise provided in this Section.
B. Non-conforming uses must comply with all regulations for off-street parking and _
loading,screening,landscaping and performance standards.
C. Routine maintenance and repairs maybe performed on a structure or site the use of
• which is non-conforming and on a non-conforming structure.)
K:1Comm.Dev\BOA-Board of Appeals\Reports\2000\BOA Staff Report#2000-07
.
ZONING DISTRICT: R1-22
AREA CHARACTER: Half-acre+lots along Bryant Lake and Willow Creek Road .
BACKGROUND:
1998-1999
•
In 1998,this property was part of the Perkins Variance#98-06, See Attachment 1.
The Board of Adjustments and Appeals denied the variances. The variances were appealed to the City
Council. The City Council granted the variances on July 6, 1999,based upon Findings,Conclusion,
and Order,see Attachment 2.
2000
Mr.Bergeland bought Lot 2 of the plat titled Bryant Lake Heights.
Mr.Perkins appeared before the City Council in March of 2000 and requested a building permit be
issued for construction on.Lot 3 and for the driveway access across Lot 1 without removal of the.
house on Lot 2,which request was contrary to the plan approved by the Council which depicted a
new house upon this Lot 2. The request was denied, See Attachment 3.
In the Spring of 2000,Mr.Bergeland commenced remodeling of the lakeside gazebo without a building
permit. The work was stopped by order of the Building Official and code conformance requested.
See Attachment 4.
On May 9,2000,Mr.Bergeland submitted an application for variances,Variance#2000-07.
On May 18,2000,the Building Official issued an order,requiring Mr.Bergeland to remove the gazebo
from Lot 2 or to move it to a location on the property beyond the required setback. See Attachment 5.
Mr.Bergeland has appealed this order. See Attachment 6.
APPLICANT'S STATED HARDSHIP: See submission material.
K'Coum Dev180A-Board ofAppea]slReports120001S0A Staff Report#2000-07.doc
{
;'I
ACTION I. The Board may wish to choose from one of the following actions:
1. Approve Variance Request 412000-07 with conditions.
The following conditions are recommended:
a. No building permits for the construction on the house be issued until an
approved septic system has been installed.
b. Approval by the City Council of an amendment to the Developer's Agreement
between the City and James and Raynell Perkins,dated Aug.3,1999 allowing
the issuance of building permits for the construction requested on Lot 2 and
construction of a driveway and new septic system without removal of all
existing structures on the property.
2. Continue Variance Request#2000-07 if additional information is needed.
3. Deny Variance Request#2000-07 based upon the following findings:
a. The alterations proposed for the house and gazebo are significant and exceed
routine maintenance and repair allowed by City Code for non-conforming uses.
b. There are no circumstances unique to the property that justify granting the
variances and thereby altering the previously approved plan.
c. There has been no showing of"Undue Hardship"as defined in the City Code,
Section 11.76,Subdivision 1.
d. The property can be put to a reasonable use if used in conformance with the
City Code.
e. The property owner purchased the property with knowledge of its condition.
f. At the time the property owner purchased the property it was a non-
conforming use under the City Code.
g. The variances requested are significant and do not meet the spirit and intent
of the City Code,which contemplates the eventual elimination.of non-
conforming structures.
h. The variances requested do not adhere to Section 11.50 of the City Code
providing for shoreland regulation,which contains required structure setbacks
from a lake's Ordinary High Water Mark.
•
ACTION II. The Board may wish to choose from one of the following actions:
1. Affirm the decision of the Building Official regarding the gazebo. •
2. Overrule the decision of the Building Official regarding the gazebo.
t.
K fComm.DcA130A-13oard of Appak\Reports12000180A Staff Report t2000-07.doc
Minutes
Board of Adjustments&Appeals -
June 8, 2000
III: VARIANCES ,.
• Request#2000-06 by John and Roberta Cvetnic for 6955 Mariann Drive for approv • to
•.nstruct a third-stall garage 11.4 feet from the side lot line(Code requires a 15- •of •
•• .'mum setback).
•
John Cy-•.'c, 6955 Mariann Drive, appeared before the Board expl•• '•: that he is
requesting royal-of a variance to change the setback requirements -• the south side _
of his lot from 5 feet to 11.4 feet to allow him to add a third stall • his double garage.
Cvetnic presentee. .hotos of his house and the existing garage. - is proposing to add a
14-foot wide thirds 411 for storage of his boat.He currently .res the boat on the apron
near the street. Cvetni •ointed out that the 14-foot width ' the minimum he could
consider to accommodate -ither the boat/trailer or Che • Suburban. Cvetnic said he has
talked-to his neighbors and signatures from 14 • ghbors supporting the request.
Jean Johnson presented the staff :sorting sta '•g that the property is zoned R1-22 .
which requires a 15-foot minimum s'•e yar• setback.This home does have an existing
24' x 24'garage back 25.4 feet from th- : de lot line. The applicant is requesting a
14-foot wide addition for a third stall :• • .The only option available to the applicant
is to reduce the width of the additi• Johnso: reported that notices were mailed to the
surrounding property owners . ' the City did n• receive any comments from those
neighbors.
In response to a questi• • from Ford, Cvetnic explained at on his street there are
approximately ten h• es and of those two have three-stal =• garages.
Dunham open:• the public hearing. Having no one appear,D . . . .. closed the public
hearing.
Gigli• aid he does support this request with the hardship being the topo aphy of the
1. ,which does not allow for an alternate location of this addition.Ismail ••'d he
e'oncurs and stated that the backyard is rather steep.
•
Motion/Second: Giglio/Ismail to approve Request#2000-06 with the stated hardship
being the topography of the land,which does not allow the applicant an alternative
location for the addition.The motion carried, 5-0.
B. Request#2000-07 by Nathan D.Bergeland for 7012 Willow Creek Road to grant the
following variances for the existing non-conforming house and gazebo:
1. Grant the following variances for the existing non conforming house and gazebo:
a. A setback of 40 feet from the Ordinary High Water Mark of Bryant Lake for the house.
b. A setback of 0 feet from the Ordinary High Water Mark of Bryant Lake for the gazebo.
(Code required setback is 100 feet for structures).
-_ _ 2 4
Minutes
Board of Adjustments &Appeals
June 8,2000 .
at
2. To alter the non conforming house structure by removing a one story portion of the house
and constructing in its place a two story addition 60 feet from the Ordinary High Water
Mark(required setback is 100 feet). Code allows only routine maintenance and repairs on
non-conforming uses.)
3. To permit repair, remodeling and improvements to the existing non-conforming house
and gazebo.
The proposed work includes electrical installations, replacement of roofs and insulation,
construction of a two story addition, and new fixtures, doors, windows, cabinets, flooring,
stove&venting,gas fireplace, and siding.
(City Code, Sec.11.75 NON-CONFORMING USES, STRUCTURES AND SIGNS.
Sub&1.
Purposes. This Section is intended to limit the number and extent of non-conforming uses
by prohibiting their enlargement, their re-establishment after.abandonment, and the
alteration of restoration after destruction of the structures they occupy. Eventually, certain
classes of non-conforming structures of nominal value, and certain non-conforming signs
• are to be eliminated or altered to conform.
Subd.2 Continuation and Maintenance.
A. Except as otherwise provided in this Chapter, a use, lawfully occupying a structure or
a site on the effective date of this Section or amendments thereto that does not
conform with the use regulations or the site area per dwelling unit regulations for the
district in which the use is located shall be deemed to be a non-conforming use and
maybe continued except as otherwise provided in this Section.
B. Non-conforming uses must comply with all regulations for off-street parking and
loading,screening,landscaping and performance standards. • •
C. Routine maintenance and repairs may be performed on a structure or site the use of
• which is non-conforming and on a non-conforming structure.)
4. Appeal the order of the Building Inspector requiring the removal of the gazebo or
the relocation of the gazebo to a location meeting setbacks.
•
(Vasaly arrived during discussion of this item.)
Nathan Bergeland,7012 Willow Creek Road,explained that he purchased the
property with the understanding that he would remodel and improve the property.
Bergeland stated that there is a lot of leaking of the roof occurring as well as
problems with the integrity of the siding.Bergeland pointed out that he is not
intending to change the plat,however,he is requesting to extend the structure
upward to provide for a sloping roof.Bergeland said he is requesting to put on a
new roof,new siding, as well as add some new windows to give the structure a
more aesthetic flair.Bergeland said he would also like to put in a wooden floor in
I
.Minutes
Board of Adjustments&Appeals
June 8,2000
the dining room,new cabinets in the kitchen and to possibly open up thdbasement
- area.His main intent is to update the home.
Bergeland said that regarding the Gazebo,he did do some repairs in order to
maintain the integrity of the property.He explained that he was having a party and
the Gazebo was not safe to use and he,therefore,braced up the building.He was not .
aware that a permit was necessary for the type of work he was doing.Again,
Bergeland said he.is not intending to change the structure of the Gazebo or to build
outside of that structure but to maintain the integrity of it.He would like to put
windows in instead of screens and to update the electricity.
David Hellmuth,Attorney for the applicant,distributed pictures of the subject
property.He explained that Bergeland's primary goal is to maintain and repair the
• existing structures.The siding needs to be replaced as well as the windows which
are poorly sealed and don't open.They are requesting clarification as to what the
applicant can legally do under the exclusion of the Code in order to maintain the
property. The roof could be replaced with a flat roof,however,a better solution
would be to eliminate the existing deck area and to build up and make it a sloping
roof that matches up with the normal roof of the structure. Hellmuth said he did
review the Staffs report and has responded to that.He feels the basis for denying
this request is not adequate.The primary issue with the denial is that 90%of what
they are proposing is maintenance and repair which falls within the exclusions.
They may go a little beyond that by correcting what could be a long-term problem.
Ismail said he feels that removing a portion of the house and adding two rooms is
beyond repair and maintenance.Bergeland responded that the only way to maintain
the integrity of the structure would be to remove a portion of the house and build up
to replace it.He would like to eliminate the roofing where the deck exists because
they believe that wood is rotted. .
Bergeland estimated the exterior stucco work would be approximately$80,000,
$30,000 for roof repairs,$30,000 for windows.
Denham inquired if the house had been thoroughly evaluated by a professional in
order to identify building repairs needed beyond what is listed?
Mr.Bergeland responded negative.
In response to a question from Giglio,Bergeland explained that it is his intent to
take care of the septic system should this request be approved.Vasaly asked if
Bergeland was aware that the house and Gazebo were non-conforming when he
purchased the property.Bergeland said he did not.In December a neighbor told him
about the Developer's Agreement on the property.Vasaly asked if Bergeland has
considered tearing down the existing structures and building a new home.Bergeland
responded that he likes the existing structure and he anticipates the cost would be
4 Z/ .
Minutes
Board of Adjustments &Appeals
June 8,2000 . .
considerably more than what he is currently proposing to do to the existing
structure(an estimated$200,000-S3 00,000 for repairs). It would also involve his
having to find temporary housing while the existing home is tore down and the new
one is built.Hellmuth pointed out that the cost to build a new home would be
substantial and would require substantial excavating to build a house similar to the
size of the existing house. Vasaly said it appears to her that the applicant is
proposing more replacement than repair of the house.
Richard Rosow, City Attorney, explained that the Developer's Agreement does not
play a role in this request.The request is because of the Shoreland Ordinance. The
house and gazebo are non-conforming uses.The applicant is requesting a variance
to do maintenance and repair above and beyond ordinary maintenance and repair.
Items beyond ordinary maintenance and repair require building permits. Rosow
stated that should the Board approve the variances requested,they must determine
hardship.Also,if the Board grants the variance it should be conditioned on the
amendment of the Developer's Agreement. The Board must also decide if they will
overrule the decision of the Building Official regarding the gazebo.It is impossible
to put the gazebo back into the condition it was before the repairs were made.The
alternatives are to remove it from the property or to move it back beyond the
setbacks so it is a conforming structure. Giglio asked what routine maintenance and
repairs include. Rosow responded that the Building Official would determine what
is permitted.
Kevin Schmieg,the City's Building Official, described the work that was done on
the gazebo by Bergeland.Rosow explained that the Board is being asked to act on
two separate matters. The first action is to act on the variance request and the
second is to affirm or overrule the decision of the Building Official.Vasaly asked if
the variances are approved would anyone else be allowed to build on the other lots.
Rosow responded that future development could not occur unless the Development
Agreement was changed. - .
Jean Johnson presented the staff report reporting that the main issues are the
_ setbacks from Bryant Lake.The applicant is also requesting to alter the non-
conforming house, and a list of the repairs and improvements are included in the
applicant's submission. The other requested action is on the Building Official's
order for the removal of the gazebo or relocation. Johnson reviewed the background
of this request.Notices were mailed to surrounding property owners. Staff did not
receive any written comments from neighbors.
Dunham opened the public hearing.
Sherry Adams,realtor with Edina Realty, explained that she represented
Mr.Bergeland when he purchased this.property.The gazebo added tremendous
charm to the property.They were never informed that these structures were non-
Minutes
Board of Adjustments &Appeals
June 8,2000
conforming and the Title Company did not disclose any such information. Adams
- pointed out that the applicant's total intent when he purchased the property was to
remodel it. The seller was aware of this and agreed to provide him with the plans.
Being no one else requesting to speak,Dunham closed the public hearing.
• Ford said he does not support the variances due to the list of repairs and
improvements to the non-conforming structure,it is a significant amount of money. .
The intent of the ordinance is that non-conforming structures are not to be improved
and he does not feel that the variances meet the intent of the Code.Ford said he
does have a more difficult time in deciding how the gazebo should be handled. The
applicant may have done more than ordinary maintenance to the gazebo, a hardship •
may be present.
O'Leary said he feels Bergeland is being penalized because he purchased the
property not knowing it was non-conforming. With regard to the changes to the
gazebo,he only increased the structure integrity'and O'Leary said he did not feel
that Bergeland should have to tear it down or remove it. O'Leary stated that he feels
the Code is too rigid. The reason for the extensive maintenance needed is because
regular maintenance was not done.The applicant was not aware that he could not
make the improvements he is proposing. O'Leary said he supports a major portion
of the variances.He does not necessarily agree that the applicant should be able to
build an additional bedroom but he should be able to replace siding and windows.
Vasaly pointed out that the purpose of the Code is to eventually eliminate non-
conforming uses. O'Leary said he feels it is an undue hardship to the applicant since
he did not know the structures were non-conforming.
Ismail said he has difficulty in accepting the premise that the applicant did not
know that he could not make improvements to the property.Ismail indicated that he •
would not be able to support the variances being requested.
Vasaly said that testimony presented this evening gives her the impression that this
is not a house that can be fixed up with routine maintenance. The applicant himself
• has stated that it is difficult to call this situation a hardship.Vasaly said she could
not support the variances requested. •
• Dunham explained that he is not in favor of the variances requested for either the
house or gazebo. The house is in need of major repairs. Dunham said he feels the
applicant has made substantial changes to the gazebo.
Board members discussed Action I,item 3.e.,of the staff report regarding the
applicant's knowledge of the property's condition at time of purchase.
Clarification on the item was asked. Richard Rosow, City Attorney,responded
reference is to the owner's knowledge of the property's physical condition.
Minutes
Board of Adjustments &Appeals
June 8,2000
The consensus of the board members was to insert the word `physical before the
- word condition in item (e).
Motion/Second: Ford/Vasaly, to deny Variance Request#2000-07 based upon the
following findings:
(a) The alterations proposed for the house and gazebo are significant and exceed
routine maintenance and repair allowed by City Code-for non-conforming
uses.
(b) There are no circumstances unique to the property that justify granting the
variances and thereby altering the previously approved plan.
(c) There has been no showing of"Undue Hardship"as defined in the City Code,
Section 11.76, Subdivision 1.
(d) The property can be put to a reasonable use if used in conformance with the
City Code.
(e) The property owner purchased the property with knowledge of the physical
condition.
(f) At the time the property owner purchased the property it was a non-
conforming use under the City Code.
(g) The variances requested are significant and do not meet the spirit and intent of
the City Code,which contemplates the eventual elimination'of non-
conforming structures.
(h) The variances requested do not adhere to Section 11.50 of the City Code
providing for shoreland regulation,which contains required structure setbacks
from a lake's Ordinary High Water Mark. (Motion carried 6:0)
Motion/Second: Vasaly/Ismail,to affirm the decision of the Building Official
regarding the gazebo. The motion carried,4-2 with Ford and O'Leary voting nay.
IV. NEW BUSINESS
Johnson reported that currently there are not items to be considered by the Board for
their July meeting.
VI. ADJOURNMENT •
Motion/Second: Vasaly/Ismail,to adjourn the meeting at 9:25 p.m. Motion carried, 6-0.
7 5 /
VARIANCE#2000-07
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS •
.
R _
FINAL ORDER
RE: Petition of Nathan Bergeland
ADDRESS: 7012 Willow Creek Road
OTHER DESCRIPTION: N/A
VARIANCE REQUEST:
- 1. Grant the following variances for the existing non conforming house and gazebo:
a. A setback of 40 feet from the Ordinary High Water Mark of Bryant Lake for the house.
b. A setback of Q feet from the Ordinary High Water Mark of Bryant Lake for the gazebo.
(Code required setback is 100 feet for structures).
2. To alter the non conforming house structure by removing a one story portion of The house and
constructing in its place a two story addition 60 feet from the Ordinary Nigh Water Mark.
required setback is 100 feet. Code allows only routine maintenance and repairs on ,
non-conforming uses.)
3. To permit repair, remodeling and improvements to the existing non-conforming house and gazebo.
The proposed work includes electrical installations, replacement of roofs and insulation, construction
of a two story addition, and new fixtures, doors, windows, cabinets, flooring, stove&venting, gas
fireplace, and siding.
(City Code, Sec.11.75 NON-CONFORMING USES, STRUCTURES AND SIGNS. Subd.1.
Purposes. This Section is intended to limit the number and extent of non-conforming uses by
prohibiting their enlargement, their re-establishment after abandonment, and the alteration of
restoration after destruction of the structures they occupy. Eventually, certain classes of non
conforming structures of nominal value, and certain non-conforming signs are to be eliminated
or altered to conform.
Subd.2 Continuation and Maintenance.
A. Except as otherwise provided in this Chapter, a use, lawfully occupying a structure or a site on
the effective date of this Section or amendments thereto that does not conform with the use
regulations or the site area per dwelling unit regulations for the district in which the use
is located shall be deemed to be a non-conforming use and may be continued except as
• otherwise provided in this Section.
. B. Non-conforming uses must comply with all regulations for off-street parking and
loading, screening, landscaping and performance standards.
C. Routine maintenance and repairs may be performed on a structure or site the use of
which is non-conforming and on a non-conforming structure.)
7r4 rill_ nF Anne...Wmal(Trrlenxt?LYY111±i .1 limit 7(YY1.117 dry.
•
The Board of Adjustments and Appeals for the City of Eden Prairie at a regular meeting thereof duly considered
the above petition and after hearing and examining all of the evidence presented and the file therein does hereby
find and order as follows: - R
1. All procedural requirements necessary for the review of said variance have been met. (Yes X No J.
2. Variance Request#2000-07 is herein Granted Denied X .
3. Findings to the denial of said variance are as follows:
a. The alterations proposed fo'tthe house and gazebo are significant and exceed routine
maintenance and repair allowed by City Code for non-conforming uses.
b. There are no circumstances unique to the property that justify granting the variances
and thereby altering the previously approved plan.
c. There has been no showing of"Undue Hardship"as defined in the City Code,Sec.11.75,Subd.l.
d. The property can be put to a reasonable use if used in conformance with the City Code.
e. The property owner purchased the property with knowledge of its physical condition.
f. At the time the property owner purchased the property it was a non-conforming use
•
under the City Code.
g. The variances requested are significant and do not meet the spirit andintent of the City Code,
which contemplates the eventual elirnination of non-conforming structures.
h. The variances requested do not adhere to Section 11.50 of the City Code providing for
Shoreland regulation, which contains required structure setbacks from a lake's Ordinary High
Water Mark.
4. A copy of this order shall be forwarded to the applicant by the City Clerk.
5. This order shall be effective June 8,2000
6. All Board of Adjustments and Appeals actions are subject to•City Council review.
•
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS
N/A=Not Applicable
BY:
DATED: June 8,2000
•
•
53
K:1Co®m.Dev1BOA-Board of AppeaialFinal Orde s12000iFina1 Order 2000-07.doc
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
JULY 18,2000
Page 13
X. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS
XI. PETITIONS,REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
A. REVIEW BERGELAND VARIANCE REQUEST 2000-07
Enger said on June 8, 2000 the Board of Adjustments and Appeals heard Mr.
Bergeland's request for shoreland setback variances, approval to alter the non-
conforming house structure, permission to allow repair, remodeling and
improvements to the existing non-conforming house and gazebo,and an appeal of
the Building Official's Order for removal or relocation of the non-conforming
gazebo. The Board denied the variance requests and upheld the Building
Official's Order.
David Hellmuth, attorney for Mr. Bergeland, said he participated in the previous
hearing before the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. In September, 1999, Mr.
Bergeland purchased this property (Lot 2, Block 1, .Bryant Lake Heights),
intending to live there and to fix up the property. The condition of the property is
deteriorating and a proposal to repair the house and gazebo was submitted to the
Board of Adjustments and Appeals. After the Board turned down this proposal,
he submitted an alternative proposal to Mr.Rosow,the City Attorney.
The original proposal is still being appealed, however. Mr. Hellmuth believed a
minimum of repairs should be allowed. Mr.Bergeland plans to put new siding on
the house, a new roof and new windows. He plans to enclose the flat roof,which
would be adding onto the property, but that is the only addition. Mr. Hellmuth
discussed the denial of the request with Mr. Rosow, who said an alternative,
proposal could be considered. Regarding the gazebo, prior to Mr. Bergeland
submitting the variance application, he had discussions with Mr. Rosow and
understood he could make some basic repairs to the gazebo. He did not get a .
permit from the City,and a City Staff member came out and determined what was
•done was more than maintenance and repairs.
Nathan Bergeland said he moved into the house in March of this year. He has a
business in Eden Prairie with 20 employees. His intention is to be a long-term •
resident of the City. He understood when he purchased the property that he
would be able to remodel the house and gazebo. He was not told these structures
were non-conforming when he made the purchase. In order to get rid of the flat
roof,he has proposed removing the porch and building a two-story addition in its
place;but this would not enlarge the plat. He expressed willingness to work with
the City on whatever conditions or requirements are made to his proposal. The
house is-in an upscale neighborhood and the neighbors would also like the house
to have a new look. The improvements would benefit the City by increasing the
tax base.
David Hellmuth said he questions a portion of the Eden Prairie Code pertaining to
non-conforming structures. He believed the new roof would come under"basic
repair or maintenance", as it is 25 2ea old. The alternative proposal was
J1 L�
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
JULY 18,2000
Page 14
prepared to highlight what he believed to be permissible Under the code. This
allows room for compromise. The cedar siding and windows need to be replaced
because of water damage. The code prohibits enlargement or alteration of non-
conforming structures,but Hellmuth did not think that was applicable with regard
to the work being proposed -for this house. The main proposal has a small
addition to the property but the alternative proposal does not.
Mayor Harris asked Pauly if it is appropriate to consider the alternative proposal
as well as the proposal made to the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. Pauly
said it is appropriate to consider both.
_ Thorfnnson said Council should deal with the proposals in two stages. Tyra-
Lukens said denial by the Board was based on the original proposal, and Council
needs to separate the two.
Mayor Harris asked Bergeland, with reference to the Purchase Agreement, if he
understood there was an opportunity to improve,remodel or enhance the property.
Bergeland replied he did, and was to get the original blueprints of the plan.
Mayor Harris said the Council approved the plat on condition the house would be
torn down. She asked Dietz if the road to this house was the one referenced in the
Developer's Agreement. Dietz replied he believed that agreement referenced a
common driveway and a brand new driveway was contemplated.
Jean Johnson,Zoning Administrator,presented the following information.
Nathan D. Bergeland ("Bergeland") is the owner of Lot 2, Block 1,Bryant Lake
Heights(7012 Willow Creek Road,Eden Prairie)the"Property."There is situated
on the Property a house and a gazebo. The Property is situated on a point on
Bryant Lake and includes shoreland on both sides of the tip of the point. In the
spring of 2000 Bergeland commenced remodeling of the gazebo without a
building permit. The work was stopped by order of the City's building official on
May 7, 2000. On May 18, 2000, the City's building official advised Bergeland
that the gazebo is a non-conforming structure; that pursuant to City Code, a non-
conforming structure may not be enlarged, altered or reconstructed except for
routine maintenance and repairs and that the work of the gazebo constituted
alteration and reconstruction of the gazebo in violation of the City Code.
Bergeland was further advised that it would be impossible to return the gazebo to
its original condition and therefore, Bergeland was ordered to remove the gazebo
from the Property or as an alternative, to move it to a location in conformance
with the set-back requirements of the City Code. It was also noted that no
• building permit had been obtained from the City for the work performed on the
gazebo.
The City's official records evidence that Lot 2 was granted six variances by the
City Council on July 6, 1999,specifically the following:
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
JULY 18,2000
Page 15
Code Requirement Variances: -
5 acre without sewer - 1.18 acres
300-foot lot width at building line 170 feet
100-foot setback from OHW 75 feet
90-foot street frontage;55 feet on cul-de-sac 0 feet
Frontage on public street 0 feet
Alteration or structure withing 50 foot
shore impact zone Grading
The variances granted by the City Council on July 6, 1999 were not used within
one year and therefore expired on July 6, 2000 pursuant to City Code Section
11.76,subd. 3.
On March 7,2000 Bergeland entered into an Easement Agreement with James W.
Perkins, Raynelle Perkins and Pearl A. Freeburg whereby Burgeland was granted
a perpetual easement for driveway purposes over the Freeburg parcel, a perpetual
easement for sanitary sewer maintenance and use overjhe Freeburg parcel anc
Berglund granted to Freeburg a sanitary sewer maintenance and use easemen
over the Berglund parcel.
The City's official records evidence that on August 3, 1999 the City entered int(
that certain Developer Agreement between the City of Eden Prairie and James
Perkins and Raynelle Perkins ("Developer Agreement") relative to . the
development of Lots 1, 2 and 3, Bryant Lake Heights, Hennepin. County. The •
Easement Agreement was required by the Developer Agreement.
Bergeland purchased Lot 2,Block 1,Bryant Lake Heights on September 29, 1999
from James and Raynelle Perkins pursuant to a Purchase Agreement dated August
23, 1999. The Purchase Agreement states in lines 181 through 185 that: "Seller
certifies that the City, County and State agencies have approved a 75' set back on
1999 plans that have been filed and recorded to allow the potential building of a
new house on this existing lot."
•
Pauly said reference has been made to the Purchase Agreement and Developer's
Agreement. The Purchase Agreement was made on August 23, 1999 and the
Developer's Agreement for Perkins Subdivision, between Perkins and the City,
was made on August 3, 1999. Pauly requested that the Purchase Agreement and
Developer's Agreement be made part of the record.
Mayor Harris said the two issues need to be separated. First is the decision of the
Board of Adjustments and Appeals and the Council needs to decide if it is going
to uphold that decision.
Tyra-Lukens said because the original proposal included an addition to the house,
she would deny the appeal and support the decision of the Board of Adjustments
and Appeals.
5,C
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
JULY 18,2000
Page 16
MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Case, to affirm the-denial action of the
Board of Adjustments and Appeals based upon the Findings contained in the
Board of Adjustments and appeals motion made on June 8, 2000 regarding the
variances. Discussion followed.
Pauly said Staff has prepared some additional Findings that incorporate, but are
more extensive than,the Findings of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals. The
draft makes mention of the alternative plan as well, and would require some
editing. Pauly suggested these be revised and provided for review by the Council.
Mayor Harris called a recess to permit editing of the above-referenced Findings.
Council recessed at 9:17 p.m.
Mayor Harris reconvened the meeting at 9:35 p.m.
Pauly suggested that because of the alternative proposal being made, Council
should just vote on the motion without reference to Findings. •Then Council can
take up the request for approval of the alternative proposal and can vote on that,
and afterwards discuss the Findings regarding these improvements.
Butcher and Case withdrew their motion.
MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Case, to affirm the denial action of the
Board of Adjustments and Appeals made on June 8,2000 regarding the variances;
and affirm the action of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals regarding
upholding the Building Official's Order regarding removal/relocation of the
gazebo. Motion carried 5-0.
Mayor Harris said Council should now consider the alternative proposal in terms
of the maintenance and repair work proposed.
Case said it seems that this is more than routine- maintenance and repairs
according to the City Code,and should not allow anything beyond that.
Tyra-Lukens said concerning replacement of the siding and windows, routine
maintenance would be replacement of a few pieces of siding and replacement of a
few windows, not all the siding and windows. The roof-replacement issue is
different because the life of a roof is 25 years and this roof is that old, similar to
what is already there. Changing the roof line is another matter,however.
Mayor Harris said she felt when the owner starts removing beams, replacing
windows and siding, etc. that is beyond routine maintenance. She had read the
Building Inspection's Report that states routine maintenance is no longer
sufficient for this house.
Johnson read the language in the Purchase Agreement stated"the seller certifies
that City,County and State agencies have approved a 75-foot setback on 99 plans
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
JULY 18,2000
Page 17
that have been filed and recorded to allow the potential building of a new house
on this existing lot."
Mayor Harris said.because there is a Developer's Agreement covering this, she
did not want to retreat from that. •
Butcher agreed with that also. She believed replacing a roof would be beyond
routine maintenance.
David Hellmuth said siding and windows, in addition to roofs, have a useful life,
and their replacement should be considered routine maintenance and repair. He
asked if Council would require his client to live in a home that needs a new roof
and new siding. Mr. Bergeland had invited Councilmembers to come and look at
his house.
Mayor Harris said she came out with the Building Official and looked at it..
Thorfinnson.said Councilmembers have a good knowledge of this house after a
year of discussing the property. He has been out to see it. Case said he believed
all of the Councilmembers have been out there at one time or another.
MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Case, to deny the alternative proposed
by Mr.Nathan Bergeland to make changes to his existing house. Motion carried
5-0.
Mayor Harris said Council sympathizes with the situation in which Mr. Bergeland
finds himself. However,the City has rules and regulations that it must follow.
Pauly called Council's attention to the Findings that were placed on their desks
during the recess. They are the Findings Staff suggested be adopted by the
Council in connection with the two motions,with some slight modification. Item
8 should read, "The setback variance granted by the City Council on July 6, 1999,
'was not used within one year and therefore expired on July 6, 2000, pursuant to
City Code, Section 11.73, Subdivision 3." To the order on the last page should be
added,"It is also ordered that Mr.Bergeland's alternative proposal is denied."
Hellmuth voiced his objection to the Findings. He called the City that day and
asked that City reports be faxed and none were provided to him until that night.
He would have addressed these Findings if he had had them. Enger replied that
he had faxed Staff reports. Hellmuth said he received a report from the Building
Official, but did not receive these Findings. He had asked for Staff reports and
anything else relevant to that evening's meeting. -
Pauly said it is customary for Findings to be adopted upon actions being taken by
the Council. It is not always possible to anticipate what those actions would be
and so it is customary not to distribute Findings in advance. Nevertheless, it is
usual.to have Findings drafted, in anticipation of actions being taken. He
suggested Council consider adopting these Findings. _
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
JULY 18,2000
Page 18
MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher,to-adopt these Findings. Motion
carried 5-0.
XII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS &COMMISSIONS
•
A. COMMUNITY PROGRAM BOARD
1. Management and Use of Historic Properties
Swaggert reported that on January 18,2000,the City Council directed the
City Staff to work with the Community Program Board and Heritage
Preservation Commission to develop recommendations for the future use
of the Smith-Douglas-More House, the Cummins House and Riley Farm.
The Analysis of the Properties was to take into account their historic
significance,' potential adaptive reuse, operations, maintenance,
programming, all costs, and financial sustainability over time. The City
Staff, with input from the Heritage Preservation=Commission, developed
several optional uses for each of the historic sites and presented these
recommendations to the Community Program Board. The Board met on
July 11 to review the Adaptive Reuse Proposal prepared by the Historic
Preservation Commission. The Board members supported the general
recommendation of the proposal for the three properties.
Lambert gave background information on how these three sites were
acquired. The Cummins House was acquired with a larger portion of land
using a federal LAWCOM Grant in the late 1970s. As part of the grant,
no mention was made of the historic property,as it was purchased for park
purposes. After the purchase,it was determined to preserve the house and
grounds. The Riley-Jacques Farm was also purchased with a LAWCON
Grant in the 1980s. The City determined to preserve the house, barn,
granary and another storage building as part of a historic homestead site. •
The Smith House was purchased in 1981 for $140,000, using Cash Park
Fees to preserve the property. The City gave the Mores life estate so they
could remain in the house with no property taxes or repair costs. The City
looked after the property and invested money to replace the roof and
furnace.
•
- Gertz explained that the term-"adaptive reuse"is a widely used restoration
planning process. The proposal in the report is the same process that
would be used by the state or federal government for finding new uses for
a historic property. The goal is to adapt the property to for the use but still
retain its historic uses. The Glen Lake Camp and Consolidated School are
• both being used this way.
Jan Mosman, Chair of the Heritage Preservation Commission(HPC), said
these three historic houses are of similar age and architecture. It has been
a challenge as well as an opportunity to find uses for these properties. The_
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA, .
BERGELAND VARIANCE REQUEST 42040-07
BERGELAND APPEAL OF THE ORDER OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND ORDER
FINDINGS
1. A request for variance 2000-07 was made by the applicant Nathan D. Bergeland for the
property located at 701::Willow Creek Road.
2. Nathan D. Bergeland("Bergeland") is the owner of Lot 2, Block 1, Bryant Lake Heights
(7012 Willow Creek Road,,Eden Prairie)the"Property."There is situated on the Property
a house and a gazebo. The Property is situated on a point on Bryant Lake and includes
shoreland on both sides of the tip of the point. In the spring of 2000 Bergeland commenced
remodeling of the gazebo without a building permit.The work was stopped by order of the
. City's building official on May 7,.2000. On May 18, 2000, the City's building official
advised Bergeland that the gazebo is a non-conforming structure;that pursuant to City Code,
a non-conforming structure may not be enlarged,altered or reconstructed except for routine
maintenance and repairs and that the work of the gazebo constituted alteration an<
reconstruction of the gazebo in violation of the City Code. Bergeland was further advise(
that it would be imposible to return the gazebo to its original condition and therefore
Bergeland was ordered to remove the gazebo from the Property or as an alternative,to move
it to a location in conformance with the set-back requirements of the City Code. It was also
noted that no building pt mnit had been obtained from the City for the work performed on the
gazebo.
3. Prior thereto,on May 9. 2000,Bergeland applied to the City for a variance for work to be
performed on the house and gazebo.The request contained numerous items as set forth in
a document entitled "Nathan D. Bergeland, Residence 7012 Willow Creek Road, Eden
Prairie, MN 55344, 612-914-0123 including those under the following headings:
"Immediate Repairs-Ha2ardous,""Repairs"and"Improvements".("Variance Request#2000-
007")(hereinafter"Bergeland Request.")
4. In addition to the request for work to be performed on the house, Bergeland requested the
following set back variances: A set back of 40 feet from the ordinary high water mark of
Bryant Lake for the hose and a set back of 0 feet from the ordinary high water mark for the
gazebo. City Code requires a 100 foot set back from the ordinary high water mark.
I
07/18/00 TUE 14.43 FAX 8123496718 FAX LC7000 . 1414
•
5. In addition to requesting a variances to be considered by the City's Board of Adjustments and
Appeals, Bergeland requested that the Board of Adjustments and Appeals also review the
Building Official's decision and order relating to gazebo.
6. The Board of Adjustments and Appeals heard both matters at its meeting on June 8,2000.
Upon conclusion of the hearing, the Board, denied Variance request #2000-07 finding,
among other things, that the proposed work for the house and gazebo exceeded routine
maintenance and repairs allowed by City Code for nonconforming uses. The Board also
Affirmed the May 18,2000 decision and order of the Building Official relating to the gazebo.
7. The City's official records evidence that Lot 2 was granted six variances by the City Council
on July 6, 1999,specifically the following:
Code Requirement Variances
5 acre without sewer 1.18 acres
300-foot lot width at building line 170 feet .
100-foot setback from OHW 75 feet
90-foot street frontage; 55 feet on cul-de-sac 0 feet
Frontage on public street 0 feet
Alteration or structure withing 50 foot
shore impact zone Grading .
8. The variances granted by the City Council on July 6, 1999 were not used within one year and
therefore expired on July 6,2000 pursuant to City Code Section 11.76,subd. 3.
9. On March 7,2000 Bergeland entered into an Easement Agreement with James W.Perkins,
Raynelle Perkins and Pearl A. Freeburg whereby Burgeland was granted a perpetual
casement for driveway purposes over the Freeburg parcel,a perpetual easement for sanitary
sewer maintenance and use over the Freeburg parcel and Berglund granted to Freeburg a •
sanitary sewer maintenance and use easement over the Berglund parcel.
10. The City's official records evidence that on August 3, 1999 the City entered into that certain
Developer Agreement between the City of Eden Prairie and James Perkins and Raynelle
Perkins ("Developer Agreement")relative to the development of Lots 1, 2 and 3, Bryant
Lake Heights,Hennepin County.The Easement Agreement was required by the Developer
Agreement.
11. Bergeland purchased Lot 2, Block 1, Bryant Lake Heights on September 29, 1999 from
James and Raynelle Perkins pursuant to a Purchase Agreement dated August 23, 1999.The
Purchase Agreement states in lines 181 through 185 that "Seller certifies that the City,
County and State agencies have approved a 75'set back on 1999 plans that have been filed
and recorded to allow the potential building of a new house on this existing lot."
2
I
12. In addition to the items ofwork contained in the"Bergeland Request,"Bergeland's attorney
characterizes the maintenance and repairs to the Property as originally submitted to the Board
of Adjustments and Appeals as follows:
a. Altering the house structure by removing a one story portion of the house and
constructing in its place a two story addition;
b. electrical installations;
c. replacement of roof and insulation;
d. interior installation and construction, new fixtures, doors, windows, cabinets,
flooring and appliances;
e. replacement of::iding,
•
• f. repairs made to the gazebo without changing the footprint or basic design of the
structure.
13. In submissions to the City Council in connection with his appeal of the decision of the Board
of Adjustments and Appeals,Bergeland and his attorney submitted an alternative proposal
that deletes the request for altering the house structure by removinga one story portion of the
house and constructing in its place a two story addition.
14. The requested work to be performed on the house and gazebo includes a number of elements
that constitute improvements or large enhancements beyond the usual and ordinary meanings
of the terms`routine,""maintenance"and"repair"including:
a. • new windows and new window openings in the house;
b. addition of flooring;
c. . removal of wall and addition of sauna;
.d. addition of a cupola to the gazebo;
• e. installation of a gas fireplace in the living room;
f. replacement of beams and floorboards;
g. The installation of windows in the gazebo.
15. Installing windows on the gazebo is an enhancement or improvement and not a replacement
and therefore,does not constitute routine maintenance and repair.
16. Replacing the roofing on the deck would require replacing the underlying wood supporting
the roofing because it is believed by Bergeland to be rotten.The replacement of the wood
does not constitute routine maintenance and repair.
3
�i
07/16/00 TOE 14.44 FAX 6123496718 FAX LC7000 t
17. Section 11.75 of the City Code authorizes the routine Maintenance and repairs of a
nonconforming structure.
18. Black's Law Dictionary defines repair as"to mend,ieiuedy,restore,renovate,to restore to
sound or a good state after decay, injury, dilapidation, or partial destruction. The word
"repair"contemplates as existing structure or thing which has become imperfect,and mesns
to supply in the original existing structure that which is lost or destroyed,and thereby restore
it to the condition in which it originally existed, as near as may be."
19. Black's Law Dictionary describes maintenance as"the upkeep,or preserving the condition
of property to be operated.The word"maintain"is defined as"acts of repairs and other acts
to prevent a decline, lapse or cessation from existing state or condition....rebuild, repair,
replace."
20. The use of the words`maintenance"and"repairs"in the City Code is modified by the word
"routine" which is defined in Webster's Collegiate Dictionary.as "of a commonplace or
repetitious character;of,or relating to,or being in accordance with established procedure."
The use of the word"routine"suggests performing the maintenance and repairs on a regular,
continuing basis rather than an irregular or one-time massive replacement effort..
•
21. In testimony before the Board of Adjustments and Appeals,Bergeland informed the Board
that the gazebo was not safe to use in the condition it existed prior to his reconstruction.
Bergeland also informed the Board that he wished to reconstruct the gazebo by installing
windows instead of screens and updating the electrical service to the structure.
•
•
22. Bergeland also informed the City that-the repairs are necessary because the house and gazebo
were allowed to deteriorate into their present condition because of a lack of maintenance by
the prior owner,that the house has been neglected for quite some time;and that the Property
is currently in a dilapidated condition and needs substantial maintenance and repair
23. Repairs made to the gazebo were structural repairs in that they included replacement of
headers and trimmers a.�well as the addition of collar ties.
24. Structural framing components include all members that provide a load path to carry applied .
loads through the structure to load bearing elements and ultimately to the footings.
25. Headers,trimmers and collar ties all meet the definition of structural framing components
as they are all load bearing elements.
26. Structural repairs are alw required on the house.
27. There is evidence of decay in the header above the patio door.
4
28_ There is damage to the beam beneath the deck area of the house.
29_ The decay and damage identified in the above two findings are extensive enoggh that repair
or replacement is necessary_
30. Given the deteriorated condition of the roof, siding and windows, additional damage has
been done to the house that will need structural repairs.
31. The house has received little routine exterior maintenance.Because of this the majority of
the exterior shell,(roof,siding,windows)has deteriorated to a point where it can no longer
be maintained or repaired_
32. The roof; windows and siding must be removed and replaced for the structure to remain •
functional and weather tight
33_ Routine maintenance and repair are always to be done"in kind"and are not enhancements
to a property.Items of routine maintenance and repairs,in order to keep a building in good
repair, include such things as caulking, painting, replacing windows and furnace filter
replacement Repairs include placing building components in good condition after damage
or decay including replacement of broken windows,shingles and damaged siding,sort,and
trim boards. Repair also includes replacement of building components in their totality
including replacement "in kind" of windows and doors in existing openings, roof
replacement in kind and siding replacement in kind.
34. Enhancements are item:;that increase the building's value or attractiveness or improve or
augment a building or structure and include such items as upgrading roofing materials;
• (asphalt shingles to cedar shakes or tile root); upgrading siding(wood to stucco or brick);
enlarging or adding window or door openings; reconfiguring the interior layout; and
expanding the footprint or square footage of a structure.
35. Bergeland has acknowledged that"As I look globally and nationally,it is hard to call this
situation a.'hardship'." and characterizes the"inconveniences"that arise or are currently
present at 7012 Willow Creek Road.
36. Bcrgeland has informed the City that the repairs and alterations that he wishes to make to the
house will cost from $200,000 - $300,000, including $80,000 for replacing siding with
stucco;$30,000 for the roof repairs; and$30,000 for windows.
37. Variances may be granted where the strict enforcement would cause undo hardship because
of circumstances unique to the individual property under consideration and provided such
variances would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the Chapter I 1 of the City Code.
5
38_ The Property can be put to a reasonable residential use if used in compliance with the 1999
plat approved by the City Council
39. Bergeland's plight is due to circumstances created by Bergeland and his predecessor in title,
in that Bergeland's predecessor in title allowed the house and gazebo to come into their
current deteriorated condition_
40. Economic consideration,in this case the cost of replacingthe structure with a new structure,
may not alone constitute an undo hardship if reasonable use for the Property exists.
• 41. The alterations proposed for the house and gazebo are significant and exceed routin41
maintenance and repair allowed by the City Code for nonconforming uses.
42. There are no circumstances unique to the property that justify granting the variances and
thereby altering the previously approved plan.
43. There had been no showing of"undue hardship"as defined in City Code§ 11.76,subd. 1.
44. The variances requested are significant and do not meet the spirit and intent of the City Code,
which contemplates the twentual elimination of nonconforming uses.
45. The variances requested do not adhere to the Section 11.50 of the.City Code providing for
shoreland regulation,which contains required structure set backs from the lake's Ordinary
Highwater Mark.
46. The findings of the Board of Appeals and Adjustments made on its meeting June 8, 2000
• relating to variance request#2000-07 by Bergeland are adopted as findings by the Council.
CONCLUSIONS
I. . The repairs and alterations the applicant desires to make to the house and gazebo are not in
keeping with the spirit and intent of the City Code.
2. No undue hardship exists in that the Property can be put to a reasonable use if used under
conditions allowed by the City Code.
3. The plight of Bergeland is due,in large part,to matters created by Bergeland,or Bergeland's
predecessor in title, for whose actions Bergeland is legally responsible.
6
-_Y
4_ Economic considerations such as the cost of replacing the structure versus the cost of the
alterations proposed by B crgeland cannot alone constitute undue.hardship as the Property can
be put to a reasonable use under the terms of the City Code.
ORDER
Based upon the foregoing Findings and Conclusions,the City Council hereby orders that the
decision of the Board of Adjustments and Appeals on variance request 2000-07 and the Building
Officials's order for removal(mlocation of the gazebo are hereby affirmed.
Yr18urchubmnidw,o.Condu:ionOrdcr.071700
•
•
•
7
,>ar7-03-01 O1=01P HOFF SAKKY KUU�t�EK 1 Ca �4t i�u?s 1JG
JAN . 2000
STATE OF MINNESOTA - DISTRICT COURT,-
.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
Nathan Bergeland, Court File No. CT 00-12426
• Plaintiff,
• FINDINGS OF FACT
vs. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
AND ORDER
City of Eden Prairie,a Minnesota
municipal corporation
Defendants.
The above-entitled matter came on for hearing before the Honorable Harvey C_ Ginsberg on
November 7,2000 at 1:30 p.m.by Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment.David 1-Iellmuth, Esq.,
and Brian Liebo,Esq.appeared on behalf of the Plaintiff; Kimberly Kozar,Esq.appeared on behalf
of Defendant.Based upon the briefs,records and proceedings herein,this court issues the following:
ORDER
l. Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is GRANTED.
2. Plaintiffs request for authorization to remove the siding from his home and gazebo and
' replace the siding with new materials chosen by plaintiff is GRANTED. .
3. Plaintiffs request for authorization to remove the roofing and insulation from his home and
gazebo and replace the roofing and insulation with materials chosen by plaintiff is
GRANTED.
/ 7
Jan O3-01 O1_02P HOFF BARRY KUUlKEK 1 b1G y41 Jbt3 F'_Usk
4. Plaintiff's request for authorization to remove all windows from his home and gazebo and
replace the windows with new windows as determined by plaintiff is GRANTED.
5. Plaintiffs request for authorization for all repairs previously performed on the gazebo prior
to the date of this order and reversal of the order requiring plaintiff to remove or replace the
gazebo is GRANTED.
6. Plaintiff's request for costs and disbursements is DENIED.
7. The memorandum of law attached hereto is hereby incorporated by reference.
BY THE COURT:
Date- 11V6VC0/
Judge Harvey C.Ginsb g
•
FINDINGS OF FACT
Nathan Bergeland is the record fee owner and occupant of the real property located at 7012
Willow Creek Road, Eden Prairie,Minnesota where he currently resides.The property is zoned for
residential use and is situated on a point on Bryant Lake with shoreland on both sides of the tip of
the point. Bergeland's home has a setback of forty feet from the ordinary water mark of Bryant
Lake and his gazebo has a setback of zero feet. Both structures were present when Bergeland
2
03-01 01:02P HOFF BARRY KUDEKEF- 1 612 5 41 /96 3 F-'-04
3
purchased the property. The city code requires a setback of 100 feet. Both th home and ga
zebo are
non-conforming structures.
Bergcland purchased the property from James and Raynelle Perkins. Closing occurred on
September 29, 1999 a warranty deed was exchanged for the purchase price of$640,000.
Bergeland's warranty deed was recorded with the Hennepin County Registrar of Titles on
December 6, 1999.
The parties dispute whether Bergeland had knowledge of the property's zoning history. On
July 6, 1999, the city council granted six variances at the request of the Perkins.The variances were
to expire on July 6, 2000 if not exercised by then. These variances were: •
Code Requirement Variances
5 acre without sewer 1.18
300-foot lot width at the building line •
170 feet
100-foot setback from OHW 75
90-foot street frontage; 55 feet on cul de sac 0 feet
Frontage on public street 0 fcct
The 75 foot setback was acknowledged in the purchase agreement,which states in lines 181- .
185,that: "Seller certifies that the City,County, and State agencies have approved a 75'setback on
1999 plans that have been filed and recorded to allow the potential building of a new house on this
existing lot."
The city entered into a developers agreement with Perkins on August 3, 1999. The
developers agreement controlled the development of Lots 1, 2,and 3,on Bryant Lake Heights.
Bergeland's property is located on Lot 2. The developer agreement required that the structure on
Lot 2 be torn down prior to the issuance of any building permits.
On March 21,2000 BergeIand attended the Eden Prairie city council meeting where the
developer agreement was discussed. The Eden Prairie city attorney admitted that the developer
3
.]ar-i-03-01 O1_02P HOFF BARRY KUDERER 1 'b12 `341 i�dts •,_u5�
agreement against Bergeland's property had not been recorded and therefore,"the city would not he
in a position to enforce the terms of the agreement against[Bergeland]."
Both parties agree that the home and gazebo are in need of repair.They arc over 25 years
old and were not properly maintained by the prior owners.Mr. Bergeland has described the
condition of the home as follows:
1. Window rot on almost every window.
2. Elimination of window casings due to rain coupled with ants,woodpeckers,mice,
squirrels, and chipmunks.
3. Squirrels living between the ceiling and the floor.
4. Water leaks in stairwells,kitchen,main bathroom,dining area, family room,and entire
east basement.
5. Drainage and water runoff flows to the foundation on the north, cast, and-west sides of
the house. �-
6. Dirt falling to the floor from the ceiling in several areas in the basement_
7. Excessive rotting caused by the neglect of the flat roof structure.-
8_ Holes in doors and walls.
9. Exposed ceilings that plywood has been tacked up to keep dirt from falling on the floor.
10.Wallboard is warped due to excessive moisture.
11.Ceilings have separated or are water damaged.
The tax assessment value for Bergeland's home is$53,200.00 for the year 2000. The home
is approximately 5000 square feet in size. The tax assessed value per square foot is less than
$11.00. The land value is assessed at$266,400.00.
In tim spring of 2000 Bergeland performed work on his gazebo,including structural repair.
Bergeland stated that he received permission to perform the work from Richard Roscow,Eden
Prairie city attorney. The city,however,issued a stop work order on May 1,2000.
On May 9,2000 Bergeland applied to the city for variances to allow him to perform needed
repairs on his house and gazebo. Bergeland originally petitioned the city for the granting of
variances to perform the following repairs to his property:
•
7(
CT.3-01 01:OZP HUH- BAKKY KUUtitf 1 biZ 941 F 5bi3 Y_Ub
•
(a) Remove a one-story portion of his house and construct in its place a two-story
addition,sixty feet from the ordinary high water mark.
(b) Perform interior remodeling of his home, including the replacement or installation of
cabinets,flooring, stove and venting and a gas fireplace. •
(c) Repair,by necessarily replacing,roofs and insulation,doors and fixtures,windows,
and siding of the house and gazebo.
On May 18,2000 Bergeland received a letter from the Eden Prairie building inspections
division ordering him to remove or relocate his gazebo after he made the repairs to make it safer.
Bergeland appealed the order to the city's board of adjustments.
• On June S,2000 the board conducted a hearing on Bergeland's petition and appeal,denied
all of his variance requests,and affirmed the division's decision.The board denied the variance and
adopted detailed findings which included,among other things,that the proposed work for the house
and gazebo exceeded routine maintenance and repairs as allowed by city code for non-conforming
uses.
On June 14,2000 Bergeland appealed the board's denial. On July 6, 2000,Bergeland
submitted an alternative proposal to the city again requesting variances.The alternative proposed
replacing the roof siding,and windows but dropped the expansion.
On July 18,2000 the city council heard Bergeland's variance request, alternate request,and
appeal The city council affirmed the board of adjustments' denial of the variance request and the
building official's order requiring Bergeland to remove or relocate his gazebo. The city council
also denied Bergeland's alternate request,finding among other things, that the proposed work
exceeds"routine maintenance and repairs"permitted under the city code.The city has offered to
allow Bergeland to replace the siding and roofing with same or similar materials and to replace
windows without enlarging window openings.
5
7/
Jan_U3-01 O1:OZP HOFF L ARRY KUDERER. 1 b12 94-1 19E7a P_O1
MEMORANDUM OF LAW
Summary judgment shall be rendered if the pleadings depositions,answers to
interrogatories, and admissions on file together with any affidavits,show that there is no genuine
issue as to any material fact and that either party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
Minn.R.Civ.P.56. See Hunt v.IBM Mid America Employees Federal Credit Union,384 N.W.2d
853 (Minn. 1986). The role of the court on a summary judgement motion is to determine whether
thcre is a genuine issue of material fact for triaL Fed.R.Civ.P. 56. See DHL,Inc.v. Russ,566
N.W.2d 60(Minn. 1997)(citing Celotex Corp. v. Catrett,477 U.S. 317(1986); Anderson v. Liberty
Lohbj,477 U.S.242(1986);and Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co.v. Zenith Radio Corp.,475 U.S. 574
(1986)). A party moving for summary judgment has the burden of showing that there are no genuine
issues as to material fact; the non-moving party has the benefits of the view of the evidence most
favorable to him. Lundgren v.Eustcrmann,370 N.W.2d 877(Minn. 1985). A motion for summary
judgment should be denied if the facts are not conclusive, in that reasonable persons might draw
different conclusions from the evidence presented. Illinois Farmers Ins. Co. v. 1 apemark Co.,273
N.W.2d 630(Minn. 1978).
•
Variance Requirement
Eden Prairie City Code Section 11.75-Non-Conforming Uses, Structures and Signs states:
Subd. 1.Purposes. This section is intended to limit the number and extent of non-
conforming uses by prohibiting their enlargement,their re-establishment after abandonment,
and the alteration of restoration after destruction of the structures they occupy. Eventually,
certain classes of non-conforming uses,non-conforming structures of nominal value, and
certain non-conforming signs arc to be eliminated or altered to conform.
Subd.2. Continuation and Maintenance.
- 72^
•
I
=03-01 O1:03P HOFF BARRY KUOERER 1 612 941 1968 P_08
C. Routine maintenance and repairs may be performed on a structure or site that use of
which is non-conforming and on a non-conforming structure.
BergeIand has petitioned the city and now petitions this court for the authority to perform
the following work to this property:
1. Remove the siding from his home and gazebo and replace the siding with new materials
chosen by plaintiff; •
2. Remove the roofing and insulation from his home and gazebo and replace the roofing
and insulation with new materials chosen by plaintiff;
3. Remove the windows from his home and gazebo and replace the windows with new
windows as determined by plaintiff;and, .
4. Authorize all repairs plaintiff previously performed on his gazebo prior to the date of
this Order,and reverse its order requiring the removal or replacement of plaintiffs
gazebo.
The city will permit Bergeland to replace the siding and roofing with same or similar
materials and to replace windows without enlarging window openings. The city's decision is based
on its interpretation of"routine maintenance and repairs,"stating that Bergeland's proposed work
exceeds maintenance and repairs and is an improvement to the property.
Minnesota courts have defined an"improvement to real property"as:
A permanent addition to or betterment of real property that enhances its capital
value and that involves the expenditure of labor or money or money and is
designed to make the property more useful or valuable as distinguished from
ordinary repairs.
Williams v.Tweed 520 N.W.2d 515,516(Minn.App. 1994). Two key factors in
determining whether a change is an improvement to real property are whether the change is
permanent and whether the change increases the usefulness or capital value of the property.
Hartford Fire Ins.Co.v.Westinghouse Elec. Corp.,450 N.W?d 183, 186(Minn.App. 1990).
Repairs merely restore the value or usefulness of the property.Id.
7
Jan-03-01 01 =03P HOFF BARRY KUOERER 1 612 941 7968 P_O91
The proposed work to Bergeland's property will involve the expenditure of laborrand money.
The proposed work to the house,at a minimum,will cost S 140,000.However, the amount of the
expenditure is not diapositive. Bergeland's work will only restore the existing roof,siding,and
windows of the house and thus restore the value and usefulness of the property.The footprint will
not be expanded nor will the internal layout of the home change. The work will not expand or better
the use of the property.
Interpretation of an existing zoning ordinance is a question of law and the manner in which
an ordinance is to be applied to the facts in a particular case are for the court to decide. SLS
Partnership v. City of Apple Valley,496 N.W.2d 429,430(Minn.App. 1993): The city argues that
stucco is distinguishable from siding,that certain roofing materials are distinguishable from others,
and that the size of the windows alters their classification. The court disagrees in the context of this
dispute. Thus summary judgment is appropriate in favor of the plaintiff in on this issue.
•
Denial of the Variances
Bcrgeland argues that if a variance is required,the city should permit variance from the
provisions of the city code because enforcement of the code would cause undue hardship.
Bergeland asks this court to grant authorization to replace the roofing and siding with material of
his choice;replace and enlarge windows; authorize all work that has been completed on the gazebo
and authorize future structural repairs to the gazebo.Section 11.76 provides the following factors
requiring the city to grant variances:
Subd. 1. Purposes and Authorizations. Variance from the literal provisions of
this Chapter may be granted in instances v(herc the strict enforcement of those
provisions would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the
individual property under consideration,and such variances may be granted only
when it is determined that such action will be in keeping with the sprit and intent
8
/ _03-Oi 01r.03P HOFF BARRY KUDERER 1 612 941 7968 P_1O
of this Chapter. "Undue hardship"as used in connection with the granting of a
variance means the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used
under conditions allowed by the official controls,the plight of the landowner,
and the variance,if granted,will not alter the essential character of the locality. .
Economic considerations alone shall not constitute an undue hardship if -
reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of this Chapter....
In order to establish that he will suffer"undue hardship"Bergeland must show: 1) that the
property cannot be put to a reasonable use if the city denies the proposed work and limits the work
to replacement of the siding and roofing with same or similar materials and replacement of the
windows without enlargement;2)Bergeland's circumstances arc unique to the property and not
created by Bergeland;and,3)the character of the locality will not be altered if a variance is granted.
The issue of reasonable use was addressed in Rowell v.Board of Adjustment of the City of
Moorhead,446 N.W.2d 917, 922(Minn.App..1989),where the court stated that the undue hardship
requirement"does not mean that a property owner must show the land cannot be put to any reasonable
use without the variance. Rather,the undue hardship standard requires a showing that the property
owner would like to use their property in a reasonable manner that is prohibited by the ordinance." Sec
also,Nolan v.City of Eden Prairie,201)0 WL 665708 (Minn.App. 2000); Sagstetter v. City of Saint
Paul,529 N.W.2d 488,492(Minn.App. 1995). .
Bergeland seeks to reside in the home and use the gazebo for recreational purposes.Both of
these arc reasonable uses for the property. The reasonable use requirement of the"undue hardship"
standard has been satisfied. .
Section 11.76 states that the"plight of the landowner"is relevant in considering whether the
"undue hardship"standard has been met. This statute incorporates the requirements of Minn.Stat.
§462.357,which states,"the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property
not created by the landowner."Interpreting"plight of the landowner"as circumstances unique to
9
7
Jan-03-01 01:04P HOFF BARRY KUDERER 1 612 941 7968 P_ 11'
•
the property that were not created by Bergeland establishes that Bergeland satisfies this
requirement.
In Stagstetter,Id. at 492,the court found that a soil condition and a sewer main prohibited
excavation that would allow the proposed structure to comply with a 30 foot height limitation. In
Nolan, Id. at 5, the court held that the circumstances were unique to the property because the
property was located at the end of a cul-de-sac,had a stand of trees, and a grade change of 44 feet.
Bergland argues that his circumstances are unique to the property and not of his creation because
the house will have to be torn down in order to comply with the setback requirements;the extent of
the physical deterioration of the home;and, that the condition of the house is-a result of neglect by
the former owners. The city argues that the house does not have to be torn down so long as the
repairs to be performed comply with the limitations established by it regarding materials and
window size.As the city is not legally justified in restricting those materials or window sizes it's
position is not tenable. Further, general deterioration in this case is the type of"circumstance unique
to the property" contemplated by the statute under Minnesota case law. In the cases cited the
circumstances that justified a variance were special situations that applied only to the property in
questions. In this case,the circumstances that Bergeland asserts as.the basis for a variance arc
unique to his property:while all homes deteriorate, the scale and extent of the deterioration in this
home is unusual.
The parties dispute whether Bergeland,had knowledge of the setback requirement. His
knowledge would be relevant to whether the circumstances were created by the landowner, the
second acquirement of undue hardship,if the work performed was an improvement rather than a
repair. As the court has found that the work is a repair this argument is moot.
10
-0:3-01 O1:04P HOFF BA-21-ZY KUDEKER I tal7e 3 J I 3 P- 1L
Finally,the variance,if granted,will not alter the essential character of the locality: If the
structure is already in existence,the general rule is that the variance will not alter the essential '
character of the locality.Rowell,Id at 922.
Developer Agreement
Minnesota Statutes Section 508.25 provides that every person receiving a certificate of title
pursuant to a decree of registration shall hold it free from all encumbrances and adverse claims,
except only the estates,mortgages, liens,charges and interests that may be noted in the last
certificate of title filed with the registrar.The purpose of torrens law is to establish indefeasible title,
which is immune from future adverse claims and encumbrances not noted on the torrens certificate.
Petition of Geis,576 N.W.2d 747 (Minn.App. 1998). A person dealing with registered property
"need look no further than the certificate of title for any transaction that might affect the land."Mill
City Heating and Air Con_ V. Nelson,351 N.W_2d 362, 364-365 (Minn. 1984). The torrens act
"abrogates the doctrine of constructive notice except as to matters noted on the certificate of
title...lt does not do away with the effect of actual notice,although it undoubtedly imposes the
burden of proving such notice upon the one asserting it."In re Juran,226 N.W. 201,202(Minn.
1929). See also, In re Willmus, 568 N.W.2d 722,725 (Minn.App. 1997). Actual notice means
actual knowledge. Comstock&Davis, Inc. v. G.D.S. &Assocs.,481 N.W.2d 82, 85 (Minn.App.
1992).
On September 29, 1999 Perkins delivered a warranty deed to Bergeland.Bergeland recorded
the warranty deed with the Hennepin County Registrar of Titles on December 6, 1999. Because the
land was property registered this court need only address whether Bergeland had actual knowledge
of the developer agreement.
11
Jan=0 -01 01 =04-P HOFF BARRY KUOEKER 1 b1L `,4i J 3bt3
The city offers the purchase agreement and Perkins assertion that Bergeland-had knowledge
of the agreement in support of its position.The purchase agreement states,"Seller certifies that the
City, County, and State agencies have approved a 75'setback on 1999 plans that have been filed
and recorded to allow the potential building of a new house on this existing lot."The city argues
that Bergeland's acknowledgement of this provision imputes actual knowledge-of the developers
agreement. In re Willmus,Id.,addressed a similar situation where one party argued that the actual
notice requirement had been satisfied where the encumbrance was recognized in registered
documents affecting title but was not contained in the certificate of title. The court held that the
actual notice requirement cannot be satisfied through operation of law,a party-must tcnow that the
interest in the land exists. Id.at 725.Further, the purchase agreement in this case only
acknowledges that the home and gazebo are non-conforming structures, not that the home must be
torn down prior to the issuance of a building permit. Accordingly,actual knowledge cannot be
established by Bergland's acknowledgement of the 75' setback requirement in the purchase
agreement.
Additionally, Perkins contends that Bergeland had actual or constructive knowledge of the
agreement and/or its requirements. In support of its position,the city relics solely upon a letter
dated March 31,2000 from Jeffery O'Brien, attorney for Perkins,to Bergeiand stating Perkins
intention to assert claims for reeission,reformation,and other claims regarding the sale of the
property to. These claims are based on Bergeland's"constructive and possible actual knowledge"
of the agreement prior to the closing of September 29, 1999. The letter states several documents
relating to the land that reference the developers agreement,however,the letter does not offer any
support for the claim that Bergcland had actual knowledge of the agreement.. Actual knowledge is
12
- -03-01 01=04P HOFF BARRY KUDERER 1 61."L 341 796t3 P_ 14
required and references to the agreement will not establish actual notice as required to al2ogatc the
general principles of the torrens act.
In order to survive a motion for summary judgement a nonmoving party must present
"substantial evidence."Murphy v. Country House, 240 N.W.2d 507, 512(Minn. 1976). The mere
existence of a scintilla of evidence in support of the nonmoving party will be insufficient;there
must be evidence on which the jury could reasonably find for the nonmoving party. Anderson v.
Liberty Lobby, inc.,477 U.S.242,252(1986}_ The city has failed to present evidence supporting
its assertion that Bcrgeland had actual luiowledge of the agreement,thus summary judgement is
warranted on this issue. - •
Reasonableness
A reviewing court will set aside a city's decision in a zoning decision if the decision is
unreasonable.VanLandschoot,Id..at 508. Reasonableness is measured by the standards set out in
the city's ordinance. Id.Eden Prairie City Code Section 11.75-Non-Conforming Uses, Structures
and Signs states: • .
Subd. 1_Purposes. This Section is intended to limit the number and extent of •
non-conforming uses by prohibiting their enlargement,their re-establishment after
- abandonment,and the alteration of restoration after destruction of the structures
they occupy. Eventually,certain classes of non-conforming uses,non-conforming
. structures of nominal value,and certain non-conforming signs arc to be
eliminated or altered to conform.
Reasonableness has not been directly addressed by the statute;however,the statute clearly
articulates the purpose of the ordinance,which is to eventually eliminate or alter certain classes of
non-conforming uses,non-conforming structures of nominal value,and certain non-conforming
signs.The property is zoned for residential use and the homc has been appraised at least
_ /7713
Jan-O3-01 01:05P HOFF BARRY KUOERER 1 b1Z 941 Z9b21 Y_ 13
$53,200.00,which is hardly of nominal value.In Nolan,Id.,the court found that the landowner's
variance request was reasonable because it kept with the spirit and intent of the ordinance. In this
case the city's denial of Bergland's proposed work appears to he contrary to its stated purpose for
the ordinance.
A municipality has broad discretion iri'clenying variances,and a reviewing court is limited to
determining whether the board's decision was based on legally sufficient reasons.VanLandschoot
v. City of Mendota Heights,336 N.W.2d 503,508-509(Minn. 1983).Court authority is to be
invoked"sparingly"in zoning cases, showing regard for broad discrction of municipal officials. •
White Bear Docking&Storage,Inc. v.City of White Bear Lake, 324 N.W.2d 174, 176(Minn.
1982).A zoning decision should be upheld if it is not arbitrary or capricious. Earthburners,Inc. v.
County of Carlton,504 N.W.2d 66,70(Minn.App. 1993).The reviewing court will not invalidate a
city's zoning variance decision if the city acted in good faith and within the broad discretion
accorded it by statutes and ordinances,and its decisions will only be reversed"if its stated reasons
are legally insufficient or without Tactual basis."Rowell v. Board of Adjustment,446 N.W.2d 917,
919 (Minn.App. 1989).
Bergeland does not seek to enlarge,re-establish after abandonment,or alter a restoration
after destruction of this property. The house is neither a non-conforming use nor of nominal value.
The city will allow Bergeland to replace the roofing and siding with similar materials and replace
the windows but not enlarge them. The issue is whether this Court should grant Bergeland authority
to use materials of his choosing,enlarge the windows,and make structural repairs to the gazebo.
The city has not stated an acceptable and legally sufficient basis for its decision to allow limited
repairs but not allow Mr.Bergeland to chose the materials for the roofing,siding,or enlargement of
the windows.The house is not a non-conforming use,not of nominal value, and the city has
•
14 ���,!
-:../
n`0:3-0I 01-05P HOFF 6L#RRY KUDERER 1 612 941 7968 - P-16 `
5 \
authorized Bcrgcland to make improvements to the property.Accordingly, the city's decision is
property reversed.
..,,..7'\ .
•
V
15
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE:
SECTION: Reports of Councilmembers April 9,2002
SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.:
Mayor Nancy Tyra-Lukens City Manager Contract
Requested Action
Motion: Approve the Employment Agreement for Scott Neal as Eden Prairie City Manager
Synopsis
Pursuant to the Council's direction on March 19,the Council/staff team,including Mayor Tyra-
Lukens and Councilmember Mosman,developed an employment agreement with Scott Neal who
has been selected to be Eden Prairie's new City Manager. The essential elements of this
agreement are as follows:
1) Position Mr.Neal's employment as City Manager commences April 29,2002.
2) Base Salary $106,500,to be adjusted annually in January in accordance with the City's
Employee Pay Equity Salary Guideline as the Council deems appropriate.
3) Performance Review The Council will conduct an annual performance review by May
15th of each year. Mr.Neal will then be considered for a lump-sum merit pay award of
up to 3.5%of his base salary as may be determined by the Council.
4) City Benefits Mr.Neal will participate in the standard benefit plans the City maintains
for its employees. Also,he will receive a$500/month car allowance, an initial bank of
10 days of both personal leave and sick leave, and fully paid health insurance.
5) Termination/Severance In the event that the City dismisses Mr.Neal for any reason
other than disability, death,or misconduct,the City shall pay a lump sum severance in the
amount of six months salary plus continue his insurance coverage for six months. If Mr.
Neal resigns voluntarily,no such severance payments will be made.
Mr.Neal has reviewed this agreement and gave his approval and signature on March 28. We are
confidant that this employment agreement is competitive with those from like cities in the south
and west metro area and that the terms and conditions are very fair and reasonable for both Mr.
Neal and the City. City Council approval is recommended.
• Attachments
Letter to Mr.Neal dated March 28,2002
03/28/2002 15:48 FAI 507 645 3055 CITY OF NORTHFFTPT-) 001
Eden Pimrie
Immo g080 Mitchell F sad•Eden Prairie,MN 55344-485•edenpraine.org•952-249-8300.7DD 952-949-6399
March 28,2002
Mr.Scott Neal
Re: Employment Agre -went
Dear Scott:
Enclosed please find your proposed employment agreement for the position of Eden
Prairie City Manager. T i:terms of the agreement have been drafted in accordance
with our recent phone con iersations. Please review the agreement and advise if you
have any questions or con;ems.
Following your review,pi ease sign and return the agreement to my office. City
Council approval is sched sled for April 9.
Congratulations again, Sc ltt, on your appointment as our new City Manager.
Everyone here at the City :s most pleased and looking forward to working with you.
Sincerely,
\Ike'
Carl Jul
Interim City Manager
P.S.I've also attached sor le additional materials FYI.
7671 Data 2=flaearlia
p �,r Fax N rte rl
•
•
a-a -- aoo=ao ao ea -Jew
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE:
SECTION: Report of Community Development and Financial Services Director April 9,2002
SERVICE AREA/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.:
Community Development& Singletree Lane Land Sale
Financial Services—Don Uram I :
Requested Action
Move to: Authorize the creation of an Economic Development Fund to assist local businesses
with an initial funding level of$400,000.
Synopsis
On December 20, 2001, North American Properties purchased the last piece of City owned
property on Singletree Lane that was acquired in 1992. Total revenues and expenditures equal
$6.7 million and $4.9 million respectively. The difference of$1.8 million does not take into
consideration the City's carrying costs conservatively estimated at$800,000
All sale proceeds have been deposited into the Major Center Area Construction fund. These
funds are designated to pay for projects (primarily transportation) within the MCA. Originally,
Staff estimated that the proceeds from the sale would be approximately $6.3 million and
budgeted accordingly. This leaves a difference of $400,000 between total revenues and
budgeted expenditures that Staff recommends be used to create an Economic Development Fund.
Along with supporting affordable housing, economic development efforts directed towards local
businesses will become increasingly important in sustaining/improving the City's employment
and tax base. Since there are few tools available to assist local businesses (as compared to
housing), Staff is directing this effort towards them.
Attachment
Memo
MEMORANDUM
0 To: Mayor&City Council
From: Donald R.Uram,Financial Services Director
Date: April 5,2002
Eden Prairie
Subject: Singletree Lane Property
Summary
On December 20, 2001, North American Properties purchased the last piece of City owned
property on Singletree Lane that was acquired in 1992. Other buyers included the Brunswick
Corporation and Bachman's in 1993 and Hartford Financial in 2000. When completed, this
mixed-use development will have a total of 125,000 square feet of commercial space and 385
apartment units.
The City acquired this property for the purpose of developing a commercial service/recreational
focal center for Eden Prairie. These projects in conjunction with other developments in the Major
Center Area and the Purgatory Creek Recreation Area help the City accomplish this goal.
Background
1992 - A purchase agreement was signed with John Teman, the National 1301 Exchange
Corporation and Eden Prairie Associates to purchase 23 acres of land located on Singletree Lane.
The City purchased this property to facilitate the development of an identifiable community
within the"Major Center Area."
1992/1993—An RFP was prepared and sent out to prospective developers for the "Marketcenter
on Singletree" development concept. The goal of this development was to provide for a
combination of land uses that would serve as a commercial, service and recreational focal center
for the City. After reviewing the conditions of each developer's proposal, the City concluded
that it would have to develop the property to accomplish their goals.
•
1993 - The City signed purchase agreements with Leisery Corporation to develop a Brunswick
Bowling Center and with Bremco Eden Prairie Limited Partnership to develop a new Bachman's
flower and garden center. Construction began on both projects and was completed in 1994.
1994 - City Council adopts the Eden Prairie Marketcenter Design Framework, which was a
blueprint for guiding design improvements in the market center area. Included in this design
were plans for street and pedestrian lights, decorative trail pavement and landscaping. Any new
developments within the Marketcenter area have been required to comply with this design
framework.
1994-Design was completed and construction began on the Marketcenter watertower.
1994- Centrum Corporation submitted a proposal and received approval to develop the 5.6 acre
site between Brunswick and Bachman's. Their proposal included two freestanding restaurants
and a commercial retail center. Ultimately, Centrum Corporation was unable to perform on the
contract. After that,Musicland expressed an interest in the site for the development of their new
concept"Media Play." This project was reviewed and approved by the City Council but did not
proceed due to market conditions.
1994/1999 - The City focused its economic development efforts on the Eden Prairie Center. In
addition,retail developers expressed little interest in the Singletree Lane site.
1999/2000 -Hartford Financial submitted plans for the development of a mixed-use housing and
commercial development on the 4.83-acre site adjacent to Eden Road. The 185-unit apartment
project is near completion and partially occupied. The City also began active discussions with
North American Properties (NAP) for the sale of the remaining 5.6-acre site.
2001 - A purchase agreement was signed with NAP in June with the closing scheduled for
December. Plans for a mixed-use development including 19,500 square feet of commercial
space and 223 housing units were submitted and approved by the City Council. The
"Watertower"project is expected to begin construction this year and completed in 2004.
Financial
Attached is a spreadsheet indicating revenues and expenditures per year beginning in 1992 and
ending in 2001. This spreadsheet shows total revenues and expenditures equaling $6.7 million
and $4.9 million respectively. On a gross basis, these figures indicate that the City earned $1.8
million developing this property. However, it's important to note that this figure does not take
into consideration a holding period of over 10 years and the associated carrying costs
conservatively estimated at$800,000.
Economic Development Fund
All proceeds from the sale of the Singletree Lane property have been deposited into the Major
Center Area Construction fund. This fund has been established to pay for projects (primarily
transportation) specific to the Major Center Area. A list of projects is included.
Staff originally estimated that the City would receive approximately $6.3 million dollars from
the sale of the Singletree Lane property. As mentioned, total revenue was $6.7 million dollars.
To help the City with their business related economic development efforts, staff recommends
that this difference ($400,000) be transferred to an Economic Development Fund. These funds
will be used for specific business related economic development activities allowable under State
Statute.
'a0QD�1-
o o ? 4 oCI)if cQ''''a
ro.np - gQ_5 -' < rtO oD0, D -
0= r+ G Q o G O C OO o C'O O ZS II C=O L
c39 ^ an0cm-m a o C c o o -0= Dc^ m a P.1 al—
; C CDn rrr n c a a a —L'3c O
Q _0 a 0
CD O = flG O On
a Px oX= � n a m e n fl c CO c c r c c to a- CDan c c c > = CD rc > > o D—II p A CCv a Oa n
CD to _ a
N
m n
O
CC
K a
O
7
.
N N _
CO CoiD N N CD
AN CA V A.O CD V CD C
a
CD CO CA
CDoa N
to t N o v CO CA
i. N a CO a'CO o
AO
N N N _
A N Co C V _V N Oa CD V CD CD V C. tD A N .a
V ..a ..t co A co
A N 0 V cc
COIJ fD C CD-COW 0 CO(a N a 0 V O A Co
tO tD 0 V N pb CA CCO O 0 V COA A a 0 CD 0 V
CC CC _
666. 66
Co 0 O CO O A V CD 0 CA �O CO V O-O CO
N
N .
i COA a
V.4.
A N CO CO CO itDD
O V Co O IC O o CO 0-CO A
V Co -+N OoA CDtCA
A. V V N O CO V CD C O
CA CD
N
A
O a, A N a .a
w
O O 0 0 �(.f CO d
01 o O O O o p
O O tD
CC O
D O 0 CC CC
N
CO
CO A N -a
p DC
Co -co 0CC co
Coo 00 -Co
V 1 Lt. O f0
CC A O a
A
N
C
CC A A
CO CO N 0
D DVl "co "CD V
V co N • CA
P
CoIN
q V
O
N
CA
CC
CO CO N
CoCO
CC .pa .0) m
C O
O. CD O
b CO
N
Co C.! to
A CO CD IN W Co a .a
V O CO CO
Co CD CD iD CO la DC tD
to CD
Co Co tD
6 CO OOO N
-4 N o CO
N CD 0 0 tVD in
i
V Coa(A
NO O V A A CN tD 41 p OO CA CC V O
p Co CO
ill.m. a p o w V
0
.. N N
6 6 of
V O 00 a o
A p A
CO 6 0
CO o o - v
0 0 0 0
:a Io 0 0
V D 0 j VI 0 IV
VI
Ca N A.a. a I.a V
la rV o 'p.apt io Co SC N .a
A D c.Oa a to A N CO CD 0 CO O CO fA i
V C a C. CR A V SC O ill ICo V O O V a 0Ca a.Cs Cor 0A O
In , -0 iv G6 V.aDD p 6 bAtJpa CAOO Wii6 7-4 Oo c
Co 17
Sti O C. g V O a.D O imI Ca O D p a D Oa O V A A O p N O.D a D V O a.6 6a 0 0 10 N 0 0 0 N l..D A CD A ia-a a C.p p p
i 0 0 R A q 0 0 C to to Co D 0[.0 V D 6...t Co 0 0 C A a
91
14 to D 0 a D.C.N 0 0 tC V i a CV 0 0 O a V p to at O CO C
Cl 01 CO O O Cl CO O .
N N �1 Cz3 N O -a
N -' en' Ca_ 0) — => Cn 't
-.I to0) Ca 01 W C I O. 7-
COO CO �1 N CD CICID
) -
0
-0 C0cn <--I<-3i —I K-o'a —-iCO
CO o
DB o o 8 c ' -
m w j o K
—c) 0)
0 - ; 4 7J C_ - n -, J - CO-
--- a= CO—.D67 a3 0
mTm --17-7 N �'mCn ' o C)
n .<= o g o — -n o CD
Oro< = oN7
aA C7
n= o oT7 -02 -1
00 ` V?p1c0
O i
-1 0 o Off_,3 m 0 Q N -7 n CWD 0
7 Et)D
CI
�N 1n 7 C Oo m-a o o = CO .7
v C
o in N NN C7 A n 0
^oo o < C) < d
D < y
7. o
7 — m R.
CD 7 7 CO m 7
� � 0
✓ a =
0• a 0
CO 7C)
D IV CD C..
v N v ❑.
'0
69 E» 69
-' Is")EA i 69 69 69 69 69 69 69 N �O CO
� CAD69 ,C y'
0 Cr 0 0 0 O W CO -CT CD CD N 0) 01 n
0 0 0 CO CD CD o 0 Cn CO C11 CD O r.t. "'I
O 0 0 O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 —
O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O o O CD W
O o o CD CD o oo 000000 Cr/
O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
C31 69
p O O
p O 0 O
0 O 0 "'1
C. O O
O O O
*
N 0
C. 0
.0 C
0
0 r.
0
0
69 69
�' -'6969 Cfl 69 fA 69 C-69696)69
N O CD v C71 W IV N N — ->. -�69
O CO O 01 O 00) CA 01 OD CO '-I 0) -1. .-{
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 01 CO O O
c) oo000000"CD 00-CD 0 'n
0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
00000000000000
O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 O 0 0
O O O 0 O O o 0 O 0 0 0 0 0
D
to
CA
6) 69 CD
0) N Cn
o 0) Cl)
0 0 B
'O 0 CD
0 o CD
O 0
0 o to
co 0
C)
69 no
3
(IC
0 cp
O t
DJ
0
0
69 69
O 0 0 O
0 0 0
O CD - CD
5
.
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE:
SECTION: Report of Public Works Services Director April 9,2002
SERVICE AREA/DIVISION:
Public Works Services, ITEM DESCRIPTION: Renewal of Midwest ITEM NO.:
Gene Dietz Asphalt's Land Alteration Permit and Addendum
Police/Jean Johnson,Zoning A, Covering Operating Conditions Ia. 6 /
Administrator
Requested Action
Move to direct staff to execute a two year extension of the Land Alteration Permit and
Addendum A for Midwest Asphalt Corporation.
Synopsis
Since 1996 operations at Midwest Asphalt have been covered by a two year renewable
Land Alteration Permit and associated addendum. The addendum regulates uses and
operations of the non conforming asphalt plant located in the Industrial General District
at the south end of Industrial Drive.
Attachments
Memo dated March 22,2002
Land Alteration Permit Application&Addendum A
MEMO
TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Jean Johnson,Zoning Administrator
DATE: March 22,2002
SUBJECT: Renewal of Midwest Asphalt's Land Alteration Permit and Addendum A
BACKGROUND:
Midwest Asphalt is a material crushing and asphalt batch plant located in the Industrial
General District at the south end of Industrial Drive. The use has been in operation since
the 1960s. The use is a non conforming use in the Industrial General District.
In 1995 the City and Midwest Asphalt negotiated a Land Alteration Permit process for
the asphalt plant operations. The permit includes Addendum A in which operation
conditions are outlined.
The permit duration is two years and a new permit and Adendum A are attached for the
Council's review and approval.
REVIEW OF PLANT OPERATIONS 2000-2002
Noise:
Noise readings have been taken around the site perimeter and no noise violations have
been noted.
The noise from dump truck tail gates banging and back up beepers do create noise
audible to residents to the south, but the cumulative events and decibel levels do not
exceed code limits. Staff will continue to monitor noise at the site.
Stockpile Heights:
The original permit depicted variable stockpile heights. Since crushing operations do not
occur in June,July or August, stockpile heights are created that will carry the batch plant
operations through the summer.
Enforcement/Issues:
In 2001 truck activity occurred prior to 7:00 a.m. on two separate days. This activity
occurred due to an un locked gate
On one other occasion plant operations occurred after 7:00 p.m. without prior notice to
the city due to an office error.
PERMIT RENEWAL
Some operations have occurred over the site's west property line. The applicant/owner
will need to make arrangements to pull back any operations, storage,etc.,and ensure that
the operations stay within the site's boundaries. A plan to accomplish this should be
. submitted to the City Manager for review and approval.
at
P.O.BOX 5477• HOPKINS,MINNESOTA •55343
IDWEST PHONE E1TT3T
TTT69T
SPHALT
ORPORATION
January 15, 2002
Jean Johnson
Zoning Administrator
City of Eden Prairie
8080 Mitchell Road
Eden Prairie,MN 55344-2229
Re: Renewal of Land Alteration Permit
Dear Jean:
Enclosed please find our application to renew the Land Alteration Permit for our site at 6401
Industrial Drive. As we discussed, I have included Addendum A from the previous permit, edited
for this renewal request.
Please call me with any questions.
Very Truly Yours,
ttEX114-0 "
Blaine M. Jo on
President
Cc: Dave Sellergren
11,1-/5 02 ,
MEMIER l'f` .'•
wawrAcvnutz !J Arl Eqta:OFP� 7E"PcM ►�
►�eravr Lsao SIALT �
Permit Kr/-
CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE
APPLICATION FOR RELEASE OF LAND ALTERATION PERMIT
PROJECT NAME:
APPLICANT
Name: Midwest Asphalt Corporation Address: 6401 Industrial Drive
Phone: 9 5 2—9 3 7—8 0 3 3 City/State: Eden Prairie, MN
PROPERTY OWNER
Name: Same Address:
Phone: City/State:
CONTRACTOR PERFORMING WORK •
Name: Same Address:
Phone: City/State:
II. PROJECT/PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
03-116-22-22-0033 &
Location: See Exhibit A Size of Site: 8 acres
Estimated Volume of Earth Moved: Proposed Start Date: 3—1—0 2
Proposed Completion Date: 3—1—0 4
III. MATERIALS TO BE INCLUDED WITII APPLICATION:
•
A. Two full size copies of grading, erosion control plan, restoration plan and specifications
B. Executed copy of contract documents for grading work.
C. Written project schedule and sequence of construction activities. •
D. Copies of all applicable permits from other permitting authorities. i.e., Watershed Districts, MPCA,
DNR, etc.
E. Signed and completed copy of City's Erosion Control.Policy.
F. Designated representative of design professional responsible to monitor conformance to plan and City
Erosion Control Policy.
teadll
(Applicant) Sign. re
PERMIT APPLICATON RECEIVED:
PERMIT SURETY AMOUNT: RELEASED:
SURETY OR Lba-1'P,R OF CREDIT No. PROVIDED BY:
PERMIT FEE AMOUNT: RECEIPT NO.:
EROSION CONTROL INSPECTION: V
This permit is hereby-released bythe Cityof Eden Prairie on subjecttheCity's y to conditions of the City s
Erosion Control Policy, City Code Sect. 11.55 and Special Conditions attached.
4-2000
ADDENDUM A
SPECIAL CONDITIONS TO LAND ALTERATION PERMIT RENEWAL OF
MIDWEST ASPHALT CORPORATION
The following special permit conditions apply to the property identified on Exhibit A
hereto (hereinafter,the"Rural Property") and to Tract, E,RLS 1280 solely as to
paragraphs 2, 3,4,6,and 7.
1. Applicant(MWA)shall complete the following items a-d:
a. Insure plant growth on exterior face of berm;
b. Erosion control shall be maintained as needed along entire outside
perimeter of the berm. MWA shall conform to the Erosion Control Policy
dated August 1, 1997, attached hereto as Addendum B.
T-.o4,11 re tai ,+yor r,l e:131,+ +1_.g1 4 lg„. 4 (", 3
. - • .ood,Robusta Poplar,White Poplar,Green As •-r Queen
Maple,or r. •xelder)on the berm st. 'a ; - a •ian Chief Road east
to the light rail corn•o , . -• a orthe. • 00 feet paralleling the
corridor. In addition to - • -• , -- 3 foot high bushes are to be
installed in betw--• - planted trees. Sai• p • •s of trees and bushes is
to occ - - year 2000 as weather conditions permit . . • - onsistent
2. Crushing operations shall comply with the following requirements:
a. No crushing shall take place during June,July and August;
b. No crushing shall take place on Saturdays during May and September;
c. During the remainder of any year crushing is allowed only from 7:00 a.m.
to 7:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday.
3. Asphalt plant operations shall comply with the following requirements:
a. The asphalt plant may operate year round from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.,
Monday through Saturday,provided,however, asphalt plant operations
shall be allowed during May through September from 7:00 a.m. to 9:00
p.m.ten(10)days per year and from 7:00 a.m.to 8:00 p.m. forty-five(45)
days per year only upon prior written or facsimile notice from MWA to the
City.
K.\AdministrationlAgenda Preparation\City Council Agenda Packet Items\2000\4-18-001Engineering\Midwest Asphalt Permit&
Addendum_doc
4. Noise regulations:
a. MWA shall conduct all operations so as to comply with City Code in effect
as of September 6, 1995, as well as Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
(MICA)noise regulations.
5. Rural Property:
a. Activities not permitted under the City's zoning code shall not be
conducted on the Rural Property. This provision shall not prohibit the
MWA from utilizing the inside face of the berm as a stockpile for activities
on Tract E,RLS 1280.
6. Enforcement:
a. _ If City staff believes that a violation is occurring, it shall notify MWA in
writing. MWA shall be given seven(7)business days from receipt of the
notice to respond,dispute, or cure the alleged violation. If City staff
remains of the opinion that a violation has occurred it may then refer the
matter to the City Clerk to initiate the enforcement process set forth below.
Failure to comply with any of the requirements of paragraph 1(b)-(h)shall
not be considered violations-if the same are cured within twenty(20)days
of such notice or such longer period of time as may be required because of
weather and seasonal conditions,in which case the item must be cured
withing twenty(20) days of such notice or such longer period of time as
may reasonably be required to cure the failure to comply. Each day that a
violation occurs or continues to occur shall constitute a separate violation.
b. Notice of a hearing for revocation of this permit shall be given by the City
Clerk in writing, setting forth specifically the grounds of complaint and the
time and place of hearing. Such notice shall be sent by certified mail to
MWA and the hearing must be at least twenty(20)days after receipt,of the
notice by MWA.
c. Even if the violations have been cured prior to the Council hearing,upon
the fourth violation of paragraph 4 and the third violation of all other
provisions of this permit occurring within a twelve month period,the
Council may take such action as it deems appropriate,including actions
referred to in paragraph 6(e).
d. A hearing on revocation of this permit on account of four(4)violations of
paragraph 4 within a twelve month period shall be conducted by a hearing
officer from the State Administrative Hearings Office unless otherwise
mutually agreed to by legal counsel for the parties. The City and MWA
shall be entitled to appear at the hearing and present facts and reasons why
the permit should or should not be revoked or whether some other remedy
is appropriate. The hearing officer shall submit recommendations)in
writing to the City Council(with a copy to MWA), supported by legally
sufficient facts and reasons. *The City and MWA shall share equally the
costs of the hearing officer's service.
K:1AdministrationlAgenda PreparationlCity Council Agenda Packet Items1200054-18-OO1Engineering\Miidtirest Asphalt Permit&
Addendutn_doc
•
e. If the Council determines based on legally sufficient reasons with a proper
factual basis that the requisite number of violations established in
paragraph 6(c)have occurred,the Council may:
1. Specifically enforce this permit;or
2. Collect on any bond or other security applicable to the Property to
the extent necessary to correct the violation; or
3. Enjoin further operations on the Rural Property that violate this
permit or the City Code;or
4. Revoke this permit.
f. MWA retains its right to appeal the decision of the Council to District
Court. In such proceedings the losing party shall pay the prevailing party's
costs and attorneys' fees.
g. If the permit is revoked or voluntarily relinquished,MWA shall
nevertheless remain bound by the provisions of paragraph 1 for the
remainder of the term set forth in paragraph 7(a);provided,however,that
MWA shall no longer be allowed to utilize the berm constructed pursuant
to paragraph 1(a)as a stockpile for the remainder of said term;provided
further,however,that MWA's nonconforming use rights as of September
6, 1995 as to Tract E,RLS 1280 shall be unaffected by the revocation or
voluntary relinquishment.
•
7. Renewal,Nonrenewal, and Voluntary Relinquishment:
a. This permit shall remain in full force and effect until March 1,2002.
Any application for renewal shall be made no earlier than six months and
no later than three months prior to its expiration.
b. The City Council's determination on non-renewal shall be reasonable and
based on legally sufficient reasons with a proper factual basis. Such
factual basis shall be set forth in findings of fact adopted by the Council.
The absence of violations shall constitute prima facie basis for renewal.
c. MWA may voluntarily relinquish its rights and responsibilities under this .
permit at any time by written notice to the City Manager;provided,
however, a voluntary relinquishment shall not alter the terms of
paragraph 6(g).
d. In the event that MWA voluntarily relinquishes this permit,does not
apply for a renewal or the City determines not to renew the permit,the
parties shall return to the status quo ante;that is both the City and MWA
shall be returned to their legal position which existed prior to the issuance
of this permit.
K:1Administration\Agenda Prcparatiion\City Council Agenda Packet Itenn1200014-18-O01Engineering\Midwest Asphalt Permit&
Addendumdoc 7
EXHIBIT A
LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR THE PROPERTY
That part of the Northwest Quarter of Section 3, Township 116,
Range 22. described as commencing at the Southwest corner of
the said Northwest Quarter; thence North along the West line of
the said Northwest Quarter 488.42 feet; thence deflecting to. the
right 28 degrees 21 minutes 30 seconds a distance of 1153.5 feet
to the point of beginning; thence Southwesterly along the said
lost described course to the West line of the said Northwest
Quarter; thence North along the said West line 296.81 feet; thence
deflecting to the right 43 degrees 45 minutes 30 seconds a distance
of 150.24 feet; thence on a curve to the left, having a radius of
2814.79 feet and a delta angle of 15 degrees 24 minutes, a distance
of •756.57 feet to the point of beginning, except that part thereof
described as follows: Commencing at the Southwest corner of the
Northwest Quarter of Section 3, Township 116, Range 22; thence
in a Northerly direction along the West line of said Northwest
Quarter having on assumed bearing of North 0 degrees 44 minutes•
30 seconds West a distance of 488.22 feet to the actual point of
beginning of the area to be described; thence continuing along
West line of said Northwest Quarter having an assumed bearing
of North 0 degrees 44 minutes 30 seconds West a distance of
237.30 feet; thence South 23 degrees 06 minutes 12 seconds East .
a distance of 28.86 feet: thence Easterly a distance of 112.22 feet .
. to its intersection with the West right—of—way line of the Chicago
and Northwestern Railroad along a curve concave to the South
and not tangent with the last described line, said curve has a radius
of 335.00 feet, a centre! angle of 19 degrees 11 minutes 34 seconds
and the chord of said curve bears North 81 degrees 37 minutes
51 seconds East, thence Southerly along the West right—of--way
line of the soid railroad having a bearing of South 27 degrees 37
minutes West a distance of 256.18 feet to the actual point of
beginning and there terminating.
Subject to on easement in favor of Dennis D, Crawley and Dorothy
A. Crawley, husband and wife, over that part of the Northwest
Quarter of said Section 3, described as commencing at the
Southwest corner of said Northwest Quarter; thence North along
the West line thereof 488.42 feet to the point of beginning; thence
deflecting to the right 28 degrees 21 minutes 30 seconds a distance
of 264.13 feet; thence deflecting to the left 95 degrees a• distance of
50.19 feet; thence deflecting to the left 85 degrees a distance of
167.13 feet to the West line of said Northwest Quarter; thence South .
along said West line 105.27....feet_ _tbe.point of beginning,.as. shown
in deed Doc. No. 745509, f Files of Registrar of Titles. .
ocs:ous
ADDENDUM B
EROSION CONTROL POLICY August 1, 1997
1. All construction projects permitted by the City of Eden Prairie which result in the temporary
disturbance of vegetative or non-vegetative surfaces protecting soils from erosion require the use
of Best Management Practices(BMP's)as outlined in the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's
manual, Protecting Water Quality In Urban Areas, to mitigate the impact of erosion on wetland
and water resources. The City Engineer or the Director of Inspections may impose special
conditions to permits which stipulate erosion control procedures and/or direct the installation of
erosion control features or the clean up of erosion at construction sites. Permits affected by this
policy include all grading permits, building permits, and permits for the installation of utilities.
2. All erosion control systems stipulated in the permit application shall be installed prior to the
issuance of the permit. Supplemental erosion control systems ordered by the City Engineer or
the Director of Inspections shall be installed within 48 hours of that order.
3. All erosion control systems must be maintained by the applicant in a functional condition until
the completion of turf and/or structural surfaces which protect the soil from erosion. The
applicant must inspect erosion control bi-weekly and immediately after each rainfall event of.5
inches or more. Needed maintenance shall be performed within 48 hours.
4. Best Management Practices (BMP's) shall be utilized at all construction sites to minimize the
trackage or spillage of soil on public streets or highways. BMP's may include, but are not
limited to, rock construction entrances, washing stations, frequent cleaning of streets adjacent
to the construction site or limiting operations when site conditions are unmanageable. Trackage
or spillage of -on a public street or highway must be cleaned by power sweepers,withii:the
time frame stipulated in the permit special conditions or as ordered by the City Engineer or the
Director of Inspections.
5. If erosion breaches the perimeter of a construction site, the applicant shall immediately develop
a clean up and restoration plan, obtain the right-of-entry from the adjoining property owner, and
implement the clean up and restoration plan within 48 hours of obtaining the adjoining property
owner's permission. In the event eroded soils enter onto or are tracked or spilled on a public
street, highway, sidewalk or trail, the applicant shall remove the soil material and thoroughly
sweep the street or sidewalk surface within four hours. If eroded soils enter, or entrance
appears imminent, into wetlands or other water bodies, clean up and repair shall be immediate.
Applicant shall provide all traffic control and flagging required to protect the traveling public
during the clean up operations.
•
6. When a applicant fails to conform to any provision of this policy within the time stipulated in
a written notification, the City may take the following actions:
a. Withhold the scheduling of inspections and/or the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy
or other approvals.
b. Direct the correction of the deficiency by City personnel or separate contract.
c. Withhold the issuance of building permits
d. At its option, institute and prosecute an action to enjoin violations of th. Agreement
and/or an action to specifically enforce performance of this Agreement
The issuance of a permit constitutes a right-of-entry for the City or its contractor to enter upon
the construction site for the purpose of correcting deficiencies in erosion control.
All costs, including but not limited to, attorneys' fees and engineering fees incurred by the City
in correcting erosion control deficiencies or enforcing this policy shall be reimbursed by the
applicant. All invoices for erosion control correction shall be due and payable within 30 days.
Invoices not paid within 30 days shall accrue interest at a rate of 1% per month or the highest
legal rate.
Each charge for correction of erosion deficiencies shall be a lien upon the property to which the
permit applies. Invoices more than 30 days old on September 30 or any year or on any other
date as determined by the City Engineer or the Director of Inspections may be assessed against
the property. As a condition of the permit, the owner shall waive notice of any assessment
hearing to be conducted by the City, concurs that the benefit to the property exceeds the amount
of the proposed assessment and waive all rights by virtue of Minnesota Statute 429.081 or
otherwise to challenge the amount or validity of the assessment.
I, We, The Undersigned, hereby.accept the terms and conditions of the Erosion Control Policy dated
August 1, 1997 as set forth and agree to fully comply therewith to the satisfaction of the City of Eden
Prairie, Minnesota.
By: �. By: 44WZ041• 411161
Owner's ' gnature Applicant's signature
President 2-9-00 President 2-9-00
Title Date: Title Date:
DEVELOPMENT NAME: Lot: Block:
OWNER INFORMATION OWNER(PRINT'): Midwest Asphalt Corporation
ADDRESS 6401 Industrial Drive
CITY Eden Prairie STATE MN ZiP 55346
Office Phone:937-8033 Mobile No. - Home No. -
APPLICANT INFORMATION APPLICANT(PRINT): Midwest Asphalt Corporation
ADDRESS
6350 Industrial Drive
Cris Eden Prairie STATE MN ZIP 55346
Office Phone:937-8033 Mobile No. - Home No. -
DsicPOLICY_EROSION_POL