Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 03/23/2004 AGENDA EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP/FORUM TUESDAY, MARCH 23,2004 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, Jan Mosman, and Philip Young CITY STAFF: City Manager Scott Neal, Police Chief Dan Carlson,Fire Chief George Esbensen,Public Works Director Eugene Dietz,Parks and Recreation Director Bob Lambert, Communications Manager Jack Sheehan, City Attorney Ric Rosow, and Recorder Lorene McWaters Heritage Room II I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA III. REFERENDUM COMMUNICATIONS IV. OTHER TOPICS Council Chamber V. OPEN FORUM VI. OPEN PODIUM VII. ADJOURNMENT AGENDA EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY,MARCH 23,2004 7:00 PM,CITY CENTER Council Chamber 8080 Mitchell Road CITY COUNCIL: Mayor Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Councilmembers Sherry Butcher,Ron Case,Jan Mosman, and Philip Young CITY STAFF: City Manager Scott Neal,Parks&Recreation Director Bob Lambert,Public Works Director Eugene Dietz, City Planner Michael Franzen,City Attorney Ric Rosow and Council Recorder Carol Pelzel I. ROLL CALL/CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. COUNCIL FORUM INVITATION IV. PROCLAMATION OF APRIL AS CHILD ABUSE PREVENTION MONTH(p. 1) V. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS VI. MINUTES A. COUNCIL WORKSHOP HELD TUESDAY,MARCH 9,2004 (p. 2) B. CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY,MARCH 9,2004 (p. 6) VII. CONSENT CALENDAR A. CLERK'S LICENSE LIST (p. 16) B. VIKING COLLECTIONS PARKING by Kloeckner Limited Partnership.2nd Reading for Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 4.42 acres, Zoning District Amendment in the Office Zoning District on 4.42 acres,and Site Plan Review on 4.42 acres. Location: 7500 Office Ridge Circle and 7544 Market Place Drive. (Ordinance for PUD District Review,Zoning District Amendment, Resolution for Site Plan Review) (p. 17) C. HENNEPIN VILLAGE SITE C AND D REZONING by Pemtom Land Company. 2nd Reading for Planned Unit Development District Review on 11.99 acres,Zoning District Change from R1-9.5 to RM 6.5 on 11.99 acres, and Site Plan Review on 11.99 acres. Location: North of Highway 212, east of Spring Road. (Ordinance for PUD District Review,Zoning District Change,and Resolution for Site Plan Review) (p. 36) CITY COUNCIL AGENDA March 23,2004 Page 2 D. MICRO EAR TECHNOLOGY by Gavic Construction Corporation. 2nd Reading for Planned Unit Development District Review on 35.55 acres,Zoning District Amendment within the I-5 and I-2 Zoning Districts on 35.55 acres, and Site Plan Review on 11.21 acres. Location: 6426 Flying Cloud Drive. (Ordinance for PUD District Review,Zoning District Amendment, and Resolution for Site Plan Review) (p. 47) E. LAMETTRY TIRE SHOP by Richard LaMettry. 2nd Reading for Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 1.22 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural to Commercial Regional Service on 1.22 acres, and Site Plan Review on 1.22 acres. Location: East of Plaza Drive,west of I-494. (Ordinance for PUD District Review, Zoning District Change, and Resolution for Site Plan Review) (p. 70) F. APPROVE SECOND READING OF AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CITY CODE SECTION 2.82,RELATING TO PERSONNEL RULES AND REGULATIONS (p. 97) G. ADOPT RESOLUTION APPROVING TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAL AGREEMENT FOR TRAFFIC SIGNALS ON CSAH 62 AT BAKER ROAD, CSAH 62 AT I-494 WEST RAMPS,TH 62 AT I-494 EAST RAMPS AND TH 62 AT CLEARWATER DRIVE/BEACH ROAD,I.C. 02-5553 (p. 99) H. ADOPT RESOLUTION APPROVING HENNEPIN COUNTY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN (p. 117) I. ADOPT RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ACQUISITION OF EASEMENTS AND RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR TH 212/PRAIRIE CENTER DRIVE IMPROVEMENTS, I.C. 015527 (p. 119) J. ADOPT RESOLUTION FOR SUBMITTAL OF APPLICATION FOR 2004 DNR NATURAL AND SCENIC AREA GRANT PROGRAM (p. 122) K. AWARD CONTRACT FOR STREET SWEEPING TO RELIAKOR SERVICES, I.C. 04-5613 (p. 124) L. APPROVE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH TKDA FOR WATER FILL STATION AT THE WATER TREATMENT PLANT (p. 125) M. APPROVE CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 FOR TH212/VALLEY VIEW ROAD INTERCHANGE AREA IMPROVEMENT PROJECT,I.C. 01-5543 (p. 136) N. APPROVE CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 FOR PRAIRIE CENTER DRIVE/ PRAIRIE LAKES DRIVE TRAFFIC SIGNAL PROJECT,I.C. 95-5372 (p. 141) VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS A. ORDINANCE AMENDING CITY CODE SECTION 11.70 RELATING TO SIGN PERMITS (First Reading of the Ordinance) (p. 144) CITY COUNCIL AGENDA March 23,2004 Page 3 B. SCENIC HEIGHTS APARTMENTS Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential on .62 acres,Planned Unit Development Concept Review on.97 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on .97 acres,Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on .35 acres and from Rural to RM-6.5 on .62 acres, Site Plan Review on .62 acres, and Preliminary Plat of .97 acres into 2 lots and road right-of-way. Location: Red Rock Road and Scenic Heights Road. (Resolution for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change, Resolution for PUD Concept Review, Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning Change, and Resolution for Preliminary Plat) (p. 147) C. PEMBERTON LANDING by Minnstar Builders, Inc. Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential on 17.29 acres, Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 21.66 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 21.66 acres, Zoning District Change from R1-22 to RM-6.5 on 17.29 acres, Site Plan Review on 17.29 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 21.66 acres into 32 lots, 1 outlot, and road right-of-way. Location: South of Pioneer Trail,north of Hilltop Road,west of Eden Prairie Road. (Resolution for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change,Resolution for PUD Concept Review, Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning Change, and Resolution for Preliminary Plat) (p. 168) IX. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS X. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS A. ORDINANCE AMENDING CITY CODE SECTION 11.70 RELATING TO SIGN PERMITS (Second Reading of the Ordinance) (p. 235) B. RESOLUTION REGARDING POLICY OF NOT FENCING STORM WATER PONDS AND WETLANDS (p. 244) XL PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS XII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS& COMMISSIONS XIII. APPOINTMENTS XIV. REPORTS OF OFFICERS A. REPORTS OF COUNCILMEMBERS 1. I-494 Corridor Funding(Resolution) (p. 251) B. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER CITY COUNCIL AGENDA March 23,2004 Page 4 C. REPORT OF PARKS AND RECREATION DIRECTOR 1. Round Lake Water Quality Report (p. 253) D. REPORT OF PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR E. REPORT OF POLICE CHIEF F. REPORT OF FIRE CHIEF G. REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY XV. OTHER BUSINESS A. CLOSED SESSION 1. City Manager's Performance Review 2. Potential Litigation XVI. ADJOURNMENT . PROCLAMATION City of Eden Prairie Hennepin County, Minnesota WHEREAS, child abuse prevention is a community problem and finding solutions depends on involvement among people throughout the community; and WHEREAS,the effects of child abuse are felt by whole communities and need to be addressed by the entire community; and WHEREAS, effective child abuse prevention succeeds because of partnerships created between parents, practitioners, schools, faith communities, health care organizations, law enforcement agencies, and the business community; and WHEREAS, family-serving, youth-focused prevention programs, indicated in our community by blue ribbons, offer positive alternatives for young people; and WHEREAS, all citizens need to be more aware of child abuse and neglect and its prevention within the community, and be involved in supporting parents to raise their children in a safe, nurturing society. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved, that the City of Eden Prairie hereby proclaims April as Child Abuse Prevention Month in the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, and calls upon all citizens, community agencies, religious organizations, medical facilities and businesses to increase their participation in efforts to prevent child abuse and neglect, thereby strengthening the communities in which we live. Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor City of Eden Prairie 1 A , UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP/FORUM TUESDAY,MARCH 9,2004 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, Jan Mosman, and Philip Young CITY STAFF: City Manager Scott Neal,Police Chief Dan Carlson,Fire Chief George Esbensen, Parks and Recreation Director Bob Lambert, Communications Manager Jack Sheehan, Economic Development Director David Lindahl,Assistant to the City Manager Michael Barone, City Attorney Ric Rosow, and Recorder Lorene McWaters Heritage Room II I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA III. CITY PARCEL AT MITCHELL ROAD AND 312 Background Lindahl reviewed the history of the City-owned parcel at 7900 Mitchell Road. The City purchased the site around 1981. A police facility was constructed on the site in 1983. The building was closed in 1993 after the department moved into the City Center Space. In 1995, a City consultant recommended marketing the site with the building. The building was shown to many prospective buyers; however,the cost of renovating the building for another use proved prohibitive. In 2000, developer Dan Wright proposed replatting the property into three lots: one for a Wingate Hotel on the 2.89 south site; one for a restaurant on the 2.36 acre north site; and a small parcel to be retained by the City for a well house. Wright agreed to buy the two lots for a total of$1.7 million. The hotel project was approved by the City Council in June 2000, and Wright closed on the hotel site in late 2000 for$1,071,000. Wright,however, was unable to close on the north parcel due to a downturn in the economy,the death of his partner, and difficulty finding an a suitable restaurant for the site. Mr. Wright passed away in 2002. Wright's estate still controls the property, which has been listed with Cambridge Commercial Realty since 2000. Over the past several years, City staff and Cambridge have discussed alternative uses for the property;however, staffs position to date has been that the City would prefer to see the approved hotel/restaurant plan built if possible. Staff believes the hotel and restaurant parcels are co-dependent since they share the same access,parking, and storm water retention pond. Some of the uses that have been proposed by prospective buyers,but have not come to fruition, are: • Office condos • Bank/offices • Drug store • Furniture store • Restaurants • Strip retail • Private school • Health and fitness club Lindahl noted that Eaton Corp. has indicated that a hotel in this location would be desirable, and occupants of the ADC site would likely use the hotel as well. Lindahl said staff continues to market the site, but they have been reluctant to encourage certain uses, such as the proposed drug store or fast food restaurants,that they feel do not fit with the needs of the area. Lindahl said he is looking for specific input from Council on the direction to take with the site. Discussion Councilmember Young asked for an estimate of what the tax revenues would be on the site. Lindahl noted that the site is currently being reappraised, and Lindahl expects the results will show an increase in value of around$200,000. Lindahl said it would be between$20,000 and$25,000 a year on the City's site, and double that for the other site. Young said although it might be in the City's interest to hold onto the property, he believes this is not part of what City's do. He is,however, interested in finding a good use for the site. Councilmember Butcher asked if the City has considered a development along the lines of the Excelsior Lake area. Young agreed that would be a great use,but he asked how long the City would be willing to wait for the market to support that type of development. Mayor Tyra-Lukens said it is her impression that the site is probably too small for that type of development. Councilmember Case said he would like to see a prioritization of possible uses. He suggested focusing on five uses and then aggressively going after those types of project. Case said he personally would not mind seeing a hotel and a restaurant(particularly a quality breakfast restaurant) on the property. 3 Tyra-Lukens said she supports Lindahl's approach in dealing with proposed restaurants. She would be disappointed to see the site used for a fast food restaurant. She said she would not necessarily object to offices,but is not sure a strip mall would be desirable. Lindahl said he would get input from the appraisers and develop a matrix of possible uses for review by the Council. IV. 2004 WORK PLANS Neal said staff has begun translating the objectives and strategies developed and approved by Council last year into specific work plans. Barone and Kurt, along with consultant Clare O'Connell,have been working with Directors and Division Managers on drafting these work plans. Neal noted that Public Works worked with Kurt and Barone to develop a"prototype"work plan that is being used as an example from which other Departments can work. After all of the work plans are completed,Department Directors and Division Managers will translate these work plans into goals for individual employees. Staff expects to complete this process by the end of May. These goals will then be used to set performance expectations. Kurt said after all of this work is done, HR will be able to reestablish expectation of regular performance reviews. Goals will be established and communicated early in the year, city-wide employee and manager competencies will be developed,and the content of the performance reviews will be revised. Neal said the intent is to measure performance,but not to create a bureaucracy around the system. Councilmember Case pointed out that much of the work of the City is service-oriented and not easily measured. Kurt agreed,and said performance reviews will focus not only on what is done,but how it is done. V. OTHER TOPICS Tyra-Lukens suggested that the topic for the next workshop be educating the public about the upcoming referendum. Sheehan said the"Referendum Talking Points"would be posted on the City's web site this week. An icon that takes the user directly to the referendum page is being developed. The referendum page will include a tax impact table, artistic renderings,a sample ballot, and a list of polling places. Staff is also working on an educational mailer which will be mailed to Eden Prairie residents on or around March 26. Tyra-Lukens asked if staff has come up with a catchy tagline. Sheehan said they have considered several possibilities,but have not found one that does not cross the line to advocacy. Mosman said she is concerned over what exactly she can say in support of the referendum without violating any rules. Council Chamber VI. OPEN FORUM Lulu Mosman, daughter of Councilmember Jan Mosman,briefed Council on her trip the NLC Conference in Washington,DC,as a youth delegate. Lulu noted that she attended all of the general sessions and she described one seminar she attended on immigrant issues. She said she also met the Mayor of Beaverton, Oregon, and learned about his City's 28-member youth commission. VII. OPEN PODIUM No one requested to speak at Open Podium. VIII. ADJOURNMENT 5 VL ,B • UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY,MARCH 9, 2004 7:00 PM, CITY CENTER Council Chamber 8080 Mitchell Road CITY COUNCIL: Mayor Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Councilmembers Sherry Butcher, Ron Case, Jan Mosman, and Philip Young CITY STAFF: City Manager Scott Neal,Parks &Recreation Director Bob Lambert,Public Works Director Eugene Dietz, City Planner Michael Franzen, City Attorney Ric Rosow and Council Recorder Theresa Brundage I. ROLL CALL/CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER Mayor Tyra-Lukens called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with all Councilmembers present. Lambert, Dietz and Franzen were absent. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. COUNCIL FORUM INVITATION Mayor Tyra-Lukens announced that the City Council provides an Open Forum opportunity for Eden Prairie citizens to address the Council on issues related to Eden Prairie city government on the first and third Tuesday of each month from 6:30-6:50 p.m. in the Council Chambers immediately prior to the start of the City Council's regularly scheduled meetings. She said this month's meetings are on the second and fourth Tuesdays because of precinct caucuses held last week. She said Open Forum is reserved for scheduled participants and if you wish to speak to the Council during Open Forum,please contact the City Manager's office by calling 952.949. 8412 by noon of the meeting date with your name and the subject matter you wish to address. Tyra-Lukens said the Council provides an impromptu,unscheduled Open Podium opportunity for citizens to address the Council concerning issues related to Eden Prairie city government from 6:50 to 7:00 p.m. immediately following Open Forum. She said Open Forum and Open Podium are not recorded or televised. The City Council reserves the right to adjust the time allocations for Open Forum and Open Podium. If you have questions about the process or procedures of Open Forum or Open Podium,please contact the City Manager's office. IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS Neal added discussion on a proposed resolution in support of funding for Natural and Scenic Areas grant programs (Item VII.L.); and the appointment of Molly Koivumaki as primary delegate and Councilmember Butcher as alternate to the Hennepin South Services Collaborative Board (Item VII.M.). Tyra-Lukens added an item regarding a traffic issue under Reports of Councilmembers. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 9,2004 Page 2 MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher,to approve the agenda as published and amended.Motion carried 5-0. V. MINUTES A. COUNCIL WORKSHOP HELD TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 17, 2004 MOTION: Young moved, seconded by Mosman,to approve the Minutes of the City Council Workshop held Tuesday, February 17, 2004. Motion carried 5-0. B. CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 17,2004 MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Case,to approve the Minutes of the City Council Meeting held Tuesday, February 17, 2004. Motion carried 5-0. VI. HABITAT FOR TECHNOLOGY PRESENTATION Irene Kelly from Habitat for Technology introduced Nick Eian, co-chair of the board,who gave an update on last year's accomplishments sponsored by the Council. He and Kelly also spoke about learning initiatives for 2004, educational benefits,business-to-business benefits and a website development and hosting service at MNedenprairie.com. Eian said it is the group's mission to make Eden Prairie the epicenter of Minnesota's high tech corridor. Kelly said the website is a program the Council funded last year to allow Habitat for Technology to launch a pilot to try the initiative. She demonstrated, via live web cast,how the site works in establishing an electronic community for Eden Prairie,providing authentic learning opportunities for students, and assisting businesses with online presence. Case asked if people using search engines such as Google or Yahoo will be led to the site. Kelly said it does come up but is not at the top of the list. She said there are fees for being listed at the top. Kelly said the more dynamic a site is,the more hits you get on it so using key words and phrasing will attract users. Eian said what the group hopes to accomplish this year is to provide the opportunity for every Eden Prairie business to participate and have a first class,professional website at a reasonable price. Kelly said there is also a marketing plan for the website. Mosman asked at what age students can potentially get involved in the program. Kelly said at this point there are 4 interns, all high school seniors. She said there is a need for design work so there will also be college students helping with that. Mosman asked how the internet yellow pages overlap for companies. Kelly said internet yellow pages marketing tool is a directory with businesses listed with an address and phone number. She said it is a parallel product. Butcher asked if there are similar models out there. Kelly said research has been done and as far as she knows,there are no other communities that have all the partners coming together like this one.Eian said the site has more community informational pieces and less advertisement. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 9, 2004 Page 3 VII. CONSENT CALENDAR A. CLERK'S LICENSE LIST B. BRYANT LAKE HEIGHTS for 7012 and 7014 Willow Creek Road. Request for City Council to consider a request from James and Raynelle Perkins and Stephen Longman Builders,Inc. to amend that certain Developer's Agreement entered into on or about August 3, 1999 between the City of Eden Prairie and James and Raynelle Perkins with respect to Bryant Lake Heights. The Developer is requesting the following action by the City: Amendment of Exhibit C, paragraph XIII of the Developer's Agreement,by deleting the requirement that all structures on Lot 3, Block 1 be removed prior to issuance of any building permit for Lot 1 and Lot 3, Block 1,Bryant Lake Heights. C. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2004-35 AUTHORIZING A GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND REFERENDUM TO BE HELD ON MAY 11,2004 D. APPROVE ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE PHASE II NPDES STORMWATER PERMIT PROGRAM,I.C. 02-5585 E. APPROVE MUNICIPAL WASTE ABATEMENT INCENTIVE FUND GRANT APPLICATION,I.C. 02-5578 F. APPROVE PROPOSAL FOR PAVEMENT EVALUATION SERVICES FROM GOOD POINTE TECHNOLOGY G. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2004-36 APPROVING PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND SETTING BID DATE FOR INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS AT CSAH 4 (EDEN PRAIRIE ROAD)AND VALLEY VIEW ROAD,I.C. 96-5405 H. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2004-37 VACATING DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS IN THE BIG WOODS 3RD ADDITION,VACATION 04-01 I. APPOINTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION MEMBER TO CITY/SCHOOL FACILITY USE ADVISORY COMMITTEE J. AUTHORIZE STAFF TO CONTRACT FOR ARCHITECTURAL SERVICES FOR DESIGN OF A CONCEPT PLAN FOR THE PARK BUILDING AT MILLER PARK SOFTBALL COMPLEX K. AWARD BID FOR RICHARD T.ANDERSON CONSERVATION AREA GRADING AND PARKING LOT CONSTRUCTION TO MIDWEST ASPHALT L. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2004-38 SUPPORTING LOCAL INITIATIVE GRANTS HF 2556, SF 2392 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 9,2004 Page 4 M. APPOINTMENT OF MOLLY KOIVUMAKI AS PRIMARY DELEGATE AND COUNCILMEMBER BUTCHER AS ALTERNATE TO THE HENNEPIN SOUTH SERVICES COLLABORATIVE BOARD MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Mosman,to approve Items A-M of the Consent Calendar. Young asked that Item L.be pulled for discussion. He said Lambert asked the City to pass a resolution regarding specific funding of an item which the governor has recommended$0. Neal said the resolution asks for Council endorsement of the resolution in the amount of$4 million.Young said the object of the funding is laudable,but he has strong reservation about passing a resolution on what the governor should do on his budget or what the legislature should do within their spending scope. Mosman asked that Item C.be pulled for discussion. Discussion on Item L. Tyra-Lukens asked how then does the Council communicate its needs to the senate and governor if not by resolution. She said she is not uncomfortable with voting on this. Butcher said she does not have a problem with this because it is a formal tool that city councils use on issues of importance where they want to make a statement. Case said there was previously discussion on whether to take a vote on a resolution after the legislature had approved something. He said there was discussion on whether it was appropriate after the fact, in essence,to judge another body.He said this is exactly the time to be advising another body, especially one above the Council, so they can receive direction from cities on what those bodies believe and then make decisions in the best interest for the state. Case said it is critical that bodies across Minnesota pass resolutions to advise as the bills are going through the process. He said once the legislature enacts it into law, it would then be inappropriate to take a stand on an issue. He said the Council would be doing a great disservice to the people of Eden Prairie if it did not lobby and argue for and on behalf of the residents for what benefits them the most. Neal this is an important way of communicating formally to the State because they often ask if a resolution has been passed regarding the City's stand on an issue. He said he does not believe the State sees it as confrontational or argumentative,but just a position on an issue. Mosman said it seems better that the Council asks for something now that may not happen, rather than complaining or criticizing afterwards. It was agreed that Item L. be voted on separately. Discussion on Item C. Mosman said when she looked at the list of items for the referendum,the question is such that we are not legally tied to spending the money exactly where it was said to be spent,but are politically tied to the amounts. She said spending could be interpreted differently if not specifically specified. She said the spending for purchase of open space went from specific one 9 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 9,2004 Page 5 or two projects to very general.Mosman said in the interest of those voting for different things on the referendum,priorities should be specified in the educational materials sent out by the City. Tyra-Lukens suggested discussing at another time,possibly a workshop,details on how citizens are educated on what is in the referendum. Mosman said that is fine as long as it's not too late to make points about what will be included.Butcher she thought the Council agreed to be more general on the wording. Neal said the item before the Council this evening does not contain the list for spending,but a decision does need to be made before the Council goes forward with a public education effort so he believes a workshop is the best venue for that. It was agreed to include Item C. on the Consent Calendar. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Mosman,to revise the motion to approve the Consent Calendar with the exception of Item L. Motion carried 5-0. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Mosman,to approve Item L. of the Consent Calendar. Motion carried 4-1.Young opposed. VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS A. 2004 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDING(CDBG) RECOMMENDATIONS (RESOLUTION NO.2004-39) City Manager Scott Neal said official notice of this public hearing was published in the February 19,2004,Eden Prairie Sun Current.He said the Eden Prairie Human Service Review Committee(EPHSRC)reviewed the 2004 CDBG proposals and recommended the following activities be funded: Funding County Public Service Activities(15%cap) Level Priority 1. PROP—Emergency Housing Assistance/Car Repair$10,100 High 2. HOPE—Family Support Services $7,000 High 3. GMDCA—Child Care Subsidy Program $10,000 High 4. HOME—Household&Outside Maintenance for the Elderly $5,000 High 5. HomeLine Tenant's Advocacy Service $3,000 High Subtotal $35,100 (15% of total) Housing Activities Level 6. Housing Rehabilitation Deferred Loan Program $50,000 High 7. Affordable Housing/Land Trust $148,900 High Subtotal $198,000 (75%of total) Grand Total $234,000 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 9,2004 Page 6 Neal introduced Molly Koivumaki,Housing and Human Services Manager,who is available for answering questions. Tyra-Lukens said the amount of funding for the CDBG is never as much as we would like and everything listed is county priority High. She asked if cities ever fund things that are not high priority. Koivumaki said one exception that CDBG is being used for is rehabbing the site at Eden Prairie Center and that is a medium level priority. It was noted that these are the same 7 organizations that have been funded recently. Butcher said this is a measurable success for the dollars that are spent because there are reports that show how dollars are spent and the number of people who benefit from the services. Carla Jacobson from the Greater Minneapolis Daycare Association thanked the Council for their past and continued support. She said the money is appreciated and needed for serving low income families in the community. She submitted a report on the economic impact study for Hennepin County. Tyra-Lukens said the Council appreciates being kept informed about the activities of the agency as well as other agencies on this list. MOTION: Mosman moved, seconded by Butcher, to adopt a Resolution approving the use of funds for the 2004 Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant(CDBG)program as recommended by the Eden Prairie Human Service Review Committee(EPHSRC). Motion carried 5-0. IX. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS MOTION: Young moved, seconded by Case, to approve the Payment of Claims. The motion was approved on a roll call vote,with Case,Butcher,Mosman,Young and Tyra-Lukens voting"aye." X. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS Neal suggested reversing the order of these items. Council agreed to discuss Item B.prior to Item A. B. RESOLUTION NO. 2004-40 ADOPTING CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE EMPLOYEE HANDBOOK City Manager Scott Neal said the employee handbook is a summary of City employment policies written to serve as a guide for employees and managers. He said the City's previous handbook was last updated in 1991 and the new employee handbook is intended to capture changes in the city's operations, to update policies relative to changes in the legal environment and best practices, and to consolidate city employment policies into one document. In general, few changes were made that would constitute a significant deviation from current practices.Neal said content for the handbook was developed by a team of managers and human resources over a period of several months. A draft copy was then forwarded to Department Heads,The League of Minnesota Cities, and the City Attorney for additional comments. The final version is the culmination of this extensive review. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 9,2004 Page 7 MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Case,to adopt the resolution adopting the City of Eden Prairie Employee Handbook and repealing Resolutions No. 823, 1088, R80-24, R85-98,R86-16, R90-170,R91-27,R91-215, and R95-216. Motion carried 5-0. A. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE AMENDING CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 BY AMENDING SECTION 2.82 RELATING TO PERSONNEL RULES AND REGULATIONS City Manager Scott Neal said the proposed ordinance change would give the City Manager the authority to establish personnel policies without council approval. This change would allow for more efficient implementation of policy changes in our dynamic operating environment.He said the change would also be consistent with the statutory structure of the City, which gives the City Manager the authority for the proper administration of the affairs of the City. Neal said the reason he asked for these two items to be reversed is because this is more of a policy discussion. He said this is being brought to the Council for the first time without much previous discussion, and there are times when there is a need to react fairly quickly on a policy matter. Case said he has great trust and confidence in this city manager and this ordinance is appropriate. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Mosman,to approve First Reading of an Ordinance amending City Code Chapter 1 by amending Section 2.82 relating to personnel rules and regulations, and adopting by reference City Code Chapter 1 and Section 2.99. Young asked if the scope of the City Manager's power would include the Council. City Attorney Ric Rosow said the Council is not subject to the employee handbook. He said there is much in the employee manual that is not pertinent to the Council as well as boards, commissions and volunteers. Rosow said it has been discussed that a topic for a workshop would be appropriate policies that the Council should pass for itself that mirror some of the major policies in the employee manual. Motion carried 5-0. XI. PETITIONS, REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS XII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS & COMMISSIONS XIII. APPOINTMENTS A. 2004 BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS City Manager Scott Neal said the City Council held Board and Commission interviews on Tuesday,February 24,2004. Twenty-one candidates applied for consideration; six l�, CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 9,2004 Page 8 of which were seeking reappointment, and one seeking appointment to a different Commission. Sixteen candidates have been designated for appointment on March 9, 2004. MOTIONS: Butcher moved, seconded by Young, to appoint to the Community Planning Board Larry Kacher,Peter Rocheford and Fred Seymour —terms to expire March 31, 2007 and Jon Stoltz—term to expire March 31, 2005. Motion carried 5-0. Young moved, seconded by Case,to appoint to the Heritage Preservation Commission Betsy Adams and Robert Amell—terms to expire March 31, 2007. Motion carried 5-0. Case moved, seconded by Young,to appoint to the Human Rights and Diversity Commission Linda Chung and Pamela Miller—terms to expire March 31, 2007. Motion carried 5-0. Young moved, seconded by Case, to appoint to the Arts & Culture Commission Susan Dickman, Steve Mosow and Heather Olson—terms to expire March 31, 2007 and Ann Rorem—term to expire March 31, 2006. Motion carried 5-0. Butcher moved, seconded by Young, to appoint to the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission Tom Bierman, Jeff Gerst, Cari Grayson and Michael Moriarity— terms to expire March 31, 2007. Motion carried 5-0. B. 2004 BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION City Manager Scott Neal said the proposed members for Council approval are experienced real estate professionals with knowledge of the Southwest metro area. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher, to appoint to the Board of Appeal and Equalization Mike Best, Judy Ilstrup,Doug Malam,Annette O'Connor and Patricia Pidcock for the period of April 14, 2004 through May 3, 2004. Motion carried 5-0. C. 2004 BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS CHAIRS AND VICE CHAIRS City Manager Scott Neal said Chairs and Vice Chairs are appointed annually by the City Council following the appointment of members to City Boards and Commissions. MOTIONS: Case moved, seconded by Butcher,to appoint Ray Stoelting as Chair and Kathy Nelson as Vice-Chair of the Community Planning Board. Motion carried 5-0. Young moved, seconded by Case,to appoint Betsy Adams as Chair and Jennie Brown as Vice-Chair of the Heritage Preservation Commission. Motion carried 5-0. Butcher moved, seconded by Young, to appoint Rob Barrett as Chair and Jeff Gerst as Vice-Chair of the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission. Motion carried 5-0. 13 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 9,2004 Page 9 Young moved, seconded by Case, to appoint Larry Piumbroeck as Chair and Jeff Strate as Vice-Chair of the Human Rights and Diversity Commission. Motion carried 5-0. Case moved, seconded by Young,to appoint Susan Dickman as Chair and Steve Mosow as Vice-Chair of the Arts and Culture Commission. Motion carried 5-0. Butcher moved, seconded by Case,to appoint Patricia Pidcock as Chair and Mike Best as Vice-Chair of the Board of Equalization and Appeals. Motion carried 5-0. XIV. REPORTS OF OFFICERS A. REPORTS OF COUNCILMEMBERS Tyra Lukens said this is regarding a letter received from Boulder Point Homeowner's Association about the intersection of Mitchell Road and Blakeney. She asked if this has been referred to engineering and how is it going to be handled. She said she also feels unsafe at the intersection and she hopes it's being looked into. Neal said it has been referred to Engineering and he will keep the Council posted on results. B. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER C. REPORT OF PARKS AND RECREATION DIRECTOR D. REPORT OF PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR 1. Renewal of Midwest Asphalt's Land Alteration Permit and Addendum A, Covering Operating Conditions City Manager Scott Neal said 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 plan located in the Industrial General District at the south end of Industrial Drive. Zoning Administrator Jean Johnson said this is an asphalt batch plant and explained its location and operations. She said staff sees no reason at this time for the city to not renew the permit. Tyra-Lukens asked if the permit is no more restrictive or lenient than the old permit. Johnson said that is correct,it is the same. MOTION: Young moved, seconded by Buther, to direct staff to execute a two- year extension of the Land Alteration Permit and Addendum A for Midwest Asphalt Corporation. Motion carried 5-0. E. REPORT OF POLICE CHIEF I11 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES March 9,2004 Page 10 F. REPORT OF FIRE CHIEF G. REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY XV. OTHER BUSINESS XVI. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher, to adjourn the meeting. Motion carried 5-0. Mayor Tyra-Lukens adjourned the meeting at 8:06 p.m. '5 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Consent Calendar March 23,2004 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Police/C.O.P. Unit Clerk's License Application List �j Christy Weigel J These licenses have been approved by the department heads responsible for the licensed activity. Gambling(Bingo) Organization: Eden Prairie Lions Club Place: Round Lake Park Dates: June 4-6, Schooner Days Gambling(Raffle) Organization: Ducks Unlimited Chapter 151,Eden Prairie Place: Bearpath Golf& Country Club Date: April 12, 2004 /6 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 03/23/04 SECTION: Consent Agenda DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Office of City Manager/Planning Scott H. Neal Viking Collections Parking ' B . Scott A. Kipp Requested Action Move to: • Approve 2nd Reading of the Ordinance for Planned Unit District Review with waivers and Zoning District Amendment within the Office Zoning District on 4.42 acres; and • Adopt the Resolution for Site Plan Review on 4.42 acres; and • Approve the Development Agreement for Viking Collections Parking; and • Approve and Authorize Issuance of a Grading Permit for Viking Collections Parking, subject to release by the City Engineer upon determination that the final contract documents conform to plans stamp dated December 2, 2003, as approved by the City Council. Synopsis This is for a 158 space parking lot on a 1.66 acre site located to the southeast of the Viking Collections building it is to serve. Attachments 1. Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Amendment 2. Resolution for Site Plan Review 3. Development Agreement VIKING COLLECTIONS PARKING CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 10-2004-PUD-8-2004 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING CERTAIN LAND WITHIN A ZONING DISTRICT, 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 amended within the Office Zoning District 10-2004-PUD-8-2004 (hereinafter "PUD-8-2004-Office). Section 3. The City Council hereby makes the following findings: A. PUD-8-2004-Office is not in conflict with the goals of the Comprehensive Guide Plan of the City. B. PUD-8-2004-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-8-2004-Office are justified by the design of the development described therein. D. PUD-8-2004-Office is of sufficient size, composition, and arrangement that its construction, marketing, and operation is feasible as a complete unit without dependence upon any subsequent unit. Section 4. The proposal is hereby adopted and the land shall be, and hereby is amended within the Office District and shall be included hereafter in the Planned Unit Development 4-2004-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 5. 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 1 verbatim herein. Section 6. This Ordinance shall become effective from and after its passage and publication. FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 3rd day of February, 2004, 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 23rd day of March, 2004. ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie Sun Current on 19' EXHIBIT A PUD Legal Description — Viking Collections Parking Legal Description Lot 1, Block 1, Office Ridge Circle, Hennepin County, MN. Lot 1, Block 1, Bryant Lake Center 3`a Addition, Hennepin County, MN. x VIKING COLLECTIONS PARKING CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 10-2004-PUD-8-2004 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING TIIE ZONING OF CERTAIN LAND WITHIN ONE 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 amendment of the zoning of land located at 7500 Office Ridge Circle and 7544 Market Place Drive within 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 Sun Current on the (A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from City Clerk.) VIKING COLLECTIONS PARKING CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2004- A RESOLUTION GRANTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR VIKING COLLECTIONS PARKING BY KLOECKNER LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, LLC WHEREAS, Kloeckner Limited Partnership, LLC, has applied for Site Plan approval of Viking Collections Parking to construct a 158 space parking lot, by an Ordinance approved by the City Council on March 23, 2004; and WIIEREAS, the Community Planning Board reviewed said application at a public hearing at its January 12, 2004 meeting and recommended approval of said site plans; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed said application at a public hearing at its February 3, 2004 meeting. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE,that site plan approval be granted to Viking Collections Parking based on the development agreement between Kloeckner Limited Partnership, LLC, and the City of Eden Prairie, reviewed and approved by the City Council on March 23, 2004. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 23rd day of March, 2004. Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT • Viking Collections Parking THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is entered into as of March 23, 2004, by Kloeckner Limited Partnership, LLC, hereinafter referred to as "Developer," its successors and assigns, and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City": WITNESSETH: WHEREAS,Developer has applied to City for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 4.42 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 4.42 acres, Zoning District Amendment in the Office Zoning District on 4.42 acres, and Site Plan Review on 4.42 acres, legally described on Exhibit A (the "Property"); NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the City adopting Resolution No. 2004-25 for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment, Ordinance No. for Planned Unit Development District Review and Zoning District Amendment within the Office Zoning District on 4.42 acres,and Resolution No. for Site Plan Review,Developer agrees to construct, develop and maintain the Property as follows: 1. PLANS: Developer shall develop the Property in conformance with the materials revised and stamp dated December 2,2003,reviewed and approved by the City Council on February 3, 2004, (hereinafter the "Plans") and identified on Exhibit B, subject to such changes and modifications as provided herein. 2. EXHIBIT C: Developer agrees to the terms, covenants, agreements, and conditions set forth in Exhibit C. 0,3 3. CASH PARK FEE: Prior to the issuance of a land alteration permit for the Property, Developer shall pay cash park fees based on the 1.6 acres of the Property required by City Code in effect as of the date of the issuance of land alteration permit for construction of the parking lot on the Property. 4. DEVELOPER'S RESPONSIBILITY FOR CODE VIOLATIONS: In the event of a violation of City Code relating to use of the Land construction thereon or failure to fulfill an obligation imposed upon the Developer pursuant to this Agreement, City shall give 24 hour notice of such violation in order to allow a cure of such violation,provided however, City need not issue a building or occupancy permit for construction or occupancy on the Land while such a violation is continuing,unless waived by City. The existence of a violation of City Code or the failure to perform or fulfill an obligation required by this Agreement shall be determined solely and conclusively by the City Manager of the City or a designee. 5. DEVELOPER'S RESPONSIBILITY FOR ITS CONTRACTORS: Developer shall release,defend and indemnify City,its elected and appointed officials,employees and agents from and against any and all claims, demands, lawsuits, complaints, loss, costs (including attorneys' fees), damages and injunctions relating to any acts, failures to act, errors, omissions of Developer or Developer's consultants,contractors,subcontractors,suppliers and agents. Developer shall not be released from its responsibilities to release, defend and indemnify because of any inspection,review or approval by City. 6. GRADING,DRAINAGE, AND EROSION CONTROL PLANS: A. FINAL GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN: Developer agree that the grading and drainage plan contained in the Plans may require revision based on review by the City Engineer of the final construction documents which include a construction grading and drainage plan. Prior to the release of a land alteration permit for the Property,Developer shall submit and obtain the City Engineer's written approval of . the construction grading and drainage plan for the Property. The construction grading and drainage plan shall include all wetland, wetland buffer strips, wetland buffer monument locations, water quality ponds, storm water detention areas and other items required by the application for and release of a land alteration permit.All design calculations for storm water quality and quantity together with a drainage area map shall be submitted with the final grading and drainage plan. Prior to release of the grading bond, Developer shall certify to the City that the water quality pond conforms to the final grading plan. Developer shall employ the design professional who prepared the construction grading plan.The design professional shall monitor construction for conformance to the approved construction grading plan and City erosion control policy. The design professional shall provide a final report to the City certifying completion of the grading in conformance the approved construction grading plan and City erosion control policy. B. EROSION CONTROL PLAN: Prior to issuance of a land alteration permit, Developer s hall s ubmit t o the City Engineer and obtain City Engineer's written approval of an erosion control plan for the Property. The erosion control plan shall include all boundary erosion control features,temporary stockpile locations and turf restoration procedures: All site grading operations shall conform to the City's Erosion Control Policy labeled Exhibit D, attached hereto and made a part hereof. Prior to release of the grading bond,Developer shall complete implementation of the approved plan. Developer shall remove any sediment that accumulates in the existing and/or proposed sedimentation pond during construction. Upon request by the City, Developer shall provide preconstruction and post construction surveys for evaluation by City. 7. IRRIGATION PLAN: Prior to issuance of a land alteration permit, the Developer shall submit to the City Planner and receive the City Planner's written approval of a plan for irrigation of the landscaped areas on the Property. The irrigation plan shall be designed so that water is not directed on or over public trails and sidewalks. Developer shall complete implementation of the approved irrigation plan in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property. 8. LANDSCAPE PLAN: Prior to issuance of a land alteration permit issuance,the Developer shall submit to the City Planner and receive the City Planner's written approval of a final landscape plan for the Property depicting a total of 22 caliper inches. The approved landscape plan shall be consistent with the quantity,type, and size of plant materials shown on the landscape plan on the Plans. Developer shall furnish to the City Planner and receive the City Planner's approval of a landscape bond equal to 150% of the cost of said improvements as required by City Code. Developer shall complete implementation of the approved landscape plan in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C. 9. PRIVATE DRIVEWAY: Prior to issuance of a land alteration permit for the Property, Developer shall submit proof to the City Planner that a reciprocal, joint access and maintenance agreement with Outlot A, Bryant Lake Center 3rd Addition, for the shared driveway has.been filed against the Property with the Hennepin County Recorder's/Registrar of Titles' Office in a form approved in writing by the City Planner. The agreement shall provide access from the Property across Outlot A to both Market Place Drive and Office Ridge Circle. 10. PUD WAIVERS GRANTED: The city hereby grants the following waivers to City Code requirements within the Office Zoning District through the Planned Unit Development District Review for the Property and incorporates said waivers as part of PUD A. Off-site parking. City Code requires parking to be located on the same parcel of land as the structure they are to serve. 11. SITE LIGHTING: Prior to issuance of a land alteration permit issuance,Developer shall submit to the City Planner and receive.the City Planner's written approval of a plan for site lighting on the Property. All pole lighting shall consist of downcast shoebox fixtures. Developer shall complete implementation of the approved lighting plan concurrent with construction of the parking lot for the Property. 12. TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT PLAN: Prior to issuance of a land alteration permit for the Property, Developer shall submit to the Traffic,Engineer and receive the Traffic Engineer's approval of a Travel Demand Management (TDM) Plan. The Developer shall implement the TDM Plan at the site to help reduce traffic congestion. Prior to issuance of a land alteration permit for the Property,Developer shall furnish to the Traffic Engineer and receive the Traffic Engineer's approval of a TDM performance bond, cash escrow, letter of credit with a corporation approved by the City Manager or other guarantee acceptable to the City Manager equal to 100% of the cost ($20,000) of implementing the first two (2) years of the TDM Plan. The Developer shall initiate implementation of the T DM P Ian, including a ctive marketing t o its employees and a 11 building tenants and their employees, 1 month after the land alteration permit has been issued. The bond, cash escrow, letter of credit or other guarantee will be reduced to the Developer on a "draw-down" basis, in the following manner: A. The City will consider reduction or release of the performance bond,cash escrow,letter of credit or other guarantee at the following times: - Upon completion of items associated with plan start up. - After 1 calendar year of TDM plan implementation - After 2 calendar years of TDM plan implementation and completion of the plan evaluation. B. To request a reduction or release of the performance bond,cash escrow, letter of credit or other guarantee the Developer shall submit to the Traffic Engineer a letter requesting a reduction and a summary of the TDM activities completed to date. A summary of the required information can be obtained for the Traffic Engineer upon request. C. The City shall have 30 business days to review requests for reduction or release of the performance bond,cash escrow,letter of credit or other guarantee and provide indication of approval or objection to any part of the request. e 13. TREE LOSS-TREE REPLACEMENT: There are 16 diameter inches of significant trees on the Property. Tree replacement required is 22 caliper inches.Prior to the issuance of any grading permit for the Property,Developer shall submit to the City Forester and receive the City Forester's written approval of a tree replacement plan for 22 caliper inches. This approved plan shall include replacement trees of a 3-inch diameter minimum size for a shade tree and a 7-foot minimum height for conifer trees. The approved plan shall also provide that, should actual tree loss exceed that calculated herein, Developer shall provide tree replacement on a caliper inch per caliper inch basis for such excess loss. Prior to issuance of any land alteration permit for the Property,Developer shall furnish to the City Planner and receive the City Planner's approval of a tree replacement bond equal to 150% of the cost of said improvements as required by City Code. Developer shall complete implementation of the approved tree replacement plan concurrent with construction of the parking lot for the Property. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties to this Agreement have caused these presents to be executed as of the day and year aforesaid. DEVELOPER CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE Kloeckner Limited P nership, LLC By By Its _Cory Kloeckner—Partner Nancy Tyra-Lukens Its Mayor By By Its Scott H.Neal Its City Manager ,STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 2004, by Nancy Tyra-Lukens and Scott H. Neal, respectively the Mayor and the City Manager of the City of Eden Prairie, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of said corporation. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _9th_ day of March_, 2004, by Cory Kloeckner, the Partner , of Kloeckner Limited Partnership, LLC, on behalf of the Partnership. �4 D.C. BOYUM .1101ka Notary Publi NOTARY PUBLIC-MINNESOTA .,,a My Comm.Exp.Jan.31,2005 EXHIBIT A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - VIKING COLLECTIONS PARKING Legal Description Lot 1, Block 1, Office Ridge Circle, Hennepin County, MN. Lot 1, Block 1, Bryant Lake Center 3`d Addition, Hennepin County, MN. EXHIBIT B DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT -VIKING COLLECTIONS PARKING LIST OF MATERIALS 1. Reference Site Plan dated December 12, 2003 by.Cluts, O'Brien, Strother Architects. 2. Parking Lot Plan dated December 2, 2003 by Cluts, O'Brien, Strother Architects. 3. Parking Lot Lighting Plan dated December 2, 2003 by.Cluts, O'Brien, Strother Architects. 4. Existing Conditions Survey dated December 1, 2003 by Cluts, O'Brien, Strother Architects, and Hansen, Thorp, Pellinen, Olson, Inc. 5. Grading, Drainage, Erosion Control and Utility Plan dated December 1, 2003 by Cluts, O'Brien, Strother Architects, and Hansen, Thorp, Pellinen, Olson, Inc. 6. Preliminary Landscape Plan dated December 1, 2003 by Cluts, O'Brien, Strother Architects, and Hansen, Thorp, Pellinen, Olson, Inc. 30 EXHIBIT C DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - VIKING COLLECTIONS PARKING I. Prior to release of any building permit, Developer shall submit to the City Engineer for approval two copies of a development plan (1"=100'scale)showing existing and proposed contours,proposed streets,and lot arrangements and size,minimum floor elevations on each lot,preliminary alignment and grades for sanitary sewer,water main,and storm sewer, 100- year flood plain contours, ponding areas, tributary areas to catch basins, arrows showing direction of storm water flow on all lots,location of walks,trails,and any property deeded to the City. II. Developer shall submit detailed construction and storm sewer plans to the Watershed District for review and.approval. Developer shall follow all rules and'recommendations of said Watershed District. M. Developer shall pay cash park fees as to all of the Property required by City Code in effect as of the date of the issuance of each building permit for construction on the Property. IV. If Developer fails to proceed in accordance with this Agreement within twenty-four (24) months of the date hereof,Developer,for itself,its successors,and assigns,shall not oppose the City's reconsideration and rescission of any Planned Unit Development,Zoning District Amendment,or Site Plan Review approved in connection with this Agreement,thus restoring the status of the Property before the Development Agreement and all approvals listed above were approved. V. Provisions of this Agreement shall be binding upon and enforceable against the Property and the Owners, their successors and assigns of the Property. VI. The Developer hereby irrevocably nominates, constitutes, and appoints and designates the City as its attorney-in-fact for the sole purpose and right to amend Exhibit A hereto to identify the legal description of the Property after platting thereof. VII. Developer represents that it has marketable fee title to the Property. With respect to any interest in all portions of the Property which Developer is required, pursuant to this Agreement, to dedicate or convey to the City(the "Dedicated Property"), Developer represents and warrants as follows now and at the time of dedication or conveyance: • A. That Developer has marketable fee title free and clear of all mortgages, liens, and other encumbrances. Prior to final plat approval,Developer shall provide to the City a current title insurance policy insuring such a condition of title. 31 B. That Developer has not used, employed, deposited, stored, disposed of, placed or otherwise allowed to come in or on the Dedicated Property,any hazardous substance, hazardous waste, pollutant, or contaminant, including, b ut not limited t o, t hose defined in or pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 9601, et. seq.,or Minn. Stat.,Sec. 115B.01,et. seq. (such substances, wastes,pollutants, and contaminants hereafter referred to as "Hazardous Substances"); C. That Developer has not allowed any other person to use, employ, deposit, store, dispose of,place or otherwise have,in or on the Property,any Hazardous Substances. D. That no previous owner, operator or possessor of the Property deposited, stored, disposed of, placed or otherwise allowed in or on the Property any hazardous substances. Developer agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless City, its successors and assigns, against any and all loss, costs,damage and expense,including reasonable attorneys fees and costs that the City incurs because of the breach of any of the above representations or warranties and/or resulting from or due to the release or threatened release of Hazardous Substances which were, or are claimed or alleged to have been, used, employed, deposited, stored, disposed of, placed, or otherwise located or allowed to be located, in or on the Dedicated Property by Developer, its employees, agents, contractors or representatives. VIII. Developer acknowledges that Developer is familiar with the requirements of Chapter 11, Zoning,and Chapter 12, Subdivision Regulations,of the City Code and other applicable City ordinances affecting the development of the Property. Developer agrees to develop the Property in accordance with the requirements of all applicable City Code requirements and City Ordinances. IX. Prior to release of the final plat,Developer shall pay to City fees for the first three(3)years' street lighting on the public streets adjacent to the Property(including installation costs, if any, as determined by electrical power provider), engineering review, and street signs. X. Developer shall submit detailed water main, fire protection, and emergency vehicle access plans to the Fire Marshal for review and approval. Developer shall follow all the recommendations of the Fire Marshal. XI. Developer acknowledges that the rights of City performance of obligations of Developer contemplated in this agreement are special, unique, and of an extraordinary character, and that, in the event that Developer violates, or fails, or refuses to perform any covenant, condition, or provision m ade h erein, C ity m ay b e without a n a dequate remedy a t 1 aw. Developer agrees,therefore,that in the event Developer violates,fails,or refuses to perform any covenant, condition, or provision made herein, City may, at its option, institute and prosecute an action to specifically enforce such covenant, withhold building permits or rescind or revoke any approvals granted by the City. No remedy conferred in this agreement is intended to be exclusive and each shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to every other remedy. The election of anyone or more remedies shall not constitute a waiver of any other remedy. XII. Developer shall,prior to the commencement of any improvements,provide written notice to Time Warner Cable,a Minnesota Limited Partnership,the franchisee under the City's Cable Communication Ordinance(80-33)of the development contemplated by this Development Agreement. Notice shall be sent to Time Warner Cable, 801 Plymouth Avenue North, Minneapolis,Minnesota 55411. XIII. Prior to building permit issuance,all fees associated with the building permit shall be paid to the Inspections Department,including;Building permit fee,plan check fee,State surcharge, metro system access charge(SAC),City SAC and City water access charge(WAC),and park dedication. Contact Metropolitan Waste Control to determine the number of SAC units. XIV. Prior to building permit issuance, existing structures, walls and septic systems (if present) shall be properly abandoned or removed as required by City ordinance and all permits obtained through the Inspections Department. • XV. Prior to building permit issuance,provide two copies of an approved survey or site plan(1"= 200 scale)showing proposed building location and all proposed streets,with approved street names, lot arrangements and property lines. XVI. The City shall not issue any building permit for the construction of any building,structure,or improvement o n the Property until a 11 requirements I isted i n t his E xhibit C have b een satisfactorily addressed by Developer. XVII. No failure of the City to comply with any term,condition,covenant or agreement herein shall subject the City to liability for any claim for damages,costs or other financial or pecuniary charges. No execution on any claim, demand, cause of action or judgment shall be levied upon or collected from the general credit, general fund or taxing powers of the City. XVIII. 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. EXHIBIT D DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - VIKING COLLECTIONS PARKING EROSION CONTROL POLICY- AUGUST 1, 1997 1. All construction projects permitted by the City of Eden Prairie which results 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. The applicant must maintain all erosion control systems 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 biweekly 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 conditibns are unmanageable. Trackage or spillage of soil on a public street or highway must be cleaned by power sweepers within 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 plans, obtain the right-of-entry from the adjoining property owner, and implement the clean up and a 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. The applicant shall provide all traffic control and flagging required to protect the traveling public during the clean up operations. -3y 6. When an 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 this 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, concur 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: NOT TO BE SIGNED By: NOT TO BE SIGNED Owner's Signature Applicant's Signature DEVELOPMENT NAME: Lot: Block: OWNER INFORMATION OWNER(PRINT): ADDRESS City State Zip CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 03/23/04 SECTION: Consent Agenda DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Office of City Manager//Planning Scott H. Neal Hennepin Village Site C and D Rezoning VI I ,C • Michael D. Franzen Requested Action Move to: • Approve 2"`i Reading of the Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Change from R1-9.5 to RM-6.5 with waivers on 11.99 acres, Zoning; and • Adopt the Resolution for Site Plan Review on 11.99 acres; and • Approve the Supplement to Developer Agreement for Hennepin Village Site C and D; and • Approve and Authorize Issuance of a Grading Permit for Hennepin Village Site C and D, subject to release by the City Engineer upon determination that the final contract documents conform to plans stamp dated March 23, 2004, as approved by the City Council. Synopsis This is an amendment to the planned development and rezoning of 84,R1-9.5 single family lots to RM-6.5. Attachments 1. Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Amendment 2. Resolution for Site Plan Review 3. Development Agreement 36 HENNEPIN VILLAGE SITES C & D REZONING CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 6-2004-PUD-4-2004 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 R1-9.5 Zoning District and be placed in the Planned Unit Development RM-6.5 Zoning District 6-2004-PUD-4-2004 (hereinafter "PUD-4-2004-RM-6.5"). Section 3. The land shall be subject to the terms and conditions of that certain Developer's Agreement dated as of March 23, 2004, entered into between Pemtom Land Company, and the City of Eden Prairie, (hereinafter "Developer's Agreement"). The Developer's Agreement contains the terms and conditions of PUD-4-2004-RM-6.5, and are hereby made a part hereof Section 4. The City Council hereby makes the following findings: A. PUD-4-2004-RM-6.5 is not in conflict with the goals of the Comprehensive Guide Plan of the City. B. PUD-4-2004-RM-6.5 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-4-2004-RM-6.5 are justified by the design of the development described therein. D. PUD-4-2004-RM-6.5 is of sufficient size, composition, and arrangement that its construction, marketing, and operation are feasible as a complete unit without dependence upon any subsequent unit. Section 5. The proposal is hereby adopted and the land shall be, and hereby is removed from the R1-9.5 Zoning District, and placed in the RM-6.5 Zoning District and shall be included hereafter in the Planned Unit Development PUD-4-2004-RM-6.5 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 3rd day of February, 2004, 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 23rd day of March, 2004. ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie Sun Current on 3 EXHIBIT A PUD Legal Description — Hennepin Village Sites C & D Rezoning Blocks 5, 6, 7, and 8, and Outlots D, and E of Eagle Ridge at Hennepin Village One. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 6-2004-PUD-4-2004 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 11.99 acres of land located north of Highway 212, east of Spring Road, from the R1-9.5 Zoning District to the RM-6.5 Zoning District. Exhibit A, included with this Ordinance, gives the full legal description of this property. Effective Date: This Ordinance shall take effect upon publication. ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie Sun Current on (A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from City Clerk.) 210 HENNEPIN VILLAGE SITES C & D REZONING CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2004- A RESOLUTION GRANTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR HENNEPIN VILLAGE SITES C & D REZONING BY PEMTOM LAND COMPANY WHEREAS, Pemtom Land Company, has applied for Site Plan approval of Hennepin Village Sites C &D Rezoning to construct a 84 multiple family units, by an Ordinance approved by the City Council on March 23, 2004; and WHEREAS, the Community Planning Board reviewed said application at a public hearing at its December 8, 2004 meeting and recommended approval of said site plans; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed said application at a public hearing at its February 17, 2004 meeting. NOW, T HEREFORE, B E I T H EREBY RESOLVED B Y T HE C ITY C OUNCIL OF TIIE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, that site plan approval be granted to Hennepin Village Sites C & D Rezoning, based on the developer agreement between Pemtom Land Company and the City of Eden Prairie, reviewed and approved by the City Council on March 23, 2004. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 23rd day of March, 2004. Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk SUPPLEMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT SITE C AND D HENNEPIN VILLAGE THIS SUPPLEMENT TO AGREEMENT,made and entered into as of March 23, 2004,by HENNEPIN VILLAGE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a Minnesota limited partnership, hereinafter referred to as "Developer," and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City"; WHEREAS, Developer has applied for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 64.9 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review on 11.99 acres, Zoning District Change from R1-9.5 to RM-6.5 on 11.99 acres, and Site Plan Review on 11.99 acres, Exhibit A, the "Amended Property"); WHEREAS, the parties desire to amend the Development Agreement between HENNEPIN VILLAGE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a Minnesota limited partnership, and the City of Eden Prairie for HENNEPIN VILLAGE SITES C AND D, OFFICE, AND NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL, dated May 20, 2003 (hereinafter the "Development Agreement) for that portion of the Property legally described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof, and depicted as the "Amended Area" in the Plans, identified in Exhibit B. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the City adopting Resolution No.2004-29 for Planned Unit Development Concept Review, Ordinance 6-2004-PUD-4-2004 for Planned Unit Development District Review and Zoning District Change from R1-9.5 to RM-6.5, and Resolution No. for Site Plan Review,Developer agrees to develop the Property as amended as follows: 1. "Developer shall develop the Amended Area of the Property in conformance with the materials revised and stamp dated February 20, 2004, reviewed and approved by the City Council on February 20, 2004, and attached hereto as the Plans and identified in Exhibit B. 2. PUD WAIVERS GRANTED: The City hereby grants the following waivers to City Code requirements within the RM- 6.5 through the Planned Unit Development District Review for Site C and D and incorporates said waivers as part of PUD 6-2004-PUD-4- 2004. RM-6.5 Zoning District • Lot depth from 100 feet to 90 feet. • Front yard setback from 30 feet to 10 feet. • Rear yard setback from 20 feet to 10 feet. • Side yard setback from 10 feet minimum to 0 feet on one side. • Side yard setback from 10 feet minimum to 7 feet on one side. 3. Developer agrees to and reaffirms all of the terms and conditions and accepts the obligations of"Developer"under the Development Agreement except as inconsistent with or amended by this Supplement. LID Hennepin Village Limited Partnership CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE a Minnesota limited partnership By: The ' : . Land Company, a Minnes.to i,rpo :tion its- General P. e Nancy Tyra-Lukens,Mayor By: A �lu.� Scott H.Neal Mana er Its: Now _ City g STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ,2004,by Nancy Tyra-Lukens and Scott H. Neal,respectively the Mayor and the City Manager of the City of Eden Prairie, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of said corporation. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) n,, The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this L{ ,day of /�" ar , 2004,by The Pemtom Land Company, a Minnesota corporation, the General Partner, of Hennepin Village Limited Partnershi , a Minnesota limited partnership,by DtpiY1 J S - ,its P i S i d , on behalf of the partnership. M a/t. irt,}(1- &-IL- Notary Pub MARGARET C. MILLER NOTARY PUBLIC-MINNESOTA MY COMMISSION •I�, EXPIRES JAN.31,2005 14 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION SITE C and D HENNEPIN VILLAGE Blocks 5, 6, 7, and 8, and Outlots D, and E of Eagle Ridge at Hennepin Village One. • �15 EXHIBIT B PLANS SITE C and D HENNEPIN VILLAGE Hennepin Village Plans Full Sized Plans: • Cover sheet revised site plan dated November 7, 2003,by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. • Proposed Land Use Plan Revised Village Homes dated November 7, 2003,by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. • Revised Site Plan dated November 7, 2003 by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. • Revised Preliminary Grading Plan dated November 7, 2003,by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. • Revised Preliminary Utility Plan dated November 7, 2003, by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. • Revised Landscape Plan dated November 7, 2003, by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. Reduced Plans: • Revised Village Home Streetscape color renderings, no date, by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. • Revised Village Home Streetscape - Mixed Use Layout color renderings, no date,by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. • Typical Village Home Collection Layout- Site C and D color renderings, no date, by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. • Historical Architectural References color renderings, no date, by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. • Village Home Collection color renderings, no date, by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. • Village Home Collection color renderings, no date, by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. • Proposed Land Use Plan color renderings dated February 4, 2004, by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 03/23/04 SECTION: Consent Agenda DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Office of City Manager/Planning ��--{{-- Scott H. Neal Micro Ear Technology Scott A. Kipp Requested Action Move to: • Approve 2nd Reading of the Ordinance for Planned Unit District Review with waivers and Zoning District Amendment within the I-5 and I-2 Zoning District on 35.55 acres; and • Adopt the Resolution for Site Plan Review on 11.21 acres; and • Approve the Development Agreement for Micro Ear Technology; and • Approve and Authorize Issuance of a Grading Permit for Micro Ear Technology, subject to release by the City Engineer upon determination that the final contract documents conform to plans stamp dated February 6, 2004, as approved by the City Council. Synopsis This is for a 30,280 square foot building addition. Attachments 1. Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Amendment 2. Resolution for Site Plan Review 3. Development Agreement MICRO EAR TECHNOLOGY CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 8-2004-PUD-6-2004 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING CERTAIN LAND WITHIN A ZONING DISTRICT, 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 amended within the I-5 and I-2 Zoning Districts 8-2004-PUD-6-2004 (hereinafter "PUD-6-2004-I-5, I-2). Section 3. The City Council hereby makes the following findings: A. PUD-6-2004-I-5, I-2 is not in conflict with the goals of the Comprehensive Guide Plan of the City. B. PUD-6-2004-I-5, I-2 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-6-2004-I-5, I-2 are justified by the design of the development described therein. D. PUD-6-2004-I-5, I-2 is of sufficient size, composition, and arrangement that its construction, marketing, and operation is feasible as a complete unit without dependence upon any subsequent unit. Section 4. The proposal is hereby adopted and the land shall be, and hereby is amended within the I-5 and I-2 Districts and shall be included hereafter in the Planned Unit Development 6-2004-1-5, 1-2, 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 5. 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 6. This Ordinance shall become effective from and after its passage and publication. FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 17th day of February, 2004, 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 23rd day of March, 2004. ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie Sun Current on L19 EXHIBIT A PUD Legal Description — Micro Ear Technology Lot 1, Block 1, Research Addition, Hennepin County, MN. Lot 2, Block 1, Research Second Addition, Hennepin County, MN. Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Claredon Park, Hennepin County, MN. And, That part of the North 10 acres of the North East 1/4 of the South East 1/4 of Section 1, Township 116, Range 22, except roads,which lies Westerly of a line parallel with and 40.0 feet Westerly of the following described line; beginning at the North East Corner of Section 1, Township 116, Range 22; thence South 87 degrees 24 minutes 02 seconds East a distance of 88.5 feet; thence South 00 degrees 45 minutes 42 seconds East a distance of 2750.28 feet; thence South 89 degrees 14 minutes 18 seconds West a distance of 136.0 feet to the actual point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South 00 degrees 45 minutes 42 seconds East a distance of 373.78 feet; thence Southeasterly along a tangential curve to the left, said curve having a radius of 2864.79 feet(delta angle 17 degrees 27 minutes 15 seconds) a distance of 872.71 feet and there terminating. For the purpose of this description the East line of the North East 1/4 of said Section 1, shall be designated as having an assumed bearing of North 04 degrees 19 minutes 05 seconds West. Hennepin County,MN. MICRO EAR TECHNOLOGY CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 8-2004-PUD-6-2004 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING THE ZONING OF CERTAIN LAND WITHIN ONE 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 amendment of the zoning of land located at 6426 Flying Cloud Drive within the I-5 and I-2 Zoning Districts. 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 Sun Current on the (A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from City Clerk.) 51 MICRO EAR TECHNOLOGY CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2004- A RESOLUTION GRANTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR MICRO EAR TECHNOLOGY BY MICRO EAR TECHNOLOGY, INC. WHEREAS, Micro Ear Technology, Inc., has applied for Site Plan approval of Micro Ear Technology to construct a 30,280 square foot building addition, by an Ordinance approved by the City Council on March 23, 2004; and WHEREAS, the Community Planning Board reviewed said application at a public hearing at its January 26,2004 meeting and recommended approval of said site plans; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed said application at a public hearing at its February 17, 2004 meeting. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, that site plan approval be granted to Micro Ear Technology, Inc., based on the development agreement between Micro Ear Technology, Inc., and the City of Eden Prairie, reviewed and approved by the City Council on March 23, 2004. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 23'd day of March, 2004. Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Micro Ear Technology THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ("Agreement")is entered into as of March 23,2004,by Micro Ear Technology Inc.,a Minnesota corporation,hereinafter referred to as"Developer,"its successors and assigns,and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City": WITNESSETH: WHEREAS,Developer has applied to City for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 35.55 acres,Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 35.55 acres,Zoning District Amendment within the I-5 and I-2 Zoning District on 35.55 acres, and Site Plan Review on 11.21, legally described on Exhibit A(the "Property"); NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the City adopting Resolution No. 2004-32 for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment, Ordinance No. for Planned Unit Development District Review and Zoning District Amendment within the I-5 and I-2 Zoning District on 35.55 acres, and Resolution No. for Site Plan Review, Developer agrees to construct, develop and maintain the Property as follows: 1. PLANS: Developer shall develop the Property in conformance with the materials revised and stamp dated February 6, 2004,reviewed and approved by the City Council on February 17,2004, (hereinafter the"Plans")and identified on Exhibit B,subject to such changes and modifications as provided herein. 2. EXHIBIT C: Developer agrees to the terms, covenants, agreements, and conditions set forth in Exhibit C. 3. DEVELOPER'S RESPONSIBILITY FOR CODE VIOLATIONS: In the event of a violation of City Code relating to use of the Land construction thereon or failure to fulfill an obligation imposed upon the Developer pursuant to this Agreement, City shall give 24 hour notice of such violation in order to allow a cure of such violation;provided however, City need not issue a building or occupancy permit for construction or occupancy on the Land while such a violation is continuing, unless waived by City. The existence of a violation of City Code or the failure to perform or fulfill an obligation required by this Agreement shall be determined solely and conclusively by the City Manager of the City or a designee. 4. DEVELOPER'S RESPONSIBILITY FOR ITS CONTRACTORS: Developer shall release,defend and indemnify City,its elected and appointed officials,employees and agents from and against any and all claims, demands, lawsuits, complaints, loss, costs (including attorneys' fees), damages and injunctions relating to any acts, failures to act, errors, omissions of Developer or Developer's consultants,contractors,subcontractors,suppliers and agents. Developer shall not be released from its responsibilities to release, defend and indemnify because of any inspection, review or approval by City. • 5. EXTERIOR MATERIALS: Prior to building permit issuance,Developer shall submit to the City Planner, and receive the City Planner's written approval of a plan depicting exterior materials and colors to be used on the buildings on the Property. Prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property, Developer shall complete implementation of the approved exterior materials and colors plan in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C, attached hereto. 6. GRADING, DRAINAGE,AND EROSION CONTROL PLANS: A. FINAL GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN: Developer agree that the grading and drainage plan contained in the Plans may require revision based on review by the City Engineer of the final construction documents which include a construction grading and drainage plan. Prior to the release of a land alteration permit for the Property,Developer shall submit and obtain the City Engineer's written approval of the construction grading and drainage plan for the Property. The construction grading and drainage plan shall include all wetland, wetland buffer strips, wetland buffer monument locations, water quality ponds, storm water detention areas and other items required by the application for and release of a land alteration permit.All design calculations for storm water quality and quantity together with a drainage area map shall be submitted with the final grading and drainage plan. Prior to release of the grading bond, Developer shall certify to the City that the water quality pond conforms to the final grading plan. 5� Developer shall employ the design professional who prepared the construction grading plan.The design professional shall monitor construction for conformance to the approved construction grading plan and City erosion control policy. The design professional shall provide a final report to the City certifying completion of the grading in conformance the approved construction grading plan and City erosion control policy. B. EROSION CONTROL PLAN: Prior to issuance of a. land alteration permit, Developer s hall submit t o the City Engineer and obtain City Engineer's written approval of an erosion control plan for the Property. The erosion control plan shall include all boundary erosion control features,temporary stockpile locations and turf restoration procedures: All site grading operations shall conform to the City's Erosion Control Policy labeled Exhibit D, attached hereto and made a part hereof. Prior to release of the grading bond,Developer shall complete implementation of the approved plan. Developer shall remove any sediment that accumulates in the existing and/or proposed sedimentation pond during construction. Upon request by the City, Developer shall provide preconstruction and post constriction surveys for evaluation by City. 7. LANDSCAPE PLAN: Prior to building permit issuance,the Developer shall submit to the City Planner and receive the City Planner's written approval of a final landscape plan for the Property depicting a total o f 2 4 c aliper inches. T he approved 1 andscape p lan shall be consistent with the quantity,type,and size of plant materials shown on the landscape plan on the Plans. Developer shall furnish to the City Planner and receive the City Planner's approval of a landscape bond equal to 150% of the cost of said improvements as required by City Code. Prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property, Developer shall complete implementation of the approved landscape plan in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C. 8. PROOF OF PARKING SPACES: Developer and City acknowledge that the 24 proof of parking spaces proposed for the Property, depicted in the Plans,.are not required to be constructed at this time. At such time as the City Manager,in his or her sole discretion,determines that it is necessary for all or a portion of the proof of parking spaces to be constructed in order to accommodate the use, the City Manager shall notify the Developer in writing of the need to construct additional proof of parking spaces. This notification shall include the number,location and timetable for construction of the additional proof-of-parking spaces.Developer shall comply with all requirements contained in the City Manager's notification. 9. PUD WAIVERS GRANTED: The city hereby grants the following waivers to City Code requirements within the I-5 Zoning District through the Planned Unit Development District Review for the Property and incorporates said waivers as part of PUD A. Front yard parking setback waiver from 75 feet to 50 feet for 15 existing parking stalls along Flying Cloud Drive. 10. SIGNS: Developer agrees that for each sign which requires a permit by Eden Prairie City Code,Section 11.70,Developer shall file with the City Planner and receive the City Planner's written approval of an application for a sign permit. The application shall include a complete description of the sign and a sketch showing the size,location,the manner of construction, and other such information as necessary to inform the City of the kind, s ize,material construction,and location of any such sign,consistent with the sign.plan shown on the Plans and in accordance with the requirements of City Code, Section 11.70, Subdivision 5a. 11. SITE LIGHTING: Prior to building permit issuance, Developer shall submit to the City Planner and receive the City Planner's written approval of a plan for site lighting on the Property. All pole lighting shall consist of downcast shoebox fixtures not to exceed 20 feet in height. Developer shall complete implementation of the approved lighting plan prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property. 12. TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT PLAN: Developer shall implement the Travel Demand Management(TDM)Plan at the site to help reduce traffic congestion according to the attached plan shown as Exhibit E. Prior to issuance of the building permit for the Property, Developer shall furnish to the Traffic Engineer and receive the Traffic Engineer's approval of a TDM performance bond, cash escrow, letter of credit with a corporation approved by the City Manager or other guarantee acceptable to the City Manager equal to 100% of the cost ($60,000) of implementing the first two (2) years of the TDM Plan. The Developer shall initiate implementation of the T DM P lan, including active m arketing t o its employees and a 11 building tenants and their employees, 1 month after a building permit has been issued. The bond, cash escrow, letter of credit or other guarantee will be reduced to the Developer on a "draw-down" basis, in the following manner: A. The City will consider reduction or release of the performance bond,cash escrow,letter of credit or other guarantee at the following times: - Upon completion of items associated with plan start up. - After 1 calendar year of TDM plan implementation - After 2 calendar years of TDM plan implementation and completion of the plan evaluation. B. To request a reduction or release of the performance bond,cash escrow,letter of credit or other guarantee the Developer shall submit to the Traffic Engineer a letter requesting a reduction and a summary of the TDM activities completed to date. A summary of the required information can be obtained for the Traffic Engineer upon request. C. The City shall have 30 business days to review requests for reduction or release of the performance bond,cash escrow,letter of credit or other guarantee and provide indication of approval or objection to any part of the request. • 7- IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties to this Agreement have caused these presents to be executed as of the day and year aforesaid. DEVELOPER CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE Micro Ear Technolog ., a Minnesota corporation By By Its "-�5- Nancy Tyra-Lukens Its Mayor By By Its Scott H. Neal Its City Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ,2004, by Nancy Tyra-Lukens and Scott H.Neal,respectively the Mayor and the City Manager of the City of Eden Prairie, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of said corporation. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this )/11 day of M AR 2004,by Ror►'►E C Ru i'cKAthe , of Micro Ear Technology Inc., a Minnesota corporation, on behalf of the corporation. JIILIE A.MILLER aPubl' w NOTARY PUBLIC.MIN21. '' + MY COMMISSION EXPIRES *;w;.�' JANUARY 31.2005 5 EXHIBIT A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - MICRO EAR TECHNOLOGY Legal Description Lot 1, Block 1, Research Addition,Hennepin County,MN. Lot 2, Block 1, Research Second Addition, Hennepin County, MN. Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Claredon Park, Hennepin County, MN. And, That part of the North 10 acres of the North East 1/4 of the South East 1/4 of Section 1, Township 116, Range 22, except roads, which lies Westerly of a line parallel with and 40.0 feet Westerly of the following described line; beginning at the North East Corner of Section 1, Township 116, Range 22; thence South 87 degrees 24 minutes 02 seconds East a distance of 88.5 feet; thence South 00 degrees 45 minutes 42 seconds East a distance of 2750.28 feet; thence South 89 degrees 14 minutes 18 seconds West a distance of 136.0 feet to the actual point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South 00 degrees 45 minutes 42 seconds East a distance of 373.78 feet; thence Southeasterly along a tangential curve to the left, said curve having a radius of 2864.79 feet(delta angle 17 degrees 27 minutes 15 seconds) a distance of 872.71 feet and there terminating. For the purpose of this description the East line of the North East 1/4 of said Section 1, shall be designated as having an assumed bearing of North 04 degrees 19 minutes 05 seconds West. Hennepin County, MN. 5c( EXHIBIT B DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - MICRO EAR TECHNOLOGY LIST OF MATERIALS 1. Title Sheet dated 2/06/04 by RLK-Kuusisto, Ltd. 2. Existing PUD Plan dated 2/06/04 by RLK-Kuusisto, Ltd. 3. Proposed PUD Plan dated 2/06/04 by RLK-Kuusisto, Ltd. 4. Existing Conditions dated 2/06/04 by RLK-Kuusisto, Ltd. 5. Preliminary Removals Plan dated 2/06/04 by RLK-Kuusisto, Ltd. 6. Preliminary Site Plan dated 2/06/04 by RLK-Kuusisto, Ltd. 7. Preliminary Grading and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan slated 2/06/04 by RLK- Kuusisto, Ltd. 8. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Details dated 2/06/04 by RLK-Kuusisto, Ltd. 9. Preliminary Lighting Plan dated 2/06/04 by RLK-Kuusisto, Ltd. 10. Landscape Plan dated 2/05/04 by Krech, O'Brien, Mueller & Wass, Inc. 11. Overall Floor Plan dated 2/05/04 by Krech, O'Brien, Mueller & Wass, Inc. 12. Demolition Plan dated 2/05/04 by Krech, O'Brien, Mueller & Wass, Inc. 13.Exterior Elevations dated 2/05/04 by Krech, O'Brien, Mueller & Wass, Inc. CO EXHIBIT C DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - MICRO EAR TECHNOLOGY 1. Prior to release of any building permit, Developer shall submit to the City Engineer for approval two copies of a development plan(1"=100' scale)showing existing and proposed contours,proposed streets,and lot arrangements and size,minimum floor elevations on each lot,preliminary alignment and grades for sanitary sewer,water main,and storm sewer, 100- year flood plain contours, ponding areas, tributary areas to catch basins, arrows showing direction of storm water flow on all lots,location of walks,trails, and any property deeded to the City. II. Developer shall submit detailed construction and storm sewer plans to the Watershed District for review and approval. Developer shall follow all rules and recommendations of said Watershed District. III. Developer shall pay cash park fees as to all of the Property required by City Code in effect as of the date of the issuance of each building permit for construction on the Property. IV. If Developer fails to proceed in accordance with this Agreement within twenty-four (24) months of the date hereof,Developer,for itself,its successors, and assigns,shall not oppose the City's reconsideration and rescission of any Planned Unit Development,Rezoning, and Site Plan Review approved in connection with this Agreement, thus restoring the status of the Property before the Development Agreement and all approvals listed above were approved. V. Provisions of this Agreement shall be binding upon and enforceable against the Property and the Owners, their successors and assigns of the Property. VI. The Developer hereby irrevocably nominates, constitutes, and appoints and designates the City as its attorney-in-fact for the sole purpose and right to amend Exhibit A hereto to identify the legal description of the Property after platting thereof. VII. Developer represents that it has marketable fee title to the Property. With respect to any interest in all portions of the Property which Developer is required, pursuant to this Agreement, to dedicate or convey to the City (the "Dedicated Property"), Developer represents and warrants as follows now and at the time of dedication or conveyance: A. That Developer has marketable fee title free and clear of all mortgages, liens, and other encumbrances. Prior to final plat approval,Developer shall provide to the City 61 a current title insurance policy insuring such a condition of title. B. That Developer has not used, employed, deposited, stored, disposed of, placed or otherwise allowed to come in or on the Dedicated Property,any hazardous substance, hazardous waste, pollutant, or contaminant, i ncluding, b ut n of 1 imited t o, t hose defined in or pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 9601, et. seq.,or Minn. Stat., Sec. 115B.01,et. seq. (such substances, wastes,pollutants, and contaminants hereafter referred to as "Hazardous Substances"); C. That Developer has not allowed any other person to use, employ, deposit, store, dispose of,place or otherwise have,in or on the Property,arty Hazardous Substances. D. That no previous owner, operator or possessor of the Property deposited, stored, disposed of, placed or otherwise allowed in or on the Property any hazardous substances. Developer agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless City, its successors and assigns, against any and all loss,costs,damage and expense,including reasonable attorneys fees and costs that the City incurs because of the breach of any of the above representations or warranties and/or resulting from or due to the release or threatened release of Hazardous Substances which were, or are claimed or alleged to have been, used, employed, deposited, stored, disposed of, placed, or otherwise located or allowed to be located, in or on the Dedicated Property by Developer, its employees, agents, contractors or representatives. VIII. Developer acknowledges that Developer is familiar with the requirements of Chapter 11, Zoning,and Chapter 12,Subdivision Regulations,of the City Code and other applicable City ordinances affecting the development of the Property. Developer agrees to develop the Property in accordance with the requirements of all applicable City Code requirements and City Ordinances. IX. Prior to release of the final plat,Developer shall pay to City fees for the first three(3)years' street lighting on the public streets adjacent to the Property(including installation costs, if any, as determined by electrical power provider), engineering review, and street signs. X. Developer shall submit detailed water main, fire protection, and emergency vehicle access plans to the Fire Marshal for review and approval. Developer shall follow all the recommendations of the Fire Marshal. XI. Developer acknowledges that the rights of City performance of obligations of Developer contemplated in this agreement are special, unique, and of an extraordinary character, and that, in the event that Developer violates, or fails, or refuses to perform any covenant, condition, or provision m ade herein, C ity may b e w ithout an adequate remedy a t 1 aw. Developer agrees,therefore,that in the event Developer violates,fails,or refuses to perform any covenant, condition, or provision made herein, City may, at its option, institute and r�. prosecute an action to specifically enforce such covenant, withhold building permits or rescind or revoke any approvals granted by the City. No remedy conferred in this agreement is intended to be exclusive and each shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to every other remedy. The election of anyone or more remedies shall not constitute a waiver of any other remedy. XII. Developer shall,prior to the commencement of any improvements,provide written notice to Time Warner Cable,a Minnesota Limited Partnership,the franchisee under the City's Cable Communication Ordinance(80-33)of the development contemplated by this Development Agreement. Notice shall be sent to Time Warner Cable, 801 Plymouth Avenue North, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55411. XIII. Prior to building permit issuance,all fees associated with the building permit shall be paid to the Inspections Department,including;Building permit fee,plan check fee,State surcharge, metro system access charge(SAC),City SAC and City water access charge(WAC),and park dedication. Contact Metropolitan Waste Control to determine the number of SAC units. XIV. Prior to building permit issuance,provide two copies of an approved survey or site plan(1"= 200 scale)showing proposed building location and all proposed streets,with approved street names, lot arrangements and property lines. XV. The City shall not issue any building permit for the construction of any building,structure,or improvement o n the P roperty until a 11 requirements 1 isted i n t his E xhibit C have b een satisfactorily addressed by Developer. XVI No failure of the City to comply with any term,condition,covenant or agreement herein shall subject the City to liability for any claim for damages, costs or other financial or pecuniary charges. No execution on any claim, demand, cause of action or judgment shall be levied upon or collected from the general credit, general fund or taxing powers of the City. XVII. 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 V2 by 6 inch sign or decal reading "Scenic/Conservation Easement Boundary,City of Eden Prairie",will be affixed to the top of the post. EXHIBIT D DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - MICRO EAR TECHNOLOGY EROSION CONTROL POLICY-AUGUST 1, 1997 1. All construction projects permitted by the City of Eden Prairie which results 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. The applicant must maintain all erosion control systems 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 biweekly 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 soil on a public street or highway must be cleaned by power sweepers within 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 plans, obtain the right-of-entry from the adjoining property owner, and implement the clean up and a 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. The applicant shall provide all traffic control and flagging required to protect the traveling public during the clean up operations. 6. When an 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 this 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 maybe 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, concur 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: NOT TO BE SIGNED By: NOT TO BE SIGNED Owner's Signature Applicant's Signature DEVELOPMENT-NAME: Lot: Block: OWNER INFORMATION OWNER(PRINT): ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP EXHIBIT E DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT — MICRO EAR TECHNOLOGY Starkey Laboratories Proposed Transportation Demand Management Plan I. Starkey Laboratories has proposed the following Transportation Demand Management Plan to support our employees in the use of alternative modes of transportation. Starkey Labs has set a goal of a 15%reduction in single vehicle trips to our office buildings. A. The Transportation Demand Management Plan is designated for the Starkey Labs campus located at 6600 Washington Ave.,6700 Washington Ave.,9505 Hamilton Road and the new building purchased just to the north of the 6600 building. B. The 6700 building is approximately 92,000 sq. feet,the 6600 building is approximately 80,000 sq. feet,the new building just to the north of the 6600 building is approximately 90,000 sq.feet and the Hamilton building is approximately 40,000 sq. feet.Each building is used for manufacturing and office work. C. Approximately 1220 employees will work at this campus. (Please see Appendix A for more details) D. Please see Appendix A for the anticipated number of daily vehicle trips • and their arrival and departure times E. Our campus has approximately 1,200 parking spots available. II. Starkey Laboratories has set a goal of a 15%reduction in single vehicle trips to our office buildings by encouraging alternative modes of transportation. A. We will strive to reduce the number of peak period trips. This includes encouraging limited delivery times especially during peak hours. The Shipping and Receiving,Materials Management and Cafeteria departments will strive to reduce peak hour deliveries. B. . The focus of the plan will be on communicating commuting options and benefits to employees and encouraging them to use these options. C. Our goal is to reduce single vehicle trips to our facility by 15%. III. TDM Plan/Program A. Starkey Labs(the tenant)is responsible for each aspect of this plan. B. TDM Measures 1. Starkey Labs has designated an employee as the"Employee Transportation Coordinator"who will continue to act as a liaison with Metro Commuter services. 2. Carpoolivanpool information will be given to employees in several formats. Starkey will also subsidize empty vanpool seats and hold employee zip code meetings to assist employees with locating others in their area they could carpool with. Starkey Labs will continue to provide information about the Guaranteed Ride Home program to all employees. 3. Bus information will be provided to employees in several formats. Starkey will also make discounted bus passes available for purchase and hold monthly raffles for those that currently participate. 4. Lockers and shower facilities will be provided for those who bicycle to work.Parking spaces will be identified for motorcycles and bicycles along with monthly raffles for those who participate. Starkey Labs will continue to promote the President's Challenge to encourage bicycle usage. 5. Starkey Labs will continue to participate in its local TMA. 6. Employees will receive information on their commuting options as new hires and Starkey will continue to display commuter information in each cafeteria location. This will include information on transit schedules,rideshare applications and the Guaranteed Ride Home program. Starkey will also host a commuter fair annually. 7. Starkey Labs will continue to review flexible and staggered work schedules when appropriate. (Appendix A) 8. Starkey Labs will continue to review telecommuting options when appropriate. 9. Intelligent Transportation Systems- Starkey Labs will develop an Intranet site to communicate traffic and commuter news and special commuter events. All employees will have access to the Intranet through kiosks located in each building. C. Support Services 1. Starkey Labs will work with Southwest Metro Transit to communicate bus information to employees 2. Starkey Labs will work closely with Metro Commuter Services to provide communication and incentives for employees. 3. By partnering with Metro Commuter Services, Starkey Labs will continue to promote alternative modes of transportation during a designated month each year. This will include a display with educational materials concerning alternative modes of transportation and a commuter fair to assist employees with finding the most efficient and cost-effective alternative modes of transportation. 6p1- • IV. . TDM Plan/Program A. Starkey Labs will allocate$30,000 annually towards the TDM Plan. B. Transportation Coordinator salary-the Transportation coordinator spends approximately 10% of her time on work related to commuting options.The budget will include$3,000 for this purpose. C. Starkey will include$1,000 for start-up costs including the cost of allocating preferential parking spots and purchasing bike racks. D. Starkey Labs will allocate$5,000 per year for the cost of promotional • materials. E. Starkey Labs will allocate the remaining$21,000 on transit incentives that will include discounted bus passes,monthly drawings for commuters(which will include a bicycle,free lunches, free bus passes etc.), a monthly monetary incentive for commuters, and subsidizing employees vanpool costs. V. Evaluation A. Starkey Labs will partner with Metro Commuter Services to conduct an initial employee survey to analyze employees commuting needs. B. Starkey Labs will also conduct a follow-up survey to evaluate the results of commuter promotional activities. C. Starkey will modify the TDM Plan as necessary. Appendix-A Starkey Laboratories Traffic Flow Analysis Location #of Employees Work Schedule Research Building(projected) 25 6:00am-2:30pm 179 7:00am-3:30pm 109 8:00am-4:30pm 18 9:00am-5:30pm 6700 Washington Avenue 29 6:00am-2:30pm 331 7:O0am-3:30pm 139 ' 8:O0am-4:30pm 76 9:00am-5:30pm 6600 Washington Avenue 29 5:00am-1:30pm 25 6:00am-2:30pm 58 7:OOam 3:30pm 113 8:00am-4:30pm 51 9:00am-5:30pm 14 2:30pm-11:00pm Hamilton Avenue 18 7:00am-3:30pm 6 8:00am-4:30pm CAMPUS TOTALS 29 5:O0am-1:30pm 79 6:00am-2:30pm 586 7:OOam-3:30pm 367 8:OOam-4:30pm 145 9:OOam-5:30pm 14 2:30pm-11:OOpm CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 03/23/04 SECTION: Consent Agenda DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Office of City Manager/Planning Scott H. Neal LaMettry Tire Shop Scott A. Kipp Requested Action Move to: • Approve 2"d Reading of the Ordinance for Planned Unit District Review with waivers and Zoning District Change from Rural to Commercial Regional Service Zoning District on 1.22 acres; and • Adopt the Resolution for Site Plan Review on 1.22 acres; and • Approve the Development Agreement for LaMettry Tire Shop; and • Approve and Authorize Issuance of a Grading Permit for LaMettry Tire Shop, subject to release by the City Engineer upon determination that the final contract documents confoini to plans stamp dated January 28, 2004, as approved by the City Council. Synopsis This is for a 10,888 square foot retail tire shop located east of Plaza Drive, west of I-494. Attachments 1. Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Amendment 2. Resolution for Site Plan Review 3. Development Agreement LAMETTRY TIRE SHOP CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 9-2004-PUD-7-2004 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 TIIE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1. That the land which is the subject of this Ordinance (hereinafter, the "land") is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof. Section 2. That action was duly initiated proposing that the land be removed from the Rural Zoning District and be placed in the Planned Unit Development Commercial Regional Service Zoning District 9-2004-PUD-7-2004 (hereinafter "PUD-7-2004-C-Reg-Ser"). Section 3. The land shall be subject to the terms and conditions of that certain Development Agreement dated as of March 23, 2004, entered into between Richard LaMettry, and the City of Eden Prairie, (hereinafter "Development Agreement"). The Development Agreement contains the terms and conditions of PUD-7-2004-C-Reg-Ser, and are hereby made a part hereof. Section 4. The City Council hereby makes the following findings: A. PUD-7-2004-C-Reg-Ser is not i n conflict with the goals o f t he Comprehensive Guide Plan of the City. B. PUD-7-2004-C-Reg-Ser 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-7-2004-C-Reg-Ser are justified by the design of the development described therein. D. PUD-7-2004-C-Reg-Ser is of sufficient size, composition, and arrangement that its construction, marketing, and operation are feasible as a complete unit without dependence upon any subsequent unit. Section 5. The proposal is hereby adopted and the land shall be, and hereby is removed from the Rural Zoning District, and placed in the Commercial Regional Service Zoning � I District and shall be included hereafter in the Planned Unit Development PUD-7-2004-C-Reg- Ser and the legal descriptions of land in each district referred to in City C ode 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 17th d ay o f F ebruary, 2 004, and finally r ead and a dopted and ordered p ublished i n summary form as attached hereto at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the 23rd day of March, 2004. ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Cleric Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie Sun Current on EXHIBIT A PUD Legal Description — LaMettry Tire Shop Outlot A, Menard 3rd Addition, Hennepin County, MN. 73 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 9-2004-PUD-7-2004 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 1.22 acres of land located east of Plaza Drive, west of I-494, from the Rural Zoning District to the Commercial Regional Service 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 Sun Current on (A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from City Clerk.) 71-I LAMETTRY TIRE SHOP CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2004- A RESOLUTION GRANTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR LAMETTRY TIRE SHOP BY RICHARD LAMETTRY WHEREAS, Richard LaMettry, has applied for Site Plan approval of LaMettry Tire Shop to construct a 10,888 square foot tire shop, by an Ordinance approved by the City Council on March 23, 2004; and WHEREAS, the Community Planning Board reviewed said application at a public hearing at its January 12, 2004 meeting and recommended approval of said site plans; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed said application at a public hearing at its February 17, 2004 meeting. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, that site plan approval be granted to LaMettry Tire Shop based on the development agreement between Richard LaMettry and the City of Eden Prairie, reviewed and approved by the City Council on March 23, 2004. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 23rd day of March, 2004. Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk -75 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT LaMettry Tire Shop --- THIS-DEVELOPMENT—AGREEMENT-( Agreement--')-is-enter-ed into-as-of March 23,2004-by-Richard- LaMettry,an individual,hereinafter referred to as"Developer,"its successors and assigns,and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City": WITNESSETH: WHEREAS,Developer has applied to City for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 1.22 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 1.22 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural to Commercial Regional Service Zoning District on 1.22 acres,and Site Plan Review on 1.22 acres,legally described on Exhibit A(the "Property"); NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the City adopting Resolution No. 2004-33 for Planned Unit Development Concept Review, Ordinance No. for Planned Unit Development District Review and Zoning.District Change from Rural to Commercial Regional Service on 1.22 acres,and Resolution No. for Site Plan Review,Developer agrees to construct, develop and maintain the Property as follows: 1. PLANS: Developer shall develop the Property in conformance with the materials revised and stamp dated January 28,2004,reviewed and approved by the City Council on February 17, 2004,(hereinafter the"Plans")and identified on Exhibit B,subject to such changes and modifications as provided herein. 2. EXHIBIT C: Developer agrees to the terms, covenants, agreements, and conditions set forth in Exhibit C. 3. DEVELOPER'S RESPONSIBILITY FOR CODE VIOLATIONS: In the event of a violation of City Code relating to use of the Land construction thereon or failure to fulfill an obligation imposed upon the Developer pursuant to this Agreement, City shall give 24 hour notice of such violation in order to allow a cure of such violation, provided however, City need not issue a building or occupancy permit for construction or occupancy on the Land while such a violation is continuing, unless waived by City. The existence of a violation of City Code or the failure to perform or fulfill an obligation required by this Agreement shall be determined solely and conclusively by the City Manager of the City or a designee. 4. DEVELOPER'S RESPONSIBILITY FOR ITS CONTRACTORS: Developer shall release,defend and indemnify City,its elected and appointed officials,employees and agents from and against any and all claims, demands, lawsuits, complaints, loss, costs (including attorneys' fees), damages and injunctions relating to any acts, failures to act, errors, omissions of Developer or Developer's consultants,contractors,subcontractors,suppliers and agents. Developer shall not be released from its responsibilities to release, defend and indemnify because of any inspection, review or approval by City. EXTERIOR MATERIALS: Prior to building permit issuance,Developer shall submit to the City Planner,and receive the City Planner's written approval of a plan depicting exterior materials and colors to be used on the buildings on the Property. Prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property, Developer shall complete implementation of the approved exterior materials and colors plan in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C, attached hereto. 6. GRADING,DRAINAGE,AND EROSION CONTROL PLANS: A. FINAL GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN: Developer agree that the grading and drainage plan contained in the Plans may require revision based on review by the City Engineer of the final construction documents which include a construction grading and drainage plan. Prior to the release of a land alteration permit for the Property,Developer shall submit and obtain the City Engineer's written approval of the construction grading and drainage plan for the Property. The construction grading and drainage plan shall include all wetland, wetland buffer strips, wetland buffer monument locations, water quality ponds, storm water detention areas and other items required by the application for and release of a land alteration permit.All design calculations for storm water quality and quantity together with a drainage area map shall be submitted with the final grading and drainage plan. Prior to release of the grading bond, Developer shall certify to the City that the water quality pond conforms to the final grading plan. Developer shall employ the design professional who prepared the construction grading plan.The design professional shall monitor construction for conformance to the approved construction grading plan and City erosion control policy. The design professional shall provide a final report to the City certifying completion of the grading in conformance the approved construction grading plan and City erosion control policy. B. EROSION CONTROL PLAN: Prior to issuance of a land alteration permit, Developer s hall s ubmit t o the City Engineer and obtain City Engineer's written approval of an erosion control plan for the Property. The erosion control plan shall include all boundary erosion control features,temporary stockpile locations and turf restoration procedures: All site grading operations shall conform to the City's Erosion Control Policy labeled Exhibit D, attached hereto and made a part hereof. Prior to release of the grading bond,Developer shall complete implementation of the approved plan. Developer shall remove any sediment that accumulates in the existing and/or proposed sedimentation pond during construction. Upon request by the City, Developer shall provide preconstruction and post construction surveys for evaluation by City. 7. IRRIGATION PLAN: Developer shall submit to the City Planner and receive the City Planuaer's written approval of a,plan for irrigation of the landscaped areas on the Property. The irrigation plan shall be designed so that water is not directed on or over public trails and sidewalks. Developer shall complete implementation of the approved irrigation plan in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property. 8. LANDSCAPE PLAN: Prior to building permit issuance,the Developer shall submit to the City Planner and receive the City Planner's written approval of a final landscape plan for the Property consistent with the quantity, type, and size of plant materials shown on the landscape plan on the Plans. Developer shall furnish to the City Planner and receive the City Planner's approval of a landscape bond equal to 150% of the cost of said improvements as required by City Code. Prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property, Developer shall complete implementation of the approved landscape plan in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C. 9. MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT SCREENING: Developer shall submit to the City Planner, and receive the City Planner's written approval of a plan for screening of mechanical equipment on the Property. For purposes of this paragraph, "mechanical equipment" includes gas meters, electrical conduit, water meters, and standard heating,ventilating, and air-conditioning units. Security to guarantee construction of said screening shall be included with that provided for landscaping on the Property, in accordance with City Code -t) requirements. D eveloper s hall complete implementation o f t he approved plan prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property. If, after completion of construction of the mechanical equipment screening,it is determined by the City Planner,in his or her sole discretion,that the constructed screening does not meet the Code requirements to screen mechanical equipment from public streets and differing, adjacent land uses, then the City Planner shall notify Developer and Developer shall take corrective action to reconstruct the mechanical equipment screening in order to cure the deficiencies identified by the City Planner. Developer agrees that the City will not release the security provided until Developer completes all such corrective measures. 10. OUTSIDE STORAGE: Developer shall not permit on the Property any outside storage of inoperable automobiles, automobile parts, equipment, inventory or refuse. • 11. PUD WAIVERS GRANTED: The city hereby grants the following waivers to City Code requirements within the Commercial Regional Service Zoning District through the Planned Unit Development District Review for the Property and incorporates said waivers as part of PUD 1. A 20-foot wetland buffer and 0-foot structure setback for the easterly wetland. 2. A 5-foot structure setback for the northerly wetland. City code requires a 25-foot wetland buffer and 15-foot structure setback Prior to issuance of any building permit for the Property, Developer shall submit to the Environmental Coordinator,and receive the Environmental Coordinator's written approval of a wetland restoration planting plan for re-establishing wetland buffer areas to minimize the impact of this waiver. 12. SIDEWALK AND TRAIL CONSTRUCTION: Prior to issuance by City of any building permit on the Property, Developer shall submit to the Director of Parks and Recreation Services and obtain the Director's written approval of detailed plans for sidewalks and trails to be constructed on the Property. Developer shall c onvey a ccess e asements for s uch sidewallcs and trails in such locations as determined by the Director of Parks and Recreation Services. Sidewalks and trails shall be constructed in the following locations: A. A five-foot wide concrete sidewalk to be located along the north and east side of Plaza Drive adjacent to the Property as depicted in the Plans. Developer shall complete implementation of the approved plans in accordance with the terms of Exhibit C prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the P roperty. B onding i n accordance with City Code shall be required for sidewalk construction. 13. SIGNS: Developer agrees that for each sign which requires a permit by Eden Prairie City Code,Section 11.70,Developer shall file with the City Planner and receive the City Planner's written approval of an application for a sign permit. The application shall include a complete description of the sign and a sketch showing the size, location, the manner of construction, and other such information as necessary to inform the City of the k ind, s ize, m aterial construction, and location of any such sign,consistent with the sign plan shown on the Plans and in accordance with the requirements of City Code, Section 11.70, Subdivision 5a. 14. SITE LIGHTING: Prior to building permit issuance, Developer shall submit to the City Planner and receive the City Planner's written approval of a plan for site lighting on the Property. All pole and building lighting shall consist of downcast shoebox fixtures. Developer shall complete implementation of the approved lighting plan prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the Property. 15. TRASH: Developer agrees that all trash, trash receptacles and recycling bins shall at all times be located inside of the building as depicted on the Plans. 16. VACATION OF EXISTING SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT: Prior to the issuance of any building permit for the Property, the Developer shall submit to the City Engineer, written documentation that the existing sanitary sewer easement located on the Property has been vacated by the Metropolitan Council. 17. WETLAND PLAN: _____...._ Prior_to issuance of_the_buildingpermit for the.Property, Developer_shall submit to the Environmental Coordinator and receive the Environmental Coordinator's approval of a Wetland Plan. The approved W etland Plan s hall b e consistent with the materials and requirements shown on the Plans and as required by City Code. The Plan shall include the following elements. • A. Wetland Delineation and Wetland Buffer Strip Vegetation Evaluation: Developer shall submit to the City a Wetland Buffer Strip Evaluation Report("Buffer Report") and Wetland Delineation Report in accordance with the Wetland Plan and City code requirements prior to issuance of the building permit for the Property. If the Buffer Report identifies any unacceptable vegetation or other conditions, the wetland buffer strip shall be graded, treated, reseeded and/or replanted (thereon known as "Landscaping", or "Landscaped") by the Developer within 90 days of submission o f the Buffer Report. If Landscaping of the wetland buffer strip is required, the Developer shall submit a s igned s tatement by a qualified w etland consultant, as determined by the City Manager, stating that the wetland buffer strip vegetation complies with all City requirements within 30 days of completion of the Landscaping of the wetland buffer strip. B. Annual Wetland and Wetland Buffer Strip Evaluation: Prior to issuance of the building permit for the Property, Developer shall submit a signed contract with a qualified wetland consultant,as determined by the City Manager and/or designee,for preparation o fan Annual W etland and Wetland Buffer Strip Evaluation Report (Annual Buffer Report) that evaluates the condition of the wetland(s) and wetland buffer strip(s). The Annual Buffer Report shall provide both an action plan and ?CO proposed cost for correction of all problems identified within the wetland(s) and/or wetland buffer strip(s). The first Annual Buffer Report shall be submitted no later than November 1 of the calendar year in which construction of the wetland and/or wetland buffer strip is completed. Thereafter,this report shall be submitted annually until two full growing seasons following completion of the development have passed,at which point a final Annual Report shall be submitted. The final Annual Buffer Report shall be submitted two full growing seasons following completion of the development and shall evaluate the wetland(s) and wetland buffer strip(s) to determine if the wetland(s) and/or wetland buffer strip(s) remain in compliance with all City requirements. If any unacceptable conditions or vegetation are identified within the Annual Buffer Reports or final Annual Buffer Report, the Developer, shall correct the area(s) identified within 90 days of submission of the Annual Buffer Report. C. Conservation Easement: Prior to issuance of a building permit for the Property, Developer shall submit a Conservation Easement(Exhibit E)for review and written approval by the Environmental Coordinator, for the area delineated on the Plans. Prior_to_issulance of the building_permit for the Property, Developer shall submit evidence to the Environmental Coordinator that the approved Conservation Easement has been executed by the owners of the Property platted and has been filed in the Hennepin County Recorder's/Registrar of Titles' Office. D. Wetland Buffer Strip Monuments: Prior to issuance of the building permit for the Property,Developer shall install all wetland buffer strip monuments for the property. Wetland buffer strip monument locations shall be shown on the final grading plan and final p lat. T he p ost s hall b e a fiberglass reinforced composite post with a maximum size of 4 inch by 4 inch(4"x 4")that states"Wetland Buffer:No Mowing Allowed". The post shall be mounted to a height of a minimum of four feet above grade set at least 42 inches in the ground. The bottom of the post must be fitted with an anchor attachment that would expand upon attempted removal. Removal of the wetland buffer strip monuments is prohibited. E. Wetland Performance Bond: Prior to issuance of the building permit for the Property,Developer shall furnish to the Environmental Coordinator and receive the Environmental Coordinator's approval of 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 and/or Landscaping as depicted on the Plans and as required by City Code. Said performance bond,cash escrow, letter of credit or o ther guarantee s hall c over c osts a ssociated with the Wetland Plan during development and for two full growing seasons following completion of the development. 0I IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties to this Agreement have caused these presents to be executed as of the day and year aforesaid. EVELOPE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE • By.. chard LaM 'try Nancy Tyra-Lukens Its Mayor By Scott H. Neal Its City Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA ) • ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ,2004, _ ._ __ ______ hXNanc_y_T_yxa_Lulceils and Scott H.Neal,respectively the Mayor and the City Manager of the City of Eden Prairie, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of said corporation. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this Pikday o lC , 2004,by Richard LaMettry, an individual. ( ' : JANE E. HOVIND N Public k .v. -j. NOTARY PUBLIC•MiNNESOTA _,_ .: • My Commission Expires Jan,31,2005 Y ig • • (!c'. EXHIBIT A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - LAMETTRY TIRE SHOP Legal Description Outlot A,Menard 3rd Addition,Hennepin County,MN. U EXHIBIT B DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - LAMETTRY TIRE SHOP LIST OF MATERIALS 1. Cover Sheet dated 1/28/04 by Smuckler Architecture, Inc. 2. Site Plan dated 1/28/04 by Smuckler Architecture, Inc. 3. Floor Plans dated 1/28/04 by Smuckler Architecture, Inc. 4. Floor Plan dated 1/28/04 by Smuckler Architecture, Inc. 5. Exterior Elevations dated 1/28/04 by Smuckler Architecture, Inc. 6. Building Sections dated 1/28/04 by Smuckler Architecture, Inc. 7. Landscape Plan dated 1/28/04 by Smuckler Architecture,Inc. 8. Vicinity Exhibit dated 1/21/04 by HTPO, Inc. 9. Grading and Drainage Plan dated 1/21/04 by HTPO, Inc. 10. Utility Plan dated 1/21/04 by HTPO, Inc. 11. Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan dated 1/21/04 by HTPO, Inc. 12. Detail Sheet dated 1/21/04 by HTPO, Inc. 13. Detail Sheet dated 1/21/04 by HTPO, Inc. y EXHIBIT C DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - LAMETTRY TIRE SHOP I. Prior to release of any building permit, Developer shall submit to the City Engineer for approval two copies of a development plan (1" =100'scale) showing existing and proposed contours,proposed streets, and lot arrangements and size,minimum floor elevations on each lot,preliminary alignment and grades for sanitary sewer,water main, and storm sewer, 100- year flood plain contours, ponding areas, tributary areas to catch basins, arrows showing direction of storm water flow on all lots,location of walks,trails,and any property deeded to the City. • II. Developer shall submit detailed construction and storm sewer plans to the Watershed District for review and approval. Developer shall follow all rules and recommendations of said Watershed District. Ill. Developer shall pay cash park fees as to all of the Property required by City Code in effect as of the date of the issuance of each building permit for construction on the Property. -1-\-- --If-Devel-oper--fails-to--proceed-in-accordance-with-this-Agreement-within_twenty--four..(24)_._-_. months of the date hereof,Developer, for itself,its successors,and assigns,shall not oppose the City's reconsideration and rescission of any Planned Unit Development, Rezoning, or Site Plan Review approved in connection with this Agreement, thus restoring the status of the Property before the Development Agreement and all approvals listed above were approved. V. Provisions of this Agreement shall be binding upon and enforceable against the Property and the Owners, their successors and assigns of the Property. VI. The Developer hereby irrevocably nominates, constitutes, and appoints and designates the City as its attorney-in-fact for the sole purpose and right to amend Exhibit A hereto to identify the legal description of the Property after platting thereof. VII. Developer represents that it has marketable fee title to the Property. With respect to any interest in all portions of the Property which Developer is required, pursuant to this Agreement, to dedicate or convey to the City (the "Dedicated Property"), Developer represents and warrants as follows now and at the time of dedication or conveyance: A. That Developer has marketable fee title free and clear of all mortgages, liens, and other encumbrances. Prior to final plat approval,Developer shall provide to the City a current title insurance policy insuring such a condition of title. B. That Developer has not used, employed, deposited, stored, disposed of, placed or otherwise allowed to come in or on the Dedicated Property,any hazardous substance, hazardous waste, pollutant, or contaminant, including,b ut not 1 imited t o,t hose defined in or pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 9601, et. seq.,or Minn. Stat., Sec. 115B.01,et. seq. (such substances, wastes, pollutants, and contaminants hereafter referred to as "Hazardous Substances"); C. That Developer has not allowed any other person to use, employ, deposit, store, dispose of,place or otherwise have,in or on the Property,any Hazardous Substances. D. That no previous owner, operator or possessor of the Property deposited, stored, disposed of, placed or otherwise allowed in or on the Property any hazardous substances. • Developer agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless City,its successors and assigns, against any and all loss,costs, damage and expense, including reasonable attorneys fees and costs that the City incurs because of the breach of any of the above representations or warranties and/or resulting from or due to the release or threatened release of Hazardous Substances which were,or are claimed or alleged to have been,used, employed,deposited, stored, disposed of, placed, or otherwise located or allowed to be located, in or on the Dedicated Property by Developer, its employees, agents, contractors or representatives. VIII. Developer acknowledges that Developer is familiar with the requirements of Chapter 11, Zoning,and Chapter 12,Subdivision Regulations,of the City Code and other applicable City ordinances affecting the development of the Property. Developer agrees to develop the Property in accordance with the requirements of all applicable City Code requirements and City Ordinances. IX. Prior to release of the final plat,Developer shall pay to City fees for the first three(3)years' street lighting on the public streets adjacent to the Property(including installation costs, if any, as determined by electrical power provider), engineering review, and street signs. X. Developer shall submit detailed water main, fire protection, and emergency vehicle access plans to the Fire Marshal for review and approval. Developer shall follow all the recommendations of the Fire Marshal. XI. Developer acknowledges that the rights of City performance of obligations of Developer contemplated in this agreement are special, unique, and of an extraordinary character, and that, in the event that Developer violates, or fails, or refuses to perform any covenant, condition, or- provision m ade h erein, C ity m ay b e without an adequate remedy a t 1 aw. Developer agrees,therefore,that in the event Developer violates,fails,or refuses to perform any covenant, condition, or provision made herein, City may, at its option, institute and prosecute an action to specifically enforce such covenant, withhold building permits or rescind or revoke any approvals granted by the City. No remedy conferred in this agreement is intended to be exclusive and each shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to every other remedy. The election of anyone or more remedies shall not constitute a waiver of any U�r other remedy. Xll. Developer shall,prior to the commencement of any improvements,provide written notice to Time Warner Cable, a Minnesota Limited Partnership,the franchisee under the City's Cable Communication Ordinance(80-33) of the development contemplated by this Development Agreement. Notice shall be sent to Time Warner Cable, 801 Plymouth Avenue North, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55411. XIII. Prior to building permit issuance,all fees associated with the building permit shall be paid to the Inspections Department,including;Building permit fee,plan check fee,State surcharge, metro system access charge(SAC), City SAC and City water access charge(WAC),and park dedication. Contact Metropolitan Waste Control to determine the number of SAC units. XIV. Prior to building permit issuance, existing structures, walls and septic systems (if present) shall be properly abandoned or removed as required by City ordinance and all permits obtained through the Inspections Department. XV. Prior to building permit issuance,provide two copies of an approved survey or site plan(1"= 200 scale)showing proposed building location and all proposed streets,with approved street names, lot arrangements and property lines. — X-Vi--TIZe City-shall-not.issue_any_building permit for_the construction of any building,structure,or improvement o n the P roperty until a 11 requirements 1 isted i n t his Exhibit C have b een satisfactorily addressed by Developer. XVII. No failure of the City to comply with any term,condition,covenant or agreement herein shall subject the City to liability for any claim for damages, costs or other financial or pecuniary charges. No execution on any claim, demand, cause of action or judgment shall be levied upon or collected from the general credit, general fund or taxing powers of the City. XVIII. 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 %z by 6 inch sign or decal reading "Scenic/Conservation Easement Boundary,City of Eden Prairie",will be affixed to the top of the post. EXHIBIT D DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - LAMETTRY TIRE SHOP EROSION CONTROL POLICY-AUGUST 1, 1997 1. All construction projects permitted by the City of Eden Prairie which results 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. The applicant must maintain all erosion control systems 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 biweekly 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 soil on a public street or highway must be cleaned by power sweepers within 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 plans, obtain the right-of-entry from the adjoining property owner, and implement the clean up and a 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. The applicant shall provide all traffic control and flagging required to protect the traveling public during the clean up operations. G uv 6. When an 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 this 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, concur 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: NOT TO BE SIGNED By: NOT TO BE SIGNED Owner's Signature Applicant's Signature DEVELOPMENT NAME: Lot: Block: OWNER INFORMATION OwNER (PRINT): ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP UI EXHIBIT E DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - LAMETTRY TIRE SHOP CONSERVATION/SCENIC EASEMENT THIS EASEMENT AGREEMENT is made this day of ,2004 by and between Richard LaMettry, an individual, hereinafter referred to as "Grantor," and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a Minnesota municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City"; WHEREAS,'Grantor is the fee owner of land located in Hennepin County,Minnesota,more fully described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof,and said land hereinafter referred to as "the Property"; and, WHEREAS, Grantor has marketable title to the Property, free and clear of all liens, mortgage, and encumbrances, except: WHEREAS,Grantor and City wish to enter into an agreement which will grant to the City a conservancy/scenic easement for conservation and preservation of the terrain and vegetation,and to prohibit certain destructive acts thereon,over that portion of the Property as described in Exhibit B, hereinafter referred to as the "Easement Area", attached hereto; NOW,THEREFORE,in consideration of the premises contained herein,it is agreed by the parties as follows: 1. Grantor hereby conveys to City and its successors and assigns a conservation and scenic easement i n, under, o n, and o ver the "Easement Area", and City h ereby accepts such conveyance. 2. The following terms and conditions shall apply to the Easement Area: A. The Easement Area shall be preserved predominantly in its natural condition. No trees, shrubs or other vegetation shall be planted or removed from the Easement Area without the prior written consent of the City. The City will consider removal of noxious weeds, as defined by Minnesota Statutes Sections 18.76-18.88, upon submission and approval of a Vegetation Management Plan. No vegetation cutting,fertilizer application or placement of turfgrass, such as Kentucky bluegrass, shall occur within the Easement Area. B. Wetland buffer monuments must be placed at the boundaries of the wetland buffer strip as shown on Exhibit C. Removal of the wetland buffer strip monuments is not allowed. C. No building, road, sign, billboard, utility, or other structures shall be placed in the Easement Area without the prior written consent of City. D. No trash, waste, or other offensive material, soil, or landfill shall be placed upon or within the Easement Area without the prior written consent of the City. E. No change in the general topography of the Easement Area landscape, including,but not limited,to excavation,dredging,movement, and removal or placement of soil, shall be allowed within the Easement Area without the prior written consent of the City. F. Grantor may,no more than once per calendar year,remove sediment caused by stormwater drainage into a stormwater ponding area. Any removal of sediment must be pre-approved in writing by the City and be in accordance with City and Wetland Conservation Act guidelines. Landscaping must be replaced in accordance with the requirements outlined in this Conservation -- - - - - -- -- -Easement • 3. With respect to the Easement Area, Grantor represents and warrants as follows: A. That Grantor has marketable title free and clear of all liens, encumbrances and mortgages. B. That Grantor has not used, employed, deposited, stored, disposed of,placed or otherwise allowed to come in or on the Easement Area, any hazardous substance, hazardous waste, pollutant, or contaminant, including, but not limited to,those defined in or pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 9601,et. seq.,or Minn. Stat., Sec. 115B.01, et. seq. (such substances, wastes, pollutants, and contaminants hereafter referred to as "Hazardous Substances"); C. That Grantor has not allowed any other person to use,employ,deposit,store, dispose of, place or otherwise have, in or on the Easement Area, any Hazardous Substances; D. - That no previous owner, operator or possessor of the easement area, deposited, stored, disposed of, placed, or otherwise allowed in or on the Easement Area any Hazardous Substances; Grantor agrees to indemnify,defend and hold harmless City,against any and all loss, costs, damage and expense, including reasonable attorney's fees and costs that City incurs because of the breach of any of the above representations or warranties and/or qI resulting from or due to the inaccuracy or falsity of any representation or warranty herein. 4. Grantor agrees to maintain the Easement Area subject to the provisions stated herein. 5. The duration of this easement is perpetual and shall bind and inure to the benefit of the parties, their successors, and assigns. 6. Nothing contained herein shall impair any right of City now held or hereafter acquired to construct or maintain public utilities in or on the Easement Area. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties to this Agreement have caused these presents to be executed as of the day and year aforesaid. GRANTOR CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE NOT TO BE SIGNED By NOT TO BE SIGNED Nancy Tyra-Lukens Its Mayor NOT TO BE SIGNED By NOT TO BE SIGNED Scott H. Neal Its City Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ,2004, by Nancy Tyra-Lukens and Scott H.Neal,respectively the Mayor and the City Manager of the City of�den Praine, a Minnesofa municipal corporation,on bel alf-of said-corporation: - -- - - - --- Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ,2004, by Richard LaMettry, an individual. Notary Public �3 EXHIBIT A "THE PROPERTY" EXHIBIT B "EASEMENT AREA" ----____-_ __---_ _--- '---_--'_--._____ � - EXHIBIT C "EASEMENT AREA" DIAGRAM CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: March 23,2004 SECTION: Ordinances and Resolutions DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Scott Neal, City Manager Second Reading of Ordinance Giving City Manager Authority to Establish Personnel Policies lar .F. Requested Action Move to: Approve Second Reading of an Ordinance amending City Code Section 2.82,relating to personnel rules and regulations, and adopting by reference City Code Chapter 1 and Section 2.99. Synopsis The First reading of the Ordinance was approved at the March 9,2004, Council meeting. The proposed ordinance change would give the City Manager the authority to establish personnel policies without council approval. This change would allow for more efficient implementation of policy changes in our dynamic operating environment. The change would also be consistent with the statutory structure of the City,which gives the City Manager the authority for the proper administration of the affairs of the City. Attachment Ordinance Cu . CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. -2004 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, AMENDING CITY CODE CHAPTER 2 BY AMENDING SECTION 2.82 RELATING TO PERSONNEL RULES AND REGULATIONS,AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 2.99 WHICH, AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE,MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1. The City Code Section 2.82 is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: The City Manager may promulgate personnel rules setting forth the rights, duties and responsibilities of employees. Such rules may from time to time be amended. Section 2. The 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 of publication. FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie on the 9th day of March, 2004, and finally read and adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the day of , 2004. Kathleen Porta, City Clerk Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie Sun Current on , 2004. CU CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: March 23, 2004 SECTION: Consent Calendar DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: I.C. 02-5553 ITEM NO.: Engineering Division Approve Traffic Control Signal Agreement for Randy Newton Traffic Signals on CSAH 62 at Baker Road, CSAH 62 at I-494 West Ramps,TH 62 at I-494 .7 ' East Ramps and TH 62 at Clearwater Drive/ Beach Road. Requested Action Move to: Adopt resolution approving Traffic Control Signal Agreement No. 86263M with MnDOT,Hennepin County and the City of Minnetonka for traffic signals on CSAH 62 at Baker Road, CSAH 62 at I-494 West Ramps, TH 62 at I-494 East Ramps and TH 62 at Clearwater Drive/Beach Road. Synopsis This signal agreement defines the maintenance, operation and electric energy requirements for the traffic signals along CSAH 62 /TH 62 at I-494. The agreement is for the traffic signals that will be modified or replaced as part of the I-494 Third Lane project between TH 5/212 and I-394. With this agreement the City of Eden Prairie will be responsible for the minor maintenance and electrical energy costs at the CSAH 62 / CSAH 60 (Baker Road) and CSAH 62 / I-494 West Ramps intersections. Background Information The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) is preparing to construct a third lane on I- 494 between TH 5 / 212 in Eden Prairie and I-394 in Minnetonka. The project requires traffic signal revisions at the CSAH 62/CSAH 60 (Baker Road)intersection and new traffic signals at the CSAH 62 /I-494 West Ramps, TH 62 / I-494 East Ramps and TH 62 / Clearwater Drive /Beach Road intersections. In order to update the traffic signals agreements and bring them up to current practice Mn/DOT has prepared a new agreement that meets the need of all affected parties (MnDOT, Hennepin County, City of Minnetonka, and the City of Eden Prairie). With the agreement the City of Eden Prairie will be responsible for paying the electrical energy costs at one additional signal and for performing minor maintenance at two additional signals. The resulting benefit is that the responsibilities of all affected parties are clearly defined and MnDOT will be able to operate all the traffic signals as a coordinated system. In addition, it evenly distributes the maintenance and electrical energy responsibilities for the traffic signals on the entire CSAH 62 /TH 62 corridor between the cities of Minnetonka and Eden Prairie. Attachments Traffic Control Signal Agreement No. 86263M q9 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. APPROVE TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAL AGREEMENT WITH MnDOT, HENNEPIN COUNTY AND THE CITY OF MINNETONKA FOR TRAFFIC SIGNALS ON CSAH 62 AT CSAH 60 (BAKER ROAD), CSAH 62 AT I-494 WEST RAMPS, TH 62 AT I-494 EAST RAMPS AND TH 62 AT CLEARWATER DRIVE/BEACH ROAD. I.C. 02-5553 WHEREAS, the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) is preparing to construct a third lane on Interstate Highway 494 between Trunk Highway 5 /212 in Eden Prairie and Interstate Highway 394 in Minnetonka, and WHEREAS, the I-494 construction project requires traffic signal revisions at the CSAH 62 / CSAH 60 (Baker Road) intersection and new traffic signals at the CSAH 62/ I-494 West Ramps, TH 62/I-494 East Ramps and TH 62/Clearwater Drive/Beach Road intersections, and WHEREAS,MnDOT, Hennepin County,the City of Minnetonka, and the City of Eden Prairie has determined that it is in the public's best interest to revise the traffic signal agreements, and WHEREAS, MnDOT has prepared a traffic control signal agreement that identifies the maintenance, operation and electrical energy requirements for the traffic signals at the CSAH 62 / CSAH 60 (Baker Road), CSAH 62 / I-494 West Ramps, TH 62 / I-494 East Ramps and TH 62 / Clearwater Drive/Beach Road intersections. NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council that Traffic Control Signal Agreement No. 86263M for S.P.2785-304 (City Project No. 02-5553) 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 March 23,2004. Nancy Tyra-Lukens,Mayor ATTEST: - SEAL Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk /OD MINNESOTA TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAL AGREEMENT NO. 86263M BETWEEN THE STATE OF MINNESOTA, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND THE COUNTY OF HENNEPIN AND THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE AND THE CITY OF MINNETONKA TO Provide Maintenance and Electrical Energy for the revised Traffic Control Signal with Street Lights, Emergency Vehicle Pre-emption, Interconnect and Signing on CSAH 62 at Baker Road/CSAH 60; and for the new Traffic Control Signals with Street Lights, Emergency Vehicle Pre-emption, Interconnect and Signing on CSAH 62 at T.H. 494 West Ramps, and on T.H. 62 at T.H.494 East Ramps in Eden Prairie, and on T.H. 62 at Clearwater Drive/Beach Road in Minnetonka, Hennepin County, Minnesota. S .P. 2785-304 Prepared by Metropolitan District Traffic Engineering ESTIMATED AMOUNT RECEIVABLE AMOUNT ENCUMBERED None None Otherwise Covered /0/ PARTIES THIS AGREEMENT is entered into by the Minnesota Department of Transportation, (State) , and the County of Hennepin, (County) , the City of Eden Prairie, (Eden Prairie) , and the City of Minnetonka, (Minnetonka) . RECITALS Minnesota Statutes Section 161.20 authorizes the Commissioner of Transportation to enter into agreements with any governmental authority for the purposes of constructing, maintaining and improving the Trunk Highway system. The State has determined that there is justification and it is in the public ' s best interest to revise the existing traffic control signal including street lights, interconnect and signing, (Traffic Control Signal (s) ) on CSAH 62 at Baker Road/CSAH 60 (System "A") ; and remove the existing traffic control signals and install new traffic control signals including street lights, interconnect, and signing, (Traffic Control Signal (s) ) on CSAH 62 at T.H. 494 West Ramps (System "B") , on T.H. 62 at T.H. 494 East Ramps (System "C") , and on T.H. 62 at Clearwater Drive/Beach Road (System "D") . Eden Prairie and Minnetonka request and the State agrees to the- installation of Emergency Vehicle Pre-emption -1- 86263M Systems, (EVP System(s) ) as a part of the new and revised Traffic Control Signal installations. It is considered in the public' s best interest for the State to provide a master controller and three new cabinets and control equipment to operate the new Traffic Control Signals. The County, Eden Prairie, Minnetonka, and the State will participate in the maintenance and operation of the new and revised Traffic Control Signals and EVP Systems . CONTRACT 1. The State will prepare the necessary plan, specifications and proposal, (Preliminary Engineering) . The State will also perform all necessary construction inspection, (Construction Engineering) . 2 . The State with its own resources or by contract will revise the existing Traffic Control Signal and EVP System on CSAH 62 at Baker Road/CSAH 60 (System "A") ; and remove the existing traffic control signals and install new Traffic Control Signals and EVP Systems on CSAH 62 at T.H. 494 West Ramps (System "B") , on T.H. 62 at T.H. 494 East Ramps (System "C") , and on T.H. 62 at Clearwater Drive/Beach Road (System "D" ) pursuant to the plans and specifications for State Project No. 2785-304 . The Construction Costs and State Furnished Materials costs are covered in Municipal Agreement No. 86078 between the -2- 86263M /03 State and Eden Prairie, Municipal Agreement No. 86079 between the State and Minnetonka, and Municipal Agreement No. 86080 between the State and the County. 3 . Eden Prairie will be responsible for the cost and application to secure an adequate power supply to the service pads or poles (Systems "A" and "B") . Upon completion of this project (Systems "A" and "B") , Eden Prairie will thereafter pay all monthly electrical service expenses necessary to operate the Traffic Control Signals and EVP Systems . 4 . The State will be responsible for the cost and application to secure an adequate power supply to the service pad or pole (System "C") . Upon completion of this project (System "C") , the State will thereafter pay all monthly electrical service expenses necessary to operate the Traffic Control Signal and EVP System. 5 . Minnetonka will be responsible for the cost and application to secure an adequate power supply to the service pad or pole (System "D") . Upon completion of this project (System "D" ) , Minnetonka will thereafter pay all monthly electrical service expenses necessary to operate the Traffic • Control Signal and EVP System. 6 . Upon completion of this project (System "A") , Eden Prairie will, at its cost and expense: (1) maintain the luminaires and all its components, including replacing the -3- 86263M /o / luminaire when necessary; (2) relamp the revised traffic control signal and street lights; and (3) clean and paint the revised traffic control signal, cabinet and luminaire mast arm extensions. The State will maintain the traffic control signal cabinet and control equipment, repair knockdowns of the revised Traffic Control Signal System, and perform all other revised traffic control signal and street light maintenance, and be responsible for the timing and operation of the revised Traffic Control Signal, all on a reimbursable basis with the County. 7 . Upon completion of this project (System "B") Eden Prairie will, at its cost and expense: (1) maintain the luminaires and all its components, including replacing the luminaire when necessary; (2) relamp the new traffic control signal and street lights; and (3) clean and paint the new traffic control signal, cabinet and luminaire mast arm extensions. The State will, at its cost and expense, maintain the signing and interconnect and perform all other traffic control and street light maintenance. 8 . Upon completion of this project (System "C" ) the State will, at its cost and expense maintain and keep in repair the new Traffic Control Signal . 9. Upon completion of this project (System "D") Minnetonka will, at its cost and expense: (1) maintain the luminaires and all its components, including replacing the -4- 86263M /05 luminaire when necessary; (2) relamp the new traffic control signal and street lights; and (3) clean and paint the new traffic control signal, cabinet and luminaire mast arm extensions . The State will, at its cost and expense, maintain the signing and interconnect and perform all other traffic control and street light maintenance. • 10 . The EVP Systems (Systems "A" , "B" , "C" and "D") will be installed, operated, maintained, or rerhoved in accordance with the following conditions and requirements : a) All maintenance of the EVP Systems (Systems "B" , "C" , and "D" ) must be done by State forces . b) All maintenance of the EVP System (System "A") , including timing will be performed by the State, all on a reimbursable basis with the County. c) Emitter units may be installed only on authorized emergency vehicles, as defined in Minnesota Statutes Section 169 . 01, Subdivision 5. Authorized emergency vehicles may use emitter units only when responding to an emergency. Eden Prairie and Minnetonka will provide the State' s Metropolitan District Engineer or his designated -5- 86263M /66 representative a list of all vehicles with emitter units. d) Malfunction of the EVP Systems must be reported to the State immediately. e) In the event the EVP Systems or the components are, in the opinion of the State, being misused or the conditions set forth in Paragraph b above are violated, and such misuse or violation continues after Eden Prairie and/or Minnetonka receives written notice from the State, the State may remove the EVP System(s) . Upon removal of the EVP System(s) pursuant to this Paragraph, all of the parts and components become the property of the State . f) All timing of the EVP Systems (Systems "B" , "C" and "D") will be determined by the State. 11 . All timing of the new Traffic Control Signals (Systems "B" , "C" and "D") will be determined by the State, and no changes may be made except with the approval of the State. 12 . The State and the County will enter into Traffic Control Maintenance Agreement No. 86264-R for the intersection -6- 86263M 07- of CSAH 62 at Baker Road/CSAH 60 covering maintenance of the traffic signal cabinet and control equipment, maintenance of the EVP System, repair of knockdowns of the Traffic Control Signal System, and performance of all other traffic control signal and street light maintenance not performed by the County or Eden Prairie, and the responsibility for the timing and operation of the Traffic Control Signal and EVP System by State Forces and the terms and conditions covering payment by the County. 13 . Each party will be solely responsible for its own acts and omissions, and the results thereof, to the extent authorized by law. The State's liability is governed by the Minnesota Tort Claims Act, Minnesota Statutes Section 3 .736. Each party will be solely responsible for its own employees for any Workers Compensation Claims. 14 . Any amendment to this Agreement must be in writing and will not be effective until it has been executed and approved by the same parties who executed and approved the original Agreement, or their successors in office. 15 . If the State fails to enforce any provisions of this Agreement, that failure does not waive the provision or its right to enforce it. 16. This Agreement contains all negotiations and agreements between the parties relative to this project. No -7- 86263M IOC other understanding regarding this Agreement, whether written or oral, may be used to bind either party. 17 . Minnesota law governs this contract . Venue for all legal proceedings arising out of this Agreement, or its breach, must be in the appropriate state or federal court with competent jurisdiction in Ramsey County, Minnesota. 18 . This Agreement is effective on the date the State obtains all required signatures under Minnesota Statutes 16C.05, Subdivision 2, and will remain in effect until terminated by written agreement of the parties. 19. The State' s obligation to perform any work, or to let a Contract for the performance of the work, on the State Project referenced above, is subject to the availability of funding from the Minnesota Legislature or other funding source. 20 . Upon execution and approval by the County, Eden Prairie, Minnetonka, and the State and completion of the construction work provided for herein, this agreement will supercede and terminate the maintenance, operation, and removal terms the EVP Systems of Agreement No. 83001M, dated April 18, 2002, between Eden Prairie and the State, regarding the intersections of CSAH 62 at T.H. 494 West Ramps and T.H. 62 at T.H. 494 East Ramps and will also supercede and terminate the maintenance, operation, and removal terms of EVP Systems of Agreement No. 82649M, dated April 25, 2002, between Minnetonka • -8- 86263M !61 and the State, regarding the intersections on CSAH 62 at Baker Road/CSAH 60 and on T.H. 62 at Clearwater Drive/ Beach Road. -9- 86263M 10 COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ATTEST: By: Chair of its County Board By: Deputy/Clerk of the County Date: Board And: Date: Assistant/Deputy/County Administrator APPROVED AS TO FORM: Date: By: Assistant County Attorney And: Assistant County Date : Administrator, Public Works And County Engineer APPROVED AS TO EXECUTION: Date: By: Assistant County Attorney RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: Date : By: Director, Transportation Department Date : This certifies that the signatories for the County have lawful authority, by virtue of board resolution to bind the County to the terms of this agreement. -10- 86263M CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE APPROVED AS TO FORM: City Attorney By: Mayor Date: By: City Manager Date: -11- 86263M //p- CITY OF MINNETONKA. APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Mayor City Attorney Date: By: City Manager ,Date: -12- 86263M 113 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL: Approved: By: Metropolitan District Engineer State Design Engineer Date : COMMISSIONER OF ADMINISTRATION As to form and execution: As delegated to Materials Management Division By: Contract Management By: Date : Date: -13- 86263M lly RESOLUTION BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Eden Prairie enter into an agreement with the State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation for the following purposes, to wit: • Provide Maintenance and Electrical Energy for the revised Traffic Control Signal with Street Lights, Emergency Vehicle Pre-emption, Interconnect and Signing on CSAH 62 at Baker Road/CSAH 60, and for the new Traffic Control Signals with Street Lights, Emergency Vehicle Pre- emption, Interconnect and Signing on CSAH 62 at T.H. 494 • West Ramps, on T.H. 62 at T.H.494 East Ramps, and on T.H. 62 at Clearwater Drive/Beach Road in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth and contained in Agreement No. 86263M, a copy of which was before 'the Council. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the proper City officers be and hereby are authorized to execute such agreement and any amendments, and thereby assume for and on behalf of the City all of the contractual obligations contained therein. CERTIFICATION • State of Minnesota County of Hennepin City of Eden Prairie City of Minnetonka I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution is a true and correct copy of a resolution presented to and adopted by the Council of the City of Eden Prairie at a duly authorized meeting thereof held on the day of , 2004, as shown by the minutes of said meeting in my possession. City Manager (Seal) 115 RESOLUTION BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Minnetonka enter into an agreement with the State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation for the following purposes, to wit : Provide Maintenance and Electrical Energy for the revised Traffic Control Signal with Street Lights, Emergency Vehicle Pre-emption, Interconnect and Signing on CSAH 62 at Baker Road/CSAH 60, and for the new Traffic Control Signals with Street Lights, Emergency Vehicle Pre- emption, Interconnect and Signing on CSAH 62 at T.H. 494 . West Ramps, on T.H. 62 at T.H.494 East Ramps, and on T.H. 62 at Clearwater Drive/Beach Road in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth and contained in Agreement No. 86263M, a copy of which was before ,the Council . BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the proper City officers be and hereby are authorized to execute such agreement and any amendments, and thereby assume for and on behalf of the City all of the contractual obligations contained therein. CERTIFICATION State of Minnesota County of Hennepin City of Eden Prairie City of Minnetonka I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution is a true and correct copy of a resolution presented to and adopted by the Council of the City of Minnetonka at a duly authorized meeting thereof held on the day of , 2004, as shown by the minutes of said meeting in my possession. City Clerk (Seal) //I CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Consent Calendar March 23,2004 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Fire Department Resolution Approving Hennepin County Hazard M. George F.Esbensen Mitigation Plan L Requested Action Move to:Adopt Resolution approving the Hennepin County Mitigation plan Synopsis The City of Eden Prairie has an emergency plan for responding to both natural and man-made disasters. Hennepin County has recently developed a hazard mitigation plan which provides for uniform practices and procedures throughout the County.The City will benefit from the incorporation of this plan in its emergency plan. Attachments Resolution CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO.2004- RESOLUTION APPROVING INCORPORATION OF THE HENNEPIN COUNTY HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN AS PART OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE'S EMERGENCY PLAN WHEREAS,the City of Eden Prairie has in place an emergency plan for responding to both natural and man-made disasters;and WHEREAS,Hennepin County has developed a hazard mitigation plan which provides for uniform practices and procedures throughout the County; and WHEREAS,The City of Eden Prairie believes that it would benefit from the incorporation of this plan in its emergency plan. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that the Eden Prairie City Council approves and adopts the Hennepin County Hazard Mitigation Plan as part of the City of Eden Prairie Emergency Plan. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 23rd day of March,2004. Nancy Tyra-Lukens,Mayor ATTEST: SEAL Kathleen Porta, City Clerk t 18. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: March 23,2004 SECTION: Consent Calendar DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: I.C. 01-5527 ITEM NO.: Engineering Services Resolution Authorizing Acquisition of Easements 1/ Randy Newton and Right-of-Way for the TH 212/Prairie Center V I I . Drive Intersection Improvements Project. Requested Action Move to: Adopt the resolution authorizing the City Engineer and City Attorney to pursue the acquisition of easements and right-of-way, by negotiation or condemnation, for the construction of the TH 212/Prairie Center Drive Intersection Improvement Project. Synopsis In order to construct the TH 212/Prairie Center Drive Intersection Improvement Project it is necessary to obtain easements and right-of-way from some of the adjacent property owners. None of the acquisitions significantly impact the existing uses or constitute a full taking. The anticipated cost of the easements and right-of-way is$50,000. Background Information In January 2003, Mn/DOT selected the project for inclusion in the FY 2004 Municipal Agreement Program and identified a maximum contribution of$540,000. In April 2003,the City Council authorized the project along with the Professional Services Agreement with SRF Consulting Group, Inc. Since that time SRF Consulting has been preparing the final design documents. Pending final plan approval from Mn/DOT and the acquisition of the necessary easements and right-of-way the project will be ready for bid in late May/early June. The TH 212 (Flying Cloud Drive)/Prairie Center Drive project will increase the capacity of one of the most congested intersections in the City by providing additional turn lanes. The importance of this intersection to the City's transportation system along with the problems associated with its poor operation make its improvement one of the highest priorities in our system. Financial Implications The preliminary cost estimate for the TH 212 / Prairie Center Drive Intersection Improvement is $1,680,000. The estimate includes approximately $1,300,000 for roadway construction, $210,000 for design services, $120,000 for construction administration and $50,000 for right-of-way. With the Municipal Agreement Program funding Mn/DOT will contribute up to$540,000 towards the construction costs. The City of Eden Prairie would be responsible for the remainder of the project costs($1,140,000). The City costs would come from the Major Center Area Construction Fund. Attachments Exhibit"A" showing the affected properties. � l� CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ACQUISITION OF EASEMENTS AND RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR TH 212/PRAIRIE CENTER DRIVE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS I.C. # 01-5527 WHEREAS, the Eden Prairie City Council previously ordered TH 212 / Prairie Center Drive Intersection Improvements (LC. 01-5527); and WHEREAS, easements and right-of-way over adjoining properties are required to construct the improvements. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council that the City Engineer and City Attorney are hereby authorized to acquire the necessary easements or right-of- way,by negotiation or condemnation, on the following properties: Parcel 14-116-22-31-0019,Parcel 14-116-22-31-0020, Parcel 14-116-22-31-0036,Parcel 14-116-22-34-0019, Parcel 14-116-22-34-0026,Parcel 14-116-22-34-0028, and Parcel 14-116-22-34-0029. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on March 23,2004 Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk it‘'‘. & w L16 \- A 1 . , N . .,, . \ ..$! Cat Locs‘s N N ------ ii • , . . • _ __.--0.--A , N / ' . .....-.:E?•-----1 \NA e4 .. 1- -• __----- w --i .ig rei. ..„ ------ -._: - Ncwor. / --- " , .,--,------ \ .N,/ ,k Lex,AAftu, _ _.---- .-"--"._--.--- ' - , jq ___ ____C<00044meiur , -------,„ . "cck.c,0 sem ANIILN millmIllro Lott44,4 k C4t‘t. tk&se. eaiN IN Oc N N i • NN • NN , iN 0 , . A / NN / . . 1: •,• Ji,11 • l'1' il Iti _ ,1 J ,,. i 1 l't.f, *.i • // --i li. • / „.:. 1 II .... ' . . /al CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Consent Calendar March 23,2004 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Robert A. Lambert Resolution for the 2004 DNR Natural and Scenic Director of Parks &Recreation Area Grant Program Requested Action Move to: Adopt Resolution for submittal of an application for the 2004 DNR Natural and Scenic Area Grant Program. Synopsis The City of Eden Prairie will submit a grant application to the Minnesota DNR for land acquisition of the Birch Island Woods, a 4.04 acre parcel of wooded land on the north side of Birch Island Road in Eden Prairie. This parcel is the last parcel of land to be acquired for Birch Island Woods, a 31 acre conservation area that includes woods and wetlands adjacent to Birch Island Park in northern Eden Prairie. The purpose of the Natural and Scenic Area Grant Program is to increase, protect and enhance natural and scenic areas. The Minnesota DNR provides matching grants to local units of government up to 50% of the cost of the acquisition of natural and scenic areas. The total cost for the remaining 4.04 acre parcel of the Birch Island Woods is $800,000. The grant request (50%) is for$400,000. The Friends of Birch Island Woods are committed to raising $200,000 of the local matching funds, and the City of Eden Prairie will provided the additional $200,000 in matching funds for a total local match(50%) of$400,000. The Minnesota DNR will review and rank applications during the spring of 2004. Preliminary grant awards will be announced in the summer of 2004. Attachment Resolution I ;d Ili �_ S. • CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO.2004- RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF AN APPLICATION FOR THE 2004 DNR NATURAL AND SCENIC AREA GRANT PROGRAM BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Eden Prairie act as legal sponsor for the project contained in the Natural and Scenic Area Grant Program Application to be submitted in March 2004 and that Robert A. Lambert is hereby authorized to apply to the Department of Natural Resources for funding of this project on behalf of the City of Eden Prairie. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Eden Prairie has the legal authority to apply for financial assistance, and financial capability to meet the match requirement and ensure adequate management and protection. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Eden Prairie has not entered into a written purchase agreement for the property. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that upon approval of its application by the state, the City of Eden Prairie may enter into an agreement with the State of Minnesota for the above-referenced project, and that City of Eden Prairie certifies that it will comply with all applicable laws and • regulations as stated in the grant agreement including dedicating the park property for natural and/or scenic uses into perpetuity. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Manager is hereby authorized to execute such application and agreements as are necessary to implement the project on behalf of the applicant. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 23rd day of March, 2004. Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL Kathleen Porta, City Clerk - • 1,), CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: March 23,2004 SECTION: Consent Calendar DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: I.C. 04-5613 ITEM NO.: Engineering Award Contract for 2004 Street Sweeping III , i< Mary Krause Requested Action Move to: Award contract for 2004 Street Sweeping to Reliakor Services in the amount of $32,780.50. Synopsis Sealed bids were received Thursday, March 11, 2004 for the 2004 Street Sweeping. Four bids were received as follows: Reliakor Services $32,780.50 Allied Blacktop, Inc. $34,317.50 ASTECH Corp. $34,794.50 Pearson Brothers $38,400.00 Background Information The schedule for street sweeping in the project specifications indicates a start date of April 12, 2004. This early cleaning of the streets prevents sand and debris that has accumulated from the winter snow removal operations from entering into the City's wetlands, creeks and lakes. Sweeping of the streets takes approximately 8-10 working days. Funding for the sweeping comes from the Storm Water Utility. Staff recommends award to Reliakor Services. JL ) CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: March 23, 2004 SECTION: Consent Calendar DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Public Works Professional Services Agreement,Water Fill Eugene A. Dietz Station at the Treatment Plant ZE.,L Requested Action Move to: Approve a Professional Services Agreement with TKDA for design and construction phase services for a Water Fill Station for Trucks at the Water Treatment Plant Entrance Road. Synopsis Currently, all contractors that utilize trucks to haul water for various construction activities, including directional boring, landscape water and mobile car washing, are required to fill at a specified location at the Water Plant. This location is within the fenced perimeter of the Water Plant site, which is in conflict with our goals for security for the facility. This design services phase will lead to a contract to construct a permanent truck filling station along the out-bound lanes for the Water Treatment Plant driveway. The estimated fee for TKDA is $18,400.00. Background Information Ironically, it has taken many years to "train" the contracting community to secure their construction water at only a specified hydrant located at the Water Treatment Plant rather than at any hydrant of their choosing in the community. The intent of the restriction was to be able to both meter/pay for the water and to avoid damage to hydrants within our system. Although we have successfully solved that particular problem, the more heightened awareness of security issues at our facility makes this impractical to continue. The proposed Fill Station along the exit driveway from the Water Plant will essentially be a widening of the driveway to create a parking lane for trucks receiving water. Included in the plan will be a pay station to obtain the water. A number of other communities have successfully implemented a pay Fill Station and we will utilize that proven technology. The resulting facility will accomplish both goals—security for the treatment facility and a single point delivery system for water to the contracting community. The funding source for both the consultant and the construction contract will be from the Utility Construction Fund and will have no impact on the General Fund Budget. Staff recommends approval of the motion. Attachments Professional Services Agreement /D5 TKDA ENGINEERS•ARCHITECTS•PLANNERS 1500 Piper Jaffrey Plaza 444 Cedar Street Saint Paul,MN 55101-2140 (651)292-4400 (651)292-0083 Fax www.tkda.com January 5, 2004 Mr. Ed Sorensen Manager of Utility Operations City of Eden Prairie -Utilities Division 14100 Technology Drive Eden Prairie,Minnesota 55344-2260 Re: Proposal for Engineering Services Water Fill Station for Trucks on the Water Treatment Plant Entrance Road City of Eden Prairie,Minnesota Dear Mr. Sorensen: Pursuant to communications with Mr. Verne Jacobsen, we propose to provide Engineering Services to the City of Eden Prairie in connection with Water Fill Station for Trucks on the Water Treatment Plant Entrance Road, hereinafter called the Project. Our services will be provided in the manner described in this Proposal subject to the terms and conditions set forth in the attached "City of Eden Prairie General Conditions of Consultant Agreement"dated February 2001. Hereinafter, the City of Eden Prairie is referred to as the OWNER. I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The OWNER desires to install a Water Fill Station for truck use on the west side of the Water Treatment Plant entrance road just north of Technology Drive. The fill station shall be coin operated and include metering and back flow prevention. The Project includes the preparation of plans and specifications and construction administration services. An Employee Owned Company Promoting Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity 1D6 Mr. Ed Sorensen City of Eden Prairie-Utilities Division Proposal for Engineering Services Water Fill Station for Trucks on the Water Treatment Plant Entrance Road January 5, 2004 Page 2 II. SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED BY TKDA Based on TKDA'S understanding of the Project,we propose to provide the following services: . A. DESIGN 1. Review the existing drawings and site conditions, and provide the OWNER with recommendations regarding fill station location and equipment. 2. In conjunction with the OWNER'S staff, discuss specific design requirements and prepare a construction schedule. 3. Prepare Project Plans and Specifications (Contract Documents), along with opinion of probable cost for construction. 4. Provide additional Project design services as required. Includes submittal of plans and specifications for State of Minnesota approval, attendance at meetings with the OWNER'S staff, and providing general Project support. 5. Prepare 15 sets of Contract Documents for the OWNER'S use in obtaining competitive bids for the Project. B. BIDDING PHASE 1. Provide information regarding the Project to prospective bidders and conduct a pre-bid meeting at the Project site. 2. Prepare required addenda. 3. Prepare bid tabulation to assist the OWNER in evaluating bids and in assembling and awarding contracts. C. CONSTRUCTION PHASE - GENERAL SERVICES 1. Consult with and advise the OWNER and act as the OWNER'S representative as provided in the Contract Documents. 2. Attend and assist the OWNER with pre-construction conference to be attended by the Contractor, the OWNER, and others as may be requested by the OWNER. 3. Make visits to the site to observe the progress and quality of the executed work of the Contractor and to determine, in general, if such work is proceeding in accordance with the Contract Documents. 1rt Mr.Ed Sorensen City of Eden Prairie-Utilities Division Proposal for Engineering Services Water Fill Station for Trucks on the Water Treatment Plant Entrance Road January 5,2004 Page 3 4. Review and approve (or take other appropriate action with respect to) Shop Drawings (as that term is defined in the Contract Documents),samples, and other data which the Contractor is required to submit,but only for conformance with the design concept of the Project and compliance with the information given in the Contract Documents. Such reviews and approvals or other action shall not extend to means,methods, techniques, sequences or procedures of construction, or to safety precautions, and programs incident thereto. • 5. Based on TKDA'S on-site observations,determine payments to the Contractor in such amounts as is appropriate; such recommendations of payment will constitute a representation to the OWNER,based on such observations and review,that the work has progressed to the point indicated, and that,to the best of TKDA'S knowledge, information and belief,the quality of such work is in accordance with the Contract Documents. 6. Conduct a final inspection of the work to determine if the Project appears to have been completed in accordance with the Contract Documents and if the Contractor has fulfilled all of his obligations thereunder, so that TKDA may recommend,in writing, final payment to the Contractor and may give written notice to the OWNER and the Contractor that the work is acceptable(subject to any conditions therein expressed). 7. TKDA shall not have control or charge of and shall not be responsible for construction means,methods,techniques, sequences or procedures, or for safety precautions and programs in connection with the Work,for acts or omissions of the Contractor, Subcontractors or any other persons performing any of the Work, or for the failure of any of them to carry out the Work in accordance with the Contract Documents. III. ADDITIONAL SERVICES If authorized by you,we will furnish or obtain from others Additional Services which are not considered as basic services under this Proposal. Additional Services shall be billable on an Hourly Rate basis as defined in SECTION 13 - EXTRA WORK of the attached General Provisions, and such billings shall be over and above any maximum amounts set forth in this Proposal. Cl() Mr.Ed Sorensen City of Eden Prairie -Utilities Division Proposal for Engineering Services Water Fill Station for Trucks on the Water Treatment Plant Entrance Road January 5, 2004 Page 4 IV. OWNER'S RESPONSIBILITIES The OWNER'S responsibilities shall be as set forth in SECTION 2 - SITE LOCATION, ACCESS, PERMITS, APPROVALS AND UTILITIES of the attached General Provisions and as further described or clarified hereinbelow: A. Provide access to the OWNER'S files,records, and data pertaining to the Project. B. Provide reasonable access to the OWNER'S facilities included in the Project. C. Provide input,review of submitted plans and specifications, acid assistance in scheduling to accommodate construction of the Project. V. PERIOD OF SERVICE We would expect to start our services promptly upon receipt of your acceptance of this Proposal and to complete SECTION II services on or before October 15, 2004. VI. COMPENSATION Compensation to TKDA for services provided as described in SECTION II of this Proposal shall be on an Hourly Rate basis as described in SECTION 4 - FEE PAYMENT/CLAIMS of the attached General Provisions in the following estimated amounts. Our current Hourly Rate Schedule is attached. SECTION II.A $12,300 SECTION II.B and II.0 $ 6,100 The level of effort required to accomplish SECTION II services can be affected by factors which are beyond our control. Therefore,if it appears at any time that charges for services rendered will exceed $18,400 for all phases of services,we agree that we will not perform services or incur costs which will result in billings in excess of such amount until we have been advised by you that additional funds are available and our work can proceed. Mr.Ed Sorensen City of Eden Prairie-Utilities Division Proposal for Engineering Services Water Fill Station for Trucks on the Water Treatment Plant Entrance Road January 5, 2004 Page 5 VII. CONTRACTUAL INTENT We thank you for the opportunity to submit this Proposal and are willing that this letter and attachments constitute a contract between us upon its signature by an authorized official of the City of Eden Prairie and the return of a signed copy to us. This Proposal will be open for acceptance for 60 days,unless the provisions herein are changed by us in writing prior to that time. • Sincerely, 115' Richard N. Sobiech, P.E. Verne ' . Jacobsen,P.E. President/CEO Project Manager ACCEPTED FOR THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA By CITY MANAGER Date RNS:VEJ:kms ATTACHMENTS: SCHEDULE 2850-S85 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE GENERAL CONDITIONS dated February 200I 130 TOLTZ, KING, DUVALL, ANDERSON ST.PAUL, MINNESOTA AND ASSOCIATES, INCORPORATED ENGINEERS • ARCHITECTS •PLANNERS JANUARY 1, 2004 SCHEDULE OF BILLING RATES • Classification Range of Hourly Billing Rates* Director; Senior Registered Engineer,Architect,or Planner $ 96.00 to $ 186.00 Engineering or Architectural Specialist II $ 91.00 to $ 134.00 Engineering or Architectural Specialist I $ 59.00 to $ 109.00 Registered Engineer, Architect,Land Surveyor, $' 62.00 to $ 120.00 Planner, or Interior Designer Graduate Engineer,Architect, or Planner $ 45.00 to $ 92.00 Technician III $ 51.00 to $ 72.00 ** Technician II $ 39.00 to $ 57.00 ** Technician I $ 25.00 to $ 43.00 ** • In addition to the hourly charges,TKDA shall be reimbursed at cost for the following direct expenses when incurred in the performance of the work: 1. Travel and subsistence. (Mileage currently at IRS Standard Rate of$0.375 per mile.) 2. Computer services. (Currently at$12.00 per hour of logged-on time.) 3. Outside professional and technical services with costs defined as the amount billed TKDA plus 10%. 4. Identifiable reproduction and reprographic costs. * Rates effective until December 31,2004. ** For hours worked over 8 hours per day or 40 hours per week,whichever is greater, individuals will be paid one and one-half times the above rates where required by Local, State and/or Federal Government Wage and Hour Regulations. Schedule 2850-S85 131 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE GENERAL CONDITIONS Consultant Agreement SECTION 1: PROJECT INFORMATION by Consultant's negligence. 1.1 City will provide to Consultant all known information 2.5 City agrees to render reasonable assistance requested by regarding existing and proposed conditions of the site or which Consultant to enable performance of work without delay or affects the work to be performed by Consultant. Such interference,and upon request of Consultant,to provide a suitable information shall include, but not be limited to site plans, workplace. surveys, known hazardous waste or conditions, previous laboratory analysis results,written reports,soil boring logs and 2,6 City will be responsible for locating and identifying all applicable regulatory site response(Project Information). subterranean structures and utilities. Consultant will take reasonable precautions to avoid damage or injury to subterranean 1.2 City will transmit to Consultant any additions,updates,or structures and utilities identified and located by City and/or revisions to the Project Information as it becomes available to representatives of Utility Companies. City,its subcontractors or consultants. SECTION 3: SAMPLES 1.3 City will provide an on-site representative to Consultant within 24 hours upon request, to aid, define, supervise, or Not Applicable coordinate work or Project Information as requested by Consultant. SECTION 4: FEE PAYMENT/CLAIMS 1.4 Consultant will not be liable for any decision,conclusion, 4.1 Consultant will submit invoices to City monthly,and a final recommendations, judgement or advice based on any invoice upon completion of work. Invoices will show charges inaccurate information furnished by City, or other based on the current Consultant Fee Schedule or other documents subcontractors or consultants engaged by City. as attached. SECTION 2: SITE LOCATION,ACCESS,PERMITS, 4.2 To receive any payment on this Contract,the invoice or bill APPROVALS AND UTILITIES must include the following signed and dated statement: "I declare under penalty of perjury that this account, claim, or demand is 2.1 City will indicate to Consultant the property lines of the just and correct and that no part of it has been paid." site and assume responsibility for accuracy of markers. 4.3 The balance stated on the invoice shall be deemed correct 2.2 City will provide for right-of-way for Consultant personnel unless City notifies Consultant,in writing,of the particular item and equipment necessary to perform the work. that is alleged to be incorrect within ten (10) days from the invoice date. Consultant will review the alleged incorrect item 2.3 City will be solely responsible for applying for and within ten(10)days and either submits a corrected invoice or a obtaining permits and approvals necessary for Consultant to statement indicating the original amount is correct. perform the work. Consultant will assist City in applying for and obtaining such permits and approvals as needed. It is 4.4 Payment is due upon receipt of invoice(or corrected invoice) understood that City authorizes Consultant to act as agent for and is past due sixty(60) days from invoice date. On past due City for City's responsibilities under this section including accounts,City will pay a finance charge of 1.5%per month on the signing certain forms on City's behalf such as Right-of-Way unpaid balance,or the maximum allowed by law,whichever is forms. less,until invoice is fully paid. 2.4 While Consultant will take reasonable precautions to 4.5 If City fails to pay Consultant within sixty(60)days following minimize any damage to property,it is understood by City that invoice date, Consultant may deem the default a breach of its in the normal course of the work some damage may occur. agreement,terminate the agreement,and be relieved of any and The correction of any damage is the responsibility of City or, all duties under the agreement. City however,will not be relieved at City's direction,the damage may be corrected by Consultant of Fee Payment responsibilities by the default or termination of and billed to City at cost plus 15%. Notwithstanding the the agreement above,Consultant agrees to be responsible for damage Caused City of Eden Prairie General Conditions Consultant Agreement -February-2001 Page 1 of 4 13D 4.6 City will be solely responsible for applying for and SECTION 6: DISPUTES I LIMITATIONS OF REMEDIES obtaining any applicable compensation fund reimbursements from various state and federal programs. Consultant may 6.1 In the event of a breach of Contract by City,the Consultant assist City in applying for or meeting notification shall not be entitled to recover punitive,special or consequential . requirements,however. Consultant makes no representations damages or damages for loss of business. or guarantees as to what fund reimbursement City may receive. Consultant shall not be liable for any reductions from 6.2 City will pay all reasonable litigation or collection expenses reimbursement programs made for any reason by state or including attorney fees that Consultant incurs in collecting any federal agencies, except as may be caused by Consultant's delinquent amount City owes under this agreement. negligence. 6.3 If City institutes a suit against Consultant,which is dismissed, 4.7 City may withhold from arty final payment due the dropped,or for which judgement is rendered for Consultant,City Consultant such amounts as are incurred or expended by the will pay Consultant for all costs of defense, including attorney City on account of the termination of the Contract. fees,expert witness fees and court costs. SECTION 5: OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS 6.4 If Consultant institutes a suit against City,which is dismissed, dropped,or for which judgement is rendered for City,Consultant 5.1 donsultant Will deliver to City certain reports as will pay City for all costs of defense, including attorney fees, instruments of the professional work or services performed expert witness fees and court costs. pursuant to this Agreement. All reports are intended solely for City,and Consultant will not be liable for any interpretations 6.5 Dispute Resolution ' made by others. • j.51 Mediation 5.2 City agrees that all reports and other work furnished to City,or City's agents or representatives,which are not paid for, All claims, disputes and other matters in question(hereinafter will be returned to Consultant upon demand and will not be "claim")between the parties to this Agreement,arising out of or used by City for any purpose. relating to this Agreement or the breach thereof,shall be subject to mediation. lithe parties have not resolved the dispute within 5.3 Unless otherwise agreed, Consultant will retain all thirty(30)days of receipt of a written complaint,each party may pertinent records or reports concerning work and services require the dispute be submitted for mediation. If the parties are performed for a period of at least two(2)years after report is unable to agree on a mediator within ten (10)days following a submitted. During that time the records will be made available request for mediation,either party may request that a mediator be to City during Consultant's normal business hours. City may appointed by the Fourth Judicial District Court. The parties agree obtain reproducible copies of all software, manuals, maps, to share equally all fees incurred in the mediation. drawings, logs and reports at cost, plus 15%, for data and materials not being provided as part of the scope of work for The parties shall submit to mediation for a minimum of eight(8) the project. hours. The parties agree that the mediation proceedings are private and confidential. If, at the end of eight hours of 5.4 City may use the Consultant report in its entirety and may mediation,the parties have not resolved the dispute, the parties make copies of the entire report available to others. However, may agree to extend hours of mediation. City shall not make disclosure to others of any portions or excerpts of a report constituting less than the entire report,or 6.5.2 Arbitration to mislead others by omitting certain aspects contained in the report. At the option of the party asserting the same,a claim between the panics to this Agreement, arising out of or relating to this 5.5 Consultant will consider Project Information as Agreement or the breach thereof, whereby the party or parries confidential and will not disclose to third parties information asserting the same claims entitlement to damages or payment of that it acquires, uncovers, or generates in the course of less than$25,000.00 in aggregate may be decided by arbitration performing the work,except as and to the extent Consultant in accordance with the Construction Industry Arbitration Rules of may, in its sole discretion, deem itself required by law to the American Arbitration Association then existing unless the disclose. parties mutually agree otherwise. In the event any person shall commence an action in any oourt for any claim arising out of or relating to this Agreement or the breach thereof or the Project or construction thereof or any contract for such construction, the • party making a claim in arbitration may dismiss such proceedings City of Eden Prairie General Conditions Consultant Agreement February 2001 Page 2of4 133 (unless the hearing on the claim has commenced)and elect to indemnify and hold Consultant harmless from and against assert its claim in such action if such party could have done so demands,damages,and expenses caused by City's negligent acts but for the provisions of this Paragraph. and omissions,and breach of contract and those acts,omissions, and breaches of persons for whom City is legally responsible. The parties agree to bear equal responsibility for the fees of AAA,including the arbitrator(s). Judgement upon the award SECTION 9: INSURANCE/WORKER'S rendered by the arbitrator(s) may be entered in any court COMPENSATION baying jurisdiction thereof. 9.1 Consultant represents and warrants that it has and will In the event that arbitration services are not available from maintain during the performance of this agreement Worker's AAA,either party may request that an arbitrator be appointed Compensation Insurance coverage required pursuant to Minn. by the Fourth Judicial District Court. Stat. 176.181,subd.2 and that the Certificate of Insurance or the mitten order of the Commissioner of Commerce permitting self 6.5.3 Compliance insurance of Worker's Compensation Insurance coverage provided to the City prior to execution of this agreement is The parties deem the dispute resolution procedure as set forth current and in force and effect. herein to be an integral and essential part of this Agreement. A party's failure to comply in all respects with this procedure 9.2 Consultant shall procure and maintain professional liability shall be a substantial breach of this Agreement. The insurance for protection from claims arising out of professional arbitrator(s)shall be authorized to assess costs and attomey's services caused by any negligent act,error or omission for which fees against a party that has failed to comply with the Consultant is legally liable: procedure in all respects,and,may as a condition precedent to arbitration,require the parties to mediate in accordance with 9.3 Certificate of insurance will be provided to City upon request. Section 6.5.1 hereof. SECTION 10: TERMD ATION SECTION 7: STANDARD OF CARE • 10.1 The agreement between Consultant and City may be 7.1 Consultant's opinions,conclusions,recommendations,and terminated by either party upon thirty-(30)days written notice. report,if any,will be prepared in accordance with the City's Request for Proposal and Consultant's proposal and no 10.2 If the agreement is terminated prior to completion of the warranties,representations,guarantees,or certifications will be project, Consultant will receive an equitable adjustment of made. Except that Consultant warrants that hardware and compensation. software will perform as represented in their proposal and other parts of this agreement. SECTION 11: ASSIGNMENT 7.2 Although data obtained from discrete sample locations will 11.1 Neither party may assign duties, rights or interests in the be used to infer conditions between sample locations no performance of the work without obtaining the prior written guarantee may be given that the inferred conditions exist consent of the other party, which consent will not be because soil, surface and groundwater quality conditions unreasonably withheld. • between sample locations may vary significantly,and because conditions at the time of sample collection may also vary SECTION 12: DELAYS significantly with respect to soil, surface water and • groundwater quality at any other given time and for other 12.1 If Consultant is delayed in performance due to any cause reasons beyond Consultant's control. beyond its reasonable control,including but not limited to strikes, riots,fires,acts of God,governmental actions,actions of a third 7.3 Consultant will not be responsible or liable for the party, or actions or inactions of City, the time for performance interpretation of its data or report by others. shall be extended by a period of time lost by reason of the delay. Consultant will be entitled to payment for its reasonable SECTION 8: GENERAL INDEMNIFICATION additional charges,if any,due to the delay. 8.1 Consultant will indemnify and hold City harmless from SECTION 13: EXTRA WORK and against demands, damages, and expenses caused by Consultant's negligent acts and omissions, and breach of 13.1 Extra work,additional compensation for same,and extension contract and those negligent acts,omissions,and breaches of of time for completion shall be covered by written amendment to persons for whom Consultant is legally responsible. City will this agreement prior to proceeding with any extra work or related City of Eden Prairie General Conditions Consultant Agreement February-2001 Page 3 of 9 132-1 expenditures. SECTION 19: CONFLICTS SECTION 14: WITHHOLDING TAXES No salaried officer or employee of the City and no member of the Board of the City shall have a financial interest,dircot or indirect, 14.1 No final payment shall be made to the Consultant until in this contract. The violation of this provision renders the the Consultant has provided satisfactory evidence to the City Contract void. Any federal regulations and applicable state that the Consultant and each of its subcontracts has complied statutes shall not be violated. with the provisions of Minn. Stat. 290.92 relating to withholding of income taxes upon wages. A certificate by the SECTION 20: ENTIRE AGREEMENT Commissioner of Revenue shall satisfy this requirement. 18.1 This Agreement contains the entire understanding between SECTION 15: AUDITS the City and Consultant and supersedes any prior written or oral agreements between them respecting the written subject matter. 15.1 The books, records, documents and accounting There are no representations, agreements, arrangements or procedures and practices of the Consultant or other parties understandings, oral or written between City and Consultant relevant to this Agreement are subject to examination by the relating to the subject matter of this Agreement which are not City and either the Legislative Auditor or the State Auditor for fully expressed herein. a period of six (6) years after the effective date of this Contract. 18.2 The agreement between Consultant and City may be modified only by a written amendment executed by both City and SECTION 16: PAYMENT TO SUBCONTRACTORS Consultant. 16.1 The Consultant shall pay to any Subcontractor within ten 18.3 This agreement is governed by the laws of the State of (10)days of the Consultant's receipt of payment from the City Minnesota for undisputed services provided by the Subcontractor. The . Consultant shall pay interest of one and a half percent (1-1/2%)per month or any part of a month to a Subcontractor on any undisputed amount not paid on time to the Subcontractor. The minimum monthly interest penalty payment for an unpaid balance of$100.00 or more is$10.00. For an unpaid balance of less than $100.00, the Consultant shall pay the actual amount due to the Subcontractor. SECTION 17: DATA PRACTICES ACT COMPLIANCE 17.1 The Consultant shall at all times abide by Minn. Stat. 13.01 et seq.,the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, to the extent the Act is applicable to data and documents in the • possession of the Consultant. • SECTION 18: DISCRU'YIINATION In performance of this contract, the Consultant shall not discriminate on the grounds of or because of race,color,creed, religion,national origin,sex,marital status,status with regards to public assistance, disability, sexual orientation, or age against any employee of the Consultant,any subcontractor of the Consultant, or any applicant for employment. The Consultant shall include a similar provision in all contracts - with subcontractors to this Contract. The Consultant further agrees to comply will all aspects of the Minnesota Human . Rights Act,Minn. Stat. 363.01, et seq.,Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. • City of Eden Prairie General Conditions Consultant dgreentert February 2001 Page 4 of 4 135 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: March 23,2004 SECTION: Consent Calendar DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: I.C. 01-5543 ITEM NO.: Engineering Division Approve Change Order No. 1 for the TH 212/ Randy Newton Valley View Road Interchange Area Improvement ��� � (�(� Project JCS• ' 1 • Requested Action Move to: Approve Change Order No. 1 for the TH 212 /Valley View Road Interchange Area Improvement Project in the amount of$74,102.08. Synopsis This change order is a result of the various minor field revisions that were required during the construction of the project. This project is nearly complete and no additional change orders are expected. Background Information The TH 212/Valley View Road Interchange Area Improvement Project includes double left turn lanes from Bryant Lake Drive to Valley View Road, a trail along Bryant Lake Drive and replacement of the watermain along Bryant Lake Drive. The total construction cost of the project is approximately $2,092,000. The City's share of the project is approximately $980,000 which is paid from the Construction and Utility funds. l-36 March 8, 2004 CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 Project: TH212 at Valley View Road and Bryant Lake Drive Eden Prairie, Minnesota City Project No. 01-5543 To: Bituminous Roadways, Inc. You are hereby directed to make the changes riled below in the contract. NATURE OF CHANGE TO CONTRACT 1. Remove and Dispose Concrete Pavement 2. Test and Dis-infect Water Main 3. Additional Work for Butterfly Valve 4. Utility Delay 5. Re-mobilization 6. Furnish and Install Hydrant Extensions 7. Furnish 2 New Signal Heads 8. Relocate Lighting Controller 9. Furnish and Install TMS Cabinet 10. Directional Bore 2" Conduit 11. Bituminous Pavement Removal 12. Topsoil Borrow 13. Change in Bituminous Mixtures 14. Change in Striping Material 15. Credit for Field Paint 16. Credit for LED Lenses 17. Density of Bituminous Mixtures Deduct ADD the following costs to the contract: Unit Unit Price Oty Amount 1. Remove and Dispose Concrete Pavement S.F. $ 1.10 2,700 $2,970.00 2. Test and Dis-infect Water Main L.S. $ 328.91 1 $ 328.91 3. Additional Work for Butterfly Valve L.S. $1,930.86 1 $1,930.86 4. Utility Delay L.S. $6,604.62 1 $6,604.62 5. Re-mobilization L.S. $1,617.00 1 $1,617.00 6. Furnish and Install Hydrant Extensions L.S. $2,433.90 1 $2,433.90 7. Furnish 2 New Signal Heads L.S. $2,101.67 1 $2,101.67 8. Relocate Lighting Controller L.S. $3,810.33 1 $3,810.33 9. Furnish and Install TMS Cabinet L.S. $ 958.89 1 $ 958.89 10. Directional Bore 2" Conduit L.S. $1,393.14 1 $1,393.14 11. Bituminous Pavement Removal (Add 59,035 SF to Quantity) $26,565.75 12. Topsoil Borrow (Add 2,041 CY to Quantity) $32,656.00 TOTAL ADDITONS $83,371.07 REMOVE the following costs to the contract: Unit Unit Price Oty Amount 13. Change in Bituminous Mixtures (See Mn/DOT Work Order No. 4) -$ 1,701.00 14. Change in Striping Material (See Mn/DOT Work Order No. 5) -$ 5,928.65 15. Credit for Field Paint L.S. -$ 250.00 1 -$ 250.00 16. Credit for LED Lenses L.S. -$ 270.00 1 -$ 270.00 17. Density of Bituminous Mixtures Deduct L.S. -$ 1,119.34 1 -$ 1,119.34 TOTAL DELETIONS -$9,268.99 ORIGINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT $2,018,292.95 TOTAL ADDITONS $ 83,371.07 TOTAL DELETIONS -$ 9,268.99 TOTAL CHANGE RESULTING FROM THIS CHANGE ORDER $ 74,102.08 TOTAL CONTRACT VALUE INCLUDING THIS CHANGE ORDER $2,092,395.03 THE ABOVE CHANGES ARE APPROVED: MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE By By Project Engineer City Manager Date Date THE ABOVE CHANGES ARE ACCEPTED: BITUMINOUS ROADWAYS,INC CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE By By Mayor Date Date I33 CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 Project: TH212 at Valley View Road and Bryant Lake Drive Eden Prairie, Minnesota City Project No. 01-5543 ITEM DESCRIPTION OF CHANGES 1. Remove and Dispose Concrete Pavement: Existing Concrete Pavement conflicted with the installation of the new 16" Water Main. The removal and disposal of the concrete pavement and a corresponding pay item was not included in the construction plans. Payment for this work was determined to be at the negotiated price of$1.10 per square foot. 2. Test and Dis-infect Water Main: Due to utility conflicts beyond the control of the Contractor additional testing and dis-infection of the 16" Water Main was required. Payment for this item was determined on a force account basis. The corresponding lump sum price for this work is $328.91 3. Additional Work for Butterfly Valve: In order to accommodate a utility delay that was beyond the control of the Contractor an additional Butterfly Valve in the 16" Water Main was required to be furnished and installed. Payment for this item was determined on a force account basis. The corresponding lump sum price for this work is $1,930.86. 4. Utility Delay: During Construction the contractor experienced unexpected delays due to the presence of Xcel Power lines, which required relocation, and concrete payment buried beneath the surface neither of which was shown in the plan. The contractor will accept a $6,604.62 lump sum payment as compensation for idle equipment and idle labor resulting from the unanticipated utility relocations and concrete removal. 5. Re-mobilization: Center Point Energy did not anticipate relocation of a 16" gas main, and therefore did not perform the relocation prior to the Contract start date. Due to the gas main relocation conflicting with the Contractor operations, the Contractor was required to suspend operations during the gas main relocation. The contractor will accept a $1,617.00 lump sum payment as compensation for an additional mobilization/de-mobilization resulting from the unanticipated gas main relocation. 6. Furnish and Install Hydrant Extensions: In order to account for the change in elevation due to grading work the Contractor was required to furnish and install three hydrant extensions. Payment for this work was determined on a force account basis. The corresponding lump sum price for this work is $2,433.90 7. Furnish 2 New Signal Heads: During construction it was determined that two signal heads, planned for re-installation, were incompatible with the new LED indicators and required replacement. Payment for this work was determined by reasonable invoice. The corresponding lump sum price for this work is$2,101.67. 8. Relocate Lighting Controller: The construction plans inadvertently showed the lighting controller cabinet on the wrong side of the ramp. Due to a conflict with the new ramp alignment the lighting controller cabinet was required to be relocated. Payment for this item was determined on a force account basis. The corresponding lump sum price for this work is$3,810.33. /35 City Project No. 01-5543 Change Order No. 1 March 8, 2004 ITEM DESCRIPTION OF CHANGES Furnish and Install TMS Cabinet: During construction it was determined that a permanent source of power for the Traffic Management System was required. Payment for this item was determined on a force account basis. The corresponding lump sum price for this work is $958.89. 10. Directional Bore 2" Conduit: The construction of a right turn lane on Valley View Road, as part of another project, was not accounted for within the construction plans. As a result conduit that was anticipated to be direct buried was required to be directionally bored. Payment for this item was determined on a force account basis. The corresponding lump sum price for this work is $1,393.14. 11. Bituminous Pavement Removal: The plan quantity for this item calculated remove Bituminous Pavement using square yards, however, the contract stipulated square feet. As a result the item was over run by approximately nine (9) times. The contract unit price for this item was reasonable and no price negotiation was deemed necessary. This change adds 59,035 square feet to the contract quantity. 12. Topsoil Borrow: The plan quantity for this item significantly underestimated the necessary Topsoil Borrow needed for construction. The unit price for this item was reasonable and no price negotiation was deemed necessary. This change adds 2041 cubic yards to the contract quantity. 13. Change in Bituminous Mixtures: During construction it was determined that a lesser performance grade of asphalt could be used on Valley View Road. As a result, new prices for the Bituminous Mixtures pay items were established. The effected pay items are documented in Mn/DOT Work Order Number 4. The corresponding net change in the contact is a credit of$1,701.00. 14. Change in Striping Material: During construction it was determined that there was no pay item for removing pavement marking. In addition it was determined that epoxy pavement marking were adequate for use on existing pavement. As a result, the necessary pay items were established and negotiated. The effected pay items are documented in Mn/DOT Work Order Number 5. The corresponding net change in the contact is a credit of$5,928.65. 15. Credit for Field Paint: One signal mast arm was delivered with the incorrect color. In order to bring the color into compliance field painting of the mast arm was required. Due to the shortened life span of the field paint system as compared to the manufactured field paint system a credit of $250.00 was negotiated. 16. Credit for LED Lenses: The contractor failed to salvage existing LED lenses to the City. Due to this failure a credit of$270.00 was negotiated. 17. Density of Bituminous Mixtures Deduct: As per Special Provisions for Superpave Hot Mix Asphalt the contractor is due a lump sum deduction of $1,119.34 for Bituminous Mixtures placed on the project. IL/U CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: March 23,2004 SECTION: Consent Calendar DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: I.C. 95-5372 ITEM NO.: Engineering Division Approve Change Order No. 1 for Prairie Center Randy Newton Drive/Prairie Lakes Drive Traffic Signal Project U. , Requested Action Move to: Approve Change Order No. 1 for Prairie Center Drive / Prairie Lakes Drive Traffic Signal project in the amount of$940.00. Synopsis This change order is a result of minor revisions made to the traffic signal system during construction. The project is now complete and no additional change orders are expected. Background Information This project added a new traffic signal to the Prairie Center Drive/ Prairie Lakes Drive intersection. The project also included traffic signal interconnect on Prairie Center Drive between TH 212 and Viking Drive and between West 78th Street and Preserve Boulevard. The total project costs are approximately $175,000. As part of the 1994 Hartford Place PUD development proposals $71,000 was allocated towards the construction of this project. The remainder of the construction cost for this project is paid from the Construction Fund. JLI) March 5, 2004 CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 Project: Traffic Control Signal System at Prairie Center Drive & Prairie Lakes Drive Eden Prairie, Minnesota City Project 94-5372 To: Egan-McKay Electrical Contractors, Inc. You are hereby directed to make the changes noted below in the contract. NATURE OF CHANGE TO CONTRACT 1. Extension of Mastarm 2. Addition of Pedestal Collar ADJUSTMENTS TO CONTRACT COSTS ADD the following costs to the contract. Item Description Unit Unit Price Quantity Amount 1. Mastarm extension L.S. $650.00 1 $650.00 2. Pedestal collar L.S. $290.00 1 $290.00 TOTAL ADDITIONS $940.00 DELETE the following costs from the contract. Item Description Unit Unit Price Quantity Amount 1. N.A. $0.00 TOTAL DELETIONS $0.00 ORIGINAL CONTRACT AMOUNT $131,149.00 TOTAL ADDITIONS +940.00 TOTAL DELETIONS - 0.00 INCREASE RESULTING FROM THIS CHANGE ORDER $940.00 TOTAL CONTRACT VALUE INCLUDING THIS CHANGE ORDER $132,089.00 THE ABOVE CHANGES ARE APPROVED: WESTWOOD PROFESSIONAL'' SERVICES, INC. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE By 01Lá,vi S /� By Manager Date -3/l F/0 4- By THE ABOVE CHANGES ARE ACCEPTED: EGAN- CKAY ELEC ICAL CONTRACTORS, INC. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE By By Mayor Date —/�—'Q By /LID March 5, 2004 CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 Project: Traffic Control Signal System at Prairie Center Drive & Prairie Lakes Drive Eden Prairie, Minnesota City Project 94-5372 To: Egan-McKay Electrical Contractors, Inc. ITEM DESCRIPTION OF CHANGES 1. Extension of Mastarm: In the southwest corner of the intersection, the location of the foundation for pole number 2 was adjusted to avoid a conflict with inplace underground utilities. To accommodate the change in foundation location while maintaining correct signal head placement, the Contractor was directed to furnish and install a forty foot mastarm rather than the 35 foot mastarm indicated on the plans. The estimated cost for the longer mastarm is $650.00. 2. Addition of Pedestal Collar: At the time of project letting, the standard, metro-wide, specifications for traffic signal construction did not include a pedestal shaft wind collar. After.project letting, the standard specifications were amended to include the collar. The Contractor was ordered to furnish and install a wind collar on the pedestal shaft in the southeast corner of the intersection to meet with current industry practice and to ensure • greater stability to the pedestal shaft. II3 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Public Hearings March 23,2004 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Office of City Manager/Planning Ordinance Amending City Code Section 11.70 '1 Scott H.Neal, City Manager Relating to Sign Permits .A. Michael D. Franzen, City Planner L Requested Action Move to: • Close the Public Hearing; and • Approve 1st Reading of the Ordinance to amend Section 11.70 to include definitions for both commercial and non-commercial speech related to signs posted within the City of Eden Prairie and to set forth which regulations in Section 11.70 are applicable to signs containing non-commercial speech. Synopsis The City Code is being revised for the following reasons: • The code does not include a definition regarding Non-Commercial speech. Signs containing Non-Commercial speech are allowed in any district, subject to size, height and setbacks of the district they are located in. • To clarify the difference between Commercial and Non-Commercial speech. Commercial speech is related to a business, commodity, service, or entertainment. Non-Commercial speech is the dissemination of messages not classified as Commercial Speech which include, but are not limited to, messages concerning political, religious, social, ideological,public service and informational topics. • To clarify the regulations applicable to Commercial and Non-Commercial Speech. Second Reading of the Ordinance appears on this agenda under Ordinances and Resolutions. Community Planning Board Recommendation The Community Planning Board will review the code change on March 22, 2004. Staff will bring a draft copy of the minutes to the meeting. Attachments Ordinance for Sign Code Amendment Community Planning Board Staff Report dated March 19,2004 JyLl CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. - 2004 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE,MINNESOTA,AMENDING CITY CODE CHAPTER 11 BY AMENDING SECTION 11.70 RELATING TO SIGN PERMITS; AND ADOPTING B Y 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. City Code Section 11.70,Subd. 2 is amended by inserting the following two(2)new definitions in alphabetical order and renumbering the Definitions section accordingly: "Commercial Speech" - Speech relating to a business, profession, commodity, service or entertainment. "Non-Commercial Speech" - Dissemination of messages not classified as Commercial Speech which include, but are not limited to, messages concerning political, religious, social, ideological, public service and informational topics. Section 2. City Code Section 11.70, Subd. 3, Subsection H shall be deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: H. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Section, all signs of any size containing Non-Commercial Speech may be posted from August 1 in any general election year until ten (10) days following the general election and thirteen(13)weeks prior to any special election until ten(10) days following the special election. Section 3. City Code Section 11.70,Subd. 3, Subsection AA shall be deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: AA. Sign permits will not be issued for signs containing Commercial Speech which bear misleading or false information or any sign which includes information inconsistent with zoning and/or land use. Section 4. City Code Section 11.70, Subd. 3 is amended by adding Subsection II which shall read as follows: II. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Section, signs containing Non-Commercial Speech are permitted in all Districts and are subject to only 115 the following Subsections of 11.70,Subd. 3: B,C,D,E,F,G,H,L,M,0,Q, V, W, X, Z, AA. Non-commercial signs are also subject to individual District setback provisions and total signage regulations as applicable to each particular sign type (i.e. Free-standing, Temporary, Wall). Section 5. City Code Section 11.70,Subd. 5, Subsection D is amended by adding a new number 6 which shall read as follows: 6. Portable Signs containing Non-Commercial Speech. 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 day of , 2004, and finally read and adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the day of ,2004. Kathleen Porta, City Clerk Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie Sun Current on , 2004. Planning Board Minutes March 22, 2004 • Page 13 D. SIGN PERMITS Proposal to amend City,Code`Section 11.70 to include definitions for both commercial and non-cola merc al'speech'related to signs posted within the City of Eden Prairie and to set for hh.,which regulations in Section 11.70 applicable to signs containing non-commercial Franzen speecli. Franzen stated the code for signpermits doesn't include a definition regarding noncommercial speech. He saidthe difference between commercial and noncommercial speech is that coi neicial'is re1ated,to a business, commodity, service, or entertainment,whereas iioncoiinane czal applies to signs that include personal messages such as anti-war or,ellecti'on sig s :The ordinance would provide that all signs need to have a certain setback':aid szeiir:tati°on. Nelson asked if Section 2 H is going to,include the special'election language. Rosow responded it has been revised.`'©°more'closely match the state statute. The state statute only applies to general:eleetions�wlile'-the.City Code language has been expanded to include special elections He stated residents will be placing signs out soon for the elections and the City wants to be clear on That's permitted with noncommercial signs. Nelson'`as1 e:d whetherthe eo`de;should apply to caucuses and �;fit;^S..�i' :� ij.?�rais.. ;. :.,: c.::• other elections. She said there�.is a;bill i ;the legislature currently which would allow signs anytime. Rosow responded that if that bill SAnacted, the ordinance would be brought back before the Plani ing�;Board'a ,d-Coa ncil to change the wording to conform to state law. Nelson said there is onlyra zionth to elections,:aad the ordinance does not address caucuses. Rosow responded there are other sections that caucuses would fall under but that's an excellent,po{it'and the language can be changed to make it more encompassing, inclu iig-special and primary elections. Nelson stated it would be appropriate since the„elections are:;on a two year cycle. Foote askeTA d if •this ordinance`woul :�adadreSs language and not placement. Rosow stated noncommercial speech~ii-less,regulated than commercial and the amendment will apply��•. o,noncommercial speech;He,;said content can't be regulated since freedom of peech is ari t=mportant right. Nelson;:asked whether tt*<item should be continued for further discussion. Rosow respox de.d:the ordinance will be presented to the City Council on Tuesday and there w.o 't,be'time to address t aga+ g 11' OTI;OlY::'by Sutherland,r econd,-by Nelson, to close the public hearing. Motion MOTION'by Nelson, second-=by Foote, to recommend approval of an amendment to City Code Sectzo r1.L70 to=include definitions for both commercial and non- commercial speech relatedto signs posted within the City of Eden Prairie and to set Planning Board Minutes March 22, 2004 •Page 14 •• ••1 A • forth which regulations in Section 11.70 are applicable tolsigns containing non- commercial speech, including a change to section which would include primary, general and special elections, subject to the recommendations of the staff report dated March 19, 2004, to the City Council. M:Otioietiire.(1.,.541 •.Aig• " 4 • ',V•„ , P- •17?'7•,.-.'••;•!t.,•.-:•:'. t . CA :“.t;:•-71!W ••• 4,*••• 44;1414* • t.,. '•%:„ ••••!),, t,. ••••••••.-.•-• • • •• .• • • ••. • ••••••:•:•?tp: •••• • "••••• • • •••:::..•A• • CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 03/23/04 SECTION: Public Hearings DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Office of City Manager/Planning -� Scott H. Neal Scenic Heights Apartments Michael D. Franzen Requested Action Move to: • Close the Public Hearing; and • Adopt the Resolution for Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential on .62 acres; and • Adopt the Resolution for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on .97 acres; and • Approve 1st Reading of the Ordinance for Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers, and Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on .35 acres, and from Rural to RM-6.5 on .62 acres; and • Adopt the Resolution for Preliminary Plat on .97 acres into 2 lots; and • Direct Staff to prepare a Development Agreement incorporating Staff and Board recommendations and Council conditions. Synopsis This project is to create two lots. One is for a single family home and other is for the existing apartment building. A guide plan change from low density residential to medium density residential and planned unit development waivers for density and parking are required. Community Planning Board Recommendation This project was first reviewed at an informational meeting in November 2003. The Board concluded that the creation of a single family lot was acceptable provided the existing multiple building could not be expanded for additional units. The staff suggested the RM-6.5 zoning district with waivers to allow the existing building to remain, with provisions to preclude additional units in the future. At the February 23, 2004 meeting the Community Planning Board voted 7-0 to recommend approval of the project to the City Council, including the waiver for density and parking based on the condition to maintain the character of the site as it exists today, for not enlarging the building, adding units, or adding garages. Background Information The proposed single family lot conforms to the lot size and dimensional requirements of the R1- 13.5 district. The minimum lot size required is 13,500 square feet. The minimum street frontage requirement is 85 feet. The proposed house meets the required front, rear and side yard setbacks. The proposed multiple family lot meets the requirements of the RM-6.5 district with the exception of enclosed parking and density. The granting of the waiver for parking and density is in exchange for maintaining the character of the site as it exists today, for not enlarging the building, adding units, or adding garages. Attachments 1. Resolution for Guide Plan Change 2. Resolution for Planned Unit Development Concept Review 3. Resolution for Preliminary Plat 4. Community Planning Board Staff Reports dated November 21, 2003, February 20, 2004 5. Community Planning Board Minutes dated November 24, 2003, February 23, 2004. 6. Letter from Doug Schmidt 7. Email Jan Mosman SCENIC HEIGHTS APARTMENTS CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2004- A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE MUNICIPAL PLAN WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has prepared and adopted the Comprehensive Municipal Plan ("Plan"); and WHEREAS, the Plan has been submitted to the Metropolitan Council for review and comment; and WHEREAS, the proposal of Scenic Heights Apartments by Duane and Patricia Pidcock is for a subdivision to create a lot for a new single family home and a lot for the existing 6-unit apartment building; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, hereby adopts the amendment of the Plan subject to Metropolitan Council approval as follows: .62 acres from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential, located at Red Rock Road and Scenic Heights Road. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 23rd day of March, 2004. Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk 1y9 SCENIC HEIGHTS APARTMENTS CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2004- A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT OF SCENIC HEIGHTS APARTMENTS FOR DUANE AND PATRICIA PIDCOCK 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 February 23, 2004, on Scenic Heights Apartments for Duane and Patricia Pidcock and considered their request for approval of the PUD Concept plan and recommended approval of the request to the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council did consider the request on March 23, 2004. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, as follows: 1, Scenic Heights Apartments, 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 stamp dated January 23, 2004. 3. That the PUD Concept meets the recommendations of the Community Planning Board dated February 23, 2004. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 23rd day of March, 2004. Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk 150 EXHIBIT A PUD Concept- Scenic Heights Apartments Legal Description: Tract A, Registered Land Survey No. 136 151 SCENIC HEIGHTS APARTMENTS CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2004- RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF SCENIC HEIGHTS APARTMENTS FOR DUANE AND PATRICIA PIDCOCK BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of Scenic Heights Apartments for Duane and Patricia Pidcock stamp dated January 23, 2004, and consisting of.97 acres into 2 lots and road right-of-way, 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 23rd day of March, 2004. Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk I5?. STAFF REPORT TO: Community Planning Board FROM: Michael D. Franzen, City Planner DATE: November 21, 2003 SUBJECT: Scenic Heights Apartments—Informational Meeting APPLICANT/ Duane and Patricia Pidcock OWNER: Duane and Patricia Pidcock LOCATION: 15201 Scenic Heights Road 1 Area Location Map - Scenic He Apartments Address: 15201 Scenic Heights htApa Road , :...... .. . : .... : .., .,.... " • : .. .;• : . .. i - !li ll• l!• .11 • .. v:firri ` * �.1,_ ..:; ' :t;21:` - t!.:,y,: .... . . ... ' : 1: ? :- �'_:-�. . •.:,. . ia=, _--:. :. ._ . , I 1 1. ik ,.,,...,.I�,. .._ .. : Li;..;:l •J. _. i : A..- , rr :.I. a.. r. . , I il : s �oa :,.- .._..... __.t....J.,.r._...v• l. ....e • : A . `Sceni: 'Heg° fi '. .�. :i...r.;_,.,. :°��� , . •C . W .�: (}k,r ,1; � y1 lf�" - •v;:flk4AY f�•�A^� ' ti. , : - « ' ;I g.:! � �� ., vL ` ' 'k ' ` •t ;.A VI'�{ �I:� . .I 1 •r: r. .r E'r .F•� --_ • - . { . '• • r. .,-. b ,,: fA4ati .'::."+.,w ' •F� fi "( -.._ - • •• • • •• • •k, ; u•.' 7: -.-` ;..... ..- •r;!.!;.,. i > x r..!4 - lj•r„ ,I. . : ,; 1;,,,.., , J'r; .� � ,#r •'.:i. d 4,tIi+" R, . r r. witi :,:h; :...:..:.._: ...._,.!:4 . .._ ; L -_:Y`' _,F_ i: _ � ' .a - _�.4w :_vn�v��i..A,:nEr-'. __ 1,. _i _ •s:4or `iAx ; _ 9F - , } � _"•.• ;:—" r '4F fF.i: •- 51 �+er I" i�'.. .._ur: _�, -•:;v. f/.!.), II - l ' ! y..}� ., wr?"r.-•r ;',';."rf°I:._ :,^A !.4..nF_!_ -• ;__,„:.:'.:..-.. ,.: y,yy€,:!.' •� i y:°` !1r •,,'Y.v1; l.ti<: ,*: l •`I {!' .,�.�;-,.,,.:;���,,:.::.. .4L„JP"t4 +lt[?'t,_'.. - s, ... .- : l' y�!• `i-J.k' .// y , u:-r,4 i"„n4.1•`S:•"',V'Wti r'r ,kM� J�, ";x Cy:.Sa.Tei,Mt,Ntti, !,' ,I.:,:''r„!.rIk"4•1•4 • , ^- k F;"M4,:•:' 'I..I + 1RriFI y'.'.w� r, ;I'!�k�1:i. 1 `:.`"';r;'u'.f',,i:�yu..:k' :, • m :, -:�.i1J !::xM. ,ht, i '.. '� ' •r14i'!;;II:.S ���"';h:4',iir,ef0,x: ISi;, ry 1. • !;c,.,',. ;{lx'y.1;p,, t#�,,' ills',1 e':Q iVe• ,," - '.:.z'; Fti;nY. k�..'F :,k + '1 - ' II il;i• j.. ;[J�!: 5 ~k,h ,i 'fir - ,Y! ''II _ '!;;..I!:1 I'i.„.4;..'4. '; ;''t' ,,...; .,;.'.;, I !,S';.1 t:! �nG,:rF„" ,,. +4. .....•: ..•'• .:iI I.IilIi(:!I„I ,.r1,_. ,.M:.rtM;:r,*� 'j;:,,r•_:' .. ...:. :..kkks.x ;!v4;Sf',, , r I • !§_� ,;am: i , ;''"'' -i.- i. ii - I!'.;;: ' ,... r _J ; _ .. , .-- . .:, ' te .. : _U: i--'—_ _. ......,. ar•" - ---- , ' 'ti. - CC: . i •'t:••:-::i:'•:•'• 't•••'•- •1. i. 2. J � _ !'i��i...:-.+ " ; - •s�( . ,- ,.•J�J i* 'i 5 isik ,i k �,;,•. ,'•'5.:1"' :,,,G�:{:.. 4:x..r'.:: .fL^,,,'i '•� '.i, .k"! x'4u:ry Shy?= 1;'x 14T;1 .Ifi' ,Y.: x, __ I!1 _ `*1. C,,,.,1,� •.,11 .'arc', .'r" _>'x; • .I. !:`�;'J_:.�.�=:`i;:':', '.••! .wy .✓K jy;"q:.l�'�j:� .]' r� x .I.7t14r^�:".14���,' 1� p _ _-- I�}i' '�.lM Le :t.'3�'x,i�k'ei:i",IAr:%`x•!i ,.! �I! :,C.`v',v',, :,kit',-.r„j.11. r✓.4: __„"Iw•. _ '.,. •u!r.'I'4i!:',,,,W,.,,Ll ,1 k:.x: y'I•:M! ki _-_,.. ."-:::11__::. '!:v li,w.i,i.Mn:,,,• — tr$!•: (l:ih�l i.r•f6.:, __ 1: viut ,,,,::„... ...,.......;.„:"`•:„':':',,,,,••••:'...4L'ilk c.- .;. .},!. ...... .....:._..._...._.:'';' - �`.,s!;.f.�i,�u.dam..= __�_— ;"� L. .Y I'd ='•F ,r,,1 d \ •. '.•-:•...—:. ," . .••.1::...‘;::''''''': '.••••:..;1••:...E.-::,;7..;,:::;•:::: .1'iill's i .r•-\ �.� • �• .: :.• ,.. .. .. ..I.;i•:.. _ .:IYiI'�'ti'ill,il! .1'f, .......i.,.:..:.:. I.!r J..•. ..Ili�;_..,�.:._:' .. ..:_:., t - _ �"��...q"iki"I�l it', - :i'. r;"d;:krl I�;'l! •,:!,� ,�I�; tr gi;l� l�'�n:"':: ,rr,, �'/{ '':'�!',' I • x'�„�.r11 ',,I., „yi�''4:, ,I 1'L!r'�"� •;F.,,„ i 'il.l;4; '.,,.;.,..• ,,,.+yip .,._.,—. ....._..._.._... �"„I'1 k- „'I'I;i,;,,�. .^;•,,� ,,!p 1;�1., rl:G:-,• 'T -;��. .'�! ' „_,,r. �:'III;I!I .,�,� ,.. ^ '.i,l.l�!' !'� .''l.' :::i!il':i,:•!i';,I� •• r•n,,,..i• r^{';'i ..:': "illl'n.. I.,v �i'i-'f' ,:4�'e''.": 'r'�:; " ::I I'1,;,.Il il.;;1:. _.--::!'ii!111,I ::..I is ,,.,;' ' .,r .. ( •:�.!,!'; ,... r•.-•'n•••,. ,,. .,.II... il'1I'I,., IIT Ij'I !i .:..,.._y_ ,. ;',i, li, .11, it:•illl•.4,:.". .!ir',,'h .�;I'.II'i!j irl.i,,-; ;'.F..'-. �7'C::il:'!i), ,_..� :III,,. ;,;III,I;..,.p. � .,.,.r. E�iJI.: !SAY�Ir�•;I,i it � - •,1:{.f.!; iill, F .,v'F,•'!da"r '':� t -1 v.li,•4._, r•; ';'sx - - -- — ,•k ' k r 1-.. .-.. :•••],_::,-s is ..,,,.i;. .. ..: "!t•' -'li::':.y, _ f4 iced=l�`aic�k�.a�i��d�: 0 , .. .. ....... ....• . 4. III .... ... .... .... .�Inr;,l-,,-."••• : I'!` - .,i:l .1!!, - .,�: ::1:.;1''I.!:'!:.J:i • �!1 „•„...,..,., .... ,... it 'I l.l:.d, `i .i.l ,,.., ;. ... , !>r I...r.: , ,. it..: ':r ; :I YM:.,!. I''.I:! lll,,:e:i:::!:i , I,..,. � .:.... :,: • �•, v• v. i ... ...:. _ 'll I'll k - i,l.,l. :':.I'a'R:.:..e: "... i .... , I....._ ;,,,i{�' ,I, III I. `''.4.',._ .';- . � ._.. ........ .._. .. 1 .,1.•i.r.:lllll;;1;.......: ... •:.:- '�F,= I 'I 11!:!. ,I,. ,,Yl.n-=k: i •li F' • • • - - _ �\\ : : .: _. :I,1� .. \,:- _..--_ '::f !::,:, • •�.. __ _ ' 111 t�`I ,ti t .:rt� I LJ Staff Report—Scenic Heights Apartments Informational Meeting November 21, 2003 PURPOSE The purpose of the informational meeting is for: 1. The developer to present the proposed concept plan. 2. The developer, the Community Planning Board, and staff to hear comments from area residents on the proposal. 3. To identify issues for the developer and staff to address in detailed plans prior to returning for a public hearing. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL The Pidcock family would like to continue to use the existing building for 6 rental units and to split off a piece of land to be sold for a single family home. In order to accomplish this, the City will have to consider the following actions at a future public hearing. • A Guide Plan change from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential on .66 acres. • A rezoning from Rural to RM-2.5 on .66 acres. • A rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5. • A Preliminary Plat of.92 acres into 2 lots. CURRENT ZONING OF THE PROPERTY The property is currently zoned Rural. The existing six unit rental building is a non conforming use. GUIDE PLAN The site is currently guided Low Density Residential. Surrounding land uses are guided Low Density Residential. PROPOSED R1-13.5 LOT The proposed lot conforms to the lot size and dimensional requirements of the R1-13.5 district.The minimum lot size required is 13,500 square feet . The minimum street frontage requirement is 85 feet. l Staff Report—Scenic Heights Apartments Informational Meeting November 21, 2003 PROPOSED RM-2.5 LOT The proposed lot meets the requirements of the RM-2.5 district with the exception of parking, side yard setback, and exterior materials. District Standard Proposed plan Lot size—25,000 sf 28,879 sf Lot Width 150 feet 80 feet Lot depth— 150 feet 180 feet Front yard setback—35 feet 50 feet Sideyard setback 25 feet 23.2 feet Rear yard setback—30 feet 110 feet Building height—45 feet 22 feet Parking- 2/unit, one enclosed no garages, six open spaces 75%brick and glass exterior 10% brick and glass STAFF ASSESSMENT The C ity C ode regulates n on-conforming u ses. These are u ses t hat w ere b uilt prior to zoning regulations. The intent is to limit the number and extent of non-conforming uses by prohibiting their enlargement, their re-establishment after abandonment, and the alteration or restoration after destruction of the structures they occupy. There are alternative ways to use the property. 1. Allow the current use of the property to continue. The property remains in its current use until the owner redevelops in conformance with the guide plan for two single family lots. Single family would be consistent with the guide plan and the development pattern in the area. 2. Subdivide a lot and rezone to R1-13.5,leave the other lot zoned Rural. An additional single family lot would be consistent with the area. The apartment building Staff Report—Scenic Heights Apartments Informational Meeting November 21, 2003 would remain as a non-conforming use in the Rural zoning district until the owner redevelops the property in conformance with the guide plan for a second single family lot. 3. Change the guide plan from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential, rezone the property to R1-13.5 and RM-2.5, subdivide, and grant variances as requested. This requires a decision that a multiple family use for six units can be compatible with the surrounding area. The existing character of the property will not change appreciably. One additional single family lot is consistent with the area. 4. Change the guide plan from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential, rezone the property to R1-13.5 and RM-2.5, subdivide, and require the apartment building to conform to City Code. This requires a decision that a multiple family use for six units can be compatible with the surrounding area, provided the building and s ite i s brought into c onformance with the performance standards of the City Code. This would require building six garages,paving the parking lot,incorporating face brick on the building and garages,landscaping, screening of parking and other building and fire code requirements. 5. Change the guide plan from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential, rezone the property to RM 6.5, tear down the building and build 6 townhouse units. The density of the property would be the same. Create six townhouse units and lots for individual ownership. The staff would support choices 1, 2, 4, and 5. SUMMARY The Community Planning Board should discuss the following questions. 1. Should the land remain guided Low Density Residential? 2. Should this site continue for apartment rental housing? 3. What are the potential impacts of continuing the existing use? 4. Are there other more appropriate uses for the property? 151 STAFF REPORT TO: Community Planning Board FROM: Michael D. Franzen, City Planner DATE: February 20, 2004 SUBJECT: Scenic Heights APPLICANT/ Duane and Patricia Pidcock OWNER: Duane and Patricia Pidcock LOCATION: 15201 Scenic Heights Road 1. Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential on .62 acres. 2. Planned Unit Development Concept Review on .97 acres 3. Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on .97 acres 4. Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on .35 acres and from Rural to RM-6.5 on .62 acres 5. Site Plan Review on .62 acres 6. Preliminary Plat of .97 acres into 2 lots and road right-of-way • 'Area L-- o'5.'---A-.1.;3.c:Ci a7-. :.t1 ion±2'2 Map _. .._._,'3.k Sc:.,I,,..,1I._.z,:7,,14..:e_,*,::1:;,W'7:R- n.iis-.'_',_E' ji,,1tr24-i:1c H"-----':---.--;71.-.7re:-:•-dz.▪. i.-.;0.• ..:..ig..4.k.:1a261gha-44..ilM.-l'a5t.1tf2.S47-0a.."a7-ls.74i:ng1g A k,.pa-:,,]3n,„-il....°'.$...k-=.'-1.1,7i2i_.i-F2 17.r54i-71-1-T14'.1g.4.:1-_2tm4-;=, e- n .m7t:2„. s Address' 15201 Scenic Heights Road q iA : t 5 w : • v4 ' , . tEf„t ,,, 4m a - - Z2 7\ _ kr ;: 47 &-5% I7- zt ± % r z It 4 t# 1iNkkV0d1 _ n _4.:1_". : gkig:"4-U51161:4°'''''-'"--" ,1•17 :iisitr_-- --- ;_--r:•-!.. -- ...-. :_rwt::-,--_,---:_.--,-1--:::!-IF-:,---:"•-.7- ...,,„,...,,,,mit,!,.7 4.11,1wv-------- __.:,.. .„-:•: _7-g-:! : ,. F.w.-,-----,.,-_::._71--,.27:i‘1,,ej‘:7_:•t,-_-.7#4-6----• ,......,..„,_.-„,,,,,-,4,-.*TAL._-1.-.,:- ;---- Og.,,____%47-14.-Vii#ALM:".13riatTREfe:MWAggilkx "'''' ' '1411:e>' ratiglIW:: -.:-.W' _,_,41;4V-TIVP-5a: E..v.F.Y:Wisty.4*.irlicIrgi F..•=1:- c.:,...F.._-11dget-i..r,7!fr..N:;-:4-:-,z,!t63;--.10-7.1.1 gOli7';,--'17E.T.,1!.Err.2: --. -i-:1-FATiiiNiira.V tift.m.77-2tAl :.....Ttitw,L4< . ,,,--it.stria%7-.416.r. irr4,•' ..dtkliVtVer.:401kii:!:iir" '7".. mAtz-f,i.:--.:.::-;--.1.P.Ng - ----.!.,41,-sli::.:;.:-.-_,.=;7:7E--,1 rwre.4.7. .,'.---..'Z :;_*-'-: :LiAtt-W:2.1.EIEFIEF -il E-1 r Rhea ..:.:":,...,n_.:1,.7.„..--._*,.7---_,:jor.;„-.,.:,:_,---..----Rotr4W--• -'•.'''"- . : giii4401---r% War-gpillieregs-V4zaa-7Q. :ist,..=vie,....,:a.,,,,••••'')4' , .,,kritt.,-;.-qti5-'.fr.. naikiAt=1•44 =-r-'. ...E-44..-Lir•i:_:-._-.-::;±-kz---7..-- - -1.7,7-a i=„,:sz,-,-,AI .„'*' .1 .E.I...., kr-5:4,14!.it„..,,,,j,kilOii.i'ki!'toktioitek:‘,:...,,. 6..',.5- ,:1',..2r.::: ::-i-72ii -4.20ititti .!ffiT117,F:Flitit10.41:..liefftr0.- frl...L.R.Witt .:; -fr:littlIT4„..17.,744r;!._..57_1'.7_; -,-f='_,IN.EtlitharAIRW-a4C0.1 FiNg.i.kg .t.:.-.. -+F.:4alliKfs:.': -.-Witlit.7g____%:5; 1,-. .. r-Prgf.rigUM-4-1%-i,-..:.-.F.- •-i--7511kniipEiggi,;:tirrix : --:•;:.:;iE,-.L7:;.: 7,,,,,-7:-.7.7.1 sti-:-.,.- .:44...i ..:-m-.T7:::Rcir-_-'EF%W-ff•-- A.,...--,441 ..FrLf.Q.ii- E:.a.:7:71,74 ..:.- -.1 4.--7E..52.:4'm..7.4:•..-75-... f-1--';'77: ;i": 1-Zi7:Wi4kiinul' ' '''''". ___-46.litil,.:Ifil.4M11 .j'17-7W:7141*.t.5,,E11;?:-.24.N Iiiiii2M,11.11- i-.1:3Wi ...mgq.-.11:-414.011rEr* ZAiia:', 124-rg-7:T.r1-7-*-4-- -41f5: 1-StgiFfftglfEtTratii";_ji=t !i:tgli4E:T-MEW*zi.-szg.:-zr. -- k-pw:-ElAi.:,-,•!--,-..ftTit-w-Fatwill 7----:,-----„1„._ ...„_-,-,,,,Q.-_:-,?.f.!:-Alaa.-Ti.2 IR,,,...r7----•-',....warftyr as_Eve,Aftgo----— -.:-,;..,.,._.,.4.7,:a7,-._-7_;- :_.7.-,L.tii t:Etirlir, :,..,..,;,,,.„ „.;,11-Lime,...,---.. r•-•-'--• -•-:- ', "71.9-7,ii.T7Mfgik" ----rf.:7J41 i----,1..-1-7-..,77-7-:-.A-7.-4.5.::-.2E-:÷.,.:-z.--v4: -.•.:i::&1-.:,::-.---....., .:.,,..2-=-7----, ki.W.-'2ffFE:11Mr-7.7..:IFT:71,1?-454*UN ..q15.1-73T 1.17:'.72.'"IiEe.--%'":-'57-111Qii--4----=_.7-7-7-':'41-:•5745.E-.41 ,--r'.7*.-..m-::.,.7.-..-I:t.:.-- `E.W4'r+IZEtlit'..W-.121.: 1 :7 .Z.-:;;;:..:?I' V'l Ilii. ,--2711ria:&';:"224AM-Tr--114.774 .-:_,:l egraf-41:-=. d*A-Ukl,,,._,..„,t.'--Z.Z...-4.-Riwi rifiP'.'''',"Wa..1-ElFrg migacEf-.A.sFaE.49! ,._,-r4--,._:--:-,-;114-4.4 etZirAYA.'...'-7fitiriAlleitilii .112".." --Z."-__.- :.=-1.1 kit-fATt-Q8.-.. ..1:.:IaL---7:f, klgthj :--6-.t.;..--5 - -Tgaf.42iii.E.,-,4r..., ...1..-a-7....:-77.7.t7:44S;e2i,4giTtrj-lx2-..-7-7P aggi-14M-74:nlailk-ES.,rVig -57E..:--;.-1-geltrelA:--- .÷.7.4!17.141-A4.74in ., .r.,-7.;7:-Ft,"'ir'F:1"_.,. a t1.0-nk-W- 2.7sn-02 !ri --..11 ,L----Tr2:: --- -'1------'.-----,-17,...,-1,---- "Tgg 14-- ---$5.Ar NticipT:11!,11r.r.!-TI ril.Atria.:55-1-1:14 -41 ER:17:fatiai Rir7:47-t7-.:4100401-f-Tiak. ..,!,.. . 7 galfisli51- 7.4*-..7-•:at. -- . gma,..-:---Ett ,•;'111-Ro'-gr.-•-• -,:::40.,,,!...-4gra_N-1.5R-i-.::"*.,N,„ N't2E-:st.--.AFV ,V1 :442-kg E'Aligre"- -.-0;_.V.-Pc.--Yt'ir„,._,:=:-.....q !'•:7-7L-...---t..,--.41 -7.1 -X-tr:r:*......m• -..• ..:,;atiii;:ii-.-7-- - 11tilef_T-:=_.Egh-k!L ivkl -'-'7A-= ---r.•-_-. -..,..:,-,--.,itiig0",--5-**:,..--:. .'.1.,,,_."•-:= ..:.:.',,ifl_..14.-_-:::: ▪111*Ata-T?51--.22.- .---023..-FATtigige--,, i:N '''''''-i-i‘7. ..___---.•_,-:--- ---,,Tgl':-. WV_Vt..141.4'17,-;.-i-.1. -twa.og !:,,-: t+:,..mrgiuK--- ilit..L-A.,...4..t--7-3,...is,--'.7-7/4e7.---g__„.,. ___,,,. . gi6122.-:. M24,9E-47T.*:;:-'-n':;-ZS.F.t"4-f*1.11itllt--TS:S.-W,-S,i-7.41;1114.17 . .---'&1411:117 --.13tESW- 32 .ftkt*.741b-Mnill.ftatit:t.N, -,--'"'-'-•-"T -.,-...-1-M!''!-Mt4.7-V-7.7i-,-1,1L-..,-.iN4-1-Miti .- --,Airii%E r.'"'n7.."-- -r41:EtiT4,- #:.7-glagl-R-2FI22ff,-..--4,18%.75W,M.S.!7,,,. .. A.,., .-1!-i44--t0.44-V41-22-6tVa="4.::::..tp:Tr.r71.41.k!4-fttaft!.*.liar ADA:MiTlii-''VrIkii.;r4-16,1*M..sitITT5E,W..,10:tfitit:-.3 -11,Mirai:V.,-;--,:-; _..1 N. --- "V-'-:--- ik... • '..:AC":::-.-1--f:.V.:rria#1.ritikEtti 2W0,2:17::. -r'S:-.11:-,21':::.--Eg:-.r. -"'4;'.X.ActitFa_.j,i.t_-4100.1--mim47.7.:::;attkii,! • ..,. ..:.-.1--,-_,....-zi:z,ri---,72,41.711.rtgii, -.-.1"-.-.31i,-..=.4.77-.- ...,,g7,,-- b-4:,-- --ar..atN.74- 1g.:-..-:- .,.':,...:Qq...ii.i?r:-_--T-.E.: :,,,71-,If:.`4`1.15 A 1 A -. .7.-X1-_,--.t_,.,.=-------.,—...----. .e:-."..m.ft.4.-5..v..-7_--4....: ,_...:-14,, .,,,,.__,,-.... ,,--....;,i-rt:.%.-:., :,-.E.-:i:.v,smw-,,:k,,g:.-T,,74:7",,,Itt• '*.--"w''"k'' '''''''r.--' '''''''..'rz'j-')Wrp:-- --r'''' ''''"' --7.-- -:••••-'"'14•Dilikrz: ,v,4.1E;i2g.ztz.:. .-Y-?---•11%-.-z..,7!:-:11,,. .,:- Ar..": .....o,. .-k•-' .7-...„-,:;.,1.--:3;,:..--;•7.-.4•-re,--..g.A,.:sp. ,-h!.: rk ,:-....„4:;,;•_:1- __- ----- i L•14%,65-112.447.]:,-4- -;T._ '1]-"i:-...-E.::±trilti-frk%).7-"treg rkili.ir--Ii-ktiaisla ...1.1..„z. 1,,,,,,,:t.;.,•;-„,;..-5 - r,_.,--,E:z3715:1=411 ',:l-Orittgarilltr7:40§?.4111Rti-Olk0-q-:-,'----'talir__;.iikaWf f------- ,*s-,:i glikkritiltiltaffiA*; ligazilliFAr141*-!,%4iFii:E2;7antAlktifgWillail*4.NRIM,..__4:5t1 --.A.-7-17- --q==--; --,.. iiri,E,T,A..45.-A--,..d...4: 7.2.y..- _,S5p:--L±FINEiTligEW=a75=1.-4.1,32.1-e--:..73-z- ..E2Z:ii-EIEF-Pr-M>i,T.Agitt-tift:4-r-- .1-1:t1 N'Zgge.S.E;-e-qW'72' . 3Tf. :Ti!lr*M-TT*F:ftTt'ili-rtl:l-Eilg,T'?=7.:1:i__T:Wci...-L'.72: 'ir";. . 7,,E 1..,. ..4.1-.--51121Pb&P.1.-t.t-------7...., -,4L-7.:Tiiiin..',.= V:i-'= ';! ::-;'11 €5t15:--77:':-E= •:''.i'lgi-46-4- 737Silarit'-'7::::! *:::.! - : . WaiM.0:2 ""1:17:11:::::T.:N!4F-TI:g.,..,,artatZ1 i,... frfLL.Li7i7t:j. .7-t7Tffil.lt:thilEF-kFtri;:-iling-t.3..;.-gligTig.;:MI:2q;',i-1 .:5.j,S.5: ::-.::7; . .:.,---)A-4".'<-114il*AMLItigg=.tr.:7 :- .-"-- ---,:T.'1::,---7_-_---!',-.!..;,.. "-,+-Itiligilti!Flair-25*.7-Y-11:7,;_.7,-§.,;:.:=-. 7.-,•j?7: 1:77:.n•-Ef 7.,!-::!+ cil .L.-_=__......42.Aftereinti. ..24, .."- 1_ .....,:_:=44 '''------- fl'Ak''' -'11 : -7-"'I - - L-.. -.C..7.1::: :-q-Y-4221':-.1 TM- -..e." ...„......--,... .- Ktc47;-;i::-27T-.--.420=Eiff-7 .7541P.E.77.;a:Z:EZ.;:rE:24:3›:,1;- '57 :12. • .--"-- :644:-,i. .S1-1:141r YT.7"T.--:- .7..-NeTtli:a114420:g;r-trti+!:411.-S4:7 - 11f:IiZ:.:::-.177411• .1174 '4.7.4 ria..:7: --; ,. ,_•.• •7-,---- '.--.. ",ft-ITLI1+,3 .. : . 1,7,7-r,,::' 1":1-17,;:- - 74:,:.t.-.::,.:V„,..„ ---Z.3...."Etak-7.-47,-,-7- 77.-1Z.:7 -•---M:5-..:;- ..,: -...-,-';.-1.-.,,..;.;:::'.1•4 -1.,------,.........„...------ ---1----1. --- - .:•-: :;-451*:.:,:::':.:IH:4*-,::;."-....ffgF:2-ii..1--, 1T-.71-gf)..,_"W:,.: .,..,,...-.s•V,Tir-t.M.t1F--.0"tf‘-;14&.;!Y.'7. -i*':;-7-7-1:-."1-7.,:;. ::;- 4;::.;:if-n2.7:7'::IN v--:\-_,In=7::: -:),"1-:---__ZiTZ-4.$411,A-? ..-4.,.... ii:,..- -Ti:.-':-t -:r*I--.=-•-747.§..1--f--4:iia-;!s•:-.--' 7:1',:-,4:,,T.7,- .7-:_=ft-k-K'_i!,-._- ":5-;;:;Af%--;.--T-1-x vy17:-.-'17-_=_. 1.'"-7tE4T:Ti:',A -.4- 11g- '- ' 371'•7-1-•'-•-'-- -Al--.÷.-:-..-7-:=3-7, .. --;.--Alt---731:.-+Tf-: .!.-'5;i1$.1.-T_f" --47-7.7.- Igi-..,7,:e1:11 c":.:4- ;,(Z1:43;]•-7.' tt _ ]SC1 Staff Report—Scenic Heights February 20, 2004 BACKGROUND This project was first reviewed at an informational meeting in November 2003. The Board concluded that the creation of a single family lot was acceptable provided the existing multiple building could not be expanded for additional units. The staff suggested the RM-6.5 zoning district with waivers to allow the existing building to remain, with provisions to preclude additional units in the future. GUIDE PLAN The site is currently guided Low Density Residential. Surrounding land uses are guided Low Density Residential. The guide plan change is to Medium Density Residential on.62 acres for the pat ltnent lot. The proposed density is 9.62 units per acre.If the single family lot is included the density of the entire site is 7.2 units per acre. PROPOSED R1-13.5 LOT The proposed lot conforms to the lot size and dimensional requirements of the R1-13.5 district.The minimum lot size required is 13,500 square feet.The minimum street frontage requirement is 85 feet. The proposed house meets the required front,rear and side yard setbacks. PROPOSED RM-6.5 LOT The proposed lot meets the requirements of the RM-6.5 district with the exception of enclosed parking and density District Standard Proposed plan Lot size— 13,000 24,094 sf Lot Width 24 feet 80 feet Lot depth— 100 feet 180 feet Front yard setback—30 feet 31 feet Side yard setback 10 feet 14 feet Rear yard setback—20 feet 110 feet Building height—40 feet 22 feet Parking- 2/unit, one enclosed no garages, six open spaces Density 6.7 units per acre 9.62 units per acre The granting of the waiver for parking and density is in exchange for maintaining the character of the site as it exists today, for not enlarging the building, adding units, or adding garages. Staff Report—Scenic Heights February 20,2004 SUMMARY The Community Planning Board should discuss the following questions. 1. Should the Guide Plan be changed to Medium Density? 2. Should the PUD waivers be granted? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Recommend approval of the following requests. • Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential on .62 acres • Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on .97 acres • Planned Unit Development District Review on 97 acres • Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on.35 acres and from Rural to RM 6.5 on.62 acres • Site Plan Review on .97 acres • Preliminary Plat of.97 acres into two lots and road right of way. This approval is subject to the recommendations of the staff report dated February 20, 2004 and plans dated February 20, 2004, and the following following: 1. Prior to Final Plat approval, the proponent shall submit detailed storm water runoff,utility and erosion control plans for review by the City Engineer and Watershed District 2. Prior to grading permit issuance, the proponent shall install erosion control and tree protection fencing at the grading limits of the property for review and approval by the City Engineer and City Forester. 3. Prior to Building permit issuance, the proponent shall: A. Meet with the Fire Marshal to go over fire code requirements. B. Pay the appropriate cash park fee. 4. The following waiver from the City Code are granted as part of the Planned Unit Development District review in the RM 6.5 Zoning District based on the condition that the building can not be enlarged, units cannot be added, and no garages will be built.: • Density from 6.7 to 9.62 units per acre. • Six enclosed parking spaces to zero. l61 Planning Board Minutes November 24,2003 Page 2 V. INFORMATIONAL MEETING A. INFORMATIONAL MEETING— SCENIC HEIGHTS APARTMENTS by Duane and Patricia Pidcock. Request for Informational meeting to discuss a Guide Plan Change from Low Density to Medium Density Residential, Rezoning fiom Rural to RM—2.5, Rezoning from Rural to R1-13.5 and Subdivision of.97 acres into two lots. Location: 15201 Scenic Heights Road. Duane Pidcock presented his request. He stated they have been providing affordable housing for residents of Eden Prairie with their six unit apartment building for the past 52 years. He said when the properties were platted it was with the intention that they would be divided at some point. He stated he is requesting rezoning to protect their retirement investment and to subdivide the single family lot. Franzen stated although this is not a public hearing notices were sent to residents within 500 feet of the property. He said staff has looked at several alternatives for use of the property and the informational meeting is intended to provide direction as to the alternative that would fit best in the neighborhood. He said the proponent will then take that information and prepare for a public hearing. Franzen stated there are five alternatives listed in the staff report and staff is comfortable with numbers 1, 2, 4, and 5. Steppat asked Pidcock for his input on the alternatives. Pidcock responded he would prefer number three but has no other preference at this point. He said he would like the Board's feedback on the matter. Foote asked staff for clarification as to what the Pidcocks were requesting. Franzen responded they requested rezoning for both parcels with use of the property remaining as it had been. He stated they would like to develop the property within zoning regulations. He said if the apartment building is maintained and the other lot split off this would conform best with the guide plan and the pattern of the neighborhood. Foote questioned if the property were to remain Rural whether the Pidcocks could leave it as it exists until it was sold. Franzen responded they could that but the problem would be that if the property were destroyed the structure could not be rebuilt. Brooks asked staff if something happened to the apartment building under the current zoning, how many homes could be built on that piece of land. Franzen responded they could create two R1-13.5 lots. Brooks asked Mr. Pidcock if he had looked at the economic value of the rental units versus selling the property as two residential lots. Mr. Pidcock responded the apartment building is in good condition, is providing a good income and he sees no value in tearing it down. He said if they were to build single family homes they would not provide that income, / Planning Board Minutes November 24, 2003 Page 3 consequently, they were interested in preserving the property as it is. Foote asked Mr. Pidcock if he had talked to his neighbors as to their opinion regarding the rezoning. He responded he spoke with neighbors abutting the property and didn't get any negative response. Steppat asked about the difference between alternatives three and four. He asked whether changing the guide plan as described would require bringing the building up to code. Franzen responded it would. Sutherland asked about how the grandfathering in process works and whether it is something that would happen automatically or whether property owners had to apply for it. Franzen responded at that time, the city rezoned areas; most of them were grandfathered in when the zoning was changed. The zoning was not changed on this site. He said whether the zoning is rural or multi-family the building wouldn't fit the current code. He stated if property was zoned multi-family the city would have to allow them to build but since it's zoned rural the city has discretionary power to change zoning. Sutherland asked if the property were zoned multi-family 52 years ago with today's zoning standard it could not be rebuilt as it is. Franzen responded the building would have to meet current rules and could not be rebuilt as it exists today. Nelson asked if the building was up to fire code. Franzen responded that Mr. Pidcock has worked with the building inspections department to bring the building up to code for fire doors and smoke detectors but not all building and fire codes. Steppat asked about option number four regarding the building of six garages, paving the parking lot, and landscaping. Pidcock responded it would not be economically feasible to build the garages and they intend to pave the parking lot but haven't because of the question regarding building the garages. He said a few years ago they discussed the possibility of adding on to the building and that would have necessitated doing all those things so they decided not to pursue that and decided to leave the building as it is. Sutherland asked Mr. Pidcock what he meant in the fourth paragraph of his memo where he talks about the residential character of Scenic Heights Road. Pidcock responded that in 1958 it was rural and that over the years the character has changed with the construction of the City Center, a Fire Administration Building, Scenic Heights Office Buildings and a Methodist Church. Brooks agreed with spinning off the lot for single family but could not agree to a change in the density. Foote stated a single family home would fit in there perfectly. He stated if the neighbors don't have a problem with the apartment building than he was fine with it. He said he can't support tearing the building down. Seymour agreed that the lot could be spun off and leaving the apartment as is. He said the other options don't make sense. Steppat stated he agreed with spinning off the lot. He would like to see the building remain since it is a source of /63 Planning Board Minutes November 24, 2003 Page 4 retirement income for the Pidcocks. He stated he would be comfortable with option four or some variation thereof Sutherland stated the Pidcocks are good citizens and with a zoning change there could be problems if the property were sold and wasn't kept up. He said he agrees with the idea of spinning off the lot for single family housing. He said the property blends well in the neighborhood as it is currently and building a large garage would detract from the property and wouldn't be a good fit. Foote asked staff if there is discretion with number four. Franzen responded that the Board has the authority to grant variances. Sutherland asked if the driveway paving is an improvement that could be made or if it would require a variance. Franzen stated that they would not need a variance and it would be considered upkeep, similar to replacing a roof Nelson stated she would have no problem splitting off the lot for a single family home. She said if the apartment meets all health and safety requirements it should remain as it is and she would not want a 12-unit building or six townhouses on this site. Franzen stated if the property were rezoned as multifamily they would need to conform to zoning rules. He said with a guide plan change, zoning change, and variances they could rebuild the structure. Foote agreed with this approach. Brooks stated he is challenged by the thought of rezoning the property at this time. It's functioned well for the Pidcocks and it fits the neighborhood. Someone else could come in with a different plan and they would be locked into that plan. Foote stated he could understand the concern with rezoning and that someone else may not be as good with the property as the Pidcocks. He said he didn't want it torn down and didn't believe they should build the garages. Pidcock stated he doesn't understand why the City didn't zone it multi-family at the time in 1958. They have difficulty understanding why there are problems with rezoning. He asked if it couldn't be rezoned could there by a requirement that it could only be six units if rebuilt. Nelson stated there should be some amendments crafted to allow only the six unit building. Franzen responded there is a possibility rather than rezoning to RM-2.5 the site could be zoned RM-6.5 with a waiver for density, garages and setbacks and language that would require the property be used only for six units. Nelson stated if the neighbors are agreeable, it looks as though this would be a good option. Steppat stated he would like to amend his comments and would be in favor of rezoning. Nelson suggested Pidcock meet with the staff to develop an appropriate plan for a future meeting. Planing Board Minutes February 23, 2004 Page 4 B. SCENIC HEIGHTS by Duane and Patricia Pidcock. Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential on .62 acres, Planned Unit Development Concept Review on .97 acres,Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on .97 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on .35 acres and from Rural to RM-6.5 on .62 acres, Site Plan Review on .62 acres, Preliminary Plat of.97 acres into 2 lots and road right-of-way. Location: Red Rock Road and Scenic Heights Road. Duane Pidcock presented the request. He stated they are requesting a rezoning of the existing apartment building to multi-family and the creation of a single family lot on the south end of the property. There would be minimal impact because the single family lot abuts to a single family neighborhood. Franzen stated this is a project that had been before the Board at an informational meeting. At that meeting, the Planning Board agreed that the building should remain as is and that it was appropriate to allow a lot split for a single family home. The RM-6.5 zoning will keep the building the way it is today and if the home were destroyed it would allow no more than six units to be built. John Liepke of 15208 Scenic Heights Road stated he has lived there for a number of years. He said he has spoken to the neighbors and there's no problem with the single family housing or the setbacks. He said there would be a problem if changes were made in the use and height of the apartment building. Doug Schmidt of 15201 Scenic Heights Road stated he is not opposed to the single family lot and the setbacks but doesn't want anything larger put in there. He said the apartment building should be left as it is currently. Steppat stated the recommendation fits well with the waivers and he supported it. Foote agreed that it's a good property and is good to see the property kept up so well. Nelson asked about paving over the parking area. Mr. Pidcock responded when the new single family home was built, he would do so at that time. MOTION by Steppat, second by Koenig, to close the public hearing. Motion carried, 8-0 MOTION by Steppat, second by Nelson, to approve a Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential on .62 acres, Planned Unit Development Concept Review on .97 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on .97 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on .35 acres and from Rural to RM-6.5 on .62 acres, Site Plan Review on .62 acres, Preliminary Plat of.97 acres into 2 lots and road right-of-way, based on plans dated February 20, 2004, subject to the recommendations of the staff report dated February 20, 2004, to the City Council. Motion carried, 8-0 /65 To: The city of Eden Prairie From: Douglas Schmidt 15209 Scenic Heights Road Date: December 15,2003 Subject: Application for land development of the 15201 Scenic Heights Apartments Property owned by Duane and Patricia Pidcock. I have personally discussed this proposal with Duane prior to the November 24, 2003 planning board meeting and was told by him,he would like to keep the apartment building proper just as they currently exist, however would remove the garages to make enough room to create a single family lot on the south end of the property. At the planning board meeting he also told the board that this was his intention. Further to protect his investment (retirement income)he also wants to rezone the apartments. The reason for rezoning was that if something catastrophic happened to the apartments he would be able to rebuild, thus protecting his retirement income. I do think that Duane and Pat should be allowed to subdivide and create a single-family lot,however I do not agree with his request to rezone to RM-2.5 ! In accordance with city code RM-2.5 it would allow a maximum gross density of 17.4 units per acre. Therefore if such a building were to be rebuilt on this property, which now has been reduced to .66 acre,I would have an enormously tall structure right out my front door. Therefore, I would be forced to rezone to RM-2.5 to stay on equal footing and protect my investment. Towards the end of the planning board's discussion, Mr. Franzen, suggested that zoning code RM-6.5 would be more appropriate. This would allow a maximum gross density of 6.7 unites pre acre. He also suggested that a variance be granted that perpetually allowed the apartments to stay as they are. In the case of catastrophic event only a building of similar structure would be allowed to replace it. Again, depending on what the restrictions are included in the variance, I would be concerned on how this rezoning would affect my property value. This action may also force me to put the same zoning on my property. I am not totally convinced, at this time, a changing from rural district to an RM(Multi-family residential district) is in my best interest. I will be in touch with my neighbors to get their input, however my property is the only one that directly adjoins the apartments and would be mostly affected by it's rezoning. • Sincerely, "tAt' Douglas Schmidt P.S. Please copy-Planning;board members:and Council members. /4 Page 1 of 1 Mike Franzen From: Jan Mosman Umosman@mn.rr.com] Sent: Monday, November 24, 2003 5:20 PM To: Mike Franzen Subject: Duane and Patricia Pidcock proposal Michael, Regarding the proposed changes to the Pidcocks' property,we would like to offer our comments, realizing that the public hearing is not until later in the process. Their rental property has been kept up in a most meticulous fashion for the 14 years that we have lived here. The current building and grounds fit in easily with the diverse neighborhood styles of architecture. It is unobtrusive and most people do not realize that it is even a rental property. We are happy to have it stay. Having an additional single family home on Red Rock Road will not cause problems that we can foresee with traffic on this quiet street, and we do not object in the least. The intersection at Red Rock and Scenic Heights has many cars turning in and out, as well as the apartment unit drive just west of it. It is fortunate that the speed on Scenic Heights Road is 30mph, and that the road winds, because with the number of children, cars, and dog walkers, it is a well-utilized section of the City's bike trail system on the south side of the street. A denser use of the site would focus too much additional traffic at a sensitive intersection on a sloping curve. Sincerely, Jan and Mark Mosman / - 2/23/2004 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: 03/23/04 SECTION: Public Hearings DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Office of City Manager/Planning Scott H. Neal Pemberton Landing VI I I .0` Scott A. Kipp Requested Action Option #1: Withdraw Option (with proponents consent only) MOTION: Move to close the Public Hearing, and with the consent of the proponent, return the plans to the proponent without prejudice. OR, Option #2: Approval Option MOTION: Move to: • Close the Public Hearing; and • Adopt the Resolution for Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential on17.29 acres; and • Adopt the Resolution for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 21.66 acres; and • Approve 1st Reading of the Ordinance for Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers, and Zoning District Change from R1-22 to RM-64 on 17.29 acres; and • Adopt the Resolution for Preliminary Plat on 21.66 acres into 32 lots and 1 outlot; and • Direct Staff to prepare a Development Agreement incorporating Staff and Board recommendations and Council conditions. OR, Option #3: Denial Option MOTION: Move to: • Close the public hearing. MOTION: Move to: • Direct staff to prepare findings supporting denial by the City Council to be adopted at the April 13, 2004 meeting. Ujg City Council Agenda Public Hearing - Pemberton Landing March 23, 2004 Page 2 Synopsis This project is 129 townhouse units. A guide plan change from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential is required. Planned unit development waivers are required for density and setbacks. Community Planning Board Recommendation This project was first review at an informational meeting with the Community Planning Board on January 26, 2004. The Board identified issues with changing the guide plan,project density, proposed waivers, transitions and buffering, drainage, open space, walkways and play areas. The project was reviewed at a public hearing on February 22, 2004. The Community Planning Board voted 7-0 to recommend denial of the project for the following reasons. 1. The proposal is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Guide Plan. 2. The PUD waivers have not been substantiated. 3. Inadequate transition between land uses. 4. High tree loss. 5. No public road connection to Hilltop Road. Background Information 1. Should the land remain guided low density residential or changed to medium density residential as proposed by Minnstar Builders, Inc.? There are no compelling reasons to change the guide plan. The plan does not preserve natural features, does not help meet housing goals, does not provide an appropriate transition, or provide open space. 2. Is the proposed density reasonable? The density is inconsistent with the surrounding area. The visual impacts of increased density camiot be mitigated with landscaping. Additional setback, benning or fewer buildings would be helpful. 3. Does the plan with waivers result in a better design and benefits to the City? The site plan is tight and does not create an appropriate transition. The waivers are created by the density of the project and do not result in a clear benefit to the City such as preserving natural features or meeting a housing goal. 4. Is the transition between land uses adequate? Landscaping alone is not an appropriate solution where the difference in densities is high. Landscaping is better when densities and building types are similar. Fewer buildings, increased setbacks, berming and landscaping are needed. The landscaping proposed within utility easements has to be relocated and trees outside of the project boundaries are not likely to be maintained. &t City Council Agenda Public Hearing - Pemberton Landing March 23, 2004 Page 3 There are many ways to realign the project to be more consistent with reasons for changing the guide plan, granting of waivers, and criteria for establishing the appropriate transitions. For example: 1. Edenvale Villas - Edenvale Boulevard. The project is 3.0 units per acre, one level walkout single family homes on small lots. 2. Sutton Place Twin Homes - Eden Prairie Road and Summit Drive next to the Senior Center. One level, walkout twin homes at 3.5 units per acre. 3. Mixed Housing - A combination of Edenvale Villas, Sutton Place Twin Homes, and the Pemberton Landing townhouses. New Information On March 15, 2004, Minnstar Development submitted a revised development plan for the project. The number of multiple family units has been reduced from 129 to 110. The density of the multiple family units has been reduced from 7.4 to 6.18 units per acre. A public road connection is shown between Pioneer Trail and Hilltop Road as recommended in the staff report. The revised plan eliminates the need for waivers. Due to the timing of the revised plan it has not been reviewed in detail by staff. Even though the density has been reduced, the staff does not believe there are compelling reasons for changing the guide plan and the project does not provide an appropriate transition to the surrounding neighborhood. Staff believes the appropriate density is 3 to 3.5 units per acre for single family, twin homes or a combination. Attachments 1. Resolution for Guide Plan Change 2. Resolution for PUD Concept Review 3. Resolution for Preliminary Plat 4. Staff Report - Informational Meeting dated January 23,2004 5. Staff Report - Public Hearing dated February 20, 2004 6. Community Planning Board minutes dated January 26, 2004 7. Community Planning Board minutes dated February 23, 2004 8. Neighborhood Petition 9. Letter from Eden Prairie Resident I70 PEMBERTON LANDING CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2004- A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE MUNICIPAL PLAN WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie has prepared and adopted the Comprehensive Municipal Plan ("Plan"); and WHEREAS, the Plan has been submitted to the Metropolitan Council for review and comment; and WHEREAS, the proposal of Pemberton Landing, by Minnstar Builders, Inc. is for 110 multiple family units; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, hereby adopts the amendment of the Plan subject to Metropolitan Council approval as follows: 17.29 acres from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential, located south of Pioneer Trail, north of Hilltop Road, west of Eden Prairie Road. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 23rd day of March, 2004. Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk 171 PEMBERTON LANDING CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2004- A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT OF PEMBERTON LANDING FOR MINNSTAR BUILDERS, INC. 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 February 23, 2004, on Pemberton Landing by Minstar Builders, Inc., and considered their request for approval of the PUD Concept plan and recommended denial of the request to the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council did consider the request on March 23, 2004. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, as follows: 1. Pemberton Landing, 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 stamp dated March 15, 2004. 3. That the PUD Concept does not meet the recommendations of the Community Planning Board dated February 23, 2004. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 23rd day of March, 2004. Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk 17� EXHIBIT A PUD Concept- Pemberton Landing Legal Description: Lots 3 —8, Lot 13 and 14, Lot 15 except the East 90 feet of the South half thereof,the West half of Lot 16 and Lot 17. All in Block 1, EDEN HEIGHTS, Hennepin County, Minnesota. 173 PEMBERTON LANDING CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2004- RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF PEMBERTON LANDING FOR MINNSTAR BUILDERS, INC. BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of Pemberton Landing for Minnstar Builders, Inc., stamp dated March 15, 2004, and consisting of 21.66 acres into 34 lots, 1 outlot and road right-of-way, 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 23rd day of March, 2004. Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk 1711 STAFF REPORT TO: Community Planning Board FROM: Scott A. Kipp, Senior Planner DATE: January 23, 2004 SUBJECT: Pemberton Landing—Informational Meeting APPLICANT/ Minnstar Builders, Inc. LOCATION: South of Pioneer Trail, north of IIilltop Road, west of Eden Prairie Road 175 Area Location Map - Pemberton Landing Address: S. of Pioneer Tr., North of Hilltop Rd., W. of Eden Prairie Rd. Pioneer Trail . I --... -- — ! ' i i ;, i I l o' iill_ _-..- - I-. 1 , 1. ..- i i L i 1 • 1 I . I: I I ; i I. I. f 1 i • i � ' iI/ ,I. .. .., , i , ..: I •I , ,_ . , • 1 - SITE - - , , . . . ::: --1 -•:-.1 .. - I : - i_� Eden I 1 ; 1. . .. 1 1- Prairie: I Road: : . ; L . :SITE .. ...-: \--..:..----.:.... i 1 i I I /' ^, I 1 . / 1 I i ! i 1 I ) i. 1 I .. Hillto Roa.d.- I I � j i p .:. : isI: , I 1 I I I II . r I i . ! I i - 1 i --i .1 . i ;I I I . I 1 .. - / . f I 1 ';� 1 I No Scale \ \ • 176 Staff Report—Pemberton Landing-Informational Meeting January 23, 2004 Page 2 PURPOSE The purpose of the informational meeting is for: 1. The developer to present the proposed concept plan. 2. The developer, the Community Planning Board, and staff to hear comments from area residents on the proposal. 3. To identify issues for the developer and staff to address in detailed plans prior to returning for a public hearing. At future public hearings detailed plans will be presented for grading and drainage,trees,wetlands, utilities, roads and sidewalks. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL The proposed plan is for 135 multiple family townhouse units. This requires a guide plan change from low density residential (2.5 units per acre) to medium density residential (10 units per acre). The existing guide plan would allow up to 44 units on the 17.4 acres proposed to be rezoned to RM-6.5. Surrounding land is guided low density residential to the north, south and west. Land to the east is guided church. A zoning change is required from R1-22 to RM-6.5. The density of the 17.4 acres to be zoned RM-6.5 is 7.4 units per acre. The density of the overall project area of 21.74 acres, including the remaining single-family lots is 6.2 units per acre. A future concept plan for the remaining lots surrounding the project has been developed. This plan would require the cooperation of all the remaining lot owners for it to be implemented. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT WAIVERS The plan as proposed will require the following waivers. 1. Density of 7.4 units per acre in a RM-6.5 zoning district. Code permits up to 6.7 units per acre. Staff Report—Pemberton Landing-Informational Meeting January 23, 2004 Page 3 2. Land area less than 6,500 square feet per unit. Code requires 6,500 square feet of land area per unit in the RM-6.5 district. 3. Lot 2, Block 2 of 20,600 square feet. Code requires a minimum of 22,000 square feet within the R1-22 district. 4. Side yard setback of less than 15 feet adjacent to R1-22 zoned property. Code requires rear and side yard setbacks for dissimilar abutting districts meet the larger of the two requirements. A planned unit development allows the city to grant waivers if: • The plan results in a more creative and efficient approach to the use of land. • The plan is designed in such a manner to form a unified environment within its own boundaries. • The waivers are justified by the design. • The plan is better for the site and the City than if no waivers are granted. LAND USE TRANSITIONS Transitions are required where there are differences in land use, building mass, height, or densities. The code states that transitions may be accomplished by increased setbacks, berming, planting, larger lot sizes, lower densities, lower floor area ratios, and smaller buildings. The proposed buildings are approximately 25 feet from the side and rear property lines adjacent to the single-family homes. The code requires 20 feet. Due to the sloping nature of the site, and drainage requirements, benning is not possible. A landscaped boarder of conifer and deciduous trees is proposed on both sides of the property line shared with the abutting single-family lots. The buildings immediately adjacent to existing single family homes are four-plex, two-story walkouts approximately 45 feet in height measured from the walkout side. ROADS The project has private roads with two access points to Pioneer Trail. A public road should be extended through the project connecting to Hilltop Road to provide circulation, emergency vehicle access and to limit turning movements onto Pioneer Trail. Hennepin County is Staff Report—Pemberton Landing-Informational Meeting January 23, 2004 Page 4 recommending that the westerly access to Pioneer Trail be eliminated. PARKS AND SCHOOLS There are two neighborhood parks within the %2 mile service area for the property. These are Pioneer Park north of Pioneer Tail along Eden Prairie Road, and a new park to be constructed south of Valley Road along Eden Prairie Road. Staring Lake Park is a community park within 3/4 mile of the property. Cedar Ridge Elementary School is within ''/2 mile of the property along Braxton Road. FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT Flying Cloud Airport is located approximately Y2 mile to the east. The proposed development is not within any runway protection zone, state safety zone, or within the DNL 60 dBA noise contour or higher threshold where aircraft noise can impact residential land use. SUMMARY The Conununity Planning Board should discuss the following questions. 1. Should the land remain guided low density residential or changed to medium density residential as proposed by Minnstar Builders, Inc.? 2. Is the proposed density reasonable? 3. Does the plan with waivers result in a better design and benefits to the City? 4. Is the transition between land uses adequate? STAFF ANALYSIS Developing the property according to the comprehensive plan is an acceptable use of the property. Appropriate berming and landscaping will be needed to mitigate the impacts of traffic noise and lights from Pioneer Trail. A public road connection to Pioneer Trail would be necessary to evenly distribute traffic and provide emergency vehicle access. Developing the site for multiple-family housing will require a determination that the density is appropriate and the transition properly mitigates the impacts of the new land use on an existing single family neighborhood. Consideration must also include the potential for and acceptance of future redevelopment proposals for the remaining property north and south of Hilltop Road. The project would benefit from two primary changes. One is a public road connection from Pioneer I 7ci Staff Report—Pemberton Landing- Informational Meeting January 23, 2004 Page 5 Trail to Hilltop Road. The second would be increased setback adjacent to existing single family homes for a better transition. ISO STAFF REPORT TO: Community Planning Board THROUGII: Michael D. Franzen, City Planner FROM: Scott A. Kipp, Senior Planner DATE: February 20, 2004 SUBJECT: Pemberton Landing APPLICANT: Minnstar Builders, Inc. FEE OWNERS: Allen L. Nash Fred Wong C. Richard Perkins and Mary Perkins Douglas and Cynthia Christensen Scott Brau and Marie O'Brien Brau Peter and Diane Jorgensen Thomas and Martha Bolke Michael and Carol Clarke John Hansen Scott and Candice Fiedler Krista and Patrick D. Maynard Duane A. Auseth LOCATION: South of Pioneer Trail, north of Hilltop Road, west of Eden Prairie Road REQUEST: 1. Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential on 17.29 acres. 2. Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 21.66 acres. 3. Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 21.66 acres. 4. Zoning District Change from R1-22 to RM- 6.5 on 17.29 acres. 5. Site Plan Review on 17.29 acres. 6. Preliminary Plat on 21.66 acres into 32 lots, 1 outlot, and road right-of- way. ()I Area Location Map - Pemberton Landing Address: S. of Pioneer Tr., North of Hilltop Rd., W. of Eden Prairie Rd. ---1 ; • i --- Pioneer. Trail 5 ;1 I i -------il 1 I i i _-_ 1• ITE ' 1 , i it, I i : 2Eden= i ,. I. ____. ; , �. Praiirie \ i----\ - I 1 _II , .... 1 1 1. . ' ,. Road` • i • /ili 'i'. i€ T • • I, -; ' I I j •I { I 1 Hilltop Road I . 1. -' . I I ; , . -: z. : • 1 I • I �. is I I ; 1. i .i [ i I o r N . i I i No Scale I; I g Staff Report—Pemberton Landing February 20, 2004 Page 2 BACKGROUND The Comprehensive Guide Plan shows the property as low density residential for up to 2.5 units per acre. The property is zoned R1-22 single-family. Surrounding land use consists of low density residential, with R1-22 to the east and south, R1-9.5 to the west, and rural to the north. Grace Church is located to the east of Eden Prairie Road. This project was first review at an informational meeting with the Community Planning Board on January 26, 2004. The Board raised concerns with changing the guide plan, project density, proposed waivers, transitions and buffering, drainage, open space, walkways and play areas. COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE PLAN CHANGE The proposed plan is for 129 multiple family townhouse units. This will require a guide plan change from low density residential (2.5 units per acre) to medium density residential (10 units per acre). The existing low density residential guiding for the proposed multiple-family portion of the project would allow up to 44 units. The proposed density is 7.4 units per acre for the 17.29 acres to be zoned RM-6.5. The density of the overall 21.66 acre project area, including single-family lots on Hilltop Road is 6.2 units per acre. Reasons to consider guide plan changes are as follows. 1. Preservation of Open Space - This is preservation of open space beyond what is typically required by code. An example is Hennepin Village where 40% (70 of 240 acres) is preserved and dedicated to the City. 2. Meeting Housing Goals for Senior and Affordable Housing- The 1995 Senior Issues Task force identified a need to provide for all types of senior housing. Summit Place provides 325 units of senior housing, including townhouse, apartment, and assisted living. Starring Lake Townhouses near Anderson Lakes Parkway and Columbine Road provides affordable housing. 3. Eliminating Land Use Incompatibility-Hartford Commons east of the Eden Prairie Center converted 20 acres of commercial to townhouses. The surrounding area was single family, twin homes and townhouses. 4. Preservation of Natural Features -An example would be United Health Group 2001 PUD. The planned development is mixed land use including residential, commercial, and office IOU Staff Report—Pemberton Landing February 20, 2004 Page 3 use. A visually prominent 10 acre wooded knoll is preserved adjacent to where Crosstown Highway and Highway 212 split. The City is currently 55% single family and 45% multiple family. There are 5,093 twin homes, condominiums or townhouse units in the City. Within the surrounding area there are 600 townhouses, 550 of which are approved as part of Hennepin Village. The density in Hennepin Village is approximately 7.5 units per acre. The City approved waivers for small lots in exchange for open space dedication. SITE PLAN AND PRELIMINARY PLAT The plan shows a mix of four, six, and eight unit buildings. All the multiple family lots meet the minimum lot size of 3,000 square feet for the RM-6.5 zoning district. None of the lots meet a 100-foot lot depth, and will require a waiver. Lot 2, Block 2 which will remain in the R1-22 zoning district requires a minimum lot size of 22,000 square feet. This lot contains 20,600 square feet, requiring a waiver. All buildings meet the setback requirements for the RM-6.5 zoning district. Code also requires that side and rear yard setbacks for dissimilar abutting districts meet the larger of the two setbacks. Since the development abuts the R1-22 zoning district, the side yard requirement increases to from 10 feet to 15 feet. Lot 16, Block 1 shows a 10.2-foot side yard setback, and will require a waiver. Parking meets the requirement of 2 stalls per unit with 1 enclosed. An additional 74 guest parking stalls are provided. Additional right-of-way is provided to accommodate the future widening of Pioneer Trail. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT & WAIVERS The purpose of a planned unit development is to provide the means for greater creativity and flexibility in environmental design than is provided under the strict application of the code. Waivers have been used to promote development goals such as preservation of open space, senior and affordable housing, eliminating land use incompatibility, and to protect natural features. The proposed waivers do not address development goals, or result in a more creative and efficient approach to the use of land and do not result in better plan for the site than if no waivers are granted. 19 Staff Report—Pemberton Landing February 20, 2004 Page 4 The proposed plan will require the following waivers. 1. Density of 7.4 units per acre in a RM-6.5 zoning district. Code permits up to 6.7 units per acre. 2. Land area of 5,588 square feet per unit. Code requires 6,500 square feet of land area per unit in the RM-6.5 district. 3. All multi-family lot depths of 78 feet and 88 feet. Code requires 100 feet. 4. Lot 2, Block 2 of 20,600 square feet. Code requires a minimum of 22,000 square feet within the RI-22 district. 5. Side yard setback of 10.2 feet for Lot 16, Block 1 adjacent to R1-22 zoned property. Code requires side yard setbacks for dissimilar abutting districts meet the larger of the two requirements which is 15 feet. LAND USE TRANSITIONS Transitions are required where there are differences in land use, building mass, height, or densities. The code states that transitions may be accomplished by increased setbacks, berming, planting, larger lot sizes, lower densities, lower floor area ratios, and smaller buildings. The proposed buildings immediately adjacent to existing single family homes are four-plex, two- story walkouts approximately 45 feet in height measured from the walkout side, and are setback 25 feet from the rear property line. The proposed plan relies exclusively on the use of plant materials to provide a transition, since it is not physically possible to create a berm due to the sloping nature of the site and minimal setback to property lines. Plantings alone do not provide an appropriate transition. The trees are small at the time of planting and it will take 10 years or more to create something meaningful. Also many of the trees plantings are proposed on top of a rear yard storm sewer and will have to be relocated. Many of the trees are proposed on the rear portions of abutting single-family lots. Since the trees are not part of the townhouse development, it raises a question of maintenance responsibility. Tree planting is appropriate where the differences in density and building size between proposed and existing neighborhoods are minimal. GRADING AND TREE LOSS The tree inventory shows1,609 diameter inches of significant trees on site. Tree loss is 1,239 I Staff Report—Pemberton Landing February 20, 2004 Page 5 diameter inches, or 77%. The average tree loss for residential development is 35%. Tree replacement is 1,269 caliper inches. The plan provides the required caliper inches. Retaining walls are proposed along the east property line with an elevation change of 15 to 18 feet from the driveway to the bottom of the retaining walls, making it difficult for internal road access for any future development to the east. DRAINAGE AND UTILITIES All storm water will be treated to NURP standards. Rear yard swales and catch basins are proposed along the south property line. Easements will need to be obtained by the developer to provide access for pond maintenance, and over the storm water outlet pipe leading to Eden Prairie Road. There is the potential of a wetland in the general location of proposed NURP pond. The Watershed District can not do wetland verification at this time due to snow cover. If a wetland is found, wetland impacts may occur that could potentially require mitigation, or result in pond relocation to avoid wetland impacts. The storm water plan will need to be revised to provide for 100-year storm event ponding and safe emergency overflow elevations to Eden Prairie Road to protect adjacent homes. Sanitary sewer and water will be provided to the site from existing water along Pioneer Trail and sanitary sewer along Eden Prairie Road. The water main will need to be extended to Hilltop Road to provide for a looped water main system. An easement will need to be obtained for the sanitary sewer extending off-site to Eden Prairie Road. LANDSCAPING A total of 916 caliper inches of landscaping is required based on the total square footage of all buildings. Together with the tree replacement, a total of 2,185 caliper inches of trees is required for the development. The landscaping plan provides the required caliper inches. Trees are proposed as the transition between the differing land uses. These trees are either located off-site, or over a storm sewer, both of which are not practical. Planting trees over the storm sewer eliminates access for maintenance, and can jeopardize the sewer system. Planting trees off-site requires cooperation of neighboring property owners with no assurances that the trees will be maintained. Berms and landscaping are proposed as a buffer along Pioneer Trail. The berm is located in the I11 Staff Report—Pemberton Landing February 20,2004 Page 6 proposed future right-of-way for Pioneer Trail and will need to be shifted within the project area. Eliminating the berm and plantings is not an option. ACCESS The project has private roads with two access points to Pioneer Trail. A public road which includes a pedestrian sidewalk should be extended through the project connecting to Hilltop Road to provide circulation, emergency vehicle access and to limit turning movements onto Pioneer Trail. Hennepin County is recommending that the westerly access to Pioneer Trail be eliminated. The private drive north of Lots 5 and 6, and its intersection with the easterly access to Pioneer Trail are too close to Pioneer Trail and should be eliminated. HILLTOP ROAD IMPROVEMENTS Currently the Hilltop Road neighborhood is served by private wells and septic systems. Since public utility improvements are recommended for this project with a connection to Hilltop Road, it would make sense to improve Hilltop Road, including sewer, water, and storm sewer. A special assessment agreement will be required for the Hilltop Road improvements. PARKS AND SCHOOLS There are two neighborhood parks within the Y2 mile service area for the property. These are Pioneer Park north of Pioneer Tail along Eden Prairie Road, and a new park to be constructed south of Valley Road along Eden Prairie Road. Staring Lake Park is a community park within 3/4 mile of the property. Cedar Ridge Elementary School is within %2 mile of the property along Braxton Road. FLYING CLOUD AIRPORT Flying Cloud Airport is located approximately %2 mile to the east. The proposed development is not within any runway protection zone, state safety zone, or within the DNL 60 dBA noise contour or higher threshold where aircraft noise can impact residential land use. FUTURE DEVELOPMENT CONSIDERATIONS With every development proposal the city looks at the impacts on adjoining property. Staff asked the developer to provide a plan to show one way adjoining land could develop since the proposed plan did not show potential extension of sewer, water, and roads. Without these extensions the �U� Staff Report—Pemberton Landing February 20, 2004 Page 7 potential for inefficient use of the land and higher development costs exists on adjoining land. The plan identifies two potential problems. One is that the layout shows an arrangement of buildings that do not visually appear to be connected to the Pemberton proposal and many of the buildings are not physically connected by roads. The second is that any multiple family in the area can create a ripple effect and there would be pressure to build multiple family on the south side of Hilltop Road or at the very least create a transition problem for which there is no solution. Neither the City nor developer is proposing this plan for development; it is only a tool for evaluating future development impacts. Future development will occur if requested by land owners in the area. SUMMARY The Community Planning Board should discuss the following questions. 1. Should the land remain guided low density residential or changed to medium density residential as proposed by Minnstar Builders, Inc.? There are no compelling reasons to change the guide plan. The plan does not preserve natural features, does not help meet housing goals, does not provide an appropriate transition, or provide open space. 2. Is the proposed density reasonable? The density is inconsistent with the surrounding area. The visual impacts of increased density cannot be mitigated with landscaping. Additional setback, berming or fewer buildings would be helpful. 3. Does the plan with waivers result in a better design and benefits to the City? The site plan is tight and does not create an appropriate transition. The waivers are created by the density of the project and do not result in a clear benefit to the City such as preserving natural features or meeting a housing goal. 4. Is the transition between land uses adequate? Landscaping alone is not an appropriate solution where the difference in densities is high. Landscaping is better when densities and building types are similar. Fewer buildings, increased setbacks,berming and landscaping are needed. The landscaping proposed within utility easements has to be relocated and trees outside of the project boundaries are not likely to be maintained. There are many ways to realign the project to be more consistent with reasons for changing the guide plan, granting of waivers, and criteria for establishing the appropriate transitions. For example: l 00 Staff Report— Pemberton Landing February 20,2004 Page 8 1. Edenvale Villas - Edenvale Boulevard. The project is 3.0 units per acre, one level walkout single family homes on small lots. 2. Sutton Place Twin Homes - Eden Prairie Road and Summit Drive next to the Senior Center. One level,walkout twinhomes at 3.5 units per acre. 3. Mixed Housing- A combination of Edenvale Villas, Sutton Place Twin Homes, and the Pemberton Landing townhouses. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Option l Recommend approval of the following request: • Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential on 17.29 acres. • Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 21.66 acres. • Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 21.66 acres. • Zoning District Change from R1-22 to RM- 6.5 on 17.29 acres. • Site Plan Review on 17.29 acres. • • Preliminary Plat of 21.66 acres into 32 lots, 1 outlot, and road right-of-way. This is based on plans dated February 18, 2004, and the following conditions: 1. Prior to release of the final plat, the proponent shall submit detailed storm water runoff, utility, and erosion control plans for review and approval by the City Engineer and Watershed District. 2. Prior to grading permit issuance, the proponent shall: A. Notify the City and Watershed District 48 hours in advance of grading. B. Install erosion control on the property, as well as tree protection fencing at the grading limits in the wooded areas for trees to be preserved as part of the development. Said fencing shall be field inspected by the City Forester prior to any grading. 3. Prior to building permit issuance for the property, the proponent shall: �s Staff Report—Pemberton Landing February 20,2004 Page 9 A. Provide a tree replacement/landscaping surety equivalent to 150% of the cost of the tree replacement/landscaping for 2,185 caliper inches. B. Pay the Cash Park Fee. 4. The following waivers are granted through the PUD for the project: A. Density of 7.4 units per acre in a RM-6.5 zoning district. Code permits up to 6.7 units per acre. B. Land area of 5,588 square feet per unit. Code requires 6,500 square feet of land area per unit in the RM-6.5 district. C. All multi-family lot depths of 78 feet and 88 feet. Code requires 100 feet. D. Lot 2, Block 2 of 20,600 square feet. Code requires a minimum of 22,000 square feet within the R1-22 district. E. Side yard setback of 10.2 feet for Lot 16, Block 1 adjacent to R1-22 zoned property. Code requires side yard setbacks for dissimilar abutting districts meet the larger of the two requirements which is 15 feet. Option 2 Recommend a continuance of the project to the March 22, 2004, Community Planning Board meeting and direct the proponent to revise the plans as follows. 1. Reduce the density of the project according to the examples identified in the summary section of this report. 2. Eliminate the PUD waivers. 3. Reduce tree loss. 4. Create an adequate transition between land uses consisting of berming, tree planting, increased setbacks, and reduced building mass and height. 5. Eliminate the westerly access to Pioneer Trail. 6. Provide a public road and sidewalk connection through the project from Pioneer Trail to Staff Report—Pemberton Landing February 20, 2004 Page 10 Hilltop Road, including extension of sanitary sewer and water. 7. Revise the drainage plan to provide for 100-year storm event ponding and safe emergency overflow elevations to Eden Prairie Road to protect adjacent homes. 8. Eliminate the private drive north of Lots 5 and 6, and its intersection with the easterly access to Pioneer Trail. 9. Create berms and landscaping to buffer the project from Pioneer Trail. Option 3 Recommend denial of the project based on the following. 1. The proposal is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Guide Plan. 2. The PUD waivers have not been substantiated. 3. Inadequate transition between land uses. 4. High tree loss. 5. No public road connection to Hilltop Road. Staff Recommends Option 2 1 q I Planning Board Minutes January 26, 2004 Page 5 VI. INFORMATIONAL MEETINGS A. PEMBERTON LANDING by Minnstar Builders, Inc. An informational meeting for the developer to present plans for a 135 unit townhouse development. Timothy Bohlman presented the project. He stated the total number of units per acre as 7.41with a total of 129 units. He displayed a view of the landscape plan. He said there are two product types,Veranda style, which is a back to back unit and the Classic unit which is a row style. He said they're all walkout units and take advantage of the change in elevation. He stated there are two issues for which the project would require waivers; the first of those is for density. The zoning designation of RM-6.5 allows up to 6.7 units per acre. Based on the layout of the land, costs, etc., they would be asking for a waiver of 0.71 units per acre. The second waiver has to do with square footage of the lot. He said rather than 6,500 square feet per unit required by code, they are asking for 5,875 per unit which is a waiver of 625 square feet. The third waiver includes the home belonging to Mr. Duane Auseth. After purchasing a portion of the property from him,the lot remaining would be 20,600 square feet. This is less than the minimum required 22,000 square feet for the R1-22 zoning district. He said they could adjust that by purchasing less of his land which would allow him to stay within the 22,000 square feet. He stated the final waiver has to do with side yard setbacks which would have to do with the RM-6.5 zoned lots that abut the R1-22lots. He said there aren't too many setbacks that fall under 25 feet between buildings. To remove 15 units from the development would make it impossible for them to proceed with the project. He said he would like to show the Board how high quality their homes are. In exchange for the small waivers, Eden Prairie and neighbors will get a lot in return. Stoelting asked to see the exterior of the proposed units. Bohlman displayed the colored renderings of the exterior of the homes. He said the Classic homes have a number of plans for each building so that they look different. They will sell for $350,000—500,000. He displayed the Veranda unit which is smaller and less expensive. He said the unit looks custom, not mass produced. They allow for double garages and provide quite a few amenities. They will sell at$250,000—low 300,000s. Bohlman said he assembled a larger tract of land by purchasing land from abutting homeowners which resulted in a larger development. He stated currently there is not a public street connecting Hilltop Road and Pioneer Trail. He said the road would be placed through an owner's property and they are not willing to sell their property. He said he will work with abutting property owners regarding extension of the utilities system to those currently using wells and septic tanks. Stoelting asked where the existing single family homes are located. Bohlman responded they are located in the southern area of the development. Planning Board Minutes January 26, 2004 Page 6 Franzen said the Board first needs to determine if there are compelling reasons to change the guide plan. Second, determine if the density is appropriate for the site and the area. Third, determine if there is an adequate transition. The last thing the Board needs to look at is the relationship of the project to the current neighborhood. The developer is planning to buffer the single family homes with trees and plantings. He stated the development will result in a neighborhood part single family part multifamily. Roxanne Johnson of 9009 Sutton Drive has concerns with density of the proposal. She said they live on a private drive and that's the only access into and out of the neighborhood. She stated her concerns include safety, noise and traffic with the high density development. She said the churches manage traffic well and haven't been a problem. She said that during rush hour Pioneer Trail will become more congested and there doesn't seem to be anything done about speeding and u-turns on Pioneer Trail. Carolyn Nelson of 9049 McGuffy Road stated she is concerned about the density and the two road access points to the project. She stated that adding 129 more units would make traffic much worse and the addition of more children would add to an already overfill school. John Hansen of 16200 Hilltop Road stated he is selling part of his property. He said approximately two years ago he talked to three developers but Ron Clark followed through and can't develop the land unless have the density to pay for it. He stated that traffic is terrible on Pioneer Trail and many people turn into the neighborhoods to the north because of the backup of traffic. He said there is a need for sanitary sewer and water and it seems the development will go in before installing it. Tim Burgett of 16400 Hilltop Road stated when it rains there is a river of water that runs through his property. He said he is concerned that this development will make runoff worse. He stated it's important the development maintain the 25 foot setbacks; the buildings seem to be very close together. Tom Totall of 16176 Hilltop Road said he is sure Mr. Bohlman's company will put together some aesthetic buildings that will be pleasing but before the waivers are granted he wants to make sure to protect the property on Hilltop Road. He stated the developer should downsize the number of units. Liz Deminico of 16100 Hilltop Road said she did not sell any of her property and is very concerned and worried about the development and the density as proposed. She said she is fearful that the developer will try to force the single family homeowners out. She said her lot is in a lower lying area and when spoke to project manager, the first lots will be pond areas. She said there isn't any flooding currently but would (q3 Planning Board Minutes January 26, 2004 Page 7 like to know how that site will be developed to the east of her property. Dawn Stover of 16291 Hilltop Road said the area has a very rural feel with small children and wooded area. She is concerned about traffic, density and loss of trees. Mike Clarke of 16290 Hilltop Road stated he agreed about density and there are good reasons for rules considering density. Stoelting summarized the neighbors' comments which included concerns with traffic, density, who units are targeted to and sewer and water installation. There are concerned for runoff from the east and to the east. He stated there was the concern that homeowners may be forced out and issues regarding tree loss, biking and walking. Bohlman stated regarding traffic,he said he's been on the site and discovered that 312 is a faster route to take to the area. He said there has been a marked increase in traffic and the extra traffic will dissipate as 312 develops. The amount of traffic generated by the project falls within the maximum capacity limits of Pioneer Trail and area roadways. The access points to the development will be private streets off of Pioneer Trail which will line up with existing streets. The target market will include a variety of buyers including young families with children and empty nesters. These are unique buildings with unique floor plans. The amount of money schools have is directly tied to the number of students in the community. School boards are required to plan for the growth of the community and they need to work with the City to determine how to plan for growth. Public utilities are not shown along Hilltop Road because the proponent doesn't own the property and, as a result, can't develop it. If there's interest in hooking up to City services, will try to accommodate that by working with staff and neighbors. He said storm water is a huge issue and the project has a storm water holding and treatment basin that is one acre square and allows for the best water quality and sedimentation removal before water goes into the City's sewer system. The pond's size will handle two one-hundred year rain events back to back without overflowing to neighboring properties. The net affect is that it will correct and remedy runoff problems on the east of the site. The pond is in the lowest elevation of the block. Storm sewer pipe is planned behind the southern part of the development and catch basins to channel down to the pond where it is stored. The idea that they would try to force people out is not a problem. He said the builder is very ethical and would not want to cause problems for homeowners. When purchasing land from owners did not use high pressure tactics. They were asked and if they don't want to sell their land that is fine. That is not the intent to force people out of their homes. Stoelting asked Bohlman to address the setbacks. Bowman stated they aren't asking for waivers on the rear of the buildings. Many are more than 25 feet away from the lines. In reference to the homeowner who mentioned the homes in one development `� I Planning Board Minutes January 26, 2004 Page 8 that were so close together was a totally different type of development than this one. There is no product such as that proposed. Side setbacks in this product are 20 feet or greater. There may be building to building where may need to go with 17 or 18 foot side yard setbacks. Stoelting asked Gray to address traffic concerns and the sanitary hookup. Gray responded in regard to traffic the first speaker from the public articulated the problems getting on to Eden Prairie Road. It's a perfect example of the difficulties of neighborhoods with a single roadway access onto a high volume county road. Her concern regarding this project is that we are adding traffic but there is growth and it will add to traffic. He said the timing of the extension of 312 is to be advanced and will be extended from County Road 4 to Chaska over the next three years. It is to be expected the impact will involve a significant drop in traffic volumes on Pioneer Road. Currently, there is a significant volume of traffic from Chanhassen and Chaska also utilizing Pioneer Trail. He said in 2 -3 years with the extension of 312 there will be a significant drop in traffic volmes. He stated that section of Pioneer Trail needs to be improved similar to east of 169 and 212. That is what is anticipated in the future. For this project there needs to be a public road connection between Pioneer Trail and Hilltop. Hennepin County is going to have a lot to say about how they take access to Pioneer Trail. They have said that one of the access' on this plan be eliminated. Hilltop Road is a neighborhood a few years ago where the board recommended a connection. Council agreed to approve the development with- out the connection. The City is in a situation where the development has a plan that we question whether the county will approve. We have a recommendation that we think the County will approve but the developer states it's a difficult plan to imple- ment. The best solution would be a connection between Hilltop and Pioneer Trail. Gray stated regarding drainage there are existing drainage and erosion problems. He said this plan can reduce some of the problems. The sedimentation pond is unique in that it is not in the center of the development; it is located on the perimeter. Generally, ponds are aesthetic becomes part of the amenities within projects and are maintained by the association. There is a question whether the association would be concerned about the aesthetics of this pond. The existing walkout home backing up to the pond has a home daycare. He stated it would be important to know that the daycare is isolated from the situation. The topography indicates this is where it should be located. He said typically ponds have overflow so that it doesn't end up in someone's basement. The sanitary sewer at Eden Prairie Road does not function. Grace Church has access to sewer but they have a lift station. The lift station to make it useable for this development is under construction and won't be ready for a year. What the City plans to do is come to the neighborhood and reach an agreement with neighbors to put in sanitary improvements in the neighborhood,probably in 2005. Mr. Hanson stated the ponding will take care of the other people on Hilltop Road. He stated they are not connected to utilities but have to pay a utility bill. He said 195 Planning Board Minutes January 26, 2004 Page 9 everything that goes east drains onto the corner lot and what overflows their lot goes into the new ponding. He believes that the sanitary sewer and basin will help everybody. Stoelting asked the members for input. Brooks stated there are two questions why multi-family housing on this site and whether the proponent has looked at the number of multi-family units in the Eden Prairie today versus the number of single family lots available. Bohlman responded Minnstar Builders are involved mainly in multi-family housing. The market base is there and demand is strong. They have a product no one else is building. The sheer cost of developing this type of project because they can't tear down existing homes and build single family because they would lose money. He stated he is aware through a report from a company that reviews housing that Eden Prairie has a huge need for this type of product at this price point. Brooks stated he would like to see that report because he has a difficult time with increasing from low density to a higher density. He said he wants to encourage development and Ron Clark has a good reputation but because of Hennepin Village and Market Center area, the Board has had a hard time with multi- family projects. He said he doesn't have a compelling reason to change the zoning or approve the waivers on the site. Nelson asked about the drainage pond and how water will drain to it without going over someone's land. Bohlman stated the water collected in catch basins will be piped underground and through an easement. The easements that would be required have not been obtained at this point. It's a small area that would be affected. It's a 10 or 15 foot triangle. Nelson asked if the density level includes the homes on the south but are not part of the development or just this development. Franzen responded that it would be exclusive of the single family homes. Nelson stated that she was surprised at the use of vinyl siding and windows throughout the units. She asked why they weren't using wood. Bohlman responded the palettes have been put together because vinyl requires less maintenance and retains the appearance much longer. The materials are of superior quality and heavy mill weight materials. Vinyl windows are more energy efficient and easier to take care of. The other option would be wood windows with alminum. Nelson stated she is concerned about the density of this project. She said an alternative would be go to half acre lots. The addition of 129 families onto Pioneer Trail is a concern. She said doesn't believe the timing of the project is good considering the sanitary sewer and road situation. She stated if it remains high density there should be a play area. This doesn't seem to be accommodating with a playground at this point. She said there also needs to be walking paths through the development; with the numerous driveways exiting onto the streets, safety is an issue. She commented that the unit sizes are too large and there doesn't seem to be circulation; it needs redesigning and would want to see it again in 6 months. Steppat stated that he understands the traffic issues which do not involve this Planning Board Minutes January 26, 2004 Page 10 development. He said he doesn't have a problem going from low density to medium density but is concerned about the density of this project. He said he is unconvinced that it has to have this many units to have the development pay off. There isn't a lot of green space. The drainage question is a problem. He urged the proponent to meet with neighbors. Foote stated that the first thing he looked at was the Guide Plan changes and the change from low to medium density which he is reluctant to change. He said this would be a good spot for low density housing; single family would fit well in the area. He commented that it's unfortunate that a proponent would say they need this type of density in order to make it work. He said with Hennepin Village down the road he doesn't see the need for additional multi-family. Foote stated he would rather see single level multiple but wants the area to remain low density. Seymour stated it's a good looking project but he's not sure this is the right place for that project with the density. He said he was concerned about the northern side of Hilltop Road and the impact on traffic. He stated he doesn't like the density at this time and in this location. Koenig stated a lot of the issues have been addressed by the other board members. She said one of her concerns was if the project were to go through that the buffer be maintained between the multi-family and single family housing. She stated she is not sure how that would be addressed with the topography. She stated she is not in favor of the waivers to the setbacks Bohlman stated that Nine Mile Cove consists of detached townhomes. He said the waivers to the setbacks for Pemberton Landing are only for buildings where the curve causes them to reduce the setback. Koenig stated they would need the minimum setback and more for the transition. She was impressed with the Nine Mile Cove development; it didn't appear dense. Bohlman stated the units in Nine Mile Cover started at$500,000 and most expensive $900,000. Koenig stated she can't understand why someone would pay that much for a townhome rather than a single family home. Bohlman responded it's a lifestyle change for people so that they don't have the upkeep. Mr. Hanson stated that regarding the density the lots are 450 feet deep and the single family owners don't need that much land. There was a developer who came through and wanted to put in 6 single family homes and they couldn't build a million dollar home on the small lots. The density is necessary in order to afford to build. Most of the homes have a 15 foot setback between the single family homes. Bohlman stated this is the density the project requires to make it happen. They've done the math and numbers and to do a project like this they need this number of homes. In the early stages of the project when he was acquiring land he made it clear to the homeowners that here's the number he calculated and that was all he could pay per square foot. The City of Eden Prairie has a decision as to what to do with pieces 193— Planning Board Minutes January 26, 2004 Page 11 of land such as this within the City. This property doesn't have any chance of being redeveloped into anything else but this type of project. He stated there are sewer and water pipes that are dinning past open land and rather than perpetrating urban sprawl lets make this work. He said in regard to concerns related to drainage there are still some minor details that still need to be worked out. Traffic related issues have been addressed by staff but there are problems all over Eden Prairie with additional development. Regarding this type of home these are the types of units people are wanting to buy and this is the kind of product that can be built and sold in these ratios. With the topography and setbacks in conjunction with the reforestation along the property line the single family homes will be adequately screened. Association living is what people want and there will be maintenance taken care of by the association. He stated he lives in a neighborhood where there are covenants and people want that. Stoelting asked Gray about Hennepin County and needing their approval for access to Pioneer Trail. He questioned whether the developer could contact the County and bring back a letter from the County as to their position on this access. He said he heard a lot of comments about drainage, pond aesthetics, and daycare. The Board needs to be convinced that this product is needed and it's really going to sell. There are a lot of issues with density and the waivers being requested. Stoelting stated there's need for a play area, green space, sidewalks, and the question of how people are going to live in this highly dense area. Also of concern is the future impact to the south and how that will affect infrastructure. This is a redevelopment project and is very challenging. The Board has not dealt with many redevelopment projects and there will be more in the future. The Board took a five minute recess at 10:10 p.m. The Board reconvened at 10:15 p.m. Planning Board Minutes February 23, 2004 Page 5 C. PEMBERTON LANDING by Minnstar Builders, Inc. Request for Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential on 17.29 acres, Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 21.66 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 21.66 acres, Zoning District Change from R1-22 to RM-6.5 on 17.29 acres, Site Plan Review on 17.29 acres, Preliminary Plat of 21.66 acres into 32 lots, 1 outlot, and road right-of-way. Location: South of Pioneer Trail, north of Hilltop Road, west of Eden Prairie Road. Timothy Bohlman introduced the project. He stated there have been a couple of changes made since the informational meeting. He said the most notable changes are the entrances from the development onto Pioneer Trail. He stated he had further discussions with Hennepin County regarding location and number of entrances. They are proposing two entrances to the site. He displayed a site plan that shows an entrance on the western end of the development off Pioneer Trail and a right in, right out access on Pioneer Trail across from Gould Road. He said the issues to discuss include the waivers for the project as proposed. If they were taken off the table, the project would be similar to other projects in town. The report indicated they were three units per acre. He said this project would not work at that density. In order to purchase property and make it work financially, it needs to be more dense than 3 units per acre. He stated the premise is to take the older neighborhood that was built 30 years ago without city utilities and to redevelop the area and install utilities. He is looking at developing this area and bringing in City utilities. He stated an independent research firm indicated that this type of housing is needed in Eden Prairie. He stated taxes on the current property are estimated at around $4,617 for the City's portion . With redevelopment, there would be $128,048 in taxes for the City. He indicated this would be an advantage to the City and be helpful in providing revenue for City services. The park dedication fees would add another $400,000. He displayed a chart which he referred to as Area 25 which includes south central Hennepin County including Eden Prairie, Minnetonka, Deephaven and Woodland. . He stated the firm have done the research and they don't expect to have any problems selling the units; this is a product type that is in demand and there is a lack of this type of product. He stated Ron Clark Construction has built in Bear Path, they were the only builders in Bear Path to build four product types including single family, twin and both types of townhome units. They aren't trying to replicate Hennepin Village. He showed the sign monument and landscaping at the entrance. He said they are proposing to incorporate a decorative and screening fence which would consist of stone pillars every 40 or 50 feet. It will carry through the theme with the early settler homestead type of feel. There are some changes in the names of the products. The Veranda unit is now called the Homestead product; the Classic is now the Hearth home. I ` t Planning Board Minutes February 23, 2004 Page 6 Franzen stated what planning must do on a continual basis is review projects and direct changes in the plans so they contribute to accomplishing one of the strategic initiatives of the City Council, which is the "quality of life" .The quality of life began back in 1968 when the City decided to create a guide plan with 30% open space, balanced land uses,with a strong office and industrial base. In 1968,the City envisioned a town with 55 percent single family and 45 percent multi-family homes. This would allow people to move to different housing types to meet their changing needs and still be able to live in the City. He said 98% of the time the City has voted to remain consistent with the guise plan. For the 2% of the time that guide plan changes are reviewed the staff takes them very seriously. Although there is certainly nothing wrong with building out the rest of the land consistent with the guide plan and repeating more of the great things we already enjoy, there are those projects that stand out from the others and should be considered for a change. However there must be compelling reasons to change the guide plan, or the offer that cannot be refused, or better than god, motherhood and apple pie. These reasons fall into categories such as preservation of open space, affordable housing, senior housing, eliminating a land use incompatibility. With this project there is no compelling reason to change the guide plan. To create the appropriate transition the density needs to be lowered to 3 —3 %2 units per acre or similar to Sutton Place. This project is more than just the guide plan and density, it is about neighborhood character. Residents should be able to rely upon the guide plan when deciding on where to live and the City has a responsibility to uphold the guide plan in order to protect the integrity of its neighborhoods. The City cannot deny a project simply because it impacts neighborhood character; the reasons must be substantiated in fact not a goal. However the inconsistency with the guide plan, lack of transition and waivers from the City code become reasons for denial and at the same time those reasons also support maintaining neighborhood character. Franzen said the last point of his presentation has to do with the philosophy of redevelopment. With the 2008 guide plan update the City must have redevelopment policies. The Board cannot delay the project because the City does not have a policy. Eventually the City needs to determine if older neighborhoods should be allowed to redevelop. The second question would be what type of redevelopment the City should allow. The last question would be should the City get involved financially. The City does not have to redevelop older neighborhoods. Older suburbs that may not have properly planned their communities now have a strong financial incentive Planning Board Minutes February 23, 2004 Page 7 to redevelop land that is underused since tax base is so low. Other communities are faced with planning problems from years ago which has resulted in zoning that is incompatible and they need to make changes to clean up neighborhoods. Franzen noted that tax base alone cannot be a determining factor. Tax base is not a huge issue considering the total city value is around 8 billion dollars and the City has an AAA bond rating. In summary Franzen suggested that the Board needs to first discuss whether the land use proposed is appropriate for this location and whether there is a compelling reason to change the comprehensive guide plan. If not, there no further discussion is needed. John Deminico of 16100 Hilltop Road stated he is representing members of his neighborhood including Hilltop Road, south of Hilltop Road, Riley Creek, Valley Road, Fairfield and Eden Prairie Road. He said there was a lack of due process with this project from the beginning. He displayed a drawing that indicated the location of his home. He questioned the tactics of Minnstar. He was told that they were the only one that had not agreed to sell part of their property which was not the case. One of the reasons they are here is to oppose the rezoning to medium density. They had not been given a forum to be heard. There were no neighborhood meetings where their thoughts could be incorporated in the design. He said it is necessary to obtain easements for a holding pond on the east end of the development. The only two most likely places the easements could be granted is either his property or another property. Neither property owner had been contacted. He stated he would back up 120 feet from the units. The transition that is proposed is a single method which consists of trees. Many builders use fencing, and berms in addition to trees. He said Mr. Bohlman stated he would place trees on the single family properties. He said he is not for that because it would take 10 years for the trees to be effective as a transition element. He stated there are 11 objectives listed in the City Code for Land Development. He stated he would like to discuss three of them. He said Objective #2 states "to foster a harmonious convenient workable relationship among land uses." He said he can't see putting a high density development next to single family homes as being harmonious. Objective #3 states "to promote the stability of existing land uses that conform wit the Guide Plan and to protect them from inharmonious influences and harmful intrusions." He stated intrusions are an understatement when you have a four-plex in your back yard. Objective#5 states "to prevent excessive population densities and over-crowding of the land with structures." He said this is what's being proposed too much density. He stated, in summary, for all these reasons the neighbors are asking the Board to consider option#3, to deny the project as they don't want a continuance. Dawn Stover of 16291 Hilltop Road stated there are 26 property owners in the neighborhood and only 6 neighbors who approve of the project. She said they built their home and worked closely with City staff. The negative effects will be c Q1 Planning Board Minutes February 23, 2004 Page 8 immediate and others such as tree loss will be long term affecting the bird population. The townhomes would be in full view of the single family homes. The development will affect the life and security of the neighborhood. Hilltop Road can't bear the additional traffic and when the road is widened, it will not be wide enough for sidewalks. Neighbors are aware of what's going on in the neighborhood; it's safe and there's no crime in the area. She said they agree with the staff report which states "any multiple family in the area can create a ripple effect and there would be pressure to build multiple family on the south of Hilltop Road or at the very least cause a transition problem for which there is no solution." She said the reality is that someday the neighbors will be looking out at a cluster of townhomes and the neighborhood they have known will no longer exist. She stated the plan can't stand on its own. She described the positive aspects of the neighborhood and the qualities and connections between neighbors that have made their neighborhood special. She said Eden Prairie has positive family focused living and neighborhoods such as hers are the reason. Brad Longton of 9180 Eden Prairie Road said his property sits along the road and there is a drainage ditch planned for their back yard. He said they have a daycare and there is a concern for safety. He stated concerns regarding smell and safety, and is against this project for those reasons. John Howe of 16380 Valley Road stated he was representing the Valley Road residents and other communities surrounding the area. He referred to a petition which did not support the rezoning. He said it states support retaining the existing zoning and oppose rezoning to a higher density and opposition to any future rezoning to allow that density of zoning. In summary, the petitions include over 275 signatures. Two points he would like to mention. He stated for Valley Road residents proposed development of this type would affect the community in many ways. They believe that the overall affect on quality of life would be negative such as increased traffic. The guide plan indicates low density, single family for this area. The residents relied on the current guide plan when they built in the area. There are also no services available to a development of this size such as gas stations, convenience stores, etc. He stated Eden Prairie is on the higher end for multifamily to single family. He said they need to determine the impact on surrounding land— isn't consistent. He stated there would be an impact on City services with water usage impacted with such a large development. Most of the topography would need to be regarded. Establishing sod would be a tax on the water supply. Impervious surfaces could be upwards of 50%with this proposed density. He is looking to promote rainwater gardens. He stated this is a mature neighborhood with a lot of hardwood trees which provide shade and they don't have to water as often. He said according to MAC and Met Council they would like the area to stay low density. He continued the west side of Hilltop Road has a drainage problem due to the Riley Creek development. The neighbors have discussed what they'd like to see. They developed a plan which includes 42 single family homes which could fit into the aaD- Planning Board Minutes February 23, 2004 Page 9 area. In this plan, it would allow the existing homes to stay in place. John Hamel of 16260 Valley Road displayed a concept plan which included 42 single family homes. He described town home living as not as desirable because of the expense with monthly fees for maintenance; single family homes would be more desirable to most people. He said he spoke with a developer who felt the plan was viable. He said the area hadn't been developed because there is no City sewer or water. He stated the biggest concern was because they are a smaller neighborhood a large development like this would split them in two. Andy Vergeront of 16759 Thatcher Road stated he supports all arguments against the development. He stated traffic is crowded on Pioneer Trail and the development could introduce up to 200 more cars per day. He said a lot of people coming down Eden Prairie Road to avoid the traffic on Pioneer Trail will cut through the neighborhood near the elementary school which creates an unsafe situation for children in the area. He stated the area would be so dense and wondered whether the buses could even get in there. He said it's important not to put profit margins in front of safety. Carol Nelson of 9049 McGuffey Road stated that town homes are not appropriate for the area and should not be built in this project. This is currently a single family home development and Pemberton Landing will not fit with this neighborhood. The property surrounding the area is all single family. She said when they built their home the City staff assured them the guide plan was a credible plan for the future. She said they need to locate this type of development near shopping areas; if senior citizens, singles and empty nesters locate in the development, there aren't the services they need nearby. She stated there is no place for children to play,no playgrounds, yards, and they will end up playing in the streets. This area can be redeveloped within the single family home designation. There is only one opportunity to redevelop this property. The decision made will send a message to Minstar and all developers, development and redevelopment within the City of Eden Prairie is to be done by the book by following the guide plan. Dick Perkins of 16351 Pioneer Trail stated when they bought their home they knew the area would be built up. He said that development is inevitable and it's not right to think others shouldn't make Eden Prairie their home. He said he believes Pemberton Landing is a good addition to Eden Prairie. Floyd Hagen of 15721 Cedar Ridge Road bought their home where they did because the comprehensive guide plan was so well planned out. He was surprised about the Pemberton Landing and how it diverges from the comprehensive guide plan. He stated he would strongly recommend option three recommending denial of the project because it is inconsistent with the comprehensive guide plan. 0.05 Planning Board Minutes February 23, 2004 Page 10 Corey Gellner of 9097 Gateway Lane stated he was against the high density and is concerned about traffic issues. Marie Brau of 16201 Pioneer Trail said they built their home 18 years ago. When developers approached them about selling their home they were adamant that they would not and didn't want to leave. The six residents got together as a group and looked into Ron Clark's credibility discovering that he is honest, a great home builder, and developer. He said he and his neighbors looked at his product line and liked it and they were happy he'd be retaining the trees. The six homes don't fit in with the more expensive ones in the area. He said when he looked at selling her home, looked at it as an opportunity and sincerely believed she was doing what the City of Eden Prairie would like. Lori Campos of 15710 Corral Lane is in support of the smaller pocket of older homes. She said she was very concerned about rezoning and making the land more usable. John Hansen of 16200 Hilltop Road. He said he likes the development except the City wants to put a road through to Hilltop Road which would destroy the quality of life on Hilltop Road. He stated he is in favor of Ron Clark developing this area. The privacy of the neighborhood is protected by the dead end streets. He stated he is for the development. Tom Briant 15560 Boulder Pointe Road is against the plan because the traffic on Pioneer Road would significantly increase. He said they are concerned about the impact on property values and that the proposed density does not fit the area. For those reasons adhere to the comprehensive guide plan and do not approve the project. Diane Jorgensen of 16101 Pioneer Trail stated she grew up in Eden Prairie. She said she has seen development occur around her home and she is for the project because of the traffic situation and she wants to get out of Eden Prairie. She believes their house doesn't fit into the area anymore because it was built in 1952. Stoelting summarized the issues discussed which included—land use, transition, due process, Hilltop Road, drainage, outlot, zoning changes, conceptual plan, traffic flow, density and safety concerns, setbacks, sidewalks, safety, buses, and children. Franzen stated some of the concerns are comprehensive such as do whether the guide plan should be changed, some are site specific. An appropriate place to start would be a discussion as to whether the guide plan should be changed. If the answer is no, nothing else needs to be discussed. Brooks thanked the residents and developer because it takes both parties to develop Doy Planning Board Minutes February 23,2004 Page 11 the community. He said he's not opposed to guide plan changes because things have changed over time. He stated there is no question that Ron Clark is a quality builder. Along Pioneer Trail there are some multi-family but no where near the density of this project. He said he thinks there could be a nice transition to the multifamily homes on Pioneer Trail with berms and landscaping. He stated he is more concerned about density than a guide plan change. Nelson stated she's not against a guide plan change especially along Pioneer Trail. She said she's not sure about the density but double and triple homes can fit in nicely near single family homes. She said she can see the possibility of multiple family and the density is really high and if went with multiple would want open land planned for, access for buses, and reasonable access to roads. The value of whatever goes in needs to match the value of the neighborhood whether it's multiple or single. There are environmental issues with this land. This project needs to be continued to answer some of those questions. She said it's not appropriate to say that multiple housing on Pioneer Trail wouldn't be feasible. Foote stated he is not against redevelopment which is something Eden Prairie needs to look at for the future. He said he appreciates the efforts the developer has gone through and the hard work of the neighbors. He said from a guide plan perspective we need to hold to it as closely as possible. He stated he is looking at the 77%tree loss would make the project undesirable. He said there could be multi family along Pioneer Trail if they were single level. He concluded he could not support the density of this development. Steppat agreed with Foote stating he is not against redevelopment or changing the guide plan but feels the density is inappropriate. There has to be a compelling reason for a guide plan change and there isn't one here and he would not support the project. Koenig agreed and said she looks at guide plan changes carefully. Although she was very impressed with the developer's product, she said she is hesitant to change the guide plan. She stated diversity of housing is important and because a neighborhood is older doesn't mean it needs to be redeveloped. it needs to be on a case by case basis. There needs to be some perks in exchange for changing the guide plan. She said she liked some of the work the developer's done but there are just too many problems with this development and she is against a guide plan change. Seymour stated he doesn't support a guide plan change for this project, there's no compelling reason to change it. He said there are serious problems with transportation,transition and density. He stated nothing has changed since the last meeting even though the board recommended changes to the developer. This project doesn't fit this area and doesn't give any thing to the City. Sutherland stated it has been an interesting project.. The comprehensive guide plan QO5 Planning Board Minutes February 23, 2004 Page 12 is not perfect but it has wisdom and process. He said he sees no compelling reason to change the guide plan. He stated he is uncomfortable with the plan which seems to amputate a part of the neighborhood with excessive elbow room and stitch on a neighborhood with excessive impervious surface. Even with a guide plan change the square peg in a round whole aspect of this development doesn't work. Nelson stated that those with large lots do have a right to find aplan to utilize the land. The rest of the neighborhood doesn't have a right to say they can't look at options. The City needs to develop ways to address developments that can fit into a variety of neighborhoods. Bohlman asked the Board to not continue the project since he has timelines to meet and would ask the Board to either approve or deny the project. MOTION by Brooks, second by Nelson, to close the public hearing. Motion carried, 8-0 MOTION by Brooks, second by Koenig, to deny a Comprehensive Guide Plan Change from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential on 17.29 acres, Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 21.66 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 21.66 acres, Zoning District Change from R1-22 to RM-6.5 on 17.29 acres, Site Plan Review on 17.29 acres,Preliminary Plat of 21.66 acres into 32 lots, 1 outlot, and road right-of-way,based on plans dated February 18, 2004, subject to the recommendations of the staff report dated February 20, 2004, to the City Council, based on the following reasons: • There are no compelling reasons to change the guide plan, • The density is inconsistent with the surrounding area, • The proposed plan does not preserve natural features, help meet housing goals, provide an appropriate transition, and it does not provide open space. Motion carried, 8-0 Franzen informed the Board members that the developer can choose to go forward to the City Council with the project even with a denial recommendation.. If he decides to proceed staff will be sending out public hearing notices. Foote asked if the developer came forward to the City Council with a completely different plan, would it come back again before the Board. Franzen responded the City Council could look at it in two ways. The first would be that all items have been addressed and the plans look fine and they would act on it or they may send it back to the Board for a recommendation on a new plan.. .D06 PETITION AGAINST THE RE-ZONING OF EDEN HEIGHTS We the residents of Eden Prairie endorse this Petition in support of sustaining the existing zoning of Eden Heights as low density, single-family residences. We are opposed to re-zoning this area to medium density as currently proposed by the developers of Pemberton Landing and, as such, are also opposed to any future re-development that would require Eden Heights to be re-zoned to medium density. We ask the Eden Prairie City Council to support this Petition and support the residents of this area in order to preserve our neighborhoods. Printed Name . Address Signature 1.C��o _N � •-•- N-Sow qo ��.cv � _�� ' - 'z—,—, • , c:�� 2. J p Fru It ?t, s o 4 901"9 41 c 6 u F r e Y led. ' V. 3. -\ YtA Vca1ti62\ iL - ` 4 ov\\V�G T(� L '. <<f c �47 4. )ck�, P r a Ad 2 -i k- i(e cv ‘ Y\2 -n�i G E-(� / � vat, ��-ct ci2-- k . 5. P(9iy fi ti ec1<-ea (DJ� e1vi ('k 4 C—:? Q`.`- - 6. )1Bn1 - ICI5k1 Kam, 7. .1 , ,- 1 6 S 4 e ,,; k'n' / - ip --7�8. -- ,-V9 Th�I�,iJI ,, i . �()1(( 1_ / 1 i ,( /8 it �jC' 9/44.., 1 �24-, '(. !` ✓"c 1/f7�`�.' — 9. 6,4R�.`� G VZtwx v� /6 5j2 11`)6�/N R e . ,r: U 10. L-�- .�"--� Cam:��M t (o5 7� 1Le(.n� r) al "I7-� ck � ..>~,� O j c), 12. /7.A /RGlE / - /{cA/nl:i✓G= 4-)! ,C�- 13.r_c:�.c-,moo_ (DQ r �E'.� C�, L,N, ot,',\ �,f1 '� ��t ` LL ' / Fr c 14. \ t,,1 ' l'!1c(1 ESP/1 ( 3 (��' c (�, </. �r ?�,!/i J.tin, 15. Lail-'c,1 (- d (�IP e ?0 (0 Y C"ce a)c Liz . ; 4^_ 16. St,�Sa�n 1� vy o?(v 6t�fP(. i t-�r�n_ EP "C ' , i . 17. �l,_'le v/-e 6� I et C tea' Cr a l�ef-,lrti� �� 18. ( CL �+z-ENoi U EN 900! gGi-9 RD 77,4 fir= 19. 'ys,.. o,,,c—,i, &,t.p 1 �,-,A FP ,.. ._ o,,,,Q,,„� . 20. (55sj)-1..-e cl0 8 C [ems.�� s P -- 1 C �� .23. Cgr1/2L,4. > j/i/ e. e 'v /6 .1/ /C.fv ,Z7 7- y 24. �)n lc\i(ed- L _ 076 Pit } 96 tIF 11C 6.tilz.� /Q �.��1�.� JZO ) A,./ t d Page-1 of 10 We the residents of Eden Prairie endorse this Petition in support of sustaining the existing zoning of Eden Heights as low density, single-family residences. . We are opposed to re-zoning this area to medium density as currently proposed by the developers of Pemberton Landing and, as such, are also opposed to any future re-development that would require Eden Heights to be re-zoned to medium density. We ask the Eden Prairie City Council to support this Petition and support the residents of this area in order to preserve our neighborhoods. Printed Name Address / Signature 2. ka.- T2o+.I t (-i-? Ki t l tvp v EtP 3. /1/160.Akt,LGlCcoi( �o7a(a � t�t,� 4. 1 j l4ove'4�- 4 4 p 0,(4 7`I weod ia4v4 ig rile, 0 5. it�tl`''�_. - ei i; l 4./t G14,-1 f� / 'iI /-47f1 ✓c'l- :1?, 6. ��A Do v�."2r,,N-� \61 C i wk r 7. 5� aq 9 ztthAtzt L"713'1 �'t �Li 8. e Aka-CJL'E LI qc1 tyziA2C i (Z.3. EP. 9. ' 1 o(L( zc: owl-- (eca et! 3cl t3� QC (en Re( E' 11. t y r 697 7 I C a k , r p 12. ��c w t 77h%ads q 7 hei- k7d 6,6 g 13 _, 14. / R'13 .s - A.a,, At, E. , .S3 E 15. ae A Ltd Q /.3 -:iiV 1 Rd P 6 53 16_: �� �, ��, s, ( Lam. ?(/C-) `x t f/r:r*/7 c•( " ;7-ss 4 18. i e. 5 (i..4 C 3)? S/u Mvii ri. t p. 5:c3 •? . r , ,,( . , `f(,f , S T�rrilc\ ty,,0 553( 7 20. /� e/(a ...Z4 e 9JW riVe.71,. ►-4/HQ" , j"s 7Y7 21. .j .,.„, ,.› 6 s 7i S' -( -1. .-i SS3(tri 22. � ctL . -- 1 i3 biet -} tzA `353 ir 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. caQ. (.../.` /I w We the residents of Eden Prairie endorse this Petition in support of sustaining the existing zoning of Eden Heights as low density, single-family residences. . We are opposed to re-zoning this area to medium density as currently proposed by the developers of Pemberton Landing and, as such,are also opposed to any future re-development that would require Eden Heights to be re-zoned to medium density. We ask the Eden Prairie City Council to support this Petition and support the residents of this area in order to preserve our _. neighborhoods. Printed Name Address Signature . 1. . ;If. ;/1,f ;.,t_ , 1),))rcli. �Il( C i'I )i. f-.43,-�' h/ L. i.. LL: !f,�_01 rj' (' ')/ltfCLf . -1-.Nee.1 �1Giceer ;rl 113 She l ti» —, 4. ,��j Nee., q(f3 5( 1 5. t )c✓K LJ;IkciU5 Cl(IS 5L I—.) 12...J j, ,_ 6. 1r-v'i yh✓-1 Nat 1t6ovJ Sloe, cll ff SI B-{QQAct vrA 7. 0;*,41 Z Y ivl K L ,-5i'' '!'L7-1 Sinc. .L4/vo r2 ,! y�►;8. 4.e._ v• 12 Y( S k OC.. -. iz-to 9 ,W , 10. /<" -� (v-S-S i ? `!i j 4 -4.1 .--..r" /11cl �,{� ___- r -�•� 11. �'I Put. / .,1 5 0,7 yS )At'r C'a ( A-- -,..�L4-7-.et—i . . /-;- ,._,-.:.„2 ke A y�- 13. lai;kho— 1 ve (I�sI S c3a_ �ord R ` , - U l' / iv. rd. 15. E ., (,G.3 i.'v 7,17 1 r AciL ( 21,) , ' 16.,i4t 14 .;T) 1/C) / r, �j Lam, t XJt ; fit; ��k1.•„t -1 17, .��u_ .,.c,V..,— 1 (p''> C'O - i. ,Z i �61 //���4e-C,:— 18. rrt --lusi- 11300 R;i J i e,J Roctd E? _ S�.r ` 19. -� ' i 20. Srtx.f ,•)1:.1e. !r;.t•:I !._. 0 .c: `^-'_ .► Q. ;� ' �, k ^ 21. r111t A-ca.i \ '..,. i �.ct'.L !•.r..�(r' r: `, \ ' , r. ,1 Gt,,r: jftt.f'� (+ 1.. 22. :T ,.. _" . li,1 ";/,. . _ .__Ti : 11,, 23. fi -'-'t1 rj`''�: ,ice ,fe;f .,.,,,-e--, g ':%.:."=� '.y / . I F., '14 (. +.. f 24. &)p�': ' �r: ;."t.,.- Ate;6 L4Pc 72-`6 'I a;-G1-1., t .- f, �. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. PETITION AGAINST THE RE-ZONING OF EDEN HEIGHTS We the residents of Eden Prairie endorse this Petition in support of sustaining the existing zoning of Eden Heights as low density, single-family residences. We are opposed to re-zoning this area to medium density as currently proposed by the developers of Pemberton Landing and, as such, are also opposed to any future re-development that would require Eden Heights to be re-zoned to medium density. We ask the Eden Prairie City Council to support this Petition and support the residents of this area in order to preserve our neighborhoods. Printed Name Address 9,--,---Signature 1. Jury G- /7/V/Y.5'D�r C/,a-2 o 17 2/oN.5 ,D, ,`v�- „ .&a �,_ 2. /9744.0-&-L e /ti; /-/#9- xcoAi 5020 0.1'4"7- -e.v ,2/v6- 3. ,oxahh c/ahh 5O/) 9d 0 9 5aft't Di-yY _4. i4�.64 OrGi, /,14 Z ,,00/ 5-60-revJ A/v,E 5. .C..9-c. ��.�, ,PU�7t-`& C1 oGG 4-4 rr',v 0 /vim4 . .. 6. /4,22Y -5: /'4 & f"ej c'._ li 7 4/ 1Z//r 6_, 7. / AW OW— i'� 7 crrde 0/ & G 8. /IZi,e4 /LL. -10. �� n-i L Rl�l.1/ 70/8 .,5 - / " 0 • _11. , 'e v �, � _ 510-6 terra&. �y2_ _ 12. AJN 71--Vjccr� � `. 13. V ,,, .. {c \-\\1L-�c�;iY.c.,k 10t-1`t ZQQ 7)rt U<-- lr,- .-:-c- 14. D4v..ii\ �) 1.,r,Lr� ckr1L\`I �Jv.4-� 'Dai ,)Lti7_4764-- I #, 15. &t N A AA5 9D 34 5czee 7rl+r ` _ 16. C L-th -Pei erkcl" 2 Svt�h Dry a r-.t; , 17. Asrr.J t of d M v 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. Page 1 of 10 We the reside of Eden Prairie endorse this Petition in support of sustaining the existing zoning of Eden Heights as low density, single-family residences. We are opposed to re-zoning this area to medium density as currently proposed by the developers of Pemberton Landing and, as such, are also opposed to any future re-development that would require Eden Heights to be re-zoned to medium density. We ask the Eden Prairie City Council to support this Petition and support the residents of this area in order to preserve our neighborhoods. Printed Name Address Signature 1. Q,s L -., 17 7 z6 s'fr.'rrtP Ut 2. /6.7-I rrerierAt 3.� u. a lk )C t_ 5r•240p t n.„sr- 4. 5 Na0 `r1 rY1 LOf n.v�� 1 t(1 J 0 L5Mrf dip 5. Di \k) emirs t,J�i1� 1�15k 5hrcup 6. Ch vJRtkirtis -NJIt.1 Sl-►rru,�4. 7. MA A.Nrvr 1'44, effr S I(¢Z34) SN1-111.4w,0 IA/ . s. CP v. t�Z(s s' rv. L.a,i 9. IlexwtC� G 161i5-5-kr►�.up 10. krt-G Du �/ AA !6617 5h01" 11. StAt_ - ' rZ /'r ( 6 '7 Si* rtr' L A 12. N Cop d4 r , 1;, oil 02z/ #1i.T'P 13. SA^vbIZf) 570A::04 f l ! G / ' Inv J/xCcrot e 14. tYjiw F_-r ray raj in2 A i, %� /s2,32 90 i�o�� C.T. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. /, PETITION AGAINST THE RE-ZONING OF EDEN HEIGHTS 1t.: We the residents of Eden Prairie endorse this Petition in support of sustaining the existing zoning of Eden Heights as low density, single-family residences. We are opposed to re-zoning this area to medium density as currently proposed by the developers of Pemberton Landing and, as such, are also opposed to any future re-development that would require Eden Heights to be re-zoned to medium density. We ask the Eden Prairie City Council to support this Petition and support the residents of this area in order to preserve our neighborhoods. • Printed Name Address Signature . 1. -w aM 1 S.t.4 sum NO-w.— J 6. �Co Vim, e Roccaf Z^s _2. r evw ✓ 7 L cti X.i.Q" /fa 1-56 Va II e }, iZ�ad) 7 ` -- 3. '.3 / ct &,'1 `1 h e.)r,•1 �% I G 400 1..1 d—J 4.i !'.'e e et 4.. V< i— 1(a 4�4) i) 'UA. �' `"`4 5. c-1.„ i-ret311c ( a..:.:2-t c' U�'tilEY t.‘rr•{ , --t..., tzk' 6. ��- .<>/'E�>� i s,.'4' er /.%' ':'-i :,. _ :-�- 7. ' cYv�-1.. ,(7-cr.t�'-k k :l�`.C• !';Lti L� \ 1 i L'-A ' \J t", 1 1 t<c ' `4.Z+44 (-4 ' 4,,� 8. U 10 • 'A...„, I, ())11, 9 I 1 i'''‘ , . 4,.).A.- W--4')/11' p11:(7-Yrill. i 1,4-6 CEA.) qt 17c;' Cc',ivv(•-%40 0 r. 12.` . ' /. \ G, 7 7,. 1k' ---rf. `=�' ,.. ,� , •,`, 13. . • . __ .. ' . L . .. & , - - f,-. CAL, - -- M 14. "' ` 15. t i::�� !i Cr �L 'i S<< 0:`! cc_dre'e 1 kJ,-.-1-c ,--('( I" 16. r 17. ,.-d7 18. 19.204Ts, � T i_v1 prv,e,'CI C � i 7kt. .. d 21. 7.5ahe._, Go I I ct►--•. ?;g.V--1 C: 1-19 C.AC�e Lc.-a,-a- • ^z, . �. �r�- 22.,V,v r f ;;e I'l ki S ,I.---. _ t/G 46c- J....�1-tom /C t:( ,. , it41--,-1.1L.A -0 , 23( 7 y. ,y, ? fj .� •. A- .:7 `Lf/ �. . :. '-1L4.- 1 t. 24. ' 6 t t_L (-lit-!i r - -- (6 3o 1 V/h e, Ro A-IS. t. ��,- -- L . Page 1 of 10 We the residents of Eden Prairie endorse this Petition in'tupport of sustaining the existing zoning of Eden Heights as low density, single-family residences. We are opposed to re-zonipg this area to medium density as currently proposed by the developeremberton Landing and, as such,are also opposed to any future redevelopment that would require Eden Heights to be re-zoned to medium density. We ask the Eden Prairie City Council to support this Petition and support the residents of this area in order to preserve our neighborhoods. Printed Name Address Si'1, re 5. '., .< 12-i Cw ,•'� �'9d�r' ;: 6. , 2 , - t . 0 c:.,,(, . - ' .. .d ) ci) G f 7- 5_ r . tvi5 -- -HA C! 8. V- l� J` / . i �� a .4 62/40/ ( r- I 3 10. jai I # I_ •.. 12: Q_ t, lmilimeraff wintoy It‘ 1211^ - 15. 'J(L t 1 `--a d—t - 5_ . 16. _ 7 • , L _ .( 7 ' 19. zit1 (kink. w, `�. arc 1'7Or Erne') C:; _t 20. _ - 61111111 r Affline /... 22. � :.1' a�f'� 7i� `�'_-ram 234111k, .// /. _!.L[/ • g �/. , _4a r / ft MINIM 26. 27. 28. 29. 13 We the residents of Eden Prairie endorse this Petition in support of sustaining the existing zoning of Eden Heights as low density, single-family residences. We are opposed to re-zoning this area to medium density as currently proposed by the developers of Pemberton Landing and, as such, are also opposed to any future re-development that would require Eden Heights to be re-zoned to medium density. We ask the Eden Prairie City Council to support this Petition and support the residents of this area in order to preserve our . neighborhoods. Printed Name Address Si nature 1. I,)44 Mi.H-e4W a /Aite g `7' 1)A42u1 C EP 2. 741\11 id' . -?f.:1t L. Lti: f ':-'_ ~)• ,I L-' ' 1ti�,f 1 rL , n ' 4 3. i C / ti h (,-r 4. itela. k �A ii '- , /70/3_ f wl? 1 ' ilf g9Y7 Mill er 7. to . mod.le-y Af'- � •� ,,i�� / yoV `,qe, - • - # 8. B mow►rk ,e,. i.t, ,:.1f le /42V nt•�►' h Li L�; . 9• Uwr ----6 . . is - ; d .. i d am y of i/f ` F J. 10. i .h'I ,(-�1-6.YV �t ' .40 , 'hit J 11 )rx '1 G' 11. ' ( . - � . k. 12. ��Wr^"` t8 Vc t fi¢ 1 c j _ 13. ' .� C i4-794 13( . EP SS 347 14. l(L I 7'/l' 7 dL1�lc1 fg5✓� / 15. p �--5 a VRsi I eli el° 9-3 q. 16. , _v r' .Jr-A `r'`�Y� (-P y cu to f �2. .1)-3' 17. hr , � Q b f J L✓� 3y 18. '1JJ • r1 , ber* , - ) /,71 r 7 , 344_ 19. �% G D`l Ge d 3 j 5� l 20. 'De s'i re e- C; ;fc:-F h 17 'E��\ ?,.�.._ �� 21. f lleo /jam i fe�o`� r�5 Y!n� i.c,,/ 22. ur ii- tt fc+ /4 .1 lCe� - °f,�,„d LQ- 23. S'r d r� - e, 'I . 'Z EPrST S 2t^1a L' i"& 1EP. C- ?Y7 24. 1 d 'T I(vj E. ? ice bt- l i 4 1 25. : � --iii-y,� is e- a /,o:?e,( /I,'LW, 4 /-15.-3542-- 26. 27. 28. 29. We the residents of Eden Prairie endorse this Petition in support of sustaining the existing zoning of Eden Heights as low density, single-family residences. We are opposed to re-zoning this area to medium density as currently proposed by the developers of Pemberton Landing and, as such, are also opposed to any future re-development that would require Eden Heights to be re-zoned to medium density.. We ask the Eden Prairie City Council to support this Petition and support the residents of this area in order to preserve our _. neighborhoods. Printed Name Address S'!nature 1. l7 vti IA. t-C.. ��G ./ i..�. . , 2 ' 2. Lttf �'r Y _-_. . G _ /E - II, / - G'' 3. ' .►t► 411 (405 b •i � t ' .c V1 0 , ►^ / )-fit p 72'e -D7' . l.ova_• - 6. 0.., i c..KE vv 1 zfz,'7 13 01.4(der To i'v i- e 7. $77S -{a " f $7yy LJ Rf;IJ iccl. 9- rt.«;Ct. "1-C h v1SltY.di I 3 a 4 Ci,. t 10. QQc) r `11.?(ot- ' 91'c5 Cr1€ -f 1 4- f•/0 11. Li,. 30k.-Avg li' 1/ . S 6?3 bo-yore, C4-- n['P- ,.._S34t > 12. S __ /7/OCU. 'i-Ly✓'r fe c/4 13. . A I* 14,14. I. e A IR 0, .i!1 '' ..r+./ 2.f_ .%i�`_ •r., � , . y7 15. ni 6K _ a.i w. "I,, _ 1i-5piimiwti w } e? Sc`17 17. .0"-Ag,11,i rait)`f-- .." fr? 1(1 «ii U1- <?r e.!r� l 18. ' • Eve 170 1.& 20.. ,' /1� bvt bait /O1� 612 2 '$ ' /111Y , ,Til ; 6atik t a :1 • gq / 4/ - C /PS-7 Wa v-e�-i ( 24. ohry 6)-- co?Z prLi c r-I 25. kl it-7sc Li e,s ' cae-'cc--y-4 . 27. �-z�Y i �, L � l��--i%/LI-L 28. a) .( 0132q S `c t �'4 ' 29. ,, . '6 c vQ ,.rva iZ� 30 triNoct slAstickLvici tom. 3i . 32 . 33 • We the residents of Eden Prairie endorse this Petition in support of sustaining the existing zoning of Eden Heights as low density, single-family residences. We are opposed to re-zoning this area to medium density as currently proposed by the developers of Pemberton Landing and, as such, are also opposed to any future re-development that would require Eden Heights to be re-zoned to medium density. We ask the Eden Prairie City Council to support this Petition and support the residents of this area in order to preserve our .. neighborhoods. Printed Name Address Si.na 1. "Tilt S' c z Q h t cc:' "to- ,.., . iel- t -' 47 Nei -1 ca .•6UL 09 2. . OS ` C �. r x `\ ,c \ t~e\. t i'c\i1 3. Wrce; Mel c� iSovt 11111.M./,: 1. I ,r6( a 4. f� sty. MOM, _A r ' . •t • — 7. tet.W0-,__, 7.,(. k :. 7 Maar ,,,:'t..-7,4' , -3(1171hoe/-, (on', 9. ' itt►.r.. • 77141( '!1• - —047 S I u `i, Ii2rac 4 11. pjtj ,SAC-1-ID eV _ �..� • qii?5-7 t "-c/ /%�-�'/ - 3y'-2 12. —. , I 1•74ZS ijoi4-k2AA-- - T , e, 5s-34-'7 13. i,d ► ‘,1 �,, 14. rPo(t2* i l-. 'l— _ ' ,4 15. i' r, , 810 PV'if7b l Ali , 'i ',WYi Miv S p, 17. lb-go t P;Qr —cti'� -C,P to t•)-s--3LI7 .I 18. j 11 9 3 g4 L � (' A 3`C4 19. ret. c9o7S cJ3r-;r.i P� cce m. 21.22. 7' i�3 , 1t) /Z. ,Y� !Sc 3 / 23. C.X'O c� �7Y 7 5f cY1 6c ss / ?. — 24. • ...-� /a 76 t e-, n 3J ' yj-3 '1 7 25. /7S3 5`3�/7 26. /-�6f� < e�, as ;->- Ss-3`I) 27. o 6' be k 8bt• ram.i-2a1.3 R civc Rd. 'c 3 417 28. - i10IUf- . 1! 6 J�C 29. t- .1. r- ,rJ DID We the residents of Eden Prairie endorse this Petition in support of sustaining the existing zoning of Eden Heights as low density, single-family residences. We are opposed to re-zoning this area to medium density as currently proposed by the developers of Pemberton Landing and, as such, are also opposed to any future re-development that would require Eden Heights to be re-zoned to medium density. We ask the Eden Prairie City Council to support this Petition and support the residents of this area in order to preserve our neighborhoods. Printed Name Address Si.nature 1. - 1, r a IA _ - '/6 7 c die�rQ • 2. - - • 1 c V fP ''' / Cf3 12 rQ� ;G 3. )1,1 ' LL 4. r � k (54 ' 2 ,.i,< 5. rh /f E.>/C•et." _ _f` � ' rr- Ir , _-7e 6. LNre.' SS-2)'t 7. • 8. '�or- CLc-3)%-< <,� �s 3i - 10, ce � 1� s5 3 (iv 12. 11. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. PETITION AGAINST THE RE-ZONING OF EDEN HEIGHTS We the residents of Eden Prairie endorse this Petition in support of sustaining the existing zoning of Eden Heights as low density, single-family residences. We are opposed to re-zoning this area to medium density as currently proposed by the developers of Pemberton Landing and, as such, are also opposed to any future re-development that would require Eden Heights to be re-zoned to medium density. We ask the Eden Prairie City Council to support this Petition and support the residents of this area in order to preserve our neighborhoods. Printed me Address n ur 1. A k, 1 Lot 01 iCk. t_w C`f (c,[ dam-. 2c< r<y • 4. 1 `c 4'6 Luna_ 5. le J I L.. /-IgcK7 t7/7� , L' l 7. 8. P 9. cQ 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. , 24. Page 1 of 10 OIJole6ed • '89 'L9 '99 '99 '179 'E9 'Z9 '09 '6i7 '8t' Lt7 .9t7 'Et7 'Zt7 '1t7 'Ot7 '6E '8E 'LE 4-1,-yrte •v 7 a.}v t'; C 2 gr ��� yruuv 9 '9£ ,Fjyrrg 41. vap) naVazid, Q3si ( ")A w;�.A\o L Z 2,1 I �sAr04 �v09.‘11 v% ('7/4 �y�,•'�?q' r/'l117-'e,-(W// O.9/9/ '�'�.�� op° a �)>r ram, -iv iv/ 46 -pi lc n •b1 ii c ``Tot ac-o l. . .0E der Jf ao1�J a! iUs�-7q, 2 1 .6Z (. ab s�� o� 1-`di�� ' 5�' �/ '8Z 7? 1 ag t l N " S � �� /v9z )7<- (7Q/ f)) �"`'��'� - x- ' a t 9z S1H IJH N9a3 AO ONINOZ-al 3HI ISNIVOY NOIII13d Russell W. Hanson From: Robert&Lois Kurzeka[rkurzeka@webtv.net] Sent: Sunday, February 22,2004 6:11 PM To: Russell W. Hanson Subject: Re: Petition signatures Russ,we agree with you 100%.This E-mail is Roxanne Johnson authority to act as proxy on our behalf,We apreciate the work that is being done to sidetrack this development.Thanks for your help. D30 Russell W. Hanson From: George Ritzinger[p.gritz@attglobal.net] Sent: Sunday, February 22,2004 6:30 PM To: Russell W. Hanson Subject: Re: Petition signatures Importance: High Hello Russ Pat and I have been following the developments relating to Ron Clark's project with more than casual interest, in reality, with deep concern. This section of Eden Prairie is exclusively single homes and, to the best of our knowledge 2-plexes. To intersperse into this a large number of high density living quarters would be inconsistent with what is the big picture development plan for this area. Accordingly, we oppose any rezoning of buildable property from low density residential to medium density residential. We authorize Roxann Johnson to act as our proxy in this matter. Respectfully Pat and George Ritzinger ---Original Message--- From:Russell W. Hanson To: bdaniel792@aol.com;wjohnson@visi.com; Lois and Bob Kurzeka ; Pat and George Ritzinger Sent:Sunday, February 22, 2004 12:06 PM Subject: Petition signatures A developer,Ron Clark,has a request before the EP Planning Board and City Council to rezone 17.5 acres of land immediately south of Sutton Park,west of Co.Road 4 down to Hilltop Road. He is asking that the current restriction,which is low density residential (2.5 units per acre)to medium density residential(10 units per acre) Clark is further proposing to then build 135 multiple family townhouse units,4-plexes and 8-plexes along Pioneer Trail west to about Braxton. Roxanne Johnson,,11ohnsonl(cr�,mn.rr.com,has all the details and is representing the Sutton Park Association residents at the meetings protesting these changes. I am undertaking to have a petition signed by SPA folks which will be helpful for the cause. The problem is getting the pen and paper to our members who are missing out on this beautiful weather. If you agree with those of us who are dissenting,I would appreciate your sending back an e-mail expressing your views. I wonder if,provided you agree with our`protest,' that you indicate that Roxanne has your proxy to sign the petition if that becomes necessary. If you have no opinion in either direction or if you are for the Clark proposal feel free to express that view....it is important that Sutton Park is represented at the hearings and an"as one"bloc our views will be heard. Hopefully the powers that be will agree with us. The wheels are moving,June and I attended one of the meetings with Roxanne Johnson and we are pleased with the people who are handling our end of the details. They are calm,collected and appear to have strong qualifications to make our case known. Please reply as soon as possible because there is a meeting Monday,Feb.23,at City Hall and your input will give us a much stronger,and needed base. Russ Hanson russhanson@att.net 2/23/04 23) PETITION AGAINST THE RE-ZONING OF EDEN HEIGHTS We the residents of Eden Prairie endorse this Petition in support of sustaining the existing zoning of Eden Heights as low density, single-family residences. We are opposed to re-zoning this area to medium density as currently proposed by the developers of Pemberton Landing and, as such, are also opposed to any future re-development that would require Eden Heights to be re-zoned to medium density. We ask the Eden Prairie City Council to support this Petition and support the residents of this area in order to preserve our neighborhoods. Printed Name Address Signature 2. ` Cr, 3. L. c5� 4. L v \ Sc ‘ (,,tor ; I (to? -ZCA. Ac r, e_ 5. c ta,.� �.u is Woitt.Z. \10 10 ,12q. O,o 6. 7. 8. 93 9. W 10. • Q ) 11. 1— 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. Page 1 of 10 We the residents of Eden Prairie endorse this Petition in support of sustaining the existing zoning of Eden Heights as low density, single-family residences. We are opposed to re-zoning this area to medium density as currently proposed by the developers of Pemberton Landing and, as such, are also opposed to any future re-development that would require Eden Heights to be re-zoned to medium density. We ask the Eden Prairie City Council to support this Petition and support the residents of this area in order to preserve our neighborhoods. Printed Name Address n Signature 1. h1 -4-7 1✓ cA69 4 Ai vo 9 v,9 e fA- Kf moo; `�i eo�Jq� cif,tsAa .Yr.,,,, 2. S Aaron i,uc(I P. ),Axvin,,, 935 C 1 dld Sired,„ in 3. AR _v A,-,n C \ c o► T� 0 \\S- o LZA,, s, v2A P S'' 5. , _ C2/ 66e-f-t7(___- t)6/--0/ PC.t,c_ t-e,Cil/ae. .3q 7 6. t t( ��M l f al,. 7. V),.. ,,,:\, / (--,,g.A (1?_Pe" .1- % 9 k k Ai k u 5,k,cli,r)fr_,,_ 9. r—t w,� \ 6),e_v� c fYA '.2q A— I. +Zor-Or''v� 10. C t, -1 \ , 1,-,, l ( ( 1 V - 5, Noe li• �Th S _, - \ r~Or-- L� LL `C 12. LL S . ¢ \ 4 r-- `"* ��-' 7- 13t �� ,L I �L (bs �_ - 14. 4 „ D f U1 ` � 15. ,-)2!'a..l> , \` 16. c i--I& S f_1`I c cl i (] r c ki r44_,I-ri p 17. lA0 ;� D m �' e i1 18. ,zcleR� 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. Page 1 of 1 Mike Franzen From: Jodi Hoag Sent: Monday, February 23, 2004 9:08 AM To: Mike Franzen Subject: FW: Please forward to planning board members, ie Ray Stoelting,etc Original Message From: Mark.Diede [mailto:Mark.Diede@target.com] Sent: Monday, February 23, 2004 9:08 AM To: Jodi Hoag Subject: Please forward to planning board members, ie Ray Stoelting,etc Regarding Pemberton Landing... High density housing should be developed on land that corresponds to its home value. For example, the new multifamily housing developments like that new golden triangle development and areas around the ep center are perfect. Eden Prairie must continue to put out higher end homes. Higher end homes results in the ceo types wanting to set up shop here. Even if the high density housing increases the tax base, it still does not come close to a ceo moving in and moving or creating a business and basing it in Eden Prairie. Lower priced homes=lower priced land. Pemberton Landing should hold high priced homes as this land is highly desirable. Thank you. Mark Diede EP resident my whole life (32 years) 2/23/2004 a,�j� Pemberton Landing—City Council Meeting,March 23,2004 I am Caryl Hansen, 16200 Hilltop Rd,and we are selling the back of our property to be part of this project. A firestorm regarding the Pemberton Landing Project erupted on Hilltop Rd and Valley Rd when Scott Kipp of the City Planning Dept told Kari Totall that the Conceptual Future Land Use Plan(required by the City when any new development is proposed) was Phase 2 of Pemberton Landing Development. The fear of the City of EP exercising its right of Eminent Domain(such as the Richfield-Best Buy situation)to destroy the houses on Hilltop Rd and Valley Rd is very intense and real and no matter what we said, they don't believe us. Before I go any further,I want someone with authority from the City(and I presume this may be Mike Fransen)to unequivocally state that there is no Phase 2 and that the exercise of Eminent Domain to destroy all the houses on Hilltop Rd and Valley Rd is completely unfounded. So,I ask you, Mike Fransen,to make that clarification to this gathering at this time. With Phase 2 and Eminent Domain clarified,that leaves concerns about density and traffic. Minnstar has done a very good redesign to try to satisfy the City. In the Staff Report dated January 23,2004, it states that"Hennepin County is recommending that the westerly access to Pioneer Trail be eliminated". So Hennepin County is not insisting there be only one access onto Pioneer,only recommending, and would that not leave an option for two entrances as was originally proposed? Regarding the traffic issue on Pioneer Trail and Eden Prairie Road,that is not a pretty scene,but it is temporary. I encourage the group of people opposing this development to use the same energy and zeal to go after the MN State Legislature and MNDOT to get Hwy 312 finished posthaste which could eliminate one-third to one-half the morning and evening traffic that originates in Chaska and Chanhassen and further west. Residents of Sutton Place and Fairfield have expressed safety concerns about entering Eden Prairie Road;however, in looking at the City map,they can enter safely at the traffic light on Candlewood Parkway—a very slight inconvenience for safety. When we moved to Eden Prairie 38 yrs ago,there were fewer than 4,000 residents,no stoplights, only restaurant was Lion's Tap and a little lunch counter at"the Y' (Flying Red Horse gas station),the closest supermarket was at Hwy 7 or Southdale. Our children rode their horses all the way over to where Bearpath now exists, over to Red Rock Lake, down a sandy road now called Mitchell Road for horse shows, had a pony cart and drove along Pioneer Trail and over to Cedar Ridge Rd area to visit friends. Whenever they would lament that houses were being built in these areas,we reminded them that although it seemed sad to them, if you don't own the land,you have no control over it. Yes,the traffic is a real pain in the lower extremities, but that comes with development. To the people who are living in all these developments, I want you to know that you have caused great inconvenience to us,but that is what happens in a developing community. Thank you. We have lived in our home for 30 years, in Eden Prairie for 37 years. I had trouble writing checks at Southdale and Southtown.because people didn't know where Eden Prairie was. They thought it was in out state Minnesota. We've watched Eden Prairie grow tremendously. • (photo) The photo was taken in the late 80s. This is the density and traffic level I would like to have kept in Eden. My son rode his tricycle on Pioneer Trail to visit his friend to the east. Back then the city offices were small. When I brought in my hand drawn plans for a plumbing permit the inspector said, I'll meet you at your house in a few minutes. When he arrived I explained what I wanted to do. He offered advice and I started working. He stopped by later to check on my work and the came back a few days later for the final inspection. I purchased my home knowing the land would be subdivided. It has been a home AND a 30 year investment. We watched developments spring up around us, and never thought to try to stop others from enjoying the benefits of living in a beautiful community or the landowners from profiting on their property. When the thousands of homes were being built in the developments around us we did not attend meetings and try to deny other families from building their homes in Eden Prairie. I didn't expect people would move to Eden Prairie and say, "Now that I'm here I'm going to tell you what you can do with your property." (guide plan) Today the intersection of Eden Prairie Road and Pioneer Trail has a huge church on the southeast corner, another church on the northeast corner and a small business on the northwest corner. Were those in the guide plan drawn up in 1968? Were town homes, of the type being proposed by Minnstar, in the guide plan in 1968? As I recall town homes were new concepts in Minnesota at the time the guide plan was being created. The guide plan needs to change as Eden Prairie changes. In 1968 there was an abandoned church on the southeast corner of Pioneer Trail and Eden Prairie Road, it was accidentally burned down in the 70s. Sometime in the 80s a single family home was built, almost exactly on the old church site. Recently the home was torn down and that property was combined with the Roguet farm and part of the Hone farm to build the Grace Church complex. Single-family homes should not be built on the remaining corner of a commercial type intersection. Town homes of the type proposed in the revised plan from Minnstar will provide a smooth transition. The new plan . places the larger multi unit town homes near the road and then transition into twin homes that will blend with the single-family homes on Hilltop Road. We did extensive remodeling in the last 30 years with a lot of help from family and friends. Leaving was not an easy decision. But the neighborhood is ready; we are ready for a smaller home or a town home. For the last 3 years I have hired someone to mow the yard for us. Last year our son was married, in fact they live in a town home in Chaska, they too get together with their neighbors for parties and cookouts. It's been 2 years since we started working with developers. We have put home projects on hold and done minimal maintenance to our homes. The price we were offered is 2 years old, and like everything else, it will go up. It will be even harder for the next developer to cost justify another project. This, in addition to the fact that Minnstar has brought 12 property owners together, makes today a unique point in time to support this project. Dick Perkins 16351 Pioneer Trail Eden Prairie, MN 55347 952-937-2039 - , 4017 t., _ to:µ. • • �. lit . .. , _ • Nr•wf 4.'-',','.-T. ;;. ,•'.',....'.:" , . .- '''114*- X .,. ity T - * �` 4.• IE• r • • • FT _` ?B..• ' �/ .t;,3 'I•_ =1y • » .yY- ; r .. mo , , z rtfZ ,r;r i ['• , . 1Lhc F• �' � Jl..� ems.-r�+7 r ' Irk r ,X t 5 ,' i "$1 - '�1'zi x rs • •',•. •_ +T r3 ,•: f-; 't.;ca':K, 'T.f':;F'; :..�.1- •2 ':. e:,.I.,_ _' - n�s r' 'car y _ ; • • +• r `;itt,ti3O%, e'„�i:'''• =�� it e�' -4'•,,?z- • F rT4l u 3• .l; ,+.x-- 1 .. ..r..;x. }} - , •.4 1 ir-- - `• ' ,w..- •' .. 7 ? f drr : ..'f, - i!. -i.,1, - s{ ykr a r - Al 3 r r.A ate • - {t •.'F! :t � L fix. V fir' yr x'-•� � • r e +l : S' 1•, - —Gel•:f:1 _ 'y." r.:' 1 ` f • :•.,fLr:la- `y �' h '' ] ..+ _ _ tom -Y S • • .Y• '4''�••4 .r`7' ..t - l • �'� xfwC b f ' '.,t. _ js r:`_ ` ¢' I am John Hansen, 16200 Hilltop Rd and one of the landowners selling part of our property. I have been working on this project for 3 years and spent hundreds of hours with City officials, developers,builders,bankers trying to this project together. Alan Gray in consultation with City planners suggested an east-west road where the Pioneer Trail properties and Hilltop Road properties met. They suggested two access points on Pioneer Trail and possibly another access onto Hilltop Rd. This plan was to use the original plat of Eden Heights and end up with half-acre lots 100 ft wide and 225 ft deep. I could not find any small developers who could help us to accomplish this subdivision. To do this on our own,we would have had to have pre-engineering work done which includes surveys, subdividing lots, and the engineering work required in roads meeting the levels of the lots,a system of sewer,water and storm drains. It would have required a substantial outlay of money to accomplish this. I had no guarantee that I could get all the landowners to cooperate to pay this cost and decided we would have to look for a large developer who could afford to purchase all the available land and replat it with smaller and greater number of lots. There was one developer and builder of million dollar homes who was interested. He had hoped to use the suggested plan that Alan Grey had done,but he dropped out because he found the cost was too much and the number of homes you can build on half-acres too few to be profitable. We had to find a developer who could afford to buy all the land and homes necessary to redesign the project. We did have four big developers who could afford to do this. Different ones had different approaches and different needs. One wanted me to tell him a price he would have to pay to buy the land and homes. I told him "I cannot name a price. You have to determine what you can pay and how many homes you can build and still make a profit". We went back and forth on this and could not resolve it. Other developers that could afford to do the project did not move forward on analyzing their costs and profits. It is quite complicated. Finally Ron Clark decided to move ahead and do the project. All of the people selling • properties to Ron Clark are happy to have this development under way. However,this has been such a long involved process and the owners on Pioneer Trail have purchased other homes or have purchase agreements pending or don't know yet if they should look for another place. We are all in limbo. We are anguishing not only over the time it is taking,but the way in which the Planning Dept has handled this project. Because of the required Conceptual Land Use Plan being referred to as Phase 2, and what is stated in the Planning Staff Reports,the fear of people losing their homes all the way down to Valley Road has gotten completely out of control. Mike Fransen confirmed in a meeting with me, Tim Bohiman and Tom Totall that there is no Phase II and that the City has never used Eminent Domain to take people's property to change a neighborhood. Eminent Domain has only been used to obtain property for public use such as roads, schools, fire station, sewer&water,etc. The City has no plans to change the process. We wrote letters to everyone in Eden Heights stating what Mike Fransen said and although we have said this, Tim Bohlman has written this,these people no longer believe me, Tim Bohlman or the City of Eden Prairie. How can they believe when in the staff report of January 23,page 2, you state"A future concept plan for the remaining lots surrounding the project has been developed. This plan would require the cooperation of all the remaining lot owners for it to be implemented". And you know there is zero chance that you would ever get this implemented. Yet in the same staff report at the end,page 4, Staff Analysis,"Consideration must also include the potential for and acceptance of future redevelopment proposals for the remaining property north and south of Hilltop Road." Again in Feb. 20 Staff Report,page 6, under the heading Future Development Considerations, "Staff asked the developer to provide a plan to show one way adjoining land could develop since the proposed plan did not show potential extension of sewer,water, and roads. Without these extensions the potential for inefficient use of the land and higher development costs exists on adjoining land....the layout shows an arrangement of buildings that do not visually appear to be connected to the Pemberton proposal and many of the buildings are not physically connected by roads...any multiple family in the area can create a ripple effect and there would be pressure to build multiple family on the south side of Hilltop Road.." In one place in your staff report you say there cannot be any future development without the request of' all property owners. In another part of your report,you require the developer to draw plans for multiples over the entire area of Eden Heights. Is this just loony ideas to harass the developer,frighten the homeowners who already fear the City and are anguished over the city's proposals and to also aggravate and anger the land owners who are trying to get their project accomplished? What is the real purpose of this"double speak"? It is because of this that people don't trust you. Because I relay your message that no development can happen without the cooperation of all landowners,they don't believe me either. A graphic example that people don't believe you or me anymore is this. A neighbor across the street just sold his house and I went over to talk with him in his driveway and asked where they were moving,to which he answered "Woodbury". When I asked why they were moving,he replied"because of you and Tim Bohlman and your project —you are the cause. He said"please leave my property" I didn't understand him and asked"what did you say?"to which he replied, "please leave my property--you are not welcome here". When we moved to Eden Prairie there was farmland all around us. Just looking at this map,you will see everything that has been developed and here is the big blank spot which is being proposed to be developed. It is our turn. LLv5fltrl, l) iv ( Tl_t 5 - 5 C 7-0 DIG A ).).. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Payment of Claims March 23,2004 DEPARTMENT: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Management and Budget Payment of Claims Sue Kotchevar Requested Action Move to: Synopsis Checks 128190- 128608 Wire Transfers 1970- 1978 Background Information Attachments .. 5 City of Eden Prairie Council Check Summary 3/27/2004 Division Amount General 27,824 100 City Manager 437 101 Legislative 2,317 102 Legal Counsel 1,238 110 City Clerk 325 111 Customer Service 9,734 112 Human Resources 4,016 113 Communication Services 2,611 115 Risk Management 669 116 Facilities 11,970 117 City Center 1,795 130 Assessing 6,320 131 Finance 645 133 Community Development -446 134 Heritage Preservation 7 135 Information Technology 51,863 136 Wireless Communication 7,282 137 Economic Development 1,667 150 Park Administration 18 151 Park Maintenance 8,102 153 Athletic Programs 13 154 Community Center 19,885 156 Youth Programs 1,825 157 Special Events 69 158 Senior Center 1,387 159 Recreation Administration 4,428 160 Therapeutic Recreation 218 161 Oak Point Pool 185 162 Arts 1,588 163 Park Facilities 369 180 Police 26,857 183 Civil Defense 43 184 Fire 31,005 185 Animal Control 351 186 Inspections 869 200 Engineering 2,866 201 Street Maintenance 27,543 202 Street Lighting 889 203 Fleet Services 35,095 204 Equipment Revolving 37,198 300 Heritage Preservation Grants 1,000 301 CDBG 38 308 E-911 1,481 312 Recycle Rebate 65 314 Liquor Compliance 90 404 Building Refunding 1992A 912,740 416 Certificate Debt Fund 183,046 418 HRA 2002A JP-ace Revenue Bonds 1,000 421 2003A Park Bonds Refunding 374 422 G.O W/Sewer Refund 2003B 374 423 2003C Open Space Bonds 374 502 Park Development 937 503 Utility Improvement 21,879 506 Improvment Bonds 1996 24,024 507 Construction Fund 2,728 509 CIP Fund 40,149 511 Construction Fund 43,237 601 Prairie Village Liquor 76,974 602 Den Road Liquor 129,345 603 Prairie View Liquor 84,674 701 Water Fund 128,918 702 Sewer Fund 31,015 703 Storm Drainage Fund 37 803 Escrow Fund 20,223 806 SAC Agency Fund 48,450 807 Benefits Fund 224,069 Report Totals 2,308,318 City of Eden Prairie Council Check Register 03/23/2004 Check# Amount Vendor/Explanation Account Description Business Unit 1970 71,805 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT Benefit payments Health and Benefits 1971 9,878 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-457 Deferred Compensation General Fund 1972 23,845 MINNESOTA DEPT OF REVENUE State Taxes Withheld Health and Benefits 1973 14,918 ORCHARD TRUST CO AS TRUSTEE/CU Deferred Compensation General Fund 1974 123,094 WELLS FARGO MINNESOTA N A Benefit payments Health and Benefits 1975 912,740 US BANK TRUST NATIONAL ASSN Principal Building Refunding Bonds 1995A 1976 183,046 ANCHOR BANK Principal $890,000 G.O.Cert.of Indebt 1977 457 MINNESOTA DEPT OF REVENUE Motor Fuels Fleet Services 1978 52,838 MINNESOTA DEPT OF REVENUE Equipment Rental Ice Arena 128190 508 ANCHOR PAPER COMPANY Office Supplies General 128191 10 CANNON,TOM Program Fee Senior Center Program 128192 145 CAWLEY COMPANY,THE Miscellaneous City Manager 128193 66 FEDEX Small Tools Fleet Services 128194 43 FRANKLIN,WOODROW G Clothing&Uniforms Emergency Preparedness 128195 45 HANDEGARD,AMY Other Contracted Services Liquor Compliance 128196 1,411 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER Board of Prisoner Police 128197 30 HTCIA Dues&Subscriptions Police 128198 154 IMATION IMAX THEATRE Operating Supplies Teen Programs 128199 57 J H LARSON ELECTRICAL COMPANY Repair&Maint.Supplies City Center Operations 128200 16,990 JEFFERSON FIRE&SAFETY INC Small Tools Fire 128201 70 LAPADAT,BILL Events/Admission Fee Ice Show 128202 100 MEDINA ENTERTAINMENT CENTER Tuition Reimbursement/School Police 128203 1,587 METRO SALES INCORPORATED* Other Rentals General 128204 295 METROPOLITAN AREA PROMOTIONS C Advertising Prairie Village Liquor Store 128205 48 MINNESOTA DEPT OF PUBLIC SAFET Operating Supplies Fleet Services 128206 5,000 OPUS CORPORATION Deposits Escrow 128207 45 PEARSON,TREVOR Other Contracted Services Liquor Compliance 128208 83 PETTY CASH-EPCC Mileage&Parking Community Center Admin 128209 21 PITNEY BOWES INC Postage General 128210 7,804 PRAIRIE PARTNERS SIX LLP Building Rental Prairie Village Liquor Store 128211 14,720 PRAIRIEVIEW RETAIL LLC Building Rental Prairie View Liquor Store 128212 32 PRIORITY COURIER EXPERTS Equipment Repair&Maint Fleet Services 128213 271 QWEST Telephone Crestwood Park 128214 35 STANTON GROUP Conference Expense Risk Management 128215 1,710 SUMMIT ENVIROSOLUTIONS Other Contracted Services Utility Improvement Fund 128216 1,500 SURVEY TECHNOLOGIES INC Other Assets Wireless Communication 128217 129 UPPER MIDWEST COMMUNITY POLICI Tuition Reimbursement/School Police 128218 124 VERIZON WIRELESS BELLEVUE Pager&Cell Phone Police 128219 10 VICK,JEAN Program Fee Senior Center Program 128220 69 WERTS,SANDY Mileage&Parking Special Events Administration 128221 61 WHITE,NICOLE Mileage&Parking Therapeutic Rec Administration 128222 45 WITTICH,CYNTHIA Lessons&Classes Fitness Classes 128223 33 AIRLINK COMMUNICATIONS INC Software Maintenance Information Technology 128224 128 ASPEN WASTE SYSTEMS INC. Waste Disposal Den Road Liquor Store 128225 1,641 BENSHOOF&ASSOCIATES INC Deposits Escrow 128226 135 D'AMICO AND SONS Miscellaneous Communication Services 128227 61 DE LAGE LANDEN FINANCIAL SERVI Equipment Repair&Maint General 128228 490 DIGIGRAPHICS/PHOTOS INC. Video&Photo Supplies Communication Services 128229 32 DRISKILLS FOODS Operating Supplies Athletic Programs Admin 128230 119 G&K SERVICES-MPLS INDUSTRIAL Other Rentals Park Maintenance 128231 433 GLENROSE FLORAL AND GIFT SHOPS Deposits Escrow 128232 2,438 GREGERSON ROSOW JOHNSON&NILA Legal Legal Council 128233 217 HOLIDAY INN OF ST.CLOUD Travel Expense Fire 128234 114 IMATION IMAX THEATRE Special Event Fees Adult Program 128235 5,708 KMC TELECOM HOLDINGS INC. Telephone Telephone 128236 24 KRAEMERS HARDWARE INC Equipment Parts Fleet Services 128237 180 MINNESOTA CHAPTER IAAI-J SCHAD Tuition Reimbursement/School Fire 128238 3,000 POSTAGE BY PHONE RESERVE ACCOU Postage General 128239 2,276 QWEST Telephone Purgatory Creek Rec Area 128240 79 RED WING SHOE STORE Clothing&Uniforms Maintenance 128241 13 RIGID HITCH INCORPORATED Equipment Parts Fleet Services 128242 500 SCOTT COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPT Deposits Escrow 128243 851 SOUTH ST PAUL STEEL SUPPLY Building Repair&Maint. Park Maintenance 128244 143 SPRINT Software Maintenance Information Technology 128245 292 THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR Equipment Repair&Maint Water Treatment Plant Check# Amount Vendor/Explanation Account Description Business Unit 128246 1,020 UNITED PROPERTIES LLC DESIGN S Other Contracted Services Prairie View Liquor Store 128247 259 UNLIMITED SUPPLIES INC Equipment Parts Fleet Services 128248 33 ACE ICE COMPANY Misc Non-Taxable Prairie View Liquor Store 128249 78 AMERIPRIDE LINEN&APPAREL SER Repair&Maint.Supplies Prairie Village Liquor Store 128250 89 ARCTIC GLACIER INC Misc Non-Taxable Den Road Liquor Store 128251 2,172 BELLBOY CORPORATION Wine Imported Prairie Village Liquor Store 128252 8,418 DAY DISTRIBUTING Beer Prairie View Liquor Store 128253 4,073 EAGLE WINE COMPANY Wine Domestic Prairie View Liquor Store 128254 8,601 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE COMPANY Beer Prairie View Liquor Store 128255 616 GRAPE BEGINNINGS Wine Domestic Den Road Liquor Store 128256 10,431 GRIGGS COOPER&CO Liquor Den Road Liquor Store 128257 26 HOHENSTEINS INC Beer Den Road Liquor Store 128258 21,265 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO Liquor Prairie Village Liquor Store 128259 3,599 MARK VII Beer Prairie View Liquor Store 128260 324 MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING COM Misc Taxable Prairie Village Liquor Store 128261 243 MORAN USA,LLC Misc Taxable Den Road Liquor Store 128262 649 NEW FRANCE WINE COMPANY Wine Domestic Den Road Liquor Store 128263 3,336 PAUSTIS&SONS COMPANY Wine Domestic Prairie View Liquor Store 128264 92 PEPSI COLA COMPANY Misc Taxable Prairie Village Liquor Store 128265 8,731 PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRITS INC Transportation Den Road Liquor Store 128266 760 PINNACLE DISTRIBUTING Misc Non-Taxable Prairie View Liquor Store 128267 3,087 PRIOR WINE COMPANY Wine Domestic Den Road Liquor Store 128268 6,285 QUALITY WINE&SPIRITS CO Wine Domestic Prairie Village Liquor Store 128269 11,606 THORPE DISTRIBUTING Beer Den Road Liquor Store 128270 1,028 WINE COMPANY,THE Wine Domestic Den Road Liquor Store 128271 1,425 WINE MERCHANTS INC Wine Domestic Prairie View Liquor Store 128273 225 AMERICAN MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATIO Dues&Subscriptions Water Utility-General 128274 94 AQUATIC PLANT MANAGEMENT Licenses&Taxes Park Maintenance 128275 745 ARAMARK SERVICES INC Operating Supplies Special Events&Trips 128276 128 BACHMANS CREDIT DEPT Operating Supplies Special Events&Trips 128277 946 BIFFS INC Waste Disposal Park Maintenance 128278 35 CAPOUCH,ROBIN Program Fee Winter Skill Development 128279 100 CERQUEIRA,HELTON Refunds Environmental Education 128280 195 CLAREYS INC Repair&Maint.Supplies Fire 128281 75 CULLIGAN BOTTLED WATER Operating Supplies Fire 128282 180 DEGREE,BETH Mileage&Parking Aquatics&Fitness Admin 128283 1,846 DU ALL SERVICE CONTRACTORS INC Repair&Maint.Supplies Fire 128284 201 DURST&GANS BUILDING CORP Building Permits General Fund 128285 300 ENTERTAINMENT PUBLICATIONS INC Deposits Escrow 128286 300 FUN SERVICES Operating Supplies Youth Programs Administration 128287 160 GE CAPITAL Other Rentals General 128288 14 GUTHRIE THEATER Special Event Fees Adult Program 128289 100 HALL,GARY Refunds Environmental Education 128290 197 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER-TAXP Printing Assessing 128291 1,155 JEFFERSON FIRE&SAFETY INC Small Tools Fire 128292 1,475 KINKO'S Operating Supplies Economic Development 128293 60 KRAEMERS HARDWARE INC Operating Supplies Skating Rinks 128295 48,114 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL Due to Other Governments SAC Agency Fund 128296 6,891 MINNESOTA STATE TREASURER Building Surcharge General Fund 128297 37 MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP Electric Sewer Liftstation 128298 120 MITCHELL,JR.JOHNNIE Outdoor Center Park Facilities 128299 129 OFFICE DEPOT CREDIT PLAN Operating Supplies Special Events&Trips 128300 280 PEDERSON,TOM Other Contracted Services Senior Center Program 128301 46 PRIORITY COURIER EXPERTS Equipment Repair&Maint Fleet Services 128302 131 QWEST Telephone Prairie Village Liquor Store 128303 156 RADISSON HOTEL Tuition Reimbursement/School Fire 128304 9 RITZ CAMERA CENTER INC Video&Photo Supplies Fire 128305 100 ROBINSON,MIKE Refunds Environmental Education 128306 1,375 RODGERS&HAMMERSTEIN ANNEX,T Other Contracted Services Summer Theatre 128307 58 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET GEO Equipment Parts Fleet Services 128308 15 TWEET,JANICE Program Fee Senior Center Program 128309 4,328 US POSTMASTER-HOPKINS Postage Community Brochure 128310 18 WILS Conference Expense Parks Administration 128311 2,148 ARCH PAGING Pager&Cell Phone Wireless Communication 128312 14,626 CENTERPOINT ENEGY Gas Fire Station#1 128313 731 CIMA LABS INC Deposits Escrow 128314 663 COFFMAN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES I Deposits Escrow 128315 209 CONSTRUCTION BULLETIN Dues&Subscriptions Engineering 128316 302 CRYSTEEL TRUCK EQUIPMENT INC Operating Supplies Fleet Services gJ() Check# Amount Vendor/Explanation Account Description Business Unit 128317 196 D'AMICO AND SONS Miscellaneous City Council 128318 180 DARTNELL CORPORATION,THE Dues&Subscriptions Water Utility-General 128319 20 DEM CON LANDFILL LLC Waste Disposal Park Maintenance 128320 850 EAGLE TRAINING LLC Tuition Reimbursement/School Police 128321 881 EMERGENCY AUTOMOTIVE TECHNOLOG Equipment Parts Fleet Services 128322 299 F&D HOLDINGS LLC Deposits Escrow 128323 42 FLYING CLOUD ANIMAL HOSPITAL Canine Supplies Police 128325 1,207 GENUINE PARTS COMPANY Equipment Parts Fleet Services 128326 450 GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS AS Awards Finance 128327 50 HENNEPIN COUNTY Deposits Escrow 128328 781 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER Operating Supplies Community Development 128329 17,305 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER Design&Engineering Improvement Projects 1996 128330 22 HOOGENAKKER,KATHLEEN Mileage&Parking Finance 128331 100 INTERNATIONAL CONF OF POLICE C Dues&Subscriptions Police 128332 15 LTD COMMODITIES Recreation Supplies Youth Programs Administration 128333 1,234 MARQUIS JEWELERS INC Deposits Escrow 128334 314 MARSHALL&SWIFT Operating Supplies Assessing 128335 2,897 MINN CHILD SUPPORT PAYMENT CTR Garnishment Withheld General Fund 128336 69 MINNESOTA COUNTY ATTORNEYS ASS Printing Police 128337 119 MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSP Operating Supplies Street Maintenance 128338 83 PETSMART Canine Supplies Police 128339 18 PRAIRIE LAWN AND GARDEN Operating Supplies Street Maintenance 128340 804 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT Pension Plans Engineering 128341 2,487 QWEST Telephone Telephone 128342 231 REED CONSTRUCTION DATA Legal Notices Publishing Street Maintenance 128343 176 STAAF,CARTER Clothing&Uniforms Police 128344 217 STEVE LUCAS PHOTOGRAPHY Other Contracted Services Police 128345 100 STEWART-HESTER,RENEE Other Contracted Services Recreation Administration 128346 1,487 STREICHERS Training Supplies Police 128347 9 TIME WARNER CABLE Cable TV Fire 128348 2,121 U S BANK Bond Issue Costs 2003B G.O.W/Sewer Refunding 128349 1,388 US POSTMASTER-HOPKINS Postage Water Accounting 128350 336 ZWIEG,JEFF Building Repair&Maint. Fire Station#1 128351 428 BROWN INSTITUTE Special Event Fees Senior Center Program 128352 7 EDEN PRAIRIE MAGAZINE Miscellaneous Heritage Preservation 128353 48 RICHFIELD,CITY OF Operating Supplies Fleet Services 128354 5,325 STANDARD INSURANCE CO Life Insurance EE/ER Health and Benefits 128355 321 YOUNG,PHIL Travel Expense City Council 128356 26,460 ABULLARADE,CAROL&CONSTRUCT- Insurance Claims Sewer Utility-General 128357 30 ANOKA TECHNICAL COLLEGE Tuition Reimbursement/School Fire 128358 40 BOLD,PAULINE Instructor Service Outdoor Center 128359 553 CHANHASSEN BUMPER TO BUMPER Equipment Parts Fleet Services 128360 175 CHOICE INC Other Contracted Services Prairie Village Liquor Store 128361 2,105 DYNAMIC IMAGING SYSTEMS INC Software Maintenance Information Technology 128362 150 GRAF,JIM Refunds Environmental Education 128363 65 HILGERS,JESSICA Tuition Reimbursement/School Police 128364 108 INFRATECH Equipment Parts Sewer Liftstation 128365 796 INSIGHT PUBLIC SECTOR Miscellaneous Information Technology 128366 100 KRANENDONK,MICHELLE Refunds Environmental Education 128367 100 KUISMI,ANGIE Refunds Environmental Education 128368 55,486 LOGIS Network Support Information Technology 128369 4 MACMILLAN,GENEVA Program Fee Senior Center Program 128370 5 MCCARTHY,BOB Program Fee Outdoor Center 128371 100 MCFERRIN,TANYA Instructor Service Outdoor Center 128372 60 MERLINS ACE HARDWARE Repair&Maint.Supplies Maintenance 128373 548 METRO SALES INCORPORATED* Other Rentals General 128374 41 MINNESOTA CHIEFS OF POLICE ASS Printing Police 128375 23 MINNESOTA DEPT OF HEALTH Licenses&Taxes Water Utility-General 128376 495 MINNESOTA SAFETY COUNCIL Conference Expense Risk Management 128377 1,364 MINNESOTA VALLEY ELECTRIC COOP Electric Park Maintenance 128378 7 MOTA,MICHELE Program Fee Outdoor Center 128379 6,129 NILSSEN,BETH Instructor Service Ice Arena 128380 32 PUNTON,JASON Licenses&Taxes Water Utility-General 128381 20 QUICKSILVER EXPRESS COURIER Postage General 128382 36 QWEST Telephone Sewer Liftstation 128383 160 REED CONSTRUCTION DATA Legal Notices Publishing Water Treatment Plant 128384 61 SBC PAGING Pager&Cell Phone Water System Maintenance 128385 378 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISHING- Employment Advertising Human Resources 128386 195 STAR Dues&Subscriptions In Service Training Check# Amount Vendor/Explanation Account Description Business Unit 128387 13 STAR TRIBUNE Misc Taxable Den Road Liquor Store 128388 41 STAR TRIBUNE Dues&Subscriptions Fire 128389 245 STATE TREASURER Conference Expense Inspections-Administration 128390 1,800 SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY Dues&Subscriptions City Council 128391 254 TKACH,GEORGE Equipment Repair&Maint Senior Center Operations 128392 173 UP FRONT Printing Finance 128393 106 VERIZON DIRECTORIES CORP Advertising Prairie View Liquor Store 128394 7 WEISBECKER,LEE Program Fee Outdoor Center 128395 150 WEISSER,JAY P Refunds Environmental Education 128396 14 WILDER,LOIS Other Contracted Services Adult Program 128397 88 AMERIPRIDE LINEN&APPAREL SER Repair&Maint.Supplies Prairie View Liquor Store 128398 3,901 BELLBOY CORPORATION Operating Supplies Prairie Village Liquor Store 128399 388 D'VINE WINE DISTRIBUTORS Wine Imported Prairie Village Liquor Store 128400 4,993 DAY DISTRIBUTING Beer Den Road Liquor Store 128401 2,892 EAGLE WINE COMPANY Liquor Den Road Liquor Store 128402 8,368 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE COMPANY Beer Prairie View Liquor Store 128403 96 EXTREME BEVERAGE Misc Taxable Prairie View Liquor Store 128404 1,791 GRAPE BEGINNINGS Wine Domestic Prairie Village Liquor Store 128405 7,120 GRIGGS COOPER&CO Transportation Den Road Liquor Store 128406 1,404 HOHENSTEINS INC Beer Prairie View Liquor Store 128408 20,628 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO Liquor Den Road Liquor Store 128409 13,164 MARK VII Beer Prairie View Liquor Store 128410 628 MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING COM Misc Taxable Prairie Village Liquor Store 128411 652 NEW FRANCE WINE COMPANY Wine Domestic Den Road Liquor Store 128412 2,539 PAUSTIS&SONS COMPANY Wine Domestic Prairie View Liquor Store 128413 9,568 PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRITS INC Transportation Prairie Village Liquor Store 128414 462 PINNACLE DISTRIBUTING Misc Taxable Prairie Village Liquor Store 128415 2,588 PRIOR WINE COMPANY Wine Imported Prairie Village Liquor Store 128416 13,862 QUALITY WINE&SPIRITS CO Wine Domestic Den Road Liquor Store 128417 15,683 THORPE DISTRIBUTING Beer Den Road Liquor Store 128418 1,521 WINE COMPANY,THE Wine Domestic Den Road Liquor Store 128419 1,292 WINE MERCHANTS INC Wine Imported Den Road Liquor Store 128420 1,733 WORLD CLASS WINES INC Wine Imported Den Road Liquor Store 128421 50 ACKERMAN,KENNETH E Refunds Environmental Education 128422 178 AT&T Pager&Cell Phone Police 128423 43 BECKER,DAVE Operating Supplies Police 128424 310 CHANHASSEN BUMPER TO BUMPER Equipment Parts Fleet Services 128425 12 CUB FOODS EDEN PRAIRIE Operating Supplies Reserves 128426 100 DEAM,BETH Refunds Environmental Education 128427 115 DILLON,JOAN Other Contracted Services Adult Program 128428 60 EDEN PRAIRIE LIONS CLUB Advertising Prairie View Liquor Store 128429 143 EDEN PRAIRIE TAILOR&SHOE REP Training Supplies Police 128430 334 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC Other Contracted Services Water System Maintenance 128431 5 KIKKEN,DAVID Events/Admission Fee Cummins House Special Events 128432 37 KREBSBACH,LESLIE Lessons&Classes Pool Lessons 128433 460 McFARLAND CONSTRUCTION COMPANY Building Repair&Maint. Prairie View Liquor Store 128434 26 MIDDLETON,JILL Fac.Rental-P&R Oak Point Operations 128435 454 MINNESOTA'S BOOKSTORE Operating Supplies Inspections-Administration 128436 500 MN WEIGHTS AND MEASURES Equipment Repair&Maint Street Maintenance 128437 43 PETSMART Canine Supplies Police 128438 141 PRIORITY COURIER EXPERTS Equipment Repair&Maint Fleet Services 128439 111 QUINLAN PUBLISHING Dues&Subscriptions Police 128440 1,118 QWEST COMMUNICATIONS Pager&Cell Phone Police 128441 9 REED,PATRICIA Lessons&Classes Ice Arena 128442 1,763 REGION 6AA SHARE Fac.Rental-P&R Ice Arena 128443 56 SANDBERG,MICHAEL AR Utility Water Enterprise Fund 128444 282 SEARS COMMERCIAL ONE Operating Supplies General Facilities 128445 49 ST.LOUIS PARK,CITY OF Conference Expense Human Resources 128446 887 STREICHERS Miscellaneous Animal Control 128447 114 THIELMAN,MARC Mileage&Parking General Facilities 128448 165 WIGLEY,GRIFFIN J. Software Information Technology 128449 139 WRIGHT,DOUG&LYNN AR Utility Water Enterprise Fund 128450 7 XCEL ENERGY Electric Staring Lake 128451 20 YAHOO! Other Contracted Services Police 128452 733 A TO Z RENTAL CENTER Repair&Maint.Supplies Concessions 128453 136 ABRASIVE TECHNOLOGIES INC Equipment Parts Fleet Services 128454 731 ACTIVAR Repair&Maint.Supplies Water Treatment Plant 128455 856 AIR POWER EQUIPMENT CORPORATIO Equipment Repair&Maint Fire Station#3 128456 10 ANCHOR PAPER COMPANY �^y Office Supplies General C� 10 Check# Amount Vendor/Explanation Account Description Business Unit 128457 1,104 AOI ELECTRICAL INC Equipment Parts Fleet Services 128458 60 ASPEN EQUIPMENT CO. Equipment Parts Fleet Services 128459 937 ATHLETICA Advertising Park Acquisition&Development 128460 251 BAUER BUILT TIRE AND BATTERY Tires Fleet Services 128461 459 BERTELSON OFFICE PLUS Office Supplies Water Utility-General 128462 208 BLACK&DECKER,USPTG Equipment Parts Water System Maintenance 128463 60 BLOOMINGTON SECURITY SOLUTIONS Building Repair&Maint. Water Treatment Plant 128464 103 BORDER STATES ELECTRIC SUPPLY Repair&Maint.Supplies Park Maintenance 128465 424 BOYER TRUCKS SO.ST.PAUL Equipment Parts Fleet Services 128466 287 BRISSMAN-KENNEDY Cleaning Supplies Maintenance 128467 7 BROADWAY AWARDS Awards Raquetball 128468 24,171 BROWN TRAFFIC PRODUCTS Equipment Repair&Maint Traffic Signals 128469 1,188 CLAREYS INC Tuition Reimbursement/School Fire 128470 300 CLIP'N'SAVE INC Advertising Prairie View Liquor Store 128471 2,500 CLOSED CIRCUIT SPECIALISTS INC Building Water Treatment Plant 128472 958 CONSOLIDATED PLASTICS COMPANY Repair&Maint.Supplies Water Treatment Plant 128473 150 CONTRACT HARDWARE CO,INC Building Repair&Maint. Water Treatment Plant 128474 20 COPY EQUIPMENT INC Operating Supplies Engineering 128475 3,286 CORPORATE EXPRESS Office Supplies Police 128476 1,750 CREATIVE MARKETING CONSULTING Other Contracted Services Communication Services 128477 4,468 CROSIBLE INC. Equipment Parts Water Treatment Plant 128478 6,846 CUTLER MAGNER COMPANY Chemicals Water Treatment Plant 128479 1,967 CY'S UNIFORMS Clothing&Uniforms Reserves 128480 76 DALCO Equipment Parts Maintenance 128481 694 DECORATIVE DESIGNS INC Other Contracted Services City Center Operations 128482 79 DELEGARD TOOL CO Equipment Parts Fleet Services 128483 31 DIGI-KEY Equipment Parts Wireless Communication 128484 1,422 DIVERSE BUILDING MAINTENANCE Other Contracted Services Public Works/Parks 128485 1,250 DLT SOLUTIONS INC. Software Information Technology 128486 468 DNR SCREEN PRINTING INC Clothing&Uniforms Ice Arena 128487 7,772 DRT TRANSPORT Other Contracted Services Lime Sludge 128488 1,033 EARL F ANDERSEN INC Signs Traffic Signs 128489 565 ECOLAB INC Building Repair&Maint. City Center Operations 128490 28 EDEN PRAIRIE APPLIANCE Equipment Parts City Center Operations 128491 1,712 EF JOHNSON Equipment Parts Wireless Communication 128492 277 ELVIN SAFETY SUPPLY INC Safety Supplies Fire 128493 81 EMERGENCY MEDICAL PRODUCTS INC Awards City Manager 128494 192 ERDAHL AERIAL PHOTOS Other Contracted Services Economic Development 128495 330 FASTSIGNS Operating Supplies Den Road Liquor Store 128496 3,593 FB LEOPOLD INC Equipment Parts Water Treatment Plant 128497 262 FERRELLGAS Motor Fuels Ice Arena 128498 19 FIKES HYGIENE SERVICES Operating Supplies Prairie View Liquor Store 128499 165 FINLEY BROS INC Repair&Maint.Supplies Edenvale Park 128500 671 FLYING CLOUD ANIMAL HOSPITAL Canine Supplies Police 128501 142 FORCE AMERICA Equipment Parts Fleet Services 128502 754 FORE MECHANICAL,INC Building Repair&Maint. Public Works/Parks 128503 434 FRESCO INC Operating Supplies Park Maintenance 128504 1,055 G&K SERVICES-MPLS INDUSTRIAL Cleaning Supplies Water Treatment Plant 128505 5,922 GALLES CORPORATION Machinery&Equipment Water Treatment Plant 128506 211 GALLS INC Awards City Manager 128507 1,640 GARTNER REFRIGERATION&MFG IN Equipment Repair&Maint Ice Arena 128508 1,994 GENERAL REPAIR SERVICE Equipment Parts Water Treatment Plant 128509 27 GINA MARIAS INC Operating Supplies Fire 128510 118 GRAFIX SHOPPE Equipment Repair&Maint Fleet Services 128511 329 GRAINGER Building Repair&Maint. Park Maintenance 128512 672 GREG LARSON SPORTS Operating Supplies Raquetball 128513 70 HACH COMPANY Operating Supplies Water Treatment Plant 128514 309 HALDEMANN HOMME INC Printing Assessing 128515 19,722 HANSEN THORP PELLINEN OLSON Design&Engineering Construction Fund 128516 466 HARMON INC. Building Repair&Maint. Fire Station#2 128517 12,742 HARTLAND FUEL PRODUCTS LLC Motor Fuels Fleet Services 128518 447 HENNEPIN COUNTY I/T DEPT Software Maintenance Information Technology 128519 49,860 HONEYWELL INDUSTRY SOLUTIONS Other Contracted Services Water Treatment Plant 128520 1,088 ICI DULUX PAINT CTRS Equipment Parts Fleet Services 128521 173 INDUSTRIAL CONTAINER SERVICES Operating Supplies Police 128522 272 INTEREUM INC Capital Under$2,000 Furniture 128523 451 J I KELLER&ASSOCIATES INC Training Supplies Sewer Utility-General 128524 722 JANEX INC Cleaning Supplies Fire Station#3 128525 1,064 JEFFERSON FIRE&SAFETY INC Operating Supplies Fire 1.1lt Check# Amount Vendor/Explanation Account Description Business Unit 128526 223 KUSTOM SIGNALS INC Equipment Parts Fleet Services 128527 120 LAKE COUNTRY DOOR Building Repair&Maint. Water Treatment Plant 128528 7,048 LAMETIRYS COLLISION Small Tools Fleet Services 128529 1,442 LANO EQUIPMENT INC Equipment Repair&Maint Fleet Services 128530 87 LASER LABS INC Operating Supplies Police 128531 120 LOES OIL COMPANY Waste Disposal Fleet Services 128532 850 MARTIN-MCALLISTER Employment Support Test Human Resources 128533 435 MAXI-PRINT INC Printing Police 128535 536 MENARDS Repair&Maint.Supplies Water System Maintenance 128536 19 METRO FIRE Safety Supplies Fire 128537 38 METRO LEGAL SERVICES INC Other Contracted Services 2000 Rehab 128538 479 METRO PRINTING Office Supplies Fire 128539 220 METROPOLITAN FORD Equipment Parts Fleet Services 128540 153 MIDWEST ASPHALT Patching Asphalt Street Maintenance 128541 1,531 MILLER DUNWIDDIE Building Capital Impr./Maint.Fund 128542 1,833 MINN BLUE DIGITAL Operating Supplies Engineering 128543 8,258 MINNESOTA PIPE AND EQUIPMENT* Repair&Maint.Supplies Water System Maintenance 128544 20,373 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC Equipment Parts Fleet Services 128545 5,679 MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY SERVICES Protective Clothing Fire 128546 202 NATIONAL CAMERA EXCHANGE Video&Photo Supplies Fire 128547 2,311 NATIONAL WATERWORKS Merchandise for Resale Water Meter Reading 128548 1,490 NATIONWIDE ADVERTISING SERVICE Employment Advertising Human Resources 128549 14 NEW PAPER LLC Operating Supplies Special Events&Trips 128550 212 NORTH CENTRAL LABORATORIES Operating Supplies Water System Maintenance 128551 340 NORTHERN SAFETY TECHNOLOGY INC Equipment Parts Fleet Services 128552 122 NORTHWEST RESPIRATORY SERVICE Safety Supplies Fire 128553 93 OLSEN COMPANIES Repair&Maint.Supplies Water System Maintenance 128554 177 ORIENTAL TRADING COMPANY INC Operating Supplies Special Events&Trips 128555 104 OSI BATTERIES INC Operating Supplies Police 128556 319 PAGING&WIRELESS SERVICE CENT Equipment Repair&Maint Wireless Communication 128557 108 PAIN ENTERPRISES INC. Chemicals Pool Maintenance 128558 38,618 PARKOS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY Building Capital Impr./Maint.Fund 128559 1,553 PEPSI COLA COMPANY Merchandise for Resale Concessions 128560 416 PRAIRIE ELECTRIC COMPANY Building Repair&Maint. Maintenance 128561 136 PRINTERS SERVICE INC Repair&Maint.Supplies Ice Arena 128562 965 QUALITY FLOW SYSTEMS INC Equipment Parts Sewer Liftstation 128563 65 RECYCLING ASSOCIATION OF MINNE Dues&Subscriptions Recycle Rebate 128564 139 RIDGEVIEW MEDICAL CENTER Other Contracted Services Risk Management 128565 17,962 RMR SYSTEMS INC Other Contracted Services Utility Improvement Fund 128566 1,000 ROBERT C VOGEL&ASSOCIATES Other Contracted Services 1999 CLG Grant 128567 502 SCHAD TRACY SIGNS Equipment Repair&Maint Prairie Village Liquor Store 128568 17,890 SCHARBER&SONS Machinery&Equipment Park&Recreation 128569 150 SCRAP METAL PROCESSORS INC Waste Disposal Fleet Services 128570 95 SHERWIN WILLIAMS CO Operating Supplies Fleet Services 128571 9,816 SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON INC Design&Engineering Improvement Projects 1996 128572 60 SHRED-IT Waste Disposal City Center Operations 128573 768 SIGHTLINE DISPLAYS,LLC Building Repair&Maint. City Center Operations 128574 279 SNAP-ON TOOLS Small Tools Fleet Services 128575 104 SOUTHWEST LOCK&KEY Building Repair&Maint. Ice Arena 128576 300 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISHING- Employment Advertising Human Resources 128577 262 SPS COMPANIES Repair&Maint.Supplies Water System Maintenance 128578 23,145 SRF CONSULTING GROUP 1NC Design&Engineering Construction Fund 128579 47 STERICYCLE INC Operating Supplies Police 128580 324 STEVE LUCAS PHOTOGRAPHY Other Contracted Services Police 128581 4,286 STOP STICK LTD. Capital Under$2,000 Police 128582 1,453 STRAND MANUFACTURING CO INC Building Repair&Maint. Water Treatment Plant 128583 175 STRATUM ONE FITNESS EQUIPMENT Equipment Repair&Maint Police 128585 8,707 STREICHERS Clothing&Uniforms Police 128586 1,259 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET GEO Equipment Parts Fleet Services 128587 352 SULLIVANS UTILITY SERVICES INC Waste Disposal Public Works/Parks 128588 5,220 SUMMIT ENVIROSOLUTIONS Other Contracted Services Utility Improvement Fund 128589 1,080 SUN NEWSPAPERS Employment Advertising Human Resources 128590 308 SYSTEM CONTROL SERVICES Equipment Repair&Maint Sewer Liftstation 128591 881 THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR Building Repair&Maint. Senior Center 128592 923 TINKER&RASOR Repair&Maint.Supplies Water System Maintenance 128593 5,987 TKDA Improvement Contracts Utility Improvement Fund 128594 790 TOWER 2000 Equipment Repair&Maint Wireless Communication 128595 148 TWIN CITY OXYGEN CO Operating Supplies General Facilities 128596 563 TWIN CITY WINDUSTRIAL CO. Repair Maint.Supplies Water Treatment Plant 'cfI` Check# Amount Vendor/Explanation Account Description Business Unit 128597 68 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED Clothing&Uniforms Police 128598 224 UNLIMITED SUPPLIES INC Operating Supplies Park Maintenance 128599 2,105 US CAVALRY Clothing&Uniforms Police 128600 7,077 VESSCO INC Machinery&Equipment Water Treatment Plant 128601 290 VIDEO SERVICE OF AMERICA Operating Supplies Police 128602 129 VOSS LIGHTING Repair&Maint.Supplies Maintenance 128603 496 W GORDON SMITH COMPANY,THE Repair&Maint.Supplies Water System Maintenance 128604 2,701 WATSON CO INC,THE Merchandise for Resale Concessions 128605 236 WHOLESALE ART AND FRAMING Video&Photo Supplies Communication Services 128606 1,175 WM MUELLER AND SONS INC Sand Snow&Ice Control 128607 68 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE Safety Supplies Pool Operations 128608 373 ZEP MANUFACTURING CO Lubricants&Additives Fleet Services 2,308,318 Grand Total Dy- CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Ordinances and Resolutions March 23,2004 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Office of City Manager/Planning Ordinance Amending City Code Section 11.70 Scott H.Neal, City Manager Relating to Sign Permits X A Michael D. Franzen,City Planner Requested Action Move to: • Approve 2nd Reading of the Ordinance to amend Section 11.70 to include definitions for both Commercial and Non-Commercial speech related to signs posted within the City of Eden Prairie and to set forth which regulations in Section 11.70 are applicable to signs containing Commercial and Non-Commercial speech. Synopsis First Reading of the Ordinance appears under Public Hearings on this agenda. Attachments Ordinance for Sign Code Amendment • D. yLI CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. - 2004 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE,MINNESOTA,AMENDING CITY CODE CHAPTER 11 BY AMENDING SECTION 11.70 RELATING TO SIGN PERMITS; AND ADOPTING B Y 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. City Code Section 11.70,Subd.2 is amended by inserting the following two(2)new definitions in alphabetical order and renumbering the Definitions section accordingly: "Commercial Speech" - Speech relating to a business, profession, commodity, service or entertainment. "Non-Commercial Speech" - Dissemination of messages not classified as Commercial Speech which include, but are not limited to, messages concerning political, religious, social, ideological, public service and informational topics. Section 2. City Code Section 11.70, Subd. 3, Subsection H shall be deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: H. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Section, all signs of any size containing Non-Commercial Speech may be posted from August 1 in any general election year until ten (10) days following the general election and thirteen(13)weeks prior to any special election until ten(10) days following the special election. Section 3. City Code Section 11.70, Subd. 3, Subsection AA shall be deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: AA. Sign permits will not be issued for signs containing Commercial Speech which bear misleading or false information or any sign which includes information inconsistent with zoning and/or land use. Section 4. City Code Section 11.70, Subd. 3 is amended by adding Subsection II which shall read as follows: II. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Section, signs containing Non-Commercial Speech are permitted in all Districts and are subject to only ac 3 the following Subsections of 11.70,Subd.3: B,C,D,E,F,G,H,L,M,0,Q, V, W, X, Z, AA. Non-commercial signs are also subject to individual District setback provisions and total signage regulations as applicable to each particular sign type(i.e.Free-standing, Temporary, Wall). Section 5. City Code Section 11.70,Subd.5,Subsection D is amended by adding a new number 6 which shall read as follows: 6. Portable Signs containing Non-Commercial Speech. 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 day of , 2004, and finally read and adopted and ordered published at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City on the day of ,2004. Kathleen Porta, City Clerk Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie Sun Current on , 2004. 46 STAFF REPORT TO: Community Planning Board FROM: Steve Durham, Planner II THROUGH: Michael D. Franzen, City Planner DATE: March 19, 2004 SUBJECT: City Code Amendment—Sign Permits PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO SECTION 11.70 ENTITLED SIGN PERMITS The revision to the City Code is for the following reasons. • The code does not include a definition regarding Non-Commercial Speech.Signs containing Non-Commercial speech are allowed in any district, subject to size,height and setbacks of the district they are located in. • To clarify the difference between Commercial and Non-Commercial Speech. Commercial speech is related to a business, commodity, service, or entertainment. Non-Commercial speech is the dissemination of messages not classified as Commercial Speech which include, but are not limited to, messages concerning political, religious, social, ideological, public service and informational topics. • To clarify the regulations applicable to Commercial and Non-Commercial Speech. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the code changes. al� CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: March 23,2004 SECTION: Ordinances and Resolutions 1i DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Public Works Resolution Regarding a Policy of Not Fencing -- Eugene A. Dietz Storm Water Ponds and Wetlands a • B. n Requested Action Move to: Adopt resolution regarding a Policy of Not Fencing Storm Water Ponds and Wetlands Synopsis The City has had a long standing practice of not fencing ponding and wetland facilities within our community. Statutory and Case Law allow for municipalities to assess benefit and risks and establish formal policy that provides some measure of liability protection known as discretionary immunity. The attached resolution, prepared by our legal staff, is modeled directly after a resolution that was adopted by the City of Minnetonka in 2003. Staff recommends adoption of the resolution. Background Information No one has ever requested that the City of Eden Prairie provide fencing around Mitchell Lake, along the Minnesota River or any of the other natural lakes or creeks within our corporate limits. However, staff does receive expression of concern regarding ponding areas that are a result of the Wetland Conservation Act and the desire to improve water quality. In a state where water hazards should be the expected norm, protection of our population from these risks can only be successful as a matter of personal responsibility and parental guidance rather than through government intervention. Staff therefore strongly urges Council to adopt the attached resolution. ? q5 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 04- RESOLUTION REGARDING A POLICY OF NOT FENCING STORM WATER PONDS AND WETLANDS BACKGROUND A. The City of Eden Prairie Storm Water Management System includes a large number of natural and man-made holding ponds and wetlands, which serve to control both the quantity and quality of surface water drainage. B. There is a risk that children and trespassers may enter the holding ponds or wetlands and be injured or killed. If this occurs, there is a risk that the City could be sued for damages. C. Building fences around the holding ponds and wetlands would decrease the likelihood of people accidently stumbling into ponds, but no ordinary fence will stop a determined child or trespasser. D. A fence sufficiently constructed to defeat a determined child or trespasser would be expensive to construct and maintain, would be unsightly, and would create dangers of its own such as children injured by falling off the fence, being tangled in the fence, or being trapped inside and unable to get out. In addition, a fence would delay rescuers in reaching a victim. E. Many holding ponds and wetlands are located in drainage easements on private property rather than property owned by the City. Obtaining permission from landowners to build a fence across their backyards could be expensive, and constructing a fence would disturb the property owners= views of their backyards and may decrease private property values. F. Having numerous fences around the holding ponds and wetlands in the City would be contrary to the natural feeling which Eden Prairie elected officials have sought to preserve and which the citizens treasure. In addition, numerous fences would be disruptive of the neighborhood=s continuity,harmony and sense of openness. G. For the reasons noted above, the City has a long-standing policy of not fencing around ponds and wetlands. The City wishes now to formally recognize this policy in writing. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL THAT: 1. The City Council finds that the social, economic and political factors involved in constructing and maintaining fences around surface water holding ponds and wetlands are outweighed by the social, economic and political reasons not to build such fences; 2. The City Council declares that the City of Eden Prairie has not and will not build fences around holding ponds and wetlands for which the City is responsible. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 23rd day of March, 2004. Nancy Tyra-Lukens,Mayor (Seal) ATTEST: Kathleen Porta, City Clerk DSO Viii. 5. . Flying Cloud (BFI) Transfer Station Proposed Capacity Expansion Recommendation Move to direct staff to submit to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) the following City Council concerns regarding BFI's proposed expansion of the waste processing capacity at the Flying Cloud Transfer Station prior the comment period deadline for the Environmental Assessment Worksheet(EAW)on March 31,2004. • The BFI Transfer Station has only been in operation since September 2003. Odor, dust, pest and other nuisance impacts that may occur during a full year, including the spring and summer season, are unknown. The Council requests that BFI utilize Best Management Practices to minimize odor and other nuisances from leaving the Transfer Station site. This may include practices such as closing the bay doors when there are windy conditions which may blow odors, dust or litter toward residential or environmentally sensitive areas (such as the Minnesota River Valley which are known to have rare species habitat) and limiting overnight storage during summer months. • Council recommends that BFI continue their contractual obligations with a suitable pest control company to control pest populations for species such as insects,rats and mice as moderate to heavy feeding has been identified at bait'stations set out by the current pest control company. • The expansion will result in increased traffic volumes and traffic stacking at the intersection of Flying Cloud Drive (TH212) and the BFI entrance. The Council requests that BFI develop specific operational and driving procedures and provide driver training to reduce/minimize traffic-related incidents at this intersection. • Although the proposed hours of operation are being expanded to 4:00 AM to 9:00 PM, the City will demand compliance with our noise ordinances that limit noise generation between 7:00 PM and 7:00 AM. The Council requests that best management practices be established by BFI to comply with City ordinances. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: March 23,2004 SECTION: Reports of Councilmember DEPARTMENT/DIVISION ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Jan Mossman, Councilmember Adopt Resolution Supporting Improved Funding for 1-494 Corridor Improvements . A Requested Action Move to: Adopt resolution supporting legislation to provide improved funding for I-494 corridor improvements. Synopsis At the most recent I-494 Corridor Coalition Meeting, it was determined that member cities would seek approval of a resolution requesting stable funding for transportation. The attached resolution supports: • An increase in state gas tax • Full allocation of Motor Vehicle Excise Taxes (MVET) • Dedication of 0.5 percent sales tax collected in the metropolitan area; and • Other steps to increase State revenues available for improvements to the I-494 corridor and other metropolitan transportation systems. 1 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING LEGISLATION TO PROVIDE IMPROVED FUNDING FOR I-494 CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, the cities of Bloomington, Edina, Eden Prairie, Minnetonka, Plymouth and Richfield have joined together to promote improvements of I-494 from the Minnesota River to I-94 in order to increase road capacity and to improve the productivity and convenience of resident and businesses throughout the region; and WHEREAS, accelerating the scheduled expansion of I-494 is a common and high priority objective of the I-494 Corridor Coalition communities; and WHEREAS, the I-494 corridor is at 50 percent overcapacity in many locations; the cost of traffic congestion along the corridor is $100 million per year, and congestion is expected to double in the next 20 years; and WHEREAS, funding for improvements to the I-494 corridor, the Twin Cities metropolitan region and greater Minnesota has not kept pace with growth and demand due to a lack of any state gas tax increase in Minnesota since 1988; and WHEREAS, transportation spending, as a percentage of the state gross product, has declined from 1.2 percent to .9 percent over the past decade, transit is funded at 65 percent that of similarly sized regions and planners estimate that at least$1 billion in improvements per year for the next decade is needed to simply keep up with anticipated congestion; and WHEREAS, the costs and ramifications of congestion are an impediment to business development, economic growth,and reduce the overall quality of life in the metropolitan area. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Eden Prairie that this Council supports an increase in the state gas tax, full allocation of Motor Vehicle Excise Taxes, a dedication of.5 percent of the sales tax collected in the metropolitan area and other steps to increase the state revenues available for improvements to the I-494 corridor and other metropolitan transportation systems. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on March 23,2004. Nancy Tyra-Lukens,Mayor ATTEST: SEAL Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Reports of Director of Parks and Recreation March 23,2004 O : DEPARTMI;NT/DIVISI N ITEM NO.:ITEM DESCRIPTION: Robert A. Lambert XIV C C . I Director of Parks &Recreation Round Lake Water Quality Report Requested Action Move to: Authorize staff to close Round Lake Beach until water quality conditions meet level one requirements or full support of swimable use. Furthermore, to authorize staff to meet with the Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District to develop a plan to meet those conditions. Synopsis Attached to this memorandum is a report from Barr Engineering indicating that water quality of Round Lake has not meet level one conditions for the last two years, while the City was experimenting with the use of Clarify to improve water quality at Round Lake. The Trophic State Index average over the summer months exceeded 53 in 2003 and 54 in 2002. The Trophic State Index must be less than 53 to fully support swimable use. Background In 1999, the Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District completed the Round Lake Use Attainability Analysis (UAA). The UAA is a structured scientific assessment of the chemical, physical and biological conditions in a water body. The analysis determines the causes of problems and recommendations of remedial measures that will result in the attainment in the intended beneficial uses of the lake. Water quality goals were set for Round Lake that included a Trophic State Index of less than 53, so that this water body would fully support swimming. The recommendations of the UAA included upgrading existing runoff detention ponds, adding new runoff detention ponds, treating the runoff from the sub-watershed with alum to reduce its phosphorus content, treat the lake with alum (the alum treatment recommendations are still considered a last resort by City staff), initiate a fisheries management program that would include supplemental feeding of blue gills, and an annual stocking of northern pike to restore the balance to the predator fish community and initiate an aquatic weed management program using the herbicide "Reward". The City will continue with the Canada Goose Management Program, which includes removing all geese from Round Lake in the early summer, and discouraging geese from grazing near the lake in the later summer by applying products that deter geese from foraging. Round Lake Water Quality Report March 1, 2004 Page 2 - Related Issues City staff will be meeting with the Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District Board and their staff in March to discuss a variety of cooperative projects the City is requesting the Watershed District to consider including: 1. Round Lake water quality improvement (City and Watershed District need to agree on a phased program). 2. Joint funding of the bridge crossing Riley Creek to accommodate access to Crestwood Park by the Settler's Ridge development. 3. Joint funding of the bridge crossing Riley Creek adjacent to Miller Spring to provide access to the Prairie Bluff Conservation Area trail. 4. Cooperative project to construct a trail along Riley Creek'from County Road 1 south and east to Miller Spring. 5. Cooperative project to develop a trail along Purgatory Creek from County Road 1 south to Riverview Road. 6. Joint planning of grand opening ceremonies for partnership projects in 2004 including the Purgatory Creek Recreation Area and Miller Spring redevelopment. 7. Consider initiating a jointly sponsored annual 10K race at the Purgatory Creek Recreation Area to promote awareness of the Watershed District purpose and their programs. Attachments: February 4 memorandum—Recent Round Lake Water Quality Conditions Lake Water Resource Goal tables from the 1996 Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District Plan RAL:bju Barr Engineering Company 4700 West 77th Street • Minneapolis, MN 55435-4803 Phone: 952-832-2600 • Fax: 952-832-2601 • www.barr.com Ba RR Minneapolis, MN • Hibbing, MN • Duluth, MN • Ann Arbor, MI • Jefferson City, MO Memorandum To: Board of Managers,Riley-Purgatory-Bluff Creek Watershed District From: Hal Runke,.Limnologist,Barr Engineering Co. Subject: Recent Round Lake Water Quality Conditions Date: .February 4, 2004 Project: 23/27-E07 c: B. Obermeyer,P.Haik,D. Wright(Mn/DNR) The attached graphs and table present recent(2001-2003)Round Lake water quality data for the three principal water quality indicators used to calculate Trophic State Index (TSI)values: .• Total phosphorus (µg/L) • Chlorophyll a(µg/L) • Secchi disc transparency(m) Corresponding data from 1997,the year upon which the Round Lake Use Attainability Analysis (UAA) report was based,are also reported here for comparative purposes. As you will recall, the past 3 years of monitoring were conducted to evaluate the response of the lake to treatments made by the City of Eden Prairie using proprietary products offered by the Greener Pastures Company. TSI values for the four most recent years of record are listed below, with higher values being indicative of poorer water quality conditions. Summer of Record • Trophic State Index (TSI) Basis 1997 2001 2002 2003 Total Phosphorus (TSIIrrt) 63 48 55 62 Chlorophyll a (TS liChl al) 60 49 57 64 Secchi Disc Transparency (TSIsD) 56 48 54 53 As noted in previous correspondence about this matter, and as discussed in the UAA report,late- summer water quality seems to be most strongly correlated to the amount of summer rainfall received each year, as shown on the attached total phosphorus graph. Observed year-to-year variations in recent Round Lake water quality appear to be largely unrelated to any treatments made by the City of Eden Prairie,therefore. • 3��.J::ODTZA\PCDOCS\DOCS\243090\1 Table 1. Round Lake Water Quality Data for 1997 through 2003 Sample Date Total Phosphorus Chlorophyl a Secchi Depth (µg/L) (µg/L) (m) 6/2/1997 36 4.6 2.5 7/2/1997 45 6.4 0.9 7/14/1997 53 16 1.2 8/5/1997 101 36.2 0.9 8/18/1997 64 31.6 1.1 4/24/2001 54 4.3 1.2 5/14/2001 30 5 2.6 6/11/2001 21 5 3 6/26/2001 31 7.7 3 7/11/2001 32 11 2 7/23/2001 34 4.3 1.6 8/7/2001 23 1.3 2.4 8/23/2001 22 9 1.7 9/5/2001 21 2 9/9/2001 48 1.4 9/19/2001 40 15 1.9 4/30/2002 29 1.6 2.4 5/20/2002 25 1.1 3.1 6/10/2002 28 0.5 2 7/1/2002 29 9.4 2 7/24/2002 42 30 1.1 8/20/2002 37 19 1.1 9/10/2002 30 15 1.4 4/23/2003 30 10 2 5/15/2003 29 2 2.7 6/10/2002 52 0.5 2.3 6/30/2003 46 13 2.4 7/21/2003 64 39 1.1 8/11/2003 58 70 0.5 9/3/2003 40 33 0.8 2/4/2004 P:123\2710531Round2003Graph(boatguy).xis 11:14 AM a5,6 Round Lake (Eden Prairie, MN) y 110 72 0 • • .. 100 - ...._ .- - __. __ _.._ .._.. . 71 = O • L 90 - -.-- . .. .. _ .. 69 ,V CD Level IV:Non-Support of • Swimmable Use 80 67 - • a . to !- 70 -._ 2003 Summer Average TSITP=62 65 1997 Summer Average TSITP=63 "0 CO C O - Level lll:Partial Support of Swimmable Use03 0. co i Cl) V O 50 - -- - - 61 2002 Summer ▪LI a- • Average TSITP=55 0 i ~ 40 - - - -- - - - - - 57 o - Level II:Full Support of Swimmable Use,but Threatened 2003 -ti MMMMMMM in — - - =k 2002 30 -- •--= - • _..._,_ '>C_....__._._..._....._ 53 - -2001 ■I--1997 • 2001 Summer 20 ------ Average TSITP=48 47/ 15 June 15-August 15 Pptn. . Level l:Full Support off' 1+ $ . Swimmable Use 2002(13.2 in) 10 - 37/ 7.5 MSP -30 Yr Avq(7.4 in) 2003(5.9 in) •• 2001 (2.2 in) 0 - 4/ 0 1-Apr 1-May 31-May 30-Jun 30-Jul 29-Aug 28-Sep 2/3/2004 P:\23\27\053\Round2003Graph(boatguy).xls 4:21 PM Round Lake (Eden Prairie, MN) 80 - 74 70 - - 72 ▪ Level IV:Non-Support of Swimmable Use 60 - - 71 • . .-. RI 0 50 - __. . - ---- 69 — 0 O 03 • 2003 Summer Average TSIchia=64 _ 5, 40 - - :..._.._._..-..._._... ---- 67 O C2. 2002 Summer Average TSIchia=57 2001 Summer Average TSIchia=49 CO O v .0 V30 - -... : 64 1997 Summer Average TSIchia=59.5 63 Oi- • Level III:Partial Support of i ' 20 ___Swimmable UseA _ _ 60 • - - - - - ./11116.' , • 57 Level II:Full Support of Swimmable Use,but Threatened — 53 2003 Level l:Full Support of Swimmable Use --•-2001 0 - '-* --a-1997 1-Apr 1-May 31-May 30-Jun 30-Jul 29-Aug 28-Sep 2/3/2004 P:\23\27\053\Round2003Graph(boatguy).xls 4:21 PM Round Lake (Eden Prairie, MN) 0 - L 126 Level IV:Non-Support of Swimmable Use • 1997 Summer Average TSIsp=56 63 Level 111:Partial Support of 1 f Swimmable Use — 60 lir E . /141 \ 57 0 )% • Level ll:Full Support of (.) Swimmable Use,but • X CThreatened ' " ' ' 53 ,a a / C Cl)CU C. ,• -• CU 2 -- - ' — - - 50 H -v co / 0. 1 V VLevel l:Full Support of O Swimmable Use a) r cn • 2001 Summer Average TSIsp=48 3 --- - - - - -- - 44 2002 Summer Average TSIsp=54 . 2003 2003 Summer Average TSIsp=53 —--2002 -+-2001 --E-1997 4 40 1-Apr 1-May 31-May 30-Jun 30-Jul 29-Aug 28-Sep 2/3/2004 P:\23127\053\Round2003Graph(boatguy).xls 4:21 PM 5C • f ,- , • • "--)• • --- - ---• -- ..., Table,.1A2-•• • • ., - • • -- --- : • - Lake Water Resource Goals :..,.. , ',..*:-..' 71,;-•Lake-4661i - ,- • • .3:.' -f-7t1-:,. -, ,,5.:. ;.... .- . . . ..„ . . Water Oualitsi.:(1)- 'i''' ----:- ..51- -i • .7. • . .-. ; . • ''?- . • :.: ,. .• . Lake,.by Type Description- !-- TS1,0(2) Writer Quantity -:: Wildlife Public Participation Lake Monitoring Program • .. . . •-:".• Swimming Lakes • • •- - . -.: .., ,.: . .• • • Ann • Full support of <49(3) .Sufficient storage Protect existing Encourage public "intensive or"Advanced"level of data • Riley swimming and designated. ; <53(4) tfor a retjioriat! '. beneficial wildlife participation as part of a collection per Metropolitan Council and . •.: • •Round •' fishing activities. <53(4) :•:11Odd. -. .:.„.1-v.:-uses. Use Attainability • MPCMecommendations,respectivelY. , ..,-!;_.-,-, Analysis for each lake. , .. - . ,. ;•,-. ...,1,.,--, • • FIShing Lakes vid.MDNR StoachilOrociranis • •' .i '- .• • Hyland Fell support of designated ' a62(5) . --. . "Managemenr or- "latermediate"level of 6 Lotus fishing activities. .s.56(5) s. - :• -....- • data collection per Metropolitan Council • Mitchell . <55(3) - !'•- and MPCA recOminendations, • Red klOck (5)62(5) • Staring • Siisan „ .-4 .-- '- z-_-6 7 -- -: • --- - k--_,-58 .., ,:-!- • • , ,:;:ri. • '. . respectively. . . - - . . - -Fish takós.we/MOM • - (1) . StOoking.Procirttms • . - . . - . DOCIC . . :Survey"or"Basic"level of data collection' .. 6 Lticy Full support Of designated - :46215) fishing activitiosplus - ! <57(3) .•:. • ,.:_. per Metropolitan Council and MPCA 1•21 • Rice Marsh waterfowl and wildlife habitat .. a62(5) . _ .,..z.. . recommendations respectively. • ' • Silver - . requirements. • • - ,<70(3). • . ' • (1) The most restrictive water quality goal of the MDNR,MPCA or RPI3CWD is assumed to govern the entry in this solentn. (2) TSlir, -Carlson's Trophio State indeic score. This iiidexiis--calculated from the interrelationships between summer Secchi disc transparencies and epilimnetic concentrations of chlorophyll a and total phosphorus. The index result in scoring generally tn the range between zero and brie.tfundlidaower,score%being„ihdicative of better lake water quality. (3) Water quality goals for Lake Ann,Lake Lucy,Mitchell Lake,and Silver Lake reflect the•rip40yry.gilfty,.g(poitfootiatio-rizdCoient lake water quality conditions:current conditions assumed to be best represented by calibrated phosphorus mass balance model predictions of annualhydiologikand.phesphorus loads resulting.fibin present watetshed land use during a year of average PracipitOtion. .. ..,;, 1 :-!:'• _ ::,:e4 ---••- _ . : (4) The tiraterquality goal for Lake Riley and Round.Lake was established to provide-water quality sufficiently good to fully support swimming activities there,throughout the'summer[MPCA, 1993. • 2.;.,-• ClearrWaterAat-Reoort16 Congress.] -•::,_.. :.._ ... .: . (5) •Waterquality-geals forHyland;Lotusitled-F,lock,Staring,Susan,Duck:and Rice Marsh lakes correspond to,Ecological.,Use.Clatsitications set by.the•MDNR tot lake fisheries and associated aquatic OomintinitiesISChuppi 1-992. An ecological classification Or Minnesota lakes with-aStOtietett fish coremenitios. MDNR Investigational Report No.4174 • . (6)• Mitchell Lake is stocked by a-local propertYlAhers•asseciatiOn,rather than by:t1WMD.1114.5.-ii:,.f.-1-, ":-3-':' c, •... il • . • _ .. ... . .,....... ... . ... • • : .:,'. - • . ....- - . ' - --- - •'• • • --"..Copyright ifE:JOW • • Rilej.Piiiiaiei4ZBIgfteiiikltriaiiiikl Diiigik . . . 2327053N3291541YMB - Inventory and Assessment. . • . . . - • . . , . • • Table.fA1 • Desired Uses and Target Water Quality.Goals.for District Water Bodies, by Category Desired Total Desired Desired Phosphorus Chlorophyll a Seccht Disc • Concentration Concentration Transparency Water Quality Category Desired TSI (pg/L) g/L) (meters) Level is Full Support of Swimmable Use TS1553, [TP]530 [Chia]<_10 SD>_1.6 Level II: ' Full Support of.Swimmable Use, But 57>_TSI>53 40y[TPJ>30 15>jChla]>10 Threatened Level ill: Partial Support of Swimmable Use 63>_TS1>57 604TP]>40 27>[Ghla]>15 Level IV: Non-Support of Swimmable Use TS1>63` [TP]>60 [Chia]>27 SD < 0.8 • *MPCA Use Support Classification for Swimming (MPCA Method) Relative to Carison's Trophic State Index by Ecoregion. The classification is for the Central Hardwood Forests Region. • • • • • • • • • • • • CepjriR6( .1996 RaerPorgm or7-Bluff Creek W(er.6ed Di.(4cE • 2329r '2915-1/Yh111 (—h Inventory and Asses '—nt