Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council - 07/05/2005r AGENDA CITY COUNCIL OPEN FORUM/OPEN PODIUM TUESDAY,JULY 5,2005 CITY CENTER 6:30—7:00 PM, COUNCIL CHAMBER CITY COUNCIL: Mayor Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Councilmembers Brad Aho, Sherry Butcher, Ron Case, 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, Community Development Director Janet Jeremiah, Communications Manager Pat Brink, Assistant to the City Manager Michael Barone, City Attorney Ric Rosow, and Recorder Lorene McWaters I. OPEN FORUM A. Dick Feerick III. OPEN PODIUM IV. ADJOURNMENT AGENDA EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY,JULY 5,2005 7:00 PM, CITY CENTER Council Chamber 8080 Mitchell Road CITY COUNCIL: Mayor Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Councilmembers Brad Aho, Sherry Butcher, Ron Case, and Philip Young CITY STAFF: City Manager Scott Neal, Parks&Recreation Director Bob Lambert, Public Works Director Eugene Dietz, City Planner Michael Franzen, Community Development Director Janet Jeremiah, City Attorney Ric Rosow and Council Recorder Deb Sweeney I. ROLL CALL/CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. COUNCIL FORUM INVITATION IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS V. MINUTES A. JOINT COUNCIL/PARKS,RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION MEETING HELD,TUESDAY,JUNE 14,2005 B. COUNCIL WORKSHOP HELD TUESDAY,JUNE 21,2005 C. CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY,JUNE 21,2005 D. TOWN MEETING ON PROPOSED PARK REFERENDUM HELD JUNE 22,2005 VI. CONSENT CALENDAR A. CLERK'S LICENSE LIST B. EAGLE RIDGE AT HENNEPIN VILLAGE - SIX by Pemtom Land Company Second Reading of the Ordinance for Planned Unit Development District Review and Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-9.5 on 16.93 acres. Location: South of Charlson Road and east of Spring Road. (Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Change) C. AWARD CONTRACT FOR THE ANDERSON LAKES PARKWAY TRAIL PROJECT,FROM FRANLO TO NEILL LAKE ROAD,I.C. 01-5525 D. APPROVE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH BRAUN INTERTEC FOR CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL TESTING FOR TH 212/CHARLSON ROAD INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS,I.C. 05-5638 f CITY COUNCIL AGENDA July 5,2005 Page 2 E. ADOPT RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF QUIT CLAIM DEED TO DAVID AND CHRISTINE BRUNS F. ADOPT RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION 2005-08 SETTING MEETING PLACES AND TIMES FOR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS G. DECLARE OBSOLETE COMPUTER EQUIPMENT AS SURPLUS VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS A. ISSUANCE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BONDS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF FIRE STATION 4 (Resolution) B. EDEN PRAIRIE FIRE STATION No. 4 by City of Eden Prairie. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 3.66 acres; Planned Unit District Review with waivers on 3.66 acres; Zoning District Amendment within the Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District on 3.66 acres; Site Plan Review on 1.32 acres; Preliminary Plat of 3.66 acres into two lots and one outlot. Location: Southeast corner of Dell Road and Linwood Court. (Resolution for PUD Concept Amendment, Ordinance for PUD District Review with waivers and Zoning District Amendment,Resolution for Preliminary Plat) C. PRAIRIE ESTATES by T.H. Parker, Inc. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 6.47 acres; Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 6.47 acres; Zoning District Change from Rural to Rl- 13.5 on 6.47 acres; Preliminary Plat of 6.47 acres into 10 lots, two outlots and road right-of-way. Location: South of 62nd St. W, west of Country Road, and north of Claycross Way. (Resolution for PUD Concept Review, Ordinance for PUD District Review with waivers and Zoning District Change, Resolution for Preliminary Plat) D. DUCK LAKE KNOLL by Epic Development, LLC. Request for Zoning District Amendment within the R1-13.5 Zoning District on 1 acre; Preliminary Plat of 1 acre into 2 single family lots and road right-of-way. Location: 6700 Duck Lake Road. (Ordinance for Zoning District Amendment, Resolution for Preliminary Plat) E. MCCALL BLUFF by McCall Construction Company. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 4.89 acres; Planned Unit Development District Review and Zoning District Amendment in the Rural Zoning District on 4.89 acres; Preliminary Plat of 4.89 acres into two lots. Location: 9997 Dell Road. (Resolution for PUD Concept Review, Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Amendment,Resolution for Preliminary Plat) V1I1. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS CITY COUNCIL AGENDA July 5,2005 Page 3 IX. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS A. EDEN PRAIRIE FIRE STATION NO. 4 by City of Eden Prairie. Second reading of the Ordinance for Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers and Zoning District Amendment in the Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District on 3.66 acres; and Resolution for Site Plan Review on 1.32 acres (2°d Reading of an Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Amendment; and Resolution for Site Plan Review). Location: Southeast corner of Dell Road and Linwood Court. X. PETITIONS,REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS A. REQUEST FOR VETERANS MEMORIAL B. REQUEST FOR PRACTICE AREA AT COMMUNITY CENTER XI. REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS & COMMISSIONS XII. APPOINTMENTS XIII. REPORTS OF OFFICERS A. REPORTS OF COUNCILMEMBERS B. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER 1. Senior Issues Task Force Appointments 2. _Proposed Transfer of Cable TV Franchise from Time Warner to Comcast C. REPORT OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR 1. Cancellation Agreement with Legacy Holdings-MR,LLC, D. REPORT OF PARKS AND RECREATION DIRECTOR 1. Park Referendum Recommendation 2. Master Plan for Cardinal Creek Conservation Area E. REPORT OF PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR F. REPORT OF POLICE CHIEF G. REPORT OF FIRE CHIEF CITY COUNCIL AGENDA July 5,2005 Page 4 H. REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY XIV. OTHER BUSINESS XV. ADJOURNMENT ITEM NO.: V.A. UNAPPROVED MINUTES JOINT MEETING EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL PARKS,RECREATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION TUESDAY,JUNE 14,2005 5:00 P.M., OUTDOOR CENTER 13765 Staring Lake Parkway COUNCIL MEMBERS: Mayor Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Councilmembers: Brad Aho, Sherry Butcher, Ron Case, Philip Young COMMISSION MEMBERS: Rob Barrett, Chair; Jeffrey Gerst, Vice Chair; Tom Bierman, John Brill, Tom Crain, Randy Jacobus, Ian Mackay, Michael Moriarity, Geri Napuck CITY STAFF: Scott Neal, City Manager Bob Lambert, Parks &Recreation Director Stu Fox, Parks and Natural Resources Manager Laurie Obiazor, Recreation Manager RECORDING SECRETARY: Lorene McWaters I. ROLL CALL Mayor Tyra-Lukens called the meeting to order at 5:05 p.m. Parks Commission Members Tom Bierman, Tom Crain, Randy Jacobus, Ian Mackay, and Michael Moriarity were not present II. DISCUSSION ITEMS Scott Neal said the purpose of this special joint meeting was to try to gain consensus on a tentative referendum package-what to include and how to break down the questions. A. Senior Survey Results Bob Lambert said when the City began to consider holding another referendum, it was clear we needed input from senior citizens. Dave Bender of MarketLine Research presented results of a survey of Eden Prairie senior citizens his firm conducted in May. The surveys were mailed to 1206 seniors who had had program contact with Parks and Recreation Department, and MarketLine received 338 completed surveys. Forty-five percent of respondents said they didn't know if they supported holding another referendum, 14 percent said they did support a referendum, and 41 percent said they did not support another referendum. City Council/Parks Recreation and Natural Resources Commission Meeting June 14, 2005—page 2 MarketLine's summary f g m o.the results included the following observations: Seniors who responded to the survey are active users of Parks and Recreation facilities Respondents are content with facilities and programming relating to seniors Most were undecided on the need for additional facilities and for another referendum Most respondents require additional information before making a decision on expansion of facilities and the need for a referendum Brill said he would like to see cross-tabulations of opinions of those who use the Senior Center and those who don't, and how they feel about expansion of the Senior Center. Napuck asked if there is any correlation of likelihood to vote. Bender said they did not look at likelihood to vote in this study. Butcher said it seems that senior citizens in Eden Prairie are active voters; however, Lambert pointed out that that only other item on the ballot in November is the School Board election, which could skew the turnout. Tyra-Lukens asked about how many people attended informational meeting staff held at the Senior Center. Lambert said turnout was low; however, several of those in attendance were very vocal about the desire for an indoor walking track and a warm water pool. Lambert also noted those who attended had not yet received much information about what might be included on a referendum. B. Proposed Referendum Projects and Operating Costs Community Center Improvements - $6,650,000 Lambert said this expansion plan is the same one recommended by the 2003 Citizen Study Committee and included on the May 2004 referendum. It features a walking track, gymnasium, enlarged fitness center(four times the current size), pool locker rooms and pool seating. Staff estimates additional revenue generated by the improvements would cover any added operation costs. Aho asked how any user fees would compare to those of private health clubs. Lambert said staff based cost projections on current membership fees,which are significantly lower than private clubs. Pool Question- Option B $3,930,000) & Option C ($5,310,000) Option B includes deepening the existing pool,which would allow it to be used for competitive purposes. It also includes construction of a new warm-water pool to be used for swimming lessons for kids and water aerobics for seniors. This pool would greatly expand the City's capacity to provide swimming lessons and public open swim time. Lambert said he feels the warm-water pool would be a great addition to the Community Center. Pool Option C was developed in response to requests from swim teams and school coaches for a 50-meter competitive pool. The plan includes the indoor City Council/Parks Recreation and Natural Resources Commission Meeting June 14, 2005—page 3 warm-water pool, but adds 6 lanes of 25 yards with a bulkhead that would accommodate an additional 6 lanes of 25 yards during the fall,winter and spring, and would become a 6-lane, 50-meter pool during summer months. Lambert said this would address the needs of a relatively small number of competitive swimmers—about 200 families, but would be the best answer to resolve the swimming pool needs for Eden Prairie's competitive swim programs. The cost for Pool Option B is$3.9 million, and the cost for Option C jumps to $5.3 million. Lambert said it is optimistic to believe the City will completely rent out time on a competitive pool. Case said for 'o years the City has written off the hockey association's requests for a third sheet of ice because of cost, but it is now considering spending an extra$1.3 million on a pool that would be used by far fewer families than the hockey rink. Lambert agreed with Case, and said the worst thing the City could do is put out something that can't pass. Lambert said any pool option is going to be tough to pass in light of the previous referendum. Butcher agreed, and suggested the more conservative proposal would be best. Tyra-Lukens pointed out that it would only cost pennies per month per taxpayer to build the larger pool. Lambert said the number voters will tend to remember is $1.3 million extra rather than the cost per month. Young acknowledged pool issues have a heightened level of complexity, but he said the quality of our competitive swimming facilities is not very good. On the other hand,the City has invested a lot in soccer, baseball, and other facilities. Lambert said he feels both hockey and swimming have been short-changed over the years compared to other sports. Case said hockey users have been paying their own way, by and large, for a long time, and he is arguing very strongly for a third sheet of ice in one form or another. He said fairness is the issue. He said it would be incredibly unfair to pay$1.3 million more for a competitive pool and not provide more ice. Barrett said he wondered if this whole referendum will be tainted if it includes any kind of pool option. He suggested removing the pool question altogether this year. Aho said he hopes people will be able to see the differences between this proposal and last year's. Case said some people may think the City is trying to sneak something by them, but he feels we can overcome this if we present the question in the appropriate manner. Case said he heard from many families who were disappointed that the aquatic center was defeated. Tyra-Lukens asked about the possibility of eliminating the water park portion of the question, and keeping the competitive swimming portion. Barrett said that you would lose swimming lessons and open swim time. Tyra-Lukens then suggested keeping the warm- water pool proposal,but eliminating the water slides and other"water park"type features. She said providing swimming lessons is fairly important to our mission as a city, while providing a competitive swimming facility for about 200 families is not. Cit y Coun "crl/Parks Recreation and Natural Resources Commission Meeting June 14, 2005—page 4 Park Acquisitions and Improvements ($4,695,000) Forest Hills Park- The largest item under this proposal is $905,000 for Forest Hills Park. It includes replacing the park shelter that burned last winter and relocating the shelter and skating rink to the center of the park. Lambert said the School Board and the neighborhood are in favor of the proposed changes. Lambert said the Forest Hills PTO has asked the City to include improvements to the playground as part of this project, and he feels this makes sense. Most of the equipment on the playground is still considered safe, but does not have much"kid appeal." In addition, the playground poses supervision challenges because it is on two levels. Case asked how much the school and City paid for the existing equipment. Lambert said the City typically shares the cost for equipment at a park it shares with a school. Case said it seems that if the school has the majority of use of the equipment, they should pay a larger share. Lambert pointed out that Forest Hills also serves as a neighborhood park, and the City pays for equipment at neighborhood parks. Lambert said it makes sense for the City to pay for whatever equipment we normally provide at a neighborhood park, and the school district would be asked cover anything else. Flying Cloud Ball Field-Acquiring Flying Cloud Fields for$1.4 million would help accommodate the growth in baseball, lacrosse, and soccer programs. This is the same request that was included in last year's referendum. Case asked about the possible partnership with Grace Church that was discussed a year ago. Lambert said that was contingent on the construction of a school by Grace, and we have not heard anything from them for more than six months. Any proposal with Grace Church could work before or after the fact of constructing the ball fields. Prairie View Park-Replacement of the temporary park shelter,which also burned down several years ago, with a permanent building and replacement of some playground equipment is slated for$350,000 for Prairie View Park. Napuck asked about the recent discussion of acquiring adjacent property from a private landowner. Lambert said this land belongs to a man who was deeded used of the home until such time as he can no longer live independently. The City has first right of refusal on the property when it becomes available. The trustee of the property is not willing to sell any portion of the land at this time. Edenvale Park- Improvements to Edenvale Park would include a new park shelter and skating facilities, replacement of the baseball field with a soccer field, and the addition of a basketball court. The projected cost is 620 000. p J $ , Birch Island Woods-Lambert said there appears to be a great deal of community support for the acquisition of the final four acres of Birch Island Woods. Staff is recommending $860,000 for acquisition of the site. Case suggested including $900,000 for park acquisition with three priority sites listed. This would allow the City to leverage other funds for Birch Island Woods, if possible. City Council/Parks Recreation and Natural Resources Commission Meeting June 14, 200S—page S Additional Park Improvements-An additional $560,000 is slated for replacement of equipment at other neighborhood parks. Lambert said some of these projects could be implemented over a number of years without a referendum, but they would have to suffer with poor equipment and courts in the meantime. Trail Improvements - $2,000,000 Lambert said the proposal does not specify which trails would be improved; however, the $2 million requested would allow the City to accelerate some of the big ticket, high priority trail projects, such as the trail along County Road 4 north of Purgatory Creek. C. Related Revenue Bond Projects Lambert noted that the indoor play space and outdoor kids play pool depicted on the schematics are proposed revenue bond projects. These are projects that could be undertaken if the Community Center Improvements are approved by referendum; however, they would not be paid for through referendum funds. The Third Rink would also be a revenue bond project, but is feasible only if the Hockey Association can pay for the difference in money generated through revenue bonds and the cost of constructing the facility. Lambert asked for input on whether or not these projects should be included on the referendum schematics. Tyra-Lukens suggested labeling them as"possible future improvements." It was also suggested that these projects be shown in a different color. Case suggested labeling them "revenue bond projects,"so people will not think they are items they might be asked for vote for in a future referendum. He also suggested explaining, in small type, how revenue bonds work. Lambert said he has feedback that when people see these projects on plans, they become confused about what they are voting for. Neal advocated not showing the projects at all on the referendum schematics. Lambert noted that even though he feels strongly that we will do these projects, they must still be discussed by the Parks and Rec Commission, Council and staff. The disadvantage of showing them on the plans is that people then expect them. Neal also noted that the ability to use these kind of revenue bonds is based on state statute,which can change at any time. The group consensus was to remove the projects from the plans. D. Other Discussion Lambert said he envisions the referendum consisting of four questions: ■ Community Center Improvements ■ Pool - Option B or C ■ Park Acquisitions and Improvements ■ Trail Improvements City Council/Parks Recreation and Natural Resources Commission Meeting June 14, 2005—page 6 Aho asked how much is currently in the Park Fund. Lambert said the fund is at $5 million, with $4 million already committed to projects as part of the 5-year CIP. Tyra-Lukens requested additional discussion of the water park aspect of the proposed indoor pool. She said she would feel more comfortable proposing an indoor warm-water pool with the potential to add water slides later. Lambert said eliminating the water slides would reduce the cost by about$600,000. Butcher pointed out that even without the water slides, the pool cost would be in the $3 million range. Aho said he believes residents will view the pool differently without the water slides, because it will not appear extravagant and it will not look like a repeat of what was proposed last time. Neal noted that the City's post- referendum survey indicated no support for any kind of aquatic center. Case said he thinks there is a strong perceptual element. He is in favor of pulling the slides, but building the pool so they could be added later. Young agreed that the presence of slides has a water park connotation, and it makes sense to avoid that. Young asked if we can predict with any sense of certainty what voter turnout for off.-year election will look like. Lambert said you will get whoever would normally vote for the School Board, plus a bit more, probably in the range of 5,000 to 6,000 voters. Neal said he will consult with City Clerk Kitty Porta and forward past turnout information via e-mail. Barrett said he thinks the warm-water pool is sellable as a lesson/senior pool. Butcher supports listing the pool as a separate question. Neal said it will be important to convey to voters that the City is being responsive to the feedback we received after the last referendum, such as holding the election at the regular time, breaking it down into separate questions, etc. Lambert said it is wise to build a pool to which you can add a new features. Case asked if there will be a private group that will campaign in favor of the referendum. Lambert said that while City employees can't advocate for the referendum, Councilmembers CAN actively campaign for it. Aho said he knows not everyone agrees, but he does not think it is his role as an elected official to sell the referendum. Lambert said that Aho, as a Councilmember, can support the referendum or not. Aho said he will support it and will talk about why he supports it. Barrett said he thinks what was missing last time was the advocacy piece, and a referendum will be even harder to sell this time if that is still missing. He said everyone will be looking to the Council for the leadership element. Gerst agreed that it will be important for the Councilmembers to talk about the benefits of the referendum. Napuck said she thinks it is assumed that the Council supports the referendum if they are willing to put it out for a vote. She said it will be important for Council to talk publicly about why they think the referendum is a good idea, and how it is responsive to the information we received after the last referendum. City Council/Parks Recreation and Natural Resources Commission Meeting June 14, 2005—page 7 Young said Council's role can be looked at in more than one way. He said Council can be considered"gatekeepers" in their role of deciding on whether or not to run a referendum. That is different than deciding to spend the $17 million themselves. Young said he feels that if the referendum is going to pass, it will require strong support from groups outside the Council. He said parents, sports groups, and concerned residents need to turn out to support it. Aho said he believes the school referendum passed because of the support of private citizens. Gerst noted that Superintendent Krull attended coffees with the School Board members to inform residents of why they were holding the referendum. Case said he agrees that non-City group needs to actively advocate for the referendum, but he also believes it is important for him to come out and say what he believes as well. Case also suggested using the newspapers to publicize what Council thinks about the referendum. Napuck said it will be important to get the athletic associations involved in promoting the referendum,but she is concerned about the short timeline. Aho said he does not think the time frame should be a problem. He believes people have a short attention span, so referendum publicity should be"hit quickly and hit hard." Case said running a successful referendum really does take some planning. He believes many people did not vote on the last referendum because they forgot the date. He thinks it will help that this referendum will be on the same day as the School Board election. Butcher said School Board Member Ann Haines has offered to pass on to Council what she learned during the school referendum. Butcher said Haines strongly believes the phone campaign was what made the difference in their referendum. Butcher said it will be like herding cats to get all of the associations to work together to press for the referendum. Lambert said one problem is the athletic associations are so busy running their programs, they do not have time to devote to the referendum. E. Process to Final Decision Lambert asked if Council wished to discuss the proposed revenue bond projects now or at some point in the future. Case suggested studying those proposals after the referendum. Lambert said the next step in the process is the Town Meeting, scheduled for June 22 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chamber. Parks and Recreation staff will present a PowerPoint, answer questions, and ask for feedback. Case suggested that the water slides, etc., be removed from Pool Option B before that meeting. The group agreed that the water slides should be removed and Pool Option B should be renamed"Warm-Water Pool Option." A special Parks and Recreation Commission meeting is scheduled for June 27, and Council will be asked to make a final decision on the referendum at their July 5 meeting. Brill asked about the possibility of bundling the park acquisitions and City Council/Parks Recreation and Natural Resources Commission Meeting June 14, 2005—page 8 trails as one question. Aho suggested waiting until after the Town Meeting to make further changes to the proposal. III. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 7:10 p.m. ITEM NO.: V.B. UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP& OPEN FORUM/OPEN PODIUM TUESDAY,JUNE 21,2005 CITY CENTER 5:00—6:25 PM,HERITAGE ROOM II 6:30—7:00 PM, COUNCIL CHAMBER CITY COUNCIL: Mayor Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Councilmembers Brad Aho, Sherry Butcher, Ron Case, 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, Community Development Director Janet Jeremiah, and Recorder Lorene McWaters Heritage Room H Councilmember Young was absent. I. CEMETERY MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONAL ISSUES Scott Neal introduced Parks Manager Stu Fox. Neal said Council had requested a task force be formed to review cemetery policies and procedures. Appointments to the task force have been made, but the first meeting will not be held next week. Neal said Fox would review some of the issues the task force will be examining. Fox said there has been some difficulty scheduling the task force's first meeting due to task force member schedules and Fox's evening meeting schedule. In addition, the task force had wanted to wait until summer to view the cemetery in good weather. The first meeting is scheduled for June 28. Two residents have requested to attend a meeting of the task force. Fox said they will be invited to the second meeting. Fox said cemetery records indicate a total of 1,390 graves at the cemetery and 664 burials. There are 478 remaining lots to sell. Fox said task force members have indicated that the City talk to adjacent property owners (Pax Christi) about the possibility of acquiring more land. He said the task force may consider above ground burials, such as mausoleums that hold cremated remains. Task force members have been examining other cemeteries in preparation for their first meeting. Fox said they are very interested in looking at existing rules and regulations and possibly suggesting some changes to them. Butcher asked what an above-ground facility for cremated remains would involve. Fox said one type would be an actual building with individual spaces for remains and attached placards. Butcher asked if the task force will be considering above ground headstones. Fox said that the task force will be looking at that. The current price is $400 per grave lot for residents, $600 for non-residents. Fox said the price has not changed since the City took over management of the cemetery. Case pointed out that the Eden Prairie Cemetery board just voted to allow headstones. He said there are some particular items he would like the task force to address. He said he drove by the cemetery yesterday and noticed the chain link fence, which is not very aesthetically pleasing. He said he basically considers the cemetery a park, and would like to see some structural upgrades, such as trees, benches, a nicer fence, etc. Fox said the task force will be looking at three issues: • Current rules and regulations and operations • Supply of lots and the City's financial responsibilities • Aesthetics of the cemetery, and improvements to be listed in a Capital Improvement Plan Fox said the task force will be looking at what funds would be available from the perpetual care fund for improvements. Case would like to see recommendations considered separately from funding. Aho asked the current value of the perpetual care fund. Fox said there is about $240,000 in the fund,which pays for contracted mowing and administrative fees. An example is Wes Dunsmore's time when he meets with families to arrange for burials. Fox said the cemetery averages about 14 burials per year. He noted that most people don't pre-buy plots, but generally purchase a grave lot when it is needed. II. OTHER Tyra-Lukens asked Lambert how the Town Hall meeting will be formatted. Lambert said he would like to see it run similar to a council meeting. He asked that the Mayor bring the meeting to order, then Lambert will give a PowerPoint presentation, and the public will be invited to provide feedback. Aho, Case and Tyra-Lukens plan to be in attendance. Councilmember Young is traveling and probably will not be able to attend. Chief Carlson said his reserve officers are researching flag protocol and procedures and will report to staff and Council on their findings. Council Chamber II. OPEN FORUM A. Kathy Tyler—Cougars in Eden Prairie John and Kathy Tyler presented Council with a packet of information on cougars and reviewed their concerns about cougar sitings in Eden Prairie and nearby communities. Chief Carlson explained how the Police Department is addressing the issue. Mayor Tyra-Lukens thanked the Tylers for bringing forth their concerns. III. OPEN PODIUM IV. ADJOURNMENT ITEM NO.: V.C. UNAPPROVED MINUTES EDEN PRAIRIE CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY,DUNE 21,2005 7:00 PM, CITY CENTER Council Chamber 8080 Mitchell Road CITY COUNCIL: Mayor Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Councilmembers Brad Aho, Sherry Butcher, and Ron Case. Councilmember Philip Young was absent. CITY STAFF: City Manager Scott Neal, Parks &Recreation Director Bob Lambert, Public Works Director Eugene Dietz, City Planner Michael Franzen, Community Development Director Janet Jeremiah, City Attorney Ric Rosow and Council Recorder Deb Sweeney I. ROLL CALL/CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER Mayor Tyra-Lukens called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. She reminded citizens there is a town meeting scheduled for next Tuesday, June 28th at 7:00 p.m. to discuss the possibility of a parks referendum. Friday, June 24th at noon will see the kickoff of the new summer series at the Purgatory Creek Park Pavilion. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. COUNCIL FORUM INVITATION IV. RECOGNITION OF UPCOMING REUNION OF THE BLACK SHEEP SQUADRON AT THE 2005 AIR EXPO Former Councilmember Patricia Pidcock noted the air show at Flying Cloud Airport on July 21-24 is expected to draw 20,000 people, including many icons of World War II. The show will include a reunion dinner of the famous Black Sheep Squadron. She introduced two veterans in attendance. Tyra-Lukens read the proclamation for Black Sheep Squadron Days in honor of the veterans. Case noted the City will have a booth at the air show and that he would attend the dinner on Thursday. V. APPROVAL OF AGENDA AND OTHER ITEMS OF BUSINESS Neal noted changes to Item No VII.K. regarding sale of heavy rescue equipment, Item No. XIV.B.2 regarding City Manager Performance Pay, and an updated draft policy on priority use of public facilities as reviewed by the City Attorney. MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Aho, to approve the agenda as published and amended. Motion carried 4-0. VI. MINUTES CITY COUNCIL MINUTES June 21,2005 Page 2 A. COUNCIL WORKSHOP HELD TUESDAY,JUNE 7,2005 MOTION: Aho moved, seconded by Case, to approve the Council Workshop minutes as published. Motion carried 4-0. B. CITY COUNCIL MEETING HELD TUESDAY,JUNE 7,2005 MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher, to approve the City Council minutes as published. Motion carried 4-0. VII. CONSENT CALENDAR A. THE POINTE ON LAKE RILEY by G&L Land Investments,LLC. Second reading for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 4.5 acres; Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 4.5 acres;Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-22 on 4.5 acres and Preliminary Plat of 4.5 acres into 4 lots. Location: 9004 Lake Riley Road(Ordinance No. 9-2005-PUD-5-2005 for PUD District Review and Zoning District Change) B. APPROVE SALE OF SURPLUS VEHICLES AND EQUIPMENT AT PUBLIC AUCTION BY HENNEPIN COUNTY COOPERATIVE PURCHASING C. AUTHORIZE ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMIT TO WESTBRAND,INC. D. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2005-81 AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF LIMITED USE PERMIT FOR TRAIL PURPOSES WITH MNDOT,I.C. 05-5638 E. APPROVE CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 FOR TH 212 AT PRAIRIE CENTER DRIVE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT,I.C. 01-5527 F. APPROVE CHANGE ORDER A-1 FOR REPLACEMENT OF CEDAR SHINGLE ROOF AT THE CUMMINS GRILL BUILDING G. APPROVE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE JOINT POWERS SCHOOL DISTRICT FOR USE AND OPERATION OF OAK POINT POOL H. AUTHORIZE STAFF TO RENEW LEASE FOR PRAIRIE VILLAGE LIQUOR STORE I. ADOPT RESOLUTION NO.2005-82 RELATING TO $2,390,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES 2005 A,FOR MITCHELL ROAD/TECHNOLOGY DRIVE IMPROVEMENTS CITY COUNCIL MINUTES June 21,2005 Page 3 J. DIRECT STAFF TO NOT WAIVE MONETARY LIMITS ON MUNICIPAL TORT LIABILITY ESTABLISHED BY MINNESOTA STATUTES 466.04 MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Case, to approve Items A-J on the Consent Calendar. Motion carried 4-0. VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS/MEETINGS A. L.G.EVEREST TRANSFER FACILITY by L.G. Everest. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 2.74 acres; Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 2.74 acres; Zoning District Amendment in the I- General district on 2.74 acres; Preliminary Plat of 2.74 acres into l lot. Location: Industrial Drive. (Resolution No.2005-83 for PUD Concept Review, Ordinance for PUD District Review with waivers and Zoning District Amendment,Resolution No. 2005-84 for Preliminary Plat) Official notice of this public hearing was published in the June 9, 2005,Eden Prairie Sun Current and sent to 18 property owners. Neal noted L.G. Everest is in the aggregate business and would ship aggregate by rail from western Minnesota to this site in Eden Prairie. Aggregate will be unloaded from rail cars by front-end loader into trucks which will either deposit material on site, transfer to Midwest Asphalt across the street or to other job sites in the Twin Cities area. The Planning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the project, including the waiver for lot size and loading on a street frontage, to the City Council at the May 23, 2005 meeting. Neal introduced Rick Everest for questions. There were no comments from the public. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Aho, to close the Public Hearing. Case noted this was not the kind of project he would solicit for Eden Prairie, but the zoning is pre-existing. He asked about noise, dust, and water quality studies. Jeremiah said these were submitted. Everest explained that although the initial volume is anticipated to be 50,000 tons, the studies were done at the maximum build out rate of 300,000 tons. The impact on water quality from crushing granite is minimal. Rock is loaded wet to reduce dust. Case noted there is a connection to Purgatory Creek. Butcher asked for an idea of the volume and number of trains. Everest explained a 40-car train holds about 4,000 tons. The stock area only holds 6,000 tons. The number of trains coming in depends on how fast the aggregate goes out to customers. About half will go directly to the Midwest Asphalt plant on the neighboring property. The rest will be trucked out. There might be two trains a CITY COUNCIL MINUTES June 21,2005 Page 4 week at first depending on demand. The train comes in, stops, and is unloaded for eight hours so there are not a lot of rail cars banging about. There will be a siding so rail traffic is not disrupted. Butcher asked about the local availability of aggregate and who would buy it. Everest confirmed local supplies are dwindling. It would be used primarily for road construction to make concrete and asphalt. Aho asked how many trucks would be leaving the facility. Everest said that depends upon volume. Half the volume would be used at the asphalt plant and half trucked out. Each truck holds 27 tons. Everest said his company has had 600 trucks a day out of its Converse City and Sioux City plants without complaint. The site is small but workable due to the proximity of the railroad and arterial roads to keep trucks out of neighborhoods. Tyra-Lukens asked about debris trails from trucks and operations noise. Jeremiah said Everest's operation would follow the same operating hours as Midwest Asphalt, Monday—Saturday 7 to 7 p.m. They could get a variance for 10 days each year with prior notice. Regarding debris, Everest said his trucks do not leak material as much as drag out mud. Since the site will be paved, mud will be less of an issue here. Everest said he sweeps at his other locations and agreed to sweep Industrial Drive as needed. MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Aho,to adopt the Resolution for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 2.74 acres; approve 1st Reading of the Ordinance for Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers, and Zoning District Amendment in the I-Gen Zoning District on 2.74 acres; adopt the Resolution for Preliminary Plat on 2.74 acres into one lot; and direct Staff to prepare a Development Agreement incorporating Staff and Board recommendations and Council conditions, including conformance to Midwest Asphalt's operating hours and street sweeping. Motion carried 4-0. B. MCCALL BLUFF by McCall Construction Company. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 4.89 acres; Planned Unit Development District Review and Zoning District Amendment in the Rural Zoning District on 4.89 acres and Preliminary Plat of 4.89 acres into two lots. Location: 9997 Dell Road (Resolution for PUD Concept Review, Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Amendment,Resolution for Preliminary Plat) Neal noted is a continued item from the June 7, 2005 meeting. The hearing was delayed in order for the applicant to provide information indicating there would be access to both the existing and proposed lot across property owned by Turnbull to the west of the site. The opinion letter from Thomas L. Owens (attorney for McCall) dated June 15, 2005 declares that neither the terms of the easement or CITY COUNCIL MINUTES June 21, 2005 Page 5 subsequent instrument evidence any intention to limit the benefit, use, manner of use, or scope of the easement. Jeremiah explained a letter had been delivered this evening from Turnbull's representative disputing right to access and opposing the subdivision, so the access continues to be disputed. Rosow explained the City originally asked for a title commitment from the title insurance company, but when the title company would not provide it, the City asked the applicant for a title opinion from a title attorney (Owens). Rosow said his review of the law supports the finding of Owens' letter. An individual who has benefited by an easement in the past can continue to benefit so long as they do not unduly burden the area. The letter from the Turnbull's attorney (Olson) asserts his client has consistently restricted access over the past four years. Rosow said the title information shows there is a good faith access to a public street for this subdivision—it is not "landlocked." He said Owens is not a regular representative of the McCalls and his opinion can be relied on. The Turnbulls could seek a continuance to submit a competing title opinion, but the current letter is not arguing on that basis. Rosow said the Council had three options: proceed with the hearing and act, hold the hearing, close it, and delay action, or hold the hearing open and continue it through the first meeting in July to meet the 120-day deadline. Case asked if Rosow thought Owens' letter was valid. Rosow said it is the property owner's burden to prove access; that is why he asked the owner to get a private opinion and then reviewed it rather than doing the work himself. However, he did agree with it. Tyra-Lukens said holding the hearing open seemed reasonable. She asked if there was any hope of resolution or compromise, or if title search. opinions would decide the matter. If the Council acted, would the Court see that as favorable to either party? Rosow said City ordinances and court actions between neighbors are two separate issues. It might be used by the McCalls but would not be very prejudicial. Case suggested holding the public hearing now and Tyra-Lukens opened it. Steve Turnbull addressed the Council on behalf of his father, who lives in Hot Springs, Arkansas. He said he had just received the title document today. He noted the McCalls had gotten continuances and asked for time to present his family's opinion. He stated the easement was given illegally because the easement giver did not own the land. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES June 21,2005 Page 6 Tim McLaughlin, neighbor to the east, also addressed the Council. He stated concerns about the setback to his property line and whether the plat was accurate. Jeremiah said the survey and preliminary plat were submitted. There is a variance on the setback for both lots—seven feet for Lot 1, and 15 feet for Lot 2. The standard is a minimum 10-foot setback with a 25-foot total distance for single- family homes. The plat is accurate and would be confirmed before construction. Jeff McCall explained there had been a discrepancy on the lot line a month ago, which he had explained to McLaughlin. He had made an error but the survey and lot are now verified. Regarding the easement, McCall said other homes to the east already use this easement, and he has followed the parameters of past subdivisions. He said he has suffered delays due to this issue. McLaughlin reiterated concerns that the house is too close to his property line. Jeremiah clarified the 7-foot variance is between the existing house on the McCall property and the new house. The 15-foot setback is on McLaughlin's side. Aho asked about setbacks of adjacent property. Jeremiah said the waivers granted are similar to the Woosalsink proposal. Neal noted the 120-day period expires July 6th so the Council will need to act at the next meeting. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher, to continue the public hearing until July 5th. Motion carried 4-0. IX. PAYMENT OF CLAIMS MOTION: Aho moved, seconded by Butcher, to approve Payment of Claims as submitted. The motion carried on a roll call vote with Aho,Butcher, Case,and Tyra- Lukens voting "aye." X. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS XI. PETITIONS,REQUESTS AND COMMUNICATIONS A. PETITION FOR HORSESHOE PIT AND SAND VOLLEY BALL COURT AT EDEN VALLEY PARK Neal noted this item had received petitions for and against, hence the Council discussion. Lambert explained City staff received a petition from neighbors of the Eden Valley Park to construct a sand volleyball and horseshoe pit at their park.Neighbors who wanted the area relocated further from their homes opposed CITY COUNCIL MINUTES June 21,2005 Page 7 the plan. However,the alternative site is not workable. Seventy-seven people were for the addition and ten against. Case noted parking is limited in the area and asked about games. Lambert said there would be no league activity, only by neighbors who would most likely walk. Case agreed the facility is so far from the road that it would be low-use. Tyra- Lukens acknowledged Staff s efforts to accommodate the neighbors who opposed the plan. Lambert noted three trees would be relocated for better screening. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Aho, to authorize staff to construct a sand volleyball court and horseshoe pit in the northwest corner of Eden Valley Park the summer of 2005. Motion carried 4-0. XII. REPORTS OF ADVISORY BOARDS & COMMISSIONS XIII. APPOINTMENTS XIV. REPORTS OF OFFICERS A. REPORTS OF COUNCILMEMBERS 1. Flyine Cloud Airport—Councilmember Case Case reiterated the reasons to seek more formal and ongoing communication with MAC, including post 9-11 security, lower usage at the airport, lost tax revenue on airport land, and new FAA directives. Issues worth discussing could include status of expansion plans, FAA impacts, status of environmental issues,reliever airport closures and alternatives, sewer and water issues with the Pioneer Trail expansion, and process for resident complaints about breaches of flight times or patterns. He proposed quarterly meetings to discuss such issues. Aho asked why a motion is needed. The City has a legal agreement. Tyra- Lukens said three Staff letters have not received a response. A motion carries more weight. Neal noted an audit of the MAC agreement, requested by the Council two months ago, would be ready in September or October. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher, to direct Staff to contact MAC regarding ongoing discussion between the City and MAC. Motion carried 4-0. B. REPORT OF CITY MANAGER CITY COUNCIL MINUTES June 21,2005 Page 8 1. 2004 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report(CAFR) William Lauer,Principal of the independent auditing firm of Malloy, Montague,Karnowski,Radosevich,&Co.,P.A made a presentation of the financial report. He noted there were no control or compliance issues and praised the condition of the City's records. In general,the City's financial conditions and control procedures are sound. At Staff request,a few changes have been made to the financial statements and the way funds are structured, including putting capital projects together with utilities,breaking out an enterprise fund from water and sewer,breaking out an equipment revolving fund out of the general fund, and recording TIP funding as special revenue funding. These accounting changes account for most of the substantial changes in fund balances and expenditures vs. last year. Lauer noted that despite lack of other revenue,the City's tax rate remains below the statewide average.He attributed this to a strong industrial/ commercial base. Expenditures are average. Despite continuing development,capital outlays and debt service remain below state averages. Lauer said the City's$5.1 million revenue stabilization fund puts it in a very strong position to buffer against cuts in state aid. The City budgets its tax revenues very conservatively at 95%, but revenue is very steady. Adherence to the budget was excellent. Expenditures are very stable year to year. Lauer noted the liquor fund as a valuable asset to the City. Tyra-Lukens noted this is the third firm to give the City an unqualified opinion on the audit. Butcher praised both the report and City management and highlighted the report's praise of the City's revenue stabilization fund. These funds need to increase as a City grows and are especially important to maintain right now,given the status of the State budget. MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Aho, to accept the 2004 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report(CAFR). Motion carried 4-0. 2. City Manager Performance Pay Tyra-Lukens noted the City Council went into closed session following adjournment of its last meeting to continue the evaluation of the City Manager and to consider the award of performance pay, which matter was held in abeyance pending passage of legislation increasing the salary cap applicable to public employees including the City Manager. Based on the City Manager's performance during the past year the City Council determined to award to the City Manager the full amount of the performance pay, 3.5%of salary. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES June 21,2005 Page 9 MOTION: Case moved, seconded by Butcher, to award the City Manager performance pay in the amount of 3.5 percent of his annual salary, effective August 1, 2005. Motion carried 4-0. C. REPORT OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR D. REPORT OF PARKS AND RECREATION DIRECTOR 1. Sports Facilities Committee Proposed Revisions to the Priority Use Po icy Lambert noted the Sports Facilities Committee began meeting on a monthly basis in January 2005. The group consisted of representatives of nine sports, a school representative, and three parks representatives to discuss facility use and overuse and develop a policy. A similar City document created in 1997 was the most published and republished document by the State. It's an issue many cities struggle with. Lambert explained the document serves as the final word to allocate facilities, which are in high demand by organized leagues as well as new leagues, churches, intercity teams, etc. It was challenging to get consensus and be fair to all. Butcher expressed faith that the process produced the best possible result. Tyra-Lukens thanked the committee and Lambert for their work. MOTION: Butcher moved, seconded by Case,to approve the proposed revisions to the Priority Use Policy as submitted by the Sports Facilities Committee and amended by the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission on June 6, 2005. Motion carried 4-0. E. REPORT OF PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR F. REPORT OF POLICE CHIEF G. REPORT OF FIRE CHIEF H. REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY XV. OTHER BUSINESS XVI. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Aho moved, seconded by Case, to adjourn the meeting at 9:05 p.m.. Motion carried 4-0. ITEM NO.: V.D. UNAPPROVED MINUTES TOWN MEETING REGARDING PROPOSED PARK REFERENDUM WEDNESDAY,JUNE 22,2005 7:00 P.M., CITY CENTER Council Chambers 8080 Mitchell Road CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS: Nancy Tyra-Lukens,Brad Aho,Ron Case, Philip Young PARKS AND RECREATION BOARD: Ian Mackey,John Brill, Jeff Gerst STAFF: Scott Neal, City Manager, Bob Lambert, Director,Parks and Recreation, Stuart Fox, Manager of Parks and Natural Resources RECORDING SECRETARY: Allison Burr I. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Nancy Tyra-Lukens called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Councilmember Sherry Butcher was absent from tonight's meeting. II. OVERVIEW OF PROPOSED PARK REFERENDUM Mayor Tyra-Lukens introduced the town meeting by discussing the failed parks referendum of May 11, 2004. Subsequent research indicated there continue to be wants among the community with regard to parks and recreation;the proposed new referendum will have differences from last time. Bob Lambert initiated discussion of the proposed park referendum by citing statistics of the previous referendum effort. The referendum called for$22.5 million for acquisition, development, and improvement of land and facilities for public recreation. The question failed, with 56 percent voting no and 43 percent voting yes. The City subsequently did random a sample survey of those who voted to ascertain what they voted and why they voted that way. The facts learned from voters on the referendum: 88 percent of the no voters and 77 percent of the yes voters thought a single question was a bad idea. 92 percent of no voters and 45 percent of yes voters were not in favor of an outdoor aquatic center. 78 percent of no voters and 55 percent of yes voters did not want the City to come back with a smaller aquatic center. The major reasons people voted against the referendum: 48 percent cited cost; 35 percent, lack of choices; 29 percent, lack of need, particularly for outdoor aquatic center. TOWN MEETING REGARDING PROPOSED PARK REFERENDUM June 22, 2005 Page 2 Survey results showed there remains support for projects voters would support in a future referendum: 72 percent want bicycle and pedestrian trails; 66 percent want improvements to the Community Center; 65 percent desire replacement of old warming houses at skating rinks; 63 percent want park shelters with restrooms in parks; 61 percent support providing matching funds for other associations to help pay for improvements to facilities; 61 percent support Flying Cloud ball field expansion; 59 percent support acquiring additional park and open space land. Lambert continued,the Council is considering another referendum based on 69 percent of all voters indicating support for it. The survey suggested the Council should: offer another referendum within a year or two; hold the referendum in November in a normal election year; hold it in a year the school district is not also considering a referendum; give the voters choices on different issues rather than a single question; do not consider an outdoor aquatic center on the referendum. The Council is now considering four questions on a new referendum, the first of which is a$6.65 million addition to the Community Center. The addition would expand the fitness center and locker rooms, add team rooms, build a multi-use gymnasium, indoor walking/running track, multi-use room for teens and seniors; improve access to the facility and expanded concession and lobby areas. The average cost of this portion is $21 per year for the average home in Eden Prairie,valued at$310,000. The second question on the proposed referendum is a swimming pool addition for$3.33 million. This would create a zero-depth entry warm water recreation pool as well as deepening the east end of the existing pool for competitive swimming. The tax impact of this question would be $10 per year for an average Eden Prairie home,valued at $310,000. The third question on the proposed referendum is $4.695 million for park acquisition, development, and improvements. This would include a major renovation of Forest Hills Park and Edenvale Park. A park shelter was burned earlier this year at Forest Hills Park, and it has always been the subject of vandalism, so the City wants to move it. At Edenvale, the two parking lots will be reduced to one;the skating rink will be moved and a soccer field added. A permanent park shelter will be built at Prairie View Park. The same expansion of Flying Cloud ball fields will be proposed as was last year. This question would also provide for the acquisition of lands near Birch Island Woods Conservation Area. Also provided would be new playground equipment at several parks around the City. Typically, Parks and Recreation is budgeted $50,000 each year for improvements to meet safety standards. This referendum could take care of all this at once. The referendum would also renovate tennis courts at several parks. The tax impact would be $15 per year on a typical Eden Prairie home, valued at$310,000. The fourth question on the proposed referendum would provide for$2 million in trail improvements. There are currently $5 million in trail projects right now. This $2 million would take the City out three or four years. The City would finish 8-foot asphalt trails and sidewalks in the downtown Eden Prairie Area. This money could also be used for a TOWN MEETING REGARDING PROPOSED PARK REFERENDUM June 22, 2005 Page 3 trail along T.H. 4 north of Purgatory Creek. The tax impact would be $6 on an average Eden Prairie home, valued at $310,000. All four questions would equate to a$52 per year, or$4.33 per month,tax increase in an average Eden Prairie home. A recommendation will be made on June 27 h to the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission. On July 5, 2005,the City Council will make its decision on the proposed park referendum. Mayor Tyra-Lukens opened up the floor for public comment and question. III. OVERVIEW OF PROPOSED PARK REFERENDUM Geoffrey Ferster, 8056 Timer Lake Drive, commented the Community Center is a great value but is used a lot by high school kids; a new walking track may have a similar situation. City people do not have comparable access to the high school facilities. Can that be changed? Ferster also requested clarification regarding the expansion of changing rooms and also expressed concern about the abuse of tennis courts by bicyclists. Can there be a policing system in place? Lambert responded there is a City/Eden Prairie Schools facility committee with the purpose of looking at these issues, so both parties have use, and maximum use of all facilities is achieved. Regarding the new walking track, it is really needed. Eden Prairie High School is the largest in the state and their facilities are used all the time by students. But he offered to bring the issue before the joint committee. Regarding the locker rooms, Lambert explained they will be four times larger than currently, plus the addition of a family locker room. Finally, Lambert indicated the City has six Park Rangers and a full- time patrolman assigned to the parks to watch for abuses. He encouraged residents to report abuses. Call 911 and the police will respond and talk to the kids. Ferster asked an additional question about the income generated from the Community Center. Lambert responded it generates about$800,000 in income annually. It costs $lmillion to operate. The ice rinks pay for themselves; the pools do not. With the addition, there will be no additional operating deficits. Mayor Tyra-Lukens added increasing the locker room size by four times will get them much closer to being adequate. Dick Feerick, 13995 St. Andrew Drive, commended the Council on its progress and work on the issues. He stated there should only be two questions on the referendum, not four, one for$10 million and one for$6 million. Roger Person, 6937 Edendale Boulevard, stated there were about six things in the Power Point presentation that were supported by the voters on the survey. What would the cost of just those projects be? Also,what are the associated operating costs for these issues? Person stated the school board never reveals operating costs with bond issues. TOWN MEETING REGARDING PROPOSED PARK REFERENDUM June 22, 2005 Page 4 Lambert responded everything except the $3 million pool is supported by the survey respondents, but the City does have to address the pool issue. Lambert stated Eden Prairie has the finest competitive swimming programs in the state, and there needs to be a resolution of the conflict between competitive and recreation users of the pool. Everything else supported by the survey respondents is on the proposed referendum. The survey results indicated voters want a choice, and that is why it has been broken into four questions. Regarding operations costs, depending on what the City Council decides on whether to move forward with the referendum, the City will provide brochures to all homes with all the financial details on the referendum including operating costs. Deb Hetherington, 7252 Sunshine Drive, addressed several comments to the Council regarding Edenvale Park. She stated the park needs a new playground, warming house and improved paved parking lot. The current paved parking provides for only four or five cars, and the gravel portions are used mostly by school buses. Additionally, a beehive needs to be taken care of. Hetherington commented the park does not need major renovation, especially when it calls for baseball field removal. Kids use baseball fields more than anything else in the park. Hetherington asked what is driving the replacement of the baseball field with a soccer field. She stated if the ball field is removed, she will vote against the referendum as will others in the neighborhood. Lambert replied the reason for the change in fields is two-fold: Eden Prairie is in greater need of soccer fields than baseball fields; and the linear nature of the park lends itself easily to having a soccer field, not so much a baseball field. The City is providing a backstop for neighborhood baseball games. Lambert continued he will bring this issue to the attention of the Parks Commission. Council Member Ron Case asked Hetherington if providing a temporary backstop would be sufficient for those wanting to play baseball at Edenvale. Hetherington responded neighborhood kids play less soccer than baseball, so it does not make sense to spend money on major renovation when it is currently meeting the needs of the neighborhood. Council Member Case again addressed Hetherington, stating the city has to look at the needs of soccer and lacrosse players. He also asked if the neighborhood needs can be meet with a backstop, will that satisfy her neighbors. Hetherington replied it does not make sense to destroy a park if it is already functional the way it is. Major Tyra-Lukens added the City does have to consider the growing sport of lacrosse. Parks and Recreation will have to consider these issues. Jeffrey Strate, 15021 Summerhill Drive, addressed the Council regarding Edenvale Park. He suggested the City re-look at the plan since it is heavily used, especially by low- income families in the area. The City should cater to them as well as others. Strate encouraged the City to contact residents in the area to ask their opinion, as the park should serve the neighborhood before serving the entire city. Strate continued, since part of Edenvale is wooded, the City should consider winding a trail through the wooded area. Regarding the plan for Forest Hills Park, Strate stated the plan is pretty good, although TOWN MEETING REGARDING PROPOSED PARK REFERENDUM June 22, 2005 Page 5 citizens are reluctant to spend money on something that may not be needed, and $300,000 for a warming house is a high price. Regarding the Community Center, Strate hopes the City has a subsidy plan in place to open the rink and pool to lower-income families. He also expressed his appreciation for the survey performed after the last referendum. However, there will be more voters this November and the City has to figure out what the motivated voting public is in favor of. Finally, the park improvements are concentrated in north-central Eden Prairie, and Strate questioned if this plan can be sold to voters throughout the entire city. Pam Erickson, 16845 Terrey Pine Drive, addressed the Council regarding Round Lake. She stated it has been a sick lake for many years and has heard a$750,000 investment could solve the problem. Is this solution being overlooked in the parks referendum? Major Tyra-Lukens thanked Erickson for bringing up the issue and asked Lambert if Parks and Recreation has looked at this. Lambert stated two weeks ago the City Council approved a study to see if the $750,000 treatment is the way to solve the problem and to ascertain if there is a cheaper solution. There is concern about having to add chemicals to the natural resource forever. Major Tyra-Lukens asked Lambert if it is too preliminary to include Round Lake on the referendum, prior to the study being completed. Lambert responded affirmatively. Geoffrey Ferster addressed the Council again, asking if this referendum is actually almost a stealth school referendum. Perhaps the City should use this as a bargaining chip with the school. Also, Ferster asked if there was insurance on the burned warming house and if the showers will be expanded in the Community Center as well as the locker rooms. Lambert, responding to Ferster's comments on a stealth referendum, stated years ago the School Board sued the City Council. Fortunately relations between the two governing bodies have improved and new members have decided to look at what is best for everyone. Round Lake Park is a great campus for the high school as well as a great park for the City, and there are many other examples of City-school cooperation.' The City thinks it is good that sharing occurs, and it is a good use of taxpayer-supported facilities. Regarding the warming house, Lambert indicated it was worth $2,500 which was below the amount at which insurance kicks in. He also stated the showers at the Community Center will be expanded. Jeffrey Strate again addressed the Council, stating the voters on the referendum will want a say as to what the projects will look like and how specific funds will be spent. Council Member Case stated when the voters approve a referendum,they should know they will still have a say in how the money is spent. He also addressed a comment to Deb Hetherington, encouraging her and her neighbors to vote yes on the referendum, and they will also be a part of the subsequent planning process. TOWN MEETING REGARDING PROPOSED PARK REFERENDUM June 22, 2005 Page 6 City Manager Scott Neal added the questions on the referendum will be very general and will not list specific parks. Basil Wissner, 8293 Mitchell Road, addressed the Council regarding senior voter participation on the referendum. He stated there are seniors who did not vote last May and will be asking him what is on the upcoming referendum. They will want multiple questions rather than one and believes seniors will support it if they know the details. IV. ADJOURNMENT Major Tyra-Lukens adjourned the meeting at 8:05 p.m. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Consent Calendar July 52005 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: VI. A. Christy Weigel,Police/ Clerk's License Application List Community Investigations hit These licenses have been approved by the department heads responsible for the licensed activity. Raffle fganization: Bloomington Convention& Visitors Bureau Foundation Place: lrmpic Hills Country Club Date: July 18, 2005 New Liquor License Licensee name: Kabobi,LLC DBA: Kabobi Amendment to Liquor License 2AM Closing Permit-Renewal Champps fkrating Corporation DBA: Champps Restaurant Mar - 1 - CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Consent Agenda July 5, 2005 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: VI. B. Community Eagle Ridge at Hennepin Village 6tn Development/Planning Addition Janet Jeremiah Michael Franzen Requested Action Move to: • Approve 2nd Reading of the Ordinance for PUD District Review and rezoning from Rural to R1-9.5; and • Approve the Developer Agreement for Hennepin Village Limited Partnership Synopsis This project was initially approved for 41 single family lots. The plan has been revised to 40 lots. The developer agreement includes a provision for affordable housing as covenants and restrictions with a term of December 31, 2045 with restrictions on price and transferability. The agreement includes disclosure statement for the airport and interior noise mitigation. Attachments 1. Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning District Change 2. Summary Ordinance for PUD Zoning Change 3. Developer Agreement EAGLE RIDGE AT HENNEPIN VILLAGE - SIX CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 10-2005-PUD-6-2005 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE,MINNESOTA,REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND IN EACH DISTRICT,AND, ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99 WHICH,AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE,MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1. That the land which is the subject of this Ordinance(hereinafter,the "land") is legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof. Section 2. That action was duly initiated proposing that the land be removed from the Rural Zoning District and be placed in the Planned Unit Development R1-9.5 Zoning District 10- 2005-PUD-6-2005 (hereinafter "PUD-6-2005-R1- 9.5"). Section 3. The land shall be subject to the terms and conditions of that certain Development Agreement dated as of April 20, 2005, entered into between Hennepin Village Ltd Partnership, and the City of Eden Prairie, (hereinafter"Development Agreement"). The Development Agreement contains the terms and conditions of PUD-6-2005-R1-9.5, and are hereby made a part hereof. Section 4. The City Council hereby makes the following findings: A. PUD-6-2005-R1-9.5 is not in conflict with the goals of the Comprehensive Guide Plan of the City. B. PUD-6-2005-R1-9.5 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-6-2005-R1-9.5 are justified by the design of the development described therein. D. PUD-6-2005-R 1-9.5 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 Y P is hereby adopted and the land shall be and hereby is proposal � Y removed from the Rural Zoning District, and placed in the R1-9.5 Zoning District and shall be included hereafter in the Planned Unit Development PUD-6-2005-R1-9.5 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 7tn day of June, 2005, 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 5`n day of July, 2005. ATTEST: Kathleen Porta, City Clerk Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie Sun Current on EXHIBIT A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT - CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 10-2005-PUD-6-2005 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE,MINNESOTA,REMOVING CERTAIN LAND FROM ONE ZONING DISTRICT AND PLACING IT IN ANOTHER, AMENDING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF LAND IN EACH DISTRICT,AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE CITY CODE CHAPTER 1 AND SECTION 11.99, WHICH,AMONG OTHER THINGS, CONTAIN PENALTY PROVISIONS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE,MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Summary: This ordinance allows rezoning of land located south of Charlson Road and east of Spring Road from the Rural Zoning District to the R1-9.5 Zoning District on 16.93 acres. 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 Porta, City Clerk Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie Sun Current on , 2005. (A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from City Clerk.) DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT EAGLE RIDGE AT HENNEPIN VILLAGE 6TH ADDITION THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into as of July 5, 2005, 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 11Cityll; WHEREAS, Developer has applied for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 16.9 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review on 16.9 acres, Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-9.5 on 16.93 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 16.9 acres into 41 single family lots and 4, legally described as, Exhibit A, the"A (the"Property"); WHEREAS, the Property and other land was the subject of that certain development agreement entitled "Development Agreement Hennepin Village sites C and D, Office and Neighborhood Commercial made and entered into as of May 5, 20051 by HENNEPIN VILLAGE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a Minnesota limited partnership and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as "Sites C and D Development Agreement") filed April 9, 2004 as Document Number 3944535 with the Office of the Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County, Minnesota; as amended by that certain Development Agreement Hennepin Office to Residential made and entered into as of May 17, 2005 by and between the same parties (hereinafter referred to as "Office to Residential Development Agreement"). The Sites C and D Development Agreement and the Office to Residential Development Agreement are collectively referred to as the "Amended Development Agreement/" WHEREAS, the Property was subject of that certain development agreement entitled "Development Agreement Hennepin Office to Residential entered into as of May 15, 2005 by HENNEPIN VILLAGE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a Minnesota limited partnership and the CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, a municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as "Office to Residential Development Agreement") NOW,THEREFORE, in consideration of the City adopting Resolution No. 1 for Planned Unit Development Concept Review, Ordinance No. for Planned Unit Development District Review and Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-9.5, and Resolution No. for Preliminary Plat, Developer agrees to develop the Property as follows: 1. Developer shall develop the Property in conformance with the materials revised and stamp dated June 7, 2005, reviewed and approved by the City Council on June 7, 2005, and attached hereto as the Plans and identified in Exhibit B. 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 development of, or construction on the Property 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 Property 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. The materials and colors must be consistent with the Hennepin Village Design Manual dated November 13, 2001, by Westwood Professional Services, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as Design Framework Manual" 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: 2 A. FINAL GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN: Developer agrees that the grading and drainage plan contained in the Plans is conceptual. Prior to the release of a land alteration permit for any portion of the property, Developer shall submit and obtain the City Engineer's written approval of a final grading and drainage plan for the area included within the requested permit. The final grading and drainage plan shall include pond designs for wet basins with adequate storage for the calculated NURP and 100 year flood events, 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. B. Developer shall employ the design professional who prepared the final grading plan. The design professional shall monitor construction for conformance to the approved final grading plan and City erosion control policy. The design professional shall provide a final report to the City certifying completion of the grading in conformance the approved final grading plan and City erosion control policy. C. EROSION CONTROL PLAN: Prior to issuance of a land alteration permit, Developer shall submit to the City Engineer and obtain City Engineer's written approval of an erosion control plan for the area to be graded. 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 ponds during construction. Developer shall provide preconstruction and post construction surveys for evaluation by City. 7. IRRIGATION PLAN: Prior to building permit issuance, Developer shall submit to the City Planner and receive the City Planner's written approval of a plan for irrigation of the landscaped areas for each building site 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 occupancy permit issuance. 3 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 each building site on the Property. 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. Prior to issuance of the occupancy permits Developer shall complete implementation of the approved landscape plan in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C. The bond furnished by Developer may be provided by the landscape contractor provided the City Planner approves said landscape bond as provided above, and provided that the rights of the City as obligee under such bond are not impaired or affected in any manner by any default or failure of the Developer to perform any condition or obligation under or pursuant to the Developer's contract with the landscape contractor. 9. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS: Developer agrees that the development of the Property will occur in a manner meeting all applicable noise, vibration, dust and dirt, smoke, odor and glare laws and regulations. 10. RETAINING WALLS: Prior to issuance by the City of any permit for grading or construction on the Property, Developer shall submit to the Chief Building Official, and obtain the Chief Building Official's written approval of detailed plans for the retaining walls identified on the grading plan in the Plans. These plans shall include details with respect to the height, type of materials, and method of construction to be used for the retaining walls. Developer shall complete implementation of the approved retaining wall plan in accordance with the terms and conditions of Exhibit C, attached hereto, prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for structures on the Property. 1.1. 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 convey access easements for such sidewalks 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 on the west side of Laitris Lane from Charlson Road to Junegrass Lane as depicted in the Plans. 4 B. An eight-foot wide bituminous trail to be located on the south side of Charlson Road from Liatris Lane to T.H. 212 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 Property. 12. SIGNS: Developer agrees that for each sign which requires a permit by Eden Prairie City Code, Section 11.70, Developer shall file with the City Planner and receive the City Planner's written approval of an application for a sign permit. The application shall include a complete description of the sign and a sketch showing the size, location, the manner of construction, and other such information as necessary to inform the City of the kind, size, material construction, and location of any such sign, consistent with the sign plan shown on the Plans and in accordance with the requirements of City Code, Section 11.70, Subdivision 5a. 13. 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 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. 14. TREE REPLACEMENT: Tree replacement required is 784 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 784 caliper inches. This approved plan shall include 86 replacement shade trees of a 4-inch diameter minimum size and 108 conifer trees with a 10-foot minimum height. Prior to issuance of any grading 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 prior to occupancy permit issuance. 15. DESIGN FRAMEWORK MANUAL: The Design Framework Manual shall be applicable to the Property. Developer agrees to implement the Design Framework Manual and complete implementation prior to occupancy permit. 16. AFFORDABLE HOUSING: Developer shall maintain eight of the individual lots comprising the Property as Affordable Housing Units as defined below. Prior to the release of the Plat for any portion of the Property Developer shall present to the Community Development Director for her written approval Declarations for a 5 common interest community created under or governed by Chapter 515B, Minnesota Statutes, governing the Property which Declarations shall (i) identify which lots shall be reserved for the Affordable Housing Units and(ii) incorporate the terms of this paragraph 16. The Developer shall file the Declaration as approved by the Community Development Director with the Registrar of Titles for Hennepin County at the same time as the final plat for the Property is recorded. No conveyance of any portion of the Property to any third party shall be made unless the approved Declarations are recorded against the Property. No building permit shall be issued for any portion of the Property until Developer provides to the City proof of the filing of the approved Declaration 16.1 Definition. For purposes of this section, "Affordable Housing Units" is defined as housing units that are affordable to individuals or families whose income does not exceed 80%of the area median income in the year of purchase. Additionally, "affordable"means a residence that's monthly payments do not exceed 30%of the monthly income of the individuals or families referenced in the preceding sentence. 16.2 Price. Developer shall charge no more than what is determined to be affordable by the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency's standards, using standard underwriting practice, for each Affordable Housing Unit, adjustable yearly. For 2005, that amount is $193,700.00. 16.3 Restriction on Transfer. No Affordable Housing Unit shall be sold or transferred except to individuals or families who meet the requirements of 16.1 supra and for a Price no more than that determined at the time of sale pursuant to 16.2 supra. 16.4. Term. This section shall maintain in force until at least December 31, 2045. The City reserves the option to extend the term at that time. 17. PRIOR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT: As to the Property this Agreement supersedes in its entirety the Amended Development Agreement. 18. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT: Prior to the release of the final plat for the Property, an assessment agreement, in the form and substance as attached in Exhibit E, shall be signed by the owner(s) of the Property with the City for trunk sewer and water assessments on an assessable area of 12.9 acres in the amount of$74,626.50. Or Hennepin Village Limited Partner ship may pay off the assessment prior to release of the final plat. 19 INTERIOR NOISE MITIGATION PLAN: Prior to issuance of each residential building permit for the Property, Developer shall submit to the City Building Official, and obtain the City Building Official's written approval of plans that establish that each residence is designed to meet the structural performance standards for residential interior sound levels, depicted in Table 4 of 6 the Metropolitan Council Land Use Compatibility Guidelines for Aircraft Noise, adopted January 14, 2004. 20. DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION: No lot within the plat of the Hennepin Village shall be sold or transferred to the first intended residential homeowner, nor an agreement entered into to construct a home on any lot within the plat of Hennepin Village unless the Developer or its successors and/or assigns personally delivers prior to execution of a purchase agreement or an agreement to construct a home on the lot (whichever comes first), a disclosure statement in form and substance as attached as Exhibit F hereto regarding the Flying Cloud Airport and the planned extension of the East/West Connection Road to Eden Prairie Road. If the initial purchaser of a lot from the Developer is not the initial intended homeowner of a residence to be constructed on the lot, Developer shall require by contractual obligation with its initial purchaser to deliver the disclosure statement to the initial intended residential homeowner prior to execution by the intended homeowner of any agreement to construct a home or agreement to purchase a lot (whichever comes first). 7 Hennepin Village Limited Partnership CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE a Minnesota limited partnership By: The Pemtom Land Company Its: General Partner Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor By: Its: Scott H.Neal, City Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 2005, 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 day of , 2005, by The Pemtom Land Company, the General Partner, of Hennepin Village Limited Partnership, a Minnesota limited partnership, by , its on behalf of the partnership. Notary Public 8 EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION Outlot L of Eagle Ridge at HENNEPIN VILLAGE FOUR, according to the recorded lat thereof Hennepin County Minnesota That part of Tract D, Registered Land Survey no. 1667, lying northeasterly of Registered Land Survey No. 1730, Hennepin County, Minnesota and lying westerly of the following described line: Beginning at the northeast corner of said Tract D: thence South 89 degrees 09 minutes 06 seconds West, assumed bearing along the north line of said Tract D, a distance of 2161.87 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South 25 degrees 11 minutes 51 seconds East, a distance of 126.36 feet; thence southeasterly along a tangential curve concave to the northeast, having a radius of 735.00 feet, an included angle of 21 degrees 53 minutes 23 seconds for an arc length of 280.81 feet to the northeasterly line of Registered Land Survey No. 1730 and said line there terminating. 9 EXHIBIT B PLANS: Preliminary Plat Site Plan dated May 6, 2005 by Westwood Professional Services, Inc Preliminary Grading,Drainage &Erosion Control Plan dated May 6, 2005 by Westwood Professional Services, Inc Preliminary Utility Plan dated May 6, 2005 by Westwood Professional Services, Inc Preliminary Landscape Plan dated May 6, 2005 by Westwood Professional Services, Inc Proposed Land Use Plan revised office area dated May 18, 2005 by Westwood Professional Services, Inc Architectural Repetition Control dated May 19, 2005 by Westwood Professional Services, Inc Architectural Elevations, pages 1-30 dated May 6, 2005 by Ryland Homes 10 EXHIBIT C 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. 11. 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 Rezoning, Site Plan review and/or Guide 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 owners, their successors, and their assigns of the Property herein described. 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, except: 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. 11 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, 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 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 and 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 made herein, City may 12 r be without an adequate remedy at law. 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. XVL The City shall not issue any building permit for the construction of any building, structure, or improvement on the Property until all requirements listed in this Exhibit C have been 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 'h by 6 inch sign or decal reading "Scenic/Conservation Easement Boundary, City of Eden Prairie",will be affixed to the top of the post. 13 EXHIBIT D - 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. 1.4 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. 1, We, The Undersigned, hereby accept the terms and conditions of the Erosion Control Policy dated August 1, 1997 as set forth and agree to fully comply therewith, to the satisfaction of the City of Eden Prairie, Minnesota. By: By: Owner's Signature Applicant's Signature DEVELOPMENT NAME: Lot: Block: OWNER INFORMATION OWNER(PRINT): Address 15 EXHIBIT E AGREEMENT REGARDING SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS THIS IS AN AGREEMENT MADE THIS day of , 2005, between the City of Eden Prairie, a municipal corporation,(the "City")and a Minnesota (the "Owner"). A. The Owner holds legal and equitable title to property described as , Hennepin County, Minnesota, which property is the subject of this Agreement and is hereinafter referred to as the "Property". B. The Owner desires to develop the property in such a manner that relies upon the City's trunk utility system, including trunk sanitary sewers, trunk water mains, wells, elevated storage facilities and a water treatment plant(all of which is hereafter referred to as the "Improvement"). C. The parties hereto desire to enter into an Agreement concerning the financing of the construction of the Improvements all of which will inure to the benefit of the Property. AGREEMENTS IT IS HEREBY AGREED as follows: 1. The Owner consents to the levying of assessments against the Property in the amount of$ $74,626.50 for the Improvements. 2. The City's assessment records for the Property will show the assessments as a "pending assessment"until levied. 3. The Owner waives notice of any assessment hearing to be held at which hearing or hearings the assessment is to be considered by the City Council and thereafter approved and levied. 4. The Owner concurs that the benefit to the Property by virtue of the Improvements to be constructed exceeds the amount of the assessment to be levied against the Property. The Owner waives all rights it has by virtue of Minnesota Statute 429.081 or otherwise to challenge the amount or validity of the assessments, or the procedures used by the City in apportioning the assessments and hereby releases the City, its officers, agents and employees from any and all liability related to or arising out of the imposition or levying of the assessments. 5. This agreement shall be effective immediately 6. This Agreement may not be terminated or amended except in writing executed by both parties hereto. 16 OWNER CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE A Minnesota A Minnesota Municipal Corporation By: NOT TO BE SIGNED By: NOT TO BE SIGNED Nancy Tyra-Lukens Its Mayor 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 , 2005, by Nancy Tyra-Lukens, the Mayor, and Scott H. Neal, the City Manager, of the City of Eden Prairie, a Minnesota municipal corporation,on behalf of the corporation. Notary Public STATE OF MINNESOTA ) )ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 2005, by the a Minnesota , on behalf of the Notary Public THis INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie,MN 55344 17 EXHIBIT F HENNEPIN VILLAGE DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION Developer shall cause the following notice to be given, either from Developer itself or Developer's successors in interest to any portion of the Property, to all residential home purchasers of lots within the Property who intend to occupy a residence on such lot, prior to the execution of a purchase agreement or agreement to construct a residence on a lot within the Property, whichever occurs first: The Property is located near the Flying Cloud Airport, which is owned and operated by the Metropolitan Airports Commission. The Metropolitan Airports Commission currently has under consideration the expansion of the airport runways, which may affect the Property. Further information regarding the airport and the proposed expansion can be obtained from the Office of Airport Planner, Telephone No.: 612-726-8129 or 612- 726-81.00. The City of Eden Prairie approval of the Planned Unit Development Concept Review by Resolution No. includes the planned extension of an extension of an East/West Connection Road from Spring Road to Eden Prairie Road as identified in PUD Concept Plan dated November 2, 2001 prepared by Westwood Professional Services, Inc., which document is on file with the Community Development Services Area of the City of Eden Prairie. 18 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Consent Calendar July 5, 2005 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: I.C. # 01-5525 ITEM NO.: VI. C. Rodney Rue Award Contract for Anderson Lakes Public Works/Engineering Parkway Trail, from Franlo Road to Neill Lake Road Requested Action Move to: Award contract for the Anderson Lakes Parkway Trail project, from Franlo Road to Neill Lake Road, to Barber, Inc., in the amount of$73,080.00. Synopsis Four bids were received for this work. The lowest bid was from Barber, Inc., in the amount of $73,080.00. The other bids are shown on the attached summary of bids and recommendation letter. The lowest bid is about 23%over the Engineer's estimate of$59,115.00. Since we received four competitive bids,we believe the low bid is indicative of the value of this project in the current market and we recommend awarding the contract. We have obtained the necessary permanent and temporary easements through the condemnation process,with the temporary easement expiring in December, 2005. The project is financed through the Capital Improvement Program. Background Information This project was previously split into two separate projects, due to an easement issue along Anderson Lakes Parkway, between Franlo Road and Neill Lake Road. In 2004,the first portion of the project was completed,which included the trail construction along Anderson Lakes Parkway, east of Franlo Road and a right turn lane on Franlo Road. Attachments • HTPO Recommendation Letter 1. 1Own 11 En:1 ' rV9 ying Lae Archi ture June 23,2005 City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie, MN 55344 Attn: Rod Rue Re: Anderson Lakes Parkway Trail Phase II I.C. 01-5525 Dear Mr. Rue: Bids were received and opened at 10:00 a.m. on Thursday, June 16, 2005, for the above referenced project. The bids are shown on the attached Summary of Bids. The Engineer's Estimate was $59,115.00. The low bidder, Barber Construction Co., Inc. came in 23% above the Engineer's Estimate at$73,080.00. Based on receipt of favorable references and the necessity to complete this project prior to expiration of easements, recommendation is made that the City Council award Improvement Contract 01-5525 to Barber Construction Co., Inc. for the bid amount of $73,080.00. This recommendation considers that the City Council reserves the right to waive minor irregularities and further reserves the right to award the contract in the best interests of the City. Respectfully, HANSEN THORP PELLINEN OLSON, INC. 7510 Market Place Drive Laurie A.Jo so Principal Eden Prairie,MN 55344 952-829-0700 952-829-7806 fax LAJ:kb enclosures HANSEN - • - SUMMARY OF BIDS City of Eden Prairie I.C. 01-5525 DESCRIPTION: Anderson Lakes Parkwav Trail Phase II BIDS OPENED: June 16,2005 CONSULTING ENGINEER: Hansen Thorp Pellinen Olson Inc. CHECKED BY: Hansen Thorp Pellinen Olson Inc. BIDDER BID SECURITY TOTAL BID Barber,Inc. YES $73,080.00 Magnum Company,LLC YES $75,256.25 DMJ Corporation YES $82,557.50 Environmental Associates,Inc. YES $94,944.00 The undersigned recommend award of Contract to: Barber Construction Co.,Inc. as the lowest responsible bidder for this Improvement Contract. Laurie Johnso E. Rod Rue, E. Consulting Engineer City of Eden Prairie CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Consent Calendar July 5, 2005 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: I.C. 05-5638 ITEM NO.: VI. D. Randy Newton Approve Professional Services Public Works/Engineering Agreement with Braun Intertec for Construction Material Testing for the TH 212/Charlson Road Intersection Im rovement Project. Requested Action Move to: Approve Professional Services Agreement with Braun Intertec for Construction Material Testing for the TH 212/Charlson Road Intersection Improvement Project. Synopsis Construction material testing is a necessary component of the project inspection and is a MnDOT requirement. Background Information The TH 212/Charlson Road Intersection Improvement Project includes constructing the TH 212 /Charlson Road intersection with turn lanes, installing a traffic signal, constructing a second westbound through lane on TH 212 and constructing a pedestrian underpass. Construction on the project began in mid-June. The project includes a$50,000 Early Completion Incentive to substantially complete the project by December 9, 2005. If this date is not met the project is expected to be completed by June 2006. Financial Implications The costs of the construction material testing are the responsibility of the Eden Bluff Developer (United Properties)and will be included in the final assessment for the project. The estimated cost of the construction material testing is $21,197. A contingency of approximately $15,000 is also included in the agreement in case MnDOT is unable to complete their typical plant inspections. Attachments • Professional Services Agreement BRAU N Braun Intertec Corporation Phone: 651.487.3245 INTERTEC 245EastRoselownAvenue Fax: 651.487.1812 St.Paul,MN 55117 Web: brounintertec.com June 14,2005 Proposal SP-05-02795 Mr.J.Randall Newton,PE,PTOE City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie,MN 55344-4485 Re: Proposal for Construction Materials Testing Services,TH 212 and Charlson Road TH 212 West of Flying Cloud Airport Eden Prairie,Minnesota Dear Mr.Newton: The City of Eden Prairie is proposing to construct a new Charlson Road intersection on Trunk Highway (TH)212. Braun Intertec is pleased to furnish this proposal for construction materials testing for the proposed new intersection. We understand the field work for this project will commence on June 13 and we are prepared to begin our work as needed,following receipt of your authorization. Using Mn/DOT's"Schedule of Materials Control"and the project plans and specifications,we have attempted to estimate time and materials needed to perform the required the observations and tests. Our estimated fees for the services described above are presented and summed on the table attached to this text. Hourly and unit rates have been provided in the event that the construction schedule is extended and the efficiency of the various contractors is reduced. Based on the described scope,our fee will be about$21,197. Including the batch plant inspection contingency,we expect our fee will be about$36,592. We appreciate the opportunity to present this proposal. If you find it acceptable after your review,please sign the Signature Page of one copy and return mail or fax the entire document, including the General conditions,to us as authorization to proceed. If there are questions regarding this proposal,please call us at 651.487.3245. Sincerely, BRA TERTEC CORPORATION Paul S.Martin,PE Senior Engineer Attachment: Proposal for Construction Materials Testing Signature Page Cost Estimate Table Eden Prairie General Conditions Consult Agreement GC 1-03 Braun Providing engineering and environmental solutions since 1957 f Proposal for Construction Materials Testing Services TH 212 and Charlson Road, Eden Prairie, Minnesota Description and Understanding of Project The City of Eden Prairie is proposing to construct the new Charlson Road intersection on Trunk Highway (TH)212. SRF Consulting Group,Inc.(SRF)provided us with a set of project plans to help us estimate the scope of our proposed work. We also used the contractor's proposed schedule that was distributed at the pre-construction meeting. From the plans,we understand the new construction will include a right- turn lane,a left-turn lane and two through lanes in each direction on TH 212. The project also includes the construction of a portion of Charlson Road,a pedestrian underpass(box culvert),a walking trail and a dry pond. The new roadway construction will utilize bituminous pavements. This project will receive State-Aid funding. We understand that all field and laboratory personnel will need to be Mn/DOT certified to test and sample construction materials used for this project. The plans indicate compaction of the soils and bituminous mixtures shall be in accordance with the "Specified Density Method". Compaction of the aggregate base will be in accordance with the"Quality Compaction Method." We assumed the required concrete batch plant and bituminous batch plant observations would be performed by Mn/DOT,along with the verification testing of the aggregates and materials. We also assumed the SRF inspector will observe the placement of the concrete and prepare the weekly concrete report. The contractor's schedule indicates he will be working on: • grading for 63 days, • utilities for 48 days concurrent with grading, • box culvert for 12 days concurrent with grading, • placing select granular for 12 days,six days concurrent with grading, • placing aggregate base for 18 days, • curb and gutter for 18 days, • placing bituminous pavement for 12 days,and • concrete sidewalk and median for 9 days Proposed Scope of Services Testing During Grading and Aggregate Base Construction We assumed we would visit the site to perform density and moisture testing during grading and moisture testing during aggregate base placement an average of about twice per week. Testing on utility backfill, box culvert backfill and select granular will also take place during those site visits. i City of Eden Prairie Proposal SP-05-02795 June 14,2005 Page 3 Concrete Placement and Compression Testing We propose to provide properly-certified personnel to cast concrete cylinders to be tested for compressive strength and perform slump,air entrainment and temperature tests on the fresh concrete delivered to the site. Our responsibilities will also include monitoring the concrete for proper mix design,amount of liquid added on site and discharge time limits. We estimate there will be 16 sets of four cylinders cast for the curb and gutter,6 sets of cylinders for the sidewalks and one set for the pole bases. Those samples will be delivered to our laboratory for proper curing and compressive-strength testing. Bituminous Testing We have assumed that SRF personnel will select the core locations and the cores will be cut by the contractor. We propose to make thickness measurements and perform density testing of the companion cores and,upon receipt of the contractor's core results,provide the a completed"Incentive/Disincentive Worksheet". We have assumed these services would be needed during an estimated 10 bituminous placements(an estimated total of 20 cores). Project Supervision and Management Verbal results and recommendations will be reported to the project inspectors from SRF,and written results will be sent to you and to SRF,as soon as they become available. A professional engineer will review the results of our field observations and tests,and the results of our laboratory tests. Our engineer will also prepare summary reports,using appropriate Mn/DOT forms. The results of the testing will be distributed to the City, SRF's project manager,the general contractor and the material suppliers,as needed. Our engineer will be available for extra site visits, if needed,and will consult with you as needed to develop resolutions to any problems that may develop. Schedule We request 48 hours advance notice of construction work. We have assumed that our schedule will be coordinated by the SRF field inspector. Contingency For this proposal,we have assumed that Mn/DOT will provide the concrete and bituminous batch plant inspections and associated verification testing. We understand there is a possibility that Mn/DOT may not be able to provide all of the required batch plant inspections. As a contingency,we are prepared to offer our certified personnel to perform those inspections and to perform the verification testing. As shown on the attached cost estimate table,we estimate the cost of those services to be about$15,395. Remarks We appreciate the opportunity to present this fee estimate. Our estimated fees are based on the scope of services described and the project will be completed within the proposed schedule. City of Eden Prairie ProposalSP-05-02795 June 14,2005 Page 4 Signature Page Re: Proposal for Construction Materials Testing Services,TH 212 and Charlson Road TH 212 West of Flying Cloud Airport Eden Prairie,Minnesota Braun Intertec appreciates the opportunity to present this proposal to you. It is being presented in duplicate so if it is acceptable,the original can be retained for your records and the copy can be signed and returned to us in its entirety as written authorization to proceed or as a confirmation of you verbal authorization. We will begin the project in accordance with our schedule,upon receipt of you authorization. The estimated cost of$21,197($36,592 including the contingent batch plant inspections)presented in this proposal is based on the scope of services described in this proposal and the assumption that the proposal will be authorized within 30 days and the project will be completed within the proposed schedule. If the project is not authorized within 30 days,we may need to modify the proposal. If the project cannot be completed within the proposed schedule due to circumstances beyond our control,revising the proposal may be required for completion of the remaining tasks. Payment for services is due upon receipt of invoice,with interest added to unpaid balances after 30 days, in accordance with the attached General Conditions,which are part of this proposed contract. Authorization to Proceed: Please proceed according to the described scope of services and General Conditions. Authorizer's Firm Authorizer's Signature Authorizer Name(please print or type) Authorizer's Title Date Braun Intertec Corporation Client: City of Eden Eden Prairie Project: T H.212 and Charlson Road,Eden Prairie, MN $1n frttere Pro 1 SP 27Y 7 i s, epa�edz5/74�201J5�� - � Compaction Testing 64.50 Hours 58.00 _ 3,741.00 Site Grading 21.00 Trips at 2.50 Hours Roadways 6.00 Trips at 2.00 Hours Sample pick-up 4.50 Hours 44.00 198.00 3.00 Trips at 1.50 Hours Atterberg�Limits:LL and PL(ASTM D 4318) 1.00 Test 75.00 _ 75.00 Sieve analysis through No.200 Sieve(ASTM C 136,D 1140 or C 12.00 Tests 90.00 1,080.00 117) Mechanical(sieve)-hydrometeranasis(ASTM D 422� 1.00 Test 118.00 118.00 Constant head permeability,granula r soils,less than 10 percent 1.00 Test 241.00 241.00 fines (ASTM D 2434) Nuclear moisture-densi meter charge,per hour 64.50 Hours 10.00 645.00 Standard Proctor test ASTM D 698 4.00 Tests 126.00 480.00 Percent crushed MNNOT, 11.00 _Tests _ 55.00 605.00 Fine a re ate article sha e AASHTO T304 3.00 Tests 60.001 180.00 Sample preparation,per hour 4.00 Tests 49.00 1 196. 00 Phase Total $7 679 00 Concrete Testing 57.50 Hours 58.00 3,335.00 Footings 1.00 Trip at 2.50 Hours Sidewalks 6.00 Trips at 2.50 Hours Curb&Gutter 16.00 Trips at 2.50 Hours Concrete Cylinder Pick up 12.00 Hours 44.00 528.00 12.00 Trips at 1.00 Hour Compressive strength of concrete cy linders(ASTM C 39),per unit 92.00 Tests 20.00 1,840.00 23.00 Sets of 4.00 Cylinders Phase Total $5 703 00 V!..a _ Bituminous Observations&Testing 5.00 Hours 75.00 375.00 5.00 Trips at 1.00 Hour Thickness and density of pavement core(ASTM D 2726} 20.00 Tests 35.00 700.00 t ' k Phase T $1 075 00 1v�11iCI1C}! & C}c�ZdIt5CCi0I1S } s x e S ecial testin 10.00 440.00 4,400.00 S ecial ins ection and other on-site observation services, er hour 119.00 Hours E75.00 8,925.00 Specialty testing 23.00 90.00 2,07Q.Q0 Phase Total: $15 395.00 Table 1:Estimated Costs Page 1 of 2 Providing engineering and environmental solutions since 1957 3 `�x�a,��''f�i��[I✓y�,gBlllent4QLrIf��II� hln� r�u� , ' t«,�9 � � � *4 f �+`s � ,� . . �� �� } a ��� 42 - 00 110 Hours 90. . � �� Project Mana er 4,719.00 _ Sr.Project Engineer �_ ____ _ _10.70 Hours _126.00 1,348.20 Word Processing _ __. 11.60 _Hours 58.00 672.80 Phase Total: $6 740.00 Estimated Project Tntal_Including Contingency $36.592.00 Table 1:Estimated Costs Page 2 of 2 Providing engineering and environmental solutions since 1957 Braun Intertec Corporation Client: City of Eden Prairie Project: T H.212 and Charlson Road,Eden Prairie, MN �'�•�� f,�: ,��,�?��I.:. ,�""r'J„ ro,e�71 3rEp�� ���'`�r �l �� ,°'f�`��s,� \ �12'� 3�:!� a a;� ���IE ?.�'�`�'S���� �i.,-s'� Soil Observations&Testing 7,679.00 Concrete Observations&Testing 5,703.00 Pavement Observations&Testing 1,075.00 Contingency Batch Plant Inspections 15,395.00 Project Management&Engineering 6,740.00 Estimated Project Total,Including Contingency: $36,592.00 Estimated Costs Simmary Page Providing engineering and environmental solutions since 1957 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE GENERAL CONDITIONS Consultant Agreement SECTION 1: PROJECT INFORMATION 2.5 City agrees to render reasonable assistance requested by 1.1 City will provide to Consultant all known information Consultant to enable performance of work without delay or regarding existing and proposed conditions of the site or which interference,and upon request of Consultant,to provide a suitable affects the work to be performed by Consultant. Such workplace. information shall include, but not be limited to site plans, surveys, known hazardous waste or conditions, previous 2.6 City will be responsible for locating and identifying all laboratory analysis results,written reports,soil boring logs and subterranean structures and utilities. Consultant will take applicable regulatory site response(Project Information). reasonable precautions to avoid damage or injury to subterranean structures and utilities identified and located by City and/or 1.2 City will transmit to Consultant any additions,updates,or representatives of Utility Companies. revisions to the Project Information as it becomes available to City, its subcontractors or consultants. SECTION 3: SAMPLES 1.3 City will provide an on-site representative to Consultant 3.1 Consultant may retain at its facility selected soil, water, or within 24 hours upon request, to aid, define, supervise, or material samples for a maximum of 30 days after completion of coordinate work or Project Information as requested by the work and submission of Consultant's report, which samples Consultant. shall remain the property of City. Unless otherwise directed by 1.4 Consultant will not be liable for any decision,conclusion, the City,Consultant may dispose of any samples after 30 days. recommendations, judgement or advice based on any 3.2 Disposal of contaminated or hazardous waste samples is the inaccurate information furnished by City, or other responsibility of City. After said 30 days,City will be responsible subcontractors or consultants engaged by City. to select and arrange for lawful disposal procedures that include removal of samples from Consultant's custody and transporting SECTION 2: SITE LOCATION,ACCESS,PERMITS, them to a disposal site. City may request, or if City does not APPROVALS AND UTILITIES arrange for disposal, Consultant may deliver samples to City, freight collect,or arrange for lawful disposal and bill City at cost 2.1 City will indicate to Consultant the property lines ofthe site plus 15%. and assume responsibility for accuracy of markers. 2.2 City will provide for right-of--way for Consultant personnel SECTION 4: FEE PAYMENT/CLAIMS and equipment necessary to perform the work. 4.1 Consultant will submit invoices to City monthly,and a final invoice upon completion of work. Invoices will show charges 2.3 City will be solely responsible for applying for and based on the current Consultant Fee Schedule or other documents obtaining permits and approvals necessary for Consultant to as attached. perform the work_ Consultant will assist City in applying for and obtaining such permits and approvals as needed. It is 4.2 To receive any payment on this Contract,the invoice or bill understood that City authorizes Consultant to act as agent for must include the following signed and dated statement: "I declare City for City's responsibilities under this section including under penalty ofpedury that this account,claim,or demand is just signing certain forms on City's behalf such as Right-of-Way and correct and that no part of it has been paid." forms. 4.3 The balance stated on the invoice shall be deemed correct 2.4 While Consultant will take reasonable precautions to unless City notifies Consultant, in writing,of the particular item minimize any damage to property,it is understood by City that that is alleged to be incorrect within ten(10)days from the invoice in the normal course ofthe work some damage may occur. The date. Consultant will review the alleged incorrect item within ten correction of any damage is the responsibility of City or, at (10) days and either submits a corrected invoice or a statement City's direction, the damage may be corrected by Consultant indicating the original amount is correct. and billed to City at cost plus 15%. Notwithstanding the above,Consultant agrees to be responsible for damage caused 4.4 Payment is due upon receipt of invoice(or corrected invoice) by Consultant's negligence. and is past due sixty(60)days from invoice date. On past due City of Eden Prairie General Conditions Consultant Agreement December 2000 Page I of4 accounts,City will pay a finance charge of 1.5%per month on and will not disclose to third parties information that it acquires, the unpaid balance or the maximu m um allowed b law,whichever uncovers, or Y rs generates in the course of performing g p g the work, is less until invoice is full aid. Y p except as and to the extent Co nsultant may,in its sole discretion,' p y, etion, 4.5 If City fails to pay Consultant within sixty (60) days deem itself required by law to disclose. following invoice date, Consultant may deem the default a SECTION 6: DISPUTES/LIMITATIONS OF REMEDIES breach of its agreement, terminate the agreement, and be relieved of any and all duties under the agreement. City 6.1 Neither party shall be entitled to recover punitive,special or however,will not be relieved of Fee Payment responsibilities consequential damages or damages for loss of business. by the default or termination of the agreement. 6.2 City will pay all reasonable litigation or collection expenses 4.6 City will be solely responsible for applying for and including attorney fees that Consultant incurs in collecting any obtaining any applicable compensation fund reimbursements delinquent amount City owes under this agreement. from various state and federal programs. Consultant may assist City in applying for or meeting notification requirements, 6.3 If City institutes a suit against Consultant,which is dismissed, however. Consultant makes no representations or guarantees as dropped,or for which judgement is rendered for Consultant,City to what fund reimbursement City may receive. Consultant shall will pay Consultant for all costs of defense, including attorney not be liable for any reductions from reimbursement programs fees,expert witness fees and court costs. made for any reason by state or federal agencies,except as may be caused by Consultant's negligence. 6.4 If Consultant institutes a suit against City,which is dismissed, dropped,or for which judgement is rendered for City,Consultant 4.7 City may withhold from any final payment due the will pay City for all costs of defense, including attorney fees, Consultant such amounts as are incurred or expended by the expert witness fees and court costs. City on account of the termination of the Contract due to breach of contract by the Consultant. 6.5 Dispute Resolution SECTION 5: OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS 6.5.1 Mediation 5.1 Consultant will deliver to City certain reports as All claims, disputes and other matters in question (hereinafter instruments of the professional work or services performed "claim")between the parties to this Agreement,arising out of or pursuant to this Agreement. All reports are intended solely for relating to this Agreement or the breach thereof,shall be subject to City, and Consultant will not be liable for any interpretations mediation. If the parties have not resolved the dispute within made by others. thirty(30)days of receipt of a written complaint,each party may require the dispute be submitted for mediation. If the parties are 5.2 City agrees that all reports and other work furnished to unable to agree on a mediator within ten (10) days following a City,or City's agents or representatives,which are not paid for, request for mediation,either party may request that a mediator be will be returned to Consultant upon demand and will not be appointed by the Fourth Judicial District Court. The parties agree used by City for any purpose. to share equally all fees incurred in the mediation. 5.3 Unless otherwise agreed,Consultant will retain all pertinent The parties shall submit to mediation for a minimum of eight(8) records or reports concerning work and services performed for hours. The parties agree that the mediation proceedings are a period of at least two (2) years after report is submitted. private and confidential. If,at the end of eight hours ofinediation, During that time the records will be made available to City the parties have not resolved the dispute,the parties may agree to during Consultant's normal business hours. City may obtain extend hours of mediation. reproducible copies of all software,manuals,maps,drawings, logs and reports at cost,plus 15%,for data and materials not 6.5.2 Arbitration being provided as part of the scope of work for the project. At the option of the party asserting the same,a claim between the 5.4 City may use the Consultant report in its entirety and may parties to this Agreement, arising out of or relating to this make copies of the entire report available to others. However, Agreement or the breach thereof, whereby the party or parties City shall not make disclosure to others of any portions or asserting the same claims entitlement to damages or payment of excerpts of a report constituting less than the entire report,or to less than$25,000.00 in aggregate may be decided by arbitration in mislead others by omitting certain aspects contained in the accordance with the Construction Industry Arbitration Rules of the report. American Arbitration Association then existing unless the parties mutually agree otherwise. In the event any person shall 5.5 Consultant will consider Project Information as confidential commence an action in any court for any claim arising out of or City of Eden Prairie General Conditions Consultant Agreement December 2000 Page 2 of 4 relating to this Agreement or the breach thereof or the Project reasons beyond Consultant's control. or construction thereof or any contract for such construction, the party making a claim in arbitration may dismiss such 7.4 Consultant will not be responsible or liable for the proceedings(unless the hearing on the claim has commenced) interpretation of its data or report by others. and elect to assert its claim in such action if such party could have done so but for the provisions of this Paragraph. SECTION 8: GENERAL INDEMNIFICATION The parties agree to bear equal responsibility for the fees of 8.1 Consultant will indemnify and hold City harmless from and AAA, including the arbitrator(s). Judgement upon the award against demands,damages,and expenses caused by Consultants rendered by the arbitrator(s) may be entered in any court negligent acts and omissions, and breach of contract and those having jurisdiction thereof. negligent acts, omissions, and breaches of persons for whom Consultant is Iegally responsible. City will indemnify and hold In the event that arbitration services are not available from Consultant harmless from and against demands, damages, and AAA,either party may request that an arbitrator be appointed expenses caused by City's negligent acts and omissions, and by the Fourth Judicial District Court. breach of contract and those acts, omissions, and breaches of persons for whom City is legally responsible. 6.5.3 Compliance SECTION 9: INSURANCE/WORKER'S The parties deem the dispute resolution procedure as set forth COMPENSATION herein to be an integral and essential part of this Agreement. A party's failure to comply in all respects with this procedure 9.1 Consultant represents and warrants that it has and will shall be a substantial breach of this Agreement. The maintain during the performance of this agreement Worker's arbitrator(s)shall be authorized to assess costs and attorney's Compensation Insurance coverage required pursuant to Minn. fees against a party that has failed to comply with the procedure Stat. 176.181,subd.2 and that the Certificate of Insurance or the in all respects,and,may as a condition precedent to arbitration, written order of the Commissioner of Commerce permitting self require the parties to mediate in accordance with Section 6.5.1 insurance of Worker's Compensation Insurance coverage hereof provided to the City prior to execution of this agreement is current and in force and effect. SECTION 7: STANDARD OF CARE 9.2 Consultant shall procure and maintain professional liability 7.1 Because no sampling program can prove the non-existence insurance for protection from claims arising out of professional or non-presence of contaminated conditions or materials services caused by any negligent act,error or omission for which throughout the "entire" site or facility, Consultant cannot Consultant is legally liable. warrant, represent, guarantee, or certify the non-existence or non-presence, or the extent of existence or presence, of 9.3 Certificate of insurance will be provided to City upon request. contaminated conditions or materials, and Citys obligation under this agreement will not be contingent upon Consultant's SECTION 10: TERMINATION delivery of any warranties, representations, guarantees, or certifications. 10.1 The agreement between Consultant and City may. be terminated by either party,upon thirty-(30)days written notice. 7.2 Consultant's opinions,conclusions,recommendations,and report will be prepared in accordance with the proposal,scope 10.2 If the agreement is terminated prior to completion of the of work,and Limitations of Environmental Assessments and no project, Consultant will receive an equitable adjustment of warranties,representations,guarantees,or certifications will be compensation. made. Except that Consultant warrants that hardware and software will perform as represented in proposal and other parts of this agreement. 7.3 Although data obtained from discrete sample locations will be used to infer conditions between sample locations no guarantee may be given that the inferred conditions exist because soil, surface and groundwater quality conditions between sample locations may vary significantly,and because conditions at the time of sample collection may also vary significantly with respect to soil, surface water and groundwater quality at any other given time and for other City of Eden Prairie General Conditions Consultant Agreement December 2000 Page 3 of 4 SECTION 11: ASSIGNMENT 11.1 Neither party may assign duties,rights or interests in the SECTION 17: DATA PRACTICES ACT COMPLIANCE perform ance of the work without obtaining the P prior written g consent of the other party, which consent will not be 17.1 The Consultant shall at all times abide by Minn.Stat. 13.01 unreasonably withheld. et seq., the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, to the extent the Act is applicable to data and documents in the SECTION 12: DELAYS possession of the Consultant. 12.1 If Consultant is delayed in performance due to any cause SECTION 18: DISCRIMINATION beyond its reasonable control, including but not limited to strikes,riots, fires,acts of God,governmental actions,actions 18.1 In performance of this contract, the Consultant shall not of a third party, or actions or inactions of City, the time for discriminate on the grounds of or because of race, color,creed, performance shall be extended by a period of time lost by religion,national origin,sex,marital status,status with regards to reason of the delay. Consultant will be entitled to payment for public assistance,disability,sexual orientation,or age against any its reasonable additional charges,if any,due to the delay. employee of the Consultant,any subcontractor of the Consultant, or any applicant for employment. The Consultant shall include a SECTION 13: EXTRA WORK similar provision in all contracts with subcontractors to this Contract. The Consultant further agrees to comply will all aspects 13.1 Extra work, additional compensation for same, and of the Minnesota Human Rights Act,Minn.Stat.363.01,et seq., extension of time for completion shall be covered by written Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,and the Americans with amendment to this agreement prior to proceeding with any Disabilities Act of 1990. extra work or related expenditures. SECTION 19: CONFLICTS SECTION 14: WITHHOLDING TAXES 19.1 No salaried officer or employee of the City and no member 14.1 No final payment shall be made to the Consultant until the of the Board of the City shall have a financial interest,direct or Consultant has provided satisfactory evidence to the City that indirect, in this contract. The violation of this provision renders the Consultant and each of its subcontracts has complied with the Contract void. Any federal regulations and applicable state the provisions of Minn.Stat.290.92 relating to withholding of statutes shall not be violated. income taxes upon wages. A certificate by the Commissioner of Revenue shall satisfy this requirement. SECTION 20: ENTIRE AGREEMENT SECTION 15: AUDITS 20.1 This Agreement contains the entire understanding between the City and Consultant and supersedes any prior written or oral 15.1 The books,records,documents and accounting procedures agreements between them respecting the written subject matter. and practices of the Consultant or other parties relevant to this There are no representations, agreements, arrangements or Agreement are subject to examination by the City and either understandings, oral or written between City and Consultant the Legislative Auditor or the State Auditor for a period of six relating to the subject matter of this Agreement which are not fully (6)years after the effective date of this Contract. expressed herein. SECTION 16: PAYMENT TO SUBCONTRACTORS 20.2 The agreement between Consultant and City may be modified only by a written amendment executed by both City and 16.1 The Consultant shall pay to any Subcontractor within ten Consultant. (10)days of the Consultant's receipt of payment from the City for undisputed services provided by the Subcontractor. The 20.3 This agreement is governed by the laws of the State of Consultant shall pay interest of one and a half percent Minnesota. (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. City of Eden Prairie General Conditions Consultant Agreement December 2000 Page 4 of 4 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Consent Calendar July 5, 2005 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: VI. E. Stuart A Fox, Manager of Resolution Authorizing the Execution of Parks and Natural Resources a Quit Claim Deed to David and Christine Bruns Requested Action Move to: Authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute a Quit Claim Deed with David and Christine Burns. Synopsis Back in January 2005 the City Attorney was contacted by the Hennepin County title examiner regarding an application by David and Christine Bruns for registration of land. During the County's examination process it was discovered that a portion of land that the Bruns were seeking to have registered would result in adding acreage from Outlot A of Chatham Wood, which is a piece of property currently owned by the City of Eden Prairie. The suggestions of the County Title Examiner and the City Attorney was for staff to meet with the Bruns and come to an agreement as to where the property line should be re-established between the two land parcels. Staff has been working with the city attorney's office, HTPO and David Bruns since January to resolve this land survey issue. The outcome is that a new property line has been proposed and accepted by the Bruns and a legal description drafted by a registered land surveyor. The proposed property line description has been reviewed and accepted by all parties. The City Attorney's office has prepared a Resolution and Quit Claim Deed that will finalize the new property line. The Quit Claim Deed will be filed with Hennepin County after it is signed by the Bruns and City officials. Background The City of Eden Prairie received ownership of Outlot A—Chatham Wood in August of 1980. There were a total of four outlots that were given to the City of Eden Prairie with the development of the Chatham Wood subdivision. Outlot A is a parcel of land that fronts onto the northeast corner of the subdivision. The parcel is 3.468 acres in size and the northeast line is described as the center line of Purgatory Creek. The Bruns property is directly north of Purgatory Creek and fronts onto the Crosstown Highway. Bruns—City of Eden Prairie Land Survey July 5, 2005 Page 2 This parcel of land was not fully described and there in lies the problem with their attempt to register the title to this land. The abstract description for the Bruns' property indicates that the southern property line of the land is the center line of Purgatory Creek. Since the 1980's Purgatory Creek has slowly move south, and is in some areas up to 100 feet away from the channel that was surveyed for the Chatham Wood plat. This means that the registration of land by the Bruns would have them gain property and the City of Eden Prairie would lose property since both recognize the center line of the Creek as their boundary line. In order to rectify the discrepancies the city staff contacted HTPO and had them do some survey work to determine where the center line of the creek was during the time of platting of Chatham Wood. Following that survey work, staff meet with David Bruns in the field to discuss if using the center line of the former Purgatory Creek channel could be used to determine a new property survey for both his property and the city property.After much discussion between staff, the city attorney's office and Mr. Bruns it was agreed upon that we would use the former center line of Purgatory Creek and straighten out this common property line between the Bruns and city land. A legal survey was done and new property descriptions have been drafted and sent to the attorney for the Bruns as well as the City Attorney's office and the Hennepin County Land Registrar. The net result of doing all this work is that city and the Bruns both end up with parcels of land as close to the original acreages as possible. The property line would now be described as a straight line and will not utilize the center line of Purgatory Creek, which has been proven to meander over time. Attachments Map of Bruns Property—City property—Purgatory Creek Resolution Quit Claim Deed x i? �':x'm ,5^^'f�^� ,� rr''�,.. ,s '4 sa � .d�•"��tr', "a¢ cs - � ztx. 4 L�"�3' t - �`�'xa :- sFc"�'=T.9-<.•aa st..`� � ..aY��` ^',�"',f'++'S?? .r..>= ;, � - t m%. -`Ts'x+r�3 `a u� �,s'it�3 two a a {. :< '"" �Go 4 � s F .4tE •�.„;�'3.a'r� ''`a 3.P ks 6c�a tis, $ .� +^} ,ri, '`P'r C'e s. -•yi'�.°>E`ra"k'3 �+z�,.L"� ii �€;"" �asu��-•^<w,�Lsev..w -'�y'�;'�� ry a. '� �`$�{�p, h. `��{b�4I S•`'°`�.: t�.. �� � r'ia a n ^i Nig s sE'�t€ k }J -%•�5�3` ��'�..,ass�.�'*�s � �n..t �`' �- St.S'?�,a<iy g4., F�3 t�s4.t�,,y �'rz,' �,€�+�.� `` kq a r„ a �' '`�' 'xs F•�°%i' �*n :� � - ? Y. e+'i ;r n.tt r .+� ,cr,'�s'< s `S+t. °'� �'t` l�"�`�%�''�''`fri -� � �-���� ��#f�"�' ?a.; s »z•f rt �s �•�?_� � '�.s ., t ear F,� F^c.C s. ':. �# 'as r ix s__ rnBE ;x"�; �t 2 3'� '' a�.., • > 3k` � v� ->a..� rs"...t. '�frar °ten, .' +• • s. .;*}St 'e �^ ":..s;'1-'� �,� .a ` ���i�,k�.a.�y,-�'*t ?°qqr' .�v¢ �°�' ""�+ �t - t,, •s �, �" .� � �`t-s� 'fit;. VU .r &tp � zu •�• ror�"' .,,-.yz rM. R� Y : A ag a 2'ry kT~ � 'j ''UrSr y3"x .::f a { #c`.. sc 'r.: �•• +. <�-rr�'s.r.� PIZU � �� :w a-c. � ���,. ��� � �6 .;r �..zrz 't"�"+u;•.� +�", �`•� �A -±i,at:. t • "'��' -, Ron a-ai ° "`v-�+y ., ,. { ''r s.. -kt h t zf VON * c. _'$��.-�" fa>^..xFzi' r33 -z, �`-'q. r� eME — t,.r�£ ,g t„`aa,fir., y ``�^s'i" ,?.. `" #s IWO, 'rFY" ','`'r' 3 '� i 3", ,z F .'x { x ."a Y M „e r:� ,,.zl � � 'sY 5,�,x✓{ �,J F24 yr'a -x '� *+„+.5<5"a`a C`�f n Y rsrti .-;v `a`,? s ' `?c.+X{ ' "tea 't�.-..: 5 J��+a::� t}�,:,� �r�r-i•�.� f <'k.' � ,. x tt, � R�" x''#;n�+iu r"s§t"s'a sq +7?,*+ ;., 'a„ � ,€ ' r ?'' �- kr"s z s it � .+� '-.9,i..s �' .�s�, x'"ss- ',�F�a '".b�5.,,.n `'r" y �m-'t' '= r' �'+3 1 z'•d�..i k; sx ��.-1:+ {:s Y 2�S x.?v'r t y. s�. 3'S a c s ., kp MI.,��i�" u�'i i [''?^'�i'`xy�'�""-�`i�s��.sxY'acrx s. `��� ��iCr''�w.,�3 �i r +. �• ;�.�� Y{ �"'s-� ,7 ,s ��� -�° s4��k$s.-T ."�z� �s'�"� x'�-�e"•y,_� � *,. z^`^.-" f'� - •e 4�,. ���3.t �. ,• CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2005- RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A QUIT CLAIM DEED TO DAVID AND CHRISTINE BRUNS FOR THE PURPOSE OF RESOLVING A BOUNDARY LINE DISPUTE WHEREAS, the City of Eden Prairie is the owner of Outlot A, Chatham Wood pursuant to that Warranty Deed dated August 15, 1980 filed as document number 4650976 on June 19, 1981 with the Hennepin County Recorder; and WHEREAS,the underlying legal description of Outlot A, Chatham Wood is: That part of the East 300 feet of the North 580.80 feet of the West Half of the northwest quarter of the northeast Quarter of Section 5, Township l l 6, Range 22 West of the 5t' Principal Meridian, lying southerly of the center line of Purgatory Creek. WHEREAS, David and Christine Bruns (the "Bruns"), the property owners adjacent to Outlot A, Chatham Wood, filed an Application with the Hennepin County Examiner of Titles to Register Title to the following land: That part of the East 300 feet of the North 580.8 feet of the West Half of the northwest quarter of the northeast Quarter of Section 5, Township 116, Range 22, lying northerly of the center line of Purgatory Creek. WHEREAS,Purgatory Creek is now in a more southerly location than shown on the County Surveyor's Half Section map and on the Chatham Woods plat; and WHEREAS,the City filed an Answer in response to the Bruns' Application stating that the City is the owner of Outlot A, as platted on the Chatham Wood Plat, and that the Applicants have no interest in Outlot A; and WHEREAS,to resolve any dispute over the boundary between the two properties, the City has surveyed the Bruns' property and Outlot A to establish a new boundary line between the Bruns' property and Outlot A; and WHEREAS, to establish the new boundary line between the properties, the Examiner of Titles requires the City to execute a Quit Claim Deed conveying any and all interest north of the new boundary line to the Bruns and the Bruns to execute a Quit Claim Deed conveying any and all interest south of the new boundary line to the City. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: 1. The Quit Claim Deed from the City to David and Christine Bruns is approved. 2. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute the Quit Claim Deed. 3. Upon receipt of the Brun's Quit Claim Deed to the City, the City's legal counsel is authorized to withdraw the City's Answer in the Brun's title registration proceeding. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council on July 5, 2005. Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor ATTEST: SEAL Kathleen Porta, City Clerk QUIT CLAIM DEED Form No.32-M Nlinnesola Uniform Corporation,Partnership or Limited Conveyancing Blanks(1115/97) Liability Company to joint Tenants (Top 3 Inches Rewmil for Recording Data) DEED TAX DUE$ Date: FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, the City of Eden Prairie a municipal corporation trader the laws of Minnesota Grantor.hereby conveys and quitclaims to David F.Bruns,Sr.and Christine M.Bruns,married Grantees.as joint tenants.real property in Hennepin County.Minnesota,described as follows: That part of the unplatted portion of the East 300 feet of the North 580.80 feet of the West Half of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 5.Township 116.Range 22 and that part of Outlet A_Chatham Wood,lying northerly of the following described line: Commencing at the northwest comer of said East 300 feet of the north 580 80 feet;thence South 00 degrees.35 minutes.42 seconds East along the west line of said East 300 feet a distance of 195.00 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described;thence South 42 degrees,17 minutes,13 seconds East a distance of 451 04 feet to the east line of said West Half of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter and said line there terminating. together Willi all hereditaments and appurtenances Check box if applicable: ®The Scaler certifies that the Seller does not know of any wells on the described real property O A well disclosure certificate accompanies this document. []I am familiar With the property described in this instrument and I certify that the status and number of wells on the described real property have not changed since the last previously filed well disclosure certificate By Affix Deed Tax Stamp here Its Mayor By Its City Manager STATE OF MINNESOTA ss COUNTY OF HENNEPIN This instrument was acknowledged before me on t atel by Nancy Tyra-Lukens and Scott Neal the Mayor and Clly Manager of the City of Eden Prairie ,a municipal corporation under the laws of Minnesota on behalf of the corporation NOTARIAL STAMP OR SEAL(OR OTHER TITL E OR RANK) SIGNATURE OF NOTARY PUBLIC OR OTHER OFFICIAL Check here if part or all of the Lund is Registered(Torrens)O THIS INSTRUMENT WAS DRAFTED BY:(NAME AND ADDRESS) Christine A.Longs.Esq tax Statements for the real property described in this instrument Gregerson.Rosow.Johnson&Nilan.Lid should be sent to(include name and address of Grnntce): 1600 Park Building 650 Third Avenue South City of Eden Prairie Minneapolis.MN 55402 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie.MN 55344 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Consent Calendar July 5, 2005 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: Resolution amending Resolution 2005-08 VI. F. Office of City Manager Meeting Places and Times for Boards and Commissions for 2005 Requested Action Move to: Adopt Resolution amending Resolution 2005-0 Setting Meeting Places and Times for P g 8 g g Boards and Commissions for 2005. Synopsis The Arts and Culture Commission voted at their meeting on June 13,to reschedule their meetings for the rest of 2005,to the first Monday of the month, with the exception of when a holiday falls on the first Monday. The dates would be as follows: July 11, August 1, September 12, October 3, November 7, and December 5. They are making the change, as the chair has had a change in her work schedule. Attachment Resolution CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2005- A RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION 2005-08 DESIGNATING THE OFFICIAL MEETING DATES,TIME AND LOCATION FOR CITY COUNCIL APPOINTED BOARDS & COMMISSIONS IN 2005 BE IT RESOLVED,that the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie,Minnesota and the City Council appointed Boards and Commissions will meet at 7:00 p.m. in the Eden Prairie City Center, 8080 Mitchell Road,Eden Prairie,Minnesota as scheduled below. The Human Rights and Diversity Commission will meet at the EP Center Mall, Housing and Human Services Office. Additional workshops may be called if determined necessary by the Commission Chair and the Staff Liaison. Any regularly-scheduled meeting which occurs on a day when elections are held within the city limits of Eden Prairie will begin at 8:00 p.m. Robert's Rules of Order will prevail. Board / Commission Scheduled Meeting Dates Board of Appeal and Equalization Thursday,April 21, and Tuesday,May 10 Community Planning Commission 2"d and 4d'Mondays Heritage Preservation Commission 3rd Monday(January&February—4d'Monday) Human Rights&Diversity Commission 2"d Monday,January through May 2"d Tuesday,June through December (no meeting in July or August) Parks,Recreation&Natural Resources 1"Monday Commission Art&Culture Commission 2"d Monday thru June,then the I"Monday of the month,with the exception of July 11 and September 12. ADOPTED by the Eden Prairie City Council this 5th day of July 2005. Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen Porta, City Clerk CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Consent Calendar July 5, 2005 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: VI. G. Office of City Manager, Declare obsolete computer equipment as surplus Information Technology/ Lisa Wu Requested Action Move to: Declare obsolete computer equipment as surplus and authorize the City Manager to dispose of property through donation to the Minnesota Computers for School Program and the State of Minnesota as authorized under City Code Section 2.86, Subd. 3. Synopsis The City has a surplus of old computer equipment which is no longer in use. Computers and printers meeting minimum requirements as surplus will be donated to the Minnesota Computers for School. All other equipment will disposed of as authorized by City Code Section 2.86, Subd. 3. Attachment List of Surplus Equipment 2005 Surplus Inventory Computers Printers/Faxes UPS's Monitors Make/Model CPU CPU Speed Identifier Scrubbed Notes Make/Model Make/Model Make/Model Size Functional? Dell Dimension LBOOCXE Intel Celeron 800 5GT5SO1 Y HP LaserJet 4050 HP UPS 1000 LG 2W 21" Y HP V tra VlbClot A7tT s IIE,Ieserlett0fl APC Strt;-ttPS,l 00or LG HP Vectra VL 6/233 7MT Intel Pentium II 233 US81015276 Y HP LaserJet 1000 APC Smart-UPS 1000 ViewMate K03 94LD 21" Y tell D menrwort;tSDO --„ -Intel Gelerotl 800 . 1 Y....,, 'peskJet 660C APC•$itrt UI?S 10flo LG 2W 11 :, Dell Dimension L800CXE Intel Celeron 800 H37QL01 Y Canon BJC 610 APC Back UPS 200 LG 2W 21 Y Re1tG?lmeosion4 00 Entei';?enr ;#, 667 `' 60: .. .: b ,I, MJ .1. .- , . .. h{F3 t aserJet 5 des#Ra#t>ctt 45P f�l :;MulfwSynp5[t0 15- N Dell Dimension L80OCXE Intel Celeron 800 D37MPOl Y Brother MFC8300(Fax) APC Back-UPS 200 Dell(White) 17" Y �<� 'i P uoira VE[flDT Y.. , w. ;,.M.. ., m ......, iitel Frtre�m IIIEt US934t1>;4 `. - Brotiltatl ,(Fax) APO 5asert'wtPS Tip. . Tradoly4rk 1'a hf. HP Vectra VEi8 DT Intel Pentium III 500 US93806611 Y Brother IntelliFAX1270(Fax) NEC MultiSync A500 15" Y I tl_Ve tra VI ii i T,.�.. ..._... Tntel•P I> All 0 � �. y .. ��.• d�� rVfew 58� �:�j5 Y � ATX Intel Pentium II 400 03 023 Y EPPD 4027 IntelliTouch T(ouchMonitor 15 Y t lt)a@nylon Gt3Q ,' Ifl$fi"alB/'4rt •. -. Minro � no tea Y unmarked Intel Celeron 700 PS6237 OLD Y KDS Visual Sensations 15" N ll�0mnsioo d10o I ®»tlum 111 tiS Miori�5; #Afl I 15 '`' Deff Dimension L800CXE Intel Celeron BOO 617QL01 Y Apple 15 NP Vectra t�l, �75, .: . 1 i�sntiwm 35 U$644�13A7 Y- .. .. .. fdEC +lultlSyno�SV16+ 15'•r Y _.-.. Dell Dimension 4100 Intel Pentium III 667 6VJQ601 Y MicroScan 4G/A01 15" Y iarimerked ;?AMO 1 3 2-. 5ti„, wo t121- Y - - EPPD 4©5b` EZL?5 Visual nsatlons 1S N HP Vectra VL600 MT Intel Pentium III 600 US01467099 Y Wyse 13" N MPfJraXLtioODT„ IntTantlurrr-11[.:' sol�.b fl=0fl4 � „ . Y �; Dell Dimension L800CXE Intel Celeron 800 527QL01 Y tl12 F15 y ATX Intel Pentium II 400 03-024 Y EPPD 4023;Flammable lali drkV,,M2,41l od"f „ $6 t)A z10p..,... 4 8A 356 Y' -........ HP Vectra VE 51133 Intel Pentium 133 US64159005 Y I[1Ue#raE 5t3. �.-)ntel Prr#fum• 13-..._,. lit96fi9 ',. HP Vectra VE 5/133 Intel Pentium 133 US71161756 Y W,tlE ttra?CAI 75 ••F•mantel l?erittGtrr ,y.-... U 485 MAP " 1'! unmarked AMD-K6-2 550 03-036 Y EPPD 4047 Debi f r rt ipn 4100.. 0 ntal Fa 1t[utn 1E1'", 7.- 03>U ' ,Nh .-. Dell Dimension L800CXE Intel Celeron 800 7RVGH01 Y t�$irrtenslon4tE�� Ir>tell*entltrnlll S67 17t *{' a..... .... r_..:.... z: .. .. Dell Dimension 4100 Intel Pentium III 667 BPJQ601 Y tt6St, 2... �. .IUD,a Gateway Profile 3(T)R1 Intel Pentium III 500 024765694 N HF 11et trey 6/2E36 7f t wig P ntium II . s tJS(#24� 5-' ""N' Dell Dimension L800CXE Intel Celeron 800 G5D2SO1 N 03-052 !tlttm 2005 Total Inventory Computers Printers/Faxes UPS's Monitors Make/Model CPU Speed Identifier ;crubbe Notes Make/Model Make/Model Make/Model Size Functional? Dell Dimension L800CXE Intel Celeron 800 5GT5S01 Y HP LaserJet 4050 HP UPS 1000 LG 2W 21" Y � - HP;UeCtl �/L400 MT, lists(Pentium III 4Z)t+,�, -V US�3658$37 Y ,, HP1 asetJet 12tt0' Af?C Smart UPS 1Q00 L.�:2W HP Vectra VL 6/233 7MT Intel Pentium II 233 US81015276 Y HP LaserJet 1000 APC Smart-UPS 1000 ViewMate K9034LD 21" Y Dell)31it ens �• 18OOCXE Intel" elera SttO "l S Wt)1 Y �. Dell Laski ii !..- ��.- P refer-1? tln.:; A( Smart UPS 140f� L 21 Y . ..�..: Dell Dimension L800CXE Intel Celeron 800 H37QL01 Y HP DeskJet 660C APC Back-UPS 200 LG 2W 21" Y Dell;Dtm ;i irf 41fl0_,..,- +ntet•f' tr ;ut11 ti+ 667„ CIk JR6t)1 „ Y l� nts .8JC-61,0. ... t. Bit txtvt SU , + E _:M'ltiS rtc,E50.0.:: 15 Dell Dimension L800CXE Intel Celeron 800 D37MP01 Y HP LaserJet 5 APC Back-UPS 200 Dell(White) 17" Y .,< :IE1B pT in: i.F?entium.ltl." 4 LJS34tT674... .-, y � , , .- ` dthelV+PG83Q0(Faxjr•. APC:Smar.#L1iS.7%ld, 7rsdMarf€. ..- --: 1.5 m.t+ HP Vectra VEi8 DT Intel Pentium III 500 US93806611 Y Brother Fax8300(Fax) NEC MultiSync A500 15 Y I ,Ue ##a t/1.1t3 MT �iE Pentium III"a60 -07 'Y .. 'rot;.er trite++rFA +' x A r AceAlle � 6c 16' ATX Intel Pentium II 400 03-023 Y EPPD 4027 IntelliTouch Monitor 15" Y IeF D+mernn L8}OXE I+ttie-,isran 8b0• �.. t327GiLL}I Y MicrrSan #,gip-1 1 `f aN unmarked Intel Celeron 700 PS6237-OLD Y KDS Visual Sensations 15 N l sliAC3+i i z stian 4lt)I). _•.... �ntef IP tlum+tl f?67 JNJQ6t}1 Y. MicroSGsn V/AA1 15 . Y Dell Dimension L800CXE Intel Celeron 800 617QL01 Y Apple 15" ? Ca Xt,n 5/75, uSSI B ,.y. » NWyc XV1 � Dell Dimension 4100 Intel Pentium III 667 6VJQ601 Y MicroScan 4G/A01 15" Y :.'lPP405 ;:' 5S 1uI isafiori 16" .. td.. .,. v' HP Vectra VL600 MT Intel Pentium III 600 US01467099 Y Wyse 13 N P era6tIntei ►Its-.60 ;b��0,4-- `/.� 3ett Black) Dell Dimension L800CXE Intel Celeron 800 527QL01 Y DeII(Black) 17' Y ffx .. Intel t�;, t>;um.t+- 40Q1 -08 ATX Intel Pentium II 400 03 024 Y EPPD 4023 Dell ell(Blacckk)"�',. 17 �Y I iP elr /(.2 4IIt1Et: ;��t86 bUu 3SAf#356 v... ti HP Vectra VE 5/133 Intel Pentium 133 US64159005 Y )? estra UE 51 - into+ .. _- HP Vectra VE 5/133 Intel Pentium 133 US71161756 Y HF H> i XM1 Iri#tI Psri+im. .- tS45Q18 Y- -. unmarked AMD-K6-2 550 03-036 Y EPPD 4047 ell S► p s n� Q�. ....`��top7m m ICI : g3�C}1 ..'.1 Dell Dimension L800CXE Intel Celeron 800 7RVGH01 Y a begptrn,d. n 41(70 Psttum 1It, 7 6 .... . DeII Dimension 4100 Intel Pentium III 667 BPJQ601 Y lBti 'P / 6SLG2..., ',; 6 w6�„ ,„..', I i400 hlrI�D Dell Dimension 2300 Intel Celeron 700 8DHMT11 N Me,Me ttum IV 28t L1.,, 34C S Fsll -- Na Gateway Profile 3(T)R1 Intel Pentium III 500 024765694 N �' ictraLiU1 tntet.t' Dell Optiplex GX280 Intel Pentium IV 2800 JSLBL71 N 1elipr�ri �QO y n Dell Dimension 2100 Intel Celeron 700 D3FG711 N Ie(itil? �san �tP � eteleran..7� P ,---....N FIFzzzG1 . Dell Dimension 2100 Intel Celeron 700 H3FG711 N al lm�h IM Int01,, n 7t�0.. ., �v)3F�7:i�..... �,. �.. Dell Dimension 2200 Intel Celeron 700 J2VCM11 N b�ptm6"den 2410", , „ lrlt t Ce�eCct�� 7q0 901711 Dell Dimension 2100 Intel Celeron 700 GBFG711 N Crlt'IiCn sari LUOIXEr.. elsrrit St31 - N .....062.. - HP Vectra VUB MT Intel Pentium II 500 US92006169 N CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Public Hearings July 5, 2005 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: VII. A. Office of the City Resolution authorizing Amendment to 2004 Manager/Finance to 2008 Capital Improvement Plan and Sue Kotchevar Issuance of General Obligation Capital Improvement Plan Bonds Requested Action Move to: • Close the Public Hearing; and • Adopt Resolution authorizing an Amendment to the 2004 to 2008 Capital Improvement Plan and issuance of General Obligation Capital Improvement Bonds. Synopsis The City plans to build a fourth fire station on Dell Road and Linwood Court with construction to begin in 2005 and completion in the fall of 2006. The City plans to issue capital improvement bonds to pay for the station. The statutes covering the issuance of capital improvement bonds, Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.521, require a public hearing for the change to the capital improvement plan and the proposed issuance of the bonds. The City purchased property at the northeast corner of Dell Road and Linwood Court to construct a fire station at this site. The maximum amount of bonds expected to be issued for the project is $3.5 million. The Council can issue any amount of bonds less than this amount. Background Information In 2003 the Minnesota legislature passed Minnesota Statute 475.521, which allows cities to issue bonds under a qualified capital improvement plan without referendum requirements. Bonds may be issued for the acquisition or betterment of public lands, buildings or other improvements for the purpose of a city hall, public safety facility, and public works facility. Attachments Resolution CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2005- A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT TO THE 2004 TO 2008 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN AND THE ISSUANCE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN BONDS WHEREAS, the City Council (the Council)held a public hearing and adopted the 2004 to 2008 Capital Improvement Plan (the CIP) pursuant to and in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.521 on December 16, 2003; and WHEREAS, the City proposes to amend the CIP to increase the estimated cost of the construction of a fire station building and other improvements identified in the CIP from $3,050,000 to $3,500,000, as more fully described on Exhibit A hereto; and WHEREAS, the City intends to issue Capital Improvement Plan Bonds in an amount not to exceed $3,500,000 in order to finance the construction of a fire station building and other improvements identified in the CIP; and WHEREAS, the City has published notice of its intent to issue such capital improvement plan bonds and the time and date of the hearing to obtain public comment on the matter at least fourteen(14) but not more than twenty-eight(28)days prior to the date hereof,pursuant to and in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.521; and WHEREAS, the City has held a public hearing to obtain public comment on its intent to issue the capital improvement plan bonds on July 5, 2005. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, that the 2004 to 2008 Capital Improvement Plan be amended to increase the estimated cost of the construction of a fire station building and other improvements identified in the Capital Improvement Plan from $3,050,000 to $3,500,000; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE, MINNESOTA, that the City Council hereby authorizes the issuance of Capital Improvement Plan Bonds in an amount not to exceed $3,500,000. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 5 h day of July, 2005. Nancy Tyra-Lukens,Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen Porta, City Clerk Exhibit A The 2004 to 2008 Capital Improvement Plan was changed from $3,050,000 to $3,500,000 for the construction of the South West Fire Station and adopted by the Council on July 5, 2005. Due to changes in construction costs,the projected maximum cost for construction is estimated to be $3,500,000. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Public Hearings July 5, 2005 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: VII. B. Community Development/Planning Eden Prairie Fire Station No. 4 Janet Jeremiah Scott Kipp Requested Action Move to: • Close the Public Hearing; and • Adopt the Resolution for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 3.66 acres; and • Approve 1st Reading of the Ordinance for Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers, and Zoning District Amendment within the Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District on 3.66 acres; and • Adopt the Resolution for Preliminary Plat on 3.66 acres into two lots and one outlot. Synopsis This project is for development of Eden Prairie Fire Station No. 4 to serve the southwest quadrant of the city. Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the project to the City Council at its June 13, 2005 meeting. Background Information In 1995 the City rezoned this 3.66 acre property to Neighborhood Commercial and approved a plan for 19,840 square feet of retail. The fire station is considered a public facility and service which is a permitted use in all zoning districts and will be located on Lot 2. Lot 1 will be sold for commercial development consistent with the existing Neighborhood Commercial zoning. Based on the size of the lot a retail building of up to 10,000 square feet is possible. Prior to any development on Lot 1, a public hearing will be required at the Planning Commission and City Council so surrounding neighbors and the Commission will have an opportunity for review and comment. The followingwaivers are required. • Lot size of 1.15 acres and lot width of 153 feet for Lot 1; lot size of 1.2 acres for Lot 2. City code requires a minimum lot size of 2 acres and lot width of 200 feet. This waiver is consistent with the underlying approved commercial development for Y g Pp p smaller lots. The smaller lots are created for separate ownership. The total site exceeds the 2 acre minimum. Eden Prairie Fire Station No. 4 July 5, 2005-Page 2 • Front yard building setback of 22 feet. City code requires 35 foot front yard setback. This is temporary waiver. Outlot A defines the property that will be sold to MnDOT for construction of the extension of Linwood Court into Miller Park as part of the T.H.312 highway project. A portion of that property will be turned back to the city after the road is completed creating a front yard building setback of 45 feet. • Front yard parking setback of 10 feet. City code requires 17.5 feet on a multiple frontage property. The south property line is considered a front yard because it abuts new T.H.312 right-of- way. The highway will be approximately 200 feet away and at a much lower elevation, and the parking will be screened from view. • Building height of 36 feet, and 49 feet for the hose tower. City code maximum is 30 feet. To accommodate fire trucks and create a residential look to the building the additional 6 feet of building height is needed. The additional height for the hose tower is needed to hang hoses and the required communications antenna. The 2°d Reading of the Ordinance and adoption of the Resolution for Site Plan Review will occur under the Ordinances and Resolutions section of the agenda. Attachments 1. Resolution for PUD Concept Amendment 2. Resolution for Preliminary Plat 3. Staff Report dated June 10, 2005 4. Q&A Informational Meeting April 19, 2005 5. Site Location Map 6. Land Use Map 7. Zoning Map 8. Approved 312 Layout Plan Map 9. Historical Staff Report dated February 24, 1995 10. Planning Commission minutes dated June 13, 2005 EDEN PRAIRIE FIRE STATION NO. 4 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2005- A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT OF EDEN PRAIRIE FIRE STATION NO. 4 FOR CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE 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 Planning Commission did conduct a public hearing on June 13, 2005, on Eden Prairie Fire Station No. 4 by City of Eden Prairie 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 July 5th, 2005. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, as follows: 1. Eden Prairie Fire Station No. 4, 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 June 28, 2005. 3. That the PUD Concept meets the recommendations of the Planning Commission June 13, 2005. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 5`hh day of July, 2005. Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen Porta, City Clerk EXHIBIT A Eden Prairie Fire Station No. 4 - PUD Concept Legal Description: OUTLOT H,HAWTHORNE OF EDEN PRAIRIE,HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA EDEN PRAIRIE FIRE STATION NO. 4 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2005- RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF EDEN PRAIRIE FIRE STATION NO. 4 FOR CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of Eden Prairie Fire Station No. 4 for City of Eden Prairie stamp dated June 28, 2005, and consisting of 3.66 acres into two lots and one outlot, 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 5`"day of July, 2005. Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk I STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Scott A. Kipp, Senior Planner DATE: June 10, 2005 SUBJECT: Eden Prairie Fire Station No. 4 APPLICANT/ FEE OWNER: City of Eden Prairie LOCATION: Southeast corner of Dell Road and Linwood Court REQUEST: 1. Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 3.66 acres 2. Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 3.66 acres 3. Zoning District Amendment within the Neighborhood Commercial District on 3.66 acres 4. Site Plan Review on 1.32 acres 5. Preliminary Plat on 3.66 acres into two lots and one outlot Staff Report—Eden Prairie Fire Station No. 4 June 10,2005 Page 2 BACKGROUND The Comprehensive Guide Plan shows this site as Neighborhood Commercial. Surrounding property is guided Medium Density Residential to the north and east, and zoned RM-6.5, and as Highway right-of-way to the south and west for new T.H.312. In 1995 the City rezoned this 3.66 acre property to Neighborhood Commercial and approved a plan for 19,840 square feet of retail. This plan included three buildings; a 5,700 square foot restaurant, a 9,000 square foot retail building, and a 5,140 square foot gas convenience store with 12 gas pumps. Waivers were granted for lot size less than 2 acres since the project site was 3 acres and the project conformed to other zoning requirements(see attached staff report and approved site plan). A neighborhood meeting was held on April 19, 2005 to discuss the proposal with the surrounding neighborhoods. Attached to this report are the questions that were raised at the meeting with a response by City staff. SITE PLAN AND PRELIMINARY PLAT The proposal is to subdivide the 3.66 acre site into two lots and one outlot. The fire station would be constructed on proposed Lot 2. A fire station is considered a public facility and service which is a permitted use in all zoning districts. The base area ratio is .20 and the floor area ratio is 0.23. City code permits up to a .20 base area ratio and a .40 floor area ratio. The building meets the setback requirements except along the extension of Linwood Court along the east side of the site. The setback will be reduced from 35 feet to 22 feet. A total of 27 parking stalls are provided to meet the needs for the fire station. The parking meets the required setbacks except along the south lot line. The setback will be reduced from 17.5 feet to 10 feet. Outlot A will be sold to MnDOT for construction of the extension of Linwood Court into Miller Park as part of the T.H.312 highway project(see attached layout plan). Proposed Lot I is 1.15 acres. This site will be sold for commercial development consistent with the existing Neighborhood Commercial zoning. Based on the size of the lot a retail building of up to 10,000 square feet is possible. Prior to any development on Lot 1, a public hearing will be required at the Planning Commission and City Council so surrounding neighbors and the Commission will have an opportunity for review and comment. Staff Report—Eden Prairie Fire Station No. 4 June 10,2005 Page 3 ARCHITECTURE The fire station architecture has a residential look to help fit in better visually with the surrounding residential uses. The building meets the City Code requirement for 75% face brick, glass and stone. The main building is 36 feet in height according to code, and 49 feet in height for the hose tower. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT WAIVERS The following waivers are required. • Lot size of 1.15 acres and lot width of 153 feet for Lot ]; lot size of 1.2 acres for Lot 2. City code requires a minimum lot size of 2 acres and lot width of 200 feet. This waiver is consistent with the underlying approved commercial development for smaller lots. The smaller lots are created for separate ownership. The total site exceeds the 2 acre minimum. • Front yard building setback of 22 feet. City code requires 35 foot front yard setback. This is temporary waiver. Outlot A defines the property that will be sold to MnDOT for construction of the extension of Linwood Court into Miller Park as part of the T.H.312 highway project. A portion of that property will be turned back to the city after the road is completed creating a front yard building setback of 45 feet. • Front yard parking setback of 10 feet. City code requires 17.5 feet on a multiple frontage property. The south property line is considered a front yard because it abuts new T.H.312 right-of- way. The highway will be approximately 200 feet away and at a much lower elevation, and the parking will be screened from view. • Building height of 36 feet, and 49 feet for the hose tower. City code maximum is 30 feet. To accommodate fire trucks and create a residential look to the building the additional 6 feet of building height is needed. The additional height for the hose tower is needed to hang hoses and the required communications antenna. GRADING AND DRAINAGE The site was graded in 1998 and a storm water pond created. No significant trees are on the site. As part of the fire station project the storm water pond will be modified and include additional rain water gardens. Staff Report—Eden Prairie Fire Station No. 4 June 10,2005 Page 4 WETLANDS An isolated wetland is located in the southeast portion of the site. Based on a historical review of the data, staff determined it to be an incidental wetland created after the site was graded and development began to occur around the area. The Watershed District agreed with the City and has issued an exemption to fill the 1,735 square foot incidental wetland. UTILITIES The fire station and future commercial use will be served by city sewer and water. LIGHTINIG Site lighting will consist of downcast antique fixtures approximately 20 feet in height. LANDSCAPING Based on the size of the building a total of 37 caliper inches of trees. The plan meets this requirement. SUMMARY The City needs a fire station to serve the west and southwest portions of the City. The site will retain the ability to provide for retail services for the residents in the area, but will be at a smaller scale and would include retail and restaurant uses. The waivers are the result of ownership, design needs for the fire station, and to create a residential look to the building and the distance from highway 312. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Recommend approval of the following request: • Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 3.66 acres. • Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 3.66 acres. • Zoning District Amendment with the Neighborhood Commercial District on 3.66 acres. • Site Plan Review on 1.32 acres. • Preliminary Plat of 3.66 acres into two lots and one outlot. This is based on plans stamp dated May 20, 2005, and the following conditions: 1. Prior to grading permit issuance, the proponent shall: A. Submit detailed storm water runoff, utility, and erosion control plans for review and approval by the City Engineer and Watershed District. Staff Report—Eden Prairie Fire Station No. 4 June 10,2005 Page 5 B. Notify the City and Watershed District 48 hours in advance of grading. C. Install erosion control on the property. 2. Prior to any development on Lot 1, the future proponent shall submit detailed development plans to the City for review through a public hearing process before the Planning Commission and City Council and obtain approval for those development plans. Station Four Informational Meeting Tuesday, April 19th, 2005 Question: Will T.H. 312 be at grade or lower? Will there be a bridge? Answer: The new highway will be at a lower elevation than Dell Road. Dell Road will bridge over the new highway. Question: When is the T.H. 312 project beginning? Answer: The project is expected to begin in late summer of 2005. Question: What size of trees will be planted? Answer: Trees will range in size from 2.5 caliper inches to 4 caliper inches. Question: Will the trees on the north side of Linwood be disturbed? Answer: No. Question: Will the berm remain? Answer: Most likely. The state may need to modify the grade for the extension of Linwood Court along the west side of the fire station site. Question: Will the pond remain? Answer: Yes. It will need to be modified to accommodate drainage expected from development of the property. Question: Where will the access be to Miller Park? Answer: From the extension of Linwood Court. Question: Why aren't the entrances and exits to the station off of Dell? Answer: Linwood Court provides full access to Dell Road and T.H. 312 for the neighborhood, and this development. There is no safe location to place an access along Dell Road for the area. Question: How many fire calls are there, typically? Answer: 3 to 4 each day. Question: Will there be someone there all the time? Answer: No. Question: Will the sirens be used? Answer: Only when needed to clear traffic. At night, sirens most likely would not be used because the trucks can typically get on the road without issues. Question: Will the sirens be turned on once you are traveling on Dell? Answer: Only as needed for traffic. Question: Can signs with warning lights be installed on the roads so that other drivers are alerted when a truck will be exiting the station? Answer: This is not a standard practice with our other fire stations. The trucks stop and yield to traffic as all other motorists when leaving our fire stations. Question: What will be the impact of the house values in the area? Answer: There is no evidence of reduction of home values on a nationwide basis. But your homeowner's insurance might go down when living closer to the station. Question: Will there be additional assessments for the neighborhood to pay for the station? Answer: No—it is being funded through the City's Capital Improvement budget. Question: What station currently serves this area? Answer: Stations 1 and 3. Question: What apparatus will be at the station? Answer: Current plans call for: 1 Ladder Truck, 1 Engine, 1 light rescue truck, 1 Brush Truck Question: What will the rest of the land be used for? Answer: The property is zoned commercial. No specific use has been identified at this time. A new public hearing will take place when the property is proposed for development. Question: How much land is left for a commercial development? Answer: 1.57 acres. Question: Would the extra land house a large building? Answer: Most likely a one level building, set back from the road. The City will have some control over the architecture since we own the land. Question: Does the City have to sell the land? Answer: The property is zoned and guided commercial and will be sold for commercial development consistent with the comprehensive guide plan. Question: What is the timeframe for selling the 2°d parcel? Answer: Unknown at this time. The property will be marketed once the final plat for the property has been completed. Question: Is the upcoming meeting to approve the fire station only? Answer: Yes. The property will also be platted. Question: Has the plan for T.H. 312 been decided? Answer: Yes. Area Location Map - Eden Prairie Fire Station #4 Address: SE Corner of Linwood Court and Dell Road t � lo / Inverness Curve y ram` Cobblestone Way Erin Bay Kimball Dr. SITE ! Linwood Cr. Dell Road I � 1 �1>N. y Tri J Prairie Eden ire Station Land Use Map 1 1 �7�1 "7, WIN r-"( Inverness Curve f. / G Cobblestone Wa Y i �•; '-r _ Kimball Drive i a 1 Linwood Circle Erin Bay � c Highway SITE x ,..„_s_ .e... . -- -- Dell Road r vfir X f 1 Sdeh if r i L.-ow DensityResidental0-2,5 Unit!'Rcre Regional ommardt4i Low 6enstty,'Pubfictoraerr Space In Parvopen apace h9-dium Density residential 2.5-10 Llnl s Acre L.... 7 Putlrc'4uasi-Pukl t: j 1 Medium Density ResidentiaPOffice Chun%v Ceimtan{ ., Kgh Density Residential 1040 UnitstAcre open water Office Right-Of-Way Officellndustrial ' OffrcatPublicrapen Space Metsopolitan Urpan Service Line(MUSA) Principal Arterial Industrial Creeks AMinorArterial 03lu OAT%"Rt,i 001"07-05 Neighbortiocd Commercial --�- B Mirlar Arterial __..-Community Comrrer6al °�'^ �'h ajor allectnr (aeiiwn nri --Minor Collector Eden Prairie Fire Station n #4 Zoning Map �. � . `-� f Inverness Curve " ram` Cobblestone Way y F �f rp f �.�- V.: "~=---•�`�'"� ��. ,� Kimball Drive 70 Erin Bay I �- I Linwood Circle SITE 1 Highway 312 �1 { . '` i � ell Roo �-t y : " - City of Pr` i , .Rural One Fa miry-16 acre min J industrial Park-2 Acre Min, Shoretand Management Classifications Ri-44 One Family-44,OW sf,min, Industrial Park-5 Acre min, 6 Natural Environment Waters RI-22 One Faritty-22,0 t min, General industrial-5 Acre min.06, Recreational Development Waters R1-1 as One Family-13,500 sr miry Public Ffi—ol General Development Waters(Creeks Only) R745 One Family-8,500 sf min. �water ® 100- Year Fioodplain RM-6.5 Multl.Fam ty-6,7 U.P.A.max l Right-of-Way g ay 9312 West of County Road rA rs propos.,ed,M Constructed at thus time. Up dated through Ordinance#06-2005 RM-2,5 F utU-Family-l7.4 U.P.A,max, Chanhassen City limits Cdinance*33-2001(Elf-I Addition)aWaxed.NA riot apxwm w ttus rrwp odd6tr Office bate.May&,20G5 1 _ i _m Neighborhood Commerc l ..ww<,•.�x,.=wn�•x � �-�.=m.�a.o...aa.� set q••WNaa+f4uepFa+o��N ew,w....&p CMa.+w k....z.. 'Community Commercial �p Highway Commercial Regional Service Commercial Regional Commercial 04 LINWOOD COJJR we I %J/C . ....... Vol R I go in I INN, e 0 0 ----------------- lJ BRIDGE NO. 27137 1 --,Mqlq ---- ---------- i ------ MILLER PARK WEST 4 , v APPROVED T o-3 12' LAVoif Ff-KI4 -. STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Michael D. Franzen, City Planner DATE: February 24, 1995 SUBJECT: Delegard Commercial APPLICANT/ FEE OWNER: Curt and Duane Delegard LOCATION: Dell Road and Linwood Court REQUEST: 1. Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 94.15 acres. 2. Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 3.66 acres. 3. Rezoning from Rural to Neighborhood Commercial on 3.66 acres. 4. Preliminary Plat of 3.66 acres into 3 lots. 5. Site Plan Review on 3.66 acres. 1 ima ■iwjra .. gig NIP �'r'•,� � ill •• �'° �- � � ,� . � HIM Staff Report Delegard Commercial February 24, 1995 BACKGROUND In 1993 the City Council approved a Comprehensive Guide Plan Change for this site from Rural to Neighborhood Commercial. A Planned Unit Development Concept Plan was also approved totalling 19,840 sq. ft. of building on 3 lots. Land uses approved were a restaurant, gas convenience store, and general retail. PRELIMINARY PLAT The preliminary plat depicts [he subdivision of 3.66 acres into 3 lots. All of the lots are less than the 2 acre minimum lot size requirement in the Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District. A Planned Unit Development waiver is required. Staff believes that the Planned Unit Development waiver should be granted since the total aggregate area is greater than 2 acres. SITE PLAN The site plan depicts the construction of three buildings totalling 19,840 sq. ft. on 3.66 acres at a base area ratio of .124. The Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District would allow up to a .20 base area ratio. All buildings meet the required 35 foot front yard setback from public roads. The project meets side and rear yard setbacks. Parking required for this site is based upon 8 spaces per 1,000 for the general retail building, 1 per 3 seats for the restaurant, and 20 spaces for the gas convenience store. This is a total requirement of 134 parking spaces. The site plan depicts a total of 134 parking spaces with 9 handicapped spaces meeting ADA requirements. Zero lot line setbacks to parking are required and is a planned unit development waiver. This type of waiver is common in shopping centers. Staff supports the waiver, provided the property owners enter into a cross-access and maintenance agreement. ARCHITECTURE The PUD approval required that all buildings be designed with a residential character using similar roof lines and materials to the surrounding multiple family buildings. The buildings as proposed are designed with a pitched roof and will be using a similar brick color to match. Stucco will be used as an accent material, rather than siding. Since the building is meeting the 75% brick and glass requirement of City code, staff does not have a problem with the accent material being stucco as compared to the siding. 2 Staff Report Delegard Commercial February 24, 1995 The mechanical units are ground mounted and physically screened by a wall. LANDSCAPING The amount of landscaping required for this site is based upon a caliper inch requirement according to total building square footage, screening of parking and loading areas, and transition to the surrounding residential areas. The landscape plan meets these requirements. LIGHTING There are two primary concerns with lighting. One is the intensity of light underneath the gas canopy and the visibility from the residential areas. The other is the intensity of lighting and visibility of the backside of the retail building facing the multiple family buildings to the east. The lighting plan shows the location and intensity of lighting. It does not, indicate the intensity of lighting under the canopy, Gas pumps are typically lighted between 80 to 100 foot candles. The restaurant and the retail building, plus landscaping will shield some of the lighting from the adjoining residential areas to the north. Lighting under the canopy must be recessed so that no side glare is apparent. Lights on the backside of the retail building should be a downcast cutoff luminar. Lights should be mounted no higher than 10 feet off the ground. Since this project is adjacent to residential, the maximum height of all light poles should be no greater than 20 feet. TRASH ENCLOSURES Trash is a frequent complaint from adjoining residents near Neighborhood Commercial areas. Most of these complaints are due to inadequate areas provided for trash. Since 1990, the City has required larger trash enclosure areas for general commercial use based upon a ratio of one square foot enclosure for every 38 square feet of building. This will be large enough to handle trash and recycling. The plan meets this requirement. The restaurant must provide a total of 288 square feet of enclosure area for recycling, general refuse, and trash compactor. This is to be located inside of the building with access by an overhead door. The gas convenience station will have an outside enclosure of approximately 135 square feet. 3 Staff Report Delegard Commercial February 24, 1995 SIGNS There are two signs that are permitted by code. 1. One, 80 square foot, 20 foot high pylon sign (along Dell Road at a 20' setback.) 2. One, 36 square foot, monument sign along Linwood Court, also at a 20' setback. These signs have not been designed, but staff would suggest that they be constructed out of similar materials and colors as the entrance monument signs for the residential areas to the north. GRADING AND TREE LOSS This site contains no significant trees. The site was previously graded as part of the approval of the overall PUD. DRAINAGE AND STORM WATER QUALITY A pretreatment pond has been designed to NURP standards. This is located on the northeast corner of the site. UTILITIES Sewer and water service is immediately adjacent on the property. SIDEWALKS AND TRAILS An 8 foot wide bituminous trail must be constructed along Dell Road. Due to the right turn lane into the project, and a right turn lane into Linwood Court, there was not enough room to construct the trail within Dell Road right of way. Since the trail is located on private property, the City will need an easement agreement from the property owner for access. This project will also be required to construct a five-foot wide concrete sidewalk along Linwood Court. Part of this sidewalk is on private property and will also require an easement agreement. There are sidewalk connections proposed from the sidewalk along Linwood Court to the restaurant and retail buildings. 4 Staff Report Delegard Commercial February 24, 1995 TRAFFIC As part of the Planned Unit Development review, the City requested a traffic study to analyze the potential impacts of commercial traffic in this location. Based upon the traffic volumes proposed, changes were made in the design of Linwood Court and Dell Road to accommodate deceleration lanes off of Dell Road, a right-turn lane to Linwood Court, and a right-turn lane from Linwood Court to Dell Road. Linwood Court was increased in right-of-way from 50 to 60 feet wide. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The staff would recommend approval of the project based on plans dated February 24, 1995, subject to the Staff Report dated February 24, 1995 and subject to the following conditions: 1, Prior to final plat approval, the proponent shall: A. Submit detailed storm water runoff, utility and erosion control plans for review by the Watershed District. B. Submit detailed storm water runoff, utility and erosion control plans for review by the City Engineer. 2. Prior to Building Permit issuance, the proponent shall: A. Pay the appropriate cash park fee. B. Meet with the Fire Marshal to go over fire code requirements. C. Submit samples of exterior building materials for review. D. Submit a landscaping and screening bond for review. 3. Planned Unit Development Waivers are granted for lot size less than 2 acres in the Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District and zero lot line setback to parking in the Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District. 4. Prior to release of the final plat, the Developer shall submit a cross-access and maintenance agreement for review and approval by the City Engineer. 5 / rr t� ,1 c i. , Z z' '�- ILI- -j z \\ ��. 7 r PREPARED FOR: z gg COURT CURT-d OLIAHE DELEGARD gI ............. DCLCG 0 TOOL, CO. ;05 EASAIR7611,STREET 0 BLDOMINGI z 302 9 T 2" -co F-F ec 't POND RESTAURANT SHOM UEAU SIT DC"I 175 9 CATS LOT I TF]q* 11,74 L L, % \ _ RETAIL —,5 La \ `PZ — LOT 2�j 9 0 ,A 0 w G SI.') 0SCO 11 N V. z z:2 I'l Joff It !TR IIIIIER <Lj z In w z -j 1181.3,54.w 0 w u (TIC DATA 0 C.151114G zatill'G AG TOTAL summG so.rT. 19.840 S.F. EXISTING COUP PLAU tf-com TOTAL RETAIL so, FT. 9.0 NORAI 00 S.F. 0 REQUIRED PARKING 8/10DOSr '7 SP 10 FeelPROPOSED ZOIRIIG 14-com TOTAL RERIR'T. so. Ft. 125 SCATS 5.700 S.F. 125 SEATS REOUIRED PARKING J SP/SEAT 42 SP 93-1003 TOTAL LOT SO,F1 150.384 Sr. 3.659 AC. TOTAL CAs/comv. so.FT. 5,140 S.F. 0: LEGAL IDESCRIP 71014 LOT 1 75.007 Sr I.—AC. P ARKRIC 20 SP < .­2/23/95 OUILO H HA%viijoatic or CDE14 PITA LOT 2 j4.6s2 sr, c AC. PAR z m K G RCO into 34 SP TOTAL E104PUIA COU10'r. MIIIIIESOIA lot LOT J 45.896 Sr. I.i,d AC. PARKING AVAUILABLE 125 SP . 0 HAIJOICAP NORM tru 0 of? (. �EN Al. OUILDI14C COKrAGE 1�1.4= 5 o "' _ \ \ - 13A SPACE 3 of 7 N Planning Commission Minutes (unapproved)June 13,2005 C. EDEN PRAIRIE FIRE STATION No. 4, by the City of Eden Prairie. Request is for a Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 3.66 acres; Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 3.66 acres; Zoning District Amendment within the Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District on 3.66 acres; Site Plan Review on 1.32 acres; Preliminary Plat of 3.66 acres into two lots and one outlot. Scott Neal, City Manager for Eden Prairie, stated that they are here to propose the fourth fire station for Eden Prairie and will be in the southwest quadrant of Eden Prairie. This has been part of the City's development plan for over a decade. Miles Britz, project architect for SEH Inc., presented the proposal. He used the overhead projector to illustrate exactly where the fire station would be located, which would be between Dell Road and Linwood Court. He stated that the fire station would be built on the southern area of lot 2. Mr. Britz pointed out that Miller Parkway would be created this year to allow direct assess to the fire station. He stated that they have created a rain garden for storm water run off. This will also purify the water because there are drain tiles in the water gardens to recharge the water. He showed an image of the fire station and how the design would blend in with the residential area. Stoelting asked Mr. Britz where the 27 parking stalls are going to be located and why so many stalls. Mr. Britz stated that it is based on the number of firefighters. Stoelting asked Kipp to review the staff report. Kipp stated that an underlying plan approval for a commercial development took place in 1985 but was not constructed. He pointed out that the fire station is authorized for any zoning district. He also said that lot 1 will be sold by the City for commercial development. Kipp pointed out that there are some waivers associated with the project, and includes setbacks, lot size and building height. Staff recommendation is for approval. Stoelting asked Kipp about the front yard building setback and questioned which road it would be,Linwood Court or Miller Parkway. Kipp said that it is along Miller Parkway. The staff report indicated Linwood Ct. Stoelting opened the meeting up for public input. Craig and Mary Peterson, of 8430 Kimball Drive, had three questions and one comment. The first question is would there be a stoplight or stop sign at the cul-de-sac. The second question would be if the stop sign can have a flashing light when the fire trucks come up. The third question would be when the fire trucks come out could they go the other direction because of the many children on Linwood. Their comment was that a lot of money has come into the land and they want the City to be careful about what they put into lot 1. Stoelting asked Gray to address the traffic flow issue of the fire station and the concept of the flashing light. Gray stated that there are a lot of fire stations that exist in residential environments without a lot of conflict; because of this he does not see a need for a signal at Linwood Court because this is not a high traffic area. Mr. Britz stated that the reason the vehicles go out on Dell Road is because 90%of their calls will have to have access to go either north or south on Dell Road and not the other direction. There will be a 4 way controlled stop light at Dell Road and Linwood Court. Stoelting asked Mr. Britz if there were any sidewalks in the area. Mr. Britz stated that there are walkways on Dell Road and they will be straightened out per MNDOT. There will also be new walkways developed by MNDOT. Stoelting asked Mr. Britz what will be going into lot 1. Mr. Britz stated that the developer has no actual plan for what will go in there but that they City has controlled of what will be placed in that area. Seymour stated that he liked the design of the fire station. MOTION by Kacher, seconded by Koenig,to close the public hearing. Motion carried 6-0. MOTION by Kacher, seconded by Nelson, to approve the request for Planned Unit Development Concept Amendment on 3.66 acres; Planned Unit District Review with waivers on 3.66 acres; Zoning District Amendment within the Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District on 3.66 acres; Site Plan Review on 1.32 acre; Preliminary Plat of 3.66 acres into two lots and one outlot, based on plans stamp dated May 20, 2005, subject to the recommendations of the staff report dated June 10, 2005, to the City Council. Motion carried 6-0. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Public Hearings July 5,2005 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: VII. C. Community Development/Planning Prairie Estates Janet Jeremiah Scott Kipp Requested Action Move to: • Close the Public Hearing; and • Adopt the Resolution for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 6.47 acres; and • Approve 1 st Reading of the Ordinance for Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers, and Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 6.47 acres; and • Adopt the Resolution for Preliminary Plat on 6.47 acres into ten lots, two outlots and road right-of-way; and • Direct Staff to prepare a Development Agreement incorporating Staff and Board recommendations and Council conditions. Synopsis This is for a 10 lot single-family development. The plans meet the requirements of the R1-13.5 zoning district. Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the project to the City Council at its June 13, 2005 meeting. The Commission also recommended granting an additional waiver for average lot depth of less than 100 feet for Lot 10 to accommodate the existing wetland wholly within Outlot B. Background Information A Planned Unit Development waiver is required for cul-de-sac length of 660 feet for 62°d Street West. Code maximum is 500 feet. This waiver may be reasonable for the following reasons: 1. The project reconfigures the existing cul-de-sac without the need for additional roads within the development. 2. Provides public road frontage for the neighboring property to the west to accommodate a future lot to complete development around the cul-de-sac. Prairie Estates July 5, 2005-Page 2 A large wetland exists within the south half of the property. Most of the wetland is located within Outlot B,which will be dedicated to the city. Shifting the lot line of Lot 10 to the south will keep all of the wetland within Outlot B. This requires a waiver for average lot depth less than 100 feet. A Phase 1 Environmental Assessment was completed for the property. The Assessment recommends a follow up review of the property take place after the boats and cars are removed. This analysis may involve testing the soil for contaminants. The staff recommends that this analysis be completed before the final plat is released by the City. This is important since portions of the property will be dedicated to the City for roads and wetlands. The plans have been revised according to the staff report and Planning Commission recommendations, including shifting the lot line for Lot 10 allowing for the wetland to be wholly within Outlot B. Attachments 1. Resolution for PUD Concept 2. Resolution for Preliminary Plat 3. Staff Report dated June 10, 2005 4. Site Location Map 5. Land Use Map 6. Zoning Map 7. Planning Commission minutes dated June 13, 2005 PRAIRIE ESTATES CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2005- A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT OF PRAIRIE ESTATES FOR T.H. PARKER,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 Planning Commission did conduct a public hearing on June 13, 2005, on Prairie Estates by T.H. Parker, Inc. 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 July 5, 2005. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, as follows: 1. Prairie Estates, 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 June 24, 2005. 3. That the PUD Concept meets the recommendations of the Planning Commission June 13, 2005. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 5t'day of July, 2005. Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen Porta, City Clerk EXHIBIT A Prairie Estates - PUD Concept Legal Description: PARCEL 1: The East 110 feet of the West 281 feet of the North 300 feet of the Northeast'/4 of the Northwest '/4 of Section 5, Township 116, Range 22, Hennepin County, Minnesota. PARCEL 2: The West 300 feet of the East 521 feet of the following described property: All that part of the Northeast 1/4 of the Northwest'/4 of Section 5,Township 116,Range 22 described as follows: Commencing at a point in the North line of said Northeast'/4 of said Northwest'/4 ,which is 538 feet West of the Northeast corner thereof,thence West along said North line 803 feet,more or less to the Northwest corner of the Northeast '/4 thence South along the West line of said Northeast '/4 763.3 feet;thence East 803 feet to a point which is 789.2 feet North of the South line of said Northeast'/4; thence North 821.5 feet to the point to beginning according to the United States Government Survey thereof and situate in Hennepin County, Minnesota. PRAIRIE ESTATES CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2005- RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF PRAIRIE ESTATES FOR T.H.PARKER,INC. BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of Prairie Estates for T.H.Parker, Inc stamp dated June 24, 2005, and consisting of 6.47 acres into ten lots,two outlots 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 5 h day of July, 2005. Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Scott A. Kipp, Senior Planner DATE: June 10, 2005 SUBJECT: Prairie Estates APPLICANT: T. H. Parker, Inc. OWNER: Dale E. Evans LOCATION: 17017 and 17109 62"d Street West REQUEST: 1. Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 6.47 acres 2. Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 6.47 acres 3. Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 6.47 acres 4. Preliminary Plat of 6.47 acres into 10 lots, two outlot and road right-of- way Staff Report—Prairie Estates June 10,2005 Page 2 BACKGROUND The Comprehensive Guide Plan shows this site and adjacent property as Low Density Residential for up to 2.5 units per acre. Surrounding zoning is R1-13.5 to the east and south, and Rural to the west. PRELIMINARY PLAT The proposal is to rezone the property from Rural to R1-13.5 and subdivide into 10 single-family lots. The density of the project is 1.54 units per acre. All lots meet or exceed 13,500 square feet as required in the R1-13.5 zoning district. The average lot size is 15,497 square feet. The lots meet the dimensional and frontage requirements of the R1-13.5 zoning district. Outlots A and B will be dedicated to the City. GRADING AND TREE LOSS There are 1,265 diameter inches of significant trees on the property. A total of 660 diameter inches of significant trees will be lost due to the development. Tree replacement is 456 caliper inches. The tree replacement plan shows 456 caliper inches meeting this requirement. UTILITIES AND DRAINAGE Sewer and water will serve the property from lines within Country Road and 62"d Street West. A NURP pond is proposed within Outlot A. WETLANDS A moderate quality wetland is located in the south portion of the property. No alteration is proposed within the wetland or wetland buffer area, and no structures are proposed within the structure setback. Portions of the wetland and wetland buffer are shown within Lot 10. Typically wetlands and wetland buffers are placed into outlots that are dedicated to the city to ensure their protection. Staff recommends that the majority of the wetland and wetland buffer be placed within Outlot B. This can be accommodated while maintaining the lot size requirement for Lot 10. Those portions of wetland and wetland buffer to remain within Lot 10 will need to be placed within a conservation easement. ENVIRONMENT ASSESSMENT A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment indicates the presence of solid waste and the open storage of cars and boats on the property. Since the audit was completed with snow still on the ground it limited observations for stressed vegetation and surficial staining. A follow up review Staff Report—Prairie Estates June 10,2005 Page 3 of the property is needed after the boats and cars are removed. This analysis may involve testing the soil for contaminants. The staff recommends that this analysis be completed before the final plat is released by the City. This is important since portions of the property will be dedicated to the City for roads and wetlands. ACCESS All but two lots will take access from 62°d Street West. Lot 5 will take access from County Road, and Lot 10 from Claycross Way. A Planned Unit Development waiver is required for cul-de-sac length of 660 feet for 62°d Street West. Code maximum is 500 feet. This waiver may be reasonable for the following reasons: 1. The project reconfigures the existing cul-de-sac without the need for additional roads within the development. 2. Provides public road frontage for the neighboring property to the west to accommodate a future lot to complete development around the cul-de-sac. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Recommend approval of the following request: • Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 6.47 acres. • Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 6.47 acres. • Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 6.47 acres. • Preliminary Plat of 6.47 acres into 10 lots, two outlot and road right-of-way. This is based on plans stamp dated May 19, 2005,the Staff Report dated June 10, 2005 and the following conditions: 1. Prior to City Council review, the proponent shall revise the preliminary plat to include as much of the wetland and wetland buffer within Outlot B. Any remaining wetland or wetland buffer within Lot 10 is to be shown within a conservation easement. 2. Prior to release of the final plat, the proponent shall: A. Submit detailed storm water runoff, utility, and erosion control plans for review and approval by the City Engineer and Watershed District. B. Submit for review by the Environmental Coordinator a follow-up review as recommended in the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, dated March 22, 2005, by American Engineering Testing, Inc. 3. Prior to grading permit issuance, the proponent shall: A. Notify the City and Watershed District 48 hours in advance of grading. Staff Report—Prairie Estates June 10,2005 Page 4 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. 4. Prior to building permit issuance for the property, the proponent shall: A. Provide a tree replacement surety equivalent to 150%of the cost of the tree replacement for 456 caliper inches. B. Pay the Cash Park Fee. 5. The Planned Unit Development waiver is granted for a cul-de-sac length of 660 feet. City code maximum is 500 feet. it Area Location Map - Prairie Estates Address: 17109 and 17017 West 62nd Street Crosstwons{Co. Duck Lake Rd. SITE i/ \ Count Rd.. try .J7 I Claycross Way J Whispering Oaks Dr. _ Chatham Way \ Daniel La. No Scale,�� Prairie Estates .end Use Map £ SITE w z Country Roadi—T a` t Duck Lake Road iz Clayeross Way Chatham Way £ Whispering Qaks Drive p Daniel Lane w ! t - �.� ( 2 h" E : Duels Lake Trail " a i- a G-a , E I Map Low Density Residential 0-2,5 UaitslAcre Regional Commercial Law DensityfPubliotOpen Space ParktOpen Space Medium Density residential 2,5-10 UnitstAcre , �- PublidQuast"Public ` r � a Medium Density ResidentiaLOffice p Churcw Cemetary High Density Residential 10.40 Units/Acre Open Water } Ofte Right-UN Way a Office;4ndussiai Metropolitan UrbanService Line(tvtUSA)- Principal Arteriali7fficelPubticlC?pen Space O tekrial .. Creeks —A Minor Arterial DATE AVPMftdrta"ta4n li-idDATE,Revas1 Rt-07-05 Neighborhood Commercial """""B MirlafRfterial Community Commercial -Major Collector � -Minor Collector Prairie Estates Zoning Map Country Road i .......:......_ _ SITE I Duck Lake Road _ t Claycrass Way --� Chatham W t f Whispering Oaks Drive wf _ L1anlel La __.... l x . t Yt fus Park e Min,One Family-to acre min ihoreland Management Classifications Rl-44 Family-4s.000 sf.min. industrial Park w 6Acre tufin. GE Natural Environment Waters j €..R1 22 One Family-22,000 sf min. Generat industrial•5 Aery Min. Recreational Development Waters L _�rti-Ts,S One r-ar,uyt3,5W sf min, ;, Puttc General Development Waters(Creeks Only) £zs.5.5 One€amky-9,500 sf min Water 104- Year Figodplain RM-B_5 MGit%F�m$y-6 7 U P:A.max. i Right-of-Way t+qh ay 9312 Wesi of County Road#4 is proposed,rod.wnstructed at this time. Up dated Net*Ordm nav#08-20DS RM-2.5 Multi-Family-1 7.4 U,RA�max j Chanhassen City limits Ordnance 433-2001(RF1 Aft inn)apvroved,nut rust shawl On this map edition "€Office Date May 5,2005 ► 1 i NeVhborhoodCommerciat end.a£x,9rt aMn lrw+4aM'tF w.2 CA.M BVM G.nr cro...+�p«a ,�J,Community Comnsemial Highway Commercial Regional Service Commercial Regional Commercial Planning Commission Minutes (unapproved)June 13,2005 B. PRAIRIE ESTATES, by T.H. Parker, Inc. Request is for a Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 6.47 acres; Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 6.47 acres; Zoning District Change from Rural to R1-13.5 on 6.47 acres; and Preliminary Plat of 6.47 acres into 10 lots, two outlots and road right-of.--way. Thomas Parker, of 5100 Norman Drive in Minnetonka, presented the proposal with the assistance of Charlie Howie, engineer of the project. Mr. Parker stated that the property is 6.5 acres with two single-family homes. He also stated that the current owner, who owns both of the pieces of property, would be moving out of the area. He stated that their current proposal does meet the requirements of the City. Charlie Howie presented the plan to redevelop the two existing properties. He illustrated the proposal using an overhead projection. He showed access to all lots. He stated that Staff wanted to keep a substantial amount of wetland in outlot B, which they have done. Mr. Howie also stated that portions of lot 10 would be placed within a wetland conservation easement. He stated that they will also be dedicating additional right of way for 62°d Street. All the lots meet the setback requirements by the City. Outlots A and B will be dedicated to the City. They have met all of the City's requirements except for the length of the cul-de-sac,which they will be seeking a waiver from the City to have that extended. Mr. Howie stated that the tree loss would be met within the City standards. Stoelting asked Mr. Howie if an Environmental Assessment was completed and Mr. Howie confirmed that it was. Stoelting asked Kipp to review the staff report. Kipp stated that this property is to be rezoned to R1-13.5, which would be consistent with the surrounding area. He stated that there is a large wetland that will be dedicated to the City. He explained that when the City looks at a wetland they try to contain as much as possible in an outlot to maximize wetland preservation. The Commission can support a PUD waiver for average lot depth of less than 100 feet for Lot 10 to accommodate the staff recommendation for the wetland to be placed within the outlot. The other waiver for the length of the cul-de-sac is supported by the staff because the majority of the property served by extending cul-de-sac and provides public access to other neighboring property for future development. Kipp stated that the City recommendation is for approval. Stoelting opened the meeting up for public input. Stefan Peterson, of 6311 Country Road, had a question regarding outlot A and how it would be configured. He also was concerned about the tree loss. Mike Lanigan, of 6251 Country Road, had the same concerns as Mr. Peterson in wanting to maintain as many trees as possible. He was specifically concerned with what would happen to the trees on the east side of the project. His other concern was the outlot pond and the concern for safety for children in the neighborhood. Mr. Lanigan also asked if the sidewalks would still be kept. John Marshalla, of 17039 Claycross Way, wanted to address the trees in lot 10 and asked if they are normally tagged as to which trees are staying and which trees are going. Kipp stated that the developer does look at all of the trees as part of preparing development plans. Fox confirmed that the developer does do a complete inventory on the trees; but they do not have to inventory elms, box elders, and willows. Mr. Marshalla stated that he and the neighbors do enjoy the trees in the area and he is concerned because it looks as if half of those trees will be taken out. Mr. Marshalla also asked if lot 10 was going to have access via a driveway from Claycross Way. Kipp confirmed that was correct. Mr. Marshalla asked where the house was going to be placed. Kipp stated that it would be placed in the largest developable portion of lot 10. He stated that it does provide for a house pad design and could possibly be a custom built home. Mr. Marshalla reiterated his concern for the tree loss and asked if they had a plan in place for the planting of new trees. Stoelting stated that there is a landscaping plan that the developer submitted. Stefan Peterson wanted to know the elevation of the lot in the northeast corner, north of the pond and what kind of homes were going to be built in that area. Charles Gould, of 6285 Duck Lake Road, stated that he has lived at this address since 1962, and was concerned about the tree loss in the area. He stated that previously they were promised sewer and water by the City and have not received that yet, and now has some concerns with this forthcoming project. Stoelting asked Mr. Gould if his concern was that he was going to be assessed for storm sewer or sanitary sewer. Mr. Gould stated that was his concern. Stoelting summarized the questions and issues that were brought before the Commission and the project proponent. They are as follows: 1. Outlot A and how it will be configured and also what will be the impact to the trees in the area. 2. The issue of the sidewalks on the east side of this property and also the impact to the trees in that area. 3. The outlot pond and how safe it would he. 4. Waiver for the cul-de-sac and is there a possibility that it could be moved more towards the east. 5. Would there be storm water pipes between outlot A and the wetlands. 6. What are the expectations for lot 2; will there be elevation changes. 7. Concerns for lot 10; what is the landscaping plan, and provide an explanation of the access driveway on this lot. 8. The property owner to the southwest of this project plan has some concerns about tree loss and assessments. 9. Address the wetlands. Thomas Parker addressed the issue of lot 10 and described how it was to be configured using the overhead projector. He stated that initially they were going to divide it into two lots but decided to keep it as one large lot. He also stated that the foliage in the area, as well as the wetlands,would remain untouched. Mr. Parker stated that lot 10 would definitely have a woodsy feel to it. Mr. Parker stated that the sidewalks would also remain untouched. In regards to lot 2, Mr. Parker stated that the spruce trees would be untouched and that there would be a driveway access to this area. The home that would be put on this would be a one level rambler. He also stated that Mr. Labotta's property, which is located by the cul-de- sac, would benefit him at the time he chooses to develop because he would get three lots out of his property, not just two, because one lot can utilize the proposed cul-de-sac. Mr. Howie used the overhead protector to illustrate the tree loss to the lot 10 area. He stated that there would be 4 significant trees that would stay in that area. He said that the reason that lot 10 could not be moved is because of the sewer pipe that drains in that area. Mr. Howie pointed out that with their landscaping plan, they are saving a substantial amount of trees. He also addressed the pond issue stating that it would be between 4 and 5 feet deep and that they would be willing to put a fence around the area if required to do so. He also addressed the issue of the movement of the cul-de-sac in regards to the waivers. He stated it was placed in that location to provide the best access to the property. It was a recommendation by the City. Kipp stated that the cul-de-sac was placed there in order to allow full development of the property and also for access to the neighboring property. He stated that this was the most efficient use of the right-of- way. He also stated that the wetland area has been delineated and is fully within the development area. The staff is recommending that portion of lot 10 be included in outlot B. Kipp stated that the sidewalk would remain intact, except for a portion where the sewer line will be installed. Gray stated that in regards to the storm water pond, it is partially for esthetic value and that is why they are not fenced. In regards to safety, the City has not had any issues with that. Gray said that in regards to assessments, the City would not be doing any assessing on this property since the developer will be completing all the infrastructure improvements. Stoelting asked if development plans in the area have deviated from what was approved with regard to the trees in the area. Fox stated that at the time of neighboring development there was no tree preservation polity or ordinance. Fox stated that the developer is not responsible for mitigating the non-significant trees. Stoelting addressed the Commission for comments. Koenig asked Fox if moving the cul-de-sac to the east would save more trees. Fox stated that shifting the cul-de-sac to the east would not save any more trees. He stated that the developer is putting in over 100 trees. Koenig asked if it would help the tree loss to have less lots. Kipp stated that this developer is not over developing the land and that it is a reasonable development for the area. Removing an additional lot or two would not appreciably affect the tree loss. Nelson asked if the reason lot 2 is facing the driveway was because of its height and she stated that it would seem more reasonable to extend it to Country Road. Kipp stated that the access to W. 62°d is the most feasible approach. Nelson asked about lot 10, in regards to wetland going further into the lot and has there been any consideration for putting the west end into the wetland permanently instead of including it with lot 10. Kipp stated that Staff is recommending that the majority of that wetland be placed in outlot B. This is to preserve the wetland. Nelson asked if it was ever thought of to put it into outlot B versus a conservation easement. Mr. Howie stated that marketability wise, it was not considered. Kacher stated that he is concerned with consistency and that this project seemed to have the same tree loss as the previous proposal and questioned why would the Commission turn down one project and recommend support of another project. Kipp stated that there is a difference between landscaping trees and naturally occurring trees. Fox stated that the previous project had 25"diameter oak trees where this project has 16" spruce trees. Nelson stated that in regards to tree loss, both cases are very different. Seymour made the point that in this proposal, the Staff is addressing 10 lots versus 2 lots. Rocheford stated that he agrees with Nelson in that these are two separate cases in regards to tree loss and he would be in favor of this project. Paul Forrest, of 6227 Country Road, which is directly across the pond on the proposed project asked how far the and will be setback from the P p p J p sidewalk where the kids will be walking from the bus stop. Mr. Howie used an overhead projection to show where the pond is located;which would be 40 feet from the back of the sidewalk. He also stated that two more spruce trees can be added to the area to act as a buffer. Fox also added that three parks in the City have ponds in them and there have been no problems. MOTION by Nelson, seconded by Kacher, to close the public hearing. Motion carried 6-0. MOTION by Nelson, seconded by Kacher, to approve the request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 6.47 acres; Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers on 6.47 acres; Zoning District Change from Rural to R1- 13.5 on 6.47 acres; Preliminary Plat of 6.47 acres into 10 lots,two outlots and road right-of-way, based on plans stamp dated May 19, 2005, subject to the recommendations of the staff report dated June 10, 2005, to the City Council. Also recommending a waiver for average lot depth of less than 100 feet for lot 10 allowing for the wetland to be placed within the outlot. Motion carried 6-0. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Public Hearings July 5, 2005 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: VII. D. Community Development/Planning Duck Lake Knoll Janet Jeremiah Scott Kipp Requested Action Move to: • Close the Public Hearing; and • Approve 1st Reading of the Ordinance for Zoning District Amendment within the R1-13.5 Zoning District on one acre; and • Adopt the Resolution for Preliminary Plat on one acre into two lots and road right-of-way; and • Direct Staff to prepare a Development Agreement incorporating Staff and Board recommendations and Council conditions. Synopsis This is for a two lot single-family development. The plan meets the requirements of the R1-13.5 zoning district. Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend denial of the project to the City Council at its June 13, 2005 meeting. The reason for this recommendation was based on the environmental impacts of 5 1% significant oak tree loss and the developer's unwillingness to revise the plan as recommended in the staff report. The developer felt that shifting the lot line would impact the marketability of the lots. Following this meeting, staff met with the developer to discuss the staff s recommended revisions to the plan which reduces the tree loss to 29%. The developer realized that adequate building area remained for both lots with implementing the recommendations of the staff report. The plans have now been revised based on the recommendations of the staff report and resolve a drainage concern for the property. Staff recommends approval. Duck Lake Knoll July -5, 2005 e 2 Page Background Information There are 20 oak trees totaling 485 diameter inches of significant trees on the property. Shifting the common lot line to make proposed Lot 2, 95 feet wide and approximately 13,800 square feet in size will reduce tree loss from 5 1%to 29%by adjusting the size and location for the proposed houses. A catch basin has been extended into the property along the north property line. This will provide an outlet for some trapped drainage affecting this site and the neighboring site to the north. To help ensure protection of these trees, exclusionary tree fencing together with specific development agreement requirements for house placement and driveway locations would be appropriate. Attachments 1. Resolution for Preliminary Plat 2. Staff Report dated June 10, 2005 3. Attachment A 4. Site Location Map 5. Land Use Map 6. Zoning Map 7. Planning Commission minutes dated June 13, 2005 DUCK LAKE KNOLL CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2005- RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF DUCK LAKE KNOLL FOR EPIC DEVELOPMENT,LLC BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of Duck Lake Knoll for Epic Development, LLC stamp dated June 24, 2005, and consisting of one acre into two 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 51h day of July, 2005. Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen Porta, City Clerk STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Scott A. Kipp, Senior Planner DATE: June 10, 2005 SUBJECT: Duck Lake Knoll APPLICANT: EPIC Development, LLC. OWNER: Mary F. Eisler LOCATION: 6700 Duck Lake Road REQUEST: 1. Zoning District Amendment in the R1-13.5 Zoning District on 1.0 acre. 2. Preliminary Plat of 1.0 acre into 2 lots and road right-of-way. Staff Report—Duck Lake Knoll June 10,2005 Page 2 BACKGROUND The Comprehensive Guide Plan shows this site and adjacent roe as Low Density P J property rh' h' Residential for up to 2.5 units per acre. Surrounding zoning is R1-13.5. There is an existing house and garage located on the property. PRELIMINARY PLAT The proposal is to plat the property into two single-family lots. The density of the project is 2.0 units per acre, with a net density of 2.47 units per acre less the road right-of-way. Each lot is 17,756 square feet,exceeding the minimum 13,500 square foot requirement. Lot dimensional and frontage requirements also conform to the R1-13.5 zoning district. The adjacent lots along Duck Lake Road average 13,600 square feet. GRADING AND TREE LOSS There are 20 oak trees totaling 485 diameter inches of significant trees on the property. Tree loss has been calculated at 51%, or 249 diameter inches, based on the proposed house pads that are 95 feet wide and 50 feet deep, or 4,750 square feet. Tree replacement is 169 caliper inches. The tree replacement plan shows 169 caliper inches meeting this requirement. Shifting the common lot line to make proposed Lot 2, 95 feet wide and approximately 13,800 square feet in size will reduce tree loss from 5 1%to 29%by adjusting the size and location for the proposed houses. Tree replacement would be reduced to 54 caliper inches (see Attachment A). UTILITIES Sewer and water is available to the site from Duck Lake Road. THREE LOT PLAN The proponent requests that the alternative three lot plan be provided for your information. Any decision regarding this plan would require a new public hearing process. The plan shows three single-family lots at a density of 3.0 units per acre, 3.7 units per acre net less right-of-way. This would require a guide plan change from low density residential to medium density residential. This would be inconsistent with the low density guiding for the surrounding area. The property would require a zoning district change from R1-13.5 to R1-9.5. This would be inconsistent with the R1-13.5 zoning for the surrounding area. If the zoning were to remain R1- 13.5 variances for lot size and lot frontage for all lots would be required. Staff Report—Duck Lake Knoll June 10,2005 Page 3 Tree loss would be 48%based upon the City Foresters review. Based upon this analysis any proposal for a three lot plan would result in the greatest tree loss and not be consistent with the surrounding area. SUMMARY The City, neighborhood, and proponent all can benefit from a conforming plan that saves more trees. Shifting the common lot line to make proposed Lot 2, 95 feet wide and approximately 13,800 square feet in size will reduce tree loss from 5 1%to 29%by adjusting the size and location of the proposed houses. Tree replacement would be reduced to 54 caliper inches. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Recommend approval of the following request: • Zoning District Amendment within the R1-13.5 on 1.0 acres. • Preliminary Plat of 1.0 acres into 2 lots and road right-of-way. This is based on plans stamp dated May 20, 2005, the Staff Report dated June 10, 2005 and the following conditions: 1. Prior to City Council review, the proponent shall revise the plans to shift the common lot line to make Lot 2, 95 feet wide and approximately 13,800 square feet in size, and locate house pads, consistent with Attachment A. 2. 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. 3. 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. 4. Prior to building permit issuance for the property,the proponent shall: A. Provide a tree replacement surety equivalent to 150%of the cost of the tree replacement for 54 caliper inches. B. Pay the Cash Park Fee. o P,"Ll T-- I - I DUCK LAKE' , ROAD E. "10. SEW -7— SE R AND _WATER SER' ES YEXISTIMG S WER AN EXISTING WE AND WATER SE VICES (PROTECT RING DEMOLITION WATER SER s OR IOSS, LE RECONNECTION) n. o�,,r . . LOT P.; HoviS si 041- . . ......... C.4 BUIFRLDING SGCETBODEA KS P ZONIN Area Location Map - Duck Lake Knoll Address: 6700 Duck Lake Road West 66th Circle Duck Lake Road 67th Circle Honeysuckle Lane 77 SITE � `-`- Countryside Drive Barberry Circle i" Duck Lake Trail \ N No Scale Chuck Lake Knoll Land Use Map A & tg �. l s __ West 66th Circle �-- 1 luck Lake Road w _ _ ...... 2 .......... 67th Circle --r- --h 1SITE E . ( Honeysuckle Lane E i ---------- Countryside Drive Bar erry Circle may'. s 7 i C ..... - -; Duck Lake Trail _ s 14- 0-20..... j Law Density Residential 0-2.5 UNWAcre Regional Commercial Low DensityfPub€ief0pen Space Partiopen Space =Medium Density resid-enUal2,6,10 UWWAcm PubliclQuasi-Public Medium Density RessientallOffice Church'Cemetery 1 High Density Residential 10-40 LlnitsiAcre then Water / Office Right-Of-Wayf'y mow` L� C7#nice4nrJusi€ial _ O tiCefPubliclOpen Space Metropolitan Urban Service Lute(MUSA)mmw Principal Arterial ir�dus#r al Creeks .......A Minor Arterial DATE APWO od ea-tam iTATt-Rer4ed 01-07.05 Neighborhood commercial �8 MenorArterial community commercialMajor Collector -Miner Collector 1jusuck Labe Knoll Zoning Maly _; West 66th Circle _t Luck take Roar! .._ �_ f r e 67thIrcle _ - -. - _. k a SITE i Honeysuckle Larne s Countryside Drive �� �✓ f i�iIs � fv Duck Lake Trail , � � � �� gar +s .' r � e✓ �, ` no Rural One Family-to acre min. industrial Park-2 Acre Min, arhoreland Management Classifications -....,.�....,R144 One Family-44.OW sf,min. Industrial Park-5 Acre Min. 50 Natural Environment Waters RI-22 One Family-22,000 sf min, Gerferri industrial-5 Acre Min.06 Reaeational Development Waters 111-115 One FamilyA3,$00sf min. M Public General Development Waters(Creeks Only) s 111-9:5 One Famif}-8.500 sf min, �1laker M 100` Year Floodplaln RfiA•t,5 Mint F'arnRy-f 7 U.P.A.max k Rita-tiF-lRay H.�4hway f"12 West of Cminly Road t#4 is proposed,not constructed at th s trmQ Up dated a vuugh Ordinance -2W5 RM-2.5 Multi-Famityf7.4 U,RA,max Chanhassen C&f limits €rdv #33-2001(R<AddRkw)anprrwed.but not shown m this rrwp odason l�3 Office Date May6.2005 t Neighbortl00d Commercial - >sa,Me+wr kgMAW+Mm m a4 wEc.,As,>%'h caeAv.ni ns..+s1 W Community Commercial N Highway Commercial Regional Service Commercial Regionat Commercial Planning Commission Minutes (unapproved)June 13,2005 A. DUCK LAKE KNOLL by Epic Development, LLC. This is a request for a Zoning District Amendment within the R1-13.5 Zoning District on 1 acre; and a Preliminary Plat of 1 acre into 2 single family lots and road right-of-way. Perry Ryan, of Ryan Engineering, representing Epic Development, presented the proposal. He stated that they are proposing to rezone 2 lots that will be 125 feet wide. He used the overhead projector to illustrate this proposal. He stated that initially the proposal was for 3 lots to be on this parcel of land. Because of the tree loss it would create, the proposal was not supported by staff. They have come back tonight with a new plan to have 2 lots on this parcel of land. He stated that in keeping with the 2 lot subdivision, the houses would be built out to the side yard setback and that is where the tree loss would be calculated. The City proposed another layout for a revised two lot subdivision, stating the tree loss would go down significantly. Mr. Ryan felt that the City's layout would really limit the lots. Staff recommends the first lot being 149 feet wide and the second lot being 95 feet wide. Mr. Ryan stated the challenge is that it is hard to put a 95 foot wide lot next to a 150 foot wide lot and he would rather not. Stoelting asked Kipp to review the staff report. Kipp stated that this is a two lot proposal. It does not require a rezoning of the property. Tree loss is calculated at 51%. The City's recommendation to shift the property line 27 feet would reduce tree loss to 29%. The Commission would require a new public hearing for a three lot proposal. He stated that Staff recommends approval of the two lot plan based on recommendations on page 3 of the staff report, which includes revision of the plat to shift the lot line 27 feet to the west for a 95 foot wide lot prior to City Council. Stoelting opened the meeting up for public input. Glen Olson, of 17200 W. 671h Street Circle, stated that he boarders the back lot of lot one. And Jason Wallace, neighbor, would boarder the other lot and the Madison's would be to the north of the lots. He stated that he does support the two lot proposal but would like to see less tree loss. He also stated that there is a diseased oak tree on the lot and he would like to see that tree removed. He is an advocate for saving trees and does feel that it is a shame to see the area destroyed. Stoeltingasked Mr. Olson if he was speaking for the Wallace's and the P g Madison's. He also asked if lower tree loss was acceptable. Mr. Olson stated that the neighbors would be coming forward with their opinions and that the lower tree loss would be acceptable to him. Stoelting asked Fox about the diseased trees on the property. Fox stated that the assessment was based on the total inventory and that the large diseased oak tree was not counted in the loss. Fox stated that for the most part the trees are very healthy. Tom Madison,who resides directly north of the project, stated that he does not support the plan of the developer, but does support the City's plan of moving the house back. He also stated that another concern of his is drainage,which accumulates between his house and the oak trees. Koenig asked Kipp if the City addressed the issue of just putting one house on this property. Kipp stated that currently there is one house on the property and pointed out that the developer has the right to subdivide this property consistent with the zoning of the property. Seymour asked the Staff to address the drainage issue. Gray stated that there are improvements to the plan that would address the issue. One is that the interior lot could be graded to take it east to the roadway, and secondly there is a storm sewer in the roadway that could supply supplemental drainage to that area. Stoelting asked if these improvements would be at the cost of the project proponent or the City. Gray stated that it would be part of the project and the responsibility of the proponent. Stoelting followed up with asking Kipp to address the issue that if this was not included in the staff report then a motion would have to be made to include that and Kipp confirmed that it would. Koenig questioned Fox if the burr oak trees are resistant to construction damage. Fox stated that it would be based on the condition of the trees, the age of the trees and the timing of the construction. He stated that the most critical thing is to stay out of the drip line of the trees. The City's recommendation is to be careful in the placement of the homes and to use fencing to protect the tree roots. Koenig stated that the site looked small in order to protect all of the trees at the drip line and questioned Fox if they would have enough room to do the construction. Fox stated that because of this, the fencing is something that should be required at all times during construction. Stoelting asked the project proponent in regards to moving the pads would he have any problems with what the City has proposed. And secondly, to address the issue of developing some sort of drainage solution for this property. Mr. Ryan stated that they would like Staff to support their proposal. In regards to the second issue, he stated that there is a catch basin at the neighbors to the north area of the property. He used the overhead projector to illustrate this. He stated that what they are proposing is to move drainage along the common lot line. They would work with Gray to minimize drainage to neighboring property. Koenig asked the project proponent to address the issue of why he does not support the staff s proposal of the two lot plan since it would be reducing tree loss. Mr. Ryan stated that he believes that the one lot is too small in comparison to the other lot. Stoelting asked staff for comment. Kipp said that the commission has three options to consider. If the Commission supports the proponents plan, it can recommend approval of the their plan. If the commission supports the staff report recommendation to revise the plan, it can recommend approval, based on the recommendations of the staff report. Lastly, if the Commission does not support the proponents plan, and would like to send a strong message to the City Council, it can recommend denial of the plan, based on the environmental impact on the natural resources of the property, specifically the oak trees. MOTION by Rocheford, seconded by Koenig, to close the public hearing. Motion carried 5-0. Kacher abstained. MOTION by Rocheford, seconded by Seymour, to deny the request for Zoning District Amendment within the R1-13.5 Zoning District on 1 acre; Preliminary Plat of 1 acre into 2 single family lots and road right-of-way, based on plans stamped dated May 20, 2005, subject to the recommendations of the Staff report dated June 10, 2005, to the City Council, based on the following findings: need for a larger lot is outweighed by the impact of the trees. Stoelting asked Rocheford if the denial was because Staff feels there needs to be a larger lot. Rocheford clarified by stating that the project proponent wanted a larger lot at the expense of greater tree loss. Koenig stated that the tree loss is nearly double what it is in residential areas and asked Stoelting if it could be put in the record that tree loss is too high. Stoelting said that it states that the project developer's plan is 51%versus the City plan,which is 29 %. Koenig stated that the average residential tree loss is between 30-35%. Stoelting asked Kipp to address this issue. Kipp stated that a recommendation for denial based on the lot size would not be appropriate ro riate since the developer meets the Code for lot p size, rather,the denial should be based on the environmental impact. Koenig asked if they are conforming in lot size, does Staff need to withdraw the motion for denial. Rocheford stated that if Mr. Ryan wishes to have the lots divided equally and not follow the staff recommendation, then it would be appropriate to deny the request. Mr. Ryan stated that they wanted equal lots and that they would be willing to work with Staff to minimize the tree loss. He stated that he feels it is unfair to have one lot larger than the other lot. He also does not believe that the tree loss would be 51%. He stated that it would be a burden and challenge to market this property. Rocheford stated that he is concerned with the neighbor to the north and the tree loss that would affect them. Stoelting asked Mr. Ryan if he would be willing to compromise the lot line. Mr. Ryan stated that there should be a fair balance between his proposal and the neighbor to the north. He stated he feels that the neighbor to the north is receiving more attention to the tree loss than the proposed project. He stated he would be willing to work with Staff in regards to tree loss but would like to keep the lot lines as proposed. Kipp stated the shifting the lot line so lot 2 is 95 feet would be consistent with what is in the area. He stated that if Staff is recommending denial they should deny the proposed plan based on the high tree loss. Seymour stated that he is prepared to vote for denial of the project based on what was proposed at the meeting. Stoelting asked Rocheford to address his previous motion. MOTION by Rocheford, seconded by Koenig, to deny the request for Zoning District Amendment within the R1-13.5 Zoning District on 1 acre; Preliminary Plat of 1 acre into 2 single family lots and road right-of-way, based s on plans stamped dated May 20, 2005, subject to the recommendations of the Staff report dated June 10, 2005, to the City Council, based on the following findings: that tree loss would be 51%. Stoelting asked for an individual ruling. All Staff voted for denial,with Kacher abstaining. Stoelting suggested that the project proponent work with the City to preserve tree loss. Motion carried 5-0. Kacher abstained. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: ' SECTION: Public Hearings July 5, 2005 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: V. E. Community DevelopmentPlanning Janet Jeremiah McCall Bluff Subdivision Michael D. Franzen Requested Action Move to: • Close the Public Hearing; and • Adopt the Resolution for Planned hit Development Concept Review on 4.8 acres; and • Approve 1 st Reading of the Ordinance for Planned hit Development District Review and Zoning District Amendment in the Rural District on 4.8 acres; and • Adopt the Resolution for Preliminary Plat on 4.8 acres into 2 lots and 1 outlot; and • Direct Staff to prepare a Development Agreement incorporating Staff and Commission recommendations and Council conditions. Synopsis This is a continued item from the June 21, 2005 meeting to allow Steve and John Turnbull time to review the letter from Jeff McCall's attorney regarding access to both lots. The staff has not received a written response from Steve and John Turnbull. Jeff McCall had his surveyor stake the property line common to the Grootwassink property to the east He will be talking to Bob Grootwassink before the meeting. This is a preliminary plat in the Rural zoning district of 4.8 acres into two lots. Waivers are required for lot size, lot dimension and setbacks. Planning Commission Recommendation The Planning Commission voted 7-0 to recommend approval of the project to the City Council at the April 11, 2005. Background Information The project requires the following waivers. Code Lot 1 Lot 2 10 acres 1.1 acres 1.21 acres 300 foot width 140 feet 8 feet front setback 50 feet 30 feet 45 feet side setback 50 feet 7 feet 15 feet side setback 100 feet 61 feet 15 The property could develop when sewer and water is available in the future and no waivers would be required. By granting the waivers now, the City receives 2.31 acres of land dedication and .9 acres of conservation easement. The percen tage of land to be dedicated to the City and protected by conservation easement is similar to the approval for the Grootwassink subdivision to the east of this property. Attachments 1. Resolution for PD Concept Review 2. Resolution for Preliminary Plat 3. Planning Staff Report April $2005 4. Location Map 5. Zoning &and U Maps 6. Planning Commission Minutes April 11, 2005 MCCALL BLUFF CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2005- A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT OF MCCALL BLUFF FOR MCCALL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY 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 Planning Commission did conduct a public hearing on April 11, 2005, on McCall Bluff Addition by McCall Construction Company 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 July 5, 2005. NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Eden Prairie, Minnesota, as follows: 1. McCall Bluff Addition, 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 April 8, 2005. 3. That the PUD Concept meets the recommendations of the Planning Commission April 11, 2005. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 5`h day of July, 2005. ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor EXHIBIT A PUD Concept- Legal Description: The West 225.0 feet of the Southwest Quarter (SW 1/4) of the Southwest Quarter (SW '/a) of Section 29,Township 116 North,Range 22,Hennepin County,Minnesota,lying northerly of the northerly right of way line of State Highway No. 169-212.Together with an easement for road purposes over the South 33.0 feet of the North 66.0 feet of the Southeast Quarter(SE 1/) of the Southeast Quarter(SE'/4)of Section 30,Township 116 North,Range 22,lying Easterly of the Town Road (Dell Road). MCCALL BLUFF CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2005- RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF MCCALL BLUFF ADDITION FOR MCCALL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY BE IT RESOLVED, by the Eden Prairie City Council as follows: That the preliminary plat of McCall Bluff stamp dated April 8, 2005, and consisting of 4.89 acres into two lots, 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 5th day of July, 2005. Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission FROM: Michael D. Franzen, City Planner DATE: April 8, 2005 SUBJECT: McCall Bluff Addition APPLICANT/ Jeff McCall OWNER: Jeff McCall LOCATION: 9997 Dell Road 1. Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 4.89 acres. 2. Planned Unit Development District Review and Zoning District Amendment in he Rural Zoning District on 4.89 acres. 3. Preliminary Plat of 4.89 acres into 2 lots. Staff Report— McCall Bluff Addition April 8,2005 BACKGROUND This site is zoned Rural. The site is guided low density residential for up to 2.5 units per acre. Both houses are inside the MUSA Line. Sewer and water is not adjacent to the site but may be served in the future. PRELIMINARY PLAT The plan is to subdivide 4.89 acres into two lots. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT WAIVERS The project requires the following waivers. Code Lot 1 Lot 2 10 acres 1.1 acres 1.21 acres 300 foot width 140 feet 85 feet front setback 50 feet 30 feet 45 feet side setback 50 feet 7 feet 15 feet side setback 100 feet 61 feet 15 The property could develop when sewer and water is available in the future and no waivers would be required.By granting the waivers now,the City receives 2.31 acres of land dedication and.89 acres of conservation easement. The percentage of land to be dedicated to the City and protected by conservation easement is similar to the approval for the Grootwassink subdivision to the east of this property. TREES There are 52 inches of significant trees on the proposed lots. The required tree replacement is 69 inches. Since there is a large quantity of significant trees that will be saved in the land dedicated to the City, and the area protected by conservation easement the staff recommends that the tree replacement requirement be waived. SUMMARY 2 Staff Report— McCall Bluff Addition April 8,2005 The approval of the subdivision and the granting of the waivers will protect approximately 3.16 acres of the 4.89 acres site. This limits the number of homes on the bluff, reducing the visual impact and saving trees and slopes from impact in the future. The Planning Commission should discuss the following questions. 1. Should the land be subdivided now or wait until sewer and water is available? 2. Does the City benefit from granting the waivers? 3. Are the trees and slopes best protected with the two lot subdivision? STAFF RECOMMENDATION Recommend approval of the following request: • Planned Unit ce Development Concept o t Review on 4.89 acres. P p • Planned Unit Development District Review and Zoning District Amendment in the Rural Zoning District on 4.89 acres. • Preliminary Plat of 4.89 acres into 2 lots. This is based on plans dated stamp dated April 11, 2005, and the following conditions: 1. Prior to release of the final plat, e proponent onent shall submit detailed storm water runoff, p p 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. 3. Prior to building permit issuance for the property,the proponent shall pay the cash park fees. 4. The following waivers are granted as part of the PUD. Code Lot 1 Lot 2 10 acres 1.1 acres 1.21 acres 300 foot width 140 feet 85 feet front setback 50 feet 30 feet 45 feet 3 Staff Report— McCall Bluff Addition April 8,2005 side setback 50 feet 7 feet 15 feet side setback 100 feet 61 feet 15 4 Area Location Map - McCall Bluff Address: 9997 Dell Road l Dell Road W a� J l Flying Claud Drive(212) Lake Riley r- +1 N \`�� No Scale McCall tf Addition Zoning Map FF ITT Dell F2oad 212. Flying.Claud Drive(212) r -fir '��-•� �.��'-��..�,. t s i 1_1 a Fay-s W&,W* a2A—a-, Shoreland Management Classifications k WP"-SA—MI GWI Natural Environment Waters �,-22 ke: axu.uooa m W -sAar Wl- 1W Recreational Development Waters .Rs 195 r ls:sw �f,. Pb� l General Development Waters(Greeks Only) �Rt,46 OftF rAtA: YIf npl WMw saau.s A&x°.tFas*X�7Us-'A 100- Year Floodplain ftNFY.9 1"A F iy-V4UF'A_rzuix.��t`.aNcaSvtRC�';ivrat. carer ' Kghwatr#3 t2 West of Ctr AV Road#d is oroPosed,hat canstrtUett at this time, MnpF YVYiwtl C*M�w.afNa� lJp r:Al2fl fhmmatt Urditk'tr" #.$`-'a�t�r3'1 CxwroruNi t' re.^c,a �gzw,.nyc w Ckckrrertce i133.2�70t(8FE ts�fiation)aaprwer;,but not showncis this map aa(itit� Date'December 31,2004 P.egionat$iKV@'t'sunmrs� - A" .a C;a .4 s,.e.nae+wfar er .=.e raevc w ..a. aaw«.. McCall Bluff Addition Land Use Map FJ- J Dell Road w I - z '0 i n� Cloud Drive(212)� 1 rc Law Density Residential 0-2.5 Units/Arre Regional Commercial Principal Arterial Low DensityPublic/Open Space Parkiflpen Space A Minor Arterial Medium Density residential 2-5-10 UnitsAcre PublicfQuasi-Public w—B Minor AAeriat Medium Densty Residential/Ofrice ChurchJ Cemetwy •—Major Collector High Density Residential 10-40 Units.'Acre open water Minor Collector i=Office R7gltf-Cl-tYay Qtf ce Industriel _ Metropolitan Urban Service Line(MUSA) OfticerPubtiuOpen space Creeks oars appm-d 03-19-m Industrial Airport Boundary DATE RemWdt-01-6 Neighborhood Commercial Community Commercial Approved Planning Commission Minutes—April 11,2005 MCCALL BLUFF (2005-12)by McCall Construction Company. Request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 4.89 acres, Planned Unit Development District Review and Zoning District Amendment in the Rural Zoning District on 4.89 acres, and Preliminary Plat of 4.89 acres into two lots. Location: 9997 Dell Road. Jeff McCall, 3920 Hillcrest Way, Deephaven, is the owner of the subject property at 9997 Dell Road. He stated he is asking for waivers in order to split the top of the bluff into two lots in exchange for dedicating the bottom half of the lot to the City and also adding a conservation easement. Mr. McCall illustrated his plan using the overhead projector. He stated that this plan is keeping with the Grootwassik subdivision, which was approved a year ago. Nelson asked Franzen to review the staff report. Franzen stated the philosophical discussion taking place is to decide if it is better to wait until sewer and water comes into the area before the subdivision takes place or does the City grant the waivers in order to obtain the land to preserve the bluff. Last year the Commission and Council did this debate with the Grootwassink subdivision and the thought was that if the City did grant the waivers and did get a considerable portion of land and dedication of conservation easements that the City could preserve the character and the look and feel of the bluff. The waivers in this current proposal are basically the same as the Grootwassink proposal. Franzen stated that the percent of land that is in easement and the amount that is in dedication are very consistent with the parcel that is over to the east. The staff recommends approval, including the waivers that are listed on the last page of the staff report. Kacher asked Franzen when the Commission had talked about this property previously. Franzen stated it was a year ago. Kacher stated that the reason he is asking if this was the same property or area that they talked about previously is that he is concerned with what the impact of that discussion would be on similar areas, and what would be the response of the City and also what potential problems would that create. Franzen stated that it would have to be looked at in a very similar manner. He stated that if the City states that a fair trade is to grant waivers in exchange for dedication of land, it should not matter whether that land is a bluff, lake, creek or wetland; as long as it is something that our City deems to be an important physical feature for the City. Kacher asked what would be the potential impact for sewer and water in that area. Franzen stated that if would be some time out before the City gets sewer and water to this area. Gray stated that he could confirm Franzen's observation that the City is some distance away from providing utilities around Dell Road and Turnbull Road. The time frame for Dell Road would be 4-10 years, unless something comes along to accelerate that. He stated it is very expensive to bring sewer and water to those areas. Nelson opened up the meeting for public input. Mike Brandy old, 5382 Mason Points, civil engineer for the project, said that he just wanted to thank the City for their time and support in regards to this project. Robert Grootwassink, 15382 Mason Pointe, had some questions in regards to the lot that is to be subdivided. He asked how many feet each lot was going to be and what would the setbacks be that would be next to his property, and finally what type of houses would be built. Mr. McCall stated that the lot is 85 feet wide, and the side setbacks are 15 feet on each side to allow a 55 foot wide home. He stated that the home would be a higher end home; a 5,000 to 6,000 square foot home with a three car garage. Mr. Grootwassink stated that he is opposed to an 85 foot lot because it is much narrower than the other lots in the area. Mr. McCall stated that on the 5 acres there is an existing home that the present lot is 225 feet across the bluffs and to subdivide this lot, they came up with an 85 foot lot. Nelson asked if the lot was 1.25 acres. Mr.McCall confirmed that it was. Nelson asked the Commission members if the land should be subdivided now or when sewer and water are available and does the City benefit from granting the waivers. Are the trees and slopes best protected with this two lot subdivision. She also reaffirmed that there is an outlot A on the bluff which would be donated to the City. Kacher stated that the City does have a right to bring in sewer and water to the area. He stated that in this particular case there have been exceptions in that area and that the builder has the logical rational for asking for the waiver. Kacher would also like to see this issue resolved between the builder and the neighbor. Sutherland asked Franzen about the item under PUD waivers on the first page of the staff report, stating that the property could be developed when sewer and water is available in the future and no waivers would be required. Sutherland asked that when it said, "no waivers", does that include the entire list of waivers that appear above that in the staff report. Franzen said yes, and that the property would be rezoned to the normal single family zoning district. Sutherland asked what the setbacks would be on that and Franzen responded by stating it would be a 10 foot minimum and a 25 foot combined. Koenig stated to Franzen that the City is getting a substantial amount of land with the proposal and asked if it would be advantageous for the City to work with the developer before sewer and water is put in. Franzen stated that it is a good deal for the City and he doubts in the future if the City would end up with the same amount of land protected through dedication and conservation easements. Stoltz stated that it was a good project but asked Mr. McCall if he had talked with both neighbors one on one. Mr.McCall stated that he did not speak with Mr. Grootwassink. Stoltz stated he would like to see this proposal put on hold until Mr. McCall can speak with Mr. Grootwassink. Seymour stated that this project would be good for the City. Sutherland stated that he also thinks this is a good project, but agrees with Stoltz that Mr. McCall should speak with Mr. Grootwassink. Koenig stated that the neighbors should agree with the project before it moves forward. Kacher asked Mr. Grootwassink if he was comfortable moving ahead with the project. Mr. Grootwassink stated he did not agree with putting a home on an 85 foot lot. Mr. Grootwassink asked the Staff to explain the notice about the walking trail and the bike path. Fox responded by stating that they sent letters up to the Riley Creek Corridor and that this would not affect Mr. Grootwassink's property. Franzen asked Mr. Grootwassink if he was asking for a change in the conservation easement on his lot. Mr. Grootwassink responded yes. Franzen explained to the commission that an action to change the conditions of a previous agreement requires a public hearing and cannot be acted on at this meeting. Mr. Grootwassink stated he was comfortable moving ahead with the McCall project. MOTION by Sutherland, seconded by Koenig, to close the public hearing. Motion carried 7-0. MOTION by Sutherland, seconded by Koenig, to approve a request for Planned Unit Development Concept Review on 4.89 acres; Planned Unit development District Review with waivers on 4.89 acres;Zoning District Amendment in the Rural Zoning District on 4.89 acres; and Preliminary Plat of 4.89 acres into 2 lots, based on plans dated April 8, 2005, subject to the recommendations of the staff report dated April 8, 2005, to the City Council. Motion carried 7-0. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Payment of Claims July 5, 2005 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: VIII. Sue Kotchevar, Office of the Payment of Claims City Manager/Finance Requested Action Move to: Approve the Payment of Claims as submitted (roll call vote) Synopsis Checks 1.42227 - 142663 Wire Transfers 2263 -2269 City of Eden Prairie Council Check Summary 7/5/2005 Division Amount General 29,897 100 City Manager 1,218 101 Legislative 669 102 Legal Counsel 42,281 104 Contingency 3,000 110 City Clerk 179 III Customer Service 8,667 112 Human Resources 9,373 11.3 Communication Services 4,349 115 Risk Management 79,457 116 Facilities 42,478 117 City Center 43,350 131 Finance 7,000 132 Social Services 2,745 133 Community Development 2,233 135 Information Technology 28,669 136 Wireless Communication 355 137 Economic Development 117 151 Park Maintenance 16,701 153 Athletic Programs 3,537 154 Community Center 6,482 155 Beaches 64 156 Youth Programs 3,632 157 Special Events 13,565 158 Senior Center 947 159 Recreation Administration 136 160 Therapeutic Recreation 632 161 Oak Point Pool 3,731 162 Arts 14,500 163 Outdoor Center 4,551 164 Park Rental Facilities 226 180 Police 15,568 183 Civil Defense 75 184 Fire 24,492 185 Animal Control 189 186 Inspections 101 200 Engineering 43 201 Street Maintenance 3,879 202 Street Lighting 52,464 203 Fleet Services 11,225 204 Equipment Revolving 4,334 301 CDBG 389 303 Cemetary Operation 150 304 Senior Board 149 310 Fire Fighters Fund 1,600 316 WAFTA 3,545 502 Park Development 53,117 503 Utility Improvement 341,165 507 Construction Fund 15,071 509 CIP Fund 12,632 511 Construction Fund 150,997 512 CIP Trails 6,015 515 Fire Station 44 1,943 601 Prairie Village Liquor 107,725 602 Den Road Liquor 166,644 603 Prairie View Liquor 106,794 605 Den Road Building 176 701 Water Fund 215,039 702 Sewer Fund 14,642 703 Storm Drainage Fund 36,340 803 Escrow Fund 8,244 807 Benefits Fund 437,131 Report Totals 2,166,617 City of Eden Prairie Council Check Register 7/5/2005 Check 4 Amount Vendor/Explanation Account Description Business Unit 2263 10,223 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-457 Deferred Compensation General Fund 2264 16,046 ORCHARD TRUST CO AS TRUSTEE/CU Deferred Compensation General Fund 2265 75,690 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT AS PERA Health and Benefits 2266 27,770 MINNESOTA DEPT OF REVENUE State Taxes Withheld Health and Benefits 2267 140,136 WELLS FARGO MINNESOTA N A SS&Medicare Health and Benefits 2268 362 MINNESOTA DEPT OF REVENUE Motor Fuels Fleet Services 2269 71,049 MINNESOTA DEPT OF REVENUE Cash Over/Short General Fund 142227 270 AARP 55 ALIVE MATURE DRIVING Other Contracted Services Classes/Programs/Events 142228 3,259 ASPEN WASTE SYSTEMS INC. Waste Disposal City Hall-CAM 142229 111 BATTLE LAKE SENIOR CARD PROJEC Operating Supplies Senior Board 142230 100 BESTLER,ADAM Other Contracted Services Staring Lake Concert 142231 308 CARLSON,KAREN Clothing&Uniforms Fire 142232 330,000 COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION Improvement Contracts Utility Improvement Fund 142233 49 DONALDSON,LORINDA Program Fee Tennis 142234 2,000 EDEN PRAIRIE,CITY OF Dues&Subscriptions Fire 142235 1,291 EULL'S MANUFACTURING CO INC Repair&Maint.Supplies Storm Drainage 142236 29 EXCELSIOR,CITY OF Conference Expense City Clerk 142237 148 GE CAPITAL Other Rentals General 142238 100 GOBLIRSCH,MARY Refunds Environmental Education 142239 250 HALE,WILLIAM Other Contracted Services Staring Lake Concert 142240 246 HANLON,KIM Operating Supplies Fire 142241 461 HARTFORD GROUP,THE Deposits Escrow 142242 12 KINZEL,KAREN Lessons&Classes Ice Arena 142243 100 MARCHAND-TAUER ANNE Refunds Environmental Education 142244 243 MENARDS Repair&Maint.Supplies Storm Drainage 142245 2,122 MINN CHILD SUPPORT PAYMENT CTR Garnishment Withheld General Fund 142246 57 NABLO,RICK Program Fee Summer Skill Development 142247 121 OLSON,ROBERT Tuition Reimbursement/School Police 142248 50 OTTEN,RON Refunds Environmental Education 142249 32 PETRICH,MARY Program Fee Spring Skill Development 142250 200 PETTY CASH-SANDY WERTS Petty Cash&Change Funds General Fund 142251 72 PETTY CASH-EPCC Operating Supplies Girls on the Run 142252 253 PROGRESSIVE BUSINESS PUBLICATI Dues&Subscriptions General Facilities 142253 23 PROP Lessons&Classes Oak Point Lessons 142254 128 SEVERTSON,LESLIE Program Fee Spring Skill Development 142255 26 SHOVELSON,MARY Program Fee Spring Skill Development 142256 98 STOVRING,LESLIE Mileage&Parking Storm Drainage 142257 58 STUEBER,HARLAND Program Fee Spring Skill Development 142258 100 TOWNSEND,SUSAN Refunds Environmental Education 142259 6 TREVENA,TAMARA Lessons&Classes Pool Lessons 142260 200 WICKRE,ERIKA Other Contracted Services Accessibility 142261 27 BIRDIES GOLF Special Event Fees Afternoon Adventure 142262 382 CUB FOODS EDEN PRAIRIE Operating Supplies Fire 142263 3,538 DEX MEDIA EAST Advertising Prairie Village Liquor Store 142264 150 GASCH,ROBERT Other Contracted Services Riley-Jacques Barn 142265 1,890 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC Other Contracted Services Water System Maintenance 142266 200 HENNEPIN CHIEF'S ASSOCIATION Tuition Reimbursement/School Police 142267 1,714 HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFI Board of Prisoner Police 142268 2,745 IND SCHOOL DIST 272 Other Contracted Services Housing,Trans,&Human Sery 142269 42 KRAEMERS HARDWARE INC Small Tools Water Meter Repair 142270 800 MIDDLE SPUNK CREEK BOYS Other Contracted Services Riley-Jacques Barn 142271 20 MINNESOTA RECREATION&PARK FO Dues&Subscriptions Recreation Administration 142272 81 NOKOMIS SHOE SHOP Clothing&Uniforms Inspections-Administration 142273 293 PETTY CASH Mileage&Parking Youth Programs Administration 142274 296 PETTY CASH-POLICE DEPT Travel Expense Police 142275 448 PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT AS Benefit payments Health and Benefits 142276 200 QUAINTANCE,TRISHA Other Contracted Services Accessibility 142277 84 SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC. Dues&Subscriptions Water Utility-General 142278 160 STEARNS COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPAR Deposits Escrow 142279 500 SUTTER,ROSS Other Contracted Services Staring Lake Concert 142280 250 THREE RIVERS PARK DISTRICT Other Contracted Services Riley-Jacques Barn 142281 45 TIME WARNER CABLE Dues&Subscriptions City Council 142282 514 UNITED RENTALS HIGHWAY TECHNOL Other Contracted Services Water System Maintenance 142283 506 US POSTMASTER-HOPKINS Printing Senior Center Administration 142284 62 VERIZON DIRECTORIES CORP Advertising Community Center Admin 142285 174 XCEL ENERGY Electric Den Road Liquor Store 142286 254 ACE ICE COMPANY Misc Non-Taxable Prairie View Liquor Store 142287 126 AMERIPRIDE LINEN&APPAREL SER Repair&Maint.Supplies Den Road Liquor Store Check# Amount Vendor/Explanation Account Description Business Unit 142288 139 ARCTIC GLACIER INC Misc Non-Taxable Prairie Village Liquor Store 142289 6,447 BELLBOY CORPORATION Liquor Prairie View Liquor Store 142290 7,436 DAY DISTRIBUTING Wine Domestic Den Road Liquor Store 142291 3,007 EAGLE WINE COMPANY Wine Domestic Prairie View Liquor Store 142292 22,421 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE COMPANY Beer Prairie Village Liquor Store 142293 1,189 GRAPE BEGINNINGS Wine Domestic Prairie Village Liquor Store 142294 9,700 GRIGGS COOPER&CO Liquor Prairie Village Liquor Store 142295 60 HOHENSTEINS INC Beer Den Road Liquor Store 142296 22,079 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO Liquor Prairie View Liquor Store 142297 45 M.AMUNDSON LLP Misc Taxable Den Road Liquor Store 142298 11,943 MARK VII Misc Taxable Den Road Liquor Store 142299 569 MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING COM Misc Taxable Den Road Liquor Store 142300 30 MORAN USA,LLC Misc Taxable Den Road Liquor Store 142301 60 PACIFIC DIRECT Misc Taxable Den Road Liquor Store 142302 5,387 PAUSTIS&SONS COMPANY Wine Imported Den Road Liquor Store 142303 12,518 PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRITS INC Wine Domestic Den Road Liquor Store 142304 3,550 PRIOR WINE COMPANY Wine Domestic Prairie View Liquor Store 142305 12,525 QUALITY WINE&SPIRITS CO Wine Domestic Prairie View Liquor Store 142306 22,627 THORPE DISTRIBUTING Beer Den Road Liquor Store 142307 303 TRUE FABRICATIONS Misc Taxable Den Road Liquor Store 142308 351 WINE COMPANY,THE Wine Imported Prairie Village Liquor Store 142309 833 WINE MERCHANTS INC Wine Domestic Prairie View Liquor Store 142310 996 WORLD CLASS WINES INC Wine Imported Prairie View Liquor Store 142311 600 A MEYERS ENTERPRISES INC Instructor Service Outdoor Center 142312 60 BRAGG,ANNALISA Instructor Service Outdoor Center 142313 131 BRUENING,CHARLOTTE Landscape Materials/Supp Senior Center 142314 1,600 CAMPOS,LORI Instructor Service Outdoor Center 142315 158 CINGULAR WIRELESS Pager&Cell Phone Police 142316 519 DE LAGE LANDEN FINANCIAL SERVI Other Rentals General 142317 333 DEGREE,BETH Mileage&Parking Aquatics&Fitness Admin 142318 109 EDEN PRAIRIE HIGH SCHOOL Landscape Materials/Supp Senior Center 142319 140 ENTER,SCOTT Open Fees Ice Arena 142320 101 GE SUPPLY LOGISTICS,LLC Equipment Parts Water Treatment Plant 142321 50 HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER Operating Supplies Planning 142322 70 KOEHLER,KATHY Open Fees Ice Arena 142323 200 LACASSE,ANDREW Other Contracted Services Purgatory Creek Recreation Are 142324 258 MALONE,TOM Instructor Service Preschool Events 142325 252 MENARDS Operating Supplies Park Maintenance 142326 32 MINNESOTA POLLUTION CONTROL AG Conference Expense Engineering 142327 94 MINNESOTA ZOO Special Event Fees Leisure Education 142328 40 MRPA Conference Expense Recreation Administration 142329 93 PRIORITY COURIER EXPERTS Equipment Parts Fleet Services 142330 1,666 RICHFIELD,CITY OF Autos Capital Impr./Maint.Fund 142331 70 RYAN,PAUL Open Fees Ice Arena 142332 1,150 SHEGGEBY,MICHAEL Conference Expense General Facilities 142333 46 SNAP-ON TOOLS Repair&Maint.Supplies Water Treatment Plant 142334 70 STABNO,TODD Open Fees Ice Arena 142335 12 STAR TRIBUNE Misc Non-Taxable Den Road Liquor Store 142336 243 SUN NEWSPAPERS Dues&Subscriptions City Manager 142337 590 VERIZON WIRELESS BELLEVUE Pager&Cell Phone Water Utility-General 142338 66,246 XCEL ENERGY Electric Community Center Maintenance 142339 100 ATOM Tuition Reimbursement/School Police 142340 36 BRIDENSTINE,TED Program Fee Arts Camp 142341 916 BROWNING,RYAN Video&Photo Supplies Communication Services 142342 56 COOK,MARTY Program Fee Afternoon Playground 142343 66 CRUGER,TIM Program Fee Athletics 142344 400 CUMMINGS,MELISSA B Other Contracted Services Summer Theatre 142345 34 DELANGE,BRITT Lessons&Classes Pool Lessons 142346 15,544 DIVERSE BUILDING MAINTENANCE Janitor Service Police City Center 142347 66 EMPLOYERS ASSOCIATION INC Conference Expense Risk Management 142348 66 ERICKSON,DEANNA Program Fee Athletics 142349 20 FLYNN,SHARON Program Fee Leisure Education 142350 389 GENERAL GROWTH PROPERTIES LP-E Building Rental CDBG Fund 142351 300 HAYEN,LINDA Other Contracted Services Summer Theatre 142352 97 HEDDLE,ALLEN Other Hardware Information Technology 142353 400 HOFFMAN,JACQUI Other Contracted Services Summer Theatre 142354 1,000 JANETSKI,BETH Other Contracted Services Summer Theatre 142355 550 KACHER,PAULINE Other Contracted Services Summer Theatre 142356 9 KRAEMERS HARDWARE INC Small Tools Water System Maintenance 142357 500 LUSHINE,PEGGY E Other Contracted Services Summer Theatre 142358 53 MENARDS Safety Supplies Sewer System Maintenance 142359 162 METRO DINING CLUB Deposits Escrow Check# Amount Vendor/Explanation Account Description Business Unit 142360 25 MIDWEST ART FAIRS Advertising Cummins House Special Events 142361 9 MILAVSKY,LARION Program Fee Classes/Programs/Events 142362 8,023 PRAIRIE PARTNERS SIX LLP Building Rental Prairie Village Liquor Store 142363 7,432 PRAIRIEVIEW RETAIL LLC Building Rental Prairie View Liquor Store 142364 78 REUSS,RENEE Program Fee Camps 142365 874 RICHARDSON,JIM Instructor Service Summer Skill Development 142366 500 RODENZ,SANDRA K Other Contracted Services Summer Theatre 142367 6 ROSA,GRETCHEN Lessons&Classes Pool Lessons 142368 1,200 SMITH,SHELLEY Other Contracted Services Summer Theatre 142369 50 U.S.FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Other Contracted Services Charlson Area Construction 142370 191 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED Operating Supplies Police 142371 119 UNLIMITED SUPPLIES INC Equipment Parts Fleet Services 142372 3,476 US POSTMASTER-HOPKINS Postage Communication Services 142373 80 WELDER,GWEN Lessons&Classes Oak Point Lessons 142374 60 WHITE,NICOLE Mileage&Parking Therapeutic Rec Administration 142375 7,160 XCELENERGY Electric PublicWorks/Parks 142376 400 A MEYER'S ENTERPRISES INC Instructor Service Outdoor Center 142379 6,506 BIFFS INC Other Rentals Park Maintenance 142380 350 BOLD,PAULINE Instructor Service Outdoor Center 142381 100 BRAGG,ANNALISA Instructor Service Outdoor Center 142382 200 BURTIS,ROBERT Other Contracted Services Staring Lake Concert 142383 600 CAMPOS,LORI Instructor Service Outdoor Center 142384 346 CITIES EDGE Equipment Parts Fleet Services 142385 122 FORSETH,DAN Mileage&Parking Tree Disease 142386 357 FUN SERVICES Other Contracted Services July 4th Celebration 142387 91 GE CAPITAL Other Rentals General 142388 42,281 GREGERSON ROSOW JOHNSON&NILA Legal Legal Criminal Procecution 142389 3,500 HAMLINE UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SC Other Contracted Services Environmental Education 142390 13 HESLA,AMY Outside Water Sales Water Enterprise Fund 142391 1,411 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES Landscape Materials/Supp Park Maintenance 142392 1,560 ITRON INC. Other Contracted Services Water Meter Reading 142393 79,141 LEAGUE MN CITIES INS TRUST Workers Comp Insurance Risk Management 142394 80 MCFERRIN,TANYA Instructor Service Outdoor Center 142395 193,088 MEDICA CHOICE Medical Bills Prepaid Health and Benefits 142396 7 MRB CORP Outside Water Sales Water Enterprise Fund 142397 9 NAM,JAEWOO Outside Water Sales Water Enterprise Fund 142398 450 NELSON,JEFFERY G Other Contracted Services Staring Lake Concert 142399 2,764 NILSSEN,BETH Instructor Service Ice Arena 142400 176 OTTERNESS,RON Instructor Service Outdoor Center 142401 234 QWEST Telephone Water Utility-General 142402 67 RIVERA,DANIEL Outside Water Sales Water Enterprise Fund 142403 750 ROCKIN'HOLLYWOODS,THE Other Contracted Services Staring Lake Concert 142404 100 SLETTEN,CHARMAYNE Refunds Environmental Education 142405 38 TARASAR,PETER Outside Water Sales Water Enterprise Fund 142406 48,632 XCEL ENERGY Electric Water Treatment Plant 142407 102 AMC MALL OF AMERICA Special Event Fees Teen Work Program 142408 29 BRUEGGERS BAGEL Operating Supplies Summer Safety Camp 142409 400 CARVER COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPT. Deposits Escrow 142410 119 CATER,SHELBY SIMONSON Wages No Benefits Outdoor Center 142411 34 DISH NETWORK Cable TV Community Center Admin 142412 319 ESBENSEN,GEORGE Operating Supplies Fire 142413 750 HAYNES,TRICIA Other Contracted Services Purgatory Creek Recreation Are 142414 469 HENNEPIN COUNTY I/T DEPT Software Maintenance Information Technology 142415 256 KRAEMERS HARDWARE INC Operating Supplies Park Maintenance 142416 600 LAYMON,MARY Other Contracted Services Summer Theatre 142417 29 LEWIS,JOHN AR Utility Water Enterprise Fund 142418 36,826 LOGIS LOGIS Information Technology 142419 45 MASTER ELECTRIC CO INC Cash Over/Short General Fund 142420 139 MCGRAW-HILL COMPANIES,THE Training Supplies Water Utility-General 142421 398 MENARDS Small Tools Water System Maintenance 142422 625 MERRY BOBB MUSIC INC Other Contracted Services July 4th Celebration 142423 30 METRO GENERAL SERVICES Plumbing Permits General Fund 142424 395 NOISE Conference Expense City Council 142425 122 OLD DUTCH FOODS Operating Supplies Summer Safety Camp 142426 400 PETTY CASH-SANDY WERTS Petty Cash&Change Funds General Fund 142427 344 PITNEY BOWES INC Other Rentals General 142428 3,000 POSTAGE BY PHONE RESERVE ACCOU Postage General 142429 5,286 RAY O'HERRON CO INC Protective Clothing Police 142430 800 SCHIFFMAN,JIM Other Contracted Services Summer Theatre 142431 250 SCHNOBRICH,JIM Other Contracted Services Summer Theatre 142432 513 STOVRING,LESLIE Conference Expense Storm Drainage 142433 6,500 TEMPORARY HEROES INC Other Contracted Services July 4th Celebration Check# Amount Vendor/Explanation Account Description Business Unit 142434 135 TIME WARNER CABLE Dues&Subscriptions City Council 142435 450 TUNE INTO KIDS Operating Supplies Staring Lake Concert 142436 394 VERSATILE VEHICLES INC Other Rentals July 4th Celebration 142437 239 WALMART COMMUNITY Operating Supplies Afternoon Playground 142438 5 WOLF CAMERA Video&Photo Supplies Water Treatment Plant 142439 2,198 WORK CONNECTION-BPARK Other Contracted Services Park Maintenance 142440 54 XCEL ENERGY Electric Traffic Signals 142441 449 ACE ICE COMPANY Misc Non-Taxable Prairie View Liquor Store 142442 95 AMERIPRIDE LINEN&APPAREL SER Repair&Maint.Supplies Den Road Liquor Store 142443 286 ARCTIC GLACIER INC Misc Non-Taxable Prairie Village Liquor Store 142444 5,333 BELLBOY CORPORATION Liquor Den Road Liquor Store 142445 18,107 DAY DISTRIBUTING Beer Prairie Village Liquor Store 142446 1,400 EAGLE WINE COMPANY Wine Imported Prairie View Liquor Store 142447 13,142 EAST SIDE BEVERAGE COMPANY Beer Prairie View Liquor Store 142448 369 GETTMAN COMPANY Misc Taxable Den Road Liquor Store 142449 1,077 GRAPE BEGINNINGS Wine Domestic Prairie View Liquor Store 142450 8,519 GRIGGS COOPER&CO Liquor Prairie View Liquor Store 142451 1,723 HOHENSTEINS INC Beer Prairie View Liquor Store 142453 31,362 JOHNSON BROTHERS LIQUOR CO Wine Domestic Prairie Village Liquor Store 142454 86 M.AMUNDSON LLP Misc Taxable Prairie View Liquor Store 142455 12,647 MARK VII Beer Den Road Liquor Store 142456 596 MIDWEST COCA COLA BOTTLING COM Misc Taxable Prairie View Liquor Store 142457 1,466 NEW FRANCE WINE COMPANY Wine Domestic Prairie View Liquor Store 142458 1,920 PAUSTIS&SONS COMPANY Wine Domestic Prairie View Liquor Store 142459 11,045 PHILLIPS WINE AND SPIRITS INC Liquor Prairie Village Liquor Store 142460 1,461 PRIOR WINE COMPANY Wine Domestic Prairie View Liquor Store 142461 15,440 QUALITY WINE&SPIRITS CO Liquor Den Road Liquor Store 142462 622 SALUD AMERICA INC Wine Imported Den Road Liquor Store 142463 620 SPECIALTY WINES AND BEVERAGES Wine Imported Prairie View Liquor Store 142464 17,368 THORPE DISTRIBUTING Beer Prairie View Liquor Store 142465 463 VINTAGE ONE WINES INC Wine Domestic Prairie Village Liquor Store 142466 853 WINE COMPANY,THE Wine Domestic Den Road Liquor Store 142467 1,540 WINE MERCHANTS INC Wine Imported Den Road Liquor Store 142468 1,196 WORLD CLASS WINES INC Wine Imported Den Road Liquor Store 142469 7,972 A P LAWN INC Contract Svcs-Lawn Maint. Fire Station#1 142470 118 A TO Z RENTAL CENTER Other Rentals Park Maintenance 142471 266 ABLE HOSE&RUBBER INC Repair&Maint.Supplies Water Treatment Plant 142472 51 ACTIVAR Repair&Maint.Supplies Water Treatment Plant 142473 7,061 ALLIANT ENGINEERING INC Deposits Escrow 142474 313 ALTERNATIVE BUSINESS FURNITURE Capital Under$2,000 Furniture 142475 190 AMERICAN RED CROSS Recreation Supplies Pool Lessons 142476 3,190 ANCHOR PAPER COMPANY Office Supplies General 142477 594 ANDERBERG,CRAIG W. Other Contracted Services Softball 142478 2,052 ANOKA TECHNICAL COLLEGE Tuition Reimbursement/School Fire 142479 1,379 AQUA ENGINEERING INC Operating Supplies Street Maintenance 142480 163 AQUA LOGIC INC Other Contracted Services Pool Maintenance 142481 13,304 ASPEN EQUIPMENT CO. Machinery&Equipment Sewer System Maintenance 142482 149 BACHMANS CREDIT DEPT Landscape Materials/Supp Water Treatment Plant 142483 620 BALDWIN SUPPLY COMPANY Equipment Parts Water Treatment Plant 142484 200 BAUER BUILT TIRE AND BATTERY Equipment Parts Fleet Services 142485 877 BERTELSON OFFICE PLUS Office Supplies Water Utility-General 142486 36 BLOOMINGTON SECURITY SOLUTIONS Operating Supplies Water Utility-General 142487 438 BOYER TRUCKS SO.ST.PAUL Equipment Parts Fleet Services 142488 868 BRYAN ROCK PRODUCTS INC Gravel Water System Maintenance 142489 1,600 CARDIAC SCIENCE INC Capital Under$2,000 Fire Fighters Fund 142490 9,373 CARLSON&SOLDO,PLLP Legal Human Resources 142491 6,783 CEMSTONE PRODUCTS COMPANY Improvement Contracts CIP Trails 142492 184 CITI-CARGO&STORAGE CO,INC Other Rentals Summer Theatre 142493 236 CLAREYS INC Repair&Maint.Supplies Fire 142494 74 CLARK'S STUMP REMOVAL Equipment Repair&Maint Water Treatment Plant 142495 232 CLARKLIFT OF MINNESOTA INC Equipment Repair&Maint Water Treatment Plant 142496 3,621 CLOSED CIRCUIT SPECIALISTS INC Equipment Repair&Maint Water Treatment Plant 142497 3,620 COMMERCIAL REFRIGERATION SYSTE Other Contracted Services Ice Arena Maintenance 142498 687 CONNEY SAFETY PRODUCTS Improvement Contracts CIP Trails 142499 495 CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS INC Improvement Contracts CIP Trails 142500 2,700 CORPORATE EXPRESS Office Supplies General 142501 297 COURTNEY TRUCK SERVICE Other Contracted Services Ice Arena Maintenance 142502 25,979 CURB MASTERS INC Repair&Maint.Supplies Storm Drainage 142503 3,287 CURTIS 1000 INC Operating Supplies Sewer Accounting 142504 48 CUSTOMER CONTACT SERVICES Other Contracted Services Water Treatment Plant 142505 14,956 CUTLER-MAGNER COMPANY Chemicals Water Treatment Plant 142506 121 CY'S UNIFORMS Clothing&Uniforms Police Check# Amount Vendor/Explanation Account Description Business Unit 142507 119 DALE GREEN COMPANY,THE Landscape Materials/Supp Park Maintenance 142508 242 DAY,DAVID Other Contracted Services Softball 142509 177 DE LAGE LANDEN FINANCIAL SERVI Other Rentals General 142510 1,707 DECORATIVE DESIGNS INC Contract Svcs-Gen.Bldg City Center Operations 142511 39,644 DELANO ERICKSON ARCHITECTS Design&Engineering Park Acquisition&Development 142512 136 DELEGARD TOOL CO Small Tools Fleet Services 142513 1,989 DELL Other Hardware Capital Impr./Maint.Fund 142514 150 DIETHELM,GARY Other Contracted Services Pleasant Hill Cemetary 142515 32,038 DIVERSE BUILDING MAINTENANCE Cleaning Supplies Police City Center 142516 1,356 DNR SCREEN PRINTING INC Clothing&Uniforms July 4th Celebration 142517 13,606 DRT TRANSPORT Other Contracted Services Lime Sludge 142518 383 DYNA SYSTEMS Repair&Maint.Supplies Water Treatment Plant 142519 538 EARL F ANDERSEN INC Signs Traffic Signs 142520 222 ECOLAB INC Contract Svcs-Pest Control Senior Center 142521 1,125 EDEN PRAIRIE CHAMBER OF COMMER Miscellaneous Records Management 142522 196 EDEN PRAIRIE TAILOR&SHOE REP Clothing&Uniforms Police 142523 1,890 ELECTRIC PUMP Capital Under$2,000 Water Treatment Plant 142524 6,983 EMERGENCY APPARATUS MAINTENANC Repair&Maint.Supplies Fire 142525 721 ENERGY MANAGEMENT INC Repair&Maint.Supplies Ice Arena Maintenance 142526 117 ERDAHL AERIAL PHOTOS Other Contracted Services Economic Development 142527 175 ERICKSEN,LIZ Other Contracted Services Volleyball 142528 68 ESCHELON TELECOM INC Equipment Repair&Maint Telephone 142529 672 ETHANOL PRODUCTS LLC Chemicals Water Treatment Plant 142530 264 FALCK,TIMOTHY R Other Contracted Services Softball 142531 265 FLEET MAINTENANCE INC Equipment Repair&Maint Fleet Services 142532 300 FORESTRY SUPPLIERS INC. Operating Supplies Tree Disease 142533 1,789 G&K SERVICES Clothing&Uniforms Park Maintenance 142534 970 G&K SERVICES-MPLS INDUSTRIAL Cleaning Supplies Water Treatment Plant 142535 3,545 GEOMATRIXCONSULTANTS INC Other Contracted Services WAFTA 142536 538 GINA MARIAS INC Operating Supplies Fire 142537 360 GLEWWE DOORS INC Building Repair&Maint. Water Treatment Plant 142538 512 GLOBAL EQUIPMENT COMPANY Operating Supplies Water Treatment Plant 142539 6,800 GME CONSULTANTS INC Design&Engineering Construction Fund 142540 58 GRAINGER Supplies-General Bldg Community Center Maintenance 142541 5,339 HANSEN THORP PELLINEN OLSON Other Contracted Services Fire Station#4 142542 4,000 HAWKINS WATER TREATMENT Chemicals Water Treatment Plant 142543 173 HENNEPIN TECHNICAL COLLEGE Tuition Reimbursement/School Fire 142544 314 HENRY,PAUL Other Contracted Services Softball 142S45 1,112 HIRSHFIELDS PAINT MANUFACTURIN Operating Supplies Park Maintenance 142546 986 HOLMES,JOHN CARTER Other Contracted Services Volleyball 142547 187 HOLMES,TOM Other Contracted Services Softball 142548 1,081 ICI DULUX PAINT CTRS Repair&Maint.Supplies Water Treatment Plant 142549 4,217 IND SCHOOL DIST 272 Printing Riley-Jacques Barn 142550 604 INFRATECH Repair&Maint.Supplies Sewer System Maintenance 142551 1,560 INSIGHT PUBLIC SECTOR Office Supplies General 142552 34 JEFFERSON FIRE&SAFETY INC Operating Supplies Fire 142553 74 LAB SAFETY SUPPLY INC Cleaning Supplies Water Treatment Plant 142554 178 LAKE COUNTRY DOOR Contract Svcs-General Bldg Fire Station#3 142555 6,152 LAMETTRYS COLLISION Equipment Repair&Maint Fleet Services 142556 1,065 LANO EQUIPMENT INC Other Rentals Park Maintenance 142557 189 LEROY JOB TRUCKING INC Other Contracted Services Animal Control 142558 255 LESCO INC Landscape Materials/Supp Street Maintenance 142559 357 LIFE SAFETY SYSTEMS Contract Svcs-Fire/Life/Sfty City Hall-CAM 142560 678 LIGHTNING PRINTING INC Printing Summer Theatre 142561 3,000 LU,WEIMING Other Contracted Services Reserve 142562 100 LUBRICATION TECHNOLOGIES INC Lubricants&Additives Fleet Services 142563 940 MAJESTIC LOG HOMES AND PRODUCT Building Capital Impr./Maint.Fund 142564 763 MARKS EDEN PRAIRIE BP Motor Fuels Fleet Services 142565 195 MATTS AUTO SERVICE INC Equipment Repair&Maint Fleet Services 142566 283 MAXI-PRINT INC Printing Police 142567 75 MED COMPASS Employment Support Test Fire 142569 1,961 MENARDS Building Materials Richard T.Anderson Cons.Area 142570 6,331 METRO FIRE Repair&Maint.Supplies Fire 142571 90 METROPOLITAN FORD Equipment Parts Fleet Services 142572 12,446 MIDWEST ASPHALT CORPORATION Patching Asphalt Street Maintenance 142573 95 MIDWEST DESIGN CO Other Contracted Services Fire 142574 458 MILLER DUNWIDDIE Building Capital Impr./Maint.Fund 142575 239 MINNESOTA CONWAY Safety Supplies Fire 142576 8,901 MINNESOTA PIPE AND EQUIPMENT* Repair&Maint.Supplies Water System Maintenance 142577 583 MINNESOTA TROPHIES&GIFTS Operating Supplies Police 142578 544 MINNESOTA WANNER COMPANY Equipment Repair&Maint Park Maintenance 142579 7,000 MMKR Audit&Financial Finance f Check# Amount Vendor/Explanation Account Description Business Unit 142580 859 MTI DISTRIBUTING INC Equipment Parts Fleet Services 142581 2,759 MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY SERVICES Conference Expense Fire 142582 4,633 NATIONAL WATERWORKS Repair&Maint.Supplies Storm Drainage 142583 62 NORCOSTCO Operating Supplies Summer Theatre 142584 1,874 NORTHLAND BUSINESS SYSTEMS Software Maintenance Information Technology 142585 3,415 NORTHSTAR MUDJACKING SPECIALIS Repair&Maint.Supplies Storm Drainage 142586 101,020 NORTHWEST ASPHALT Improvement Contracts Construction Fund 142587 477 NORTHWEST BUSINESS SYSTEMS Equipment Repair&Maint Telephone 142588 498 NRG PROCESSING SOLUTIONS Waste Disposal Park Maintenance 142589 295 OSI BATTERIES INC Operating Supplies Police 142590 250 PARK NICOLLET CLINIC Other Contracted Services Risk Management 142591 23,234 PARROTT CONTRACTING INC Other Contracted Services Water System Maintenance 142592 5,044 PERNSTEINER CREATIVE GROUP INC Printing Staring Lake Concert 142593 37,524 PRAIRIE ELECTRIC COMPANY Other Contracted Services Pool Maintenance 142594 62 PRAIRIE LAWN AND GARDEN Operating Supplies Park Maintenance 142595 114 QUALITY FLOW SYSTEMS INC Equipment Parts Sewer Liftstation 142596 108 R&R SPECIALTIES OF WISCONSIN Repair&Maint.Supplies Ice Arena Maintenance 142597 775 RAY,LEE Other Contracted Services Softball 142598 521 REBS MARKETING Postage Water Accounting 142599 211 RIGID HITCH INCORPORATED Equipment Parts Fleet Services 142600 8,669 RMR SYSTEMS INC Merchandise for Resale Water Meter Reading 142601 498 S&S WORLDWIDE Operating Supplies Outdoor Center 142602 10,067 SHANK CONSTRUCTORS INC Building Repair&Maint. Water Treatment Plant 142603 28 SHERWIN WILLIAMS CO Operating Supplies Park Maintenance 142604 45 SOUTH METRO PUBLIC SAFETY TRAI Tuition Reimbursement/School Police 142605 44 SOUTHWEST SUBURBAN PUBLISHING- Advertising Community Band 142606 33 SPS COMPANIES Repair&Maint.Supplies Water System Maintenance 142607 60,444 SRF CONSULTING GROUP INC Improvements to Land Park Acquisition&Development 142608 2,029 ST CROIX ENVIRONMENTAL INC Other Contracted Services Water Treatment Plant 142609 3,229 STREICHERS Capital Under$2,000 Police 142610 56 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET Equipment Parts Fleet Services 142611 5,993 SUMMIT ENVIROSOLUTIONS Other Contracted Services Utility Improvement Fund 142612 5,421 SYSTEM CONTROL SERVICES Equipment Repair&Maint Water Treatment Plant 142613 66 TAHER INC CATERING Miscellaneous City Council 142614 41 TESSCO Equipment Parts Fleet Services 142615 1,137 TESSMAN SEED CO Chemicals Park Maintenance 142616 34 TIME EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT Training Supplies Fire 142617 3,060 TKDA Other Contracted Services Utility Improvement Fund 142618 55 TOTAL REGISTER Operating Supplies Den Road Liquor Store 142619 310 TOWN AND COUNTRY DODGE Equipment Parts Fleet Services 142620 61 TRESTMAN MUSIC CENTER Operating Supplies Community Band 142621 45 TRIARCO Operating Supplies Outdoor Center 142622 280 TRUGREEN CHEMLAWN MTKA Other Contracted Services Water Treatment Plant 142623 532 TWIN CITY FILTER SERVICE INC Repair&Maint.Supplies Water Treatment Plant 142624 965 TWIN CITY HARDWARE Improvements to Land Park Acquisition&Development 142625 45 TWIN CITY OXYGEN CO Repair&Maint.Supplies Water System Maintenance 142626 1,715 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED Clothing&Uniforms Fire 142627 210 UNITED RENTALS HIGHWAY TEC14NOL Other Contracted Services Water System Maintenance 142 628 3 UNLIMITED SUPPLIES INC Equipment Parts Fleet Services 142629 1,176 VESSCO INC Equipment Parts Water Treatment Plant 142630 18 WAYTEK INC Operating Supplies Park Maintenance 142631 671 WESTSIDE EQUIPMENT Equipment Repair&Maint Fleet Services 142632 3,001 WHEELER LUMBER LLC Improvement Contracts CIP Trails 142633 192 WUOLLET BAKERY INC Operating Supplies Fire 142634 1,472 ZIEGLER INC Equipment Parts Fleet Services 142635 61 BRIDENSTEINE,CHELSEA Other Contracted Services Teen Work Program 142636 34 CARLSTEDT,ANNIE Other Contracted Services Teen Work Program 142637 50 CHEN,CURTIS FU Other Contracted Services Teen Work Program 142638 69 FILIMONOVA,ANASTASIYA Other Contracted Services Teen Work Program 142639 68 GARTON,ELISE M Other Contracted Services Teen Work Program 142640 64 GOODWIN,MATTHEW Other Contracted Services Teen Work Program 142641 66 HANSON,NOEL P Other Contracted Services Teen Work Program 142642 34 HOLMQUIST,DAN Other Contracted Services Teen Work Program 142643 84 HYDE-STRAND,ALEXANDRA L Other Contracted Services Teen Work Program 142644 56 KEIVES,ANDREW L Other Contracted Services Teen Work Program 142645 34 KEPPEL,KYLA A Other Contracted Services Teen Work Program 142646 77 KIERSTEAD,CHRISTY Other Contracted Services Teen Work Program 142647 79 KISSINGER,SAMANTHA Other Contracted Services Teen Work Program 142648 88 MCNULTY,ZACK Other Contracted Services Teen Work Program 142649 37 NELLSON,KEVIN Other Contracted Services Teen Work Program 142650 60 NELSON,REBECCA E Other Contracted Services Teen Work Program 142651 62 O'BRIEN,COREY Other Contracted Services Teen Work Program Check 4 Amount Vendor/Explanation Account Description Business Unit 142652 58 O'BRIEN,NOLAN Other Contracted Services Teen Work Program 142653 34 O'CONNELL,LUXMI Other Contracted Services Teen Work Program 142654 60 REACH,ELIZABETH Other Contracted Services Teen Work Program 142655 34 SCHULKE,ROB Other Contracted Services Teen Work Program 142656 59 SHAH,RAOUL Other Contracted Services Teen Work Program 142657 61 SHAW,KENDRA Other Contracted Services Teen Work Program 142658 39 SHAWD,ANDREW Other Contracted Services Teen Work Program 142659 39 SHSH,SHAMIR Other Contracted Services Teen Work Program 142660 74 SKOBOV,MICHAEL E Other Contracted Services Teen Work Program 142661 60 SZE,ALLEN Other Contracted Services Teen Work Program 142662 23 WOITTE,ERIN Other Contracted Services Teen Work Program 142663 39 YEAROUS,NICHOLAS S Other Contracted Services Teen Work Program 2,166,617 Grand Total CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Ordinances and Resolutions July 5, 2005 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: IX. A. Community Development/Planning Eden Prairie Fire Station No. 4 Janet Jeremiah Scott Kipp Requested Action Move to: • Approve 2nd Reading of the Ordinance for Planned Unit Development District Review with waivers, and Zoning District Amendment within the Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District on 3.66 acres; and • Adopt the Resolution for Site Plan Review on 1.32 acres; and • Approve and Authorize Issuance of a Grading Permit for Eden Prairie Fire Station No. 4, subject to release by the City Engineer upon determination that the final contract documents conform to plans stamp dated June 28, 2005, as approved by the City Council. Synopsis This project is for development of Eden Prairie Fire Station No. 4 to serve the southwest quadrant of the city. Attachments 1. Ordinance for PUD District Review and Zoning Amendment 2. Summary Ordinance for PUD Amendment 3. Resolution for Site Plan Review EDEN PRAIRIE FIRE STATION NO 4 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA ORDINANCE NO. 11-2005-PUD-7-2005 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 Neighborhood Commercial Zoning District 11-2005-PUD-7-2005 (hereinafter 'PUD-7- 2005-N-COM). Section 3. The City Council hereby makes the following findings: A. PUD-7-2005-N-COM is not in conflict with the goals of the Comprehensive Guide Plan of the City. B. PUD-7-2005-N-COM 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-7-2005-N-COM are justified by the design of the development described therein. D. PUD-7-2005-N-COM 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 Neighborhood District and shall be included hereafter in the Planned Unit Development PUD-7-2005-N-COM, 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 51h day of July, 2005, 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 51'day of July, 2005. ATTEST: Kathleen A.Porta, City Clerk Nancy Tyra-Lukens,Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie Sun Current on ,2005. EXHIBIT A PUD Legal Description — OUTLOT H, HAWTHORNE OF EDEN PRAIRIE,HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA EDEN PRAIRIE FIRE STATION NO. 4 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 11-2005-PUD-7-2005 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: Summa : This ordinance allows amendment of the zoning of land located at Southeast corner of Dell Road and Linwood Court within the Neighborhood Commercial 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 Porta, City Clerk Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor PUBLISHED in the Eden Prairie Sun Current on , 2005. (A full copy of the text of this Ordinance is available from City Clerk.) EDEN PRAIRIE FIRE STATION NO. 4 CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE HENNEPIN COUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 2005- A RESOLUTION GRANTING SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR EDEN PRAIRIE FIRE STATION NO. 4 BY CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE WHEREAS, City of Eden Prairie, has applied for Site Plan approval of Eden Prairie Fire Station No. 4 to construct an 11,966 square foot fire station, by an Ordinance approved by the City Council on July 5, 2005; and WHEREAS,the Planning Commission reviewed said application at a public hearing at its June 13, 2005 meeting and recommended approval of said site plans; and WHEREAS,the City Council has reviewed said application at a public hearing at its July 5, 2005 meeting. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE,that site plan approval be granted to Eden Prairie Fire Station No 4, reviewed and approved by the City Council on July 5, 2005. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Eden Prairie this 5th day of July, 2005. Nancy Tyra-Lukens, Mayor ATTEST: Kathleen A. Porta, City Clerk CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Requests and Petitions July 5, 2005 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: X. A. Robert A. Lambert, Director Request for Veterans Memorial Parks and Recreation Requested Action Move to: Approve the staff recommendation for a process to utilize a Citizen's Task Force to assist the City in determining the feasibility of a Veterans Memorial within the Eden Prairie parks system, and furthermore to approve the charter statement which outlines responsibility for the Citizens Task Force and city staff for this process. Synopsis The Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission unanimously recommended approval of the process to utilize a Citizens Task Force to assist the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission and the City Council in evaluating the feasibility of developing a Veterans Memorial within the City of Eden Prairie. The Commission supported the four part process for developing a Veterans Memorial and the conceptual timeline and process for arriving at key decision points throughout the process. Staff would anticipate that the majority of the funding source for a Veterans Memorial would come from donations. Background City staff would recommend a four-part process for developing a Veterans Memorial: 1. Site selection 2. Concept design and approval 3. Fund raising 4. Construction and dedication Staff would recommend the appointment of a citizens' task force to assist City staff and a park planner in this process. Once the process is approved, staff would recommend advertising in the Eden Prairie News and Sun Current for citizens to serve on an ad hoc task force with the specific direction to assist the City in selecting a site for a memorial to people who have served our country in the military and to eventually help provide input to the design process. Request from John Mallow for Veterans Memorial July 5, 2005 Page 2 Recommended Process ■ June 27, 2005, meeting of the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission to approve the concept and the charter statement. ■ July 5, 2005, City Council approval of the concept and charter statement. • Second week of July advertise in the Eden Prairie News and the Sun Current for all Eden Prairie resident veterans who are interested in serving on an ad hoc task force to apply to serve (application to include reasons why they would like to serve on the task force). Staff would recommend the task force be limited to no more than seven veterans, preferably representing as many branches of the service as possible and with a wide age span. ■ At the August 1 meeting, Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission to appoint members to the task force. ■ August 2—September 30,task force to meet to discuss potential sites for a veteran memorial. ■ At the October Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission meeting,task force to report back with a recommendation on a site for a memorial and a request to contract with a planner to help design a veterans memorial. ■ At the October or November Council meeting, Council to approve funds for a concept design. ■ December through March,task force works with planner on concept designs. ■ Early spring task force submits a proposal to the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission for concept design of a memorial with a cost estimate for the memorial, upon approval of the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission the concept must then be approved by the City Council. ■ Spring of 2006, City Council approves the concept design and authorizes the task force to begin fund raising for the project(as soon as fund raising is completed, the Council commits to constructing the project). ■ Fund raising goal - completed fund raising by the end of the year with construction to begin in the spring of 2007. ■ Project construction to be completed late summer or early fall of 2007, with the dedication on Veteran's Day of 2007. ■ This is a tentative schedule that could be shortened or lengthened, depending on the size of the project ultimately approved. Request from John Mallow for Veterans Memorial July 5, 2005 Page 3 Considerations Mr. Mallow and city staff concur that the purpose of the memorial should be to honor the men and women who have served their country and not a"war memorial." Attachment Eden Prairie Veterans Memorial Study Task Force Charter Statement CHARTER STATEMENT EDEN PRAIRIE VETERANS MEMORIAL STUDY TASK FORCE PURPOSE STATEMENT: The purpose of the task force is to assist the City staff in selection of an appropriate site for a memorial to Eden Prairie residents who have served their country in various wars. The task force is also responsible for providing input to a park planner in the design for a memorial that would reflect the goal of honoring veterans,both living and dead, who have served their country. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES: Task Force Responsibilities A. To work with City staff in developing an appropriate location for a Veterans Memorial. The site should be a highly visible community or city park(rather than a neighborhood park). The site should not distract from other park uses, it should be easily accessible, and should reflect the honor Eden Prairie residents wish to bestow on those who have served. B. The task force is also responsible for working with City staff and a park planner or architect selected to design the memorial. The task force's responsibility will be to provide input as to the type of memorial to be designed and to react to the concepts developed by the consultant. C. The task force will also commit to working on the fundraising for the memorial, once the concept has been approved. Staff Responsibilities A. To recommend the process for site selection and assist the task force in developing criteria for design of the memorial. B. To provide all statistical data required by the task force, as well as maps and site plans of existing facilities. C. To provide input regarding possible conflicts with existing park uses, as well as recommendations on sites that would be appropriate. D. Develop agendas and provide support materials. E. Supervise a consultant through the design process. F. Supervise the construction of the project once funding is approved. Veterans Memorial Charter Statement Page 2 of 2 MEMBERSHIP: Seven to nine Eden Prairie residents who represent a variety of military services and with a relatively large age span, if possible. TASK FORCE CHAIR: To be selected by the members STAFF LIAISON: Bob Lambert, Director of Parks and Recreation, and Stu Fox, Manager of Parks and Natural Resources SUPPORT STAFF: Brenda Uting DURATION: August 2005 until the project is completed FIRST MEETING: To be announced G:\Parks and Recreation\Recreatmn\Brenda\Letter&Memos\Lambert 2005\Veterans memorial Charter Statement&20-05.doc CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Requests and Petitions July 5, 2005 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: X. B. Robert A. Lambert, Director EPHA Request for Practice Area at Parks and Recreation Community Center Requested Action Move to: Authorize replacing two twenty-foot bleacher sections with a practice area in the northwest corner of the Olympic Rink at the Eden Prairie Community Center. Synopsis At the June 27 meeting the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission voted unanimously to recommend approving the request of the Eden Prairie Hockey Association (EPHA)to replace two twenty-foot bleacher sections with a practice shooting area in the northwest corner of the Olympic Rink to create an opportunity for various user groups, including the EPHA, the Eden Prairie High School Varsity and Junior Varsity Hockey Teams (girls and boys), summer hockey camps/clinics and the general public to utilize the area for shooting and stick handling. The EPHA would pay for all costs associated with the proposed practice shooting area, including purchase, installation,maintenance and repair. Background The EPHA has requested the city to consider allowing them to pay for the installation of a practice shooting area to provide an opportunity for hockey groups to warm up or work with an instructor to hone their skills. This type of practice shooting area is available at other local hockey arenas throughout the metro area. Currently staff monitor the front lobby and other areas in the Community Center on a daily basis to ensure that youth hockey players are not shooting or stick handling in the building,which could cause injury to other customers and/or damage the facility. The practice shooting area would provide a safe alternative, free of charge to the City of Eden Prairie. During the hockey season (September through March)the EPHA and the Eden Prairie High School would have priority use of the shooting area. When not in use by these groups and during the rest of the year(April through August), the shooting area would be available to reserve on an hourly basis or on a first-come first-serve basis to various user groups and individuals. The city would expect all individuals and groups to comply with a list of posted rules for using the facility. Staff would monitor the shooting area with staff and a security camera that is already installed. There are currently five twenty-foot sections of bleachers in the Olympic Rink. Two of these EPHA Request for Practice Shooting Area at Community Center July 5, 2005 Page 2 bleacher sections would have to be removed (relocated to a community park). This reduction of bleachers would still leave three twenty-foot sections of bleachers which would be adequate for most games,practices and youth lessons that occur in the Olympic Rink. Attachments EPHA Letter of Request—March 25, 2005 EPHA Letter of Request—May 27, 2005 Proposed Shooting Area Plan Proposed Shooting Area Rules Written Approval from the EPFSC Written Approval from Building Inspections Friday,March 25, 2005 Mr. Robert Lambert Director, Parks and Recreation City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie,Mn. 55347 Dear Mr. Lambert, The Eden Prairie Hockey Association (EPHA) would like to formally request that the city allow us to install a practice shooting area in the northwest corner of the Olympic rink at the Eden ' Prairie Community Center. This shooting area would be utilized by the EPHA, the Eden Prairie High School varsity and junior varsity programs, and the general public. The EPHA will pay for the protective netting, shooting tarps, and installation required to create this area. In order to make room for the shooting area, the northernmost section of aluminum bleachers would have to be removed. This section of bleachers is rarely used. In addition,the other two sections north of the red line would have to be moved as far to the south as possible. This would yield a sufficient space for the shooting area. Please let me know if you need any additional information,or have any questions. We would Re to proceed with this project immediately. Sincerely, John J. Schmelzle President Eden Prairie Hockey Association 612-397-2406 i i i I Friday,May 27, 2005 Mr Robert Lambert Director, Parks and Recreation j City of Eden Prairie 8080 Mitchell Road Eden Prairie,Mn. 55347 Dear Mr.Lambert, Here is the information you requested regarding the proposed practice shooting area in the northwest corner of the Olympic rink at the Eden Prairie Community Center: i i 1.Design of proposed shooting area(attached) 2.Expectations of use: -Access available during regular hours at the community center -No charge for use -Facility would be available for the EPHA,Eden Prairie High School, and the public. -The facility could be reserved by teams in one hour segments. When not reserved,it would ; be available on a first-come,first-served basis. Reservations would be made at the Community Center front desk. -When reserved and used by teams,coaches would supervise. When used by the public, there would be no formallscheduled supervision. -Facility could be used during Figure skating practice/lessons on the Olympic rink. - Letter of approval/concurrance for the Eden Prairie Figure Skating Club(EPFSC)- attached 3.The impact on loss of seating is minimal. One section of bleachers needs to be removed. Neither the EPHA nor the EPFSC need this seating for any of our events. 4.If there are increased maintenance costs incurred by the city(damage,removal of marks on the wall,etc)these costs would be paid by the EPHA. Please let me know if you have any questions,or need any additional information. We are anxious to open the facility as soon as possible. Sincerely, John Schmelzle President Eden Prairie Hockey Association (EPHA) J1�1t41 L N t:l 111 r E , E rn C Z t 27` 3-JD zI'-o- a7-o I z m st{ooTtM6 CAQF Z5 MDG11 C� DGE SEE /4HsTH, VSS SHIELDING ?0 POINT OF TANOFNCY 5'4' WIDE GL ANSfTtON o i a I d '!!� o a c CA 01 � A � N. _. .. -� .l Nf:. � .:•- .,. :; ram• :, - ;.:.•�,y. :.,�: LT Ln t i cove" I� l sSh•' • } �•whas�• i ` ai Z a+►'ra'taw .Mi��wwr►w"sfw�► aiw■rc tic>,wef�- w Ewa to aa*t�+' ci��a►�'"`�' i .ew aw •- �wa►rw r.+a+. �.r 1 CD Aatl aY� aaa � • / 1 w wry�iw��•�1 ♦��`tea J�i•+� 4•.4'� '''y �•`'4: /•4•r�++++.�+�•+.��•j •+ice•*i•�`'�.�is��•�`•� / „�. .� � . d�.�:•��� ,•.-.`spa .t„ � Ln - . LQ i rn C, ilD CA W A m 3 0 a N Ri N O O a N Page 1 of 1 Bob Lanzi From: John Schmelzle Djschme@us.ibm.com] Sent: Thursday, June 02,2005 12:49 PM To: phannan@salaarc.com Cc: Bob Lanzi Subject: SHOOTING AREA RULES i Paul -This is what I expect will be posted outside the shooting area: i 1.This shooting area can be reserved in one-hour increments by teams or individuals at the front desk. 2.Teams/individuals that have reserved.time in the shooting area get to use the shooting area the entire reserved time. 3. If the shooting area is not reserved or in use, it can be used on a first-come, first-served basis, one hour at a time. 4. Anyone waiting to use the shooting area should wait in the community center lobby until the shooting area is available. 5.Teams/individuals using the shooting area should not use the bleacher seating area. 6. Noise should be kept to a minimum to avoid distracting people using the Olympic rink. 7. Only pucks or tennis balls should be used in the shooting area. They cannot be used outside of the shooting area. - 8.The facility,hockey association,and high school codes of conduct apply at all times in and around the shooting area. ' 9.Any issues or concerns regarding behavior in and around the shooting area should be directed to Community Center Staff and the Eden Prairie Hockey Association. Please let me know if you have any questions or suggestions. Otherwise, you can concur to the installation of the shooting area, including the use of it during figure skating practices. Thanks. John J. Schmelzle Client Unit Director Financial Services Sector 8/653-2406 612-397-2406 6/20/2005 Page 1 of 3 Robert Lambert From: Bob Lanzi Sent: Tuesday, June 14,2005 11:07 AM To: Robert Lambert Cc: 'John Schmelzle' Subject: FW: SHOOTING AREA RULES Bob, Listed below is the ok from EPFSC to EPHA. If something additional is needed, please contact John Schmelzle. Thanks, Bob Lanzi -----Original Message----- From: John Schmelzle[mailto:jjschme@us.ibm.com] Sent:Tuesday,June 14, 2005 10:37 AM To: Bob Lanzi Subject: Fw: SHOOTING AREA RULES i Bob- Finally,here is the concurrence from the EPFSC. Please forward as appropriate. Thanks. John J. Schmelzle I Client Unit Director Financial Services Sector 8/653-2406 612-397-2406 ----Forwarded by John Schmelzle/MinneapolisABM on 06/14/2005 10:35 AM---- Paul Hannan ToJohn Schmelzle/Minneapolis/IBM{Qa IBMUS <phannan@salaarc.com> cc SubjectRe:SHOOTING AREA RULES 06/13/2005 11:04 AM June 13, 2005 Hello John, Based on the rules and guidelines that have been submitted for the Shooting Area, the Eden Prairie Figure Skating Club has no objection to the construction of the proposed Shooting Area. However, if the rules j and guidelines as stated are not adhered to, we reserve the right to i have the Eden Prairie Hockey Association and the Eden Prairie Community Center correct the offending situation to whatever degree necessary to comply with the rules and guidelines. Sincerely, Eden Prairie Figure Skating Club 6/14/2005 rage z of.5 Paul M_ Hannan President On Jun 7, 2005, at 10:45 AM, John Schmelzle wrote: > Paul - Can you send me or the city a letter concurring to the shooting > area? Let me know if you have questions. Thanks. > John J. Schmelzle > Client Unit Director > Financial Services Sector > 8/653-2406 612-397-2406 > ----- Forwarded by John Schmelzle/Minneapolis/IBM on 06/07/2005 10:44 > AM ----- > John Schmelzle/Minneapolis/IBM > 06/02/2005 12:48 PM i > I > <image.tiff> > I > To > <image.tiff> > phannan@salaarc.com > <image.tiff> i > cc > <image.tiff> > blanzi@edenprairie.org > <image.tiff> > Subject > <image.tiff> > SHOOTING AREA RULES > <image.tiff><image_tiff> Paul - This is what I expect will be posted > outside the shooting area: > . > 1. This shooting area can be reserved in one-hour increments by teams > or individuals at the front desk. > 2. Teams/individuals that have reserved time in the shooting area get > to use the shooting area the entire reserved time. > 3. If the shooting area is not reserved or in use, it can be used on > a first-come, first-served basis, one hour at a time. > 4. Anyone waiting to use the shooting area should wait in the > community center lobby until the shooting area is available. > 5. Teams/individuals using the shooting area should not use the > bleacher seating area. > 6. Noise should be kept to a minimum to avoid distracting people > using the Olympic rink. > 7. Only pucks or tennis balls should be used in the shooting area. i > They cannot be used outside of the shooting area. > 8. The facility, hockey association, and high school codes of conduct > apply at all times in and around the shooting area. > 9. Any issues or concerns regarding behavior in and around the > shooting area should be directed to Community Center Staff and the 6/14/2005 Page 3 of 3 > Eden Prairie Hockey Association_ > > Please let me know if you have any questions or suggestions. > Otherwise, you can concur to the installation of the shooting area, > including the use of it during figure skating practices. Thanks. > John J. Schmelzle > Client Unit Director > Financial Services Sector > 8/653-2406 612-397-2406 > I I c i I I I I I I 6/14/2005 Page I of I Robert Lambert From: Kevin Schmieg Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2005 4:38 PM To: Robert Lambert Cc: Bob Lanz! Subject: Proposed practice shooting area Bob, I have reviewed the plans provided me by Bob Lanzi indicating the construction and location of a proposed practice shooting area to be located in the Community Center. I do not see any code issues related to the design or location. It is my understanding that the shooting area will not encroach into any of the required exiting width as it is to occupy an area currently being utilized for bleachers. If you have any questions please contact me at ext. 8340. -Kevin 6/2/2005 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Reports of City Manager July 5, 2005 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: XIII. B. 1. Scott Neal, City Manager Senior Task Force Appointments Requested Action Move to: Appoint the following individuals to the Senior Issues Task Force: Marvin Cofer Basil Wissner Joyce Conley Joanne Bartel Bette Anderson John Dollerschell Sharon Steiner Joan Rumford Lisa Schmidtke Scott Welter Pastor Rod Anderson Synopsis The City Council approved the establishment of the Senior Issues Task Force at their May 17, 2005, meeting. The Council directed staff to solicit and recruit community members for potential membership on the task force. The original timeline scheduled the Council's appointment of the task force members on June 14, 2005. The appointments to the task force did not occur on the scheduled date because City staff had not completed the processing of task force applications in time for that meeting. Staff did not make that deadline because of the stronger than expected response we received from citizens desiring to be members of the task force. Staff has completed a review of citizens who expressed interest in task force membership and offer the following list of names to the Council with our recommendation for appointment to the task force: Marvin Cofer-Participant on the first task force; volunteers at PROP Basil Wissner- Current volunteer with the"Shopping Bus"program; volunteer and organizer/fundraiser for the Jean Harris Memorial Gathering Bridge Joyce Conley -Retired Eden Prairie police officer; police liaison to senior community v Joanne Bartel -Director of Prairie Adult Care, a private respite care service provider Bette Anderson - Co-chaired the last Senior Issues Task Force; on the Board of Directors of PROP John Dollerschell -Chair of the Senior Advisory Board at the Senior Center Sharon Steiner -Active in programs at the Senior Center; treasurer of Senior Advisory Council Joan Rumford -Active in programs at the Senior Center; past Chair of the Senior Advisory Council; board member of Meals on Wheels Lisa Schmidtke - Interested citizen with personal experience and expertise in managing access to services for disabled and elderly citizens Scott Welter—Director of Castle Ridge Care Center Pastor Rod Anderson—Pastor of St. Andrew Lutheran Church Mary Keating from our Office of Housing&Human Services will be the official staff liaison to the Task Force. I have also asked that Carla Kress, our Therapeutic Recreation Coordinator, also serve as liaison/resource to the task force. We will also appoint an administrative liaison to the task force to take care of the administrative, logistical, and clerical needs of the task force. If the Council approves the appointment of the task force, staff will begin the process of notifying each member of the appointment and scheduling the task force's organizational meeting. I recommend the Council approve the appointments to the Senior Issues Task Force. CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Reports of Officers July 5, 2005 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: XIII. B. 2. Scott Neal, City Manager Authorize publication of notice of public hearing to consider proposed transfer of control of cable franchise from Time Warner Cable to Comcast Cable Requested Action Move to: Authorize staff to inform Time Warner of the need for a public hearing to be held on August 2, 2005, to consider the proposed transfer of control of the cable television franchise from Time Warner Cable to Comcast Cable Communications LLC and to determine whether the proposed transfer may have an adverse affect on cable television subscriber. Synopsis The City will hold a public hearing on August 2, 2005 at 7:00 p.m. to discuss issues regarding the proposed transfer of the Cable Television Franchise and system from Time Warner and Comcast Cable. Brian Grogan, an attorney with Moss&Barnett, is advising the City on this matter via the Southwest Suburban Cable Commission. He is preparing a report for the City addressing the legal, technical, and financial qualifications of Comcast. Attachments Notice of Public Hearing City of Eden Prairie,Minnesota Notice of Public Hearing Proposed Transfer of Cable Television System The City of Eden Prairie,Minnesota,will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, August 2,2005,at 7:00 p.m., in the City Council Chambers of the City Hall to discuss issues regarding the proposed transfer of the Cable Television Franchise and system from Time Warner Cable,Inc. and Comcast Cable Communications, LLC. The City Hall is located at 8080 Mitchell Road, Eden Prairie,MN 55344, Any person may speak to the City concerning the proposed transfer at the time of the public hearing. Any person may submit written comments by addressing those comrents to the City Clerk,Kathleen Pona. Any person who wishes to speak at the public hearing is requested to contact the City Clerk prior to the public hearing or to sign up to speak at the public hearing on a list which will be available in the City Council Chambers immediately prior to the hearing.. The City Clerk's telephone number is(952)949-8300,. Dated this_____day of July,2005.. CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE,MINNESOTA By: Its: 787347v1 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Community Development Director's Report July 5, 2005 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: XIII. C. 1. Janet Jeremiah, Cancellation of Purchase Agreement for Community Development Mitchell Road Property Requested Action Move to: Approve the Cancellation Agreement between the City and Legacy Holdings-MR, LLC Synopsis The requested action would terminate the purchase agreement between the City(as seller) and Hartford Group (Legacy Holdings-MR, LLC, as Buyer) for the remaining City-owned portion of the old Police station property at the southwest corner of Mitchell Road and Hwy 5. Background Information On February 1, 2005, the City Council approved an agreement for Hartford Group to purchase the City-owned property on Mitchell Road. The purchase agreement between the City(as Seller) and Legacy Holdings-MR,LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company(as Buyer)provided for a 180 day Inspection Period for the Buyer to obtain Government approvals and to perform its due diligence. Prior to the expiration of the 180-day period,the Buyer informed the City that it had decided not to proceed and intended to cancel the purchase agreement. The Buyer had not made a formal application for development approval. The parties determined that as a result of different expectations for development of the property it was no longer appropriate to continue to invest time and efforts in the transaction. The Cancellation Agreement provides for the City to retain half of the Earnest Money($25,000),which will compensate the City for holding the property off the market during the Inspection Period under the Purchase Agreement. Attachments ➢ Cancellation Agreement CANCELLATION AGREEMENT THIS CANCELLATION AGREEMENT is made as of ,2005,by and between City of Eden Prairie, a Minnesota municipal corporation("Seller"), and Legacy Holdings-MR, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company("Buyer") RECITALS A. Seller is the owner of certain land in legally described as Lot 1, Block 1, Wingate Hotel Addition,Hennepin County,Minnesota(the"Property"). B. Seller and Buyer entered into a purchase agreement for the Property dated February 1, 2005 (the"Purchase Agreement"). C. Seller and Buyer now wish to cancel and terminate the Purchase Agreement. AGREEMENT IN CONSIDERATION of the mutual covenants of the parties contained herein and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: 1. Cancellation. As of the date of this Agreement, Seller and Buyer hereby agree that the Purchase Agreement is cancelled and terminated. 2. Property Interest. Buyer agrees and acknowledges that it has no further right, title or interest in the Property. Buyer shall execute a Quit Claim Deed conveying any and all of its right,title and interest in the Property to the City. 3. Earnest Money. Seller shall retain $25,000.00 of the earnest money. The remaining $25,000.00 plus interest, if any,shall be immediately returned to Buyer. 4. Public Statement. All public statements by Buyer concerning the proposed project shall state that the parties determined that as a result of different expectations for development of the property it was no longer appropriate to continue to invest time and effort in the transaction. 5. Mutual Release. Each party, together with its members, governors, officers, representatives and agents, hereby releases the other, together with each of its members, governors, officers, representatives and agents, from all liability or obligation under the Purchase Agreement, except for those obligations set forth in paragraph 5 and 17 of the Purchase Agreement and those obligations specifically arising in the event of a cancellation or termination of the Purchase Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties have set their bands as of the day and year set forth above. Seller: CITY OF EDEN PRAIRIE Buyer: LEGACY HOLDINGS-MR,LLC By Nancy Tyra-Lukens Its Mayor By John C.Brandt By Its Chief Manager Scott Neal Its City Manager CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Report of Parks and Recreation Director July 5, 2005 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: XIII. D. 1. Robert A. Lambert,Director park Referendum Recommendation Parks and Recreation Requested Action Move to: Authorize staff to develop a three question referendum for November 8, 2005 that would provide the following options for voters: 1. Community Center addition for$6,650,000 2. Swimming pool addition for$3,330,000 3. Park acquisition, park and trail development and improvements for$6,695,000 Synopsis The Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission recommended approval of a three question referendum on a six-two vote at their June 27 meeting. The two dissenting votes supported a four question referendum that would separate either trail improvements or park acquisition as a fourth question. Background The city has been receiving feedback from residents since the May 11, 2004 referendum failed. A survey of citizens who voted on that referendum suggested the City come back within two years with another referendum that would a)give the voter choices, b)not include an outdoor water park, c) be held in November on a regular election date, and not during a year when the School District is consider a referendum. The total amount of money proposed by the three questions supported by the Parks,Recreation and Natural Resources Commission is $16,645,000 or$5,855,000 less than the $22,500,000 proposed in the May 11, 2004 referendum. This referendum does not include any outdoor swimming pool options, provides voters with three choices, and is held on November 8—a normal election day when School Board members will be elected. The majority of the discussion held at the Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Commission related around the number of questions that should be considered and how the questions should be divided. The Commission spent quite a bit of time discussing dividing the questions by similar activities and many of the Commission members felt that improving existing facilities, such as parks and trails was more comparable than acquiring additional park land and supported Park Referendum Recommendation July 5, 2005 Page 2 a$5.6 million park and trail improvement question, plus a$1 million park acquisition question; but ultimately recommended the three question referendum proposed. It will also be important to make it clear to voters that the pool question can only pass if the referendum question for the Community Center passes. Commission members were concerned over how that could clearly be stated. City staff will develop specific language for the referendum questions and resolution for the Council to consider at their July 16 meeting. Attachment Park Referendum PowerPoint Presentation Handouts own Meeting Discuss ion. on Proposed Park. Referendum 7:00 Wednesday june, 22 z CiftyCen' ter .�e 1 Rim= n ' (May , 21604) • 004 Referedum 11 • Question: $22.5 million for acquisition, development, and improvement of land and. facilities for public recreation. • Results,: 3,078, No �2,357 Yes ir • Following the 2004 Park Referendum, a random .,sample tele ho ne curve was conducted of P eo le who voted on the P referendum. • The results of the surveyprovided the City P Council with a greater understanding f the community's needs, which has guided the development of the new proposed park referendum. 3 • 88% of the "No" voters and 77% of the "Yes" voters thought that a sin le 'y ion uest'', was abad 'idea.,", 5 • 92%a of "No" voters and 45%0 of "Yes" , voters, were not in favor of an outdoor aquatic center, *78% of "No" voters and 55% of "Yes" ........ ...... voters, did, not want the City to,,come lacl with a smaller aquatic center, A- people voted ainst the, Major reasons - hat ag 2004 Park Referendum. , * 48% - Cost * 35% Lack of choices • 29% - Lack of need, articular) the outdoor aquatic center, . . ................Note: MuWtiple responses were allowed 90 -, .Projects that people would support in a,� future referendum, 721% Bicycle and, pedestrian trails 66% -= IM provements to Community Center 65% Replacing,old warming houses at 11 s'kating rinks 63% Provide park shelters with restrooms in: parks Pray'ects that would. a ort in apeople PP future referendum (continued) • 6 1% '-- Provide matching, funds for other associations to help pay a for : improvement's to facilities • 1% -- Flying Cloud Ballfield expansion Y p • 59% Acquire more additional part ,and op n sp ace land , 0a s 5 rt .,,• ,�''`��,� s MID 69%, of all voters thou ht the City should attempt another park bond referendum sometime within the next two years, including, 46% of the No)) voters rovided that te 'Ct i limit it tc►f' Y "needed" ro 'ets. l 8 s. The City Council is considering these items in a referendum in response to what the voters said in a survey after last year's referendum. This survey suggested that the Council would. Come back with a referendum within a year I ar or two. Hold a referendum in November on the normal election day. • Hold the referendum in a year that the School District isn't also considering a referendum. Give-the voters choices on different issues rather than, a a single uestion. Do not: consider an outdooraquatic center. Community., Center Addition Bond Issue Amount of$6,650,000 Improvements to the Eden Prairie Community ,Center includings Expansion of the Fitness Center and Locker Rooms Additional Team Rooms • Multi-Use ,Gymnasium ai 10 ° . Ya a§•�'S ".aa, y �7 gr e' s' ? - r t E. i • CommunityCenter `-Addition :Bond Issue Amount o $6,650,000 Improvements to the Eden Prairie' Community tY Center including continued : a Indoor,Walking/Running Track • Multi-Use Teen/Senior Recreation Room • Improved Access Control • Expanded Concession and Lobby Area 11 �' � a,�. psi ' µ .x•� x )r r t nunu�� irlii0i•N LCWY hi RIMS UPPER RINK 1 ILL trm nl; mow' MOM s UPffa POOL "o FfDM 8 r� f y Commu.nily +enter �Tpperevel Addit �an 12 EDHt�-\j 7R.A= c(ahm,f U=I (CE=R oommwry CENTER ADDMN 0 0 00 00 0 0. LOWER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN Community Center Lower Level Addition, 13 COMMUNITY CENTER , Bond Issue Amount $6)650)00­6 Property r op'erty Value A— a-x $200)000 $300)000 $21 $400)000 ' ' $27 $50000 $600)000 $41 $70000 $4& $ $00)000 55 c n - $62 s'90000 $1 $69,)OK000 14 MEN Recreational Swimming Pool Addition Bona Issue Amount of$3)330,000 • Addition of a zero depth entry warm water recreation poo1 Swimming lessen pro rams for children and youth. Water aerobics for adults and seniors. -- Improved. access and recreational pools for people with physical disabilities. - Open swim at same time as competition pool rental. 15 Warm Wader S-m.mPool Addition ,,,, Bond Issue Amount of$3)330.1000 • Deep' ening east end of M. existing pool W111 meet the safety standards re quired for use of starting blocks for competitive swim meets'-, Will allow High School to again .hold swim meets in this facility. 16 POOL Bond Issue Amount $3,330,000 Pry tv Value Annual Tax $200,000 $7 $300,000 $10 $400,000 $14 $5oa,oa0 $17 $ 00,00a $21 $ a0,000 $24 $800,000 $28 $900)0001 $31 $1,000300 $34 17 Park Acquisition, Development and Improvements Bored Issue Amount o $4)695)000 • Major Renovation of Forest i Hills Park and Edenvale Park. • Permanent bark Shelter at Prairie View Park. Expansion of Flying Cloud P Y� � Ballfelds. Acquisition of land near Birch i Island. Woods Conservation Area. 18 Park Acquisition, Development and Improvements JL Bond Issue Amount o $4,695,o00 w-New Playgrounds at. ''' , Carmel Park Edgewood ,Park......... Rustic Hills Park Sterling Field Park Topvi*ew Park, 19 k Park Acquisition, Development and Improvements Bond Issue Amount o $4,695,000 Renovated va ed Tennis , :f. Courts at+ Carmel Park -- Eden Valley Park Homeward :Hills Park F Pr .irie last.::Park ji s, Rustic Hills Park 20 u, A�F "R ti 4f A Vq z *qt ARK i! -1w L*R 7 t", 14 , 4V HASKE7 KATE 70 MOM I W 40 PIZ, 4 LA .......... RE Edenale Park City of Eden Praide OPTION B Parks&Natural Resources 7300 Edenvale Boulevard 21 s 3 � d OR xe zz s&Natural,PalPAM Rumm Flying Ocoud Ball FieldE sign >ta�t}�.r�_.C�.irr��L R rr r AdandSp try Rudd 22 T NIT, 41 �,!7# Fp r�71 ,S Cky cd Eden Pm* Forest Hills Park Parks&NmnI Resew 13708 Holly Road 23 V�( TEA K < W Wlw 7�7'k 7-77�1 "A K FFEEWATE PURE V%W E154NTIRYSIIOOL PAPX��MR (D' RO ut UN Cdy of Eden ftrie Prairie View Park P&*s Natirai Pesmrmq 117== 17255 Petatorg Road 24 PARKS Bond, Issue Amount, $40530000 Property Value Annual Tax $200',000 $10 $300,000 $15 ', $400,000 $19 $500)000 $24 $29 $700000 $34 $800)000 , $39 $900)000 $44 $13,0003000 $49 25 u Tr' ail Ins ' r v n� nts Bond .issue Amount o $2,000,000 • $ ,a0a,000 to address, Yj g I p' a" the more ex ensive � � " p ��{ ?` &. trail construction g sad " " a #' i ��► - ; c projects necessary to complete the city- •'' wide trail system. 26 Trail Imp Bond Issue Amount Of ,Ooo,00Q Possible uses of the proposed 2,000,000: • Trail along County Road 4 north of Purgatory Creek. • Complete the sidewalk and trail system in the Major Center Area.. ' • Re lace man of the 6-foot wide asphalt P Y �' trails that were installed b develo ers Y I' nearly 30 years ago with 8-foot wide trails. 27 mom= TRAILS ,Bond Issue Amount $2,o0o,Q0o ' Properly Value Annual Tax $200':000 $4 $300)'000 $6 $400)000 $8 $500)000 $12 $700000" $14 $800)000 $19 $1)000)000 $21 28 N The average market value of homein g a Eden Prairie is 3 10,000. For that home, the annual increase 1n taxes would be about $52, oar 4.33 per month if all pro)ects were approved, 29 t lh+ g • Monday, J 271h -- Parks, Recreation. and Natural Resources Commission , recommendation regarding the proposed park referendum • 'Tuesday. July ..... City 5thCouncil decision on the proposed park, referendum 30 • Questions, comments and �a �. feedback from, the public ACI — rid regarding ,th 'is propos ar ed p k, OF referendum . . 31 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA DATE: SECTION: Report of Parks and Recreation Director July 5, 2005 DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ITEM DESCRIPTION: ITEM NO.: XIII. D. 2. Robert A. Lambert, Director Recommendation to Develop a Master Parks and Recreation Plan for Cardinal Creek Conservation Area Requested Action Move to: Authorize staff to contract for planning services to assist the city in developing a master plan for the Cardinal Creek Conservation Area and to request the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District to assist the city in funding the development of this master plan and in the development of a management plan for this natural resource. Synopsis The Cardinal Creek Conservation Area includes the City-owned land west of I-494 and north of Gerard Drive and Gordon Drive and west to Baker Road. The City has acquired approximately 38 acres of land within this conservation area and anticipates acquiring approximately five additional acres of land to complete this conservation area. The Nine Mile Creek Watershed District is considering developing a water quality improvement project on the west side of I-494 within the Cardinal Creek Conservation Area to improve water quality that eventually runs into Bryant Lake. City staff recommend development of a master plan for this conservation area to ensure that the water quality improvement project enhances the goals of the City of Eden Prairie in terms of providing public access to this conservation area and preserving and enhancing the natural habitat for wild life and the native plant communities. City staff also wish to provide a master plan to ensure that existing and future property owners are aware of the goals of the City for providing public access to this site and to assure residents that the ultimate use of this property is for low impact outdoor recreation and education of the general public. The funding source for the city's portion of this project would be park dedication fees. Background The master plan should provide a detailed design that would include location of future trails, signage, parking and other amenities at access points. Master Plan should also recommend an implementation and construction schedule as well as a description of the permits necessary for work in the wetlands and how the master plan will enhance the proposed water quality improvement project for Bryant Lake. Staff would also recommend the development of a management plan for the site that would ensure the ongoing Recommendation to Develop a Master Plan for Cardinal Creek Conservation Area July 5, 2005 Page 2 improvements planned for this conservation area. The management plan should describe the benefits of developing a trail system, providing the public with access to this land. The management plan should outline any improvement projects that would be eligible for funding assistance from the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District and any other potential funding sources. Attachment Map of Cardinal Creek Conservation Area Cardinal Creek Conservation Area l t r City of%P Forest Hil Is School f �n-: J1 w i f City Of EP' I ; City f EP - _- erly i 1� i ,Got 1 tit- j t North No Scale